ELA

Content and Language Objectives in the ELA Classroom

Schoolchildren Studying In Classroom With TeacherA few weeks ago we added a post to the blog in which SIOP professional developers Amy Washam and Lindsay Young discussed the reasons behind having separate content objectives and language objectives. An English/Language Arts (ELA) teacher wrote back with the following question:

What about in an ELA classroom? Language is our content. Teachers often complain that the two objectives say the same thing.

Here are Lindsay and Amy’s responses and a final thought by SIOP author Jana Echevarria. (more…)

Advertisements

Can Content and Language Objectives be Combined?

Anyone familiar with the SIOP Model knows that content objectives (COs) based on academic standards and language objectives (LOs) designed to build students’ academic language skills are integral to all effective SIOP lessons. Some educators have wondered whether COs and LOs need to be separate or if they can be combined into one objective. Recently, a teacher posed this question to SIOP contributing author and professional developer Amy Washam and provided these examples of combined objectives:

Students will orally explain, using sequential words, how to solve a system of linear equations by graphing

Students will be able to (SWBAT) orally compare and contrast the physical adaptations of whales and sharks using conjunctions

Amy Washam and fellow SIOP professional developer Lindsay Young weigh in on this question below.

Amy Washam

In my opinion, these examples are LOs, and pretty good ones, especially given that we should help students learn conjunctions. During SIOP professional development sessions, after talking about SIOP research, I usually explain to participants that we have one objective for content and one for language so that teachers will not forget to teach language. I’m concerned that it will be easy to focus only on content with combined objectives and neglect explicit language teaching.

I am also concerned that combining the two would shortchange the content. If you look at the Next Generation Science Standards, the science objective the teacher used as an example does not really cover any of the NGSS listed. I worry that if teachers begin combining content and language objectives, curriculum folks will determine that language objectives water down the content. For me, this is a second argument for why content and language should be separate.

Lindsay Young

I would echo Amy’s sentiments. I have also had inquiries about combining objectives. As SIOP author Deborah Short has stated, if they’re combining objectives they are not doing SIOP. I’m going to continue to emphasize the research evidence on the SIOP Model. In those studies, teachers separated the COs from the LOs. Doing so is not only more effective but very doable.