While I believe that this second-grade student missed a
great deal in all three areas, I would select number two as the correct
response.
My reasoning for this is as
follows:
"Content-area lessons" are not designed to teach
language. Language is necessary to better understand them, but the intent is to convey
core knowledge to the student. And while his skills may be supported by working with the
language in these lessons, much is based upon what the teacher shares/teaches, and the
rest in how she/he manages to get the students to become engaged for better
understanding and recall of the core
material.
"Opportunities to learn" is much like content
area lessons. Learning is the basic focus in the classroom, in providing opportunities
to learn. The opportunities can be passive or interactive, but once
again, unless they are language lessons to specifically speak to the needs of an ESL
student, the results will be the same: not centralized to the language needs of that ESL
student.
"Lack of peer interaction" would be my greatest
concern. In working or playing with peers, the second-grade student is practicing his
language skills all the time: whether he is processing what is said to him or around
him, or constructing language (choosing vocabulary, etc.) to communicate with his peers,
language is the key component. It is not secondary to another agenda. Learning math or
science is the priority. Learning English, even, is not learning the language, but how
to USE the language in writing, etc.
However, interacting
with English-speaking peers takes the pressure off the student to be learning other
things while using language, and allows him to work on his skills for as long as he is
with his peers. This would be what would cause my greatest concern for a struggling ESL
student: to lack the ability to learn and put language skills to work by practicing on a
regular basis. It is the repetition of a skill that best promotes its
mastery.
No comments:
Post a Comment