The purpose of Structured English Immersion is to get ELL to learn English as quickly as possible so they can be mainstreamed into mainstream content areas by immersing ELL in a totally English environment. The English Immersion program is modeled after the French Immersion program in Canada where English speaking kids are totally immersed in French to learn the French language. Same token, ELL become immersed in English to learn English.
The advantage of Structured English Immersion is that students can learn English quickly and be mainstreamed fairly quickly into the main class.
Structured English Immersion is strongly influenced by Stephen Krashen's many language theories such as comprehensible input, communicative competence, acquisition vs learning. Learning a second language according to Krashen is just like learning a first language, first the ELL has to listen to comprehensible input for a long time before speech occurs.
This comprehensible input comes in the form of using visuals, images, charts, blackboard, body gestures, Simon Says kind of games to get students to learn English without resorting to translation into the first language as much as possible so that students learn English directly. Students interact with this comprehensible input in English and gradually learn enough English to be able to speak English, read and write English. In the meantime, students can go to certain mainstream classes that do not have much English spoken like gym, art or science lab.
When students learn English through translation, then students have to pause and think about what the proper word is in English based on the word in their NS. With English Immersion, students learn English directly so when students think of the word in a conversation, they think directly in English just like NS of English.
Another advantage of the English Immersion program is that it is not as hard to find English speaking teachers. Also, if you have a classroom of many different languages like Farsi, Chinese, Vietnamese, French, Tagalog, etc...then one teacher would suffice. The disadvantage of Bilingual Education is that it may not be possible to find a bilingual teacher who speaks Tagalog or the 15 different other languages spoken in an ELL classroom. Having one ESL teacher saves the school money.
Some Bilingual Education advocates consider the Structured Immersion program racist because students learn only English and forget about their heritage language and their culture. Ovando thinks that the advantage of Bilingual Education is children can learn to maintain their heritage/culture while still learning English rather than lose their heritage language by immersing themselves in an English Only program. Ovando considers this total immersion into American culture as a stripping away of ELL culture like what the missionaries did with the Native Americans when Native American children went to school without learning any of their heritage language or culture.
There has been much debate as to the best way to teach ELL. Should schools use the Bilingual Education model where students keep speaking their L1, learn content areas in their L1, and stay in the bilingual class until they learn enough L2 to go into a mainstream classroom? With Bilingual Ed, advocates say, students learn two languages and learn content area in two languages. However, this process can take up to 3 to 4 years whereas with the English Immersion model, students transfer into mainstream classes in a year.
Which ESL/ELL program does your school use? Which do you think is the most effective way to teach ELL students? English Only? or Bilingual Ed?
No comments:
Post a Comment