FUNIBER - John Morales: "Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign Language Learners"

Universidadde Jaén
0
FINAL PROJECT
Máster en Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza del Inglés como
Lengua Extranjera
UNIVERSIDAD DE JAÉN
Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign
Language Learners.
Author: John Morales
Supervisor:
Dr. Vanessa Anaya
Date: November 12, 2014

Universidadde Jaén
1
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................4
2. JUSTIFYING ACADEMIC AND PERSONAL INTEREST OF THE TOPIC: 5
3. OBJECTIVES........................................................................................6
3.1. Main Objective .......................................6
3.2. Specific objectives:....................................6
4.1. Bilingual education ....................................7
4.2. Bilingualism in Colombia ...............................7
4.3. Content Based-instruction ..............................8
4.4. Some Benefits of CBI. ..................................9
4.5. Content- Based Instruction in Europe.....................10
4.7. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) ..........12
4.8. The 4Cs framework guidance ...........................12
4.9. The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP)........14
Figure 1. Components and features of the SIOP model...........15
5. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 18
5.1. Research approaches .................................18
5.2. Research instruments.................................19
5.3. Research participants .................................19
5.4. Data Analysis .......................................20
6. STUDY................................................................................................ 21
6.1. Context description ..................................21
6.2. Corpus and data collection .............................22
6.2.1. Training...........................................23
6.2.2. Lesson planning....................................23
6.3.3. Questionnaire......................................24
6.4.4. Class observations .................................24
6.4.5. Assessment .......................................25
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION……………………………………………………….. 27
7.1. Questionnaire questions and answers: ...................27
7.2. Lesson plans:.................................................................................. 30
7.3. Class observations: ..................................32
7.4.1. Assessment and scores: .............................33
7.4.2. Results in the written final test.........................34
7.4.3. The Grocery store project ............................36
8. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................. 39
8.1. Recommendation 1: ..................................41
8.2. Recommendation 2: ..................................41
8.3. Recommendation 3: ..................................41
8.4. Recommendation 4: ..................................41
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................. 42
10. APPENDIX........................................................................................ 46
10.1. Appendix 1: SIOP textbook ………………………………………….. 39
10.2. Appendix 2: Lesson plan samples........................41
10.3. Appendix 3. Written evaluation ..........................46
10.4. Appendix 4: The grocery store project. ....................49

Universidadde Jaén
2
10.5. Appendix 5: Training material sample ………………………………. 50
10.6. Appendix 6: Lesson plan checklist .......................51
10.7. Appendix 7: Questionnaire on google forms. ................54

Universidadde Jaén
3
Figures
Figure 1: Components and features of the SIOP model……………………..15
Figure 2: Group arrangement………………………………………………… 21
Figure 3: Questionnaire answers……………………………………………….27
Figure 4 : Bloom´s taxonomy……………………………………………………31
Figure 5 : Result in the sum of all the SIOP components……………………33
Figure 6: Third grade exam results……………………………………………..34
Figure 7: Sixth grade exam results……………………………………………. 35
Figure 8: Third grade grocery store project…………………………………… 36
Figure 9: Sixth grade grocery store project…………………………………… 37
Figure 10: Overall results in assessment………………………………………38

Universidadde Jaén
4
1. INTRODUCTION
The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) model is a language program
that is widely used in the United States and was implemented in the Charlotte
Mecklenburg County (CMS) in 2007 when we used to work at Carmel middle school
in North Carolina (NC), USA.
After reading the literature in the Funiber master´s program about Content and
Language Learning Integrated Learning (CLIL), and how effective it is in Europe, it
occurred to me that SIOP could be an effective tool for (English as a Foreign
Language) EFL learning as well; consequently, this thesis is based on the
applicability of SIOP to test its efficacy as a content-based method for foreign
language learners.
The purpose of this research is to explore the abundant literature, evidence and
research from multiple contexts to determine if the SIOP components are effective in
teaching English at the Liceo Taller San Miguel (LTSM) School. It is my interest to
understand how the SIOP method can help our students gain greater cognitive
academic language proficiency in the target language and integrate it with subject-
content at the same time.
One of the main grounds for conducting this research is getting to understand the
theory and practice of the teaching of a content subject through another language in
SIOP and understand how its practical applications contrast when comparing among
four classes; from which, two will receive SIOP instruction whereas two more will
receive regular classes (Non-SIOP instruction). This dissertation will provide valuable
information so that administrators at school can come to a conclusion about the
pertinence and applicability of a SIOP method to provide theoretical routes to
improve the plan of study in content subjects, material development, and school
methodology in the teaching and learning of English as a foreign language

Universidadde Jaén
5
2. JUSTIFYING ACADEMIC AND PERSONAL INTEREST OF
THE TOPIC:
The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol model is a language program that we
suppose can be used extensively in a variety of language learning contexts. The
most important objective of SIOP in the US is to give rise to the impact and influence
of Content-Based Instruction (CBI) in English as a Second Language (ESL) classes
so that the students can develop their Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
(CALP), and become cognitively homogenous with their native English-speaking
peers in mainstream classes.
After having lived and taught in the United States and in Colombia, I have had the
opportunity to interact with English Language Leaners (ELLs) for over ten years and
compare teaching practices for both English as a Second Language (ESL) students
in the US and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in Colombia. When I
worked in North Carolina (NC) in 2008, I had to receive SIOP training because even
though that in a few schools, students were given the opportunity to observe ESL,
sheltered, and mainstream content classes before entering the regular ESL program
in the school, SIOP offered such positive results that it was mandated to replace all
ESL and pull-out programs in the Mecklenburg county and several other states.
At present, while working at Liceo Taller San Miguel (LTSM) in the city of Pereira, I
have come to realize that ELLs in either context (ESL vs. EFL) may, in fact, speak
English very fluently, but still perform at low academic levels in their regular classes
in bilingual immersion programs.
It is important to mention that SIOP has been a very successful approach in the US
and it is presently being used in almost all states in the US. As it is supported by
Boyson & Short (2003: 22) in the sense that “

Universidadde Jaén
6
Schools and districts have established newcomer programs to offer the educational
benefits of an intensive focus on language and content skills that help to accelerate
the students’ preparation for the regular U.S. school curriculum through a supportive
environment that fosters close ties between families and the community.
The implementation of SIOP not only in ESL programs in North America but also in
EFL programs in Iberoamerican schools, such as LTSM in Colombia, is quite
relevant because the SIOP model is a research-based approach with a repertoire of
teaching techniques called by the National Association for Education for Young
Children (NAEYC), and therefore, it should reflect valid teaching practices in EFL
classes as well as in ESL settings.
3. OBJECTIVES
3.1. Main Objective
To use the SIOP model to analyze efficacy in content teaching with Foreign
Language Learners.
3.2. Specific objectives:
- Provide participant teachers with training on the SIOP model, its components and
features to help them make content comprehensible for learners.
- To implement the SIOP model in content classes to realize the linguistic impact
when used consistently for a given period of time.
- To analyze the outcomes of implementing the SIOP model in an EFL teaching
context.

Universidadde Jaén
7
4. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
4.1. Bilingual education
Being bilingual is traditionally considered having the ability to speak to languages
fluently, even La Real Academia Española difines bilingualism as “Uso habitual de
dos lenguas en una misma región o por una misma persona”. Nonetheless, the main
focus of bilingual education in the twenty first century has been directed towards the
mastery of two languages through higher order thinking skills to achieve specific
goals. Garcia (2009: 4) explains this concept further:
Bilingual education is different from traditional language education programs that
teach a second or a foreign language. For the most part, these traditional second or
foreign language programs teach the language as a subject, whereas bilingual
education programs use the language as a medium of instruction; that is, bilingual
education programs teach content through an additional language other than the
children’s home language.
Modern bilingual education involves teaching content through a combination of two
languages, in this case the English language can be taught as a second or as a
foreign language. English as a Second Language (ESL) refers to English being
learned in a country where English is also the native language of the majority of the
community. On the other hand, English as a Foreign Language (EFL) refers to the
learning of English in a country whose native language is other than English; in this
case, this subtle contextual difference makes intelligible that EFL is learned as a
foreign language and not as an immediate socio-cultural need (ESL). It is important
to analyze the most important variety of program models in immersion and bilingual
education in order to determine their strengths, advantages and limitations according
to the students’ particular contextual, academic and social needs.
4.2. Bilingualism in Colombia
When compared to Europe, one of the big disadvantages that public education has in
Colombia is that most students graduate from high school mastering only one
language: Spanish. Most of the times, high school students are able to read,
translate and understand some words and expressions in English but they are not
entirely capable of attaining the number one objective when learning a foreign

Universidadde Jaén
8
language: communication. In other words, most Latin American schools emphasize
the EFL instruction on form (grammar) rather than meaning and communicative
skills.
In Colombia, efforts have been done in increasing the amount of schools, which
include English in their curriculums by turning it into an obligatory subject in primary
and junior high. Moreover the Plan Nacional de Bilinguismo (PNB) states that the
main objective for the Minister of Education in regards with TEFL is to have
competent citizens able to communicate in English, with standards that can be
internationally comparable, aimed at including the country in the process of universal
communication, in the global economy and in the cultural opening. The Colombian
Ministry of education is committed to make Colombian citizens bilingual in an
additional language, not only English, in this sense, Min education (2013)
emphasizes: “Aunque el inglés es el idioma universal, las dinámicas del mundo
actual evidencian la importancia de conocer otros idiomas, gracias al incremento de
nuestras relaciones económicas con la Unión Europea o al posicionamiento de
China en la economía mundial”
Bilingual education in Colombian public schools –alike the European Union (EU) has
prescribed goals and guidelines about the present-day priorities to teach English
through an integrated curriculum with communicative aims and, therefore, improve
the twentieth first century bilingual education according to the demands of global
language teaching.
4.3. Content Based-instruction
For decades, foreign language teachers have been teaching English with a variety of
methods, approaches and purposes. The experience of using academic content
rather than the structure of the English language itself was originated the language
immersion education in Canada in 1965 and it is defined as the development of use-
oriented second and foreign language skills' and is 'distinguished by the concurrent
learning of a specific content and related language use skills' (Wesche,1993).
To highlight the impact of Content-Based Instruction (CBI) in Second Language
Acquisition (SLA) teaching practices, research supports that CBI promotes
negotiation of meaning and enhances language acquisition and content learning. The

Universidadde Jaén
9
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) argues that for Culturally and
Linguistically Diverse (CLD) students to be academically successful in school, they
must continue to learn and expand their knowledge of new content so that they do
not fall behind their monolingual peers (CCSSO, 1992).
Cummins' (1981) notion of Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) as
contrasted with Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) shows that
students need to be learning content while they are developing CALP; there is not
enough time to separate language and content learning; postponing content
instruction while students develop more advanced (academic) language is not only
impractical, but it also ignores students' needs, interests, and cognitive levels.
4.4. Some Benefits of CBI.
 It can make learning a language more interesting and motivating. Students
can use the language to fulfill a real purpose, which can make students both
more independent and confident. (British Council 2003)
 Underlying CBI’s success is isually understood by “the depth of learning--the
notion that if students are actively engaged in meaningful, related theme-
based tasks, they gain repeated exposure to language that helps them to
process the language”.
 ICB instruction motivates learners because language becomes the medium
through which all students have Access to meaningful learning
developmentally appropriate material (Genesee, 1998).
 ICB instruction promotes the negotiation of meaning in context among all
students (Grabe & Stoller, 1997).
 Content-based instruction develops a wider range of discourse skills than
does traditional language instruction (because of the incorporation of higher
cognitive skills); Byrnes (2000) notes the increasing demands for high levels
of literacy in languages other than English

Universidadde Jaén
10
4.5. Content- Based Instruction in Europe
Bilingual education is always on a quest for discovering effective theories,
approaches and teaching practices that might converge in compelling tools for
language learning. The vast amount of models and methods to help Culturally and
Diverse (CLD) English Language Learners (ELLs) has gone through many changes
over time in an attempt to accommodate the shift in social/cultural needs as the world
changes.
Since the promotion of the linguistic diversity by the European Council Resolution in
1995, which came to conclusions on improving and diversifying language learning
and teaching within the education systems of the European Union (EurLex, 1995), it
is almost mandatory that all students should be able to speak two languages other
than their mother tongue by the time they are finished with compulsory schooling. By
making this policy an official statement, the European Union opened the door to
practices in Content-Based Instruction (CBI) in diverse European educational
settings. In the subject of content-oriented classes, Eurydice (2006: 8) links CBI to
foreign language teaching as follows:
Uno de los primeros textos ineludibles en la cooperación europea en materia de
AICLE (Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras) es la resolución
del consejo de 1995 que se refiere al fomento de métodos innovadores, y en
particular, a la enseñanza de una lengua extranjera, en las clases en que se imparta
una educación bilingüe, de asignatura distintas a las lenguas.
Content-centered learning is an answer to adapt the educational changes under the
light of the communicative movement and the benefit of achieving high-quality
academic competence.
4.6. Content-based instruction on Colombia
In many countries the linguistic policies for second and foreign language teaching
and learning have been gaining greater importance. In South America, the need for
plurilingual education and the fact that bilingual education can be defined as “a
gradual introduction to CALP” (Bernstein, 1971) urges academic English to became
an almost mandatory add-on to any dual-focus curricular program in the Teaching of
English to Speakers of Other Languages TESOL. As regards with Colombia, the
country has adopted some of the European guidelines to develop a solid national

Universidadde Jaén
11
bilingual program for both private and state schools. To understand this better, in
1999, it was evident for the Colombian government that the country needed to
become a more multicultural society, open to the requirements of a globalized world.
Hence, the Colombian Ministry of education drew up specific guidelines for the
Teaching of English as a Foreign Language (Lineamentos generales para la
enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera). Rodriguez (2011: 17) explains these
guidelines further:
The Colombian government restated the National Bilingualism Program, whose main
goal now is to have bilingual citizens in the Colombian territory by the end of the year
2019. In order to guarantee that this goal is met, the MEN has decided to use
European standards as a reference to evaluate the competence of Colombian
citizens. The Common European Framework (CEF) was adopted and adapted as the
document guiding the standards of language learning in the country.
It is clear that English Language Learners (ELLs) need the development of
communicative English skills or Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) in
order to express their ideas and make themselves understood; however, due to the
needs for plurilingual individuals in this globalized world, ELLs also need to develop a
good command of academic English. In this sense, Cummins (2003) indicates a
distinction between basic interpersonal communicative skills and cognitive academic
language proficiency in an online book at The University of Toronto (2003), which
explains:
Conversational fluency is often acquired to a functional level within about two years of
initial exposure to the second language whereas at least five years is usually required
to catch up to native speakers in academic aspects of the second language. Failure
to take account of the BICS/CALP (conversational/academic) distinction has resulted
in discriminatory psychological assessment of bilingual students and premature exit
from language support programs into mainstream classes.
Despite the fact that the tendency in English Language Teaching (ELT) in the 21st
century highlights the importance of content-based instruction methods to
incorporate BICS and CALP, most bilingual schools in Colombia in an attempt to
implement CBI, they teach content in English (translation) as opposed to teaching
through English (TTE). Content and language integration is quickly becoming the
most important approach in Colombian bilingual schools. More evident every year,
universities and schools have been making more curricular adjustments to finally
develop equilibrium among the demands of the Colombian ministry of education, the
challenges of the world and the professional demand of graduating proficient
individuals in more than one language.

Universidadde Jaén
12
4.7. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)
The CLIL model has had its roots from 1070 and 1980 when immersion education
started to play a very important role in European education. It is only since the 1980s
that CLIL gained importance and it was recognized as an educative European
innovation to foster the development of plurilingual curricula in European schools.
The term CLIL was, however, adopted in 1994 to promote rich learning environments
through the use of an additional language where good teaching practices in which
content and language could be integrated. One of the fist countries to embrace this
new approach was Finland. Ruiz de Zarobe & Jimenez state that since the 1990s
European Union (EU) language policies need to adopt educational models to
account for the diversity of European programs in languages; in other words; CLIL
appears as an answer to comply with the EU policies for multilingualism and
diversity. CLIL is known (Coyle, 2010) as an educational approach in which various
language-supportive methodologies are used which lead to a dual-focused form of
instruction, where attention is given both to the language and the content.
4.8. The 4Cs framework guidance
It is essential to analyze and plan how language skills in a foreign language and
subject themes can be integrated by the use of cognition and meaningful activities:
Lower-order thinking skills (LOTS) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS).
The 4Cs framework is an active part of the CLIL model methodology that seeks to
integrate and contextualize quality lessons in terms of progression in knowledge and
skills (content), teacher to student and peer to peer interaction; language usage
(communication), comprehensible input, use and application of (HOTS), cognitive
levels in the bloom’s taxonomy (Cognition), self awareness and awareness or the
world, including the culture behind the language used as means of communication
(culture).
The Coyle’s four Cs is a framework that allows CLIL teachers to conceptualize
teaching practices to focus on seeing the curriculum as a whole rather than a
succession of separate topics or linguistic units of information in L2. Coyle (1999:60)

Universidadde Jaén
13
remarks:
It is through progression in the knowledge, skills, and understanding of the content,
by engagement in associated cognitive processing, interaction in the communicative
context, and a deepening awareness and positioning of cultural self and otherness
that learning takes place
Then, Coyle makes an interrelationship between the four Cs and his concepts of
progression, engagement, interaction and awareness, as follows:
Content Progression
Cognition Engagement
Communication Interaction
Culture Awareness
The four guiding principles in this CLIL framework integrate content and language in
contextualized and functional relationships; these relationships are explained by
Coyle (2010) in more detail:
Content: At the heart of the learning process lie successful content or thematic
learning and the acquisition of knowledge, skills and understanding. Content is the
subject or the project theme.
Communication: Language is a conduit for communication and for learning. The
formula learning to use language and using language to learn is applicable here.
Communication goes beyond the grammar system. It involves learners in language
using in a way that is different from language learning lessons.
Cognition: For CLIL to be effective, it must challenge learners to think and review
and engage in higher order thinking skills. CLIL is not about a transfer of knowledge
from an expert to a novice. CLIL is about allowing individuals to construct their own
understanding and be challenged-whatever their age or ability. A useful taxonomy to
use as a guide for thinking skills is that of Bloom. It serves as an excellent checklist
in CLIL planning.
Culture: For our pluricultural and plurilingual world to be celebrated and its potential
realized, this demands tolerance and understanding. Studying through a foreign
language is fundamental to fostering international understanding. “Otherness” is a

Universidadde Jaén
14
vital concept and holds the key for discovering self.
4.9. The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP).
Sheltered Instruction was originated in North America, more specifically, when
traditional schools only used a standard curriculum for both native speakers and
ELLs that emigrated from various countries mainly to the US. Sheltered instruction is
launch more as a strong need and attempt to fill the gap that exists in terms of
language, culture and transitional curricula from countries others than the American
schools. Herrera & Murphy (2005) interpret sheltered instruction as a method that
provides communicative solutions, philosophies, strategies, and techniques that
recognize the multifaceted challenges that ELLs confront when they are trying to
adapt to their new schools in the United States.
Originally, CBI was a popular method for Canadian bilingual schools with immersion
programs during the ‘70s and ‘80s in Quebec. In the United States, CBI has been an
umbrella term that has evolved into more structured frameworks of Sheltered
Instruction (SI). First, SI evolved to be used with students who had attained an
intermediate level of English proficiency and it transformed into SDAIE (Specially
Designed Academic Instruction in English). Eventually, researchers Jana Echevarria,
MaryEllen Vogt, and Deborah Short developed a procedural model that is now
known as the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP). This variation of
sheltered instruction is the most popular filed-tested model in the United States
nowadays. The Center for Applied Linguistics (2013) describes SIOP as a research-
based and validated model of sheltered instruction that has been widely and
successfully used across the U.S. for over 15 years.
The main objective of the SIOP model is to help Culturally Linguistic Diverse (CLD)
students to adapt to regular classes in the US, and this is accepted in the American
education since there is no doubt that the social and cultural milieu in which learners
grow up determines their beliefs and behavior (Ellis, 1994). This unique approach is
not aimed at isolating immigrant students from their regular peers; on the contrary, it
seeks to optimize the cognitive, and cultural differences so that all that knowledge
can be exploited and transferred to the target language they are acquiring and the
new culture they are trying to adapt to. Echevarría, Vogt, & Short (2007) assure that
“sheltered instruction is an approach that can extend the time students have for

Universidadde Jaén
15
getting language support services while giving them a jump-start on the content
subjects they will need for graduation” (p.13). Sheltered Instruction (SI) is a method
that helps ELLS adapt grade-level curricula and meaningful ESL content to prepare
them for their transition to mainstream classes.
The SIOP model is a framework procedure that considers 8 components, as the
critical aspects of the teaching process, and 30 features that serve as more specific
indicators of teaching practices as illustrated in figure A.
Figure 1. Components and features of the SIOP model
1.Lesson Preparation
*Content objectives
*Language objectives
* Content concepts
*Supplementary materails
*Adaptation of content
*Meaningful activities
2. Building Background
*Students’ life experiences
*Students’ prior knowledge
*Key vocabulary
3. Comprehensible Input
*Speech
* Clear explanations
* Variety of techniques
4. Strategies
*Ample oppostunities to use learning
strategies
*Use of questions to promote higher-order
thinking skills
*Scaffolding techniques
5. Interaction
*Opportunities to interact and discuss lesson concept between teacher student and
among students to encourage elaborated responses.
*Sufficient response wait time.
*Grouping configurations to support content and language objectives
*Clarification of key concepts in L1 as a tool for text or peer learning.
6. practice and application
*Hands-on materials and manipulatives
*Activities integrate all language skills
(input & output).
*Activities to apply content and language
knowledge.
7. Lesson delivery
*Content objectives clearly supported
*Language objectives clearly supported
*Students engaged for most of the
class time.
*Pacing appropriate to the students
ability level.

Universidadde Jaén
16
Adapted from http://www.nclack.k12.or.us/Page/1563
In the implementation of appropriate of CBI lessons, the SIOP model considers three
critical aspects of the teaching process: preparation, instruction, and review and
assessment (Herrera & Murry, 2005, p.262).
Lesson preparation is one of the most important parts of the SIOP model because it
provides learners with access to content knowledge and language skills. Teachers
must be very careful about connecting content and language objectives for the
lesson, gather supplementary materials to give students comprehensible input and
develop ways to adapt content to the language proficiency level of the learners. The
lesson preparation category examines planning process, including the language and
content objectives, the use of supplementary materials, and the meaningfulness of
the activities (Estrada, Dalton & Yamauchi, 2000, p.5). A clear description of the
essential academic and linguistic goals that students should glean from the lesson
help learners acquire BICS, CALP, vocabulary and language structures to perform
well in a bilingual school.
Once the preparation phase is completed with content objectives, language
objectives, key vocabulary, supplementary materials, adaptations, and meaningful
activities, it is time to mull over the way (strategies) the teacher will use to deliver the
lesson in this second critical aspect of the SIOP model. During SIOP instruction,
teachers need to engage students by fostering opportunities for students use their
previous background knowledge and bring it into the classroom topic. Instruction that
helps language learners connect new concepts to their prior life and learning
experiences improves their language comprehension (Saunders et al., 1999). In
other words, the students’ background knowledge affects the understanding of topics
as they make meaningful connections between the academic subject theme and their
previous real-life experiences.
8. Review and Assessment
*Comprehensive review of key vocabulary
*Comprehensive review of content concepts
*Ongoing feedback to students regarding language production and content output
*Formal and informal assessment of student progress, comprehension and learning

Universidadde Jaén
17
Also in this second aspect of the SIOP model, strategies and interactive
accommodations needs to guarantee that students have plenty of opportunities to
develop their social language and cognitive academic language proficiency.
SIOP teachers need to teach strategies explicitly to help students learn how to
access and remember information, scaffolding strategy use, and promoting higher
order thinking skills (Moughamian, Rivera, & Francis 2009: 14). Teachers can use
these elements as necessary to engage students in language development and
encourage ELLs in learning English. The SIOP strategies, during this second critical
aspect, scaffold learning and help teachers focus on the language skills students
need for success on academic tasks. After the guided practice in this linguistic
protocol, with elements such as building background, comprehensible input,
strategies, interaction, practice and application, and lesson delivery, SIOP lessons
need to focus on opportunities to provide learners with feedback and ongoing
assessment.
According to the third critical aspect of the SIOP model, the teacher needs to yield
progressing occasions for ELLs to review the key vocabulary, the main concept
topics in the lesson, and the assimilation of the lesson input; furthermore, SIOP
lessons are filled with ample opportunities to look back upon the comprehension of
content and language objectives and ongoing assessment through qualitative and
formative techniques. As Howard, Sugarman & Coburn (2006: 17) point out:
As the SIOP Model suggests, to use a variety of assessment techniques that are
culturally appropriate for students from a variety of backgrounds, teachers should be
aware that when students learn a particular assessment structure in one language,
less time needs to be spent on teaching that test-taking skill/strategy in the other
language.
The three critical aspects of the model, the eight components are all its features
provide teachers with a framework structure that helps differentiate the learner´s
needs according to their linguistic and cognitive individual demands.

Universidadde Jaén
18
5. METHODOLOGY
5.1. Research approaches
This project uses qualitative and quantitative tools for the analysis phase as it is very
important to observe how the in-class processes evolve and the impact of the new
methodology has to produce a final result. Arguing the condition that, “There is no
need to oppose qualitative and quantitative research. Each is capable of critical
thinking and each has its place in interlanguage studies” Ellis (Ellis 1984: 284). We
believe that the survey has equilibrium in the use of qualitative and quantitative
instruments; however, qualitative research has a special concern with process rather
than simple outcomes (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982: p.2) whereas the quantitative
instruments gain more relevance at the end of the project when conclusions need to
be made.
This project seems to be based on an experimental approach because there is a
hypothesis that needs to be validated through an experimental and a control group.
In this sense, Hockly & Madrid (n.d) express that “if the researches are careful in
setting up the study, these two groups can be presumed to be virtually identical in all
respects, except that one gets the treatment (teaching method, materials, foe
example) and the other does not”. Nevertheless, even though the project is guided
through the perspective of an experimental research, it is impossible to control
variables such as age, number of students, behavioral aspects, cognitive skills, and
motivation so as to assure that both groups are identical; therefore, an action
research suits the project objectives much better.
This eclectic, action-research project will adhere to the four developmental phases
(Hockly & Madrid, n.d, p. 51) with the purpose of assuring the putting into action of
this reflective model of research:
Phase 1: Develop a plan of action to improve what is already happening
Phase 2: Act to implement the plan
Phase 3: Observe the effects of action in the context in which it occurs
Phase 4: Reflect on these effects.

Universidadde Jaén
19
5.2. Research instruments
5.2.1 Questionnaire: Participating teachers will answer a survey at the end of
the project in order to get to know their opinions about the implementation of the
SIOP model with the two control groups; furthermore, the questionnaire will aim at
collecting more accurate information on the comparative analysis between the
classes exposed to the SIOP model.
5.2.2 Lesson plans: Teachers will be asked to turn in weekly lessons plans with
the purpose of assuring that the protocol for incorporating the SIOP components in
their classes. In the lesson plan, teachers will be asked to write a short reflective
analysis on how the classes went according to what was initially planned. This
refection exercise will help us not only observe but also do an ongoing reflection on
the effects of the SIOP methodology in relation to the objectives that need to be met.
5.2.3. Class observations: Additionally, there will be bi-weekly class
observations to ensure that the SIOP lessons are coherently delivered according to
the lesson plans. The SIOP checklist will be used for this purpose, adapted from
Short, D. J., Vogt, M., & Echevarria, J. (2008). The SIOP model for administrators.
Allyn & Bacon.
5.2.4 Assessment and scores: The classes` academic performances will be
compared by the end of the quarter through a formative and summative evaluation
to keep track of their linguistic progress in their SIOP and non-SIOP classes
5.3. Research participants
For study purposes, the research participants will be primary and high school
students at Liceo Taller San Miguel (LTSM), which is one internationally, accredited
bilingual school in Colombia. This project will be carried out with one control group in
elementary and one control group in high school. The research participants will be
four groups that receive classes in English, two in primary and two in high school for
a total of four groups. Two of these classes will be using the Sheltered Instruction
Observation Protocol in content subjects (SIOP methodology) whereas the other two

Universidadde Jaén
20
groups will receive normal instruction with a non-SIOP methodology as to do a
comparative analysis between the classes being taught using SIOP and the ones
using the school regular methodology (non-SIOP).
5.4. Data Analysis
Finally, the data collected from the questionnaires, class observations and the
learners’ academic performance (formative and summative evaluation) will be
compared to determine the efficacy of the SIOP model in those groups who were
methodologically exposed to it during lesson preparation, lesson delivery and
assessment.
Therefore, by the end of the project, we will be able to analyze through class
observations, interviews and test scores to determine if SIOP can be considered an
effective methodology for dual language programs in EFL bilingual schools.

Universidadde Jaén
21
6. STUDY
6.1. Context description
The research project was designed at Liceo Taller San Miguel, which is a private
school that emerges in the city of Pereira in Colombia as an answer for some specific
needs in the areas of fine arts and bilingual education. This school has been aiming
at developing a very solid curriculum, an effective language approach and
methodology in order to rise and maintain an upright position in the field of English
Language Learning (ELL) in the region.
The research participants were 40 students in both 6th
grade groups, and 40 students
in 3rd
grade groups, even though only one class at each grade-level received SIOP
instruction; namely, a total of 40 students were selected to be exposed to SIOP in
this research. The reason we consider the sample to be random selection is because
every year the school administrators mix the students and place them in different
groups at each grade-level so as to foster socio-cultural interactions and academic
skills.
This project was carried out with four different groups in their math classes. The ‘A
classes’ used the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP methodology),
whereas the ‘B classes’ received normal instruction with a non-SIOP methodology.
The arrangement for all groups being taught with a content-based methodology was
as follows:
Figure 2: Group arrangement
Class Methodology Teacher
3A class SIOP methodology Teacher D
3B class Non-SIOP (regular
methodology)
Teacher D
6A class SIOP methodology Teacher C
6B class Non-SIOP (regular
methodology)
Teacher C

Universidadde Jaén
22
The students’ ages in 3rd grade range from 8-9 whereas the students’ ages in 6th
grade fluctuate from 11 to 12 years.
6.2. Corpus and data collection
With the purpose of successfully collecting proper information about the SIOP
strategies in Math classes, which are taught in English, we used several instruments
to collect this valuable data during the execution of the study. These instruments will
help us construct validity upon analyzing data sets and constructing validity to the
outside observer as well. Thus when we talk about ´construct validity` in research,
two things need to be taken into account: firstly, the construct needs to be verifiable,
and secondly the constructs needs to be captured or measured through various
measurement procedures (Hockly & Madrid, n.d: 76) as those used in this research
work.
As an introduction to the research tools, the class observations done through the
implementation of the SIOP methodology was gathered in written reports according
the protocol checklist -explained above- so as to identify the most important
categories of the features been observed. Quite often “categories emerge from data,
without the researcher having to apply a fixed taxonomy for analysis” (Hockly &
Madrid, n.d: 84), and those categories were taken into consideration to find
coherence on the methodology used by the math teachers in their classes.
Regarding the questionnaire and the assessment instruments, the graphing tool was
used to divide the data into meaningful analytical categories. Basically, the analysis
of the datasets obtained during the research was conducted mainly through
descriptive statistics as follows: frequencies were used to indicate how often a
phenomenon occurred, the mean showed the average of the learners’ scores in their
evaluations, and the range to indicate how homogenous or heterogeneous the
groups were when compared to one another.

Universidadde Jaén
23
6.2.1. Training.
First of all, since the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) is a North
American model that is not very well known in South America, an initial training on
SIOP was provided to both teachers participating in this action research. Inorder to
give participants anonymity, we will refer to them as Teacher D (third grade math
teacher) and Teacher C (sixth grade teacher). Both teachers gladly accepted utilizing
the SIOP model for a period of three months (from May 26th
to August the 22nd
) and
that way, analyze multiple methodologies that can be useful to improve the learning
of math in their classes, which are taught completely in English.
Since I was trained in SIOP when I worked at Carmel middle school, in North
Carolina US, in 2008, I decided to use the same booklet and materials I was exposed
to when I first received training in content based-instruction and the SIOP model. The
textbook used for the training was Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D. (2007).
Making content comprehensible to English language Learners: The SIOP model.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon (see appendix 1).
Teachers Teacher D and Teacher C had a four-hour training, divided into two
sessions in two weeks, before the research took place. The didactics of the training
was focused on assigning some reading prior our meetings, then discuss the topics
in detail, go over the contents in the SIOP textbook and finally, do some mini-
planning exercises to make sure the subject matter had been understood
consistently and homogeneously. It is only possible to complete o good research
work when all participants are fully aware of what they must do and how they should
be doing it; and this is why the training sessions were crucial in connecting the
teachers’ previous background knowledge with the goals of the research they
accepted to participate in.
6.2.2. Lesson planning
To ensure that classes had used the SIOP components during both the lesson
planning and delivery, weekly lesson plans were requested to both math teachers.
The SIOP model has a protocol that needs to be followed to perform proper
implementation of all its components and features; therefore, teachers needed to
take aside some time to plan their lessons over carefully.

Universidadde Jaén
24
For planning purposes, teachers were asked to review their notes, booklet and
photocopies from the previous training they had on SIOP, then, teachers were to
state the content and language objectives taking into account that premise that
language leads learning and language development leads to a better understanding
of the subject matter. The math teachers were to turn in weekly lessons plans and
also used to write a short reflective analysis on how the classes went according to
what was initially planned. Their refection exercise (appendix 2) helped us not only
observe but also do an ongoing reflection on the effects of the SIOP methodology in
relation to the objectives that need to be met during the research.
6.3.3. Questionnaire
At the end of the project, both participating teachers received a survey (appendix 7)
in order to get to know their opinions about the implementation of the SIOP model
with the two sample groups; in other words, the survey objective was to collect
information from the teachers’ perspectives about the impact of the SIOP
methodology in their math classes. The questions in the survey have to do with the
methodology, the quality of the workshop and the effects on their teaching styles and
learning strategies.
6.4.4. Class observations
Teachers D and C needed to be observed during their lesson delivery. In the training,
class observation was discussed with teachers as a requirement since it is an
important instrument for data collection in this type of research. The two teachers
agreed on being visited and have three unannounced class observation to guarantee
the coherence between the lesson plan and the lesson delivery.
For academic purposes, the SIOP feature checklist proposed by Echevarria, J., Vogt,
M.E., & Short, D. (2000). Making content comprehensible to English language
Learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, was used to make sure that the
most important components in the SIOP model were being implemented by both
teachers in their focus classes. Some of the most important features to be observed
were the content and language objectives, which needed to be clearly defined,
displayed and reviewed with students. In addition to these, concepts were supposed

Universidadde Jaén
25
to be explicitly linked to students’ background experiences and ample opportunities
to use learning strategies in frequent moments of interaction and discussion. A total
of three class observations were performed during the research; that is, three
observations in third grade and three observations in sixth grade.
6.4.5. Assessment
As part of the assessment process, we needed teachers focus not only on gathering
summative grades but also formative elements such as the comprehensive review of
vocabulary, the review of learned key content concepts, and the use of higher-order
thinking skills to make a good use of SIOP in their grade-level subject matter.
Moreover, with the purpose of achieving objective-oriented results, we needed to
combine strategies for formative and summative assessment in their final academic
production at the end of the three months. More specifically, we used evaluative
strategies to assess both the students’ final product but also the students´ progress
in the process; therefore, with the idea to assess reading and writing skills though
content, all students took a written test (appendix 3)
Furthermore, with the aim to assess the learners’ ability to socially interact while
using math operations in listening and speaking competencies, we designed the
grocery store project in groups of three and four students (see appendix 4). This is
why “the super grocery store project” arouse from the idea that during and
interactive/ social project, teachers were going to have the opportunity to provide
timely oral feedback, give opportunities for all students to be challenged through
open tasks in math, and allow multiple ways for learners to demonstrate
communicative skills through the use of the target language.
The grocery store activity was created in order to provide grade leaners with a real
life context, full of activities where they were able to consolidate and practice math
skills and concepts related to the numerical thinking. The students were asked to
bring objects, toys and foods from their houses to sell at the store. They were also
asked to assign the prices (with the teacher´s help) and to buy and sell the products
among themselves. Students calculated the change that they were suppose to return
to the costumers (students) and were finally asked to record their sales and find their
total incomes. During the grocery store activity many content concepts like quantity,
data collection, estimation, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and fractions

Universidadde Jaén
26
were practiced and further consolidated.
Pictures and description on appendix 4, shows how students had to prepare their
own products, use math to perform operations, negotiate meaning of expressions in
English and interact in a meaningful evaluative context.

Universidadde Jaén
27
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, the data gathered from the research instruments is analyzed in
relation to the specific objectives and the main objective in the thesis. The results are
presented in a sequential order according to the way the instruments were utilized.
The conduct of this study entails a detailed account of questions, as it is our interest
to keep into consideration the teachers´ opinions and feelings about the quality of the
training as well as the accurate information about the study among the classes
exposed to SIOP. The questionnaire teachers were to respond (appendix 7) was
designed on Google forms as it allows immediate analysis of the responses received
and allows storage in a spreadsheet where individual responses can be seen.
The Questionnaire contained questions regarding the quality of the training offered to
teachers, the level of understanding the participating teachers acquired to plan their
lessons and teach their classes using the SIOP method. In addition to this, the
questionnaire also contains some questions regarding the quality of the materials
used for the research study and the feedback provided to teachers after their turning
in their weekly lesson plans. The questions and answers provided during the
questionnaire are presented in this document to be examined. It is necessary to keep
in mind that teachers were requested to answer the questionnaire using a scale from
1 to 5, with 5 being the highest. The analysis is developed in groups of two question
at a time; exempt the last question, which was an open request to provide any
recommendations for future studies.
7.1. Questionnaire questions and answers:
Figure 3: Questionnare answers
Questions
1. Were the explanations about
SIOP clear during the training?
2. Did you understand how SIOP
works in lesson planning?
Teacher 1 5 5
Teacher 2 5 5
It is clear that teachers were satisfied with the quality of the workshop that was

Universidadde Jaén
28
offered as a preliminary stage in order to get them prepared for the research study.
Having provided the highest score confirms what we had already discovered through
multiple informal conversations with them while on campus.
Questions
3. Did you understand how
SIOP works during lesson
delivery?
4. Was the training both informative
and practical so as to learn how to
appropriately use it in class?
Teacher 1 4 4
Teacher 2 5 4
In terms of question number 3, even though both marks are high, it is understandable
that it is normal that one of the teachers feels she is not completely mindful of how
the SIOP method works. We believe that in a 4 hour workshop, the fact that they feel
capable of getting the gist of how to apply a SIOP class affirms the importance of
having provided good the training beforehand.
On a different note, in reference to the combination of theoretical framework and
exemplars of practical issues on how to implement SIOP, both teachers feel very well
about both concepts; therefore, their answers reflect the consistency during the
implementation process, that is, when they turned in their lesson plans, when their
classes were observed, and upon proper application of the assessment tools.
Questions
5. Were the materials used
during the training appropriate
for mastering the most important
concepts about the SIOP
components and features?
6. Did you receive timely and
specific feedback after turning in
the weekly lesson plans?
Teacher 1 5 4
Teacher 2 5 3
Question 5 aimed at knowing the teachers’ perceptions about the materials used for
the training as an initial stage, and the feedback provided through the entire research
time. During the training, we used the SIOP materials: Making Content
Comprehensible for Language Learners, Compiled by the Bilingual and

Universidadde Jaén
29
Compensatory Education Resource Team, Dearborn Public Schools, 2002 (see
appendix 5) , and then we continued working with the textbook Echevarria, J., Vogt,
M.E., & Short, D. (2007). Making content comprehensible to English language
Learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Allyn & Bacon (see appendix 1). I made the
request so that the school could get a copy of these books so Teacher D and
Teacher C could get them checked out from the library, and the request was
approved by the school director. The school even got the SIOP workbook which was
quite useful to refer teachers to some of those exercises as part of the timely
feedback they were provided with. All these aspects been taken into account, the
high responses match the efforts made to assist teachers with qualified materials and
to endorse this research project.
In regards with question 6, teachers are satisfied with the feedback but have
suggestions to improve how to do in in the future. Their recommendations are highly
appreciated and will be taken into consideration for further studies.
Questions
7. Did you receive constant
suggestions about how to assess
language and content learning in
class?
8. How would you rate the
quality of the workshop and the
help you received during the
study?
Teacher 1 4 4
Teacher 2 3 4
In question 7, teachers expressed that the suggestion done through the feedback
was good but could have been better. This feeling is probably based on the fact that
they were to design the assessment instruments by themselves and, once finished,
further suggestions were given to them so that they could adhere the objectives of
content-based teaching and learning framework.
Overall, the quality of the initial training, the assistance given to teachers during the
research and the feedback provided about how they were implementing SIOP in their
classes was very good and the two participating teachers were well-satisfied with the
assistance provided all along.

Universidadde Jaén
30
Open Question
Do you have any suggestions or comments to help us implement
improvement plans in future research practices?
Teacher 1
I would like the school to buy the materials we used in in the
training.
Teacher 2
My suggestion for the future is that feedback was given everyday if
possible but my students and myself learned a lot.
Respecting the open question at the end of the survey, I understand that teachers
suggested a couple of improvements that could be considered in future similar
studies. They suggest that the school could buy the materials for the teachers; in
other words, buy the materials for the teachers to own and not for library (I talked to
the teachers for a more detailed explanation since the answer was somehow
ambiguous). Furthermore, they also suggested that feedback must be given if
possible on a daily basis during the duration of the implementation stage, as
opposed to daily feedback after the submission of their lesson plans.
7.2. Lesson plans:
Teachers turned in weekly lessons plans with the purpose of assuring that the
protocol for incorporating the SIOP components in their classes was properly
implemented during lesson delivery. The lesson plan format included the learning
outcomes for each unit and the assessment strategies teachers wanted their
students to develop. The combination and adaptation of the relationship between the
language and cognitive level is an issue that has been explored following the
guidelines for content-based instruction and SIOP with the purpose of combining
language development and content level learning.
The lesson plan format also contained the components of language and
communication, cognition and citizenship (see appendix 2). In terms of the
communication component, teachers needed to identify the language objectives, the
pre-teaching and the post-teaching stage in order to reflect upon how students learn
to build language development in L2 (English as an additional language) while
learning content too, in this case mathematics.
Since a SIOP classroom definitely needs to be centered on cognitive engagement

Universidadde Jaén
31
and constant development of academic language, lesson preparation and lesson
delivery needed to be included in the format so as to show a wide variety of thinking
and problem solving skills for learners to be capable of conceptualizing,
comprehending and assimilating content themes through the use of Higher-Order
Thinking Skills (HOTS). The Bloom´´ taxonomy was used for planning purposes to
help teachers think about the levels of cognition to engage their students in.
The figure A. shows the different levels of the taxonomy used during the lessons.
Notice that the old taxonomy on the left was designed using nouns as opposed to
the new taxonomy on the right, which were re-adapted using verbs.
Figure4: Bloom taxonomy.
Taken from http://www.odu.edu/educ/llschult/blooms_taxonomy.htm
Concerning the citizenship component, its goal was to teach the students the
usefulness of their new acquired knowledge. In other words, the lesson should
include an activity that showed learners how to use their new knowledge in a
dynamic, true-to- life environment. The citizenship or community component is
supposed to teach the learners the usefulness of what they have learned in an
expanded situation; beyond the traditional classroom experience.
At the end of the lesson plan, teachers were asked to write a short reflective analysis
on how the classes went according to it what was initially planned. This reflection

Universidadde Jaén
32
exercise helped us not only observe but also do an ongoing reflection on the effects
of the SIOP methodology in relation to the objectives that needed to be met.
Furthermore, the ongoing feedback provided to teachers was usually compared to
those reflections in order to help improve the lessons week after week.
A total of 10 lessons were submitted and they all had the requested components
explained above. The planning was structured and demonstrated that the lessons
were prepared following the standardized guidelines for the research project as well
as students having been exposed to SIOP effectively. The quality of the work was
excellent and the teachers’ reflections showed that the concept ideas on how to
teach SIOP had been successfully assimilated too.
7.3. Class observations:
Each teacher was observed three times to ensure that the SIOP lessons were
coherently delivered according to the lesson plans. The SIOP checklist used for this
purpose, adapted from Short, D. J., Vogt, M., & Echevarria, J. (2008). The SIOP
model for administrators. Allyn & Bacon. The checklist observation format (appendix
6) was used in unannounced observations where the following components were
examined in their execution during lesson delivery: preparation, building background,
comprehensible input, strategies, interaction, practice & application, lesson delivery,
review & assessment.
Each teacher was observed three times in their SIOP classes, one at the beginning
of the study, another one in the middle, and a last observation towards the end of the
project, for a total of six observations altogether.
In the checklist, each component is divided into several features. Those features
were marked using a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest, to evaluate the
coherence and accordance with which the classes had been planed to teach using
the SIOP model. After this, all the features were added to get a sum for each SIOP
component (See appendix 6). For data analysis purposes, based on all the class
observations, the different components were taken into account, their values
summed up and the dataset is presented in the table below.

Universidadde Jaén
33
Figure 5: Sum of all components
Component Sum of all components
in all observations
altogether
Maximum possible
score.
Preparation 88 90
Building background 40 45
Comprehensible input 44 45
Strategies/Interaction 40 45
Interaction 35 45
Practice/application 37 45
Lesson delivery 54 60
Review/Assessment 45 60
Mean 48 53
This final chart which gathers all the collected data in the class observation formats
shows that the total sum average of the components is 48, in comparison with the
mean of 53 in the maximum score category. According to these numbers, teachers
who implemented SIOP instruction complied with the majority of the requested
procedures according to the protocol suggested by the SIOP authors.
7.4.1. Assessment and scores:
All classes took a final examination to test their reading and writing skills in english
while doing math operations. Likewise, Students in all classes did an interactive
project called “the grocery store activity” so as to assess the learners´ abilities in
listening, speaking and negotiation of meaning with math concepts. The scale
breakdown used to score the students’ results corresponds to the school grading
policy in such a degree:
Exceptional: from 90 to 100
Good: from 80 to 89
Borderline: from 70 to 79
Weak: From 1 to 69

Universidadde Jaén
34
7.4.2. Results in the written final test
The results in the exams to do a comparative analysis between the sample group
and the regular group were as follows:
Figure 6: Third grade exam results
3rd grade exams
Exceptional Good Borderline Weak
SIOP class 9 6 3 2
Non-SIOP
class
3 6 8 3
This exam shows an exceptional performance of the students exposed to the SIOP
methodology compared to those who received math class with a regular non-SIOP
methodology. There are six more students who performed at the highest score, equal
number of learners who got a good grade , five less students who performed at
borderline and one less student who failed the examination.
In conclusion of this first data set, there is a better performance in reading, writing
and grade-level math skills in those students who were exposed to SIOP during the
research study in third grade.
Figure 7: Sixth grade exam results

Universidadde Jaén
35
6th grade exams
SIOP class 7 5 6 2
Non-SIOP
class
6 6 7 1
In the sixth grade math exam the scores are more standard between both classes as
there are differences marked by only one student range, at each competence level.
At the exceptional level, there is one more students in the SIOP class compared to
the other Non-SIOP class. However, there are six students scoring good at Non-
SIOP, with the difference of one more student as well as for those scoring at
borderline. Regarding those who failed the test, there is, again, just one difference, in
range, between both classes.
In this case, it is hard to affirm that there is a better performance in reading, writing
and grade-level math skills in those students who were exposed to SIOP because all
the results were very similar. One of the hypotheses about why the results resemble
each other so much in this type of examination is because of the age factor. Children
learn foreign languages faster than teenagers and, perhaps, SIOP being a content-
based instruction model for language learning, could be better assimilated by kids
than by teenagers. In conclusion of this first data set, no remarkable differences were
evident in grade-level math skills in sixth grade.

Universidadde Jaén
36
7.4.3. The Grocery store project
Figure 8: Third-grade grocery store project
3rd grade grocery store project
SIOP class 15 3 2 0
Non-SIOP
class
9 8 3 0
The grocery store activity shows that the socio-academic competences worked in
class are better at the exceptional level in the 3rd
grade SIOP class. Once more, the
learners´ speaking abilities got better grades and this is why nobody failed the
activity in third grade. In terms of good performance, there is a higher number of high
achiever in the non-SIOP class due to many others migrated to the exceptional
levels, as seen in the bar graph.

Universidadde Jaén
37
Figure 9: Sixth-grade grocery store project
6th grade grocery store project
SIOP class 8 6 5 1
Non-SIOP
class
11 4 2 2
The 6th
grade grocery store activity shows interesting data when compared to the
previous information in the comparative analysis. In this case, the non-SIOP class
got more students being placed at the exceptional level compared to those in the
SIOP class.
This data probably means that using a content-based instruction methodology for a
short period of time does not have a significant impact on the students` speaking skill
as this is a competence that is developed over time. However, if we compare the
exceptional and good categories altogether the results shows that the SIOP class
has 14 students achieving high scores whereas the non-SIOP one has 15 students
getting high grades. Again, it will be a one-student difference that proves that the
SIOP method did not influence quite significantly in those sixth grade classes with
pre-adolescents.

Universidadde Jaén
38
From a more general perspective, adding all the students´ scores in both
assessment activities, we can observe the following results:
Figure 10: Overall scores
Criteria Exceptional Good Borderline Weak
SIOP students 39 20 16 5
Non-SIOP
students
29 24 21 6
In almost all cases, the students exposed to SIOP outperformed their Non-SIOP
peers, except for the scores in the sixth grade grocery store project. There is a
tendency that indicates that SIOP could be an effective method to use in content-
based instruction classes in bilingual schools. However, it seems that SIOP might me
more effective when used in early education but that theory would need further
studies to replicate this research and deepen into the effectiveness of this method
when compared to other similar counterparts such as Content and Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL), Language across the curriculum (LAC), and the
Cognitive and Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA).

Universidadde Jaén
39
8. CONCLUSIONS
Content-based instruction is not a new approach to language teaching but it is in
constant development, mainly with CLIL in Europe and SIOP in the United States.
The most important aspect when implementing content-based instruction, is to give
attention to both the language and the content being taught and not put more
emphasis on one or the other; even though SIOP was designed for native speakers
of English as opposed to CLIL. If properly applied, CLIL & SIOP may have a solid
future in content- based instruction in Latin America; where in fact, it is a topic that is
just arriving at the competitive bilingual schools.
Based on the results of the study, it was found that the Sheltered Instruction
Observation protocol (SIOP) that is normally used in North America works effectively
to teach content and language in schools where English is not the mother tongue.
Just like the Content and Language Integrated learning (CLIL), the Language Across
the Curriculum (LAC) approach and other content instruction methods, SIOP
incorporates some important components that accompanied by other features helps
integrates language and content learning.
There is a need for further research, going deeper; perhaps with a quasi-
experimental investigation in the near future. The participating teachers agree that it
is important to explore the advantages of using this CB method to setting clear
objectives, scaffolding language learning, and making the learning of math more
procedural.
Action research was also validated as an appropriate choice during the study
because it was used as a way to learn about our teaching, its effectiveness, and as a
way of monitoring and evaluating innovation. At the end, the results concur with
Parrott`s assertion:
“the aim of action research is not to arrive at universal truths but only to learn more
about ourselves at the moment, our teaching at the moment, our learners at the
moment and their learning at the moment” (Parrott, 1996, 6)
SIOP instruction offers a compendium of components and recourses that guides
teachers on how to teach their content classes beyond the traditional foreign

Universidadde Jaén
40
language curriculum; therefore, students become better academically proficient and
develop language skills in the process. Even though the sample classes were
exposed to SIOP in their math classes, students acquired abilities to express
accuracy in their math skills and better fluency to communicate their ideas during
instruction and the evaluative process.
The best results were noticeable with the third-graders in contrast to the sixth grade
classes. Our assumption is that it is natural that a three-month study shows better
results in children than adults because the Content Instruction (CI) conceptualization
is based on acquisition through inductive instruction rather than enforcing learning
through deductive methods.
Although the study proved some good results, mainly in the third grade sample, this
research needs some revisions to make better use of the existing opportunities of
this expanding methodology that is not wildly known to teach English as a Foreign
Language (EFL). It would be interesting to conduct this research with other content
classes taught in English, such as social studies, Science, chemistry and Language
Arts to replicate the framework of this work and discover whether or not the SIOP
model has a more powerful impact on elementary school children rather than the
middle school students.
In terms of the opinion about the instruments, qualitative and quantitative
methodologies were combined. The data in the questionnaire evidences good
characteristics in the quality of work done altogether with both math teachers at
LTSM. The opportunity Teacher D (second grade math teacher) and Teacher C
(Sixth grade math teacher) had to access this kind of training before hand, and
receive timely feedback during the study was decisive on doing a reflective work that
allowed us to gather constant data sets from all the different instruments. Lesson
planning helped to:
● Plan how to allow learners to use language in a range of different and more
complex ways in math classes.
● Enable learners to deal with complex information given to them in the target
language.
● Guide the teachers on how to systematically teach, and assess their classes’
progress according to the SIOP procedures.

Universidadde Jaén
41
Taking into consideration the datasets and the conclusions in this research study, we
would like to propose some recommendations that could be regarded as a short-
term/long –term plan of action that could offer more valuable information about the
use of SIOP in bilingual school.
The following recommendations may also contribute to the improvements and
revision of possible challenges in the improvement the obtained results in this study:
8.1. Recommendation 1:
It was hard to get the school director´s permission to conduct the research and
promote the importance of this study among the math department; hence, it is crucial
to have a timetable not only for the academic work but also for the time needed to
make the logistics arrangements before the work begins.
Further studies in SIOP are needed in order to know how effective it is in the
teaching and integration of content instruction with preschool, primary, middle and
high school students. The results in this research make us ponder about the impact
of SIOP depending on the students` age and grade-level cognitive skills. Further
studies with a special focus in the cognitive and age factors would immensely
expand this initial price of work.
SIOP should be implemented as a teacher development program and, possibly, as a
module for teacher training every time new staff members are hired to work as
specialized content teachers. Likewise, teacher training in SIOP should be updated
every school year with conferences, specials guests and state- of the art material in
the field.
For SIOP to be effective, the teachers’ suggestions in terms of more accurate,
ongoing, timely feedback must be taken into serious consideration. Resources are to
be made readily available for teachers to use and meetings are to be scheduled on a
regular basis. Study groups could also be considered so as to provide teachers with
progressing teaching tools in the field of content-based instruction in bilingual
environments.

Universidadde Jaén
42
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ball, P. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning. Spain: Fundación
Universitaria Iberoamericana.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Boyson, B. A., & Short, D. (2003). Secondary school newcomer programs in the
United States (No. 12). Center for Research on Education, Diversity &
Excellence, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Byrnes, H. (2000). Languages across the curriculum—interdepartmental curriculum
construction. In M-R. Kecht & K. von Hammerstein (Eds.), in center for
advance research on language acquisition. Available at
http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/cbi.html [Retrieved: 18th June 2014].
CCSSO. (1992). In Herrera, S. & Murphy, K. (2005). Mastering ESL and bilingual
methods. Boston: Pearson Education. P.208.
Center for applied linguistics.(2014). The SIOP model. Available at
http://www.cal.org/siop/about/ [ Retrieved: 5th
july 2014].
Coyle, D. (1999). Supporting students in content and language integrated contexts:
Planning for effective classrooms. In Masih, J. (Ed.). (1999). Learning through
a foreign language. (pp. 53-69) Lancaster: ST Martin’s college.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Universidadde Jaén
43
Coyle. (2010). In Ball, P. (n,d). Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana: Spain.
Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting
educational success for language minority students. In Schooling and
language minority students: A theoretical framework. in center for advance
research on language acquisition. Available at
http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/cbi.html [Retrieved: 19th June 2014].
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D. (2000). Making content comprehensible to
English language Learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ellis. (1984). In Hockly, N. & Madrid, D. (n.d). Observation and research in the
language classroom. Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana: Spain. P. 14..
Estrada, P., Dalton, S., & Yamauchi, L. (2000). Teaching transformed: Achieving
excellence, fairness, inclusion, and harmony. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Genesee.(1998)In Herrera, S. & Murphy, K. (2005). Mastering ESL and bilingual
methods. Boston: Pearson Education. P.214.
Grabe & Stoller. (1997). In Herrera, S. & Murphy, K. (2005). Mastering ESL and
bilingual methods. Boston: Pearson Education. P.215.
Hockly, N. & Madrid, D. (n.d). Observation and research in the language classroom.
Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana: Spain.
Howard, E. R., Sugarman, J., & Coburn, C. (2006). Adapting the sheltered instruction
observation protocol (SIOP) for two-way immersion education: An introduction
to the TWIOP. Center for Applied Linguistics.
Kemmis & McTaggart (1988). In Hockly, N. & Madrid, D. (n.d). Observation and
research in the language classroom. Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana: Spain.
P. 50.

Universidadde Jaén
44
Making Content Comprehensible for Language Learners (2002) Compiled by the
Bilingual and Compensatory Education Resource Team, Dearborn Public
Schools from from: “Making Content Comprehensible for English Language
Learners”, Echevarria, Vogt, Short . Available at
http://www.maine.gov/education/esl/webinars/documents/Downs100510SIOP
Summary.pdf [ 19th august 2014].
Ministerio de Educación Nacional de Colombia. (2013). Colombia Bilingüe. Available
at http://www.mineducacion.gov.co/1621/article-97495.html [2nd april 2014].
Moughamian, A. C., Rivera, M. O., & Francis, D. J. (2009). Instructional Models and
Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners. Center on Instruction.
Real Académia Española (2012). Definición bilinguismo. Available at
http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=bilinguismo [Retrieved: 25th
march 2014].
Richard-Amato, P. A. (1996). Making it happen: Interaction in the second language
classroom. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Oxford university press.(2012). How ESL and EFL classrooms differ. Available at
http://oupeltglobalblog.com/2011/07/12/how-esl-and-efl-classrooms-differ/
[Retrived: 7th
December 2013].
Parrott. (1996). In In Hockly, N. & Madrid, D. (n.d). Observation and research in the
language classroom. Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana: Spain. P. 54.
Peachey,N. (2003). Content-based Instruction. British council. Available at
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/content-based-instruction
[Retrieved: 20th december 2013].
Saunders et al., (1999). In Herrera, S. & Murphy, K. (2005). Mastering ESL and
bilingual methods. Boston: Pearson Education. P.274.
Scarcella, R. & Oxford, R. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The individual
in the communicative classroom. Available at http://journals.tc-
library.org/index.php/tesol/article/viewFile/19/24 [ 8th march 2014].

Universidadde Jaén
45
Short, D. J., Vogt, M., & Echevarria, J. (2008). The SIOP model for administrators.
Allyn & Bacon.
Wesche, M. B. (1993). Discipline-based approaches to language study: Research
issues and outcomes. Available at http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/cbi.html
[10th april 2014].

Universidadde Jaén
46
10. APPENDIX
10.1. Appendix 1: Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D. (2000). Making content
comprehensible to English language Learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.

Universidadde Jaén
41
10.2. Appendix 2: Lesson plan samples
SIOP LESSON PLAN TEMPLATE
Teacher D:
Third grade students
STANDARTS:
Describes patterns with numbers and identifies missing elements
THEME: SEQUENCES AND PATTERNS
LESSON TOPIC: SEQUENCES AND PATTERNS
OBJECTIVES: Describe patterns and sequences and
complete the missing elements.
LANGUAGE: use the right words, math key vocabulary and
communicative language.
CONTENT: The student is going to be able to complete
patterns, to write numbers, identify them and count.
LEARNING STRATEGIES: games, exercises, worksheets
COGNITION (LOTS- HOTS): Understand, practice and apply.
COMMUNICATION: Pair work in the competition activity and
group work to complete the number chart cooperatively.
MATERIALS: worksheets, visuals, notebooks, elements
from their pencil case
CITEZENSHIP: Students are going to learn how important
numbers are when counting sums and doing estimations.
MOTIVATION:
We are going to start with a counting game. Every student
is going to say a number in the right order, for example,
student 1 says number 1; student 2 says the number 2 and
so on. The students that don´t say the correct number,
don´t participate anymore. They have 2 chances.
PRESENTATION: after that exercise we are going to discuss
what we are working, what that is, the objectives.
PRACTICE AND APPLICATION:
We are going to talk about what counting is; if they use

Universidadde Jaén
42
it in real life, in what occasions and so on. I´m going
to gove them a paper and they have to draw those
occasions where they use counting.
After that, they have to complete a 100 chart with the
missing numbers.
We are going to do a competition, about writing numbers.
(Individually and in groups)
They are going to complete worksheets about sequences.
REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT:
They are going to complete a worksheet about sequences
and writing numbers and after that, they will change
papers
and compare their answers.
Citizenship:
Students are given paper money. Then they will follow
directions in terms of given amounts of money. They will
have to find the place value, round up, round down and
share the money. The goal is that they realize how
important it is the place value and the big difference a
digit can make.
Reflection:
Students moved well from LOTS to HOTS. I am very happy
with the result of higher-order thinking skills because
my third grade students were able to create challenging
situations and negotiate with the value of the paper
money used in the activity. At the end of the class, the
students did not want to stop and wanted to continue with
the class even when the bell rang. A very meaningful
activity, and we will have to do it again.

Universidadde Jaén
43
SIOP Lesson Plan
Teacher: Teacher C
Subject/Class:6th
grade Math
Date: April 1st
to April 7th
Content: Units of length
Teaching aims
Learning outcomes
Know:
Units of length (cm, dm, m, hm, dam,
km)
Be able to:
Identify the different units of length.
Do the conversion of the different
units.
Assessment
Can the learners……
Solve the quiz individually converting
units of length and finding the area and
the perimeter of different geometrical
shapes.
Finish the worksheet
Actively participate in the class
Do and solve the homework properly.
Communication
Language and content objectives
Language of learning
Units of length
Conversion
Unit of measurement
Width
length
Language for learning
Written practice.
Pair work/group work
Conversion
Solving problems: steps
Language through
learning
Discussion:
In what specific
situations we use km, m,
com in order to measure
the distance or the length
of the objects?
Working with others,
discussing after watching
a video.

Universidadde Jaén
44
Cognition
Lower-order thinkingskills
Understand
Apply
Interpret
Higher-order thinking skills
convert
Compare
Reason
Evaluate
Solve problems
Citizenship
Discussion: When we might need in our context to add and subtract fractions?
Procedure
Stages
Warm
up
Vocabul
ary input
Content
input
Discussi
on
Practice
Activities
Teacher will project a game in order to introducethe topic. Students
will have to identify what units of measurement they will need to use
in order to measure different objects.
http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks2/math
s/measures/index.htm
Teacher will do a revue in the vocabulary needed for the lesson.
Length units
Conversion
Width
Length
Height
Teacher will project a video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrthDhAadjI,then she will elicit
on the board the different units of measurement, and how to do the
conversions when needed.
Students will discuss in what specific situations they have to use km,
dm, cm, m, and mm in their everyday life.
Students will complete a workshop in which they will have to answer
several questions. Starting in the process of identification moving to
the conversion of units of length and finally solving problems.
In what specific situations do we use km, m, cm in order to measure the distance or the length of the objects?

Universidadde Jaén
45
Evaluati
on
Teacher will evaluate the students by using a written test.
Reflection:
I did not have too much time to get my students to do extra
conversion exercises. However, the game at the end of the activity
was an excellent way to recycle knowledge and use a formative
assessment tool with SIOP. Next week, I will probably try using a game
as a warm-up activity and another one to wrap it up to keep my sixth
graders more engaged.

Universidadde Jaén
46
10.3. Appendix 3. Written evaluation
SIOP EXAM
6 GRADE
NAME:
LOTS
1. Interpreting information
Three classrooms from Liceo Taller San Miguel collected
papers and newspapers for a recycling campaign.
4B collected 120.75 kilograms
5A collected 210.5 Kilograms
5B collected 194.86 Kilograms
a. How many kilograms of newspaper did 4B and 5A
collect all together?
b. How many pounds (lb) there are between what
classroom 5A and classroom 5B collected?
c. How many pounds of newspaper did all the classrooms
collect in total?
2. Understand the information.
The fastest animals in the world are the cheetah which
reaches 31.67 meters per second
; the pronghorn with 27.22 meters per second
and the black wildebeest with
22.22 meters per second.
a. How much more does the cheetah
runs than the pronghorn? Please justify your answer.
b. What is the difference between the speeds of the
first and the third fastest animal in the world?
HOTS
3. Evaluate and correct.
Without doing the multiplications determine which ones

Universidadde Jaén
47
are not correct.
a. Why can you determine which multiplications are not
correct? Please justify.
b. Write the correct answers when the multiplications
are not correct.
4. Solving a problem.
Each one of Juan´s horses eats in a week one and a half
bags of food. Each bag has 47.75 kg.
a. How many kilograms of food does each horse eat in a
week?
b. In order to feed all the horses in one week, how
many kilograms of food does Juan need?
c. How many kilograms of food does Juan have to buy in
order to feed all the horses in one month?
5. Creating a problem.
Using the lengths of the different cables please create
and solve an addition problem. Remember to use the steps.
(Understand, plan, solve and check).

Universidadde Jaén
49
10.4. Appendix 4: The grocery store project.

Universidadde Jaén
50
10.5. Appendix 5: Training material sample

Universidadde Jaén
51
10.6. Appendix 6: Lesson plan checklist

Universidad de Jaén
52
SIOP LESSON PLANNING SHEET
Name: _________________________________ Date: _________________
Assignment:_____________________________________
Lesson Preparation
 1. Write content objectives clearly for students.
 2. Write language objectives clearly for students.
 3. Choose content concepts appropriate for age and educational background level of students.
 4. Identify supplementary materials to use (graphs, models, visuals).
 5. Adapt content (e.g., text, assignment) to all levels of student proficiency.
 6. Plan meaningful activities that integrate lesson concepts (e.g., surveys, letter writing,
simulations, constructing models) with language practice opportunities for
reading, writing, listening, and/or speaking.
Building Background
 7. Explicitly link concepts to students’ backgrounds and experiences.
 8. Explicitly link past learning and new concepts.
 9. Emphasize key vocabulary (e.g., introduce, write, repeat, and highlight) for students.
Comprehensible Input
 10. Use speech appropriate for students’ proficiency level (e.g., slower rate, enunciation, and
simple sentence structure for beginners).
 11. Explain academic tasks clearly.
 12. Use a variety of techniques to make content concepts clear (e.g., modeling, visuals, hands-
on activities, demonstrations, gestures, body language).
Strategies
 13. Provide ample opportunities for students to use strategies, (e.g., problem solving,
predicting, organizing,
summarizing, categorizing, evaluating, self-monitoring).
 14. Use scaffolding techniques consistently (providing the right amount of support to move
students from one level of
understanding to a higher level) throughout lesson.
 15. Use a variety of question types including those that promote higher-order thinking skills
throughout the lesson
literal, analytical, and interpretive questions).
Interaction
 16. Provide frequent opportunities for interactions and discussion between teacher/student
and among students, and encourage elaborated responses.
 17. Use group configurations that support language and content objectives of the lesson.
 18. Provide sufficient wait time for student responses consistently.
 19. Give ample opportunities for students to clarify key concepts in L1 as needed with aide,
peer, or L1 text.
Practice/Application
 20. Provide hands-on materials and/or manipulatives for students to practice using new
content knowledge.
 21. Provide activities for students to apply content and language knowledge in the classroom.
 22. Provide activities that integrate all language skills (i.e., reading, writing, listening, and
speaking).
Lesson Delivery
 23. Support content objectives clearly.

53
 24. Support language objectives clearly.
 25. Engage students approximately 90-100% of the period (most students taking part and on
task throughout the lesson).
 26. Pace the lesson appropriately to the students’ ability level.
Review/Assessment
 27. Give a comprehensive review of key vocabulary.
 28. Give a comprehensive review of key content concepts.
 29. Provide feedback to students regularly on their output (e.g., language, content, work).
 30. Conduct assessments of student comprehension and learning throughout lesson on all
lesson objectives (e.g., spot checking, group response.)

54
10.7. Appendix 7: Questionnaire on google forms.

FUNIBER - John Morales: "Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign Language Learners"

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to FUNIBER - John Morales: "Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign Language Learners"

Similar to FUNIBER - John Morales: "Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign Language Learners" (20)

More from Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana (FUNIBER)

More from Fundación Universitaria Iberoamericana (FUNIBER) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

FUNIBER - John Morales: "Efficacy of the SIOP model in content teaching with Foreign Language Learners"