Strategy and Process of Teaching a Second Language to People with Disabilities - Research Paper Example

?Teaching strategies to with severe disabilities who are second language learners Introduction with severe disabilities suffer fromdifficulties in learning and in carrying out daily independent activities. Their mental capacity is limited by their physiology, with issues in terms of reading, writing, comprehension, and deduction. As a result, they are often delayed in their development and their expected learning milestones. For students who are second language learners, the process of learning is even more difficult because they cannot understand the medium of instruction. The challenge is for teachers to develop strategies which can help manage these learning difficulties and barriers. This paper shall discuss the various strategies which can be applied by the teacher in order to effectively teach students with severe disabilities who are also second language learners. Body Learning impaired students refer to students who have been diagnosed with learning disabilities, disabilities which are ranging from processing deficits (input, integration, storage, or output) (Rathus, 2010). It also includes function impairment, developmental dyslexia, dysphagia, aphasia, as well as low IQ scores. These impairments often imply that the students are not performing well in school and may be even delayed in their studies (Rathus, 2010). Second language students are those students who are in the process of learning a second language. More often than not, they may be immigrant students trying who are not native English speakers. The challenge in this case is how the teacher can communicate with the second language students, especially those students who are learning impaired. The teacher must develop strategies in order to manage the challenges in teaching these students. Schools are institutions which represent the richness and diversity of culture and languages, including customs and traditions. For most students, parents, and other educators, establishing ways by which to instruct all children effectively and meaningfully is considered a professional and pedagogical responsibility (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Specifically, ways to manage the knowledge which many people have established from the bilingual and special education fields have also been established by various academicians. Crucial to the process of teaching children is to secure a thorough understanding of his or her learning based on his or her specific learning skills, weaknesses, and needs (Wagner, et.al., 2005). There is a need to secure a complete and informal evaluation in order to ensure that the teacher understands what the child knows, and what he already understands. The primary assumption on learning is that there is also a need to secure a strong sense of a student’s language, his home setting, his values, and his previous experiences in his current or previous school (Lopez-Reyna, Birnbaum, 2002). There are eight principles which are considered effective in teaching English language learners (Gersten and Jimenez, 1994). These principles include the need to secure higher order thinking opportunities as well as expectations, including the higher level of involvement in one’s own learning, experiences, and cultural diversity. Suggestions on the use of mediation via visual organizers and modelling the application of appropriate resources have also been made. Support for the application of collaborative and cooperative learning has also been advocated (Calderon, et.al., 2011). A determination on which language to use for learning impaired students has often been posed. Even as the benefits of ensuring instruction in a child’s primary language has been seen in terms of general education settings, it is not clear how the learning should unfold for learning impaired students (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Using English can be a challenge because it would take years to master the language for second language learners. In effect, teaching academic skills to students in their native language seems to be the more effective method of teaching because children are able to discuss, develop, and understand what they are learning when they are not expected to translate or understand their lessons in English (Gersten and Woodward, 1994). However, it is commonly believed that teaching English language learners with learning impairments in their native language further affects their ability for cognitive processing. Such learning is therefore often discouraged. In general, the fast learners are able to translate knowledge from their native language to English after being exposed to language in school and after having secured academic skills in their native language (Jimenez, et.al., 1995). As a result, the bilingual learners are able to use strategies which help them use what they knew from their native language into English. However, as discussed by Jimenez, et.al., (1995), this process can be more complicated for those who are learning impaired. For students who have learning impairments, teachers have to evaluate the student’s native language speaking skills and determine the knowledge extent and skills which can be further improved for the native language (McCardle, et.al., 2005). If students have no knowledge in the English language, it would not be logical to engross him or her in English and then also expect the student to learn new information. English language learners require specific instructions in order to transmit what they know in their native language instruction (Chamot and O’Malley, 1996). When students have impairments, these resources are important to their learning process. Although some of the decisions of educators are based on the power to secure collaboration and resources, ideally, students must be allowed to utilize their native language to resolve issues in their academics including reading comprehension, mathematics, and reading (Blom and Paradis, 2013). Instructing students in their native language gives students a familiar language with which they can easily communicate. It also creates an accepting environment for students, an environment where his culture, interests, values, and experiences can be incorporated. As the choice of language may be complicated and difficult for teachers, whatever the decision would be has to be founded on various factors including the main language of the child, the child’s parents, the main caregiver, and the community in general (Brice and Roseberry-McKibbin, 2001). The amount of time that the child is exposed to the English language and his previous experience with different bilingual and ESL programs in schools are important elements to assess. As emphasized by the UNESCO (cited by Brice and Roseberry-McKibbin, 2001), it is important to acknowledge that the primary medium for teaching a child is his native language. In the psychological sense, it is the language which would work best in his mind for purposes of expression and understanding. In the sociological sense, it is a tool of identification within the community where he belongs; and academically, the child learns speedily through his native language as compared to other unfamiliar tools of instruction (in Brice and Roseberry-McKibbin, 2001). Maximizing the learning opportunities among non-native learning impaired children has best established in conditions which support a social and cultural construction (Echevarria, et.al., 2000). Instructional elements have to be managed to ensure that the students learn the new language as well as the essence of the lesson. A primary element in teaching non-native speaking students, especially those with learning disabilities is to ensure that they have much input in the lesson (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Significant input is expected as is the use of meaningful language for English language learners. It is made up of language which learners already know, including new information, which can be understood within the context of known language, supported by the efforts of the speaker to utilize signs which would ensure comprehension (Krashen, 1985). Within a sheltered instruction setting, teachers utilize second language learning elements in the classroom to ensure comprehension, managing the language by adjusting speech rate, using context elements, and relating the lesson to the experiences of students (Echevarria, et.al., 2000). Sheltered instruction settings include English language learners who use different languages. Sheltered instruction however includes more than additional techniques and Echevarria, et.al., (2000) declare that sheltered instruction is part of school wide efforts to improve learning. Sheltered instruction teachers help adjust the level of English used in the classroom with the students using techniques like visual aids, peer tutorials, native language support, as well as demonstrations. Through sheltered instruction, there is a chance to create an environment where students feel comfortable about taking risks in language. Teachers in this field also use specific connections between the information being transmitted and the experiences of students (Eppolito, et.al., 2013). The goal is also towards expanding the vocabulary of students. In order to guarantee sheltered instruction, student engagement, and interaction with the teacher and with other students is high, thereby ensuring a detailed path towards higher-order comprehension. Students are also taught functional language tools, including asking for clarification, confirming information, disagreeing, explaining, persuading, and even arguing (Eppolito, et.al., 2013). Sheltered instructional classrooms provide instructional exchanges as well as meaningful activities where students can use their new knowledge and practice their new language. Teaching guidelines in terms of preparation, instruction, and assessment are suggested by Echevarria, et.al., (2000). Lesson preparation must include a clear indication of the goals and objectives of the lesson content, a clear indication of the objectives of the language, detailing of content which is fitting for the age and education background of students, use of supplemental resources to ensure clear and meaningful lessons, adaptation of lessons to the level of students, and planning of meaningful activities which would include practice opportunities for reading, writing, listening, as well as speaking (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Instructions in the plan include detailing ways by which students can link their past experiences to the new elements in their life, focusing on key terms. In relation to key terms, different strategies like vocabulary self-selection can be used, as well as personal dictionaries, and definition maps (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Verbal communication which can be understood by all students is also part of the instruction process. Adjustments would include clear enunciation, speaking slowly, repetitions, and avoidance of jargon when gestures, visuals, and demonstrations are used. The clear use of strategies in learning and retention of knowledge including providing sufficient opportunities for students to learn is also part of the instruction process. More particularly, focus is made on cognitive and socio-affective elements (Chamot and O’Malley, 1996). Instructing also includes the promotion and establishment of opportunities for interaction between teachers and students and students with other students. This includes the process of creating opportunities for students to clarify concepts and grouping students as support systems for each other (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Providing hands-on resources for students by which they can practice the content knowledge and activities where they can apply content is also important. The teachers also use activities in order to incorporate reading, listening, and speaking skills and practicing what they are learning in general. These lessons must therefore manifest the content and language goals in teaching (Freeman, 2012). This parameter is also important in pacing the lesson based on students’ needs. In terms of reviewing and assessing, emphasis is indicated on the kinds of review and evaluation which can be seen in the lessons. This would include the extent to which main elements and vocabulary are assessed with the application of constructive feedback, clarification, and the use of instructional decisions founded on student responses (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Based on the discussions on sheltered instruction, its elements are based on the needs of students having learning and behavioural disorders. Thoughtful consideration is therefore important to manage their learning needs, including provisions of various modes for participating, strategies for instruction, as well as formative assessment. There are holistic approaches which can be used in order to ensure literacy, with compatibilities relating to sheltered instruction teaching techniques. Daniels and colleagues (1999) discuss whole language learning as part of the philosophy of learning, a general approach to curriculum which aligns with various distinctive and closely linked activities. Discussions on strategies often used by teachers supporting whole language have also been forwarded by Daniels, et.al. (1999). These strategies include: reading aloud daily, emphasizing higher-order thinking, teaching unknown words, organizing children into groups where they can work well together, managing literacy activities in various interdisciplinary elements, and ensuring that students set specific goals and participate in self assessment. For traditional special education, a basic element on learning how to read and write has faded out. This principle indicates that the best way to read and write is to read and write; in effect, students have to be engrossed in print and the written word, ensuring various opportunities in their school day to utilize written text, for securing information, for pleasure, for establishment of spelling and writing abilities, as well as for communication (Daniels, et.al., 1999). Teachers of children with learning disabilities often encounter pressure to meet reading and writing objectives; these teachers are often likely to lose sight of the other literacy developmental elements and therefore focus more on imparting isolated skills. Although imparting explicit skills and strategies is a crucial part of the curriculum, it does not unfold without a holistic instructional program (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). There are numerous examples on how teachers can impart instructions relating to explicit skills and strategies in whole language setting. Such explicit instructions are different from the traditional set of instructions, referring to how, when, and why reading skills are imparted, and the meaning emanating from the learning of skills (Dudley-Marling, 1996). The importance of establishing a classroom environment which invites reading and demonstrational reading has also been indicated. This can be accomplished by prompting students to evaluate different texts, song lyrics, including comic books and news articles (Dudley-Marling, 1996). Posting directions, posting samples of children’s work, and charting stories are also effective classroom techniques for learning. Students also demonstrably enjoy reading and reading aloud, with teachers noting improvements in vocabulary, comprehension, interests, as well as oral language building (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Reading aloud may involve chapters of books or poems, with three to four students a day being called on to read. There are various specific techniques which have been recommended in order to promote student’s learning. Literature sharing groups is one of these techniques. This technique includes the organization of a group of students with different reading skills and interests with students designated specific roles (McCardle, et.al., 2005). Assisted reading has also been recommended and includes the teacher sitting behind each student and reading along with him/her (Purcell-Gates, 1996). Through this process, the teacher uses a reasonable and fluent pace and the student attempts to match the teacher’s fluency. In order to help learning impaired students in their comprehension, the Self-Monitoring Approach to Reading has been recommended. In this approach, the student is asked to monitor his progressive comprehension by marking the part where he has understood the text, where he is confused, or where he is unfamiliar with the text (McCardle, et.al., 2005). After marking, the teacher then models and demonstrates meaning by clarifying the areas of confusion. A rereading of the passages would follow after comprehension is improved. Different methods to improve comprehension can be used, including consulting in the dictionary. In terms of writing, students seem to learn best when they are involved in relevant writing activities which ensure motivation and purpose essential in learning how to spell, learning form and different styles and rules in writing. The application of the writing process alongside specific instructions of strategies relating to effective writing can be a useful tool in managing students with learning impairments (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Students having writing disabilities may not know all the processes and often write in ways which do not involve the monitoring of the elements of writing which would eventually culminate in coherent composition. Writing abilities are built when students are given an opportunity to write about subjects that are relevant to them (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Within the above context of teaching writing, students become more exposed to spelling rules, grammatical rules, meanings, contractions, and other relevant elements. The students are able to consider elements like who, when, where, what, and how in their story-telling and writing. In relation to teaching mathematics for learning impaired students, it is often acceptable to believe that language which is most understood by the student must be that which is founded on the language of instruction, especially when new information is being imparted (Lopez-Reyna, 2002). Since math is most often taught in English, there are significant language and cultural elements which have to be considered. For instance, students in some countries are often instructed certain ways in math. The comprehension of math may even be made more difficult when teachers sometimes misuse words for same symbolic representations (Wagner, et.al., 2005). Terms expressed in a foreign language may be used interchangeably, and often understood differently. Particular attention must be attributed towards assisting students establish connections between the terms applied in the native and the English language and the relationship of the procedures learned and those used in the classroom. Conclusion In general, teaching learning impaired English who are also second language learners can be a complicated and challenging process. In order to manage the teaching process for these students, it is important to first assess the qualities of the students, including their skills, and impairments. Using the native language of students is preferred because it represents a more familiar and comfortable language to them. However, where English is an essential aspect of the lesson, different strategies can be applied in order to ensure learning. These strategies include the initial planning process, sheltered instruction, reading aloud, writing activities, including cooperative and coordinated learning with the student. For teachers, it is important to apply the strategy which can best fit each student because each student may have a specific impairment, may have specific skills, and a specific learning pace which all eventually impact on how well they can learn in the classroom setting. References Calderon, M., Slavin, R., and Sanchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127. Blom, E. and Paradis, J. (2013). Past Tense Production by English Second Language Learners With and Without Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 56(1), 281. Brice, A., and Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2001). Choice of languages in instruction: One language or two? Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 48-53. Chamot, A.U., and O’Malley, J.M. (1996). The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA): A model for linguistically diverse classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 96 (3), 259-274. Daniels, H., Zemelman, S., and Bizar, M. (1999). Whole language works: Sixty years of research. Educational Leadership, 57, 32-37. Dudley-Marling, C. (1996). Explicit instruction within a whole language framework: Teaching struggling readers and writers. Balanced instruction: Strategies and skills in whole language, 23-38. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. and Short, D. J. (2000). Making content comprehensible for English language learners: The SIOP Model. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Eppolito, A., Lasser, C. J. and Klingner, J. (2013). English Language Learners and Learning Disabilities. Advances in Special Education, 24, 141-160. Freeman, B. (2012). Using digital technologies to redress inequities for English language learners in the English speaking mathematics classroom. Computers & Education, 59(1), 50-62. Gersten, R.M., and Jimenez, R.T. (1994). A delicate balance: Enhancing literature instruction for students of English as a second language. The Reading Teacher, 47(6), 438-449. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman. Jimenez, R.T., Garcia, G.E., and Pearson, P.D. (1995). Three children, two languages, and strategic reading: Case studies of bilingual and monolingual readers. American Educational Research Journal, 32 (1), 67-97. Lopez-Reyna, N. (2002). Instructional Strategies for English Language Learners with Disabilities, in Serving English Language Learners with Disabilities [online]. Available at: http://www.isbe.state.il.us/bilingual/pdfs/bilingual_manual2002.pdf [Accessed 15 July 2013]. McCardle, P., Mele?McCarthy, J., & Leos, K. (2005). English language learners and learning disabilities: Research agenda and implications for practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 68-78. Purcell?Gates, V. (1996). Stories, coupons, and the TV Guide: Relationships between home literacy experiences and emergent literacy knowledge. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(4), 406-428. Rathus, S. A. (2010). Childhood and adolescence: Voyages in development. Cengage Learning. Wagner, R. K., Francis, D. J., & Morris, R. D. (2005). Identifying English language learners with learning disabilities: Key challenges and possible approaches. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 6-15. Read More