Month: March 2016

The question seems sort of silly, right?

Language frames, also called sentence frames, are commonly recommended and widely used as a way of providing support for English learners in oral discussions and writing. Examples include:

I agree with ______________ but would also add _____________________.

The reason I think ___________________ is because __________________.

While there are obvious benefits to scaffolding students’ language and use of complete sentences, frames should be used strategically to be effective. Sentence frames are intended to support students in producing language that they wouldn’t be able to produce on their own. The frame provides a model of language that is just beyond their current level of proficiency (a la i + 1). The following are some suggestions for using sentence frames effectively:

• Differentiate frames to match students’ proficiency levels. Although ostensibly frames are designed to help students use appropriate academic language, they are restricting students’ expression and growth when the frames are too simple or too difficult. A frame such as, I think ______ because________, is not advancing proficiency when all students are required to use the frame during a lesson, even those at advanced levels of English proficiency, as well as English-speaking students. With minimal tweaking, teachers can provide a more simplified frame for beginning speakers and more complex sentence structures and vocabulary for more advanced speakers.

 In math, for example, beginning speakers benefit from a frame such as,

The strategy I used was _____________ (counting-on, double facts, doubles plus one),

which provides sentence structure and also gives words from which to choose. Teachers might offer more advanced speakers an open-ended frame that requires them to explain the procedure on their own or make connections such as,

I solved my problem by__________. Or, Your strategy reminds me of____________.

 These frames allow students to extend their expression and use the ideas of others by linking them to solutions and strategies.

 Differentiating frames by proficiency level isn’t hard or time-consuming for teachers to do, and the effort is well worth it. Practice with the right frame may advance students’ English acquisition by allowing them to use language that is appropriate for their level.

• Avoid artificial use of frames. In some classes, teachers insist that each and every student repeat a frame when answering questions or giving their ideas/opinions rather than letting students express themselves naturally. It defeats the purpose of encouraging language growth when students are required to robotically repeat the same frame. That’s not the way authentic discussion occurs. What is intended as a beneficial support ends up being a case of students simply parroting sentences.
• Use discretion to avoid overuse. The intent of frames is to provide students with support so that they can express their ideas more coherently, using correct sentence structure and vocabulary. The idea is that, after repeated use, students internalize the vocabulary and sentence structures and it becomes part of their linguistic repertoire. However, when frames are used excessively their effectiveness is diminished. Instead of being a strategic tool to add to students’ English toolkit, frames become something that students pay little attention to and simply mimic. What is overuse? Well, one example I observed in a primary class was asking each of the 15 students sitting in a circle to say one at a time,

          “Good morning__________. How are you?” The child replies,

          “I’m _________. (uses a word from a list of adjectives) And you?”

          “I’m _________. Thanks for asking.”

Having a routine using this sequence is more effective when the teacher selects a few different students each morning to practice aloud and model for the class a polite greeting using complete sentences. Or, working in partners, the class chorally practices the sequence. But, fifteen separate versions is overkill – and it takes up too much instructional time.

• Remove frames, as needed. Language frames are a scaffold and just as scaffolding is removed from a building once it is no longer needed, frames should be removed once students are proficient enough to use authentic language.  One teacher told me that she doesn’t let her advanced speakers and English-fluent students use the frames she provides for others because she found that using frames stunted the students’ expression and their flow of ideas. Ultimately, all students should have the option of expressing themselves as they like.

Language frames are valuable tools and they support English learners in expressing their ideas orally and in writing. However, they must be used strategically and for a specific purpose. Caution: Avoid sentence frame overkill as well as a one size fits all approach.

Even though English learners are a large and growing part of the U.S. public school population, there are a number of myths and misconceptions about these students that persist. This blog series will attempt to dispel some of those myths and misconceptions. By the way, the myths are discussed in no particular order.

In previous blogs, I addressed these myths:

• Content teachers aren’t language teachers (see previous blog).
• English learners aren’t capable of completing rigorous, grade-level work

Today’s myth is:

• Only English learners benefit when teachers use best practices for ELs (e.g., the SIOP Model)

Although SIOP was designed as an instructional approach for English learners, for years we have heard anecdotal reports that the approach has been effective with all students — those in special education, struggling learners, and students who speak non-standard English. In fact, in our early research two of the middle school teachers piloting SIOP in content classes with English learners also taught a couple periods of gifted and talented classes. They began planning and delivering lessons using SIOP lesson plans and found that gifted students responded positively to SIOP teaching. SIOP’s features — including having clear objectives, an emphasis on student collaboration and discussion, higher order thinking, and opportunities for practice and application of lesson concepts — appealed to these high achieving students. In fact, the project teachers documented the improved achievement of not only their English learners but also the students in their gifted and talented classes.

More recently, a colleague who is a literacy consultant was kind enough to send me the following email when he returned from consulting with a district in another state:

“They mentioned the fine work using SIOP in [District X] – and the powerful results, not just for ELLs and struggling students but across the range of students, including their top performers (i.e. everyone derived notable benefit)…..Of course, a major reason why this worked so well was the coherent/accountable follow through and admin support from Supt to teachers and back!”

It seems reasonable that SIOP teaching would work well for all students because it’s development was grounded in research on effective teaching and the literature on second language acquisition.

The mot recent research studies have shown that all students in SIOP classes outperformed students in control or comparison classes. Studies from the Center for Research on the Educational Achievement and Teaching of English Language Learners (CREATE) showed the same: Best practices for English learners benefitted English speakers as well as English learners.[1]

The conclusion is that native English-speaking students are not disadvantaged when general education teachers use SIOP teaching in content classes, but in fact may actually do better when teachers implement the SIOP Model.

 

[1] Echevarria, J. (2012). Effective Practices for Increasing the Achievement of English Learners. Washington, DC: Center for Research on the Educational Achievement and Teaching of English Language Learners. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/create/resources/pubs/

Short, D. & Himmel, J. (2013). Moving research on Sheltered Instruction into curriculum and professional development practice. Paper delivered at AERA, San Francisco, CA.

 

It is hard to believe that we have reached this milestone – 20 years of SIOP teaching! We never expected, in the early days, that the SIOP Model would be used by more than 425,000 teachers in schools throughout all 50 states in the United States, and in dozens of countries.

SIOP has never been more relevant than it is today with the emphasis on rigorous
academic standards for all students such as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).

Teachers––now more than ever––need a proven approach for making instruction understandable for English learners while at the same time developing their academic language skills. SIOP is a mechanism for helping students reach high academic standards, and many of the features of SIOP are reflected in the standards, such as the emphasis on speaking and listening skills.

Most gratifying, though, is its impact on educators and students alike. As one teacher wrote to us (posted in a blog entitled, Another Teacher Saved Through Effective Professional Development, https://siopblog.wordpress.com

I implemented only some of the lesson to my freshmen class to try it out and it made me feel so much more successful than I have ever felt in the full 15 years I’ve been teaching. I think you and your colleagues are on to something with SIOP! T-H-A-N-K Y-O-U! You came into my life just in the nick of time. I was headed out of teaching all together after this year because I didn’t believe that I could help students anymore. SIOP has given me hope!:)

Thanks to all of the dedicated educators who have found SIOP to be useful in providing an equitable education to all students – English learners and English speakers alike.

We are excited to celebrate SIOP’s birthday in 2016!