All recommendations preserve the Stage 1 understandings, transfer goals, and AISC strand rubric. EAL access changes the path to demonstration; it does not change what students must demonstrate.
1. Operating principles
Five commitments shape every move in this guide. When a strategy in section 6 or 7 seems heavy-handed, check it against these: the principles win.
1.1 Access is not accommodation
EAL students are not getting a watered-down version of the course. They are getting the same understandings, the same authentic deliverables, the same rubric. What changes is the linguistic load on the path between input and output, not the cognitive demand of either end.
Concretely: an EAL student doing the Unit 5 Position Paper still has to take a stakeholder perspective, marshal evidence, and defend a stance under questioning. They may use a bilingual dictionary, draft initial structure in L1, work with an AI translator to refine English phrasing, and use sentence stems. The intellectual work is identical. The scaffolds carry only the language.
1.2 Rigor lives in the rubric, not the prose style
The AISC strand rubric scores K/U, T/T, and C separately. EAL students often produce strong K/U and T/T evidence well before their Communication scores catch up. That is expected and correct. Resist the urge to penalize a student in K/U because their English is bumpy. If the science thinking is sound, the K/U score reflects that.
1.3 Visuals and structure carry meaning
Every dense reading in this course should be accompanied by a visual scaffold: a diagram, a flowchart, a labeled image, a 2×2, a timeline. Visuals are not decorative; they are how meaning gets into the student before the English does. Same goes for structure: a Position Paper template with named sections (Stakeholder, Stance, Evidence, Counter, Recommendation) is not a crutch. It is a thinking tool that benefits every student and is essential for EAL learners.
1.4 Oral first, written second, polished last
EAL students often understand and reason far ahead of their ability to produce polished written English. Build oral checkpoints into every assessment so you can see thinking before you see prose. The Defense Panel, Stakeholder Q&A, and peer-talk components exist partly because of this.
1.5 AI is the EAL student's most powerful tool: when documented
Translation, paraphrase, vocabulary explanation, sentence rewording. These are exactly what large language models do well. EAL students should be using AI more heavily than monolingual students, not less, with full disclosure under the AI Documentation Protocol.
A bilingual student who drafts in Tamil, gets an AI translation, edits for accuracy, and submits with a documented AI section has done legitimate, defensible scholarship. A monolingual student who pastes the prompt into ChatGPT and submits the output has not. The protocol distinguishes between them; we should too.
2. Reading strategies for dense source material
This course is reading-heavy. Unit 1 includes NASA exoplanet briefs; Unit 4 includes IPCC excerpts; Units 5 and 6 require students to read stakeholder testimony, policy briefs, and scientific literature. Use the following sequence for any reading over ~400 words.
2.1 The pre-read move (3–5 minutes, always)
- Show students the title, headings, figures, and any bolded terms before they read a single paragraph.
- Have them predict in 1–2 sentences: "What is this text going to argue or describe?"
- Surface 2–3 vocabulary terms from the Master Vocabulary Reference that will appear. Show the visual cue. Read the sentence frame aloud.
- State the reading purpose: "You are reading this to extract X." Never assign "just read this", always pair with a deliverable.
2.2 Chunking and annotation
Break long readings into chunks of 2–3 paragraphs. After each chunk, students do one of the following:
- One-sentence summary in their own words (English or L1, your call).
- Pull one quote and mark it with a code: E (evidence), C (claim), Q (question), V (vocabulary I don't know).
- Draw a quick sketch of the system or process described.
This is not optional for EAL students. Reading-without-annotation lets students slide through dense material without comprehension, and you find out at the assessment that it never landed.
2.3 L1 bridging
Allow and encourage students to read difficult passages once in English, then read a translated version in L1, then return to English with comprehension built up. Google Translate, DeepL, and modern LLM translators are all acceptable for this purpose. Be explicit: this is a comprehension strategy, not a shortcut. The student still has to produce work in English. L1 reading is scaffolding; English is the medium of demonstration.
2.4 Reciprocal reading in mixed-proficiency pairs
Pair an EAL student with a stronger English reader. Both read the chunk silently. The stronger reader summarizes aloud. The EAL student asks one clarifying question. They switch roles on the next chunk. This is not tutoring: both partners benefit, because the act of summarizing exposes the stronger reader's own gaps.
3. Writing scaffolds
The course asks for several extended written products. Each has a template in the Assessment Support package. The scaffolds below are layered on top of those templates for EAL learners.
3.1 Sentence stems by rhetorical move
Most science writing in this course performs a small set of rhetorical moves. EAL students benefit from having sentence stems pre-loaded for each move.
| Move | When you use it | Sentence stems |
|---|---|---|
| Stating a claim | Position Paper, Op-Ed, Defense | The evidence supports the claim that ___. · Based on ___, I argue that ___. · My position is that ___ because ___. |
| Citing evidence | Source Dossier, all reports | According to ___ (source, year), ___. · The data show that ___ (Source X). · ___ provides evidence for this: ___. |
| Acknowledging limits | OPVL, Source Dossier, Climate Brief | A limitation of this source is ___. · This evidence cannot tell us ___. · The author's purpose was ___, which means ___. |
| Comparing | Goldilocks, Energy Mix, Land Plan | Compared to ___, ___ has ___. · Unlike ___, ___ shows ___. · Both ___ and ___ share ___, but they differ in ___. |
| Reasoning from data | All assessments | Because ___, we can conclude that ___. · If ___, then ___, which suggests ___. · The pattern in the data indicates ___. |
| Counter-arguing | Position Paper, Op-Ed, Defense | Some would argue that ___. However, ___. · While it is true that ___, the stronger case is ___. · A reasonable objection is ___, but the evidence shows ___. |
| Recommending action | Climate Brief, Land Plan, Op-Ed | I recommend that ___ because ___. · The most defensible course of action is ___. · Decision-makers should ___ in order to ___. |
| Reflecting | AI Documentation, Year-End Synthesis | I used AI to ___ because ___. · My thinking changed when ___. · If I were to revise this, I would ___. |
3.2 The L1-draft / L2-refine workflow
- Student plans the structure in English using the assessment template.
- Student drafts the substantive content in their L1 if that gets ideas out faster.
- Student translates with AI assistance: DeepL, Google Translate, or an LLM.
- Student reads the English translation against their L1 original and checks for meaning loss. This is where the real learning happens.
- Student revises the English directly, using sentence stems and the Master Vocabulary Reference for key terms.
- Student documents the AI translation step under the AI Documentation Protocol.
This workflow takes longer than monolingual drafting. Build that into your block planning. A Position Paper that takes a monolingual student 2 blocks may take an EAL student 3.
3.3 Glossary-first vocabulary substitution
Before submitting, EAL students should run a vocabulary check: are they using the precise terms from the Master Vocabulary Reference? Or have they paraphrased around them? "The hot stuff at the bottom moves up" should become "Convection in the mantle drives plate motion."
This is not about sounding sophisticated. It is about precision: in science, "hot stuff" and "the mantle" are not synonyms, and the rubric (Communication strand) rewards precise scientific language.
3.4 Peer review with structure focus, not grammar focus
When EAL students peer-edit each other (or are edited by L1 English peers), instruct the reviewer to focus on: Is the claim clear? Is the evidence connected to the claim? Is the structure logical? Not: Are the verbs conjugated correctly? Grammar correction without structural feedback teaches EAL students that their job is to mimic native phrasing rather than to think rigorously. Reverse that.
4. Oral defense and discussion supports
Every unit assessment has an oral component. For EAL students, oral defense is simultaneously the highest-anxiety component and the place where you most often see their actual thinking.
4.1 Pre-defense preparation
- Give EAL students the question bank in advance. The U3 Defense Panel role-cards, the U1 Stakeholder Q&A bank, etc. are not secret. Sharing them is not lowering the bar; it is letting students prepare in their second language the way they would in their first.
- Allow students to prepare written notes or bullet points. They may not read verbatim, but they may consult notes between questions.
- Run a private rehearsal: student answers one or two questions to you or a peer the day before. You give feedback on content, not delivery.
4.2 During the defense
- Allow longer response wait time. 8–12 seconds of silence is normal for an EAL student composing a complex answer. Do not rescue them by rephrasing the question after 3 seconds.
- Permit clarifying requests. "Could you say that another way?" is a legitimate move that strong scholars use too.
- Allow code-switching for technical terms if a student blanks on the English. If they say "the process the Japanese call 地震" while gesturing, they have demonstrated understanding of an earthquake. Score it as such.
- Use the rubric's Communication strand to capture language production, not the K/U or T/T strands. This is the entire point of having separate strands.
4.3 Discussion-protocol supports
- Think-Pair-Share with L1 allowance in the pair: students may discuss in any language in the pair phase; share-out is English.
- Talk tokens or talking sticks: every student gets 2–3 tokens per discussion; must spend at least one. Forces equity of airtime.
- Written-first protocol: students draft a 2-sentence response, then read or paraphrase.
5. AI as an EAL partner: norms, not loopholes
This course already uses AI heavily. EAL students should use it more, not less, with the same disclosure expectations.
5.1 Legitimate AI uses for EAL students
| Use | Why it's legitimate |
|---|---|
| Translation (L1 ↔ English) | A bilingual dictionary on steroids. The student still has to read, comprehend, and decide what to do with the translated content. |
| Vocabulary explanation in L1 | Asking an LLM to explain "convection cell" in Hindi (or any L1) gives access to the concept faster than an English-only definition. Document it. |
| Sentence rewording for clarity | "Make this sentence clearer in English" is the same move a skilled L1 writer asks a colleague for. |
| Grammar checking after a draft is complete | Like Grammarly: corrects surface errors without changing meaning. Disclose. |
| Practicing oral responses | The Defense Practice Partner works in any L1 the model supports. Use it in the student's strongest language for content rehearsal, then in English for delivery. |
| Comprehension check on a reading | "Did I understand this paragraph correctly?": student summarizes, AI checks. Documented. |
5.2 Uses that cross the line: for ANY student, EAL or not
| Use | Why it's a problem |
|---|---|
| Asking AI to write the deliverable | This is the U0 line. "Write me a position paper on the Cauvery dispute" produces work the student cannot defend and cannot honestly claim. |
| Submitting AI translation without reading it | If the student cannot explain what they submitted, they have not done the assessment. The translation is a tool: the student must still own the content. |
| Hiding AI use | Undisclosed AI is academic dishonesty. The Documentation Protocol exists to make disclosure easy, not punitive. |
5.3 The disclosure pattern for EAL-heavy AI use
In the AI Documentation section of any deliverable, EAL students should be specific:
"I drafted sections 1 and 3 of this position paper in Tamil because I could think through the stakeholder logic faster in my first language. I used Google Translate to produce an initial English version, then I revised the English directly using the U5 sentence stems and the Master Vocabulary Reference. I used Claude to check the grammar of my counter-argument paragraph. All claims, evidence, and conclusions are mine."
That is a complete, defensible, honest disclosure. It is not a confession; it is a description of skilled scholarship in a second language.
6. Per-assessment EAL moves
Quick reference: the specific scaffold layered onto each unit's authentic deliverable. Use this section during planning, not during the class.
U0: Source Dossier
Pre-teach OPVL using the Master Vocabulary visual cue. Have students read one source in L1, OPVL it in L1, then translate the OPVL analysis to English using the U0 sentence frames. For the AI source: explicitly allow the student to interact with the AI partner (Skeptic, Source Evaluator) in their L1 if the model supports it. Defense peer-talk: pair EAL student with an English-strong peer using reciprocal protocol (Section 2.4).
U1: Goldilocks Report
Habitability framework template is already provided. EAL students get the additional move of color-coding each criterion as MEETS / PARTIAL / FAILS: visual coding reduces the writing demand for the comparison step. Stakeholder Q&A (NASA evaluation committee): give the question bank in advance. Allow notes. Planet Hunter is most useful in English; Systems Diagrammer can output in L1.
U2: Landscape Reading
Pair EAL students with stronger English peers for the initial fieldwork annotation. Both annotate the same photograph or map; reciprocal-reading protocol. Biography template is structural scaffold; sentence frames from Section 3 apply. Planning-audience share-out: rehearse with you privately the day before; allow notes on stage.
U3: Engineering Portfolio + Defense Panel
Tectonic City Builder simulator is largely visual: accessible across language backgrounds. EAL students may benefit from a printed glossary of the simulator's UI labels in L1. Engineering Journal uses heavy sentence stems for the design-rationale entries. Defense Panel: role-cards in advance, question bank shared, longer wait time, permission to consult notes between questions.
U4: Chennai Climate Brief
IPCC excerpts are dense. Mandatory pre-read protocol (Section 2.1) before any assigned reading. Chunk readings to 2–3 paragraphs. Climate Data Reference is graphical: most accessible component of the unit for EAL students. Lead with it before the prose readings. Brief template + Policy Panel Q&A bank shared in advance. Allow L1 drafting per Section 3.2 workflow.
U5: Stakeholder Map + Position Paper
Stakeholder perspective-taking is harder in a second language because cultural framing varies. Explicitly discuss this with EAL students: "How is this stakeholder's view shaped by their cultural context, and how do you translate that into the rhetorical conventions of an English-language position paper?" Position Paper sentence stems are essential here, especially counter-arguing and acknowledging limits. Stakeholder Roundtable: assign roles in advance, allow rehearsal, permit consultation of notes.
U6: Sustainable Land Plan
Optimization Worksheet is largely quantitative: accessible regardless of language. Lead with the math and the spatial reasoning. Regional Planning Board defense: high oral demand. Apply all Section 4.2 supports. Multi-objective tradeoff language ("At the cost of biodiversity, we gain ___") benefits from explicit sentence stems.
U7: Energy Mix Design + Op-Ed
Op-Ed is the year's most demanding audience-format. EAL students often write very tight, structurally clean op-eds because the sentence stems and rhetorical-move framework give them a scaffold they may not have in their L1 academic writing yet. Op-Ed Editor AI partner is high-value here: use it heavily for clarity feedback, disclose its use. Year-End Synthesis: allow L1 reflection draft, English final. Reflection is metacognitive, not language-performance.
7. Day-one and week-one moves
7.1 Day one: class-wide moves that benefit EAL students
- Hand out the Master Vocabulary Reference to every student. Frame it as: "This is your reference document for the year." This normalizes the document so no one has to ask for it.
- Set the AI Documentation Protocol expectation on day one. EAL students will use AI more; the protocol exists so that use is honored, not hidden.
- Establish the "longer wait time is fine" norm explicitly. Say it out loud to the class: "I will give you 8–10 seconds to think before I move on. That silence is for everyone."
- Demonstrate L1 use as legitimate by sharing your own bilingual or multilingual moments if you have them. Even a one-line aside normalizes language-mixing as scholarly behavior, not a deficit.
7.2 Week one: student conversation
In the first week, have a 5-minute private conversation with each student you suspect has EAL needs. Ask:
- What is your strongest academic language?
- Do you read scientific texts in any language besides English? Which?
- What worked for you last year in a content-heavy class?
- What was hard, and how did you handle it?
Do not promise specific accommodations in this conversation. You are gathering information. Make notes. Calibrate Section 6 moves to what the student tells you.
7.3 Coordinating with EAL specialists
If AISC has dedicated EAL specialists, loop them in within the first two weeks. Share: the Master Vocabulary Reference, the per-unit Pre-Teach Handouts, the course year-map. Ask them to flag any unit where they predict a specific student will struggle.
7.4 What NOT to do
- Do not seat all EAL students together. Mix proficiency levels for reciprocal reading and pair-share protocols.
- Do not announce who the EAL students are. The Master Vocabulary Reference, sentence stems, and scaffolds go to the whole class. Quiet equity beats visible accommodation.
- Do not let pace pressure override pre-teach. A 5-minute pre-teach at the start of a 5-block reading sequence recovers more than 5 minutes of later confusion.
- Do not score EAL students lower on K/U or T/T because their English prose is rough. Score Communication separately.
8. EAL planning checklist (per unit)
| Move | When |
|---|---|
| Distribute Pre-Teach Handout for this unit | Block 1 of the unit |
| Identify dense readings; plan pre-read scaffold for each | Lesson planning |
| Flag which Section 3 sentence stems apply to this unit's deliverable | Lesson planning |
| Share assessment question bank / role-cards in advance | Block 2–3 of the unit |
| Build in oral checkpoint before final written submission | Mid-unit |
| Set up pair / discussion protocols with mixed proficiency | Throughout |
| Confirm AI Documentation expectations re: translation + grammar use | Block 1 of the unit |
| Allow extra block for L1-draft / L2-refine workflow if assessment is writing-heavy | Pacing |
| Score K/U and T/T independently of Communication | Grading |
Closing
None of this is about lowering the bar. The students in this course, every one of them, multilingual or not, are doing the same intellectual work: reading scientific source material critically, building argued positions from evidence, defending those positions in front of an audience, and reflecting on their own thinking and tool use.
What EAL access work does is keep the language load from masking the thinking. When you score a student's Position Paper at a 7–8 on K/U and a 5–6 on Communication, you are saying: this student's understanding of water-rights stakeholder dynamics is excellent, and their English prose is still developing. Both statements are true. Both belong in the gradebook. Neither erases the other.
Use this guide alongside the Master Vocabulary Reference and the per-unit Pre-Teach Handouts (linked from the EAL hub). The three documents are a set; each one assumes the other two.