Running head: ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 1

Acquiring Academic and Content Language

EDU 747: Literacy for English Language Learners

Kayla Pollak
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 2

Today more than ever before, teachers are faced with the challenge of educating large

numbers of English Language Learners within the regular classroom setting. According to the

National Center for Education Statistics, in 2013, English Language Learners made up 9.2% of

the United States Public School Population, which equates to nearly four and a half million

students (NCES, 2013). According to Ogle and Correa-Kovtun (2010), Reading in the 21st

century demands that all students develop high levels of literacy (p. 532). It is our job as

educators to research and implement strategies that help English Language Learners achieve

success within the walls of the classroom.

Acquiring academic language proficiency can be quite a challenge for English Language

Learners. Academic language requires the use of higher order thinking skills such as analyzing,

synthesizing, and comparing and contrasting (Peregoy & Boyle, 2017). According to Cummins

(1981), academic language proficiency takes five to ten years for an English Language Learner

to develop, whereas conversational language proficiency takes roughly two to three years for an

English Language Learner to develop (as cited in Williams, 2001, p. 751). Sibold (2011) states

that Academic vocabulary is notably more difficult to learn than conversational language

because it is more specific and sometimes abstract, making it difficult to grasp (p. 24). I have

chosen to research strategies that will help my third grade ESL students acquire academic and

content language in the realm of science. The three strategies that I have researched in an effort

to help my ESL students gain a better understanding of academic and content language are

instructional conversations, cooperative learning groups, and semantic mapping.

Williams (2001) argues that All students benefit from instructional discussions that are

effectively mediated by a teacher (p. 753). In a traditional or seemingly old school classroom,

teachers initiate the conversation, students respond, and teachers evaluate the students
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 3

responses (Williams, 2001, p. 753). This language model is known as Initiate, Response,

Evaluate. This type of classroom communication is detrimental to all learners, but especially

English Language Learners because the IRE model hinders the growth of academic and

conversational language. On the contrary, Instructional Conversations is a strategy geared

toward providing ESL students with opportunities to learn academic content and vocabulary

through oral communication with others (Williams, 2001, p. 753). Echevarria, Vogt, and Short

(2004) found that ESL students must be given ample opportunities to talk with their peers about

academic content, in order to increase their exposure to and use of academic vocabulary (as cited

in Ogle & Correa-Kovtun, 2010, p. 533). The instructional conversations strategy was

discovered by Tharp and Gallimore in 1988 and was later researched by Goldenberg in 1992 and

is still used in many classrooms today to help English Language Learners acquire larger

academic vocabulary banks (Williams, 2001).

In the IRE model, teachers ask questions that have specific or known answers (Williams,

2001). With instructional conversations, it is the teachers role to provide more opportunities for

ESL students to engage in classroom conversations. Teachers should ask more open-ended

questions that allow for ESL students to explore their understanding of academic content through

the English language (Williams, 2001). When needed, teachers should ask follow up questions

or use probing to gain further clarity and understanding from the English Language Learner

(Williams, 2001). Goldenberg (1992) suggests that teachers can help extend student thoughts

with statements such as Tell me more about that. What makes you say that? How do you know

that? (as cited in Williams, 2001, p. 754).

Similar to the instructional conversations strategy is the cooperative learning strategy.

However, while the instructional conversations strategy relies on oral communication between
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 4

the teacher and student, the cooperative learning strategy promotes discussion between peers.

Peregoy and Boyle (2017) define cooperative learning as an instructional organization strategy

in which students work together in small groups to achieve academic and social learning goals

(p. 106). Wong Fillmore (1982) states that When you provide opportunities for English learners

to interact with their English-speaking peers, receptive and productive language learning

opportunities abound (as cited in Peregoy & Boyle, 2017). Cooperative learning involves

heterogeneous groups made up of students with a variety of reading levels, language abilities,

personalities, and social skills (Peregoy & Boyle, 2017). For example, imagine four students

working together to complete a WebQuest on animals. Within the heterogeneous group, each

student has an individual role. One student researches the animals appearance and habitat; one

student researches the animals diet and its place on the food chain; another student researches

the animals life cycle; and the final student researches the animals behavior and its current

status in the world. Once students complete their individual research, the group comes together

and teaches one another about what they learned. During this portion of the cooperative learning

strategy, students will be using and hearing academic language like habitat, texture, temperature,

predator, prey, herbivore, omnivore, carnivore, life cycle, endangered, extinct, etc. The academic

vocabulary and content knowledge is continually reinforced through peer conversation and kid

friendly explanations. Then, the group compiles all of the information they gathered on their

animal and they create a presentation to share with the whole class. The academic vocabulary is

reinforced once again through collaboration and written language in the making of the

presentation. Peregoy and Boyle (2017) explain that tasks such as these are Rich in natural

opportunities for the use of academic language related to higher-level thinking such as

comparing, contrasting, categorizing, explaining, and justifying (p. 105). Native English
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 5

speakers and higher-level English Language Learners serve as good role models for students in

the group who are still learning the English language (Peregoy & Boyle, 2017). Additionally,

Krashen (1981) explains that The relaxed atmosphere, or low-anxiety environment, is

considered conducive to content learning and language acquisition (as cited in Peregoy &

Boyle, 2017, p. 105).

Semantic Mapping is a strategy that helps all students, but especially English Language

Learners, gain word knowledge through the use of brainstorming, discussion, and categorizing.

Semantic maps help to activate prior knowledge by discussing words that relate to the target

vocabulary word (Colombo, 2011). For example, if my third grade class was starting a unit on

conservation, I might pick the word energy and write it on the board. As a class, we would

brainstorm words related to energy. Students might say: humans, light bulbs, food, save, plants,

animals, nutrients, heat, air conditioning, batteries, etc. As a class, we would group those words

into categories like: things that need energy to survive, things that produce energy, and things

that use energy, etc. Once the categories have been made and the words have been sorted, we

would discuss all the categories and words and then transfer the words to a semantic map

(Colombo, 2011). Students would continually add to the map throughout the unit.

The instructional conversations strategy, the cooperative learning strategy, and semantic

mapping all go hand in hand with the interactionist perspective. Long and Porter (1985) argue

that Interactionists view the communicative give-and-take of natural conversations between

native and non-native speakers as the crucial element of the language acquisition process (as

cited in Peregoy & Boyle, 2017, p. 68). In the instructional conversations strategy and the

cooperative learning strategy, group members must interact with one another to explain, discuss,

and comprehend each others thoughts and ideas. When using semantic mapping, students must
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 6

have whole group conversations that relate to academic vocabulary and then take those academic

words and categorize them based on meaning. In this process, English Language Learners are

continually using the English language to express themselves with conversational language and

academic language. Through repeated discussions and seemingly unstructured conversations,

English Language Learners further develop their understanding of English (Peregoy & Boyle,

2017).

Williams (2001) states that The emotional climate of a classroom is of extreme

importance in fostering academic progress (p. 755). In order for English Language Learners to

feel comfortable talking openly with peers, which is required by all three strategies that I shared,

the teacher must serve as a role model for acceptance and community building (Williams, 2001).

In a 1998 study of four diverse elementary classrooms, Mohr found that all four teachers used a

wealth of collaborative words, such as we, together, friends, teams, partners, and neighbors (as

cited in Williams 2001, p. 755). Currently, when addressing my class, I use the word friends. I

often talk to my students about how we are like a family and how every day we have

opportunities to learn from one another. In order for instructional conversations, cooperative

learning, and semantic mapping to prove beneficial to my students, I need to continue to foster a

classroom community that feels safe, inviting, and accepting.

Graves (2006) argues that ELLs require assistance in developing content-related

vocabulary in their second language if they are to experience success in school (as cited in

Sibold, 2011, p. 24). In order to help English Language Learners achieve academic success,

educators must research and implement strategies that help ELLs internalize academic

vocabulary and content.

ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 7

References

Colombo, M. (2011). Teaching English Language Learners. : SAGE Publications. Retrieved

from http://www.ebrary.com

Boyle, O., & Peregoy, S. F. (2017). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A resource book for

K-12 teachers (Seventh Edition ed.). Boston: Pearson/Ally and Bacon.

NationalCenterforEducationStatistics(NCES)HomePage,apartoftheU.S.Departmentof

Education.(n.d.).RetrievedMay14,2016,fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/

Ogle, D., & Correa-Kovtun, A. (2010). Supporting english-language learners and struggling

readers in content literacy with the "partner reading and content, too" routine. The

Reading Teacher, 63(7), 532-542. Retrieved from https://une.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://search.proquest.com.une.idm.oclc.org/docview/203282606?accountid=12756

Sibold, C. (2011). Building english language learners' academic vocabulary: Strategies & tips.

Multicultural Education, 18(2), 24-28. Retrieved from https://une.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://search.proquest.com.une.idm.oclc.org/docview/898418898?accountid=12756

Williams, J. A. (2001). Classroom conversations: Opportunities to learn for ESL students in

mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 54(8), 750-757. Retrieved from

https://une.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://search.proquest.com.une.idm.oclc.org/docview/203275419?accountid=12756
ACADEMIC AND CONTENT LANGUAGE 8