Integrating ELLs in a classroom requires careful planning when it comes to setting up supportive learning engagements. As seen in Steve Daniel Przymus’s article, pairing ELLs with non-ELLs based on their interests and having ELLs learn beside their non-ELL peers can be extremely successful. It would then follow that an effective teacher needs to group students with this in mind, placing ELLs in groups where they are supported and validated. In the article, “Friendships and Group Work in Linguistically Diverse Mathematics Classrooms: Opportunities to Learn for English Language Learners”, ethnographer Miwa Aoki Takeuchi shares interesting research that challenges teachers’ common sense when it comes to creating effective groups in a class.
Takeuchi conducts a study in a Grade 4 mathematics classroom in an Ontario school. The study focuses on ELLs’ participation in group work during a school year. What the research clearly shows is that when English Language Learners were placed in groups strategically chosen by the teacher, the interactions these students had were strikingly different from when they were working in groups of friends (groups formed by student choice). Takeuchi shows that although in both circumstances ELLs were considered “novices” in the groups in terms of language, they interacted in more complex ways when working with friends. In the teacher-assigned groups, the stronger non-ELL students took on dominant roles, acting as teachers, and eliciting very little interaction from ELL students. The conclusion given by the study is that ELL students could participate and have their input validated more when working with their recess friends.
This article was extremely interesting to me because I think that it very much flies in the face of what I consider teachers’ common sense. I venture that the consensus among educators is that if students are allowed to choose who they work with, this will lead to socialization that takes groups off topic. This is only one study, but it is surprising to me to see that when given the opportunity to work with friends, ELLs stayed on task and interacted with the subject matter. Despite the teacher’s well-thought out organization of groups based on leadership, language level, and mathematical ability, the teacher-created groups were unsupportive for ELLs. Student choice in grouping versus deliberate placement of ELLs is certainly something that I will want to experiment with in future classes.
Thanks Matt. The article is surprising to me as well. I will take it into consideration for my inquiry into differentiation. If the group work needs of ELL students are different than those of others, differentiating for all learners through group work may be impossible.
Thanks for the comment David. There is plenty to play with when it comes to group work, I’m not sure if it adds more complexity or not when it comes to differentiation. The idea of grouping students who learn in a similar way (students who benefit from kinetic engagements for example) springs to mind as a situation where group work and differentiation might work hand in hand. I’d be very interested in any things that come up in your inquiry related to putting groups together.
Matt, one thing that comes to mind from my own experience as a second language learner is the comfort of having my native language as a safety net. If an ELL student’s friends share a language with them, they may feel less averse to going out on a linguistic limb in group work, whether task-related or not. Furthermore, the known social values of the ELL’s circle of friends may reduce the barrier of entry to conversation, which would not be the case in a teacher-selected group.
Hypothesizing aside, Takeuchi’s finding seem to suggest that even when selecting groups, the teacher should go out of his/her way to include ELLs with one or more friends with whom they can converse and work well.
Thanks for the comment Tamir, you make an interesting point. We saw something along these lines in the chapter of “The big picture. Big ideas for expanding minds: Teaching English Language Learners Across the Curriculum” by J. Cummins and M. Early. Here we saw a peer who was stronger in Urdu and English helping a student whose English was not as strong as they created a bilingual story together. The idea of “comfort” is interesting, while I agree that ELLs need to be comfortable in class, there is the element of constant discomfort that comes with being pushed outside your comfort zone in learning a new language.
You bring up a really good case, Matt, which leads me to two more wonderings: 1) is a fellow L1 speaker better able to provide nuanced scaffolding to an ELL, e.g., draw parallels between L1 and L2 syntax (sometimes a perilous proposition), or troubleshoot common pitfalls (e.g. Japanese L1 speakers learning articles or gendered pronouns in English)? And 2) if we accept language learning as a social constructivist activity, does adding social discomfort on top of linguistic discomfort serve to push learning more quickly or hinder it?
From personal experience, I’d say that knowing the L1 of the ELL is a great tool for easing acquisition of English in (1). Regarding (2), it may simply depend on the learner; some may thrive under greater pressure while others wilt. As they say, “know thy [student]”.
A cursory search brings up this article: https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1093/applin/amn051
It looks a bit lengthy, but it should provide a plethora of new threads.
Many thanks for the article Tamir, I’m working through it now and will be posting about it soon. It is another interesting aspect of this topic.