Principles of Effective Instruction for English Learners

The Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) has developed a set of principles of effective
instruction for English learners based on research on English learner instruction and on CAL’s
extensive experience working with these students and their teachers. These principles guide
CAL’s professional development services for educators who work with English learners.
Principle 1: Learn about, value, and build on the languages, experiences, knowledge, and
interests of each student to affirm each student’s identity and to bridge to new learning.
Students arrive at school with “funds of knowledge” (Gonzalez, Moll, & Amanti, 2005; Moll,
Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992), which can be drawn on during instruction. Acknowledging
students’ languages and cultures and treating these as resources in the classroom can build
bridges between what students already know and what they are learning in school (Trueba,
1989). This is a critical component of culturally responsive instruction (Au, 1993; Banks, 1994;
Gay, 2000)—that is, taking students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences into account in order
to make instruction more appropriate and effective for them. Drawing on students’ multiple
languages, literacies, and cultures, and affirming their identities within the classroom can expand
students’ learning possibilities and help them to succeed academically (García, 2009; Gutierrez,
2008).
Principle 2: Use multiple tools and sources of information to continually learn about and
observe student performance, using the knowledge gained to inform teaching.
Formative assessment of students during classroom instruction provides teachers with important
information about how the students are doing. Formative assessments should be constructed to
allow students to show what they understand about content concepts using oral, written, or other
expressive modalities and to have sufficient supports (such as word banks or visual aids) so that
students can demonstrate what they know even if their productive language skills are limited.
Content understanding and language proficiency should both be considered when using
formative assessment for forming student groups, reporting progress, or considering remediation.
Caution should be taken when interpreting students’ scores on standardized assessment
measures, particularly when these measures have not been normed on English learners. These
measures may not give an accurate picture of what students are able to do, whereas formative
assessment and ongoing observation of students can provide a fuller picture of student progress
(Gottlieb, 2006).
Principle 3: Involve every student in authentic, challenging, and engaging academic
experiences, including tasks that prompt them to use critical thinking skills and that relate
to their lived experiences.
English learners should not be held back from engaging with grade-level content; rather, the
content should be prepared and presented in such a way that students of all language
backgrounds can engage with it meaningfully while practicing and learning more language.
Students learn language through active engagement with others in content study, as well as by
answering questions and engaging in tasks that require the use of higher order thinking skills.

© Center for Applied Linguistics 2013 1

Student engagement is essential in all activities using any or all of the four language domains.
For example, Guthrie and Alvermann’s (1999) engaged readers are those who enjoy reading, are
motivated to read and to succeed through reading, aim to understand what they read, and believe
in their own reading abilities. Creating contexts to promote engagement in reading as well as in
the other language domains involves choosing texts and topics that are interesting and relevant to
students, making connections to students’ lives, and providing goals for students to strive toward.
Because language learning is not just a technical process of learning a system of rules, but also
an affective process that involves students’ formation and reformation of their personal identities,
language learning is intimately related to how students feel about interacting in the target
language. Promoting positive interaction with the target language involves motivating students
through elements of their environment, including their social relationships, so it is important to
consider students’ personal stories when working to motivate them. One way teachers can relate
to students’ backgrounds and promote student engagement is by choosing texts from a range of
ethnic traditions, including texts that use students’ first languages and different varieties of
English and that are set in contexts that may be familiar to students.
Students will learn best through authentic experiences that challenge, motivate, and engage them
in content. Through these experiences, they will also practice and gain proficiency in English,
especially when activities are thoughtfully planned with student capabilities and interests in
mind.

Principle 4: Plan for and develop all four language domains (listening, speaking, reading,
and writing) through meaningful, task-based content instruction.
It is critical that students be given opportunities to participate in classroom activities through all
four language domains (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), as development of proficiency
in each of the domains is interdependent on the other three. For instance, a major finding of the
National Literacy Panel (August & Shanahan, 2006) was that oral language development is
related to literacy development. Creating and posting language objectives along with content
objectives helps communicate to students that language learning is an important classroom goal
(Echevarría, Vogt, & Short, 2013). These objectives can also serve as a planning tool for
teachers to ensure that opportunities are provided for students to use all language domains.
Opportunities to engage in learning through all four domains should be provided through
meaningful, task-based content instruction. Teachers should be able to identify the language that
is embedded in the content, including how the key vocabulary, grammatical patterns, phrases,
and other features of the language function to convey the content. They can then teach the
embedded language to the students and help them learn to use these language forms in the types
of meaningful contexts in which they tend to appear (Schleppegrell, 2004). It is most effective
for students to learn language forms embedded in academic content, with teachers providing
corrective feedback as appropriate and useful within the course of classroom activities (Ellis,
2008).

© Center for Applied Linguistics 2013 2

Principle 5: Involve every student in academic interaction with peers who represent a
variety of proficiency levels and with proficient speakers and writers, including the teacher.
For students to gain proficiency in English—and academic English in particular—it is crucial for
them to have opportunities to interact in English with a variety of interlocutors (Valdés, Capitelli,
& Alvarez, 2011; Wong Fillmore, 1992). Producing language in addition to receiving language is
critical in the language acquisition process, so students need opportunities to practice speaking
and writing in addition to listening and reading. Their linguistic output can contribute to
language acquisition in ways that may differ from and complement linguistic input (Swain,
1985).
Within interactional contexts in the classroom, feedback on students’ oral output can also help
them develop proficiency, for example, by helping them to notice certain language forms in
context, which can aid them in acquiring these forms (Mackey, 2006). Additionally, promoting
the use of native languages and translanguaging—using bilingualism as a resource—in pairs or
groups can facilitate understanding, encourage students to assist one another, and empower
students to participate in more meaningful ways (García, Flores, & Woodley, 2012).

Principle 6: Scaffold instruction so that every student is able to participate in academically

challenging, grade-level content instruction while developing academic language and
literacy.
It is important to provide supports for making oral and written language more comprehensible
and to aid students in production of language as well (Gibbons, 2002; Wood, Bruner, & Ross,
1976). Scaffolds can come in many forms, including written, visual, and aural. Consider all of
these modalities when planning scaffolds. Using a student’s first language is one effective way to
scaffold information and provide a bridge to new language and content. For example, students
could be allowed to first write or say something in their first language then perhaps translate it
into English, or they could be offered resources such as bilingual dictionaries. Other scaffolds
include verbal scaffolding, such as prompting students to extend their answers (e.g., “Tell me
more” or “Why do you think that?”), and instructional scaffolding, such as providing word banks
or sentence frames that could help English learners further develop their writing skills. Knowing
when and how to remove scaffolds requires careful observation and formative assessment of
students. Teachers need to know what assistance students may still need in order to communicate
what they know in English, and they need to maintain a balance between challenging and
supporting students (Mariani, 1997).
Principle 7: Engage and communicate with all stakeholders of student success, especially
with students’ families and communities.
Student academic learning and success involve more than just what happens in the classroom.
There are many valuable ways to engage families and communities in students’ learning
(Barbour & Barbour, 2001). For example, teachers can communicate to parents and others the
classroom learning goals, expectations of students, and home supports that can complement
classroom activities. In addition, they can let parents know that developing their children’s native
language literacy through home literacy activities will also help students’ development of

© Center for Applied Linguistics 2013 3

literacy in English, as well as help them become biliterate (Jimenez, 1997; Thomas & Collier,
1997). Teachers can also learn from students’ families and communities in order to better
understand their students and thus be able to more effectively engage these students in the
learning process. Students’ identities are complex and multifaceted and play a critical role in
how they participate in classroom activities and, consequently, the degree to which they succeed
academically (Bucholtz, 1999; Rymes & Pash, 2004; Wortham, 2006). Students’ roles within
their families and communities are an important part of their identities but teachers may not be
aware of these roles. However, when teachers better understand their students in the contexts of
these broader communities, they are better equipped to teach them effectively.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Factors beyond instruction that affect student success
The seven practices described above are critical features of effective instruction for English
learners. However, there are many factors beyond instruction that affect students’ success in the
classroom and beyond. Classroom-level factors include teachers’ backgrounds and the ways in
which they relate to students and to English learners in particular. The role of other students is
also important; for example, are they respectful of each other and of the diverse stories of
students within the class? At the school level, program design is an important factor. Is the
program effective in helping students learn both language and content? To what extent does it
promote the types of practices listed above? School climate also plays a crucial role. For
example, how is diversity viewed, not just on bulletin boards, but in the everyday interactions
between administrators, teachers, and students? Do students feel their cultural and linguistic
backgrounds are valued? Another crucial factor in students’ success is the availability and
accessibility of appropriate services and extracurricular activities. For example, to promote
career and college readiness at the high school level, are counseling services available for
students to learn about options for attending and paying for college and preparing for careers?
Are there factors that may inhibit certain groups of students, such as English learners, from
accessing these services or participating in extracurricular activities? Does the school strive to
reduce these barriers as much as possible? Finally, parents and the community play a critical role
in students’ success. Empowering parents to participate in their students’ education and
promoting family literacy can be invaluable in promoting English learners’ academic
achievement and personal development.

References
Au, K. H. (1993). Literacy instruction in multicultural settings. New York: Harcourt Brace.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of
the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Youth and Children. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Banks, J. A. (1994). An introduction to multicultural education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Barbour, C., & Barbour, N. H. (2001). Families, schools, and communities: Building partnerships for
educating children. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bucholtz, M. (1999). “Why be normal?”: Language and identity practices in a community of nerd girls.
Language in Society, 28, 203-223.
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2013). Making content comprehensible for English learners:
The SIOP Model (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

© Center for Applied Linguistics 2013 4

Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
García, O. (2009.) Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the 21st century. In A. Mohanty, M.
Panda, R. Phillipson, & T. Skutnabb-Kangas (Eds.), Multilingual education for social justice:
Globalising the local (pp. 128-145). New Delhi, India: Orient Blackswan.
García, O., Flores, N., & Woodley, H. (2012). Transgressing monolingualism and bilingual dualities:
Translanguaging pedagogies. In A. Yiakoumetti (Ed.), Harnessing linguistic variation to improve
education (pp. 45-75). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, & practice. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the
mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in
households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gottlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to
academic achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Guthrie, J. T., & Alvermann, D. E. (Eds.). (1999). Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy
implications. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gutierrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research
Quarterly, 43(2), 148-164.
Jimenez, R. T. (1997). The strategies, reading abilities, and potential of five low-literacy Latina/o readers
in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(3), 224-243.
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing, and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics,
27(3), 405-430.
Mariani, L. (1997). Teacher support and teacher challenge in promoting learner autonomy. Perspectives,
23(2).
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a
qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.
Rymes, B., & Pash, D. (2004). Questioning identity: The case of one second-language learner.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 32(3), 276-300.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible
output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition
(pp. 235-256). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students (NCBE
Resource Collection Series No. 9). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual
Education.
Trueba, H. (1989). Raising silent voices: Educating the linguistic minorities for the 21st century. New
York: Newbury House.
Valdés, G., Capitelli, S., & Alvarez, L. (2011). Latino children learning English: Steps in the journey.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Wong Fillmore, L. (1992). Learning a language from learners. In C. Kramsch & S. McConnell-Ginet
(Eds.), Text and context: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study. Lexington, MA:
Heath.
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
Wortham, S. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic
learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

© Center for Applied Linguistics 2013 5