Study

published:July 2009

How did the pupils benefit?
Assessment data showed:

• significant improvements in English for all
• English as an additional language (EAL) pupils in the pilot programme schools compared with EAL pupils in non-programme schools
• no difference in science and maths achievement – researchers concluded this may be because the effort was on English teaching and approaches were less embedded in science and maths, and
• no difference in the rate of improvement between EAL and non-EAL pupils in programme schools – researchers suggest this means the programme benefited all pupils

Teachers in the participating schools reported that the pilot activities encouraged EAL pupils in a number of ways, including:

• having higher expectations of themselves
• being more confident
• asking more questions
• ‘expecting to understand’
• being more prepared to use their home language in school, and
• being more ‘on task’ and focused.

Teacher interviewees explained that the benefits of using talk partners were:

• encouraging children to talk in a more constructive way and to keep ‘on task’
• more articulate responses, often from pupils who were reluctant to contribute, and
• children who were more confident talking one-to-one with another child in their first language than to the whole class.

How did teachers benefit?
The research suggested that the confidence of teachers and teaching assistants was enhanced by their work with the pilot, particularly when they worked collaboratively with consultants from the LA (see next section). Specifically they reported gains in:

• insight into the general difficulties encountered by key stage 1 and 2 pupils with EAL and the reasons why these difficulties inhibited the pupils’ attainment in national tests
• insight into the specific difficulties encountered by individual groups of pupils within the EAL cohort (e.g. such as different sets of tenses or anomalies in vocabulary)
• awareness of links between EAL teaching and learning and other current
  initiatives such as Assessment for Learning
• understanding of how the pilot strategies could be integrated into regular
  classroom routines and approaches for all learners
• extension of the individual teachers’ repertoire of strategies, techniques and presentations for use in the classroom
• opportunities to observe new models and get constructive feedback from the consultants (see next section)
• support from senior leaders, and
• collaboration with other teachers.

In some cases the teachers learned new strategies from the consultants; in others the consultants helped teachers adapt existing strategies; and on some occasions consultants helped teachers re-engage with strategies that had fallen into disuse.

Who were the pilot consultants and what was their role?
LAs appointed consultants to work with schools on pilot activities. Whilst the numbers of consultants, who served groups of schools, differed from LA to LA, each school was allocated approximately ten days of consultancy time. Schools usually had an input into how the consultants were deployed. It was important that the consultants had the relevant pedagogical knowledge and expertise and the skills to work with school senior leadership and with teacher practitioners in the classroom.

In most schools, the consultant worked with the leadership team, class teachers and TAs in a number of ways, including:

• an initial diagnostic visit
• co-teaching strategically targeted year groups
• co-teaching with individual class teachers on priorities identified by the school
• working with class teachers on integrating EAL strategies into existing units of work, and
• observing and monitoring classroom practice after strategies had been introduced.

One example of a consultant supporting teachers involved the strategy of guided reading. The consultant worked with year 3 teachers. After selecting and grouping the target pupils, the consultant modelled a guided reading session, and team taught with the teachers. In another school, the consultant held one-to-one sessions with the teacher on speaking frames. In this strategy children orally "fill in" a speaking frame; this encourages them to learn to listen to others, imitate, and invent and adapt language patterns. One class teacher explained that these sessions made her feel confident that she was using the speaking frames correctly in her classroom.

Case study 1 describes how teachers in a London borough undertook professional development activities aimed at supporting EAL learners.

How did schools identify and plan to address their pupils’ needs?
A diagnostic visit by the consultant helped schools to write a termly Raising Achievement Plan (RAP) which identified the targets and included an action plan to meet them. In most schools, the RAPs were written by the headteacher, together with members of the leadership team and the pilot consultant. RAPs had a common format which included detailed objectives in four areas: leadership and management, teaching and learning, conditions for learning and partnerships beyond the classroom. In one school at least, the RAP was incorporated into the school’s development plan; over time more schools took this approach as it made the programme more sustainable.

The diagnostic visit and the RAP set the context for the work of teachers.

Some teachers felt their first RAPs had been over-ambitious and they had not been able to meet all the success criteria. Several teachers commented that the second and third RAPs had more focus on embedding and monitoring targets they set in the first RAP. Others believed their first RAPs were too vague; and that in later RAPs success criteria, and means to achieve them, were sharpened up.

The majority of schools saw the benefits of writing termly RAPs, including

• focusing teachers’ minds through short term plans
• enabling teachers to take ownership of their actions
• clearly setting out who was accountable for the actions
• establishing success criteria, and
• creating a time frame.

What teaching and learning approaches helped?
Teachers recognised the need to prioritise speaking and listening. One headteacher commented: 'Raising standards is not about putting up signs in different languages – that doesn’t make any difference…What makes a difference is good quality teaching and learning and really focusing on the speaking and listening input.'

Strategies teachers used across a range of contexts and which seemed to be helpful in enhancing pupils’ understanding and developing their language use are described below.

Curricular/layered targets to plan for language development and curriculum access
Whole-school targets (one each for reading, writing and mathematics) were
identified from an audit of attainment against the progression strands in the 2006 Primary Framework and the schools’ original target statements for reading and writing. The curricular targets were translated into year group targets for each half-term or more frequently, and were based on age-related expectations. School staff used them to guide teaching and learning and prepare the ground for future assessment. One numeracy coordinator believed the Numeracy Strategy ‘darted around too much’ and children were being taught too many different things in any given period. Layered targets enabled him to return to focus on one aspect for a number of lessons.

Planned opportunities for speaking and listening
Schools made use of planned speaking and listening activities aiming to increase speaking and reduce time spent only listening. As one headteacher explained, ‘teachers used to talk at children and explain words; now they realise children need to talk…’. Speaking and listening activities were mainly whole class, although small groups were sometimes used.  A range of strategies for structuring dialogue were used, for example, in one school, speaking and listening activities were planned using roles in dialogue. Children were each designated a role – chair, reporter, scribe and observer – and were asked to debate a particular issue. One class teacher felt this had worked well as it focused pupils’ attention on their role. Teachers also found speaking frames and guided talk helpful; they became more aware of modelling and scaffolding language for EAL learners, recognising the importance of speaking in structured sentences and rephrasing sentences to aid comprehension. Teachers also used ‘talk buddies’ where pupils were given planned opportunities to talk with one another in English or their first language. Talk partners were used in English and mathematics when pupils were asked questions, and at the beginning and end of lessons.

Teachers who wish to look more closely at the role of dialogue in the classroom may be interested to read our earlier RfT on the work of Wegerif and his colleagues, Raising achievement through group work:

The use of first language
First language was used by children to learn – rather than limiting it to its use by adults for explanations. By the end of the pilot year, approximately two thirds of schools were attempting to promote the use of first language as a tool for learning more in the classroom. However, some monolingual teachers did not feel confident using pupils’ first languages and preferred it when bilingual TAs were present in the classroom to give them support.

In one school, teachers set up an Urdu class for pupils in which lessons were delivered by an Urdu speaking TA to high achieving bilingual learners. This was one of the most successful aspects of the pilot for this school.

Case study 2 describes additional strategies for supporting EAL students; it shows how an EAL specialist and science teacher worked together to design and implement a more appropriate teaching and learning programme for EAL learners.

How were teachers supported?
Support was based around the work of the pilot consultants, appointed by the LAs, and trained and supported by them and by PNS regional directors. The two groups worked together to provide participating schools with a programme of eight whole-staff professional development sessions which could be used flexibly to meet the specific needs of schools. Once a consultant was employed, his/her contribution to particular schools was negotiated between themselves and senior leaders in schools. In the majority of schools, an EAL coordinator was appointed to manage the pilot. This was often a more senior member of staff but a few were class teachers. In many schools, the EAL coordinator had a key role in driving the pilot and acting as the mediator between the consultant and other staff.

School based development was built around a number of strands:

• leadership and management
• teaching and learning: including language development, curriculum access and assessment for learning
• conditions for learning, and
• partnerships beyond the classroom.

Within schools, the professional development programme was most positively viewed by staff when it:

• was negotiated from the outset by the senior leadership team and the consultant
• was jointly delivered by (internal) school staff and the (external) consultant
• was explicitly linked to the current needs of the school
• offered new ideas and approaches and/or supported staff in using strategies they were already familiar with
• was accessible to all staff, including teaching assistants, and
• was supported by effective use of consultant time to ensure that professional development was enacted in practice.

How were pupils supported?
Two main ways of supporting children were through TAs and partnerships with parents/carers and the community.

Deployment of TAs
Staff commented that the pilot had enabled schools to recognise the potential of working with their TAs in the classroom and to build up TAs’ skills in appropriate areas. There was evidence that TAs who were trained in the pilot were being deployed differently. Significantly, in many cases TAs were working with teachers in the classroom with a target group of pupils, on particular tasks. By working with EAL learners in the classroom rather than withdrawing them, classrooms became more inclusive. Some of the specific tasks TAs carried out included:

• supporting guided reading
• speaking in first languages (guided talk), in all areas of the curriculum, and
• analysing the language used in National Curriculum test papers to identify areas which caused EAL learners particular difficulties.

In one school, the headteacher redeployed bilingual TAs across the whole school, rather than focusing their work in key stage 1, in order to spread their expertise more widely.

Development of partnerships beyond the classroom
Two practical activities planned to develop partnerships beyond the classroom were to:

• give staff the skills needed to liaise with members of the community, and
• involve minority ethnic parents more widely in school life.

Parent Family Learning Groups were established. These aimed to increase the involvement of parents in their children’s education by providing information about the pilot and teaching strategies being used and providing practical examples of how they could help their children’s learning. For example, teachers helped parents to recognise English coins which in turn enabled them to help their children to count and handle money. Other examples of activities designed to help parents included:

• encouraging parents to hear pupils read and inviting them in to read stories to the children in English and their first languages at the end of the day
• presenting numeracy and literacy workshops for pupils and parents
• discussions about the importance of attendance for their child’s education, and
• designing a new and easier induction process for newly arrived pupils and their parents. The new procedure was developed in one school and shared with other schools in a cluster.

One school sent a curriculum newsletter on speaking and listening to parents which described the different strategies, such as group work, guided talk and speaking frames, in user-friendly language. It also outlined possible ideas about when parents could use first languages at home – e.g. when they are getting ready in the morning, coming home from school and discussing homework.

Case study 3 illustrates an approach to training parents and other adults in supporting children’s literacy which is particularly relevant to parents of children with EAL.

How did LAs help schools and teachers implement the pilot?
The pilot was led, and pilot consultants managed, by managers of the Primary National Strategy (PNS) and the Ethnic Minority Achievement Service (EMA). In this way the pilot became embedded in the Primary National Strategy which made it possible for participants to gain access to professional development based on local specialist expertise. In some authorities, the collaboration between the two LA teams – PNS and EMA – was innovative as respective managers/teams had not previously worked together.

A key initial task LA personnel shared with schools was the diagnostic visit. LA officers and the school leadership team analysed the school’s existing provision for EAL learners using performance and self-evaluation data. The LA consultants provided feedback on lesson observations and audits of the learning environment and the school’s planning.

LA management was most effective in the following areas:

• choosing pilot schools based on a sound knowledge of school’s provision for EAL pupils and the capacity of the school to make good use of the pilot resources
• showing participating schools it was itself clear both about the aims of the pilot and its application to the schools (including the target group of pupils)
• including senior leadership within the authority in support of pilot activities and in engaging in collaboration aimed at promoting a coherent LA approach across a range of other specialist work
• identifying and creating access to resources
• developing appropriate means of monitoring and evaluating the pilot in order to support and disseminate its processes and outcomes, and
• identifying networks and providing opportunities for sharing good practice.

Schools which used the tools, such as speaking frames, but did not share funded external advice/consultation were less successful in improving outcomes for EAL pupils – suggesting the importance of external specialist input.

This finding chimes with the findings of a review of effective CPD carried out in 2005-7 by  Cordingley, P. et al. (2007) which highlighted the crucial role of specialists in effective CPD. (See Further Reading).  

What part did the schools play in implementing the pilot?
A leadership team within each school was responsible for implementing the pilot. In most cases this was made up of headteacher/deputy head, literacy and numeracy coordinators and the EMA coordinator in the school. To identify the specific needs of the school and the part the consultant could play, senior leaders and relevant middle managers, the consultant and relevant local authority advisers carried out structured audits, leading to a RAP (see next section). The pilot built upon other work schools were doing to create an inclusive curriculum.

Schools which participated in the pilot used a number of activities to enhance the learning of their EAL and non-EAL pupils, including:

• dual language displays (e.g. displaying key vocabulary; signs and instructions; languages spoken)
• visual resources (e.g. whiteboards, 3D objects)
• photography (in one school, photography had been used to build a storyboard to bring the story to life for pupils)
• better opportunities for representing minority ethnic cultures and allowing the curriculum to be more culturally inclusive (e.g. celebrating a language of the month; promoting Black History Month), and
• collaboration between a consultant and the race equality coordinator to review the school’s existing policy on race equality.

In a number of schools changes in staff deployment were made as a result of the pilot. This illustrates the importance of the involvement of senior leaders who could respond to emerging outcomes from the pilot and take strategic decisions based on the evidence.

Case study 4 describes a whole-school approach to supporting EAL learners that helped to raise achievement for all learners.

Schools and teachers also recognised the importance of sharing good practice from their pilot activities and welcomed the opportunity for further work with other schools through:

• networks of pilot schools, and
• dissemination of good practice.

Networking amongst pilot schools had occurred in approximately half of the case study LAs during the pilot year. In one LA, the consultant set up termly meetings for EAL coordinators and other teachers in the borough. Staff found them useful as a way of sharing innovative practice and resources. In other LAs, the consultant brought together teachers from pilot schools on single occasions. For example, a consultant had taught all the literacy coordinators in one LA about specific teaching strategies for EAL learners. In another example the consultant arranged for the EAL coordinator and assessment coordinator in one school to visit colleagues in another school to see how curricular/layered targets were being used.

How were the data collected?
Personnel and practitioners were consulted in 21 schools within seven LAs through interviews and visits. Seven local authorities were selected to participate in the evaluation which took part in three phases between May 2004 and April 2007. Key staff consulted in each LA included the Primary Strategy Manager, the manager of the EMA service and the pilot consultant. There were also visits to 19 schools across the seven authorities to interview a range of staff (total of 116 interviews). There were follow-up visits to 13 of the schools and visits to a further four schools recommended by the LAs for having made interesting developments in their initial year of the pilot and more telephone interviews with school staff. Three interviews were conducted with the regional director(s) during this period. This report primarily focuses on the findings from the case study school visits.

Data were analysed in relation to:

• monitoring the inclusion of EAL strategies in planning
• observing the use of teaching and learning strategies in lessons
• undertaking baseline assessments on the attainment of EAL learners
• assessing language development
• target setting, and
• monitoring and tracking the progress of EAL learners.

Schools evaluated their progress through:

• evaluation of RAPs, and
• end of year assessments.

 

Pupil performance data was analysed for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006.

What are the implications of the research?
Teachers wishing to develop their own EAL practice might like to consider the following implications of the findings of this research:

• The study emphasised the importance of learning in pupils’ home language. Could you encourage your children’s parents in order to help them develop reading skills in their home language. Could you link up with institutions such as community centres or mosque to discuss how learning in school can be linked most effectively to first language learning?
• The study highlighted the value of interactions between pupils and parents. Could you give parents and carers more guidance on activities that they could do at home to support their children’s learning such as reading books, listening to them read, experimenting with money?
• The study referred to a number of strategies that were effective in supporting speaking and listening among EAL learners such as guided reading, reading buddies, speaking frames, for example. Do you have any experience of these strategies? Would you find it helpful to work with – and possibly observe – your colleagues to refine your, and their, practice in these areas?

School leaders may wish to consider the following implications for whole-school EAL development:

• The research suggested that speaking and listening skills are important. Do you have a whole school strategy for developing your pupils’ speaking and listening skills across different curriculum areas? Could the opportunities provided to the pupils at school be complemented by work with their families? Are there any existing home-school or home-community links you could build on?
• The pilot programme was very structured and involved collaboration at a number of levels: between local authority leaders and school leaders, consultants and school leaders, consultants and school staff as well as between consultants and staff involved in other strategies like EMA support. Is it possible for you to access on-going support from your LA that would enable you to develop a programme for EAL learners in your school similar to that described in the study?

Gaps in the research
Gaps that are uncovered in a field of research also have a useful role in making sure that future research builds cumulatively on what is known. But research also needs to inform practice, so practitioners’ interpretation of the gaps and follow-up questions are crucial. In relation to research on the learning of EAL students greater information would be helpful in a number of areas including:

• more detail about classroom teaching and learning, process perhaps through an observational study
• the role of interaction with other pupils and adults, and
• the impact of cultural differences on learning.

Do you think that research exploring these questions would help you inform your practice?  Which issues are of most interest to you?

What is your experience?
Do you have any evidence about what enhances the learning of children with EAL? Do you have action research or enquiry based development programmes running that explore, for example, the impact of particular teaching and learning strategies on children with EAL? We would be interested to hear about examples of effective strategies in or out of school that have helped bilingual learners, which we could perhaps feature in our case study section.

Your feedback
Have you found this study to be useful? Have you used any aspect of this research in your own classroom teaching practice? We would like to hear your feedback on this study, which we can share and use to inform our work.

• email: research@gtce.org.uk