The Missouri Reader Vol. 37, Issue 2 | Page 9

interpersonal communication skills (BICS) more
quickly because social language is survival
language. BICS are acquired through informal
nonacademic interactions, encompass the
language of the playground and cafeteria, and
involve social negotiations using facial
expressions, gestures and body language.
Students will gain conversational proficiency
within two to four years and may appear to be
fluent speakers of the second language or L2
(Cummins, 1981). Younger English Learners will
often speak English without an accent, thus
prompting teachers to believe the child has
achieved fluency in L2. However, if the child has
obtained only a conversational level of
proficiency and not an academic level of
proficiency, he/she will have difficulty with
cognitively complex concepts in L2.
Cognitive academic language proficiency
(CALP) is the ability to use conceptual
knowledge as a tool for learning across content
areas (Cummins, 1981). Academic language is
cognitively demanding. As teachers we ask
students to do a myriad of complex tasks: to
compare and contrast, define, categorize,
connect, explain, apply, analyze, synthesis, and
evaluate (Reiss, 2012). Consequently, it can take
ELs five to seven years to fully acquire academic
language proficiency in L2. Therefore, it is
important that instructional support for the
development of cognitive academic language
proficiency in English extend well beyond
conversational skills or basic English.
According to Thomas and Collier (1995), the
amount of formal schooling a student has
received in his/her first language (L1) will
significantly impact how long it will take a
student to learn a second language (L2). The
theory of the Common Underlying Proficiency
(Cummins, 1984) maintains that academic
knowledge and skills learned in L1 will transfer
to L2. For example, if a child knows how to read
in his/her first language, the child understands
the basic concepts of reading such as decoding
and making connections to text. The various
academic skills students have learned in L1 such
as defining, predicting, analyzing, interpreting

metaphors, problem solving, and evaluating can
be applied as they learn and study in L2.
Krashen (1982) developed the input
hypothesis as a means for understanding the
process of second language acquisition. An EL
will better comprehend new information when
the input is one step above his/her current
competency level. Krashen refers to this type of
input as comprehensible input; it is the zone
between actual and potential language
development. For example, if the student is
competent at level i, then input at i + 1 is the
most comprehensible for learning new
information. While similar to Vygotsky’s zone of
proximal development (1978), Krashen (1985)
applied his concept only to second language
acquisition and concentrated on how to make
language input understandable by using: (a)
appropriate speech, (b) appropriate non-verbal
cues to support language use, (c) teaching
techniques to clarify content concepts, and (d)
clear explanations of academic tasks. Herrera
and Murry (2011) offer the following
applications of i + 1 comprehensible input:
 Previewing key content vocabulary in the
first and second languages.
 Highlighting or outlining key concepts.
 Gesturing to emphasize key points.
 Providing time for clarification of key
concepts in the first language with a peer
or paraprofessional.
 Simplifying and modifying the academic
language used during instruction. (p. 300)
English Learners thrive in classrooms
containing language-rich literacy instruction
(Herrera, Perez, & Escamilla, 2010; Ogle &
Correa-Kovtun, 2010; Reiss, 2012; Peregoy &
Boyle, 2013; Shanahan & Beck, 2006). Students
need a wide range of reading materials
available at their instructional or independent
reading level (Allington, 2007). Oral language
development must be an integral part of ELs
literacy instruction, thus requiring extensive
opportunities to talk and use new vocabulary
and concepts (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2004).
Prior knowledge should be activated and
©The Missouri Reader, 37 (2) p.9