Core Instructional Strategies Shuang Wu

Introduction In every Language class, it is supposed to have a well structured process including Opening, Introduction, Guided Practice, Modeling, Cooperative and Orally Interactive & Independence Practice and Closing. During the process, there are four core principles guided the planning, delivering, and implementing of the process. They are Language/Content Objectives, Comprehensible Input, Engagement and Recycling. In this paper, some of the core and common strategies are explored and the researches backing the three core principles (objectives, comprehensible, and engagement) are provided. I. Content and Language Objectives: In effective instruction, concrete content objectives should identify what students should know and be able to do. These objectives support school, district, or state content standards and learning outcomes (Echevarria 2009). Frequently, in texts and teachers guides, content objectives and state standards are complex and not written in a manner that is accessible to students. The standards are too generic or broad, such as describe the phases of the water cycle and interpret the impact of human use of water as resources on the cycle. So it is important to write lesson-level objectives and use student-friendly Language that suits the age and proficiency levels in the class (Echevarria 2009). So the

teacher is able to assess students learning and the students are able to monitor their own learning according to the objectives. While carefully planning and delivering content objectives, LANGUAGE teachers must also incorporate in their lessons plans activities that support students academic Language development. According to (Genesee F. 1994), the Language development of LANGUAGE immersion students depends on two aspects of learning environment, explicit Language curriculum and implicit Language curriculum. Explicit Language curriculum consists of Language arts instruction and instruction teaching designed Language in as a specific class with specific linguistic objectives. Implicit Language instructions are all other instructions which Language is medium but not the object of the instruction. In the implicit Language instruction, students are able to learn the Language in a more authentic way with long exposure time. However, in the implicit Language instruction, the object of the instruction is generally the content subject, in order to help students develop their Language at the same time, Immersion teachers need to incorporate Language objectives which are systematically integrated with academic objectives (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989; Snow, Met & Genesee, 1989). This means that teachers must specify the Language skills that are important for students to acquire (Snow, 1999). In our LANGUAGE classroom, both content and Language objectives are written in students version so they are shared orally and in written with students. Students are able to read them loud and evaluate whether or not they achieve them at the end of each class.

II.

Comprehensible Input In Krashens input hypothesis (Krashen, 1985), one of the most important

concepts he proposed is that If Language models and teachers provide enough comprehensible input, then the structures that acquirers are ready to learn will be present in that input. It has been proved by many researches that Comprehensible Input is the first and critically required factor in learning new Language at every point in Language Development. Because the learners must be able to understand most of what the speaker is saying if acquisition is to happen. The learner must be able to figure out what the speaker is saying if he is to attach meaning to the speech stream coming at him (VanPatten, 1995). When input is comprehensible, students understand what is required for learning, and the learning experience pushes them to greater understanding. Using the vocabulary which students have acquired is the simplest way to make the input comprehensible. However, making teacher talk comprehensible to students goes beyond the choice of vocabulary. It involves a conscious effort to make the lesson understandable through a variety of means. These include: Making speech appropriate for students proficiency levels; clear explaining of academic tasks; building background and making concept clear (Echevarria, 2009). To make speech appropriate for students proficiency levels includes teachers rate, enunciation and complexity of speech. Students who are at the beginning levels of Language proficiency benefit from teachers who slow down their rate of speech, use pauses, and enunciation clearly while speaking (Echevarria, 2009). Paraphrasing and repletion are useful and enhance understanding. Language learners require repeated

exposure to a word in order to hear it accurately because they often lack the auditory acuity to decipher sounds of new words. In addition, they need to see and hear the words used repeatedly, preferably in a variety of ways (Echevarria, 2009). Clear explanation of academic tasks is also one critical part of making input comprehensible. Learners (no matter L1 or L2) perform better in academic situations when the teacher gives clear instruction for assignment and activities (Echevarria, 2009). It is also critical for Language learners to have instruction presented in a step-by-step manner, preferably modeled or demonstrated for them. In our LANGUAGE classroom the modeling cycling I do, we do, you do is emphasized as a core strategies. In the I do, the teacher model how to perform the task step by step. After I do part, teacher will ask a student to model the task with the teacher with the sentence frames and vocabulary. Before the students begin the independent practice, the teacher would ask two or more students to model the activity again and provide necessary guidance to model the you do part. After the cycle of three demonstrations with the content guidance, Language usage and procedures, students should have clear understanding about what they should do in the practice. The modeling cycle bridge the guided practice and independent practice. Besides, step-by-step modeling, a finished product such as a graphic organizer, a completed worksheet and a letter could be shown to the students so that they know what the task entails (Echevarria, 2009). Other common strategies used to make content concepts clear are to show pictures or realia as visual clues along with the input. It is the most direct and effective way to associate the Language with the physical objects. Besides associating the Language with physical objects, showing picture or realia can also help students get
4

abstract ideas. One example observed in a Utah Chinese Dual Immersion program is to use a family picture to show the idea of inherited traits shared between parents and children in Biology. It will be very hard to only use the target-Language to explain the ideas of trait, but by using the family picture and some guided questions, the students are able to understand the abstract idea and comprehend the words trait in Chinese. Furthermore, besides using vocabulary appropriate for students, using pictures, realia, there are many other strategies that could be used in out LANGUAGE classroom, such as Graphic Organizer, Total Physical Response, Adapted readers theater (ART) and Concept Attainment. With these strategies, students are allowed to use alternative forms for receiving information and expressing their understanding of information and concepts. These could help to reinforce the concepts and information presented, with a reduced linguistic demand on the students (Echevarria, 2009). .

Graphic organizer: New ideas and concepts presented in a new Language can be overwhelming for Language learners. Graphic organizers take the information, vocabulary, or concept and make it more understandable by showing the key points graphically. A graphic organizer can capture and simplify a teachers many potentially confusing words. While there are many forms of graphic organizer depending on the learning task. It could be a problem/solution chart or a web with a topic with descriptor words. For order students, a concept diagram could be used. (Echevarria, 2009). Total Physical Response (TPR): TPR can be used to introduce many academic concepts concretely and comprehensively. The teacher models academic oral Language accompanied by a visual or concrete support. Each key vocabulary word or concept is

represented by a gesture or pantomime, allowing students to associate new information with a picture or real object and an action (Beeman & Urow 2013). Adapted readers theater (ART) is similar to TPR but minimizes the emphasis TPR places on associating a specific vocabulary word or phrase with a specific movement. In traditional readers theater, the students read a text and act it out; in ART, the teacher summarizes or paraphrases a text as she and the students act it out. Through the teachers narrations and the interaction and movement of the students, the concepts and vocabulary are previewed (Beeman & Urow 2013). Concept Attainment: In concept attainment, based on the work of Burner, Goodnow, and Austin (1956), students are provided with a series of appropriate and inappropriate examples of a concept. By analyzing these appropriate and inappropriate examples, students are able to formulate a definition or a description of the concept, even if they are unable to name it using specific formal Language. The teacher then provides the formal Language (Beeman & Urow 2013). III. Engagement The importance of engaging students cant be emphasized more in a Language class. Students need to engage in the class to develop conversations practicing their oral and listening skill in second Language class. Swain maintains that comprehensible input is necessary but not sufficient for Language development. Learners need the opportunities to produce output so they can: Validate their own hypothesis about the target langue; Have the chance to try the new rules and realize the gap between what they want to say and what they are able to say. Moreover, by using the Language in natural
6

communication, the leaner is forced to produce comprehensible output so they can pay attention to the forms (Swain, 2005). Beyond the second Language acquisition, in other general subject classes, there are many benefits to having students actively engaged in interaction around subject matter. These benefits are shown in many researches which include: Brain stimulation: Interesting, engaging activities, including discussion, play an important role in learning. When students are engaged, more of the pleasure structures in the brain are activated and when students are simply asked to memorize information. (Poldrack, Clark, Pare-Blagoev, 2001; Echevarria, 2009). Deeper understanding of text: When teacher use thoughtful questions to promote discussion, it encourage students to discuss what the passage is about and to think about the text at deeper levels (Echevarria, 2009). Increase attention: Use of pairs or teams can heighten attention levels. Students may be asked to work together to compare/contrast material learned, group and regroup the material, reorder it, or retell if from another point of view (Marzano, Pickering, &Pollock 2001), (Echevarria, 2009). In our language classroom, the guidelines for engagement are: All students doing all the time, Maximizing opportunities to respond and turn every opportunity to respond an opportunity to produce Language orally or written in an interactive format (Wade, 2014). The strategies are categorized according to cognitive, visual, physical, oral-written and cooperative Learning structure (Wade, 2014).

Cognitive: Wait Time Visual: Thumbs up/down, show me with your finger, show me on your whiteboards, put your picture up, show your color card. Physical: TPR, pantomime Oral-Written: Choral response, Response Journals, Add-On Response Activity Cooperative Learning Structures: Turn & Talk, Think-Pair-Share, Mingle Mingle, Bicycle Line, Fold the Line, Inside-Outside Circle, Number Heads Together, Expert Circles.

References: Beeman, K. & Urow, C. (2013). Chapter 6: Building background knowledge. Teaching for biliteracy: Strengthening bridges between Languages (pp. 78 87). Philadelphia, PA: Carlson, Inc. Brinton, D., Snow, M., & Wesche, M. (1989). Content-based second Language instruction. New York: Newbury House.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. J. (2009). Making content comprehensible for elementary English learners: The SIOP model. Allyn & Bacon. Genesee, F. (1994). Integrating Language and content: Lessons from immersion. Krashen, S.D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman. Marzano, R. J. Pickering. DJ, & Pollock, JE (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Poldrack, R. A., Clark, J., Pare-Blagoev, E. J., Shohamy, D., Moyano, J. C., Myers, C., & Gluck, M. A. (2001). Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature, 414(6863), 546-550. Snow, M.A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of Language and content in second/foreign Language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201-217. Short, D. (1991). How to integrate Language and content instruction: a training manual. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
9

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. Handbook of research in second Language teaching and learning, 1, 471-483. Wade, O. (2014). LANGUAGE Core Instructional Strategies, Powerpoint lecture presented, Foundation of LANGUAGE, University of Utah.

10