Christina Joseph
This blog is written by Christina Joseph, an EAL specialist with over 8 years of experience working across international school contexts in the UAE, supporting students following the British, American and PYP curricula.
She specialises in using the WIDA framework to design targeted language support that enables ELLs to access the curriculum fearlessly and with confidence.
Christina is the founder of Wordy Venture, an online platform that supports both students and teachers in building effective, real-world, content-focused English for ELLs.
Introduction
Too often, language support for beginner ELLs/MLLs is treated as a separate intervention. Vocabulary lists. Grammar drills. Standalone pull-out sessions disconnected from the curriculum. But language does not exist in isolation. It lives inside content.
At the start of the school year, my Grade 5 group consisted of students at WIDA level 1. No prior exposure to English. My students were from Türkiye, Kazakhstan and France. I am originally from Sri Lanka. So, my priority was: build safety before content.
Games. Cultural sharing. Laughter. LOTS of laughter.
Students saw that I, too, was a multilingual. That I, too, had navigated unfamiliar spaces. That connection mattered a great deal to me. We, as teachers of MLLs, are often their first point of contact in a school. Until they find their voices, we are their voices. Their advocates. Their foundation.
Following a period of relationship-building activities, the academic lessons began, and with that I saw firsthand what happens when language is separated from curriculum.
The Situation
During push-in sessions, students were found to be disconnected. If encouraged to participate, they relied quite heavily on translation tools (survival mode is real and is turned up to max at this early stage). But there was little second-language absorption happening.
In pull-out sessions, the pattern continued. Gentle cold-calling increased anxiety. Student responses were limited to ‘yes’ or ‘no’. It was a striking reality. For these children, the iPad wasn’t just a toy. It was their source of English, and it was dangerously close to becoming their identity and their voice. Technically, the were producing answers but it wasn’t their voices.
The topic ‘Spheres of the Earth’ came around. The cognitive demand was there. Linguistically, they were locked out. Interaction was minimal. Some days, the silence was deafening.
The question became clear: How do we move beginner MLLs from silence to structured academic expression without overwhelming them?
The Problem
EAL support is often treated as its own separate show instead of something that walks through the curriculum. Students are pulled out to work on grammar drills. Worksheets. Survival English vocabulary. Topics that may have little to no connection to what is being taught in the mainstream classroom.
This model may feel supportive, but it creates four problems:
1. It lacks purpose:
Language develops through meaning. So, when it’s detached from content, students may learn various words, but they will still lack the skill to use those words in academic contexts, whether it is to explain, argue, or reason. This way, language becomes a burdensome exercise rather than a tool for communication.
2. It lowers cognitive demand:
While attempting to scaffold, rigor is reduced. Fill-in-the-blanks. Repetition. Over simplified tasks. It is crucial to bear in mind that cognitive ability is not the same as linguistic proficiency.
When we lower thinking because language is developing, we unintentionally send a message that says: “Wait until your English improves before you engage deeply”. Students, hence, become cognitively underwhelmed and linguistically overwhelmed at the same time.
3. It limits transfer:
Grammar practiced in isolation rarely transfers into science discussions. Sentence starters memorized out of context are not automatically applied in real situations. Transfer happens when language is intentionally and regularly rehearsed in the same place they are expected to use it. If students only practice English away from the curriculum, we should not be surprised when they struggle to use it inside the curriculum.
4. It delays internalisation:
When language stands alone, students depend on external tools. Devices become the voice. Without integration into content, the language sits on the screen instead of inside the learner. It’s their voice, but it’s not their voice.
Research in second language acquisition (particularly Jim Cummins) reminds us that language develops most effectively when students use it to think and learn within the curriculum. Hence, language is not a prerequisite for curriculum. It develops through it.
The Action
I redesigned the unit using two structures:
1. The Inquiry Cycle (Tuning In, Finding Out, Sorting Out, Going Further , Making Conclusions, Taking Action).
2.Bloom’s Taxonomy for ELLs (adapted linguistically for WIDA Level 1 learners).
The goal was not just to understand content.It was:
1.Structured language production inside content and,
2.Engaging with language.
Structure through inquiry
The display board mirrored the inquiry cycle in a large circle. Each stage was colour-coded and labelled. Students always knew where they were in their learning.
At the end of each stage, they answered a central question (Images 1-3) and posted it on the board.
The central question would first be presented at the start of the lesson after we’d discussed the learning goal and the language goals. This question stays with them throughout the lesson (and is displayed on the board). This is done intentionally to guide their thinking and help them make the necessary links/connections. Questions such as:
“What makes up our planet?” “What do you see in the hydrosphere?”
The questions gradually get deeper as we progress through the inquiry cycle.
Language supports were embedded directly into the display. Sentence frames. Key vocabulary (with prefixes highlighted). Visual examples of each sphere. Later, images of volcanoes, tornadoes, drought, to discuss interactions between spheres.
The board eventually became a roadmap and a language bank.
Bloom’s, linguistically adapted.
At the Remembering stage, prompts were concrete:
“Point to..” “Label..” “What do you see?”
Cognitively aligned. Linguistically accessible.
As vocabulary confidence grew, so did the language demand.
Sentence frame progression (a few examples):
Cognition & language increased and support remained visible.
My students were not just completing science tasks. They were doing science all thanks to structured language support.Making language visible and shared. The display board was not decorative. It was instructional.
Students placed their central question sheets onto the board. They could see their language growing.
When we explored sphere interactions (Image 4), responses moved beyond labelling.
Instead of “volcano”, I began hearing: “The volcano is part of the geosphere. It affects the atmosphere because of smoke. It affects the biosphere because plants can burn.”
For learners who answered only yes/no, this mattered.
Outcome
The transformation was gradual but powerful:
- Students were producing full sentences with minimal reliance on translation tools.
- They began using academic vocabulary more confidently in mainstream classes.
- Subject teachers noticed increased participation and stronger written work.
For the concluding task, the students created volvelles and trioramas. Triorama showed the four spheres (Image 5), and the other explaining sphere interactions. They presented one or both of their volvelles (student choice) in a small group setting to reduce pressure.
This time, no devices. No scaffolds. They spoke.
The shift was not just linguistic. It was identity-based. The students went from observers of curriculum to participants in it.
Key Takeaways
- Start cognitively simple but linguistically intentional
- Keep rigor high. Scaffold the process
- Make language visible and permanent
- Rehearse language in the same contexts where it must function
What can you do tomorrow?
As you plan your next lesson, pause and ask yourself one simple question: What small change can you make in your next lesson to help multilinguals participate more?
It might be something simple:
- Teach a sentence frame or two to encourage involvement in whole-class discussions.
- Put up a visual display and encourage students to look for clues or vocabulary they can use during the lesson.
- Ask a question that invites students to explain their thinking using a sentence frame rather than simply identifying the correct answer.
Small shifts like these can make a powerful difference. Language is not a prerequisite for curriculum. It develops through it.
Most importantly, the strategies that support multilingual learners rarely benefit them alone. Clear visuals, structured language, and opportunities to explain thinking strengthen learning for all students in the classroom.
Whats next?
Join our vibrant community for free to explore what we offer, now available as an App!
Upgrade to membership for instant access to our entire library of video courses, resources, guides, training materials and more…
Want to write for Heddle? Our community blogs are written by EAL teachers, for EAL teachers.
Express your interest today. You’ll get full support from our team.
