[Assessment 1207] Re: (no subject)

Share: Share on LinkedIn! Print page! More options

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

Forrest Chisman forrest at crosslink.net
Fri Feb 8 16:49:50 EST 2008


I think that's a fantastic conceptualization. As you know, I am not
well-versed in learning theory, but I can't help believing that these kinds
of ideas would be invaluable to teachers. I would love to hear from the
group whether they think most of their teachers are "up on" these kinds of
insights from learning theory and apply them. Or is this part of the
"professional development" challenge we face. It seems to me that it would
be tragic if we don't have the resources to help teachers tap into as much
of this as there is.


From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov] On
Behalf Of Jodi Crandall
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:40 AM
To: The Assessment Discussion List
Subject: [Assessment 1184] Re: (no subject)


Are many of your students what we now refer to as generation 1.5 students?
They have had much or most of their education in this country, but may still
need extensive help with academic English, especially in writing?

If so, are there any special things that you have tried to help this

Do you also have international students?

Joy Reid has written extensively about "ear" learners (generation 1.5
learners would likely be here) and "eye" learners and how their needs are so
different. Ear learners are those who were immersed in an English-speaking
environment and have learned their English orally. As you suggest, they
have strong Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills or social language, but
may not have developed the academic language required for success in the
community college. Eye learners are just the opposite: they have learned
English through books and lack the fluency of ear learners, but are more
likely to have more standard English While these two groups share some
common needs, they are also very different in others. It's a real
challenge. Getting these ear learners prepared for the college is something
that lots of people are talking and writing about.

There is also the problem with the first group that they speak English and
often are offended when told they need more English, especially when it's

In effect you are teaching only credit ESL, is that right? Are there
linkages with any of the programs in the community that are teaching lower
level ESL?


On Feb 8, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Forrest Chisman wrote:


Thanks for the explanation. I find it VERY useful. It's a very interesting
model. I'm not surprised that your students are motivated for college,
because they've signed up for a college prep track! What worries me are the
limited aspirations of many lower level ESL students who may have college

I understand now why you don't have the resources to operate a more
comprehensive program. I've heard an increasing number of stories about
areas were the LEA runs the federal/state adult education ESL grant program
and has asked the local college to take it over (because the LEA has
concluded it's an "adult" program). Have there been any rumblings of that in
your area?

Best of luck in your good work.


From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov] On
Behalf Of Hinkle, Robert
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:42 AM
To: The Assessment Discussion List; The Assessment Discussion List
Subject: [Assessment 1174] Re: (no subject)

I believe we do have a hard time getting enough students fed into our
program and with the appropriate background to succeed if they do come to
us. It is a real problem. There are some workplace ESL programs which are
run through our Corporate and Continuing Education Office, but those
students rarely, if ever, come to us. And they serve the employees of
specific companies as opposed to the community at large.

Our ESL program is within an academic department in the college
(Communication and Languages) and so is run like every other. ESL students
pay the same tuition and fees as all other students at the college. We do
not receive special government funding beyond what the state and counties
provide for the college as a whole as a part of our yearly budget.

Finances are probably a big reason why we are getting fewer students at the
low levels. Community programs are free or low cost; although in the scheme
of higher education, the community college is less expensive, it may still
be out of reach of many students.

In terms of having a more comprehensive program, we are limited by a small
staff, and the unlikelihood of being able to expand given college budgeting
restraints. In addition, our three full-time faculty members (including
myself) not only teach 15 credit hours per semester but also do the
administrative work required. We do advising, scheduling, and the many other
tasks associate with keeping the program afloat. The only "official"
administrative support for the program is through the 3 hours of overload I
receive to serve as Adjunct Coordinator.

The belief that they can attend college does not seem to be a problem with
our population although I can certainly see that it could be. A growing
problem for us (and many around the country) is the disconnect between high
schools and colleges in terms of student preparation. Either the high
schools do not think the students are college-bound and so don't bother to
give them a college-prep course of study, or there is simply a growing gap
between the expectations of each. Additionally, students seem to think that
a high school diploma equates to college readiness.

We do our best to advise students, but we don't always have enough time -
and as professors primarily - may not know ourselves what all of the options
for students are.



From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of Forrest Chisman
Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 10:38 PM
To: 'The Assessment Discussion List'
Subject: [Assessment 1172] Re: (no subject)

Dear Kevin,

Many thanks for providing all of us with a profile of your program. Seeing
the variety of college program goals and designs is extremely valuable in
stimulating ideas about how to do a better job in delivering ESL.

Personally, I think that it is perfectly valid for colleges to elect to
offer solely pre-academic ESL at the non-credit level. But it does prompt
the concern about whether other programs in the college's service area are
providing non-academic ESL to large enough numbers of students and at a high
enough quality to "feed" the college program - as well as how well their
efforts articulate with yours. I wonder whether this troubles you, and if so
whether/how you have addressed the issue. Frankly, I think one reason why
many colleges offer comprehensive ESL programs is that they would prefer to
"make" pre-academic students themselves, rather than rely on others to do
it. Another reason, of course, if that they may not be eligible for
federal/state grant money unless they offer comprehensive programs. Does
your college receive these funds to support its pre-academic program? If
not, how is it supported financially?

I heartily agree that helping students set realistic goals and understand
their options is essential. I believe, however, that encouraging students to
expand their goals as they succeed is also essential. For example, many
immigrants come from countries where going to college is the privilege of
very few, and thus may consider that an unrealistic goal unless they are
encouraged to take the steps necessary (often one step at a time). The
problem seems to be that it is hard for most programs to find the resources
to provide very much guidance of any of these kinds to most students. I
wonder if anyone has any solutions to THAT issue.

In any event, many thanks for fleshing out an interesting model.


From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov] On
Behalf Of Hinkle, Robert
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:19 PM
To: assessment at nifl.gov
Subject: [Assessment 1148] (no subject)

Hi All,

I have been reading most of the discussion comments and wanted to address a
few issues. First, however, I'll give a summary of our program.

I teach ESL at Raritan Valley Community College in New Jersey. Our program
serves approximately 350 students from diverse language backgrounds. Our
program offers two pre-academic levels of all skills ESL instruction (a six
hour per week non-credit class). In addition, we have 5 levels of academic
ESL preparation divided into three courses - Reading/Writing, Grammar, and
Speaking/Listening). Our highest level Reading/Writing course gives
successful students 6 elective credits that count towards RVCC graduation,
but those credits do not transfer. Our semesters are 15 weeks. If a student
misses 20% of any class, the instructor may withdraw that student (they are
not, however, obliged to withdraw these students). At the moment, the late
enrollment policy is that students may register for a course prior to the
second week of class but not thereafter. Research, of course, indicates that
students who begin a class late have a much higher rate of failure than
those who begin on time.

In our program, we have three full-time faculty and approximately 16-18

We have focused our program on academic prep ESL because we are a small
program with limited resources, and we have a very difficult time finding
qualified adjuncts. Also, a significant majority of our students have
signalled their intention to obtain a college degree. Moreover, there are
community programs that offer basic English skills although there is often a
long waiting list to obtain the services. In other issues, we use the
Accuplacer ESL test for placement and have in-house standardized tests at
the end of each level of grammar and reading/writing

Within our classes, highly educated non-native speakers usually progress
much more quickly. One of the most challenging groups is students who
graduated from local high schools but still have inadequate English skills -
and not infrequently, weak academic skills in general. One of the strategies
that I would personally wish for is real communication between K-12 and
community colleges so that students get the language skills they need before
they enter college. I understand that there is great pressure to move
students out of ESL in many school districts, but ultimately, it does a huge
disservice both financially and in terms of motivation to students whose
skills remain more BICS than CALP.

I agree with those who suggest that first language literacy issues should be
addressed before students enter ESL. However, it becomes complicated to find
funding and support for such efforts. In my experience, students with low
level literacy skills become frustrated and are not ultimately successful -
probably by any definition. I am uncomfortable with the idea that they are
spending hard-earned money when the chances for success in ESL are minimal.
We advise students that the program is academically-oriented; often they
have little understanding of what that means.

I do not agree with the suggestion that the bar be lowered so that students
with low-intermediate skills be allowed in credit classes (at least at my
college). Historically, other faculty have little experience handling
language issues and are very unhappy when students cannot read, write and
converse at an appropriate level of English. They end up feeling helpless.
Students may pass classes; however, I suspect that instructors do not want
to deal with the challenges and so turn a blind eye and let them through.
Recently, there has been a problem in the nursing department with non-native
English speaking students not passing board exams because they enter the
college from other programs and circumvent ESL with us. They have trouble
reading and answering questions on the exam. This is a significant problem
because nursing programs are judged in terms of the success of their
students on these standardized exams.

I think the measure of success should be based on a realistic assessment of
student goals combined with a real-life discussion of the possibilities and
limitations. Ideally, students would have incremental goals so that success
could build. If the goals for students with low literacy levels are not
carefully discussed and planned, then they will likely encounter more
failure than success because their expectaions will be unrealistic. The more
we have the opportunity to talk to students, the more likely it is that they
can develop short-term goals that are within their reach. Unfortunately, we
have no control over the myriad of complications that accrue in their every
day lives.

Apologies for the length.

Kevin Hinkle, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of ESL/Adjunct Coordinator


National Institute for Literacy

Assessment mailing list

Assessment at nifl.gov

To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

Email delivered to crandall at umbc.edu

JoAnn (Jodi) Crandall

Professor and Director

Language, Literacy and Culture Ph.D. Program

Director, Peace Corps Master's Intl Program in ESOL/Bilingual Education

University of Maryland Baltimore County

1000 Hilltop Circle

Baltimore, MD 21250

tel: 410-455-2313

fax: 410-455-8947

eml: crandall at umbc.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lincs.ed.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20080208/c4529d99/attachment.html