There are a plethora of studies on the efficiency of various interventions and programs for English language learners (ELLs), yet their real-life applications require a thorough assessment of each specific situation. Exploring such proposals may provide significant insight into their applicability in a teacher’s specific learning environment, making reflections an essential part of creating a sound curriculum plan. This paper will assess the value and potential uses of two articles about efficient teaching techniques for ELLs.
Summary
These articles focus on improving reading proficiency among ELLs through methods proven by the existing evidence as valid. The first article by Dussling proposes a learning strategy based on a developing understanding of English phonetics during the early stages of teaching. This subject can assist with making attaining English language proficiency easier from an early start without having to prioritize other foundational abilities beforehand (Dussling, 2018). In contrast with a regular curriculum plan, it proposes an early introduction that has the potential to affect skill growth at later steps positively. Its analysis of pretest-posttest statistics reveals that phoneme segmentation and reading scores can be further affected by oral language practice without having to earn sufficient English language proficiency (Dussling, 2018). Nonsense words are also shown to be an excellent training tool, as they do not require understanding their meaning. Instead of focusing on translating material, students must apply their knowledge of phonemes without additional distractions (Dussling, 2018). The second article by Fitton et al. explores the benefits of shared book reading for early ELLs. This paper highlights that oral language skills and literacy, in general, can be improved through shared reading exercises without requiring extensive knowledge of the English language (Fitton et al., 2018). The reviewed interventions show that it is essential to begin teaching this critical skill set early on, rather than after the initial knowledge baggage accumulation. The described practices boost students’ phonological recognition and support a heterogeneous classroom population (Dussling, 2018; Fitton et al., 2018). Moreover, such tools can provide a teacher with a sufficient assessment of their students’ oral skills development.
Reflection
First of all, I agree with the proposed interventions and will assess the possibility of their implementation in my practice. They provide a sufficient amount of evidence regarding their efficiency and prove that such teaching strategies are likely to be beneficial for my classroom. The primary advantage of utilizing the reviewed interventions comes from improvements in my students’ oral language skills. I will be able to begin correcting pronunciations and teach about phonetics at an earlier stage. Moreover, shared reading exercises can provide an opportunity to boost lagging pupils’ reading proficiencies through peer support. Teaching students how to read certain words prior to explaining their meanings reflect real-world self-learning techniques, which allows an educator to utilize more efficient memorization strategies. Mixing groups of varied reading is also an advantage in such interventions, as they do not rely on a specific comprehension level.
However, the primary disadvantage of these interventions is the probability of putting students behind the expected time mark for learning and comprehending the material. If materials for reading are not correctly adapted for ELLs, such lessons might become an exercise in listening, which is not the goal of these interventions. There is also a possibility of students taking incorrect phonemes as proper ones when they are learning from each other without a sufficient attention by an instructor.
Due to the articles’ content, preparations for reading interventions in my future classroom will begin earlier than I have planned before. ELLs will have a greater opportunity to test oral and reading skills, as these language applications are the most common. Real-life experiences from which students can learn will have a more significant impact on my curriculum plans. Moreover, I will pay greater attention to the skill levels of books used as educational materials and how they can cause or alleviate barriers to each exercise’s goal.
The articles suggest that I can teach literacy without directly exploring words’ meanings. Particular sounds and phonemes can be focused on during such lessons to cement students’ understanding of patterns, which will be helpful in later exercises. Moreover, shared reading interventions can build literacy through students listening to others’ phonetic mistakes and being corrected on their pronunciation in real time. However, these articles also imply the need for a teacher to remain vigilant and correct students’ errors in a timely manner. Otherwise, using these techniques may cause incorrect pronunciations to be internalized.
Conclusion
In conclusion, these articles provide valuable information on efficient teaching strategies for ELLs. In my future practice, I will utilize these interventions to improve my students’ reading and oral language skills. Shared reading exercises can give an insight into pupils’ capabilities, as well as allow quick corrections of their pronunciation. Moreover, beginning reading interventions at the early stage of learning English gives students a chance to understand and internalize phonetic pronunciations of various parts of words without having to know their meaning. Such strategies can optimize a teacher’s curriculum and create a solid feedback loop for students’ skills.
References
Dussling, T. M. (2018). Examining the effectiveness of a supplemental reading intervention on the early literacy skills of English language learners. Literacy Research and Instruction, 57(3), 276-284.
Fitton, L., McIlraith, A. L., & Wood, C. L. (2018). Shared book reading interventions with English learners: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 88(5), 712-751.