My earlier articles have focused a great deal on the needs of beginning language learners. Whether supporting in the school context or in my regional roles, issues with addressing their needs tended to manifest first, as teachers and leaders alike struggled in the abyss of the unknown.
It’s timely then that I address how the set up of support in schools needs be equitable to our beginning language learners who are at bandscale 1 and 2. There are various models, and at the heart of any decision must be the student. Here, I address the leaders out there – when systems are set in stone and cannot be wielded to meet the needs of students, or when students are not set in the centre of the established systems, I believe we have lost the plot.
I’ve taught and led in a variety of settings, and it is important to consider how the student’s needs can be met in each of them.
Before I look at each setting, let me share two student profiles with you.
The first student was a refugee, 17 years old, with no more than a few words of English when he arrived in country. He had had the benefit of education for a few years in the refugee camp, with a few years of disruption, was fluent in literacy skills in his own language, and was intensely ambitious. He was placed in an inclusive classroom in grade 10, studying all subjects with Australian peers. In his history class, he had a highly supportive young teacher who immediately identified the challenges she would face and requested coaching to ensure her teaching and assessments were adjusted to ensure his success. This coaching along with my visits to the classroom, supported the student to develop the tools he needed for success. He used translanguaging for about 3 months intensively and quite independently across his other subjects. He also used his 3 hours of intensive tier 2 literacy support to develop his reading and writing skills. He thrived in an inclusion class, sponging off all the learning that his peers were sharing in the classroom and driving his own meaning making. After a year, he was a confident senior student who knew how to achieve his goals and continued to work hard for it.
The second student was a young refugee who came in with her 3 siblings – all of whom were shy and reticent to attempt to speak even on a one on one basis. She too, was placed in an inclusive classroom but did not get as much support in the classroom. Some of her teachers picked up on some strategies but were not consistent in establishing a language supportive classroom. Often on my visits, she would be seen seated away from the rest of the class, provided with one on one support with an aide or waiting for the teacher to come round. She was placed in a tier 2 literacy support class that focused on reading and so her writing skills were not being developed strategically. Two years after her arrival, she was still struggling at a bandscale 2 level in speaking – rarely speaking more than a couple of sentences, and in writing – struggling to write simple sentences accurately to convey meaning in her academic work. She too had dreams for herself and yet, the combination of factors, including the fact that she had come in with no prior education which meant no access to knowledge of how to learn – all these worked against her.
Depending on the setup available in the school, these students could have been placed in classes that would have led to different outcomes. As students with minimal language, it would seem that an intensive language setting would have benefited them, allowing them to build confidence in the use of language and explicitly being exposed to the language and literacy they would need to address their academic needs. What they would have lost out on though, is the interaction with similar aged peers who could have supported their acquisition of the language even as they began to engage with their age appropriate curriculum and cognitions. Certainly the student I describe in the first profile above benefited from this interaction with peers in a more inclusive space. I believe the second student may have benefited from more dedicated time and intensive work to build confidence and her voice.
Where schools do not have these intensive language settings set up, and many don’t because they don’t have the enrolment numbers to justify it, these students will possibly be working within a inclusive setting. Essentially, these students are placed in the classrooms. Utilising the multitiered systems of support (MTSS) model, the necessary supports can be established. The MTSS system ensures that teachers will have the pedagogy to address language learning and make the necessary adjustments at tier 1 – essentially ensuring universal design for learning (UDL) frames the planning of lessons and units. There will have to be tier 2 supports within the class as well as by an intervention team outside the classroom. This intervention class would deliver a rigorous language programme that addresses fundamentals that cannot be covered in a typical classroom. And finally, there must be tier 3 supports, capable of addressing particular difficulties that arise as a small group of students struggle with some aspects of the learning (and are at risk of being identified as having a learning disability). This is the system I worked with and I know it works – though it is hard work and calls for rigorous monitoring through Response to Intervention (RTI). I’ve also seen this fail, when rigid adherence to systems won’t flexibly meet the needs of students and when there are weaknesses in the programme and pedagogy used.
And finally, there is the ESL class. This class mirrors the mainstream class in content but adjusts the learning to suit the developmental needs of students. There is the opportunity here to provide a safe environment for new learners in the high school setting to experiment with their language even as they engage with the same curriculum as their peers. The difficulty here is asking ourselves – at what point do we consider students ready to join their peers. And the failure in this set up is that often, students are keep in this segregated setting for longer than they need it. This could impact on their social integration into the new society they have just joined.
So where is the sweet spot of optimal impact? It doesn’t come from treating all the students coming in to the system as if they were all alike. It doesn’t come from running literacy programmes designed for the “majority”- whoever they may be. It doesn’t come from establishing one system and expecting all students to fit into it. It comes from knowing your student, keeping them at the centre of the supports you build, and ensuring timely responses to their growth (or lack of) so that their needs are always met.
Share your thoughts!