One of the greatest challenges confronting teacherstoday is how to best serve the needs of linguistically diverse chil-dren with possible special needs. It used to be that only Texas,New York, California, Illinois, and Florida had an overwhelmingnumber of newcomers in the classrooms. Now, it is not uncommonfor a teacher anywhere in the U.S. to have a class filled with stu-dents who speak multiple languages and come from diverse cultur-al backgrounds. Within these classes of English language learners(ELLs), teachers often report that there are several children show-ing signs of learning difficulty or learning disability (LD) as well. Soboth new and experienced teachers are faced with the difficulty ofhow to determine if an ELL student has a disability and how tobest respond to the needs of the English language learner who isalso struggling academically.

Challenges of Determining Learning Difficulty in ELLsIn a previous issue of Language Magazine (December 2008), weredefined LD as Language Distance, Learning Difficulty, LinguisticDiversity, Language Distinction, and Learning-style Differences andsuggested that they should be considered first before consideringa diagnosis of a language learning disorder or a learning disability(Cohan & Honigsfeld, 2008) . Elsewhere, we presented a pre-refer-

ral data collection tool that contains a series of open-ended ques-tions that suggest teachers collect essential information about thetarget student(s) to either support or defer a special educationreferral process (Honigsfeld & Cohan, 2010). When using this tool,teachers have the opportunity to collaboratively develop an in-depth learner profile as they collect evidence on a student’s

(a) language background, (b) personal/cultural/educationalbackground, (c) language acquisition patterns, (d) learning pat-terns, and (e) behavioral patterns. It is also suggested that teams (f) describe behavior modifications implemented with the student, (g)explore dimensions of LD detection, (h) pinpoint child’s learningproblem from the perspective of several teachers (ESL, main-stream, content area specialists, SPED teachers), (i) consider somekey questions, and finally (j) design, implement, and document theoutcomes of pre-referral instructional interventions. (p. 18).

Best Practices for ELLs with Learning DifficultiesAfter conducting many workshops on the topic of meeting theneeds of struggling ELLs, we have found that the question of bestpractices for students with learning difficulties or disabilities alwaysarises. With this focus in mind, we created a model to supportlearning for ELLs who may or may not have special needs. Artiles

Methodology

30 http://www.languagemagazine.com September 2010

Audrey Cohan and Andrea Honigsfeld suggest best practices for teachingEnglish learners who may have learning difficulties

Turning the TIDE

and Ortiz (2002) argue “that substantial evidence indicates that edu-cational services offered to students with culturally and linguisticallydiverse home backgrounds are not sufficient to meet their needs”(p. 7). Trying to decide if the child is experiencing difficulty due tosecond language acquisition issues, or determining if there is anunderlying learning disability, takes significant time and careful doc-umentation by a team of educators and evaluators who can offermultiple perspectives.

So how should teachers proceed before a referral is completed?And how important is it that we classify a student with the LD label?McDermott, Goldman and Varenne (2006) state that “LD is madeconsequential by gatekeepers assigning children to fixed positions”(p.15). It is our premise that the best practices implemented forELLs do support struggling learners regardless of whether or not adisability is established.

TIDES: Intervention Principles to Support Struggling ELLsTo help teachers effectively work with ELL/LD students, we begin byrecognizing that many of the instructional strategies that are alreadyused by teachers work well. Relying on successful research-basedstrategies should be the cornerstone of an effective program for alllearners. It is to that end that we suggest the TIDES model for learn-ing. Research on the developmental and linguistic needs of ELLs(Goldenberg, 2010) has shaped the intervention principles that sup-port this model, and work toward the achievement of all learners.

T is for Teacher Collaboration As Danielson (2009) notes “it’s through conversations that teachersclarify their beliefs and plans and examine, practice, and considernew possibilities” (p. 1). Teacher collaboration — ranging fromongoing professional conversations about ELLs’ needs to collabora-tive planning, instruction, and assessment to joint decision making— allows for ELLs to receive the best possible education.

In 2006, TESOL, the international professional organization, sug-gested that ESL teachers should collaborate by co-planning instruc-tion or other activities with content-area specialists and classroomteachers as well as all other school faculty. When they work with

bilingual teachers, they can tap into the ELLs’ first language. Whenliteracy or math specialists or resource teachers work with ESLteachers, they may share results of diagnostic and formativeassessments or design intervention techniques. When special edu-cation teachers collaborate with ESL professionals, they can reviewstudent data together, attend pre-referral and, if needed, individual-ized education planning (IEP) meetings, and may jointly inform par-ents about best available services. Foremost, ESL teachers shouldalso collaborate with school administrators to design, implement,and coordinate ESL services, to plan joint professional develop-ment, in order to enforce state and local guidelines.

When teachers collaborate, they share their insights about theirstudents’ needs and design appropriate instructional practices forthem. Students become integrated into the fabric of the classroom,the school community, and, ultimately, into the larger society of theU.S. when teachers successfully share their knowledge and skills(Honigsfeld & Dove, 2010).

I is for Integrating Content and Language InstructionMa (2002) notes that ESL or English as a Foreign Language (EFL)instruction traditionally consists of programs “in which studentsreceive specific periods of instruction aimed at the development ofEnglish language skills, focusing on grammar, vocabulary, and com-munication rather than on academic subjects” (p. 4). However, thereis an increase in the popularity of ESL programs that also addressage- and grade-appropriate, general-education, content-area stan-dards. As early as the beginning of the 1980s, the focus of ESLinstruction has shifted from building linguistic competence to alsoaddressing academic language in the curricular areas of EnglishLanguage Arts, social studies, and math, and science. In responseto this shift in focus, content-based instruction (CBI) (Brinton, Snow,& Wesche, 1989) and sheltered instruction (Echevarria, Vogt, &Short, 2008), as well as several other models and approaches, haveemerged (Gibbons, 2002).

The benefits of integrating language acquisition and academicgoals are manifold: (a) students receive opportunities to practiceand polish their language skills while mastering important contentknowledge needed to succeed in today’s highly competitive, high

31http://www.languagemagazine.comSeptember 2010

Methodology

Intervention PrinciplesTIDES of LearningT is for Teacher Collaboration I is for Integrating Content and Language InstructionD is for Differentiation of InstructionE is for Exploration and Inquiry-based PracticesS is for Scaffolding

stakes testing world, (b) the combined process of learning helpsEnglish language learners develop their second language while con-cepts and skills are not being ignored.

D is for Differentiation of InstructionTomlinson (1999) has developed a comprehensive approach to thedifferentiation of instruction used by teachers today. There are gen-erally four instructional elements which can be modified by theteacher in response to learner needs (Tomlinson 1999, 2003;Gregory & Kuzmich, 2005a, b): content, process, product, andlearning environment. Differentiation by content means that theteacher may modify what students will learn and the materials thatrepresent it. In contrast, differentiation by process refers to the var-ied activities through which students make sense of key ideas usingessential skills. Widely used by teachers, the technique for differen-tiation of the product allows students to demonstrate what theyhave learned and understood in multiple ways. Lastly, a teachermay differentiate the learning environment, such as changing aclassroom condition or arrangement. The general principles of dif-ferentiation remind language teachers to be mindful of respectfultasks, flexible grouping, and to incorporate continual assessment.

E is for Exploration and InvestigationThe position statement of the National Science Teacher Association

(NSTA) (2002) includes, “Students learn science best when they areinvolved in first-hand exploration and investigation and inquiry/process skills are nurtured” (para. 3). Inquiry-based education relieson the concept that when students make a systematic search foranswers, they will ultimately make their own science discoveries.

English language learners benefit enormously from hands-onexperiences and explorations as they learn new vocabulary anddevelop new concepts in all content areas. Engagement is generallyconsidered the first step in the discovery cycle and is highly moti-vating and student-centered. Abruscato and DeRosa (2010) notethat during the second, exploration phase of concept development,the teacher “provides an opportunity for children to encounter andreflect on new content” (p. 71). Often, the teacher presents materi-als, poses questions, and offers problems and challenges that invitethe children to think about the science work at hand. The explana-tion stage is a more teacher-directed activity which focuses on theacquisition of new knowledge. Lastly, in the elaboration stage, real-life applications are implemented so that students can apply andreinforce what science concepts they have discovered.

In fact, learning about the natural world, and making sense ofone’s surroundings is something that ELLs do on a daily basis, asthey try to balance acquiring two languages and two cultures. It isfor this reason that ELLs will be more successful in an exploratory,inquiry-based, hands-on program. A possible content-based exam-

32 http://www.languagemagazine.com September 2010

Methodology

33http://www.languagemagazine.comSeptember 2010

ple of the use of inquiry-based learning is theobservation of the monarch butterfly’s lifecycle. Observing caterpillars not only providesopportunities for ELLs to develop inquiryprocess skills, but also allows them to learnabout investigation design, develop new con-cepts and vocabulary (Shimkanin & Murphy,2007), as well as build language skills neededto describe and evaluate their observations.

Explorations and investigations allow stu-dents to generate their own questions, searchfor answers, and integrate other contentareas such as mathematics or social studies. The use of inquiry-based concept development also offers opportunities for learningbasic skills such as observation, classification, communication,measurement, prediction, and inference (Abruscato & DeRosa,2010), in conjunction with linguistic skills.

S is for ScaffoldingScaffolding provides necessary support to help the English languagelearner make connections for learning and understanding new mate-rial. Artiles and Ortiz (2002) explain that scaffolds “can be used totemporarily assist both English language learners and academicallyproficient students, as they develop knowledge, understanding,

strategies, and skills. These interactive scaffolds can gradually beremoved as students start to learn more independently” (p. 135).

Research further suggests that scaffolding is an effective tool forchildren with special needs (Cooper, 2006). Generally, scaffolding isdone by modifying the task or the materials presented. An exampleof a task scaffold appropriate for ELLs is a picture that goes alongwith the written word. To use the example of the monarch butterflylife cycle, a photo of a chrysalis may be placed alongside the newterm. A scaffolding task for learning about the monarch life cyclemay be to ask some children to write about the four stages ofgrowth, while others draw or photograph their observations.

Mediated scaffolding requires a teacher or peer to work with the

Methodology

The concept of differentiation of instruction for reading content has recently been

made easier by the publishers of children’s books. For instance, National

Geographic has produced a series of science and social studies theme sets which

meet the NSTA and NCSS standards and are differentiated for reading ability. The

topics, questions, headlines and format are aligned so that students can complete

similar tasks, but the complexity of the assignment differs. Reading levels vary from

2.9 to 6.9. For life cycles, for example, ELLs can study the Giant Pandas, Monarch

Butterflies, Poison Dart Frogs, or Komodo Dragons in a jigsaw activity which is

designed to match resources to students’ literacy abilities.

34 http://www.languagemagazine.com September 2010

student in making the learning process easier. An example of thiswould be buddy reading for a book on the life cycle of butterflies.The concept of buddy reading, or mediated scaffolding, has recent-ly been made easier by the publishers of children’s books. Books inthe Two Can Read series by Edupress(http://www.highsmith.com/edupress) allow two children (one read-ing on the 1st grade and one on the 3rd grade level) to share abook meaningfully by reading alternating pages.

Some commonly used instructional scaffolding techniquesinclude modeling, bridging, contextualization, building schema, re-presenting text, and developing metacognition (Walqui, 2006).Scaffolded, partially completed graphic organizers, mentor texts,carefully designed templates, outlines, and sentence starters are allexamples of effective scaffolding techniques.

Implications for LearningWhat we envision from an implementation of the TIDES of learningis a multi-faceted approach to teaching English language learnerswho may also be struggling learners. We are less concerned withthe actual label or classification of learning disabilities, and moreconcerned with finding a comprehensive educational approachwhich will help all learners despite their apparent strengths andweaknesses in a particular moment in time. In this overview, wehighlight the instructional strategies which can assist a teacher in

best meeting the needs of many students. We recognize that thereis no single panacea; but encourage classroom teachers and ESLspecialists to meld the strategies we present with their own bestpractices, innovative ideas, and varied, differentiated resources tocreate the best teaching environment possible.

ReferencesAbruscato, J., & DeRosa, D. A. (2010). Teaching Children Science:A Discovery Approach (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Artiles, A. J., & Ortiz, A. A. (2002). English Language Learners withSpecial Education Needs: Identification, Assessment andInstruction. Washington, DC, and McHenry, IL: Center for AppliedLinguistics and Delta Systems.Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-Based Second Language Instruction. New York: Newbury House.Cohan, A., & Honigsfeld, A. (2008). “Needs are Special.” LanguageMagazine, 8(4), 18-21. Cooper, J. M. (Ed.). (2006). Classroom Teaching Skills. Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin. Danielson, C. (2009). “A Framework for Learning to Teach.”Educational Leadership Online, 66. Retrieved August 31, 2009,from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/summer09/vol66/num09/A_Framework_for_Learning_to_Teach.aspx

Methodology

35http://www.languagemagazine.comSeptember 2010

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2008). Making ContentComprehensible for English Language Learners: The SIOP Model(3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning:Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Goldenberg, C. (2010). Promoting Academic Achievement AmongEnglish Learners: A guide to the Research. Thousand Oaks: CA:Corwin Press.Gregory, G. H., & Kuzmich, L. (2005a). Differentiated LiteracyAtrategies for Student Growth and Achievement in Grades K-6.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Gregory, G. H., & Kuzmich, L. (2005b). Differentiated LiteracyStrategies for student Growth and Achievement in Grades 7-12.Thousand Oaks: CA: Corwin Press.Honigsfeld, A., & Cohan, A. (2010). “Piloting a Pre-Referral Data Col -lection Tool: A Documentary Account.” Insights on Learning Dis -abilities: From Prevailing Theories to Validated Practices, 7(1), 15-28.Honigsfeld, A., & Dove, M. G. (August 2010). Collaboration and Co-Teaching: Strategies for English Learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Ma, J. (2002). What Works for Children: What We Know and Don’tKnow about Bilingual Education. Boston: Harvard University Press. McDermott, R., Goldman, S., & Varenne, H. (2006). “The CulturalWork of Learning Disabilities.” Educational Researcher, 35(6) 12-17.

NSTA Position Statement. (2002). Retrieved fromhttp://www.nsta.org/about/positions/elementary.aspx Shimkanin, J., & Murphy, A. (2007). Let Monarchs Rule: An IntegratedButterfly Unit Begins in the Field. Science and Children, 45(1) 32-36.Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom: Respondingto the Needs of All Learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Tomlinson, C.A. (2003). Fulfilling the Promise of the DifferentiatedClassroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding Instruction for English LanguageLearners: A Conceptual Framework. The International Journal ofBilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159-180.

Audrey Cohan, Ed.D. [acohan@molloy.edu] is a Professor in theDivision of Education at Molloy College, Rockville Centre, New York.She teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses. She haspublished on child sexual abuse and effective professional develop-ment practices.

Andrea Honigsfeld, Ed.D. [ahonigsfeld@molloy.edu.] is AssociateProfessor in the Division of Education at Molloy College, RockvilleCentre, New York. She teaches courses related to cultural and lin-guistic diversity and has published on the topics of differentiatedinstruction and learning styles, with a special attention to the needsof English Learners.

Methodology