Jim Cummins has postulated three basic principles related to second language acquisition(Cummins, 1979; Cummins, 1994). These have come to be known as: <strong>the</strong> conversational/academic language pr<strong>of</strong>iciency principle, <strong>the</strong> linguistic interdependence principle, and <strong>the</strong>additive bilingual enrichment principle. It is <strong>the</strong> first <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se three principles that has given riseto <strong>the</strong> now famous distinction between basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) andcognitive academic language pr<strong>of</strong>iciency (CALP).Saville-Troike has focused on <strong>the</strong> social settings and academic skills necessary for maximumacademic achievement <strong>of</strong> CLD students (Saville-Troike, 1984; Saville-Troike, 1988). Amongo<strong>the</strong>r things, she found that a well-developed vocabulary is <strong>the</strong> most important aspect <strong>of</strong> oralEnglish pr<strong>of</strong>iciency for academic achievement. However, an academic focus on structuralpatterns, such as basic grammar rules, appears to contribute little toward meeting students’immediate academic needs. At <strong>the</strong> root <strong>of</strong> her <strong>the</strong>ory is <strong>the</strong> belief that students need opportunitiesto discuss academic concepts in <strong>the</strong>ir native language if <strong>the</strong>y are to master content areaknowledge. Thus, social interaction between students is not sufficient for development <strong>of</strong>academic English language skills.Finally, Roland Tharp’s work on sociocultural <strong>the</strong>ory (D'Amato & Tharp, 1997; Tharp, 1997;Tharp & Dalton, 1994), and his development <strong>of</strong> five principles for cross-culturally compatibleeducation, while not explicitly a <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> second language acquisition, can be readily applied tocreating environments that encourage language development and bilingualism. Tharp’s <strong>the</strong>oryand its application are discussed in more detail in <strong>the</strong> final section <strong>of</strong> this ar<strong>ticle</strong>.Best Practices for Second Language LearnersFrom <strong>the</strong> perspective <strong>of</strong> this model, every student brings with him/her to <strong>the</strong> classroom a widerange <strong>of</strong> prior skills and knowledge. <strong>In</strong> order to take advantage <strong>of</strong> this rich background, as wellas to provide students with <strong>the</strong> skills and knowledge that <strong>the</strong>y need to be successful in ourschools, teachers must focus on au<strong>the</strong>ntic and meaningful language use. Au<strong>the</strong>ntic language usetakes place when students are active participants in language use focusing on topics that aremeaningful to <strong>the</strong>m.One important factor in fostering au<strong>the</strong>ntic language usage is to focus on <strong>the</strong> social organization<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> classroom. Research with CLD students (Garcia, 1991; Miramontes, Nadeau, & Commins,1998) demonstr<strong>ates</strong> <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> teachers making <strong>the</strong> shift from <strong>the</strong> traditional classroommodel where <strong>the</strong> desks are in straight rows and teacher is in front, to a model <strong>of</strong> classroomorganization emphasizing student centers, and a mixture <strong>of</strong> guided, group, and independentwork. Not surprisingly, <strong>the</strong> same organizational models have been shown to be successful withdominant culture students as well (Resnick, 1987a; Resnick, 1987b). When such a shift in socialorganization occurs, it is almost impossible for a teacher not to change her pedagogy to onewhich is more closely aligned with <strong>the</strong> sociocultural model <strong>of</strong> teaching and learning.Assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> following conditions can be used to provide a rough estimate <strong>of</strong> whe<strong>the</strong>r aschool is providing an adequate learning environment for CLD students that is aligned with whatwe know about best practices: 1) classrooms should be student-centered and <strong>of</strong>fer a nonthreateningenvironment that is informal and literature-rich; 2) classroom climate should becomfortable in terms <strong>of</strong> space, temperature, and freedom from distractions, and <strong>of</strong>fer access totechnology, curriculum, and supplies that allow for plentiful and appropriate learning choices;and 3) to be equitable, CLD students should be participating in all activities <strong>the</strong> school <strong>of</strong>fersincluding honors classes, programs for <strong>the</strong> gifted and talented, and all manner <strong>of</strong> extracurricularactivities.© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved120
The best practices models can be thought <strong>of</strong> as constituting a rough continuum, from those thatpay <strong>the</strong> least attention to <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> student’s first language, such as immersion and Englishas a Second Language (ESL) instruction, to those models that give <strong>the</strong> first language a prominentrole, such as developmental bilingual education and dual language. While each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se modelshas some merit in certain settings, <strong>the</strong> sociocultural approach to second language acquisition thatwe advocate calls for instruction that supports and develops <strong>the</strong> first language as <strong>the</strong> way to besttake advantage <strong>of</strong> a student’s prior knowledge base (Collier, 1995; Wong Fillmore, 1991b).A Sociocultural Model for Second Language AcquisitionThe sociocultural model that is presented is meant to address <strong>the</strong> complexities <strong>of</strong> secondlanguage acquisition, including <strong>the</strong> challenges faced by CLD students and <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong>creating a classroom environment that does as much as possible to help <strong>the</strong>se students cope,survive, and thrive within <strong>the</strong> challenges <strong>of</strong> school in an alien culture and a foreign language. Asmentioned earlier, <strong>the</strong> model we present is based largely on <strong>the</strong> work <strong>of</strong> Roland Tharp (D'Amato& Tharp, 1997; Tharp, 1997; Tharp & Dalton, 1994) and his colleagues. Tharp’s model iscomposed <strong>of</strong> five standards for culturally congruent education. These standards are meant toprovide a framework for creating a classroom environment (both social and academic) thatserves as a starting point for addressing <strong>the</strong> challenges we have discussed.While Tharp does not consider himself a cultural anthropologist, his model can be categorizedwithin <strong>the</strong> anthropological framework known as cultural difference <strong>the</strong>ory. The five principlescan be expanded and streng<strong>the</strong>ned by looking to a newly emerging framework from culturalanthropology known as practice <strong>the</strong>ory. Therefore, our sociocultural model for second languageacquisition starts with Tharp’s five standards, and adds a sixth, awareness <strong>of</strong> culturalproductions. Toge<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>se six principles are meant to push students to succeed academically,while at <strong>the</strong> same time helping to create a safe and comfortable social environment where <strong>the</strong>ywill not be intimidated and will not have <strong>the</strong>ir prior knowledge devalued.We begin here by briefly outlining <strong>the</strong> framework <strong>of</strong> cultural difference. Cultural difference<strong>the</strong>ory is grounded in <strong>the</strong> idea that cultural differences arise when groups face differenthistorical, social, and economic conditions (Holland & Eisenhart, 1990; Levinson & Holland,1996). Children learn <strong>the</strong> culture <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> group through child-rearing practices in <strong>the</strong> home and <strong>the</strong>local community. Different child-rearing practices across groups lead to consistent patterns <strong>of</strong>behavior, language use, thinking, and feeling for individuals within groups. However, <strong>the</strong>sepatterns differ from <strong>the</strong> behavior, language use, etc. <strong>of</strong> members <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r groups coming fromdifferent historical, social, and economic conditions. Fur<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong> relationship between groups israrely symmetrical. Some groups enjoy greater power, prestige, and status that o<strong>the</strong>r groups.One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> strengths <strong>of</strong> cultural difference <strong>the</strong>ory is that this view lends itself to developinginterventions, based on cultural differences that can be successful in certain settings. Forexample, strategies that address uses <strong>of</strong> time, space, motivation, and language that are morecompatible with, and which build upon community-specific features, can help engage students inschool who are o<strong>the</strong>rwise prone to disengagement and failure (Heath, 1983; Moll, 1992).Tharp’s five standards have been derived from working with such diverse populations as nativeHawaiian elementary school students (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988), adult Hawaiian vocationaleducation students (D'Amato & Tharp, 1997), and Native Americans on <strong>the</strong> Navajo and Zunireservations (Tharp & Dalton, 1994). The effectiveness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se principles comes from studyingand making use <strong>of</strong> broad cultural patterns <strong>of</strong> behavior. The principles that have emerged asseemingly cross-culturally compatible are as follows:© 2008 Dr. Ca<strong>the</strong>rine CollierAll Rights Reserved121
- Page 2 and 3:
"Those who arrive by age 12 or 13 m
- Page 5:
Article I.2 Are Signed Languages "R
- Page 8 and 9:
Biological analyses of the status o
- Page 10 and 11:
and beyond, speaking and signing ch
- Page 12 and 13:
Conclusion: Are Signed Languages Re
- Page 14 and 15:
Article I.3 The Interpreter: Has a
- Page 16 and 17:
A few weeks earlier, I had called F
- Page 18 and 19:
“We struggled even getting to the
- Page 20 and 21:
herself by strapping a cassette rec
- Page 22 and 23:
In 1998, after nine years as the ch
- Page 24 and 25:
momentary burst of excitement that
- Page 26 and 27:
can shape core grammar. Because the
- Page 28 and 29:
The authors compared animal and hum
- Page 30 and 31:
monkey moved. He followed it with h
- Page 32 and 33:
delight, fear, laughter, and surpri
- Page 34 and 35:
Piipaío in a hut: Pirahã huts typ
- Page 36 and 37:
LEP students, and equitable organiz
- Page 38 and 39:
4. Second language development crea
- Page 41 and 42:
curriculum or "teaching to the test
- Page 43 and 44:
portfolio work was scanned and stor
- Page 45 and 46:
experiences of many groups of stude
- Page 47 and 48:
While not disagreeing that interpre
- Page 49 and 50:
sound educational practice, however
- Page 51 and 52:
arises from the efforts to abstract
- Page 53 and 54:
Article II.2 Cross-Cultural Communi
- Page 55 and 56:
males who can serve as positive rol
- Page 57 and 58:
Understanding another culture is a
- Page 59 and 60:
Pets and AnimalsWhich animals are v
- Page 61 and 62:
to teach standard English is reflec
- Page 63 and 64:
Asking personal questions of a pers
- Page 65 and 66:
Using Cross Cultural Communication
- Page 67 and 68:
Why Do Nonstandard English-Speaking
- Page 69 and 70: Before beginning to teach standard
- Page 71 and 72: • Negative attitudes toward low p
- Page 73 and 74: New standardized tests and assessme
- Page 75 and 76: Each of the behaviors listed above
- Page 77 and 78: Article II.3 Hard Work Hypothesis:
- Page 79 and 80: each point higher in SES, students
- Page 81 and 82: This case does not provide strong s
- Page 83 and 84: Article II.4 Language Acquisition a
- Page 85 and 86: 1992, p. XI). These researchers, wh
- Page 87 and 88: comprehend a word within a specific
- Page 89 and 90: more to the truthfulness of the chi
- Page 91 and 92: This idea of “semilingualism” c
- Page 93 and 94: Article III.1 A Brief Description o
- Page 95 and 96: take different lengths of time to c
- Page 97 and 98: example, should involve the same co
- Page 99 and 100: As with all stages of BICS acquisit
- Page 101 and 102: Assessment techniques at stage 3 ca
- Page 103 and 104: different. Therefore, the social di
- Page 105: integrative motivation. Basically,
- Page 109 and 110: (Ellis, 1985; Hakuta, 1986). Howeve
- Page 111 and 112: that sociocultural processes have o
- Page 113 and 114: Article III.3 How Children Acquire
- Page 115 and 116: phonetic units (unique to signed la
- Page 117 and 118: Article III.4 Toward a Sociocultura
- Page 119: emember is that the fundamental goa
- Page 123 and 124: By focusing on the dialectic betwee
- Page 125 and 126: intergenerational wisdom shared by
- Page 127 and 128: Daily Realities RecappedThe above v
- Page 129 and 130: traditions. At a time in our histor
- Page 131 and 132: We will now look at two examples of
- Page 133 and 134: Speakers communicate fluently, main
- Page 135 and 136: question the effects of such attitu
- Page 137 and 138: Article IV.3 Culture Change: Effect
- Page 139 and 140: and psychological characteristics o
- Page 141 and 142: Contraryto what wewere expecting, t
- Page 143 and 144: Article V.1 Assessment in ESL & Bil
- Page 145 and 146: vocabulary does the student lack?Is
- Page 147 and 148: whether they are LEP and to provide
- Page 149 and 150: Fourth, ESL and bilingual program s
- Page 151 and 152: competent reader/writer. All versio
- Page 153 and 154: Table 1Comparison of Recent Accultu
- Page 155 and 156: unilinear model, which measures the
- Page 157 and 158: an English-only instructional progr
- Page 159 and 160: Article V.3 Assessment of English L
- Page 161 and 162: 8. Change answers only for a very g
- Page 163 and 164: Riles, 1979; Jose P. v Ambac, 1983)
- Page 165 and 166: proficiency is often underestimated
- Page 167 and 168: Finally, when second language reade
- Page 169 and 170: for their decisions, noting issues
- Page 171 and 172:
As mentioned above, when the transi
- Page 173 and 174:
ather than generic adjectives and t
- Page 175 and 176:
their imagined points of view. Ther
- Page 177 and 178:
English texts and demonstrate progr
- Page 179:
using inter-district teams). In the