The article begins by discussing the history of ELL (also called heritage language students in the article) students in the state of California. Proposition 227 supported an English-only curriculum and claimed that ELL learners would learn English much more quickly if they were taught only in English. Senate Bill 2042 replaced the Cross Cultural, language, and Academic Development (CLAD) credential with an Authorization to Teach English Learners credential which did not address the cultural needs of ELL students. Cline and Necochea argue that an English-only curriculum is not supported by effective teaching methods that are designed to help ELL students. Cline and Necochea’s solution to this problem is to provide a Primary Language Support
…show more content…
The potential of the technology has not yet been fully explored, unfortunately, with many poor and inner city schools lacking the hardware and software to provide high quality computer assisted instruction. Although there is no social justice and equity standard, it is axiomatic that schools in poverty environments with a high percentage of ELLs have the same technology needs to be value added, not just electronic “drill and kill” activities, by incorporating relevant primary language and cultural artifacts as part of the core curriculum. It heavily relies on the quality of technology, which is not always available to every school in the U.S. Another ineffective way being integrated is cross age and peer tutoring. Although, there are great benefits of peer tutoring such as enhancing basic skills and self-improvement. There is the issue of the peer tutor not being the most qualified to help the ELL student. There is no requirement of knowing or being fluent in another language. This raises the key issue of how much does the ELL student’s education gets affected. For this reason, it is important to realize on why peer tutoring may not be the method that is the most
The potential of the technology has not yet been fully explored, unfortunately, with many poor and inner city schools lacking the hardware and software to provide high quality computer assisted instruction. Although there is no social justice and equity standard, it is axiomatic that schools in poverty environments with a high percentage of ELLs have the same technology needs to be value added, not just electronic “drill and kill” activities, by incorporating relevant primary language and cultural artifacts as part of the core curriculum. It heavily relies on the quality of technology, which is not always available to every school in the U.S. Another ineffective way being integrated is cross age and peer tutoring. Although, there are great benefits of peer tutoring such as enhancing basic skills and self-improvement. There is the issue of the peer tutor not being the most qualified to help the ELL student. There is no requirement of knowing or being fluent in another language. This raises the key issue of how much does the ELL student’s education gets affected. For this reason, it is important to realize on why peer tutoring may not be the method that is the most