| Popis: |
Background There has been an influx of students in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Ireland who arrive in the country without adequate English skills to fully participate in school. Governments and schools utilised a variety of methods to cater to these newcomer students. Across the aforementioned countries, numerous different approaches to English as an Additional Language (EAL) provision. These can be best categorised as placing newcomers in the mainstream classes (mainstreaming model) or withdrawing them for separate, isolated provision (withdrawal model). Research is lacking on the relative effectiveness of these two different models of newcomer EAL provision. Objectives This systematic review seeks to uncover the nature and extent of research on newcomer EAL provision in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Ireland. It aims to provide commentary on the relative effectiveness of different approaches and to determine whether policies aimed at newcomers are supported by solid evidence. Methods This review uses a best-evidence, systematic review approach to answer the research questions. The search string identified 3,332 records. Using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria the studies were screened for suitability. I evaluated the trustworthiness of each study based on study design and reporting practices. Results The review found 15 eligible studies, with six in each of Australia and the United Kingdom, two in Ireland and a solitary study conducted in Canada. Qualitative data was reported in each study, so a narrative synthesis was used. Researchers primarily conducted ethnographic studies to investigate how mainstreaming and withdrawal impacted newcomers and their emotional, social, and academic development. No records had a study design that was able to directly assess effectiveness of approaches, with comparisons between the two models non-existent. From observations and interviews with EAL stakeholders, researchers reported positive and negative aspects of both mainstreaming and withdrawal approaches. Mainstreaming was predominantly found to be exclusionary and academically unhelpful for newcomer students. Conversely, withdrawal approaches offered some tangible benefits for newly arrived students. Implications For researchers, this study shed a light on the lack of solid evidence which had empirically assessed the efficacy of approaches to newcomer EAL provision. Further research is desperately needed in this field as the current state of the field has resulted in nebulous, fragmentary, and inconsistent. With regards to policy, governments have not listened to the little evidence that does exist and instead have made policies in reaction to social movements that have little evidence to support them. The implications for policy makers and practitioners are therefore clear: re-evaluate current approaches to EAL provision and follow research suggestions as to the most effective model. |
