Navigating the Iceberg: Understanding BICS and CALP in English Language Learners

For educators working with English Learners (ELs), understanding the difference between Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) is fundamental. Coined by Dr. Jim Cummins, these two terms highlight distinct aspects of language proficiency, crucial for effective instruction and avoiding common pitfalls. While ELs might seem fluent in everyday conversation, a deeper look reveals an "iceberg" of linguistic demands.

BICS: The Tip of the Iceberg (Social Language)

BICS refers to the language skills needed for everyday, social interactions. This is the language ELs use on the playground, in the cafeteria, to chat with friends, or engage in casual conversations.

• Characteristics:

  • Context-embedded: Meaning is supported by non-linguistic cues like gestures, facial expressions, tone of voice, and the immediate environment.

  • Cognitively undemanding: Requires less complex thinking and abstract reasoning.

  • Examples: Asking for directions, telling a joke, ordering food, engaging in small talk, discussing weekend plans.

• Development Timeline: BICS typically develops relatively quickly, often within six months to two years of immersion in the target language (Cummins, 1984; Colorín Colorado). This rapid development can sometimes lead educators to mistakenly believe an EL is fully proficient in English, when in fact, they've only acquired social fluency.

CALP: The Submerged Majority (Academic Language)

CALP, on the other hand, is the language required for academic success across all content areas. It's the language of textbooks, lectures, essays, problem-solving, and abstract thinking.

• Characteristics:

  • Context-reduced: Meaning relies heavily on linguistic cues, with fewer non-linguistic supports.

  • Cognitively demanding: Requires higher-order thinking skills like analyzing, synthesizing, evaluating, inferring, and explaining complex concepts.

  • Examples: Writing a research paper, understanding a science lecture, participating in a debate, solving complex word problems, analyzing a literary text.

• Development Timeline: CALP takes significantly longer to develop than BICS, typically requiring five to seven years, or even longer for students who have had limited prior schooling (Cummins, 1984; Colorín Colorado). This is why an EL who can converse fluently may still struggle academically.

Which Develops First?

In most immersion contexts, BICS develops first. The immediate need for social interaction drives this initial acquisition. Students are motivated to communicate their basic needs and engage with peers, and the context-embedded nature of these interactions provides ample support. CALP, being more abstract and cognitively demanding, requires more time and explicit instruction to develop.

Strategies to Address BICS and CALP:

Effective EL instruction recognizes and addresses both BICS and CALP simultaneously, though with varying levels of emphasis depending on the student's proficiency and the task at hand.

Strategies to Develop BICS:

The goal is to provide frequent, low-stakes opportunities for authentic social interaction.

• Create a Low-Anxiety Environment: A welcoming classroom where students feel comfortable taking risks and making mistakes is crucial for oral language development (Big Books, by George!).

• Pair and Group Work: Facilitate structured opportunities for students to communicate with peers in informal settings. Think-Pair-Share, partner discussions, and collaborative games can boost conversational fluency.

• Role-Playing and Simulations: Engage students in real-world scenarios like ordering food, asking for directions, or making introductions.

• Focus on High-Frequency Vocabulary: Introduce and practice common words and phrases used in daily interactions.

• Utilize Visuals and Gestures: As BICS is context-embedded, visuals, gestures, and realia provide critical support for comprehension and expression.

Strategies to Develop CALP:

Developing CALP requires explicit instruction, consistent exposure to academic language, and strategic scaffolding within content areas.

• Explicit Academic Vocabulary Instruction:

  • Research Basis: Academic vocabulary is a strong predictor of reading comprehension and overall academic success (Nation, 2001).

  • In Practice: Pre-teach Tier 2 (high-frequency academic words like "analyze," "compare," "synthesize") and Tier 3 (content-specific terms) vocabulary. Use strategies like Frayer models, word walls, and semantic mapping. Encourage students to use these words in their speaking and writing (TEKS Guide).

• Scaffolding Academic Texts:

  • Research Basis: Scaffolding helps students access content that is just beyond their independent reach, aligning with Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1978).

  • In Practice: Chunk long texts, use graphic organizers (e.g., Venn diagrams, cause-and-effect charts), provide sentence frames or starters for written responses and discussions, and utilize "think-alouds" to model comprehension strategies (Student Achievement Solutions). Visuals are also crucial for making abstract concepts comprehensible (Big Books, by George!).

• Promote Academic Discussions and Writing:

  • Research Basis: Engaging in cognitively demanding talk and writing is essential for developing CALP and higher-order thinking (Cummins as cited in Wright, 2010).

  • In Practice: Structure debates, Socratic seminars, and argumentative essays. Provide clear expectations and models for academic language use in both oral and written forms. Offer targeted feedback on academic language features.

• Leverage L1 and Prior Knowledge:

  • Research Basis: Cummins' Common Underlying Proficiency (CUP) theory suggests that skills and knowledge learned in L1 transfer to L2. Conceptual knowledge developed in one language makes input in the other language more comprehensible (Cummins, 2000).

  • In Practice: Activate students' prior knowledge before new units. Allow discussion in L1 where possible, or provide L1 resources like glossaries or brief summaries to build conceptual understanding before diving into English.

• Content-Embedded Language Instruction:

  • Research Basis: Academic language is best acquired when it's taught within the context of meaningful content (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2017 - SIOP Model).

  • In Practice: ELA and content teachers should collaborate with ESOL specialists to embed explicit language objectives into their subject lessons. This means teaching not just what something is, but how to talk and write about it academically.

Conclusion:

The distinction between BICS and CALP is not a barrier to learning, but a powerful tool for educators. By understanding that social fluency does not equate to academic proficiency, teachers can set appropriate expectations and implement targeted strategies. Developing both BICS and CALP is essential for English Learners to not only navigate social interactions but to truly thrive academically, engage with complex ideas, and achieve their full potential.

References:

Avery, P., & Ehrlich, S. (1992). Teaching American English pronunciation. Oxford University Press.

Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. College-Hill Press.

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Pearson.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wright, W. E. (2010). Foundations for teaching English language learners: Research, theory, policy, and practice. Caslon Publishing. (Used as a general reference for Cummins' work as cited in multiple sources).