Using The English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standard 464220

Using The English Language Proficiency Elp Standards From Arizona Or

Using the English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards from Arizona or from your state, select the stage for a grade level of your choice. Based on the Common Core Standards’ English Language Arts (ELA) performance objectives or the English Language Arts Standards from your state, create a learning activity that is aligned with a learning objective at the basic proficiency level on the ELP standards for each of the following domains: Listening and Speaking Reading Writing Account for language acquisition principles within the design of your activities. Include a word rationale that describes how each activity addresses the characteristics of the ELL at the basic level and how language acquisition principles have been accounted for within your design. Include ideas for strategies to differentiate these activities for students in the pre-production and early production stages. I will grade you on the following: Choosing English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards from Arizona or from your state. Grade level Common Core/ELA State Standard that you decide to use to create an activity for: Listening and Speaking Reading Writing Add a rationale Use APA formatting and scholarly resources.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Effective instruction for English Language Learners (ELLs) necessitates the integration of appropriate language proficiency standards aligned with curriculum standards such as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) or state-specific standards. This paper aims to develop a comprehensive set of learning activities across the domains of Listening and Speaking, Reading, and Writing, aligned with the Basic Proficiency level of the English Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards from Arizona. Furthermore, it incorporates principles of language acquisition to ensure the activities effectively support ELLs at early stages of language development, particularly pre-production and early production stages. The activities will be differentiated to cater to diverse learner needs, facilitating gradual language development. Scholarly resources and APA formatting are incorporated to substantiate best practices in ELL instruction.

Selection of Standards and Grade Level

The Arizona ELP Standards are stratified across proficiency levels, including pre-production, early production, speech emergence, and intermediate fluency. For this assignment, I have selected the grade 3 proficiency level, aligning with middle elementary expectations. The standards selected are from the Arizona Language Arts and ELP standards, corresponding to a third-grade curriculum. Specifically, for listening and speaking, reading, and writing domains, I have identified standard objectives at the basic proficiency level, which focus on foundational language skills and limited but functional communication capabilities (Arizona Department of Education, 2018).

Learning Activities Aligned with the ELP Standards

1. Listening and Speaking Activity

The activity titled "Picture Description and Oral Responses" involves students listening to a short story read aloud and then describing a picture related to the story. The learning objective aligned with the ELP standard is to demonstrate understanding of spoken language through simple responses and descriptions (Arizona Department of Education, 2018). This activity supports the basic proficiency level by encouraging students to comprehend basic vocabulary and phrases, fostering oral language production with supported scaffolding.

To differentiate for students in pre-production and early production stages, visual aids such as picture cards and sentence frames are provided. For pre-production learners, support includes pointing to images and mimicking sounds; early production students are encouraged to produce simple phrases or key words, gradually increasing expressive language use. This scaffolding aligns with Krashen's (1982) Input Hypothesis and the Natural Approach, emphasizing comprehensible input and supportive environment for initial language acquisition.

2. Reading Activity

The "Guided Picture Reading" activity involves students looking at a picture book and answering basic questions about the story using visual cues and sentence starters. The objective is for students to demonstrate understanding of simple narrative structure and identify main ideas using basic vocabulary (Arizona Department of Education, 2018). The activity is designed to promote reading comprehension at the basic proficiency level by emphasizing contextual cues and supporting language development.

Differentiation strategies include providing simplified texts with visual supports for pre-production learners and using repeated readings with sentence frames for early production learners. These strategies are rooted in Vygotsky's (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), scaffolding learning while gradually increasing independence.

3. Writing Activity

The "Sentence Construction" activity involves students creating simple sentences about their favorite toy or meal, guided by picture prompts. The learning objective aligns with the ELP standard for constructing basic sentences using familiar vocabulary (Arizona Department of Education, 2018). At the basic proficiency level, this activity emphasizes syntactic structures, vocabulary use, and spelling practices.

To differentiate, pre-production students are supported with fill-in-the-blank sentence frames and visual cues, while early production students are encouraged to write their own sentences with minimal prompts. The activity incorporates principles from Cummins' (1981) theories on BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills) development, focusing on functional language use in practical contexts.

Rationale for Activity Design

The activities described are tailored to meet the characteristics of ELLs at the basic proficiency level, which typically include limited vocabulary, dependence on visual cues, and developing syntactic skills (Genesee et al., 2004). Each activity emphasizes meaningful interaction, contextual support, and gradual language scaffolding—principles supported by Krashen (1982), Vygotsky (1978), and Cummins (1981). For example, visual supports and sentence frames address the limited lexical and syntactic repertoire of early learners, supporting comprehensible input and encouraging initial attempts at oral and written language production.

Furthermore, differentiation ensures that pre-production learners focus on understanding and receptive language skills through pointing and mimicry, while early production students actively produce language with scaffolds, facilitating transition from receptive to expressive skills. The activities' structure promotes confidence, motivation, and gradual language acquisition by respecting developmental stages outlined in research by Pinter (2006) and Swain (1985).

Strategies for Differentiation

• Pre-production learners benefit from increased visual supports, gestural prompts, and minimal output expectations, aligning with the Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1982).
• Early production students can participate in supported speech with sentence frames, guided questioning, and opportunities for repetition, fostering confidence and language output (Vygotsky, 1978).
• Activities are kept flexible to incorporate peer collaboration, peer modeling, and scaffolded prompts based on individual proficiency levels, ensuring inclusivity and targeted support.

Conclusion

Designing activities aligned with the Arizona ELP Standards and Common Core ELA objectives requires a careful balance of authentic language use, scaffolded supports, and differentiation strategies tailored to developmental stages. By grounding these activities in established language acquisition theories, educators can foster a supportive environment that promotes meaningful language development for early-stage ELLs, ultimately enhancing their communicative competence across listening, speaking, reading, and writing domains.

References

• Arizona Department of Education. (2018). Arizona English Language Proficiency Standards. Retrieved from https://www.azed.gov
• Cummins, J. (1981). Bilingualism and bilingual education. In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Ritchie (Eds.), The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology (pp. 66–69). Longman.
• Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Nicoladis, E. (2004). Beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and multiculturalism. In F. Genesee, J. Paradis, & M. G. Rice (Eds.), Dual language development and disorders: A handbook on bilingualism and second language learning (pp. 3–23). Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
• Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
• Pinter, R. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. Oxford University Press.
• Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–256). Newbury House.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.