Teaching Emphases for English Proficiency Levels
Improving Teaching and Learning for ESL Students from Years 1 - 12

Devised by Kay Mc Namara  and Esther Watt.        Read more about the authors...
Note: This site is best viewed at 1024x768 or higher. Any lower resolution and it's a mess!

You're welcome to access this material free of charge as part of your work as educators 
but please acknowledge the source fully in any documents produced. Thankyou

Note: Updated TEEPL information is available at
www.esl.eq.edu.au/emphases
Eventually this KGSC site will transfer entirely over to the EQ ESL site.

INTRODUCTION

	Listening	Speaking	Reading	Writing
Junior Primary
Middle/Upper Primary
Secondary

View the JP Proficiency Rating Sheets -  Reading | Writing | Speaking | Listening 
View the MUP Proficiency rating Sheets here
View the Secondary Proficiency Rating sheets -  Reading | Writing | Speaking | Listening 
Go to Acknowledgements    |    Open ESL Plan Template (Word document) | How to make an IEP  |    References

What is TEEPL? top
The Teaching Emphases for English Proficiency Levels (TEEPL) document is a reference point for teachers of students in years 1-12, seeking ways to improve the learning outcomes and quality of participation of English as a Second Language (ESL) students in their classes. The purpose of TEEPL is to link assessment with teaching and learning in a way that will support children and provide practical assistance for teachers. The teaching emphases make suggestions for classroom organisation, teaching strategies and selection of texts and give background information related to social, cultural and language learning behaviours as applicable in personal, social and general school contexts as well as in academic contexts.

These suggestions, when applied to classroom organisation and pedagogy in mainstream classrooms, will prove beneficial for all students including those from English language backgrounds.

Does TEEPL make suggestions for addressing students’ non-academic needs? top
Whilst the main aim of TEEPL is to support ESL learning at various levels of proficiency in each of the four macroskills, students cannot realistically learn while they have complex social, emotional, psychological or even health related issues needing immediate attention. Students who have come from refugee camps, for example, may have had inadequate access to clean water or nutritious food causing vitamin and mineral deficiencies. These same students may also present with emotional blocks related to past trauma. Before they can focus their energy on new academic learning, such students need to release blocks and overcome dietary deficiencies in achieving some sense of physiological, psychological, social and emotional balance.  For this reason, the teaching emphases make suggestions for dealing with social, emotional, psychological and health issues which impact on learning. In this way TEEPL seeks to “enable” academic learning for all ESL students.

What is the background to the TEEPL project?  top
The TEEPL project came about because of a desire to better address the needs of students from non English speaking backgrounds (NESB). Under the current ESL service delivery model, most NESB students in mainstream classrooms only receive half to one hour per week of ESL teacher contact time. This was seen to be only ‘bandaiding’ the problems these students were facing in attempting to meet the language demands of mainstream curricula. TEEPL was started with the aim of addressing this ‘bandaiding’ problem.

Esther Watt and Kay Mc Namara began working together on TEEPL in their own time in April 2003. This involved a complex and intricate process of brainstorming ideas, referring to resources and backward and forward mapping between levels and across macroskills to ensure continuity throughout all 3 bands- Junior Primary, Middle & Upper Primary and Secondary. In this way, the suggestions offered in Secondary build on those in Middle & Upper Primary which in turn build on those in Junior Primary and any entry in one macroskill is supported by related teaching emphases in the other macroskills. Students could not, for instance, be expected to write a story retelling at level 4 Writing unless they had been retelling orally at the earlier levels of Speaking. Furthermore, as receptive skills, a version of a teaching emphasis entered in Reading may also be included in Listening and likewise for the productive skills of Writing and Speaking. The teaching emphases in the 3^rd column of each table come from a combined 25 years of ESL teaching experience. Each teaching emphasis, whether an original idea or that devised by others, has been carefully placed and then modified to ensure suitability to Bandscale level. In this way, teaching emphases have been meticulously graded so that, for instance, dictation at level 2 is on a single, simple, jointly constructed sentence while at level 4 it’s on a short familiar paragraph and at level 5 it changes to the more challenging dictogloss where groups pool notes and reconstruct text. Thus, TEEPL has emerged as a comprehensive, cross referenced document characterized by multi-layered interconnnections.

In October 2003 TEEPL attracted the attention of Curriculum Strategy Branch in Central Office. In May 2004 a project plan was submitted to further the writing and trialing of TEEPL to include Prep Year as well as Secondary Reading and Writing. The project aimed to include proposals for publication of the final materials. In June 2004 it was confirmed that the Assistant Director General, Curriculum and project sponsor was very supportive of the submission should funds become available.

In the meantime Kay and Esther used TEEPL at their schools with positive outcomes at whole school level. The materials were incorporated into whole school literacy strategies at some schools. Then in September 2004 it was announced that no immediate funding was available to continue the writing and trialing of TEEPL.

Central Office personnel now wish to see further trialing of the materials as they currently stand in order to evaluate efficacy at a district level, before considering a statewide trial.  Even though, from the outset, Education Queensland deemed the project worthy of state-wide application, the NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, Hudson & Sapuppo, 1994) themselves are now to be reviewed first before any action is taken on a wider scale. With this in mind, 2 project plans were intended to be submitted by Central Office personnel in consultation with Kay and Esther before the end of 2004 – the first was to review the NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, Hudson & Sapuppo, 1994) and the second was to evaluate TEEPL as a way of ‘growing it up’ in preparation for its potential state-wide application. This has not been actioned.

In March 2005 funding was gained through Refugee Grant monies to extend and develop the existing teaching emphases to target more closely the needs of refugee students, particularly those with limited print literacy. This work is ongoing. 

Is TEEPL a curriculum? top
No. TEEPL is best used as a reference alongside curriculum documents in planning culturally inclusive programs which differentiate teaching practices and content to facilitate learning of ESL students. TEEPL encourages cultural inclusivity in curriculum design by- • advocating for an environment free from prejudice and stereotyping • acknowledging the cultural and linguistic backgrounds of all students • involving individuals and groups from the wider community • enabling students to gain equal access to resources including teacher attention/time • supporting ongoing professional development of staff.

Are the materials prescriptive? top
Lumley in Breen et al (1997) found that ESL assessment frameworks having a format which is open to modification whilst indicating clearly the limits and scope of such modification are more likely to be willingly accommodated by teachers. Lumley further asserts that ‘clear identification of what can not be negotiable reduces the likelihood of misinterpretation whilst, in turn, specification of aspects of a framework which are potentially variable encourages genuine accommodation within established assessment practices and overall pedagogy.’

With this in mind, it is not intended that the suggestions in TEEPL be prescriptive or constrain in any way the use of professional judgement, forcing teachers to conceive of learning in certain ways. Whilst the descriptions of the students are not negotiable, the teaching emphases are designed to be open to modification. They are a range of practices from which teachers might select and then make discerning modifications to, depending on the purposes of any particular language program and the needs of the children in their class.

TEEPL is a bank of suggestions, many of which consist of multiple elements. It is not intended that all elements be practised all the time. For example, the teaching emphasis on conferencing students’ writing lists out potential errors which may be addressed during the conference. Rather than correcting all the errors in a student’s work every time, it’s more productive to limit the focus to those which impede meaning. 

In making informed choices when selecting, modifying and adapting teaching emphases to suit particular students in particular learning contexts, teachers gain a sense of personal ownership and investment in relation to the materials.

How is TEEPL related to the ESL Bandscales? top
TEEPL links to the NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, Hudson & Sapuppo, 1994) which provide descriptions of ESL learner progress at Junior Primary (1-3), Middle & Upper Primary (4-7) and Secondary (8-12) levels. The Bandscales are used to rate learner proficiency in the 4 macroskills of Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing on a scale of 1-7 (Primary) and 1-8 (Secondary) with level 1 descriptors corresponding to beginner level and level 7or 8 to advanced level. The emphasis on academic language use increases as the descriptions move from Junior Primary through to Secondary.

Lumley, in Breen et al (1997) found that a framework which is highly valued by teachers of ESL students appears to be one which:

1. addresses the teachers’ own pedagogic priorities and ways of teaching;
2. informs them of the prior linguistic and cultural experiences of ESL children, including those for whom English is essentially a foreign language in their community;
3. provides them with appropriate sources of information about the home language of their particular ESL students;
4. clearly maps their students’ developmental processes in English language and literacy;
5. offers suggestions on specific teaching strategies and other curriculum support that can facilitate these developmental processes and, thereby, enable genuine progress;
6. offers precision both in what to focus on in assessment and how to undertake it.

In the same study, Hudson, in Breen et al (1997) found that the majority of teachers shared the following beliefs concerning the kind of assessment framework with which they would most like to work:

1. A framework that provides a strong link between teaching (including goals and planning) and assessment.
2. An ESL framework that has a strong professional development focus, particularly for mainstream teachers, by providing an understanding of the varying backgrounds of ESL learners and by proposing strategies for teaching to the various levels of development in the framework.
3. A framework to assess or, at least, understand the major characteristics of the first language of ESL learners, particularly those in bilingual programs. This would include provision for assessing literacy in the first language of ESL learners.
4. A framework which details the development of oracy in English as a second language and which accounts for the role of oracy in the development of reading and writing at particular stages.
5. A framework which is sensitive to different teaching contexts. For example, the contextual differences between pre-primary, mainstream primary, and Intensive Language Centre teaching in terms of environments, priorities and procedures.
6. A framework which is inclusive of the range of ESL learners and does not characterise such learners as if they were a homogeneous group. Inclusion would need to take account of such variables as, for example: children who are new arrivals, those who have been born in or spent a long time in Australia, those with specific learning difficulties, and those with non-print literacy backgrounds as compared with children from strongly print-based literacy backgrounds, etc.

In directly addressing Lumley’s point 5 and Hudson’s points 1 and 2, the TEEPL materials have improved on the ESL Bandscales as an assessment framework by responding to teacher feedback on valued characteristics. 

Why link scaffolding to the NLLIA ESL Bandscales? top

The NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, Hudson & Sapuppo, 1994) are described by Derewianka in Breen et al, 1997 as follows-

In 1991, a team funded by the Department of Employment, Education and Training began work on an assessment and reporting package for ESL language development in schools, in order to provide a more reliable and accurate way of measuring and describing attainment levels of ESL students.

The major component of the package was to be a set of proficiency descriptions for ESL learning in schools. The project team adopted a 'top-down consultative process', with the descriptions of learner progress being derived from informing theory and research and constantly modified in response to practitioner trialing and feedback.

The ESL Development Project materials involved extensive consultation nationwide with practising teachers and ESL specialists, educators and administrators, professional associations, academics with expertise in the field of ESL, second language acquisition and assessment. The package of materials consists of the NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, Hudson & Sapuppo, 1994); exemplar assessment activities and observation guides for in-class observation and tracking of language proficiency; reporting formats and guidelines for on-going recording and for profile reporting. In developing the materials, great pains were taken to ensure that the descriptions in the Bandscales reflected the diversity of ESL learners and the characteristics of their language learning. Emphasis was placed on the context of learning, including teaching/learning settings, the age of the students, their educational and social backgrounds, the nature of the task and the degree of teacher support.

The following principles guided the development of the materials:

• To enable the assessment, recording and reporting of learners' English language development repeatedly, over a period of time, in a range of contexts, in different curriculum areas, and in situations requiring both social and academic language
• To include all ESL learner groups and to recognise the dynamic and interwoven factors of growth and context (ESL learners are, for example, learning English, developing literacy skills, studying mainstream learning content, moving from a primary learning context towards a secondary learning context, moving from one cultural context to another, growing up)
• To recognise positive starting points for ESL
• To provide positive descriptions of growth, while at the same time helping in the identification of difficulties
• To stress the key role of the L1 in the learning of English, and to have as a goal the development of effective bilingualism (rather than simply 'native speaker-like' language ability in English)
• To accommodate developmental and contextual changes, together with multiple entry points (K-12). This will include (often critical) transition points, temporary regressions and plateaus.
• To recognise and cater for the integrated nature of ESL teaching and learning (ESL across the curriculum; language and content; interrelationship of four macroskills, curriculum and assessment process) in the school context
• To take account of the constraints in the school context (eg. time, numbers of students, a range of expertise)
• To describe language ability across a range of personal, social and general/academic school contexts, in particular the students' control of 'basic interpersonal communication skills' and 'cognitive academic language proficiency'

Importantly the Bandscales recognise that being an ESL learner at age 5 is a vastly different experience to being an ESL learner at age 16. They therefore provide three quite distinct sets of descriptions for the different age groupings (junior primary, middle/upper primary, and secondary).

Junior Primary Learners

• are at earlier stages of cognitive development

• are experiencing early literacy development in English; may or may not have developed literacy concepts at home ('literacy set') in either L1 or English or both

• may be experiencing early literacy development in L1

• are still growing in their L1 language development or may be bilingual

• are not likely to be self-conscious in their language use

• sometimes experience a silent period when they begin to learn a second language

• do not have well-developed awareness of language

• are learning in a school context which is designed to cater for the individual e.g., activities are generally selected which allow learners to progress at their own level

• are learning in a context which encourages play, social interaction, shared language activities, etc.

Middle/Upper Primary Learners

• are more mature

• have an increasing knowledge of the world and therefore tend to apply this to their learning of English

• are able to draw on L1 language and literacy (to varying degrees)

• if low literacy background, generally have a literacy set because of experiences with environmental print, television, etc.

• have growing language awareness

Secondary Learners

• are more mature

• have extended knowledge of the world and possibly background knowledge in content areas which they can apply to their learning of English and through English

• may be self-conscious

• can draw on their first language and literacy (to varying degrees); for some, L1 literacy will be highly developed

• if low literacy background, generally have a literacy set because of experiences with environmental print, television, etc.

• may have advanced learning-how-to-learn skills

• are learning in a more demanding school context (e.g., more context-reduced; more abstract language; pressure of exams; difficult textbooks)

Within these age groupings, they also acknowledge the range of educational, linguistic and cultural differences among learners. The descriptors vary according to the maturity of the student, the student's literacy background in L1 and in English, the learner's experience of the world, and previous schooling.

They attempt to avoid, as far as possible, a deficit model of description of student language development. They also anticipate the various domains in which students need to develop English – personal, social, general school contexts and English for academic purposes. In addition, the descriptors suggest the various roles that the teacher might play in supporting the student's learning, thereby seeing progress as a joint responsibility, not something inherent in the individual student.

Figure 1: A Comparison of 2 sets of Government Funded ESL Assessment Frameworks developed in an ‘Equality of Outcomes’ climate in Education based on conference paper
by Dr. Helen Moore, 2005 and research report by Breen et al, 1997

*The English Profile was developed as a national template from which most of the States and Territories in Australia evolved their own local versions

How are Bandscale levels allocated? top
In order to rate students’ proficiency levels in the 4 macroskills ESL teachers use a variety of assessment practices including planned or informal observation/discussion, collection and analysis of samples, standardized tests such as the ‘Diagnostic English Language Tests’ (DELTA) or student self-assessment.

View the Proficiency Rating Sheets - 
   Junior Primary Reading | Junior Primary Writing | Junior Primary Speaking | Junior Listening  |
   Mid/Upper Primary all  | Secondary - Reading, Writing, Speaking, Listening

What is the ‘Plateau Stage’? top
Level 5 represents a ‘plateau level’ for Middle/Upper Primary and Secondary ESL learners across all 4 macroskills. Students find it hard to move beyond level 5 yet further progress is essential for success particularly in Senior Secondary. Learners may also take a long time to move from level 4 to level 5 in Secondary Reading and Writing. They may regress because of the increased demands of more complex and lengthy texts.  Progress may slow down with changes in level of support from an ESL specialist which varies according to date of arrival and year level among other factors.

How does TEEPL link to the Literate Futures Report? top

TEEPL dovetails with the Literate Futures Report (Education Queensland, 2000) in the sense that both documents foreground the areas of student diversity, whole school programs, community partnerships, and the teaching of reading.

Rather than viewing ESL students in terms of deficit, TEEPL treats student diversity as a productive resource by asking teachers to acknowledge, value and build upon the experiences, skills, knowledge and understandings these students bring to school and to involve the First Language ( L1)  community in the learning process.

In responding to the ‘at risk-ness’ of ESL students, TEEPL provides a practical tool in planning for the provision of distinctive services at whole school level. It is a ready framework for professional development which needs to be undertaken in an atmosphere of collaboration amongst all those capable of implementing change at systems level.

TEEPL informs the teaching of literacy, including reading, at all year levels and across all curriculum areas. The descriptors in the Bandscales point out that even students at higher proficiency levels experience difficulty-“reading (as in critical literacy) texts” (1994, p D36). With this in mind, each level of each macroskill in TEEPL includes a range of suggestions from all four reading practices in the Four Resources Model (code breaker, meaning maker, text user, text analyst) as appropriate to proficiency level. The opportunities for teaching the practices of text analyst increase proportionately with progressive levels.

What validity or authority do the TEEPL materials hold? top
The ideas in TEEPL are based on research into second language acquisition. Using the theories of Vygotsky (1934) and Krashen (1982) a Model of Scaffolded Support was devised to inform the development of TEEPL as a resource which helps match instruction to learner rather than the reverse.

Can TEEPL be used with refugee students from Low Literacy Backgrounds? top
All of the teaching emphases, apart from those which are obviously reliant on literacy in first language (e.g.,  using a bilingual list of topic related key words to support text construction-Middle & Upper Primary Writing Level 3), can be used to support Low Literacy Background (LLB) refugee students. While many School Literacy Background learners (SLB) can be expected to remain at the plateau level 5 for an extended period, LLB learners are more likely to remain at any of the levels (including level 5) for longer, particularly in reading and writing. 

These students require a slower pace, more repetition, heavy contextualization and reduced individual responsibility for completion of tasks using linguistically simpler texts. Teachers need to use their professional judgement firstly in identifying those teaching emphases based on L1 literacy which aren’t applicable for LLB learners and secondly in ascertaining the level of difficulty inherent in any one teaching emphasis in order to make the necessary adjustments to suit these students. 

A  Model of Scaffolded Support has been developed as a tool for adjusting teaching emphases to enhance applicability for LLB Refugee students.  By applying this framework, for example, to the teaching emphasis (Middle & Upper Primary Writing Level 3) “ Use maps marked with key locations such as parks, libraries, schools, home addresses, mark out a route from point A to point B then jointly constructing accompanying written instructions which student follows and marks on an unmarked map before checking original route marking for accuracy” could be modified using the Model of Scaffolded Support to become “Take student on a walk in the local area and jointly mark on a map, the route as well as key locations such as parks, libraries, schools, home addresses whilst verbalizing directions along the way, then model the construction of simple written instructions using the imperative mood for the student to follow in marking the route on a new map before finally checking for accuracy against the original route marking” In the second version which could still apply to Bandscale level 3, the original teaching emphasis as it appears in MUP Writing 3 has been altered, using  the Model of Scaffolded Support to be more context embedded, slower in pace and less demanding of student responsibility for the writing of a simpler text. The modified emphasis starts with the concrete before moving onto the abstract and uses language accompanying action making a deliberate progression from the spoken to the written over a longer time frame. In this way the teaching emphasis becomes more appropriate for LLB refugee learners.   

How does TEEPL fit with the Framework of Action for Embracing Diversity in Schools (2004) in catering to the needs of Low Literacy/Refugee background students? top
On 19th May 2004 a Multicultural Forum was sponsored by the Department of Education and the Arts and Multicultural Affairs, Queensland. The Forum explored the changing migration patterns of refugee students, particularly those from the Horn of Africa and the implications for schools. The forum was attended by leadership teams from schools in the Coopers Plains, Mount Gravatt and Corinda Districts. From this forum a Framework of Action for Embracing Diversity in Schools was developed. TEEPL fits in with this framework at Systems level to “Develop a curriculum toolkit for schools with a high percentage of refugee students.” (bullet point 4) Support from schools for LLB refugee students needs to include

• understanding of students needs within the refugee context

• academic support

• teachers working together with parents

• social support

Whilst the main focus of TEEPL is academic support, the materials deliberately refer to other organizations/community groups such as the Queensland Program of Assistance to Survivors of Torture and Trauma (QPASTT) in addressing the other types of support.     

How does TEEPL reflect current views on First Language (L1) maintenance? top
Even though specific suggestions with regards to L1 use may not appear at every level of every macro-skill, support of L1 maintenance throughout the student’s second language learning is a key value underpinning TEEPL and one which reflects sound ESL pedagogy. Language plays a vital role in the development of concepts as they relate to chronological age and adopting a second language can severely disrupt conceptual development if the L1 is discontinued, as there will be a period of lag until L2 proficiency is achieved. A student who experiences the depth and richness of their L1 in its full range of communicative functions will have considerable linguistic and conceptual advantage over one who experiences a total replacement of the L1 with the L2 or a limited range in both L1 and L2. As learning consists of building on existing competencies, acquisition of the L1 is both acknowledged and encouraged throughout the teaching emphases.

How does TEEPL fit with Queensland School Curriculum Council (QSCC) Syllabuses and the New Basics Framework? top
TEEPL is not limited in its application to any one type of curriculum organizer. Key Learning Areas (KLA’s) and New Basics categories are two different approaches to organizing curriculum which are not however mutually exclusive. New Basics has a specific futures orientation while KLA’s are organized around fields of knowledge but both in effect have assessable and reportable outcomes or repertoires of practice. TEEPL can be used in planning around Rich Tasks or KLA/Core Learning outcomes.

In Queensland, research is yet to be undertaken in mapping the Bandscales against KLA strands and New Basics clusters. A study of this type would help clarify the language capabilities needed for students to be able to engage successfully at various levels in a syllabus or framework.

Which macroskills are more important? top
Speaking and listening skills are the foundation skills for literacy. Increased literacy skills for ESL students, and thus their learning in all areas of the curriculum depend upon commensurate expansion of listening and speaking skills. Therefore students need to be given continuing opportunities to improve their listening and speaking skills especially as they take up new subjects and more complex work.

Who needs to refer to TEEPL? top
All teaching staff can apply TEEPL in all content/subject areas. The presence of an ESL population in a student cohort influences classroom organisation as well as choice of tasks, texts, and strategies across all subject areas. If language is best learned in context and this includes learning ESL through content areas across the curriculum, then meeting the needs of ESL learners becomes the responsibility of all teachers, not just the ESL teacher. It is intended that the suggestions in TEEPL be implemented within the context of the learning in which the student is currently engaged in mainstream classrooms or in cluster classes.  In the words of the Director-General, Ken Smith, “Improved literacy needs to be a responsibility of all our teaching staff, irrespective of discipline or speciality.’ (Education Views, January 2004) Since all teachers need to be aware of the language demands of the tasks they set, TEEPL presents suggestions for explicitly teaching the features of genre in a way that can be applied to any curriculum area or learning context. The materials include detailed explanations and practical examples to ensure accessibility for mainstream classroom teachers including those who may have had limited or no prior experience with ESL students.

What is the significance of the layout? top
TEEPL ‘the book’ has become TEEPL ‘the website’ at http://www.kelvingrovesc.eq.edu.au/asp/teepl/teepl_cover.asp In both versions the teaching emphases are presented in a tabular format (see Figure 2). In the web version, the second column was deleted to allow more space for the teaching emphases themselves. Projected or target language capabilities for any level on the website are found in the first column of the table for the following level. The final column suggests resources appropriate to the level, many of which are either in stock or on order at ESL base locations in the Greater Brisbane Region including Kelvin Grove State College.

Figure 2. Table layout in the original word document (TEEPL- the book)

LISTENING- Moving from Level 1 to Level 2     Middle & Upper Primary      

What is the goal for ESL Learners? top
The goal for ESL learners is to be effectively bilingual, most likely with continuing linguistic characteristics which differentiate them from native-speakers. In reaching this goal students will experiment with and hypothesise about the syntax and semantics of English, resulting in errors which should be viewed as signals of language growth.

How long will ESL students take to learn English? top
Cummins (1984) points to a variation in rate of development between Basic Interpersonal Skills (BICS) as in context embedded face-to-face communication more typical of the everyday world outside the classroom and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) as in context-reduced communication relying on linguistic cues to meaning more typical of classroom demands. Cummins showed that ESL learners are able to become proficient in spoken and written tasks of the BICS type in 2 years and of the CALP type in 5-7 years. TEEPL advocates starting with BICS type activities in order to build confidence before moving onto CALP types as this represents sound second language pedagogy. Since Cummins posits that CALP is highly transferable from first language (L1) to second language (L2), TEEPL recommends that students ideally develop concepts in L1 first as a means of leading to L2 cognitive skill development. Thus, recommendations include encouraging use of L1 at home and in school based discussions with L1 speaking peers or adults as an aid in concept development in L2. Clearly, without the advantage associated with age appropriate levels of L1 literacy, Low Literacy Background students can be expected to take longer to progress through the Bandscale levels on their paths to English literacy.

How should TEEPL be used? top
TEEPL is an excellent reference for mainstream teachers (in consultation with ESL teachers) when-

• planning work programs/units of work/tasks which consider the needs of ESL students in mainstream classes

• advising parents as to the best ways to support their children’s learning at home

• providing work for teacher aides to undertake with the ESL student

• purchasing commercially produced resources appropriate to levels

• targeting the needs of those ESL students who aren’t eligible for support from the ESL teacher due to visa, length of time in Australia or higher proficiency related factors

How does TEEPL link to ICT’s? top
TEEPL is based on the premise that mainstream classroom work provides the best vehicle for learning English as a second language. In this way, TEEPL links to any ICT’s as appropriate in mainstream work. Some particularly effective text input tools for ESL students include, ‘Hot Potatoes’ which is a template enabling the design of a range of interactive language learning exercises including cloze, drag and drop  matching games, multiple choice and true false, ‘Spinworks’ which generates sentence splits and  breaks texts into individual sentences for reordering and  ‘Win Wida’s Authoring Suite’ which creates text reconstruction activities.  In the 4^th column of the tables these and other ICT’s which support the teaching emphases have been listed.  The teaching emphases also lend themselves to the use of technology such as digital cameras, scanners and email.  It is important not to assume, however, that all ESL students come with an age appropriate level of computer literacy. All references to the use of ICT’s within this document may need to take this point into consideration.

Why refer to TEEPL? top
The old adage that ‘nothing succeeds like success’ is certainly true of learning another language. Repeated failure can result in panic and a very real psychological barrier to future learning. The keys to success for ESL students lie in a suitably modified program which prepares the students for learning through application to appropriate tasks. Failure can be very dispiriting particularly if students aren’t given adequate explanation for its cause. TEEPL is designed to guide program planning to maximize learner success.

Go to              Junior Primary - Listening | Speaking | Reading | Writing      
Go to Middle/Upper Primary - Listening | Speaking | Reading | Writing
Go to                     Secondary - Listening | Speaking |

Go to Acknowledgements | Open ESL Plan Template (Word document)

hits since Jan'06

Authors: Kay Mc Namara & Esther Watt                  ©Education Queensland 2005
Web pages designed by Peter Collins (Manager - Information Systems, KGSC)