Aspects of Language Development in an Intensive English Program

Alan Juffs

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781351691178
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Langues et linguistique
• Categoría: Linguistique

While there is much in the literature on ESL development, this book is the first of its kind to track the development of specific language abilities in an Intensive English Program (IEP) longitudinally and highlights the implications of this particular study's findings for future IEP implementation and practice and ESL and SLA research. The volume draws on many years' worth of data from learners at an IEP at the University of Pittsburgh to explore selected aspects of language development, including lexical, grammatical, speaking, and writing abilities, in addition to placement assessment practices and student learning outcomes. A concluding chapter points to the ways in which these findings can be applied to decision making around IEP curriculum development and the future role of IEPs in higher education more broadly. With its focus on students in IEP settings and the concentration on data from students evaluated over multiple semesters, this volume offers a unique opportunity in which to examine longitudinal developmental patterns of different L1 groups on a variety of measures from the same learners and will be key reading for students and researchers in second language acquisition, English for Academic Purposes, language education, and applied linguistics.

1 Intensive English Programs and Second Language Teaching Research

1.1 Intensive English Language Programs: Early Beginnings and Professionalization

Intensive English programs have officially existed for over 70 years in the United States to serve the needs of learners who wish to study various subjects through the medium of English at universities and colleges. It is generally accepted that the first program was established in 1941 at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor (https://lsa.umich.edu/eli/about-us.html).¹ Its founder, the linguist Charles Carpenter Fries (1887–1967) (Anthony, 1968), sought to combine teaching English as a second language (ESL), materials writing, and research on ESL learning as part of his broader work as a linguist (Anthony, 1968). According to some accounts, Fries can also be considered one of the originators of modern construction grammar, but his ideas were eclipsed by the paradigm shift in linguistics triggered by Chomsky’s generative approach to grammar (Zwicky, 2006, languagelog/archives/003743.html). This background history is important because it underpins one of the goals of this book, which is to show that knowledge of theories of language and descriptive linguistics is a vital component of understanding instructed language development. Such understanding is the basis for creating materials to make development more efficient in instructed contexts (Juffs, 2017).

After the founding of the English Language Institute (ELI) at the University of Michigan, other institutes quickly followed in the 1950s and 1960s. In 1964, one of Fries’ students, Edward Mason Anthony, Jr., was recruited from Michigan to the University of Pittsburgh. He founded the ELI as part of a program of internationalization at the university (www.utimes.pitt.edu/?p=36498). The Department of Linguistics was founded concurrently, in part as a way to train teachers for the institute. Hence, Fries’ influence extended from English language teaching to teacher training and linguistics itself.

From these early beginnings, IEPs have increased in importance and in their professional standing as the field of teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) has evolved into a mature profession. In 1967, at a conference for international student advisors, administrators and teachers (NAFSA), a group of individuals from 13 intensive English programs, including the one at the University of Pittsburgh, realized that they had many issues in common, and so the association College Intensive English Program (CIEP) was founded, later to become University and College Intensive English Programs (UCIEP) (www.uciep.org/). Subsequently, other organizations were created that included private language schools. The most well known of these organizations is now called EnglishUSA (www.englishusa.org) but was founded as the American Association of Intensive English Programs. Many IEPs belong to both organizations. In 2019, there are well over 400 intensive English programs in the United States.

The field of English as a second language is now an established profession, with international professional organizations for teaching practice and research (www.tesol.org; www.aaal.org). One of the most recent developments in the professionalization of the field was the establishment of program standards for accreditation and an organization to monitor the adherence to these standards. The Commission on English Language Program Accreditation (CEA) (www.cea-accredit.org) is one organization that is recognized by the US Department of Education as an approved accrediting body for US IEPs, as well as IEPs overseas, including in Greece, Peru, Qatar, Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. As immigration policy and border control in the United States have increased in importance, accreditation has become required for all intensive programs in the United States (www.ice.gov/sevis/accreditation-act). The enactment of this legislation was in part the result of advocacy by UCIEP, EnglishUSA, and TESOL.

1.2 The Spread of English as a World Lingua Franca and Economic Impact

As the second half of the twentieth century unfolded, and as the United States succeeded the United Kingdom as the English-speaking military and economic global power, the teaching and learning of English as a second language developed into a true industry itself. One key reason for this development is that technological and economic success continued to be linked to knowledge of English. Proficiency in English remained the gateway to acquiring expertise in science and technology in higher education and consequently to both personal and national economic advancement.

In the aftermath of World War II, the United States was the leader in science, technology, and industrial capacity. As other countries rebuilt from the devastation of the war, globalization began with the economic dominance of the United States and its leading research universities and industries, in addition to higher education in English-speaking democracies that include the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Access to education and professional training provides economic benefits to students, but these benefits could only be accessed through English-medium education. Thus, the range and influence of English as a lingua franca has continued to expand (Graddol, 1997; Melitz, 2016). For example, it was estimated in 1997 that over 750 million people world-wide are learning English as a foreign language, which was nearly twice the number of ‘native’ speakers of English (Graddol, 1997, p. 10).² For this reason, as a gateway to the benefits of higher education, learning English is a core component to the programs of many universities that seek to recruit students.

However, it is not only international students who benefit from university education overseas; the institutions where they study also benefit. For institutions in English-speaking countries, the motivation to recruit international students is both economic and cultural. One primary reason is that universities around the world increasingly need the funds that international students bring in the form of tuition dollars and services paid for; in addition, international students provide cultural diversity on campus that enriches the educational experience of the locally resident students. Because of these long-term benefits, universities provide English language training both before and during degree programs to help students succeed as well as to attract highly qualified students whose English might otherwise not be quite proficient enough for university coursework.

An added benefit is that the economic life of the towns and cities around campus benefit greatly from this educational activity. For example, the money spent on housing, food, and services had a total impact on the US economy estimated to be worth over $42 billion in 2017 (www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/Economic-Impact-of-International-Students). After graduation, international students add to the talent pool in the workforce. These factors make local and national governments view international students favorably.

This context, then, is the one in which the research in this book is situated: economic goals of international students lead them to learn English to access higher education; higher education institutions need their dollars to support their academic and cultural diversity goals in an increasingly globalized economy. All of this activity is occurring in a wider context of globalization – a trend that brings both benefits and challenges.

The role of an intensive English program is to provide a bridge for students to cross from their educational system into the world of English-medium education. Acting as a bridge – a means rather than an end goal – can be a challenge for teachers and administrators in IEPs (dePetro Orlando, 2016; Hoekje & Stevens, 2017). For some students, the IEP and standardized tests, such as the Internet-Based Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) (iBT) and the International English Language Testing System (IELTS), constitute barriers instead of a pathway to success in coursework. The IEP can be perceived as a block to students’ access to their ultimate goals of enrollment in a degree program and successful completion of that program. From the point of view of the university, the IEP can be seen as a unit that is not part of their central mission of delivering degree programs and research output funded by government and industry (Algren, 2016). Often, English language learning and teaching are seen as simply a ‘support’ enterprise, such as a computer support or some other ‘ancillary’ unit. As a result, the domain expertise that applied linguists bring to the IEP can sometimes be ignored or discounted by academic units that are ignorant about the knowledge base ESL professionals have of linguistics, language development patterns, and instructional methodology.

The hope is that this book can serve as a source of reference and documentation of how learners can improve their English in IEPs. Examples of student output are intended to allow administrators and teachers to compare what is happening in their programs with the data in this book and online at https://github.com/ELI-Data-Mining-Group/Pitt-ELI-Corpus. The more data administrators of programs can present to sponsors and learners regarding the effectiveness of their programs, the better equipped they will be to convince students and higher administrators of the importance of the education that IEPs provide and of the scientific basis of our discipline.

1.3 The Economic and Political Context of the Intensive English Program

Pennington and Hoekje (2010)’s Chapter 1 provides an excellent overview of the economic and political landscape in which IEPs operate. Although their book was written nine years ago, most of their observations remain relevant today. The international political economy of the world changes constantly, and these changes have direct impacts on IEPs. The election of Donald Trump as US president in 2016 and the tide against globalization as represented by the UK voting to leave the European Union (BREXIT) makes predicting future developments even more challenging than during usual economic cycles around the world. Because their overview of the context of intensive English programs is an important background, it is worth summarizing their main points here.

First, international students make up a significant proportion of all students in higher education in the US and other English-speaking countries. Thus, an important fact is that many English-speaking universities depend on international students for a substantial part of their tuition revenue. Some numbers that were relevant in 2010 have not changed a great deal. In Australia, from 20% in 2006, now 23% of students in higher education are international students (https://docs.education.gov.au/node/39321). The United Kingdom reported 436,585 international students in 2014–2015 (http://institutions.ukcisa.org.uk/). In the United States, data from Open Doors (www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students/Enrollment) in late 2017 showed that the number of international students increased by 1.5% to 1,094,793 students, making up 5.5% of all students in the United States. This is an increase of 2% of total students since 2008, the top five countries being China (33.2%), India (17.9%), Saudi Arabia (4.1%), South Korea (5.0%), and Canada (2.4%). While most countries have increased the numbers that they send to the United States, economic and political turmoil in countries sending students abroad can create large fluctuations. For example, the number of students from Brazil decreased 18.2% from 23,675 in 2015 to 19,370 in 2016, and students from...

Índice

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• Acknowledgments
• Preface
• 1 Intensive English Programs and Second Language Teaching Research
• 2 The Intensive English Program at the University of Pittsburgh: Methods and Curriculum
• 3 Placement Assessment and Developmental Measures in an Intensive English Program
• 4 Lexical Development in an Intensive English Program
• 5 Grammatical Development in an Intensive English Program
• 6 Spoken Language: Pronunciation and the Development of Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in an Intensive English Program
• 7 Some Features of the Development of Writing in an Intensive English Program
• 8 Epilogue
• Index