Annotated Bibliography Project

Sally Smith

Professor Nash

ETAP 201

May 15, 2014

Annotated Bibliography

Problem Statement and Research Question

There is no denying that the methods and strategies of teaching English Language Arts to English

language learners have changed in the 20th century (Pădurean, 2014; Wade, 2014; Yang, Gamble, &

Tang, 2014). In schools all around the country, the number of ELL students is rising, which is affecting

both the lives of teachers and students (Rouse, 2014; Rodriguez & Shepard, 2013; Russell, 2014; Scullin

&  Baron,  2014).  The  National  Center  for  Education  Statistics  reported  that  “the  number  of  English  

learners  in  public  schools  rose  from  4.7  to  11.2  million  between  1980  and  2009,”  which  is  a  21% increase

(Sanford, Brown, & Turner, 2014, p. 56). Ash, Rice, Redmonda, Nippold, and Pruitt-Lord (2014) also

stated  that  “an  estimated  5.3  million  children  between  kindergarten  and  12th  grade  received  English  

language learner (ELL) services in 2008–2009”  (p.  52).  With  such  an  increasing number of ELL students,

and implementation of the Common Core Standards, English Language Arts teachers must look for

strategies to structure an environment where ELLs feel comfortable and can receive the support they

need.

Research Question

What developing strategies or practices exist to assist educators in teaching English Language

Arts to ELL students?

Databases and Search Terms

For this annotated bibliography, I used databases provided by the University at Albany on their

library resources website. The Education Full Text and Education Research Complete were the most

helpful for my specific topic. I had a little trouble finding 15 sources for my specific topic, so I had to

broaden it. Initially, I wanted to focus on the use of comic books in instructional techniques for English

language  learners.  Therefore,  I  searched  for  things  like  “learning”  and  “comic  books”  in  the  two  boxes  

provided. These search terms yielded some results, but it was not very successful. After I limited the

results to full text, scholarly, and between 2000 and 2014, there were even fewer results. Afterwards, I

broadened my problem statement and research question to encompass the teaching strategies used with

ELLs,  and  not  just  comic  books.  I  then  searched  for  “teaching  strategies”  and  “ELLs,”  which  yielded  

more results and was more successful. Finally,  I  searched  for  “research”  and  “ELLs”  to  gather  more  

research articles or studies on teaching strategies used with ELLs. These results were successful as well.

As I read these articles, I realized that some discussed elementary students and others discussed college

students. Therefore, I broadened my research once again to include all levels of ELLs, which I found to

be the best idea because it allowed me to not only research the format and success of specific techniques

used with ELLs in specific grade levels, but also the same techniques used in multiple grade levels.

Annotations

Agbatogun,  A.  O.  (2014).  Developing  learners’  second  language  communicative  competence  through  

active learning: clickers or communicative approach? Educational Technology & Society, 17 (2),

257–269.

In this study, the participants were 99 ESL pupils from three primary schools in Ogun State, Nigeria from

ages 10-13.  This  study  used  “a  pre-test, post-test quasi-experimental non-randomised control group

design with two experimental groups exposed to two conditions (the communicative approach and

clickers)  and  a  control  group  taught  with  the  lecture  method”  (Agbatogun, 2014, p. 260). The data was

collected  and  analyzed  using  “boxplot,  paired  samples  t-test, analysis of covariance and multiple

regression  analyses”  (p.  261).  The  t-test statistics helped determine whether a difference existed between

pre-test and post-test scores of each group. In order to evaluate the data, researchers used English

Language  Listening  Tests  and  English  Language  Speaking  Tests  to  measure  pupils’  communicative  

competence (257). The results of the study indicated that there was a significant difference between the

pre-test and the post-test  scores  for  pupils  “in  the  communicative  approach  and  the  clicker’s  groups”  

(262). The results also revealed no significant difference between communicative competence pre-test

scores and post-test scores for pupils in the control group (p. 262). Overall, pupils in the communicative

approach and clicker group did better on the post-test than the pre-test. Pupils in the control groups had

very similar pre and post-test results. The results suggest that classrooms where communicative

approaches and clickers are used have greater communicative competence than traditional ESL

classrooms where the lecture method is used (p. 262). However, while pupils in the clicker group did

better,  the  study  indicated  that  pupils  in  the  lecture  group  had  similar  results,  which  doesn’t  mean  they  

necessary did worse. There was just more improvement in the clicker group. This information is useful to

educators because it reveals new and perhaps better ways to improve ESLs communicative competence.

If educators have been looking for ways to increase learning performance, clickers may work. In addition,

if a teacher plans to ask for clickers to use in his or her classroom, discussing this study with

administrators will help him or her explain why and how these clickers improve performance.

Furthermore, the researchers discussed why  the  control  group’s  communicative  competences  may  be  low.  

These indications could be useful for educators who have ESL students with low competences (p. 265).

Ash, A., Rice, M., Redmonda, S., Nippold, M., & Pruitt-Lord, S. (2014). Effect of language context on

ratings of shy and unsociable behaviors in English language learner children. Language, Speech &

Hearing Services in Schools, 45, 52-66. doi: 10.1044/2013_LSHSS-13-0020

In this study, the participants were about 5.3 million ELL children between kindergarten and 12th grade in

the  United  States.  “The  participants  included  71  children  and  their  mothers,  who  were  divided  into  two  

groups based on their language status. The groups included 34 children who were sequential ELLs and 37

NEs”  (Ash,  et  al.,  2014,  p.  55). Children from the ELL group were mostly from schools and churches in

the Lawrence and Kansas City, Kansas areas and from international student organizations at the

University of Kansas. The ELL group (27 girls, seven boys) included children from ages six to 13.

Children from the NE group were from schools and churches in Lawrence, Kansas, and Salt Lake City,

Utah. The NE group (20 girls, 17 boys) was between ages six and 12. For this study, researchers used

experimental  questionnaires  to  examine  the  children’s  shy  and  unsociable  behavior  in  native-language

and English-speaking contexts (p. 52). Also, at the time of the study, all ELL children were receiving or

received  ELL  support  services.  The  children’s’ mothers also reported their highest educational level. The

researchers collected data on the participants using a variety of measures, or exams. Each participant was

administered three measures to assess their language proficiency. According to the researchers, the exams

administered  had  “high  levels  of  reliability  and  validity  reported  in  the  manuals”  (p.  55).  Specifically,  the  

SLAS  exam  was  used  to  measure  the  children’s  language  ability  in  English  and  in  their  native  language  

(p. 56). Finally, researchers collected data on behavior of these participants by using the behavioral rating

measure.  Researchers  created  a  rating  scale  to  examine  the  children’s  withdrawn  behavior  (p.  56).  The  

data of this study was collected over a short-period of time. The children and mothers completed the

measures in their own homes, during one or two visits that lasted between one to two-and-a-half hours.

The  results  indicated  that  children  and  mothers  in  the  ELL  group  produced  “higher  ratings  of  shy  

behavior in English-speaking versus native-language contexts, but unsociable behavior did not differ

across  the  language  contexts”  (p.  52).  Overall,  shyness  and  unsociability  are  distinguishable  

characteristics  in  ELL  children.  Educators  can  learn  from  this  study  in  evaluating  ELL  students’  behavior.

Examining  children’s  behavior  in  terms  of  language  can  provide  a  valuable  method  for  investigating  

language-influenced behavioral problems. Professionals who provide service for ELLs need to be

conscious of the type of withdrawn behavior children are exhibiting, and under what linguistic context

before  pathologizing  an  ELL’s  behavior  (p.  62).  This  information  is  also  important  to  educators  because  

professionals working with ELLs need to work on establishing what types of withdrawn behavior are

problematic in ELLs and in what ways these behaviors can be effectively measured.

Beem, S. & Quirk, M. (2012). Examining the relations between reading fluency and reading

comprehension for English language learners. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 539- 553. doi:

10.1002/pits.21616

The participants of this study included 49 second-grade, 60 third-grade, and 62 fifth-grade students from

an elementary school in Southern California. Fifty-three percent were female and one hundred percent

were Hispanic. Eighty-six percent were classified as ELL at the time of data collection (Beem and Quirk,

2012,  p.  542).  All  ELL  students’  primary  language  was  Spanish.  These  participants  attended  a  school  

where all students received a free or reduced-cost lunch, which means that most, if not all, came from

low-income families. In this study, researchers investigated the relation between reading fluency and

comprehension.  Researchers  used  “measures  of  oral  reading  fluency…  to  make  decisions  within  these  

frameworks”  (p.  539).  Because  oral  reading  fluency  is  comprised  “of  both  word-level and text-level

skills,  students’  standard  scores  from  the  two  subtests:  the  TOWRE  (SWE  and  PDE  grade-based standard

scores) were combined with scores from the AIMSweb R-CBM passages to form a reading fluency

component  score”  (p.  543).  The  data  was  collected  by  taking  students’  raw  scores  on  the  AIMSweb  R-

CBM and converting them to zscores using grade-level means and standard deviations provided by the

AIMSweb database. The reading fluency component score that resulted was then used as the dependent

reading  fluency  variable  in  all  subsequent  analyses  in  this  study.  The  results  indicated  that  students’  

word-decoding skills were slightly better than their text-level reading skills. However, the overall reading

fluency component score fell in the average range. The overall reading comprehension zscores were

slightly below average. Although the overall relation between reading fluency and comprehension was

consistent with previous research using non-ELL student samples, results also revealed a substantial

number of students (55.5%) who displayed a significant gap between their scores on reading fluency and

comprehension assessments (p. 539). This study and the results are important for educators to consider

because the  results  “suggested  that,  although  reading  fluency  and  comprehension  are  significantly  related  

for ELL students, practitioners should be cautious when making identification and instructional decisions

for ELL students based solely on oral reading fluency data”  (p.  539).  Given  the  education-altering

decisions that professionals make and the increasing numbers of ELL students in U.S. classrooms,

educators  need  to  “better  understand  the  functional  relationship  between  oral  reading  fluency  and  reading  

comprehension  for  ELL  students”  (p.  539).

Danzak, R. L. (2011). Defining identities through multiliteracies: EL teens narrate their immigration

experiences as graphic stories. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55, 187–196.

doi:10.1002/JAAL.00024

The participants of this study were part of the Graphic Journeys project where 32 ELL students narrated

their  families’  immigration  stories  in  the  form  of  a  comic  book.  This  project  took  place  over  the  course  of  

six months in a middle school ESOL classroom in Florida. Students learned about identity, how to write

narratives, and create graphic stories. When finished, these stories were compiled and published as hard

cover books and presented in front of the families/community. This project is part of the identity-as-

narrative and multiliteracies framework. The multiliteracies framework is important because students

today have more access to electronic, Web-based, and multimedia communication devices so teachers

should try to incorporate as much of these skills as they can in the classroom so students can learn and

navigate them. This project had students create comics rather than another genre because comics allowed

the  multimodal  meanings  of  Graphic  Journeys  “become  visually  evident,  as  written  text  and  images  

converged  to  tell  the  students’  stories”  (Danzak,  2011,  p.  189).  Although  this  article  is  not  based  on  a  

study, it does discuss several studies that researched the use of comics in ELL classrooms. Comics

“provide  visual  support  for  ELs’  construction  of  meaning  during  reading”  and  “provide  comprehensible  

input  and  lower  the  affective  filter  for  second  language  readers”  (p.  189).  Overall,  by  using  comic  books,  

ELLs were able to learn language and literacy through multiple modalities and media. They also were

more engaged in their schoolwork. This information is useful to educators because it gives useful ideas as

to how they can engage and interact with ELL students in their classroom. In addition, the narrative

voice,  as  learned  and  used  in  this  project,  “can  empower ELs to simultaneously express their identities

and  advance  confidently  in  their  language  and  literacy  abilities”  (p.  196).  Finally,  this  article  is  useful  to  

educators because it outlines several other ideas, such as: journals, read-alouds, family involvement,

exhibitions, and a list of five ways educators can take action and improve the ELL classroom.

Conclusion

My question investigated strategies or practices that assist educators in teaching English Language

Arts to English language learners. The articles I read and researched answered by research question by

giving specific examples of research and strategies used and their successes and areas of improvement in

classrooms all over the world. Some articles discussed one specific strategy that teachers used in ELL

classrooms while others discussed whole-school or whole-ELL program changes. Furthermore, some of

these articles discussed how these changes make ELLs feel more comfortable and supported. All articles

that discussed the number of ELLs in classrooms indicated that the number has risen significantly in

recent decades, and is expected to rise even more in the coming years.

I found many ELL environments all over the world where changes in education are taking place.

Of the case studies I read, six were from primary schools, one was from high school, and three were from

college. One study took place in a little bit of all three levels and three articles were either from no

specific grade level or the level was not indicated. The locations the case studies took place in included:

Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Puerto Rico, Nigeria, United States, Arad, Taiwan, and Turkey. Some

of the case study locations were unknown. I was very surprised to find such a large variety of articles.

The information that was the most noteworthy for educators was the results of the use of strategies

on ELs. Educators can ponder successful strategies,  but  it’s  their  implementation  and  the  analysis  of  their  

use that will determine their success. The parts of the articles that I focused on the most when reading

were the participants, methods, and results. Some articles also had “limitations” and “implications”

sections that explained why certain changes had to be made due to resources or location or certain

challenges researchers faced when conducting the experiment.

The implications discussed how and why teachers should use the information from the article to

change or improve their teaching. In a few articles, the use of specific tools was discussed. Agbatogun

(2014) said that teachers should use communicative approaches such as clickers in the classroom to

increase competence in ESL classrooms. Some articles discussed the use of models in ELL classrooms,

such as the PLUSS model (Sanford, Brown, & Turner, 2012) and the freewriting model (Scullin and

Baron, 2013). Rabab’ah (2013) said that teachers might consider using CMC models in the ELL

classroom because they encourage females to contribute (p. 110). Two other models for student

improvement in their acquisition of English included the multimodal model and the attainment model

(Rouse, 2014). These articles were very helpful in answering my inquiry question because they gave

specific examples of models teachers could implement in their schools to see results. Also, in these

articles, teachers had measurable results in the forms of graphs or charts that made it easy to see the

success. Almost all of these models were completely new to me, and it was interesting to see how

technology has influenced and increased the strategies available to teachers of ELLs.

Other articles did not focus on specific models, but specific teaching or learning strategies. These

centered more on teaching philosophies of how teachers can support ELLs. One article implied that their

findings validate the importance of bilingualism (Iglesias and Rojas, 2013). Another article discussed the

frequent use of traditional techniques and their effect on ELL learning (Pădurean,  2014).  One  of  the  most  

useful  articles  in  answering  my  inquiry  question  was  Yilmaz’s  (2013)  article  on  feedback. This article

discussed research where students were evaluated using different types of explicit and implicit feedback

(p. 699).

Overall, this research has shown me the endless possibilities of teaching strategies and support

models for ELLs on their journey to English-proficiency.  There  is  no  “impossible”  in  the  world  of  

education as long as technology keeps improving, and researchers continue to try new approaches and

record and discuss results. The most important thing is that teachers, while they teach, continue to learn.

It is in this way that the discoveries educators and researchers make during their experiments find their

way into classrooms all over the world.

References

Agbatogun,  A.  O.  (2014).  Developing  learners’  second  language  communicative  competence  through  

active learning: clickers or communicative approach? Educational Technology & Society, 17 (2),

257–269.

Iglesias, A. & Rojas, R. (2013). The language growth of Spanish-speaking English language learners.

Child Development, 84, 630–646. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01871

Pădurean,  A.  Perspectives  on  teaching  English  as  a  second  language.  (2014).  Are  teachers  ready  to  give  

up the past? Journal Plus Education, X, 222-231.

Rabab’ah,  G.  (2013).  Discourse  functions  and  vocabulary  use  in  English  language  learners’  synchronous  

computer-mediated communication. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 14,

99- 117.

Rouse, M. E. (2014). Preparing the high school classroom for migrant English language learners. Profile:

Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, 16, 199-206.

Sanford, A., Brown, J. E., & Turner, M. (2012). Enhancing instruction for English learners in response to

intervention systems: The PLUSS Model. Multiple Voices For Ethnically Diverse Exceptional

Learners, 13, 56-70.

Scullin, B., & Baron, H. (2013). Using freewriting notebooks to reduce writing anxiety for English

language learners. California Reader, 47, 19-26.

Wade, K. C. (2009). Construyendo un segundo idioma. Zona Próxima, 156-167.

Yilmaz, Y. (2013). The relative effectiveness of mixed, explicit and implicit feedback in the acquisition

of English articles. Science Direct, 41, 691-705.