Paper+Draft

 Abstract This language analysis project is written from the perspective of first and second semester graduate students of ESL Education. The paper attempts, first, to dissect and analyze the oral and written English language skills of Fatema [1] , a lower-intermediate level ELL studying at George Mason University (GMU) as an ESL student. As a sample of oral language, an interview was conducted, while two writing samples were also collected. Second, the paper introduces some general recommendations for the improvement of her language skills. Overall, the paper is divided into four main sections: (1) background information, (2) analysis of oral and written samples of language usage, (3) general recommendations, and (4) conclusion. Fatema, a 27 year-old woman from Saudi Arabia, was chosen as a candidate for this project because of her eagerness to participate and her lower-intermediate language level. She has been studying ESL at GMU for two months and has some background in EFL from high school courses in Saudi Arabia. Background Fatema is a 27 year-old Muslim woman from eastern Saudi Arabia. Wearing her //hijab// with high heels and fashionable handbags, it is easy to see that Fatema is not an ordinary woman from Saudi Arabia. The fact that she is even studying in the U.S., while her fiancé awaits her in Saudi Arabia, is a major indicator that she represents a minority of Muslim women who can afford to enjoy certain freedoms. She is the youngest of five children, having two sisters and two brothers, while her mother is a housewife and her father’s profession is unknown. Fatema has also completed her B.A. in Managerial Information Systems back home and dreams to become a professor at a U.S. university. She would love for her fiancé, a journalist, to move to the U.S. and for her future children to grow up here [2]. Even if that is not possible, her goal is to return to Saudi Arabia with a more informed understanding of the U.S., to be shared with her family and community [3]. This is her first experience living in the U.S.   

It was very apparent from the beginning of our conversation with Fatema that she is highly motivated to learn English. She believes speaking English is very important for her career, and she is taking extra steps to aid in the speed of her learning. For instance, she told us that she watches videos on YouTube to help her learn, and she also reads websites in English. Another indicator that she is highly motivated is that she is looking for American friends to practice her English with, and is not actively seeking friendships with other students who speak Arabic. This led us to assume that Fatema is very committed and willing to leaver her comfort zone in order to meet her goal of mastering the English language. Motivation can be an indicator of the success or failure in learning a second language as an adult. It would appear that instrumental motivation is driving Fatema to learn because she specifically told us she is learning English to help herself in the job market (Baker, 2006, p. 132). She also seems interested in English for cultural reasons, although this does not seem to be as prevalent of a reason.

Analysis of Oral & Written Samples // Oral Language Assessment //   We met Fatema through the English Language Institute (ELI) that is run by GMU. After speaking with her for a few moments, it was evident that she would be an ideal candidate for this project. While she could carry a conversation with us during our initial meeting, it was apparent that her english was limited. Fatema seemed very excited and cooperative about the becoming the participant for our project.

A 25-minute interview, of which 20 minutes have been transcribed, was conducted on GMU’s campus during an hour lunch break in between Fatema’s classes. We asked Fatema questions about her family, education, life in Saudi Arabia and Fairfax, VA, and her dreams for the future. None of the questions were given to her before the interview, making the session a fairly spontaneous interchange. The questions were mostly open-ended with high flexibility, in which they were asked in random order to maintain a more conversational style interview. A follow-up discussion session was also conducted (but not transcribed) to expand our knowledge of her background, which included information about her family, ESL education, and level of L1/Arabic. In order to analyze her oral language skills, we made criterion-referenced assessments with the IB’s MYP Standard (i.e., intermediate level) language assessment criteria [4]. We later compared this to the language rating scale used by Fairfax County Public Schools’ ESL teachers. The IB MYP criteria for oral assessment are divided into two sections, in which the first section, Criterion A, rates the ESL student on ability to communicate effectively. The second section rates the student on correct usage of vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation. Each criterion has five sections of descriptors that fit on a scale from level 0 to level 7-8, the latter being the highest level. Band 1-2 corresponds to the beginner level, band 3-4 corresponds to the low intermediate level, band 5-6 corresponds to the high intermediate level, and band 7-8 corresponds to the advanced level. The scale of “Holistic Oral Language Scoring Rubric” developed by the Fairfax County Public Schools is divided into six sections from levels 1 to 6, 6 being the highest score. Levels 1-2 are placed in a beginner class, levels 3-4 are placed in an intermediate class, and levels 5-6 are places in an advanced class. 

After listening to the recorded interview multiple times and following the MYP descriptors of Criterion A, we placed Fatema at the lower end of level 5-6. The first descriptor fit Fatema well; she was able to communicate information clearly, though it was difficult to understand some of her more complex ideas.  For the most part, she maintained relevancy in answering questions and her opinions were usually justified. A rare example of an irrelevant answer was when we asked if she had an arranged marriage. She replied affirmatively but then gave the planned date of marriage, showing, therefore, no understanding of the expression. She also fit the second descriptor of level 5-6 in Criterion A since she was able to respond correctly to most questions, which demonstrates her fair level of understanding in a spontaneous situation. According to the final descriptor, Fatema was able to maintain the flow of conversation and occasional prompting from our end did not greatly interfere with communication.

For Criterion B of the oral assessment that considers vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation, we placed Fatema at level 3-4 overall.  She matches the first descriptor because her pronunciation often interfered with our understanding, as when she suggested the name “Rain Voice” as her pseudonym [5]. It was not until she wrote the name down that we were able to understand her meaning. Although we placed her at a level 3-4 based on the first descriptor, she did not fit the second descriptor in the sense that she used more than just a basic range of vocabulary. She understood more abstract terms such as //culture, freedom, liberty, resistant, values,// and //interact.//more complex grammatical structures such as //aside from// //.// She also attempted to use less literal phrases, such as //that’s a long story// and //I’m a special case.// EXPLAIN CONTEXT Therefore, in terms of vocabulary she seemed to fit a level 5-6 better. Conversely, her grammatical structures were basic and largely unvaried, and she spoke consistently in the present tense, which placed her at level 1-2. However, holistically speaking, we still felt that she fit the level 3-4 assessment, which also corresponded to the rating scale used by ESL teachers of Fairfax County Public Schools. This “Holistic Oral Language Scoring Rubric” also suggested that Fatema would fit a level 3. She was able to respond to our questions, but spoke hesitantly while searching for words as she internally translated directly from Arabic to English, and often omitted words (O’Malley & Valdez Pierce, 1996, p. 67). Based on these evaluations of her strengths and areas for oral language improvement, recommendations for further action will be given below.

//Oral Language Analysis and Interpretation//  During the interview, we noted some of Fatema's pronunciation errors. Although her pronunciation did not prevent us from understanding her overall, there were a few instances when we found it difficult to understand her speaking. These instances sometimes were a result of her (1) consistently rolled /r/, in words such as "Arabic" and "liberty"; (2) silent /h/ at the beginning of words (e.g. "human" pronounced as “youman”); (3) changing / <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> tʃ / to / ʃ/, ; (4) and replacing   <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">/ θ / with /d/. <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> It is worth noting, however, that after Fatema pronounced  <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">/  <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> tʃ / as / ʃ/    <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">, saying "changed" as "shanged", she did correct herself. This is an indicator she is at the point of recognizing and self correcting her own mistakes. <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">According to Ted Power, this also happens to be a common mistake for native Arabic speakers (www.btinternet.com). <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">On the other hand, the last pronunciation issue is interesting because it seems to contradict Power's list of common errors for native Arabic speakers. According to him, / θ / often becomes /s/, but we were unable to clarify this point, as we are all unfamiliar with the problems encountered by Arabic-speakers learning English.

Fatema's vocabulary seems to be fairly developed for someone at the low intermediate level of English learning. Vocabulary was the only area that she was assessed as a 5-6, the highest of the four areas. She could correctly use many conversational words, and had a good range of vocabulary using both high frequency and low frequency words. She used the term “liberty” more than once when "freedom" could have been more applicable to the context. This made us hypothesize that the ideas of "liberty" and "freedom" may be expressed as one word in Arabic. If so, this could be an example of “assumed synonymity” (Zughail, 1991). <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="color: rgb(229, 11, 11)"><span style="color: rgb(217, 13, 13)"> <span style="color: rgb(8, 7, 7)">As Zughail notes, "    <span style="color: rgb(8, 7, 7)"> assumed synonymity is where the learner assumes that a lexical item in English has the same reference sense, connotation, and register as its translation equivalent in Arabic.  <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="color: rgb(8, 7, 7)"><span style="color: rgb(229, 11, 11)"> (Insert citation)" Written Language Assessment Two different writing samples were collected on two separate occasions. The first writing sample was an assignment hand-written in class under test conditions. Fatema was asked to write a composition based on the following prompt: "Some people prefer to cook at home. Other people prefer to eat out (at a restaurant). Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer." This task did not require complex vocabulary or grammatical structures due to the familiarity of the topic. The second writing sample was written at our request. A topic was suggested, but she was given the opportunity to write freely on a topic of her choice. Fatema chose to express her feelings about her new experience here at GMU and in the U.S. This task required the use of more abstract vocabulary than her in-class assignment. This writing sample was also produced outside of our meeting time but unlike the first sample, was typed with computer word processing software. The fact that both writing samples were written outside of our meeting times increases the possibility that the works produced are not entirely her own. Furthermore, the use of computer software in the second sample would likely have influenced her spelling and grammar constructions if she used the help of spelling and grammar tools. As with the analyis of Fatema’s oral language, we used IB’s MYP language assessment criteria, which are also divided into two sections. The first section, Criterion C, attempts to rate the ESL student on ability to organize ideas and support ideas in a piece of writing. It is also split into 5 levels, 0 being the lowest and 7-8 being the highest. Based on both of her writing samples, we decided the descriptors for level 3-4 best fit Fatema’s organization of writing. She showed some difficulty in communicating information, supporting ideas, and attempting to structure her work. In addition, she used some basic cohesive devises, such as transitions between sentences.

After analyzing Fatema’s in-class writing sample, we concluded it would fit in the highest end of band 3-4 using the MYP Criterion D. On the other hand, her second writing sample fit a lower end of band 3-4. This discrepancy in apparent writing ability is most likely due to the fact that the first piece of writing required less complex vocabulary and less abstract ideas than the second piece. This relates to Cummins’ (1971) theory on basic interpersonal communication skills and cognitive/academic language proficiency, in which the latter takes significantly longer to achieve (approximately 5-8 years) than the former (approximately 2 years) (Baker, 2008, pp. 178-179). Overall we would place Fatema at a level 3-4 due to her use of a basic range of vocabulary and structures with occasional mistakes that sometimes interfered with communication. Futhermore, she occasionally made mistakes with spelling. These, however, seldom interfered with her message. Finally, she made an attempt to use an appropriate register which shows a sense of audience.

As with our oral assessment, we conferred with the Fairfax County Public Schools rating scale, the “Holistic Scoring Rubric for Writing Assessment” (O’Malley & Valdez Pierce, 1996, p. 142) to make a more informed judgment. According to this scale, we also found Fatema to be at a level 3, or intermediate level of writing because she expressed her ideas coherently, began to write paragraphs by organizing ideas, wrote primarily simple sentences, used high-frequency vocabulary, and made some grammatical errors that diminished communication. //Written Language Analysis and Interpretation// While taking a closer looked at Fatema’s writing samples, it is possible to point out some of her strengths and weaknesses. Fatema attempts to organize her writing in paragraphs that deal with one main idea each. However, she has some difficulty with the organization of her paragraphs. For example, her topic sentences tend to be too long and, therefore, confusing: //Actually I like eat at resturant, because it is comfortable for me, but I can’t go there everyday because I don’t have a car, but eventhough if I had a car, I wouldn’t go every day to resturant because I have some suspecious about the quality of food that is in resturant.// (see Appendix D) On the other hand, she shows a good understanding of the organization of an essay. This is particularly obvious in sample B (see Appendix D), where she includes an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Both of Fatema’s writing samples show some error patterns that need to be addressed. Fatema has difficulty in spelling some high frequency and low frequency words, such as “resturant” (restaurant), “suspecious” (suspicious), “reallity” (reality), “poplems” (problems), among others. Fatema’s spelling mistakes are especially evident in the sample she had to write in class under test conditions. As aforementioned, this might be due to the fact that she did not use computer word processing software. Fatema’s spelling skills were much better in sample B (see Appendix D). Another issue regarding Fatema’s writing skills is her punctuation. Fatema seems to be aware of the different pauses in a text; however, she uses usually commas to separate sentences instead of periods. In addition, she tends to capitalize the first word after a comma. This is particularly obvious in sample B (see Appendix D). //For me, **__B__**reathing the freedom is the first reason to coming USA**__,__** **__T__**he second is that I want to get good education that could not found it in any where except in USA**__,__** the third and not final (…) history.// (see Appendix D). When listening to Fatema speak, it is clear that she has some issues with verb tenses. She uses mainly the Simple Present, even when describing past events. However, her problem with verb tenses does not seem to transfer to her writing. She has a good command of present, past, future, and conditional. The same applies to word number. Both her writing samples demonstrate a good understanding of the difference between plural and singular nouns. As Zughail (1991) noted, ELLs, in particular Arabic students, are guilty of several lexical errors. Fatema gives evidence of at least three of them: assumed synonymity, literal translation, and confusion of binary terms. Assumed synonymity happens when a student assumes that two words have the same meaning and application in a sentence. For example, Fatema used the word “liberty” as a replacement for the word “freedom”. However, the word “liberty” was used in the wrong context. According to Zughail, the occurrence of this mistake has two possible explanations. The first is the fact that foreign language learners are encouraged to use synonyms. The second one is due to the learner’s dependence on bilingual dictionaries. Literal translation occurs when a word or expression are chosen that do not convey the meaning intended in the target language. Even though, we do not speak Arabic, we believe some of Fatema’s expressions could be a literal translation, such as “breathing of freedom” and “recognize the culture of America” (see Appendix D). Another possible explanation for the abovementioned expressions is Fatema’s creative use of the English language. Finally, Fatema showed some confusion of binary terms (relational opposites). An obvious example was her misuse of the words “teach” and “learn”: “When I com back to my country, I will __learn__ the new generation that the real face of America and American’s people”.

V. Exploratory Action Plan/General Recommendations //Writing Recommendations – Vocabulary and Grammar As mentioned above, Fatema often assumes synonymity, uses literal translations, and confuses binary terms. Since her use of literal translations can only be assumed, due to our lack of Arabic language knowledge, we have only provided recommendations for action to reduce assumption of synonymity and confusion of binary terms. We also provide a couple of general recommendations for writing. Synonymity can easily be assumed, when looking at dictionary definitions in any language, not just English. The subtle nuances that separate "synonyms" are often ignored in dictionary definitions, which are difficult to explain textually and within the limits of a dictionary. This, then, makes it easy for ELLs to make such common errors in usage: "'The lift is being fixed for the next days. During that time we regret that you will be unbearable'" (Zughol, 1991, para. 1). Or, for instance, when Fatema writes about cooking in her class assignment, she states, “Do you have any suggestions for my case?” In this context she is most likely using situation synonymously with case, but situation would be more appropriate. One direct approach to decrease the incorrect use of synonyms, or to improve understanding of subtle nuances in words, is through consulting more thorough dictionaries. By “thorough” we suggest dictionaries that, at the least, include sample sentences for each word. As for improving more accurate use of binary terms, Wong-Fillmore & Snow (2000) suggest that vocabulary should be learned in related groups “since many words are more meaningful when they are understood in connection with other words related to the same general topic” (p.18). In other words, Fatema should pay special attention to all the words that relate to learn, such as teach, student, classroom, classmate, instruction, knowledge, education, etc. Additionally, Wong-Fillmore & Snow (2000) point out that words that are morphologically related should also be learned in clusters. In other words, teach, teaching, teacher would be covered in the same lesson, paying detailed attention to the differences of each meaning. This would help lexical achievement, since understanding of word formation and oppositional meanings are examined in concert. As one general recommendation for improving writing, Fatema should definitely refer to the stages of the writing process to help her break down the task. She can also use self-assessment checklists to guide her through the process. O’Malley & Valdez Pierce (1996) identify three main stages of writing: “(1) prewriting, or motivation, discussion, and concept development; (2) writing, which takes place in classrooms or at home…; and (3) postwriting, in which students share their writing with others” (p. 138). To guide her in this process, a checklist like O’Malley & Valdez Pierce’s (1996) “Self-Assessment of Writing Dimensions” would be appropriate (p.156). The guideline requires that students look at purpose and organization, word and sentence use, mechanics and format, and finally editing aspects of their paper. In Maliha’s case, internalization of this process may be easy because of her experience of writing articles in Arabic back home. She could also refer to Purdue University’s writing center’s website, The Owl at Purdue, which offers more tools on creating collegial level work, such as writing outlines (http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/544/01/). Finally, another general recommendation for writing is that she can adopt the noticing-reformulation technique. This strategy is described in more detail below as a tool for improving pronunciation. It basically involves careful scrutiny of one’s own English language in direct comparison to a native speaker’s. For model essays, she could refer to Great Essays: An Introduction to Writing Essays by Folse, Muchmore-Vokoun & Solomon. Pronunciation Recommendations Before exploring our recommendations for Fatema to improve her pronunciation, we recognize that pronunciation is an area of language that might be especially difficult for her as an ELL. Both Woolfolk (2008) and McLaughlin (1992) suggest that achieving native-like accents are harder for older ELLs due to neurophysiological limitations. Woolfolk (2008) explains that unused neurons are “pruned” at early stages of brain development (p.25). This is why, for instance many adult Japanese ELLs have more difficulty hearing and reproducing /r/ and /l/ sounds because they are not necessary in Japanese. Thus, the neurons for recognizing those sounds would have been “pruned” at an early stage of development due to lack of use (p. 26). McLaughlin (1992) describes this phenomenon as “motor patters that have been fossilized in the first language” (para. 14). Taking this into consideration, as well as the fact that effective communication need not entail perfect replication of native-like accents, we feel that pronunciation should not take precedence over other aspects of her language learning. Fatima, however, does not agree with this sentiment and has taken the initiative to take an elective course focusing on English pronunciation. Nonetheless, we highlight below some ways in which Fatema might improve her pronunciation. One significant approach to for this can be achieved through the noticing-reformulation technique (Smith & Beckmann, 2005). There are 9 major steps in this technique which are: (1) selecting a text, (2) giving input, (3) noticing own speech, (4) listening to model input, (5) analyzing model, (6) noticing the gap, (7) reformulation, (8) informed input, (9) reflection (Smith & Beckmann, 2005, p. 2). Basically, this procedure requires that Fatema record herself reading a specific English text, compare it with a native-speaker’s reading of the same text, and scrutinize the differences between the two. After noticing the differences, a second reading would be made with, ideally, more informed pronunciation. Of course, the steps can be repeated as necessary. This noticing-reformulation model can also be adapted to other areas of language learning, such as writing and grammar (Smith & Beckmann, 2005, p. 1). One major drawback to the procedure, however, is that it does not involve spontaneous speech. Two other possible avenues for improving pronunciation are listening to audio books of personal interest on a regular basis. Another way to hear Standard English pronunciations are by using software that has audio clips of “correct” pronunciation. Interacting regularly with native speakers, watching English films, and listening to news in English, would, of course, be other advantageous avenues to improve overall oral and aural language.//

Limitations <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> One of the major limitations within the language analysis was that we felt the whole process was a bit subjective. In our opinion, we did not have the education background to correctly analyze the various forms of speech and how they would transfer over to the L2. Unfortunately, since none of the group members are experienced linguists, we were unable to analyze in depth her speaking and writing and how that related to her first language as compared to her use of the second language. In addition, we are relying on rubrics and other references for analysis when they might be subjective themselves. How do we determine what level a language learner should placed? How thin is the line from beginner level to intermediate? With only a twenty-six minute interview, it is hard to determine whether or not the sample would be an accurate illustration of the way that she would speak and in a social setting and how that differentiates from her speaking within the classroom. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Another major limitation that arose was the fact that none of the group members are Arabic speakers, nor do any of us have a firm grasp on Arabic grammar structure. This created an issue when trying to analyze why Fatema said certain words in a particular order. If any of the interviewers understood the Arabic language system the results of what level we placed our participant may have been different. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> We also felt that our lack of knowledge about how the English Language Institute (ELI) conducted Fatema’s classes put us (as researchers) at a disadvantage. Without the knowing the various ways in which her classes were structured, we were unable to see the process of her second language acquisition. This was one of the most common limitations that was addressed in Chapter 12 of the Baker book. Baker made sure to emphasize the a various limitations researchers were met with when conducting experiments and tried to analyze the information of the outcome rather then the process it took to get there (Baker, 2007). <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Unfortunately, during the process of the project, we had very limited scope in which to chose our participant from. We were very happy with the samples she gave us and the willingness she had to answering our questions and writing abstract feelings. However, the project might have been more insightful, had we had more time to observe to the participant. Throughout the analysis the issue of limited scope came up repeatedly as a limitation. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">

Lastly, we felt that we did not give Fatema enough information about how we were going to evaluate her samples (speaking and writing). Had the participant known the criteria which we were scrutinizing her with, it is very possible that she would have written things differently. However, we also did approached the analysis as bystanders, trying to take a view of educators but not allowing the participant to know what criteria her writing needed to satisfy. <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> >>     <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">
 * <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Lack of knowledge in L1 area
 * <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Limited in what we know about English Instruction
 * <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Limited scope
 * <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> Participant did not know about criteria used to rate her
 * <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> If she had known then she may have tested differently/coming at it from a bystanders view rather then educators view.

VI. Conclusions

This case study was an attempt to analyze second language acquisition, specifically concerning Fatema, an English language learner. In order to conduct this study, various SLA theories were referenced and applied throughout the project. Two sets of scales measuring English language proficiency were used to analyze and place Fatema individually. From our findings and interpretation, we created an exploratory action plan individualized for Fatema. It is our collective belief that our recommendations in the exploratory action plan would be very beneficial to her. Our approach to this project was without preconceived ideas regarding what we would find. When we began the project, we knew very little about Fatema. Our initial impressions of her English language proficiency after recording the oral sample were that she seemed to have a grasp on the English language, but there were definite mistakes in every area of assessment. It was not until we analyzed the oral and written samples in depth that we began to have a clear idea of her actual level. The analysis process was in depth within our group and we attempted to cover each area very carefully. Our findings were somewhat surprising compared to our initial impressions. As we compared Fatema to various SLA theories and assessment tools, we were better able to understand these theories as we had the chance to apply them to an actual person. One area we attempted to highly consider was Fatema's Arabic background. Had we more time and resources available, we would have liked to be able to do a more in depth analysis comparing her phrasing in English to Arabic. Fatema was an ideal participant for this project. She was cooperative and seemed to enjoy being the participant. Since her level of English language proficiency is at the lower intermediate level, there was an abundant amount of issues concerning her proficiency level for us to analyze and interpret. Aside from that, she was extremely kind, patient, and a very interesting person to get to know. This project has been an extraordinary learning tool for the entire group. As we collaborated throughout the project we were able to apply theories and concepts that are central to our education and ESOL educators. <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> References   <span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">Baker, Colin. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (2nd Edition). Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Fillmore, L. & Snow, C. (2000). What teachers need to know about language. Center for Applied Linguistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED99CO0008) Retrieved from ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) database. Folse, K., Muchmore-Vokoun, A., & Solomon, E. (2003). Great essays: An introduction to writing essays (2nd edition). Houghton Mifflin Co. Haley, M. & Austin, T. (2004). Content-based second language teaching and learning: An interactive approach. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. O’Malley, J.M & Valdez Pierce, L. (1996). Authentic assessment for English Language Learners: Practical approaches for teachers. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Searchinger, Gene (producer). (1995). Discovering human languages [Documentary]. New York: Equinox Films, Inc. Smith, J. & Beckmann, B. (2005). Improving Pronunciation Through Noticing-Reformulation Tasks. Retrieved June 28, 2008, from http://www.pho.ucl.ac.uk The Owl at Purdue (n.d.). Developing an outline. Retrieved June 29, 2008, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/544/01/

<span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> [1] A pseudonym for privacy protection. [2] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> See transcription of interview (Appendix C)  [3]  <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> See written sample (Appendix D)  [4]  <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> For IB MYP’s language assessment criteria, see Appendix B. The Standard level criteria was used because Fatema informed us beforehand that she was in the lower-intermediate ESL class at GMU. [5] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"> This part of the conversation was not transcribed.

<span style="font-size: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif">