Tier 3: Intensive EAL Provision

Whether or not to 'withdraw' students from classes in order to support the acquisition of English is an on-going debate in schools, with some suggesting that any provision that sits outside the mainstream classes is not 'inclusive'. Unfortunately, there is no strong research base on which to base our decisions, but we can look to research on second language acquisition, along with our understanding of the nature of immersion education to decide how and where to best support our students learning English as an additional language.

While it is true that we do not want students who are acquiring the language of instruction to miss out on learning opportunities, there is a flawed assumption that if they are in the mainstream classes they are able to access those learning opportunities. If we refer to Vygotsky's 'zone of proximal development' in second language acquisition terms, we have the concept of 'i' + 1, where 'i' is the student's current level of English (or other language of instruction) and the +1 denotes one level of language higher (Krashen, in Payne, 2011). In essence, this means that for a student to develop their English language ability in the mainstream classroom, the teacher needs to be pitching input (teacher talk, reading, etc.) at each students' 'i' + 1. When we say 'every teacher is a language teacher' we are setting expectations very high, and one of these expectations is that teachers understand and can manage this level of adaptive teaching in their classrooms in ways that are effective for both curricular learning and language development.

---

When we are welcoming students with levels of language significantly below that which is needed to access classroom learning opportunities, we can see the challenge we are setting for both students and teachers. In an early years setting, the language of instruction tends to be context-embedded, multi-modal, and rich in opportunity for language acquisition. Indeed, many children in early years settings are still developing language users in all their languages, and teachers take this into account when using language across the setting. This is why, by and large, students with EAL should remain in early years settings rather than being removed for specific language acquisition teaching.

As we move up the year groups, we can see an emerging gap between the level of new arrivals with emergent English and the level of language in the classroom. This is where we begin to plan for stand-alone language acquisition opportunities for students in the early levels of acquisition (Band A-B on the Bell Assessment Framework or equivalent). Drawing on research from second language acquisition (see, for example, Munoz, 2012), studies indicate that intensive language learning experiences tend to lead to better outcomes that extensive language learning experiences. This means that the same number of hours of learning over a shorter period of time lead to larger gains in proficiency. Given that proficiency in English is the strongest predictor of academic success in English-medium schools (see, for example, Murphy in Chalmers, 2022) it seems that our best course of action is to support students in developing proficiency as quickly as possible. With younger learners, where their 'i' + 1 can be catered to in the mainstream classroom, there is no need for intensive English provision outside the mainstream classroom. With older students, we need to balance the difference between their current level in English and the level of the classroom to decide what provision will support them the most effectively. Generally speaking, students in Band A-B (beginner and emergent) are not able to access learning opportunities in the mainstream classroom without significant support, through adaptive teaching and in-class support. This means that they will likely make more efficient progress in stand-alone EAL provision.

---

Practically speaking, we are looking to build the biggest gains in English proficiency as quickly as possible. The older students are, the more capable they are of building on their knowledge of language to progress quickly without becoming overwhelmed. Older students are also likely to be accessing the least in mainstream classes due to the mismatch between their level of English and the level of language in the classroom. Schools have many (many!) priorities when it comes to the schedule, so we rarely achieve the ideal schedule for EAL provision, but this is what ideal Tier 3 provision would look like:

Band A Beginner level provision:

• students in EAL programme 1-2 teaching blocks a day, ideally in English language/literacy classes, and humanities classes

Band B Emergent provision:

• students in EAL language and literacy programme 1-2 teaching blocks a day, ideally in English language/literacy classes, and humanities classes

• Depending on age, moving back into mainstream classes towards the end of Band B

Critically, to make this work efficiently and effectively for students, we also need to have a clear curriculum framework for our Tier 3 provision. This goes to the heart of the conflict between the good side of being agile (student-centred, needs based, entirely flexible) and the dangerous side of being agile (no tracking and ability to replicate, no record of provision). In order to develop our Tier 3 provision year on year, we must know what we are doing and we must be consistent in tracking our Tier 3 programme. This doesn't mean being textbook based (there are no good textbooks for EAL!) or rigid, it means creating a framework that is linked to our EAL tracking programme, and using this to build the skills students need to be successful in the classroom. We can still be unit/theme based, and it should never be English skills divorced from meaningful content, but we can engage meaningful content for the purpose of developing English skills in a consistent and measurable way.

A strong Tier 3 provision is focused, tracked, and finite:

Focused: a clear framework for developing basic English language skills for learning

Tracked: a tool designed to show progress in real time in the EAL provision and in the classroom

Finite: a clear end-point is reached when a student has achieved the objectives of the programme

If we develop our Tier 3 provision with these criteria in mind, we will make visible the learning trajectory of students through our EAL provision, and ensure that the entire school team knows what we do, how we do it, and how important it is. (see this post for more detail: The Dark Arts of Language Teaching). Once we have a strong Tier 3 provision we can begin to track our process and student progress, to refine our programme and optimise it for our students.

---

Payne, M. (2011). Exploring Stephen Krashen's ‘i+1’ acquisition model in the classroom. Linguistics and Education, Volume 22, Issue 4, p.419-429,

Munoz, C. (2012). Intensive Exposure Experiences in Second Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Murphy, V. (2022). Myths and misconceptions in bilingual language development. In H. Chalmers (Ed.), The researchED Guide to English as an Additional Language: An evidence-informed guide for teachers (pp. 35-48). Woodbridge: John Catt Educational Ltd.