A call to move beyond traditional conceptions of language as a preconceived set of grammar rules in an effort to support academic English language proficiency in students whose primary (L1) language is English

1. Born Without Limits: Nurturing the Development of English Language
Proficiency in Learners Whose Primary Language is English
Conventional Wisdom
The leading theory of language is
rooted in the belief that the human brain
operates like a computer. A computer is
a ‘smart machine’ that can store and
retrieve information at lightning speeds,
sort and assemble
information to make to
make it easier to
understand, create
images that mimic
works of art, and grow
branches or networks
exponentially, almost
infinitely. It operates
using a pre-
programmed system of
codes much like the signs
and symbols of our own
language. Impressive, indeed! But the
computer did not invent itself. It is a
product of mankind’s inventiveness and
thereby created with mankind’s
inherent flaws. Noam Chomsky defines
language as an abstract system of
grammar principles and rules
programmed in our genes (Payne and
Barbera, 2010). At the International
Congress of Linguists in Geneva, the
world-renowned scholar asserted his
belief in the theory that “languages are
derived from some fixed, internal
knowledge that determines everything.”
(Chomsky, 2013).
Could he be wrong?
A Shift in Focus
Evidence is emerging that paints a very
different picture. Traditional views of
language have done little more than
serve to answer the question What is
language? while modern views are
providing new insights by acting in
service to the question Why is
language?.

2. To understand language, we need to
consider language abilities (Verhoeven
& Vermeer, 2006). Language abilities
are observable (and to some extent
measureable) expressions of human
language. Linguists categorize language
into four (4) primary ability levels:
phonological (discrimination and
production of sounds), lexical
(understanding and production of
words), syntactical (understanding and
production of sentences), and text
(understanding and production of
spoken and written discourse). In recent
years, instruction has focused on the
improvement and mastery of such
ability levels through the development,
implementation, and evaluation of
curricula and teaching practices
designed to support language learning.
This has served beneficial because it
has provided us an opportunity to focus
our efforts on improving at least the
obvious and observable facets of
language. It has also served to
demystify language instruction for
novice literacy professionals and
content-area teachers who aim to
improve the English language
proficiency levels of learners. The
downside is that many have come to
know, understand, and teach literacy
through a narrow lens which limits the
effectiveness of English language
instruction.
You are What You Speak
There is more to language than the
assembling and understanding of words
and sentences. To teach language
effectively, we must also consider the
socio-cultural aspects of language
which can accelerate or slow English
language learning. Much of the research
on language acquisition has focused on
learners whose primary language is one

3. other than English (e.g., Spanish,
French) (Proctor et al, 2005). However,
there is also a need to refocus our
efforts on learners whose primary
language is English but who lack the
skills necessary to demonstrate
proficiency in the English language.
Learners who lack the skills necessary
to read, speak, and write with skill are
often marginalized. In other words, they
are excluded
from
participation
in classroom
and
workplace
activities that
are creative,
engaging,
and require
critical and higher-order thinking skills
even though such involvement can
actually spur English language learning.
Students with limited English language
proficiency benefit from the same kinds
of experiences that have been proven to
foster second-language learning
acquisition. In order to improve upon
this kind of learning in the classroom, it
is important that we recognize that
students who struggle with English
language proficiency (much like
students who are second-language
learners) bring a diverse set of
knowledge and skills to school. Their
language abilities should never be
labeled a form of broken English, nor
should their knowledge and experiences
be ignored or undervalued. Learners
who attribute positive feelings to the
norms and customs of their primary
language are better equipped to cross
the bridge to
learning a
second
language.
Conversely,
learners who
feel that their
customs,
which include
the production
of their primary language, are deficient
and are constantly undermined in the
presence of their peers are less likely to
learn to understand, speak, and write
using academic language with ease.
Language as a Tool for Learning
English language proficiency is
important not only for learning to speak
with proficiency but for learning how to
comprehend advanced subject matter
and how to write using tools
“English language proficiency is
important not only for learning to
speak with proficiency but for
learning how to comprehend
advanced subject matter…”

4. appropriate for communicating their
understanding of complex subjects
(Beach, Thein, & Webb, 2012). By
attending to socio-cultural elements, in
addition to important structural
elements of language, learners are
provided greater access to academic
English (Goldenberg, 2008). This
happens through extracting meaning,
explaining meaning (written/orally),
and engaging in meaning-making
through discussion in both the primary
(L1) and secondary (L2) language with
attention to the unique aspects of
language the learner brings with them
to school (Goldenberg, 2008). Such
practices also foster the learning of
new, popular, critical literacies that
seem to characterize the workplace
today (Beach, Thein, & Webb, 2012).
Facingthe Change
For centuries, Aristotle’s longstanding
conception of language as sound with
meaning was the leading thought and,
were it not for thinkers willing to
challenge such a belief system or for
the ingenuity of man who would learn
to communicate without sound, it
probably would have prevailed. Despite
advances in modern science and
technology, we are constrained still by
the complexities that language systems
bring as well as basic aspects of
language fundamentals such as
phonological, lexical, syntactic, and
text abilities. Thanks to the progress
that mankind continues to make, we are
boldly confronting brand new
challenges and new questions are
emerging, forcing us to revisit and
rethink theories such as Universal
Grammar in an effort to make more
expansive a love of literacy-learning for
ALL.
Instructional scaffolds for students lacking English language proficiency include (but are not limited to)
 pointing out similarities and differences between the L1 and academic English in a non-threatening
manner;
 a focus on the possibilities using the English language as opposed to an emphasis on the limits;
encourage students to experiment with different ways to express ideas and communicate
information in an effort to improve their academic reading, speaking, and writing skill-levels;
 teaching students to expect (and anticipate) new words in texts (Hiebert, 2014);
 teaching networks of similar-meaning words/phrases/concepts in groups or clusters (Hiebert, 2014);
 Peter Elbow Strategy/Value of Response Groups (Pearson Education Webinar, 2014);
 opportunities for students to write and read works in their own voice (or the voice of someone else);
 valuing the diverse literacy practices/experiences/knowledge-levels that learners bring to school.

5. Sources
Beach, R., Thein, A.H., & Webb, A. (2012). Teaching to Exceed the English Language Arts
Common Core State Standards: A Literacy Practices Approach for 6-12 Classrooms. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Chomsky, Noam. (July 2013). Video. What is Language and Why Does it Matter?. Retrieved
from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDc34AXWIls.
Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English Language Learners: What the research does—and
does not—say. American Educator, 32(2), 8 – 23, 42 – 44.
Hiebert, Elfrieda. (March 2014). A Generative Vocabulary. Retrieved from
www.TextProject.org.
Payne, Michael and Jessica Rae Barbera (eds). A Dictionary of Cultural and Critical Theory:
Second Edition. Blackwell Publishing, 2010. Blackwell Reference Online. 25 March 2014
http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/book.html?id=g9781405168908_9781405168908
Pearson Education. (March 2014). Webinar. Voices from the Field: Writing Teachers Discuss
Writing in the Common Core Curriculum. Retrieved from www.Commoncore.PearsonEd.com.
Proctor, C.P., Carlo, M., August, D., & Snow, C.E. (2005). Native Spanish-speaking children
reading in English: Toward a model of comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology,
97(1), 246 – 256.
Verhoeven, L. (1987). Ethnic minority children acquiring literacy. Berlin: Mouton/DeGruyter.
Verhoeven, L., & Vermeer, A. (2006). Sociocultural variation in literacy achievement. British
Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 189 – 211.
© Dessalines Floyd (March 2014)