Teaching English as a Second Language

English as a Second Language (ESL) is defined as the formal instruction of English to those (usually immigrants, international students, or refugees) whose native language is not English but who live in an English speaking country. Through instruction in reading, writing, speaking, and listening, ESL provides the necessary communication skills to help nonnative speakers enroll in school, obtain employment, and function effectively in the host country. Common instructional methods are the silent way technique, total physical response, scaffolding, the direct approach, the whole language approach, and the interactive student centered approach. Among the unresolved issues in the ESL community are inclusion, mainstreaming, and separation.

Keywords Bilingual Act of 1968 (Title VII); Bilingualism; English as a Foreign Language (EFL); English as a Second Language (ESL); Immersion; Inclusion; L1 Learners; L2 Learners; Lau v. Nichols; Limited English Proficient (LEP); Mainstreaming; Non-English Speaking (NES); Scaffolding; Separation; Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL); Teaching Methods; Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL)

Overview

Recent patterns of economic globalization and significant demographic shifts in the United States have created a pressing need for viable English proficiency programs. The current trends suggest that one of the largest growing groups in this country is people who speak English as a second language. The ESL population among students K–12 in the United States grew 138 percent between 1979–1999, and in the early years of the twenty-first century, one out of every five students spoke a language other than English at home (Coppola, 2005). The US Census Bureau reported in 2011 that 58 percent of US residents five years and over spoke a language other than English at home (US Census Bureau, 2013). By the year 2020 it is predicted that 50 percent of school-aged children will be of non-Euro-American background (Harper & de Jong, 2004).

In response to this growing cultural and linguistic incongruity, several different English instructional programs were implemented in public and private academic institutions in the United States and abroad. One of the most effective and widely used methods of English fluency is known as ESL or English as a Second Language. Since the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, public schools in the United States have been required to offer ESL programs in any school that has LEP (Limited English Proficiency) students. As if 2013, there were over 5.5 million school-age children in the United States who required some form of ESL instruction (Galvez, 2013, p. 1).

English as a Second Language (ESL) is defined as the formal instruction of English to those (usually immigrants, international students or refugees) whose native language is not English but who live in an English speaking country. Through instruction in reading, writing, speaking, and listening, ESL provides the necessary communication skills to help nonnative speakers enroll in school, obtain employment, and function effectively in the host country. During ESL training, English is the target language and medium of communication.

ESL is just one of the many English instructional methods used around the world. Other systems include EFL (English as a Foreign Language), ESP (English for Special Purposes), EIL (English as an International Language), EAP (English for Academic Purposes), ENL (English as a New Language), and ELL (English Language Learners). The term ESL is mainly used in the United States, Canada, and Australia. New Zealand, England, and Ireland refer to the practice as ESOL or English for Speakers of Other Languages.

Although the genesis of non-native English instruction can be traced back to the early 1700s, ESL was not formally recognized as a credible pedagogy until the middle of the twentieth century. The landmark Brown v. Board of Education (1954) paved the way for several legislative and judicial actions that bolstered the legitimacy and application of ESL such as the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the Bilingual Act of 1968 (Title VII), the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, Lau v. Nichols (1974), Castaneda v. Pichard (1981), Doe v. Plyler (1982), and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

The development of ESL in the twentieth century was also greatly influenced by the creation of TESOL in 1966. TESOL, or Teachers of English to Speakers Other Than English, is a professional organization with thousands of members from countries around the world who are dedicated to ensuring excellence in English instruction to speakers of other languages. One of TESOL's fundamental goals is to address "the need for a professional organization that would be permanently devoted to the problems of teaching English to speakers of other languages at all levels" (TESOL, 2006).

In order to obtain a position as an ESL instructor in the United States, students are required to complete an undergraduate program in a related linguistic field and an achieve a master’s degree in teaching of English to speakers other than English. Moreover, all students must obtain individual state licensing by completing mandatory field work through student teaching. The TESOL degree qualifies individuals to teach both ESL and EFL courses abroad.

The student population of ESL can be divided into two groups based on linguistic needs: LEP, or Limited English Proficient, refers to non-native English speakers who have difficulty writing, speaking, and reading English. NES, or Non-English Speaking, students do not speak or understand English and may even lack literacy skills in their native language (which further complicates the quest for English fluency).

At the college and university level, students are tested for English language fluency prior to admission. The TOEFL, or Test of English as a Foreign Language, measures linguistic competence of non-native speakers of English by measuring reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. Due to the growing demand for the test, TOEFL is now accessible via the Internet as an online exam. Student who fail the TOEFL are advised to complete specific ESL programs based on individual need.

Although ESL has advanced as an academic discipline, many public and private schools lack the resources and programs to adequately respond to the growing population of LEP and NES students. In fact many schools don't even have ESL programs to offer. The dearth of viable ESL curricula can also be attributed to the recent increase of anti-immigrant attitudes and resentment toward preferential treatment for minority groups (Hafernik, Messerschmitt & Vandrick, 1996).

Applications

Most ESL curricula in the United States offer various levels of study in five fundamental areas: reading, writing, grammar, speaking/conversation, and listening. ESL models differ from other English developmental programs by using only the L2 (the target language) in the classroom. The goal is to provide students the fundamental skills needed to complete the traditional all-English curriculum without relying on the L1 (the primary or native language). Some criticize this pedagogy as exclusive and argue that L1 development and fluency is necessary in order to acquire the L2, as is practiced in bilingual education.

Due to the diverse nature of the ESL population, the instructor must consider several factors about the students in the group before considering a methodology.

• Age: Linguists argue that older students have more difficulty assuming a second language and children under twelve learn languages faster than older students.

• Native Language: The instructor must consider the fluency level of the original language and the L1's phonological and syntactical proximity to English.

• L1 Literacy Level of Parents: Research suggests that if a parent is illiterate in their L1 there is a greater chance that the student will have a more difficult time learning the L2.

• Reason for Immigrating: Understanding the various motives for immigrating helps to address personal issues that may arise in the classroom.

Common strategies that have developed in K–12 and college ESL instruction include previewing (instructor reads the sections aloud before the students read), shared and paired reading, books with tapes, multicultural literature, interactive writing, theme-based instruction, reading aloud, and storytelling. All of these methods allow students to hear and apply the appropriate phonological and syntactic representations of the language.

Other ESL teaching methods include, but are not limited to:

The Silent Way Technique

This method rests on the assumption that L2 learners must visually and cognitively discover meaning rather than merely repeating linguistic concepts. The teacher is often “silent” in order to allow the students to produce as much language as possible. The only utterances from the instructor are the model forms of each concept and the introduction of the visual/physical representation of each concept. This approach allows the instructor to evaluate what the students say, which creates a switch from the lone voice of the teacher using the foreign language to a number of voices using it.

Total Physical Response

This method involves the teacher giving out commands while the students react physically rather than verbally to each directive. The method is focused on trying to develop comprehension before pronunciation and conversation (semantics before phonology and syntax). Since students are not obligated to orally repeat a concept, they are less apprehensive and focus more on understanding the concept through the use of their kinesthetic sensory system.

Scaffolding

During this assisted performance pedagogy, the teacher focuses on helping the students to know “how to do.” Scaffolding involves two main components: the learner solves or works out a task with the educator's assistance, and the student receives a higher level of independent competence as a result of the successful completion of the task. The teacher gradually hands knowledge as well as learning control over to the learner through a series of interactional scaffolding. This collaborative method is used to help students understand concepts that are just beyond their linguistic grasp. The teacher provides assistance to the student until it is no longer needed.

The Direct Approach

In this approach, the instructor begins each class by outlining a dialogue or narrative in the L2. Several questions are then presented to the students regarding specific elements of the opening example. Linguistic assessments of grammar and phonology are made by the instructor during the discourse.

Whole Language Approach

Whole Language (WL) learning places the emphasis on the interaction/discourse rather than learning specific skills through six principles: learning starts from whole to part; sessions are student-centered; lessons have meaningful outcomes for learners; during L2 education, speaking and writing can be learned simultaneously; learning through L1 helps to develop the L2; and the acquisition of L2 is also facilitated by having faith in the learner.

Interactive Student Centered Approach

This pedagogy uses cooperative group learning, visual cues, and hands-on activities with emphasis on the content of the lesson rather than on repeating directions. The instructor focuses on the individual needs of students and uses the student’s cultural heritage during class discussions in practical ways.

For children in ESL, instructors often use many of the aforementioned techniques as well as choral readings (students reciting passages together that are read from the instructor), manipulatives (items and interactive activities that allow students to learn using all of their senses), and brainstorming (when students pool their knowledge about a specific subject).

Viewpoints

A significant point of contention within the ESL community involves the correct learning environment for the ESL learner. Research and practice point to six different positions/solutions for effective ESL placement: bilingual separation, separation by ESL pull-out, the self-enclosed classroom, sheltered English, inclusion, and mainstreaming.

Bilingual Separation

The instructional objectives for bilingual education differ significantly from mainstream students. Separation through a bilingual model assumes that a student must first be fluent or well versed in L1 in order to begin to develop L2. Thus, two languages are used during the lesson so students can continue to refine L1 while they simultaneously acquire the basics of L2. However, critics argue that the method delays the acquisition of English and is limited in linguistically diverse communities.

In 1998 California residents expressed dissatisfaction with bilingual programs by voting overwhelmingly for Proposition 227, which restructured bilingual education programs by emphasizing more mainstream interaction and L2 learning. A 2006 report for the California Department of Education found that there was very little difference in achievement between students who were taught in bilingual classrooms versus student who were taught in immersion settings (American Institutes for Research, 2006, p. 204).

Self-Enclosed ESL Classroom

Here students are separated from the native speakers in the school and study a curriculum focused on L2 acquisition through L2 instruction and training.

Separation through ESL Pull-Out

In this placement, students are removed from the classroom for one to two periods for specific ESL instruction in small groups. For the rest of the day the ESL learners are mainstreamed with native L2 speakers in a traditional classroom setting. Separation through ESL pull-out allows the ESL learner to assimilate and adapt while still being treated as a unique population with special needs.

Sheltered English Classes

Sheltered English classes assist with the transition from ESL to mainstream curriculum by reviewing the same content as a traditional classes but in a way that relates directly to the special linguistic needs of the ESL learner (such as simplification, participatory activities, and contextualization). Sheltered, or linguistically enhanced, courses are designed to make traditional mainstream classes more obtainable for the ESL population.

Inclusion

Inclusion placement occurs when ESL students are mainstreamed into a traditional classroom while receiving specialized learning assistance from a bilingual specialist, electronic device, or increased work time. Inclusion teachers do not treat the ESL population as different learners. Advocates note that inclusion allows ESL learners to engage in meaningful discourse with native English speakers. However, many express concern over the poor performance of ESL students in inclusion classes and question if these students get adequate instruction and assessment.

Mainstreaming

The final method involves serving students with special linguistic needs entirely within a native English speaking population. There is no separation of students based on language proficiency, no pull-out, and no 'inconspicuous' assistance. Proponents of mainstreaming believe that English is learned by focusing on content and proper form. However, an abundance of research demonstrates that ESL students in mainstream classes have problems with note-taking, reading comprehension, and writing, which leads to poor academic performance and decreased self-esteem.

Terms & Concepts

Bilingual Act of 1968 (Title VII): first legislation to provide federal funds to help develop programs for ESL students.

Bilingualism: the process of teaching a L2 by using the L1 language of the learner. The student continues to develop the L1 while simultaneously acquiring the L2.

English as a Foreign Language (EFL): English as a Foreign Language is the instruction of English to non-native speakers living in a non-English region.

English as a Second Language (ESL): English as a Second Language is the instruction of English (writing, reading, speaking, and listening), to non-native speakers (usually immigrants, foreign students, and refugees), who need to acquire the language in order to function in an English-speaking region.

Inclusion: ESL students are mainstreamed into a traditional classroom while receiving specialized learning assistance such as a bilingual specialist, electronic device, or increased work time.

L1: The primary or native language.

L2: The target or desired language.

Lau v. Nichols: US Supreme Court Decision (1974) found that giving non-native students the same materials as native students does not fit the definition of equal access to education.

LEP: Limited English Proficient usually refers to nonnative English speakers who have difficulty writing, speaking, and reading English.

Mainstreaming: When students are not separated based on linguistic competence. ESL students are placed in classrooms with native English speakers learning the same traditional curriculum.

TESOL: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages is a global professional organization formed in 1966 to address issues of ESL instruction at all levels of education.

TOEFL: Test of English as a Foreign Language. Non-native speakers in many English-speaking colleges and universities are required to take exam prior to entry in a degree program. Test measures competency in writing, reading, speaking, and grammar

Bibliography

Almaguer, I., & Esquierdo, J. (2013). Cultivating bilingual learners' language arts knowledge: A framework for successful teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 6, 3–18. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90564967

American Institutes for Research. (2006, January 4). Effects of implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of English learners, K–12. Retrieved December 21, 2013, from http://www.wested.org/online%5Fpubs/227Reportb.pdf

Bei, Z. (2013). An analysis of spoken language and written language and how they affect English language learning and teaching. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4, 834–838. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90355552

Belcher, D. (2006). English for specific purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study, and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40 , 133-156. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Educational Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20332747&site=ehost-live

Black, S. (2005). Easing ESL students into learning English well. Education Digest, 71 , 36-38. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18260449&site=ehost-live

Case, R. E. & Taylor, S. S. (2005). Language difference or learning disability? Answers from a linguistic perspective. Language Difficulties, 78 , 127-130. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=15931651&site=ehost-live

Coppola, J. (2005). English language learners: Language and literacy development during the preschool years. Journal of the New England Reading Association, 41 , 18-23. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier, http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19679406&site=ehost-live

Crawford, J. (1998). Best evidence for bilingual education. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41 , 59-64. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=438040&site=ehost-live

Curtin, E. (2005). Instructional styles used by regular classroom teachers while teaching recently mainstreamed ESL students. Multicultural Education, 12 , 36-42. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17271059&site=ehost-live

Drucker, M. J. (2003). What reading teachers should know about ESL learners. The Reading Teacher, 57 , 22-29. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Humanities International Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=10804072&site=ehost-live

Galvez, Lorena. (2013, August 14). The No Child Left Behind Act leaves behind ESL children. University of Chicago, Loyola. Retrieved December 21, 2013, from http://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2013studentpapers/galvez.pdf

Glencoe/McGraw Hill. (2005). Teaching limited English proficiency students. Retrieved November 29, 2007, from Teaching Today http://www.glencoe.com/sec/teachingtoday/educationupclose.phtml/24

Greenburg, C. (1997). Teaching pronunciation through problem posing. College ESL,7, 62-71.

Hafernik, J.J., Messerschmitt, D., & Vandrick, S. (1996). ESL in the Academy today. Education, 166 , 403. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9606053790&site=ehost-live

Harper, C. & de Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching English-language learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48 , 152-162. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=14694597&site=ehost-live

Hirsch, L. (1996). Mainstreaming ESL students: A counterintuitive perspective. College ESL, 6 , 12-26.

Kamhi-Stein, L. (1997). Redesigning the writing assignment in general education courses. College ESL, 7 , 49-62.

Ko, J., Schallert, D. & Walters, K. (2003). Rethinking scaffolding: Examining negotiation of meaning in an ESL storytelling task. TESOL Quarterly, 37 , 303-324. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Educational Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19254684&site=ehost-live

Lapp, D. & Flood, J. (1994). Are we communicating? Effective instruction for students who are learning English as a second language. The Reading Teacher, 48 , 260-264. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Humanities International Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=9411182295&site=ehost-live

Matsuda, A. (2003). Incorporating world Englishes in teaching English as an international language. TESOL Quarterly, 37 , 719-729. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Educational Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19254667&site=ehost-live

Miller, P. C. & Endo, H. (2004). Understanding and meeting the needs of ESL students. Phi Delta Kappan, 85 , 786-79. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13292499&site=ehost-live

Nero, S. J. (2005). Language, identities, and ESL pedagogy. Language and Education, 19, 194-207. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17599905&site=ehost-live

Platt, E., Harper, C. & Mendoza, M. (2003). Dueling philosophies: Inclusion or separation for Florida's English language learners? TESOL Quarterly, 37 , 105-133. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Educational Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19155634&site=ehost-live

Program in Bilingual Education and English as a Second Language. (2006). Retrieved November 29, 2007 from, Washington State University http://www.educ.wsu.edu/esl/

Roberts, T., Brunner, J. D. & Bills, S. D. (2006). ESL programs and LEP students: A comparison of public and private schools along the Wasatch Front. Multicultural Education, 13 , 27-32. Retrieved on November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20234551&site=ehost-live

Salinas, R. A. (2006). All children can learn…to speak English. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 23 , 20-24.

Shafaei, A., Salimi, A., & Talebi, Z. (2013). The impact of gender and strategic pre-task planning time on EFL learners' oral performance in terms of accuracy. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4, 746–753. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90355542

Storch, N. & Wigglesworth, G. (2003). Is there a role for the use of the L1 in an L2 setting? TESOL Quarterly, 37 , 760-770. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from EBSCO Online Database Educational Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19254671&site=ehost-live

Tang, F. L., & Martino, M. (2000). Whole language instruction in China: Teachers' beliefs in theory versus practice and constraints. College ESL, 9 (1/2), 35-50.

TESOL (n.d.). Retrieved November 29, 2007, from http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/index.asp.

US Census Bureau. (2013, August 6). New Census Bureau interactive map shows languages spoken in America. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/education/cb13-143.html

Winer, L. & Benson, S. (1997). Stepping stones: Guided questioning in teaching reading comprehension. College ESL, 7 , 35-48.

Zamel, V. (1996). Transcending boundaries: Complicating the scene of teaching language. College ESL, 6 , 1-11.

Suggested Reading

Bascia, N. & Jacka, N. (2001). Falling in and filling in: ESL teaching careers in changing times. Journal of Educational Change , 325-346.

Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). TESOL at forty: What are the issues? TESOL Quarterly 40 , 9-34.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of the English language (3rd ed.). London: Longman.

Kuntz, P. S. (2003). A History of ESL Instruction in Madison, Wisconsin. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED474937). Retrieved November 29, 2007 from EBSCO Online Education Research Database. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/ec/71.pdf

Ming Huei, L., Groom, N., & Chin-Ying, L. (2013). Blog-assisted learning in the ESL writing classroom: A phenomenological analysis. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16, 130–139. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90300370

Ya-Ting C., Y., & Gamble, J. (2013). Effective and practical critical thinking-enhanced EFL instruction. ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal, 67, 398–412. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90572076