Bridging the Gap for Enlish Language Learners

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………….1

PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT…………………………………………………………...2

PROBLEM STATEMENT AND QUESTIONS POSED…………………………… …4

RESEARCH QUESTIONS……………………………………………………………….5

LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………………… .6

BODO AND MIMI……………………………………………………………………… 9

METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………………13

DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES……………………………………………… 16

RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………… 17

CONCLUSIONS 19

APPENDIX—BODO AND MIMI EVALUATION DATA 22

REFERENCES 23

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study was conducted to explore the value of a supplemental ELD program with kindergarten students. Many students maintained an ELD level of one until they reached eighth grade. When English language programs have been developed, they have not taken into account the need to align the English language arts (ELA) standards so the student can progress in target language acquisition.
The supplemental tool was implemented at 75th Street School in 2002 and the API base was 501 and in 2003 it was 537 and in 2004 it was 576 in 2005. The researcher’s findings was as follows; the use of real props, visuals and facial expressions or gestures, all provide contextual supports helping to make messages in English more comprehensible. The use of positive feedback and correction by modeling help create a low stress environment that encourage learners to take risks and experiment with language learning in much the same way they did with their first language.
The students receiving the supplemental tool for three years or more increased their CELDT level by two levels in speaking the target language. The probability of students increasing to a CELDT level of three is at seventy-five as per CELDT scores. The more often the teacher uses the supplemental tool every week, the greater the possibility that the students will increase their CELDT score to a three in speaking and listening.
It is recommended that further study of English language learners be conducted in several areas. This study examined only kindergarten students at one LAUSD school. Replicating the study and expanding age group to eighteen years of age would provide additional information concerning the value of an English language development program. Moreover, replicating the study with first graders might offer another perspective on treatment for this population.
Students entering public schools speaking a language other than English look at others’ perceptions of their experiences in public schools and their acculturation, rather than an in-depth look at their academic achievement. English language development programs have a limited approach to providing instruction for students with little or no English. Even though this research provides an argument in favor of an ELD supplemental tool as an intervention for English language learners, equally important is the need for further research to identify what intervention is most successful.

Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this project is to determine if there is an increase in English proficiency for English language learners after the students are exposed to Basic Interpersonal communication skills (BICS) through specific ELD supplemental material. The researcher looked at the English language learner students placed in this supplemental oral language program over a three-year period. The English proficiency gained by the students, and the methods and strategies used to achieve these improvements. A quasai-experimental research design used to determine the effects of an ELD supplemental tool that was used for three years at 75th Street School. The study involved kindergarten classes that used the supplemental tool. This study is important because it focuses on the direct treatment of English only materials for kindergartners at an elementary school. Analyzing the data determined the extent of the effect of the ELD supplemental materials. Many experts agree that these supplemental ELD materials have helped the students become fluent in English. The supplemental ELD tool is ideal because it incorporates Total Physical Response (TPR), colors, and multimodalities that use songs, dancing rhymes, and stories that tap into students’ prior knowledge. It is integrated into domains across the curriculum, and is correlated to the states ELD and ELA standards. It attracts students by affording them much creativity for learning. The supplemental program makes it ideal for English only and ELL students to receive Standard English instruction. The teachers directly involved in the study have helped students overcome obstacles while achieving their potential. They have observed specific transfer of knowledge when teaching Open Court Reading (OCR) (Adams 2002). They did not observe OCR connections or internalization prior to using this ELD supplemental tool. This research supported a supplemental ELD program that is an important component to the interdisciplinary approaches commonly used.
This study adds to the body of knowledge of the treatment of English language learners and application methods used with ELL classroom teachers. 75th Street School is used for the study. Into English is an ESL series that has been taught at 75th Street School (Tinajero and Schifini 1997). The students who received the short and long vowel sound ELD supplemental tool improved at least two ELD levels within three years. The study also proved that a well designed tool will improve ELD levels and will increase ELL academic success in the target language. The students not receiving the treatment demonstrated a less significant increase. According to the data and statistics revealed through this study, the students in the control group did not improve their ELD levels.

Problem Statement and Questions Posed

California had 1.2 million language minority students (called “English Language learners” or ELLs) in 1997 when Ron Unz, (a computer entrepreneur) promised that the passage of Proposition 227 (funded by Unz) would guarantee complete English proficiency for all ELL students in English. Furthermore, this would be accomplished “in a period not normally intended to exceed one year” (Proposition 227 1998, 1). As California embarks on its tenth year of the one-year program, the number of ELL’s has actually increased now to 1.4 million (Izumi 2000). By the standards that Ron Unz used to criticize bilingual education, his program has been a spectacular failure. Amazingly, Unz seems to have convinced most reporters that his program is actually a tremendous success (Mora 2000a).
Proposition 227 is the single most important language policy decision of the last century-one may have profound consequences on schooling in the twenty-first century. Documenting the ways school districts, the local schools, teachers, and parents make sense of this ten year old policy is central to understanding its short-, and long-term effects on the education of English language learners (Gutierrez, Baquendano-Lopez, and Asato 2000a). Ample evidence favors bilingualism, bilingual education, and literacy in children’s native languages as the means to help children grow academically. What must ensue is a new and vigorous debate that centers on how our students who are acquiring English might best learn the literacy strategies and skills they need to participate fully, in school and out (Flood and Lapp 1996). This is especially important now as students are expected to remain in an English development class for only one year.
Many of the students who receive sheltered English are the product of a dysfunctional environment and have not been able to acquire necessary skills to function because of Proposition 227 in an atmosphere that is demanding and academically challenging. The effects of a supplemental tool to improve English language development (ELD) levels are directly reflected through this study (Trujillo 2001).
The purpose of bilingual education programs is to provide eligible students the opportunity to acquire English language skills necessary for their successful participation in an English-only instructional program. This is accomplished through various structured immersion models and primary language support. The Home Language Survey determines the trigger for assessment. California English Language Development Test (CELDT) results determine eligibility as Limited English Proficient (LEP) candidates. Students are transistioned into an English-only program whey they meet established criteria for redesignation. Once redesignated, students are reclassified as fluent, English proficient (RFEP) (Trujillo 2001).
Eighty percent of kids who are limited English proficient are Spanish speakers. They come from families where the parents may have less of a history of formal education, high rates of poverty, schools that are poorly equipped, inadequately trained teachers, these kinds of conditions and that sort is true, regardless of whether you are in a bilingual or an English-only program (Hakuta) (1998).

Research Questions
1. To what degree did students participating in the implementation of this supplemental tool (BICS) improve English proficiency?
2. What were the modifications and strategies being accessed prior to the ELL student’s matriculation to a higher ELD level?
3. To what degree have the ELD levels of students improved with the ELD supplemental tool?
Literature Review

The ELD supplemental is used through direct instruction and has been used as the focus of considerable validation and feasibility research. A high level of effectiveness has been demonstrated by individual research studies, research reviewing and technical support of formal studies. Statistical integration of the data from studies showed large gains for a both regular education and special education students, and both elementary and secondary students. Large gains were found in a variety of academic subjects, whether gains were measured using norm-referenced or criterion-referenced measures, and whether the studies lasted up to one year or over one year (Engelman, 1991).
In an article the Los Angeles Times dated 10/30/07 it states the chairman of the House of Education and labor Committee, George Miller is sparring with republicans who see his proposed changes as an unacceptable watering down of the law’s core standards.
Some critics of the law No Child Left Behind saw the emphasis on math and English testing has squeezed teaching time for history, science and other subjects. Others say that the law is too strict and punishes schools that are doing a fairly good job.
“People have a very strong sense that the No Child Left Behind Act is not fair, that it is not flexible and that it is not funded, (October 2007) (Martinez). Miller said in a recent speech, “and they are not wrong.” The question is what they are going to do next.”
The 2001 law, President Bush hall marked domestic achievement, is supposed to be renewed every five years, although it remains in effect even if law makers try to bring it up.
Democrats pledged to rewrite it this year, but time is short and political tensions are high. The Bush Administration has also made it clear it wants just minimal changes. No Child Left behind was designed to end what the president called the “soft bigotry of low expectations, by forcing schools to track data on low income and minority students and holding the schools accountable if those pupils did not do well. Schools also have to show that all students are making adequate yearly progress in math and English, or face tough sanctions.
Miller seeks a balance between those who think the law’s standards are too rigid and those who want them as tightly defined as possible. The complaint has been that five years ago when, George Miller and Edward M. Kennedy helped write and pass No Child Left Behind they complained, the administration has never fully funded the law in a way that would help schools meet their additional burdens.
The law has frustrated many parents and teachers who dislike its effect in local schools. The cost has been extraordinary and pressure has been placed on students and the loss of important instruction in music, art and other elements of a well rounded education.
The draft would also change the way English-language learners are evaluated, allowing them to be tested in their native language for up to five years instead of the current three years, and permitting a two-year extension for some criteria of monetary awards to teachers will be developed with the input from the unions.
In the Senate, Democrats and Republicans are in talks about the bill, and Kennedy hopes to begin formal discussions in the education committee in the next few weeks.
According to (Spear Sveling) (2007) article assessment instrument is culturally sensitive, not culturally biased. Accuracy that is really measures the skill is assessing vetted for reliability and validity with English language learners administered by someone who is qualified to do so.
According to (Cardenas-Hagan) 2007 a way to engage parents of ELL’s is to have a small group session with refreshments. Make the parents who do participate into leaders who encourage other parents to attend. Offer a parent resource center where parents can learn about the school and use various education materials (e.g., books on tape, books, materials (e.g., books on tape, books in their native languages, etc. Provide translation services. Send home materials in their native language. Follow up with parents via personal phone calls.
English language learners benefit immensely from graphic organizers. Graphic organizers are visual devices that employ lines, circles, and boxes to depict four common ways to organize information: hierarchic, cause/effect, compare, contrast, and cyclic and linear sequences. These images serve as visual cues designed to facilitate communication and/or understanding of information by showing how essential information about a topic is organized. (Spring) 2007.
Many students with language based learning disabilities manifest difficulty processing semantic information. The design of some is language free where as others incorporate semantic prompts play in prompting effective learning for students with language difficulties. (Bromley) (1999). One of the primary goals of education is to promote literature for individuals with speaking and listening and reading and writing fluency. Specially designed academic instruction in English (SDAIE) is said to be the most effective approach for working with students when primary language is not English.

Bodo and Mimi
Several programs have developed to assist ELL students in learning English.
Bodo and Mimi is a project designed to promote language learning and character building. A variety of multimodal techniques such as music, color-coding, and kinesthetic activities in this instrument allow a natural flow of learning to occur. Students participate using methodologies, which promote motivational, entertaining ways to embrace the state of California's English language development (ELD) and English language arts (ELA) standards. This tool draws teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, and parents together to increase student achievement. On the surface, Bodo and Mimi appears to be an assembly of engaging characters who sing, play, and discover; however, underneath exists a structure of learning that is cutting edge, extremely powerful, and that embeds concepts that last a lifetime. The concepts embrace the diverse communities found throughout the inner city (Trujillo 2001).
Ms. Trujillo, the creator of Bodo and Mimi, was a kindergarten teacher who is a college professor, after the passage of Proposition 227 (English-only initiative) in California, discovered a significant lack of reading materials in either English or Spanish for her kindergarten classes. After researching theories from such experts as Cummins (1979, 1981, 1986, 1989), Krashen (1981, 1985, 1989, 1993, 1994, 1996), Terrell (1996), Asher (1972), Gardner (1990), and Snow, Met, and Genesee (1992), Ms. Trujillo developed a program that consists of multimodal strategies such as visuals, color-coding, music, and directionality. No program utilizes sensory participation by the children. In addition, her program—featuring the characters "Bodo" and "Mimi"—provides extensive comprehensible input in a consistent learning environment that has proven to be successful with her students. Trujillo's students achieved two English language levels higher than other kindergarten classrooms not participating in the program. The Bodo and Mimi series incorporates forms of phonemic awareness and provides extensive communicative approaches comprehension (Trujillo 2001).
The ELD supplemental tool Bodo and Mimi is comprised of singing, repetition, and poetry. The supplemental tool teaches the language in context to what the characters are doing. The students are learning decoding skills as a tool for cognition and language. Students learn strategies that bring them to literacy. Students were at grade level or above in oral blending, listening, and speaking. The materials are based on the premise that students are taught to decode; by reading materials they understand, they will more readily develop cognitive strategies for comprehending English. Rhythm is memory centered and makes students understand what they are learning. Memory-centered learning is consistent with the findings of brain-based learning research. With all of these strategies students begin to build literacy skills (Trujillo 2001).
Bodo and Mimi helps students acquire the skills and knowledge they need to successfully perform to high academic standards. Based on this study, the program has proven to be effective in raising the academic achievement levels of ELL students in low-performing schools. The program has been effectively implemented in multiple sites. Professional development, materials, and ongoing implementation support are available for the program, either through the program's developer, or dissemination networks established by schools already in the program (Trujillo 2001).
Bodo and Mimi has a parent component. The parents are given in-service training on lessons to do at home with their kindergartners. The homework assignments are multicultural to meet the individual needs of the students. All of the lessons correspond to the homework and the ELA and ELD standards (Trujillo 2001).
Current research of English language learners suggests both the Bilingual Plan and Proposition 227 fall short of increasing ELD levels for the LEP population. Programs that succeeded for English language learners include a program developed by James Asher, a professor of psychology at San Jose State University, California. It draws on several traditions, including developmental psychology, learning theory, and humanistic pedagogy, as well as language teaching procedures. The program, Total Physical Response (TPR) is a language teaching method built around the coordination of speech and action; it attempts to teach language through physical (motor) activity (Asher 1981).
Another program considered successful for ELL is The Natural Approach, which has also been very successful and is used for teaching ESL to students. The Natural Approach belongs to a tradition of language teaching methods based on observation and interpretation of how learners acquire both first and second languages in no formal settings. The focus of The Natural Approach is on comprehension and meaningful communication as well as the provision of the right kinds of comprehensible input and conditions for successful classroom second and foreign language acquisition. Its greatest claim to originality lies not in the techniques it employs but in their use of a method that emphasizes comprehensible and meaningful practice activities rather than production of grammatically perfect utterances and sentences (Krashen 1981).
In California, ELL students receive their primary support from classroom teachers. In order to insure that ELL students are receiving the services that they are entitled to receive, classroom teachers must address the English language requirement for the ELL students (Proposition 227 1998).
California has used several approaches to educating non-English speaking students. These varying approaches to acclimating second language learners to the target language and educational system are indicators of the long struggle in California and the nation over the best way to educate second language learners (Hakuta 1987). Elementary school educators must evaluate individual students through various testing instruments to determine their language proficiency; however, it is important to know what additional evaluation criteria California site educators at the K-5 elementary level are using to evaluate ELL students to guarantee that students receive the mandated services, which are outlined in state and federal legislation (Mora 2001a).

Methodology

The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an increase in English proficiency for English language learners after the students are exposed to Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) through specific ELD supplemental materials. With the passage of Proposition 227, the researcher looked at the percentage of ELL students placed in this oral language supplemental program, the English proficiency gained by the students, and the methods and strategies used to achieve these improvements.
Table 1 indicates the outcomes as indicated by the data analysis show the Academic Performance Index (API) report from the California Department of Education confirms that the program of Bodo and Mimi is helping 75th Street Elementary School move forward in their academic achievement. An increase of seventy-five points total for 2002 and 2003 and 2004.
CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION

75th Street Elementary School
API Base
2002
2003
2004
600
580
560 576
540
520 537
500 501
480
460

On Table 2 a questionnaire was designed for the teachers after the training workshop was held at 75th Street Elementary School. The questionnaire consisted of an evaluation of the ELD supplemental tool that was used for the kindergarten classes. The teachers wrote down their comments (see appendix).
The consultants from Bodo and Mimi went to train staff at 75th Street Elementary; the teachers were given an evaluation sheet. Table 2 shows the results of four criteria statements regarding the workshop. The percentage of the teachers who felt the information from the workshop was applicable to their classroom was 100. The percentage of teachers who felt the demonstration provided useful strategies was 100. Ninety-three point seventy five percent of the teachers felt the lesson contained specific standard implementation. The percentage of teachers who felt they could immediately implement the strategies from Bodo and Mimi in their classrooms was 87.5

TABLE 2
BODO AND MIMI EVALUATION DATA: RESPONSE DISTRIBUTIONS
DISPLAYED IN PERCENTAGES FOR FOUR
CRITERIA STATEMENTS

Percentages by Rating

Criteria (1)
Agree (2)
Neutral (3)
Disagree
1. The information
was applicable to my classroom 100 0 0
2. The demonstration
provided useful strategies 100 0 0
3. The lesson
contained specific standard implementation 93.75 6.25 0
4. I can begin
immediate implementation of these strategies 87.5 12.5 0

Source: Trujillo (2007).

Table 3 shows the results from the CELDT for the 2004 through 2005 school year. The second graders who had the supplemental tool for three years had the greatest percentage of students scored thirty five percent in early intermediate. The first grade students who had the supplemental tool for two years scored evenly at thirty percent at early intermediate and thirty percent intermediate. The kindergarten students scored highest at forty-two percent at early intermediate. When all the scores were combined for the 2004-2005 CELDT scores eighty seven percent of the students were at early intermediate. Overall in the 2004-2005 school year the kindergartners had advanced two CELDT levels within the three years of the implementation of the supplemental tool.

TABLE 3
CALIFORNIA ENGLISH LANGUAGE
DEVELOPMENT TEST 2004-2005

Kindergarten
First Grade
Second Overall
Advanced 2% 10% 2% 14%
Early advanced 6% 30% 18% 54%
Intermediate 12% 30% 35% 77%
Early intermediate 42% 15% 30% 87%
Beginning 38% 15% 15% 68%

The second graders who had the supplemental tool for three years had the greatest percentage of students scored thirty five percent in early intermediate. The first grade students who had the supplemental tool for two years scored evenly at thirty percent at early intermediate and thirty percent intermediate. The kindergarten students scored highest at forty-two percent at early intermediate. When all the scores were combined for the 2004-2005 CELDT scores eighty seven percent of the students were at early intermediate. Overall in the 2004-2005 school year the kindergartners had advanced two CELDT levels within the three years of the implementation of the supplemental tool.
Table 4 shows the reclassification rate for 75th Street Elementary as compared to the Local District and all of LAUSD schools for 2005-2006 school year. The redesignation rates for 75th Street School Elementary was eighty percent. 75th Street did ten percent better than their local school district. All of LAUSD schools reclassified at eighty-five percent.

TABLE 4
RECLASSIFICATION RATES

Redesignation 2005-2006

LAUSD
Local District
75th Street Elementary
.85 .70 .80

Data Collection Procedures
The API report was from the California Department of Education for 75th Street School. Questionnaires for the teachers about the program were given to the teachers after the program workshop. One hundred percent of the teachers felt the program was effective and would assist students acquiring a higher ELD score.
Reclassification rates were used from 2005-2006 to prove that the supplemental tool had assisted the students to become language proficient in English.

Results
Research Question One
To what degree did students participating in the implementation of this supplemental tool (BICS) improve their English proficiency?
There was significant differences after the implementation of the supplemental tool calls for picture walks and use of primary language to help students become familiar with the language. Students name objects with short vowels and long vowels while using the books. Students are asked to describe what characters are doing in the illustrations. The students listen as the teachers read aloud from the books. Students read along in their own books.
The students' English proficiency was improved because the ELD supplemental tool was designed to promote language learning and character building. A variety of multimodality techniques such as music, color-coding, and kinesthetic activities allow a natural flow of learning to occur. Students participate using methodologies that provide a motivational, entertaining way to embrace California's ELD and ELA Standards.

Research Question Two
What were the modifications and strategies being accessed prior to the ELL student's matriculation to a higher ELD level?
The test showed significant improvement in ELD levels. The supplemental tool calls for picture walks and use of primary language to help students become familiar with the language. Students name objects with short vowels while using the books. Students are asked to describe what characters are doing in the illustrations. The students listen as the teachers read aloud from the books. Students read along in their own books.
The ELD supplemental tool includes direct phonics instruction through the use of music and rhyme. It bridges the gaps that the current ELD series, Into English (Tinajero and Schifini 1997) leaves behind, it is aligned to ELD and ELA standards, and can also be used for Mainstream English Language Development (MELD). All of the previously mentioned modifications and factors have contributed to the students' improvement in ELD levels.

Research Question Three
To what degree have the ELD levels of students improved with the ELD supplemental tool and Open Court reading series after the posttest of the California English Language Development Test (CELDT)?
CELDT test showed significant improvement in ELD levels in addition to the ELD series, Into English (Tinajero and Schifini 1997), were rates as significantly improved from 2002 to 2005.
The students' English proficiency was improved because the ELD supplemental tool was designed to promote language learning and character building. A variety of multimodality techniques such as music, color-coding, and kinesthetic activities allow a natural flow of learning to occur. Students participate using methodologies that provide a motivational, entertaining way to embrace California's ELD and ELA Standards.
The students were pointing to short vowels and long vowels during frequent voluntary reading time and when Open Court introduced the long and short vowels. After the students finished the year with Bodo and Mimi they were picking words out and relating them to the lesson. Paraprofessionals, administrators, and parents work together to increase student achievement using this ELD supplemental tool, which has improved ELD levels for kindergarten students.
Current reform efforts in American schools stress the need to hold all children to high standards. In many cases, however, children with limited proficiency in English are seen as needing remedial instruction and are not expected to do as well as other children. Certainly, adjustments need to be made in teaching these children, but expectations and standards should be the same as for other children. Keeping expectations and standards high for all children is a major challenge for the future of American education.

Conclusions
Language development and teaching strategies are closely linked. The teacher of children with limited proficiency in English will inevitably need to modify their instructional style to meet the language needs of this population of students. This means keeping language in the forefront. Teachers need to assess constantly whether children with limited proficiency in English understand what is being said. Subject matter cannot be learned if the children do not understand the language in which it is taught.
The students from 75th Elementary School who participated in the study and received treatment exhibited significantly higher ELD levels on the CELDT test than those who did not receive the treatment. The reclassification of 75th Street School was .10 percent higher than the schools in the local district.
Meaningful activities help them embrace their home culture and honor diversity as they learn a new language and adjust to new social settings. Children need a safe and nurturing environment where they can participate in nonthreatening experiences in English until they are ready to express themselves. The ELD supplemental tool makes it easy to provide those experiences through the use of multilevel strategies, big books, illustrated posters, and a variety of multimodal strategies for making language comprehensible.
This study was conducted to explore the value of a supplemental ELD program with kindergarten students. Many students maintain an ELD level of one until they reach eighth grade. When English language programs have been developed, they have not taken into account the need to align the English language standards with English language arts (ELA) standards so the student can progress in target language acquisition.
The ELD supplemental tool that was used focuses instruction on language input, using strategies designed to help make messages meaningful to students. Tapping prior knowledge or background helps students connect a new language to familiar topics.
The use of real objects, props, visual, and facial expressions or gestures, all provide contextual support, helping to make messages in English more comprehensible. The use of positive feedback and correction by modeling help create a low-stress environment that encourages learners to take risks and experiment with language learning in much the same way they did with their first language.
There are compelling reasons for supporting the development of literacy via a structured ELD program that encourages discovery and allows children to have fun while learning to express themselves in the target language. In conclusion, a supplemental ELD tool is essential to a structured reading program that promotes literacy for all students.
More than one-fifth of American school-age children come from families in which languages other than English are spoken (McDonnell and Hill 1993). Many children from such families are limited in their English proficiency. During the last decade, the number of school children with limited proficiency in English grew 2 ½ times faster than regular school enrollment (August and Hakuta 1993). Given these changes in classroom demographics, it is imperative that all teachers have knowledge about second-language development and instructional strategies for developing language proficiency.

REFERENCES

Adams, Marilyn J. 2002. Open court reading. Available from http://www.mcgraw-hill.com/; Internet; accessed 30 January 2003.

Asher, J. 1972. Children's first language as a model for second-language learning. Modern Language Journal 56: 133-139.

________. 1981. Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher's guidebook. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions. Available from http://www.ehu.es/~tlvweb/InglesEPEM.html/; Internet; accessed 12 February 2002.

Asher J., J. Kusudo, and R. de la Torre. 1974. Learning a second language through commands: The second field-test. Modern Language Journal 58: 24-32.

August , D. and K. Hakuta. 1993. Federal education programs for limited-English-proficient students: A blueprint for the second generation. Available from http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/earlyed/; Internet; accessed 12 February 2002.

Bromley, K., Irwin-Devitis, L., Hires, D. (1999) Graphic Organizers (Grades K-8) New York. N.Y. Literature Scholastic, In Article Date 10/2/07 LA Times, Oct. 30, 2007.

Cardenas-Hagan, 2007. Speech-Language Pathology. http://www .Colorin Colorado.org

CELDT. 2002. See California English Language Development Test (CELDT). 2002.

Cummins, J. 1979. Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research 42, no. 2: 222-251.

________. 1981. The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework, ed. J. Cummins, 3-49. Sacramento, CA: Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education, California State Department of Education.

________. 1986. Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review 56: 18-36.

________. 1989. Empowering language minority students. Sacramento, CA: Association for Bilingual Education.

Engelmann, S. & Carnine, P. (1991). Research on Direct Instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR, Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.

Flood, James, and Diane Lapp. 1996. Literacy instruction for students acquiring English: Moving beyond the immersion debate. Reading Teacher 50, no. 4 (December/January): 356-360.

Gutierrez, Kris D., Patricia Baquendano-Lopez, and Jolynn Asato. 2000a. Crucial issues in California education 2000: Are the reform pieces fitting together? Sacramento, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education.

________. 2000b. English for the children: The new literacy of the old world order, language policy, and educational reform. Bilingual Research Journal 24, no. 1 (winter/spring): 1. Available from http://www.brj.asu.edu/; Internet; accessed
10 January 2003.

Hakuta, K. 1974. Prefabricated patterns and the emergence of structure in second language acquisition. Language Learning 24: 287-297.

________. 1987. Mirror of language: The debate on bilingualism. New York: Basic Books.

Hakuta, K., and L. J. Gould. 1987. Synthesis of research on bilingual education. Educational Leadership 44, no. 6: 38-45.
Hakuta, K., and C. Pease-Alvarez. 1992. Enriching our views of bilingualism and bilingual education. Educational Researcher 21: 4-6.
Hakuta, K, Y. G. Butler, and D. Witt. 2000. How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? Linguistic Minority Research Institute Policy Report 200-1. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California.

Izumi, Lance T. 2000. English language learners have increased! Orange County Register, 18 May, A1.

Krashen, S. D. 1981. Second language acquisition and second language learning. New York: Pergamon Press.

________. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.

________. 1989. We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal 73, no. 4: 440-464.

________. 1993. Power of reading. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

________. 1994. Writing: Research theory and applications. Torrance, CA: Laredo.

________. 1996. Under attack: The case against bilingual education. Oregon, IL: Quality Books.

Krashen, S. D., and T. Terrell. 1983. The natural approach. New York: Pergamon Press.

Krashen, S. D., and D. Biber. 1988. On course: Bilingual education's success in California. Ontario, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.

Martinez, George, Los Angeles Times, October 30, 2007.

Mora, J. K. 2000a. Proposition 227's second anniversary: Triumph or travesty? Available from http://www.coe.sdsu.edu/; Internet; accessed 10 January 2003.

________. 2001a. Effective instructional practices and assessment for literacy and biliteracy development. In Literacy assessment of second language learners, ed. S. R. Hurley and J. V. Tinajero, 149-166. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Proposition 227. 1998. Proposition 227 manual. Available from http://www.sdcoe.
k12.ca.us/iss/prop227/manual/; Internet; accessed 13 January 2003.

Snow, M. A., M. Met, and F. Genesee. 1992. A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content instruction. In The multicultural classroom: Readings for content-area teachers, ed. P. Richard-Amato and M. Snow,
58-70. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
Spear-Swerling, 2007, Learning Disabilities in English Language Learners
Terrell, Tracy D. 1996. The natural approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tinajero, J. and A. Schifini. 1997. Into English! Carmel, CA: Hampton-Brown.

Trujillo, Cheryl. 2001. Bodo and Mimi: Episode 1, short vowels. Rolling Hills Estates, CA: Lili Mar and Rick Zieff.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbasecamp.com

Please Rate this Article

5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 

Not yet Rated