Adult Learner Transitions

The Transition from Adult Literacy ESL Programs to Academic Reading and Writing: Next Steps for English Language Learners

Introduction
Similar to other colleges across the nation, a particular Washington State community college has been experiencing a larger influx of English Language Learner (ELL) students into English composition courses than ever before. These students come from varying school and programmatic experiences, some of which are the adult literacy English as a Second Language (ESL) program, Adult Basic Education (ABE) courses, and the local high school. Recognizing the need to promote ELL success, multi-divisional instructors convened in a professional development workshop to address instruction across the language curriculum. This study serves as a pilot to implement further research in the State of Texas.

Background Information
Twenty attendees participated in this workshop, which extended over two days. On the first day, the speaker addressed socio-cultural issues that surround the ELL, which included (1) the faces of bilingualism and biculturalism, (2) instructional perspectives, and (3) the impact of culture upon language. On the second day, the speaker discussed specific research-based strategies to teaching both holistic and discrete skills. These topics were interspersed with roundtable discussions.

Workshop participants, who represented a broad cross-section of both the pre-college and humanities departments, were first asked to respond to a survey regarding curriculum, instruction, and programmatic concerns. Fourteen of the twenty participants responded with the following results:

• Seventy-nine percent (11) of the respondents believe students are placed appropriately into courses spanning ESL, ABE and English Composition.
• Thirty-six percent (5) of the respondents believe ELLs begin with the same skills as monolingual English speakers. Those who believe the ELL skill set is different mentioned English language skills (6), academic writing skills (3), & conceptual differences(3).
• One hundred percent of respondents said their students used interventions. The most notable included the writing lab (57%) and tutoring (29%). Other beneficial interventions included learning communities, discussion groups, comparative English/Spanish grammar classes, bilingual language assistants, and linked classes.
• Fifty-seven percent (8) of the participants believe the ESL and English Composition courses are not aligned across the curriculum.
• A majority of participants promote participatory classroom styles. Some descriptive terms that instructors used included: interactive, practical, writing coach, individual tutoring, performance-based, clear targets, and little lecture.
• Instructors expressed varying opinions regarding instructional approaches in the ELL classroom. Some believe both ELL students and L1 students should be taught with the same methods. Others stated that ELLs need more support strategies including hands-on activities, experiential learning, and a bilingual classroom approach.

Primary Instructional and Curriculum Concerns
The roundtable discussions provided a venue where instructors exchanged their concerns, ideas, and suggestions regarding classroom instruction and ELL student transitions. These concerns included six large categories: (1) student participation/self-esteem, (2) sensitivity to culture and language, (3) classroom management, (4) course sequencing, (5) isolated skill areas, and (6) standards and assessment. Each will be discussed briefly.

Self-esteem and classroom participation elicited the most comments from instructors, who strove to encourage greater student classroom participation. Silence was mentioned by many as an inhibitor to sufficient instructor feedback. In addition, instructors mentioned the need to reinforce positive classroom behaviors that would encourage student growth, self-confidence, and enhanced learning.

Culture and language seemed tied to the primary concern of student participation and self-esteem. Instructors sensed that without one, the other could not exist. Many instructors reiterated that content must be made relevant for such diverse populations. They also expressed having experienced difficulty in finding culturally relevant instructional materials. In addition, instructors were especially sensitive to creating a classroom environment that celebrated differences while simultaneously developing cultural awareness for all students. One instructor mentioned the desire “to know how to work through the tough culturally sensitive issues…managing emotional responses.”

Classroom management included a variety of concerns. Several instructors discussed the complex nature of balancing two simultaneous objectives; creating a nurturing classroom environment while maintaining high expectations and standards. In addition, one participant suggested that students encounter new norms when they transition from ESL to other programmatic areas. For example, the ESL classroom often emphasizes collaborative learning while pre-college and college classrooms stress individual assignments and assessment. Such changes may not be clearly defined for students, thus creating confusion and misunderstanding.

Isolated skills rated high on the discussion list. Instructors believed they needed to teach linguistic areas such as syntax and lexicon even as they taught study skills and critical thinking. They expressed the delicate balance between grading students’ composition skills while correcting their isolated grammatical errors. Likewise, they questioned when to pass a student whose composition skills rated as satisfactory but whose grammatical errors detracted from the readability of the written product.

Finally, three areas mentioned less frequently included course sequencing, standards, and assessment. The most repetitive response concerned student readiness to progress. Instructors deduced that a base standard was needed to define success in English composition courses. In summary, participants initially expressed the most interest in instructional and classroom issues that were pertinent to their everyday teaching. However, as collaborative options were discussed, the group supported ways of finding answers across departmental lines.

Finding 1: This community college has undergone recent new faculty hires after several experienced instructors retired. Since new instructors do not receive a standardized orientation, they lack sufficient information concerning the linkages between the inter-departmental curricular structure, the services and the interventions available for their students. A written instructor guide that describes available campus services could ameliorate this situation.

Finding 2: Pre-college students come from many different programs and schools. In fact, pre-college courses were found to be the crossroads for entering ESL and ABE students as well as heritage language high school graduates. As a result, various assessment tools are used to place students into pre-college courses. However, the programs lacked a benchmark assessment tool for students completing pre-college courses that would indicate their readiness for English Composition. It was recommended that both pre-college and English composition instructors collaboratively devise such an assessment tool.

Finding 3: Instructors recognized the need to clarify the acceptability of grammatical errors across the writing curriculum. The speaker presented a format to identify the grammatical norms acceptable for each level of instruction. Once this curricular addition is made, instructors will enhance their students’ skills through existing software at the Writing Center.

Finding 4: Instructors recognized the importance of quality intervention strategies. Some already function well while others exist but are not developed to their full potential. For example, the existing bilingual language assistant program was favorably mentioned; however, it was suggested that assistants need further training.

Conclusion
This workshop served as a catalyst to initiate collaboration across one community college’s programmatic divides. Participants ended the session by identifying positive changes that would benefit ELLs across programmatic areas. Similar research will continue in Texas, where an on-line survey will record successful examples of ELL transitions and entertain ideas for programmatic linkages. [The following table contains information about the survey and where it can be found.]

Lisa Gardner Flores, M.A., has taught ESL and Spanish for over 25 years. She is past director of the International Language Institute at Texas A&M International University and past director of the Department of Transitional Studies in a Washington State community college. Ms. Gardner Flores, who was a TCALL fellow for 2005-06, currently divides her time between teaching and studying. She is a doctoral student in Hispanic Studies with a concentration in Bilingualism/Biculturalism at Texas A&M University, while she teaches at Texas A&M International University in Laredo.