SUBSCRIBE

What is Academic Language?


The term academic language has been used a lot in the field of English as a second language education. What is it? You will probably get a different answer from each educator you ask. How do we support students in acquiring academic language? There are varying answers to this question as well. What we can agree on is that focusing on academic language is crucial for any educator working with multilingual learners, as it equips students with necessary tools that open the doors for future opportunity and access, both inside and outside the classroom.

In the late 1970s, Jim Cummins wrote about the idea that students could have different levels of English language depending on whether they were engaged in social language (basic interpersonal communication skills, or BICS) or academic language (cognitive academic language proficiency, or CALP). Subsequently, teachers began to determine the amount of support that multilingual learners needed to participate in and complete academic tasks at their grade level by their ability to have conversations about less formal social topics like family, sports, and everyday experiences. This line of thinking did multilingual students a great disservice because, many times, students needed more or different support to be successful academically.

Unfortunately, we continue to see these scenarios in schools and classrooms quite frequently. Often, the dedicated English language development support for students who reach an intermediate level of proficiency drops off because they are able to have conversations and function well socially in the classroom environment. It’s understandable that this happens, but we need to continue to be cognizant of the needs that these students have in order for them to succeed linguistically and academically (Benegas and Benjamin, 2025).

The definition of academic language, as well as the work around it, has grown and evolved over time. The field is now taking more of an asset-based approach to language, acknowledging all of the positives that multilingual learners possess and bring to their classrooms and school communities. Importantly, looking at language through a lens of what students can do, instead of what they are unable to do, changes educators’ perspectives of their multilingual learners’ abilities and sets the stage for accelerated language acquisition and academic growth. This is essential for creating an equitable and supportive learning environment.

We can think of language development in terms of three components. The WIDA Consortium has defined these as vocabulary, language control, and linguistic forms and conventions. They work together to build the language that students need in order to access the content at their grade level (WIDA, 2020).

Vocabulary—Building on Background Knowledge

Vocabulary—which refers to the content-related words that students learn in a unit—is what comes to mind for many educators when they think of language development. It is also what most educators feel the most confident in working on with their students. Isabel Beck and her collaborators refer to Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 vocabulary words. Since Tier 1 words are common words that are very concrete to understand, we should concentrate on Tier 2 and Tier 3 words. Tier 2 words are used across content areas, perhaps with multiple meanings, and Tier 3 words are specific to one content area. There are many different strategies for teaching vocabulary words, including the Frayer model, the cognitive content dictionary, and the picture word inductive model (Beck et al., 2013). These strategies, along with other effective vocabulary development strategies, appear in Schoolwide’s Grammar Fundamentals units (https://schoolwide.com/blog/grammar-fundamentals-2024-2025-sample) as part of the embedded supports and scaffolds and appendices for multilingual learners. 

Recently, I was teaching an interdisciplinary unit on animal adaptations with multilingual learners. There were unknown vocabulary words that the students needed to know to be able to understand the content. At the beginning of each week, I previewed the vocabulary words that we would focus on. These included adaptation, camouflage, predator, and prey. Exposing the students to this vocabulary before engaging in reading and writing activities helped to build their background knowledge. Students knew that adaptations such as camouflage helped animals hunt their prey or avoid predators. They were able to use the words orally and in writing with increased proficiency throughout the unit and were successful in completing an informative writing piece about the topic.

Language Control—Explicit AND Engaging Instruction

The second component, language control, is a more complex component to address. It includes the language structures and sentence patterns students are able to incorporate into their speech and writing, as well as to process and understand when listening or reading. Examples of these would be all of the rules of grammar that many of us love to hate, including verb tenses, different types of adjectives, conjunctions, and other parts of speech. These need to be explicitly taught, as they don’t come naturally to many students, even those who are native speakers of English. One engaging way to teach language control is through the use of the sentence patterning chart. Students have fun coming up with words of different parts of speech related to the content and making creative sentences (WIDA, 2020).

Related to my prior anecdote, in the instruction around animal adaptations, I also focused on language control. I used examples of phrases and complete sentences and had students identify them. This served as a model for them in speaking or writing complete sentences when answering questions or engaging in discussions.

Linguistic Forms and Conventions—Scaffolding and Support

The final component of academic language is linguistic forms and conventions. This refers to the amount of language that students are able to use, produce, process, and understand. Our goal with this aspect is to continuously give students the tools they need to speak, write, read, and understand increasingly complex sentences. This does not happen with the wave of a magic wand, as much as we want it to. It takes a lot of work in terms of scaffolds and supports, as well as a lot of patience. When we take the time, it really pays off in students’ linguistic growth as well as academics (WIDA, 2020).

As we studied animal adaptations, I focused a great deal on using conjunctions to help students explain their reasoning; specifically, we talked about how conjunctions can be used to give more detail. Students were taught words like so and because to demonstrate their knowledge of animal adaptations. They wrote that animals had camouflage “so that they can hide from predators” or that birds have feathers “because they help them stay warm.” Knowing how sentences are put together using different parts of speech supports students’ acquisition of English.

Our work as educators of not only multilingual learners but all learners is to scaffold and support all three of these aspects of language development. Since each of these is equally important, we must address them all in instruction on a consistent basis. Doing so will lead to linguistic and academic growth for all students, regardless of background.

References

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., and Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction. Guilford Press Book/Childcraft International.

Benegas, M., and Benjamin, N. (2025). Language of Identity, Language of Access: Liberatory Learning for Multilingual Classrooms. Corwin, a Sage Company.

WIDA. (2020). WIDA English Language Development Standards Framework, 2020 Edition: Kindergarten–Grade 12. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.

Sara Huse has been an educator in Madison, Wisconsin, for over two decades. She has a strong passion for and experience in bringing practical strategies to educators working with multilingual learners, which is a hallmark of the professional development she provides. Sara began her career as a third-grade bilingual teacher and has taught extensively at the elementary and middle school levels. In addition to serving as a bilingual resource teacher and instructional coach with the Madison Metropolitan School District, she teaches in the ESL/Bilingual Education program at Edgewood College and is a literacy consultant for Schoolwide, Inc.

English 3D Updates for Early Learners

Designed by Dr. Kate Kinsella, English 3D is an explicit and interactive English language development program for multilingual learners in grades K–12. The curriculum builds upon existing linguistic strengths, enabling rapid acquisition of the academic speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills needed for reclassification, secondary school, college, and career.


English 3D has earned the WIDA Prime 2020 Seal, indicating its alignment to the current WIDA English Language Development Standards Framework, 2020 edition. English 3D received the highest score possible (a “4” rating) in all areas of review, indicating its “strong and comprehensive” alignment to the WIDA Standards Framework.


Program author Dr. Kate Kinsella has dedicated her career to recognizing and building on multilingual learners’ existing strengths to propel them to academic success. English 3D was developed from this dedication, using Dr. Kinsella’s classroom-tested, research-proven instructional routines as the backbone o the program.


Each course provides engaging, age-appropriate materials and instruction. The common thread throughout all the courses is Dr. Kinsella’s consistent, teacher-guided instructional routines that are proven to accelerate acquisition.


New for the 2024–25 school year, English 3D: Grades K–3 is an easy-to-implement English language development solution for early elementary. The curriculum makes use of Dr. Kinsella’s instructional routines, delivered in a more flexible implementation model to meet the needs of the youngest learners.

English 3D: Grades K–3 includes:

  • Brief, daily 30–45-minute lessons, with options to extend based on school and district scheduling
  • Flexibility to teach as pull-out, push-in, and/or for whole-class instruction as part of a core ELA class
  • Clear, straightforward materials that can be easily implemented by new and experienced teachers
  • Student consumables and print Teaching Guide
  • Lesson slides, data, and reporting available digitally for teachers
  • Print and digital assessment options


www.hmhco.com/programs/english-3d

“You only get one chance at this life thing, don’t waste it!”

Francis M. Hult offers a rewarding suggestion for federal workers looking for a career change.

View our Directory of Teaching Preparatory Programs here

With the landscape changing for federal workers, many people are on the lookout for new career opportunities where they can apply their skills and expertise while continuing a path of service. The field of teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) offers a wide range of possibilities, from teaching in public schools, international schools, and specialized language schools to working in refugee resettlement, community outreach, and corporate training. And you don’t have to be a linguist to get started.


Even before recent reprioritizations by the current administration, those working across government agencies and in the military looked to TESOL for career changes. I reached out to current students and alumni of the TESOL program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), where I am a professor and program director, to ask them to tell me about their journeys from the federal workforce to careers in TESOL.


When people hear about teaching English, they might think first and foremost about working in public schools. There is a national shortage of teachers in this field, with a 10.4% decrease in instructors for learners of English while the number of students who need English language support has increased by 2.6%.


A career as a public educator offers a salary with stable growth, benefits, and the chance to help students new to the US succeed academically. “I have always had an interest in languages and education,” says Ashleigh Waker, a former cryptologic linguist with the US Army who is currently pursuing the Master of Arts (MA) in TESOL with P–12 licensure at UMBC. “After working jobs that I wasn’t fully satisfied in after my military career, I finally took a risk by pursuing a career path that I knew would pique my interest: becoming an ESOL teacher.


The field of TESOL includes much more than public school teaching, though. There is also a global need for English for specific purposes (ESP), where former government workers can make a difference. Joseph, a former active-duty officer and later civilian general engineer for the US Air Force who completed the MA in TESOL at UMBC, explains: “Their professional experience through either their military service or federal service would be very valuable, especially if their government or military duties included overseas assignments.”
Those who have worked for government agencies or the uniformed services have gained specialized knowledge that can be combined with advanced teaching in medical English, aviation English, legal English, engineering English, and English for science and technology, among other professional or technical areas.


Learners of English, sometimes referred to as multilingual learners or emergent bilinguals, need support in many domains of life. A master’s degree or postbaccalaureate certificate in TESOL in conjunction with federal work experience can open doors to a career supporting newcomers through the many state, county, faith-based, and nonprofit agencies that offer refugee resettlement, workforce readiness, immigration advocacy, social services, adult education, and naturalization preparation programs.

As one current UMBC TESOL postbaccalaureate student and former intelligence specialist reflects, “With a TESOL certificate I become an asset to community programs. I look forward to making an impact within my local community and knowing I’m making things better for the people around me.”


Jafet Fortin, a former human resources specialist with the Army National Guard and current student in the UMBC MA in TESOL with a P–12 licensure concentration, agrees, noting that TESOL “plays an important role in empowering immigrants and preparing them for their future.”
With global demand for English skills increasing,2 there are also many opportunities abroad. “You only get one chance at this life thing, don’t waste it,” declares Timothy, a recent alumnus of the MA in TESOL with P–12 licensure at UMBC who previously worked as a management analyst at the Health Resources and Services Administration. “Meet cool people from all over the world while getting paid and feeling good about your work.” Universities, international schools, language academies, multinational corporations, institutes, and nongovernmental organizations throughout the world seek highly qualified English language teachers for all age ranges and proficiency levels.


Similarly, there are opportunities to work with students from other countries who come to the US and seek to improve their academic English at community colleges and universities. “It is my dream job,” asserts a current UMBC MA in TESOL student who works in intelligence for a federal agency, “working in a community college or in a charity teaching English. I want to give back to society after almost completing a government career.”


A similar refrain is offered by many current and former government workers who have chosen a career change to TESOL: a desire to continue a life of service and to make a difference. “Working in TESOL provides a service to students directly, while my previous job was an indirect service,” says Jafet. “I think it’s a great path to continue to serve,” states another current student and former language analyst for an intelligence agency who is completing the TESOL postbaccalaureate certificate.


TESOL is a profession through which federal workers and veterans can build on their years of experience, continue valuable service to society, and explore rewarding new career paths. “I highly recommend anyone who has worked in the information production part of the government, written products for policymakers, consider TESOL,” suggests a current MA in TESOL student and intelligence analyst, “since the overall intent is the same, to make meaning available to a specific audience.”


Likewise, Ashleigh advises, “if you have a curiosity and passion for language and education in general, consider this program. The program opens the door for a plethora of opportunities in a global world.”

Links
www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/the-english-learner-population-is-growing-is-teacher-training-keeping-pace/2023/02
www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/02/06/3022309/28124/en/English-Language-Learning-Market-Boom-Forecast-to-Exceed-Revenues-of-70-Billion-by-2030-with-Globalization-and-Increasing-Cross-border-Communication-Fueling-Demand.html

Francis M. Hult is professor and director of the Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) graduate program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC, https://tesol.umbc.edu). An English language educator and teacher trainer with over 20 years of experience in the field, he is known for his sociolinguistic and discourse analytic research on language policy, linguistic landscapes, and educational linguistics.

Reading Legislation Update



Iowa Gives Every G1 Student Decodable Books

Gov. Kim Reynolds and the Iowa Department of Education have announced a statewide investment of over $3.5 million to provide every first grade student with decodable book packs to take home and keep, reinforcing classroom instruction.

“Iowa is making early literacy a top priority, recently enacting landmark literacy legislation, improving state standards and ensuring teachers have the tools they need to hone this foundational skill in their students,” Gov. Reynolds said. “These book packs, based on the Science of Reading, bring parents more fully into that process by giving them a fun way to reinforce at home what their children are learning at school. It’s a powerful way to teach our kids to read—so they can spend a lifetime reading to learn.”

“In partnership with their classroom teachers, families across Iowa can use these evidence-based book packs to reinforce phonics and decoding skills with their children anytime, anywhere,” said Iowa Department of Education Director McKenzie Snow. “These decodable books meet students where they are, supporting reading comprehension that unlocks a child’s lifetime of potential.”

The book packs are being provided to all public and accredited nonpublic elementary schools to give to nearly 38,000 first-grade students. Kindergarten through second grade students in need of support who attended a Department-funded high-quality summer reading program or a Learning Beyond the Bell out-of-school program this year will also receive decodable book packs to further advance their reading gains.

In total, more than 100,000 book packs will be sent to all public and accredited nonpublic schools across the state this winter. Schools and families do not need to apply—the book packs will be sent directly to them. One million books will be sent in total as part of the book packs.

Funds for these Science of Reading-aligned book packs are provided through the Iowa Department of Education’s portion from the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) Fund and the American Rescue Plan Emergency Assistance to Nonpublic Schools (ARP EANS) Fund to address state-level educational efforts.

Michigan Implements New Literacy/Dyslexia Bills

Two new literacy/dyslexia laws were signed last month by Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer at Gardner International Magnet School in Lansing.

“Kids won today,” said State Superintendent Dr. Michael F. Rice. “This is the most consequential education legislation signed in Michigan in the past two decades, with the possible exception of historic state school aid budgets for fiscal years 2023 and 2024. In the coming years, Michigan children learning to read will benefit enormously.”

In September, the state Senate and House sent two literacy/dyslexia bills to the governor in resounding bipartisan votes. The K-12 literacy/dyslexia legislation that now becomes law has been championed by the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) and the State Board of Education. Senate Bills 567 and 568 become law. The legislature had been working on various iterations of the bills for over five years.

“It’s encouraging to witness Gov. Whitmer and our partners in the Michigan Legislature joining together — across the aisle — to take action to ensure that Michigan children have the necessary tools to develop their reading skills,” said Board President Dr. Pamela Pugh. “They recognize that literacy is a fundamental component of educational success. This investment in education benefits not only individual students but also fortifies communities and the state as a whole.”

MDE officials testified in support of the bills before the Senate Education Committee in February. They testified before the House Education Committee in June to encourage legislators to pass the bills.

Improving early literacy achievement is one of the goals in Michigan’s Top 10 Strategic Education Plan. The law will strengthen the effectiveness of literacy instruction and intervention for Michigan students, MDE officials say. It will also provide for both pre-service and in-service training to educators to learn or strengthen skills needed to identify Michigan students with characteristics of dyslexia. 

“We at MDE recognize our role and responsibilities in implementing these new laws for the benefit of children. Now that the bills have been signed into law, we look forward to working closely with our partners, including local school districts, intermediate school districts, and institutions of higher education,” said Dr. Sue C. Carnell, MDE chief deputy superintendent.

Beginning in the 2027-28 school year, the new laws will require public schools to: 

  • Screen, with a tool from a list of approved screening tools, all students in kindergarten through third grade for characteristics of dyslexia three times per school year.
  • Ensure that reading intervention is provided to all K-12 students who demonstrate characteristics of dyslexia as a result of screening assessment data.
  • Use a Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework to organize evidence-based classroom and intervention instruction and materials to effectively meet the needs of all learners.
  • Provide literacy consultants, teachers, literacy coaches, and other instructional staff with professional learning on characteristics of dyslexia, instructional practices, and accommodations that have strong evidence for improving literacy outcomes and are consistent with the Science of Reading.
  • Select from a list of approved reading instructional materials.

MDE will provide guidance and support for required pre-service and in-service learning and implementation strategies to public schools and institutions of higher education. Currently, Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling training, commonly known as LETRS, is professional learning that is accessible to Michigan elementary teachers and administrators and that is aligned to the new laws. MDE has strongly recommended this training for elementary teachers across the state. Approximately 2,600 Michigan teachers have completed the training and another approximately 7,500 have begun the training.

PA Reading Curricula Bill Passes

Pennsylvania may soon have a list of reading curricula designated by the state as “evidence-based,” under a bill that unanimously passed the House and Senate.

Unlike an earlier version of the legislation, the bill expected to be signed by Gov. Josh Shapiro won’t force any school districts to use the curricula or change how they teach reading . Science of Reading advocates say they’re still pushing to require schools to use the approved curricula and screen all young students for reading difficulties, but called the bill an important first step.

The bill directs the state Department of Education to select a council of 20 members with expertise in structured literacy to produce a list of approved evidence-based reading curricula, “aligned with the Commonwealth’s academic standards and the science of reading.”

It will also produce a list of approved structured literacy trainings for teachers, screening tests to assess children’s reading needs, and intervention approaches for children deemed in need of additional reading support.

The council must include public school elementary teachers — including reading specialists, literacy coaches, and special education teachers — and represent urban, rural, and suburban school districts.

The bill sets a deadline of June 1, 2025, for the education department to develop the list of approved reading curricula and other materials.

Literacy Funding Withheld in Wisconsin

Wisconsin State Superintendent Dr. Jill Underly is calling on lawmakers to release nearly $50 million to fund a new school literacy program.

Last year Wisconsin Act 20 passed with bipartisan support. The aim of the act is to increase reading proficiency in third graders by addressing curriculums and identifying struggling students in earlier grade levels.

The act calls for the hiring of literacy coaches to improve reading scores, but the agency has lacked the funding to bring on the staff.

Underly sent a letter to the Republican leaders of the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee, telling them the money is needed. “Now is the time to keep your promise to Wisconsin families,” she wrote. “Now is the time to take action and release the funding.”

New Jersey

Last month, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed two bills into law to establish initiatives intended to improve young learners’ access to tools and resources to help them become better readers while providing educators with professional development opportunities.

The New Jersey School Boards Association supported both measures while advocating for the necessary funding and resources to ease implementation of the provisions of each bill.

Dr. Timothy J. Purnell, executive director and CEO of the NJSBA, applauded the signing of the bills, stating. “Literacy is the essential skill that serves as the foundation for all learning. The New Jersey School Boards Association thanks Governor Murphy for prioritizing this issue and Senate Majority Leader Ruiz for her leadership in spearheading these critical measures that demonstrate her commitment to the children of New Jersey.” He added, “And we applaud the entire Legislature for taking swift and bipartisan action in promoting and approving these bills, which will better prepare New Jersey’s students to become lifelong learners and productive citizens. We look forward to seeing the positive impact they will have on students’ academic achievement.”

The first bill (S2644/A4303) aims to strengthen foundational literacy instruction by establishing a Working Group on Student Literacy. This group, comprised of members appointed by the commissioner of education from all regions of the state, will make recommendations to the New Jersey Department of Education on the implementation of evidence-based literacy strategies, screening methods, and instruction for students, in addition to investigating ways to expand professional learning.

Based on these recommendations, the NJDOE will develop and publish guidance for school districts to use beginning with the 2025-2026 school year and shall establish an online resource center to aid school districts in the selection of evidence-based, high-quality literacy instructional materials, including data analysis tools, as part of the school district’s implementation of the New Jersey Student Learning Standards in English Language Arts. Additionally, the NJDOE will create a professional development program for early education teaching staff, including librarians, and those serving multilingual learners and/or students with disabilities. This will be available to all districts at no cost.

Under the bill, districts will be required to conduct literacy screenings at least twice annually for students in grades K-3, beginning in the 2025-2026 school year. Districts must notify parents and guardians of their child’s results within 30 days of the close of the initial screening period. The fiscal year 2025 budget includes $5.25 million for literacy initiatives to advance this work.

The second bill (A2288/S2647) establishes the Office of Learning Equity and Academic Recovery in the Department of Education to promote student literacy and advance learning equity through academic recovery practices.

The office will be responsible for improving the Department’s capacity to make data-driven decisions, coordinate resources, and research best practices to support the creation of effective literacy, learning equity, learning acceleration policies, and professional development opportunities.

“Literacy education represents the foundation upon which all future learning is built, and we owe it to our children to give them the strongest foundation possible,” Murphy said. “By bolstering support for literacy education, we are enabling New Jersey students to thrive both academically and in life, helping them to become informed, thoughtful, and engaged citizens.”

Assembly Speaker Craig J. Coughlin said, “Increased equity in education, especially for foundational literacy, will serve every community in New Jersey. When every child in our state has a greater opportunity to succeed, we all benefit. These laws will ensure more strategic use of resources for our best-in-the-nation public schools. I want to commend my colleagues for all of their work on this legislation, partnering with teachers and other experts and advocates in the field to deliver for New Jersey’s kids.”

Maryland

The Maryland State Superintendent of Schools is proposing a new policy that would hold 3rd graders back if they do not meet reading requirements. The proposed retention policy, already in place in more than half of US states,  prompted concern from many educational experts and officials.

DeMyra Harvey-Morris, a former educator and the Project Read Coordinator for the Wicomico County Public Library, says it could disproportionately impact disadvantaged students. “There’s about 1 million people in Maryland right now, who can’t read above a 3rd grade reading level… Somerset County is the poorest county in Maryland, how many of those students are going to be held back? And what are we doing to provide the resources to the teachers to reduce class sizes? Probably pay them better?”

A 2024 state board of education resolution requires all schools to align instruction to the science of reading by school year 2024-25 and charges the state superintendent of schools with partnering with higher education to ensure teacher preparation programs are using evidence-based methods.

OHIO
The Ohio House Higher Education Committee recently started hosting testimony from educators and policy experts about the Science of Reading. “Explicitly teaching the sounds and symbols of our language and skills for language comprehension creates proficient readers,” said Steve Dackin, director of the Department of Education and Workforce.

Ohio’s two-year, $191 billion budget included Science of Reading provisions—$86 million for educator professional development, $64 million for curriculum and instructional materials, and $18 million for literacy coaches. Ohio colleges and universities are examining their teacher preparation programs as public school districts are starting to implement the Science of Reading.

The Ohio Department of Higher Education chancellor Mike Duffey is required to create an audit process that shows how every educator training program aligns with teaching the Science of Reading instruction.

The formal audits will start in January 2025, and Duffey can revoke a college or university’s approval if it fails the audit.

“Ohio is relatively unique among the states that have implemented the Science of Reading because we truly have teeth behind the legislative requirement,” Duffey said during a committee meeting. “This is our most powerful tool to ensure fidelity to the policy enacted by the legislature.”

Ohio has 50 approved educator preparation programs in 13 public universities and 37 independent colleges and universities. More than 4,430 people graduated through those programs in 2023, Duffey said. The state’s public school districts and community schools will start using core curriculum and instructional materials for English language arts and reading intervention programs from lists made by the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce next school year.

About a third of Ohio’s school districts and community schools are already using at least one of the initially approved core reading instruction curricula.

House Higher Education Committee chairman Tom Young said he has received positive feedback on the Science of Reading from people in his district who are teachers.

“I’ve seen nothing but enthusiasm,” he said. “I was surprised, quite frankly.”

Higher Education Committee ranking member Joe Miller (D-Amherst) questioned why the Science of Reading isn’t being implemented for all Ohio students under the state budget.

“Why is this just public schools and charter schools?” he asked. “Everybody deserves to have this.”

Those who testified said nonpublic schools can use the Science of Reading if they want.

MICHIGAN
Dyslexia bills supported by Science of Reading advocates have moved beyond all previous attempts to turn them into Michigan law.

Testimony for the two bills, which supporters say would help schools better identify and teach students with dyslexia or other reading difficulties, has begun in the House Education Committee. The bills have already passed a vote in the Senate.

The legislation would require Michigan’s K–12 public schools and teacher preparation programs to use principles from the Science of Reading. Previous iterations of the legislation passed in the Senate in 2022 but never got to a hearing in the House Education Committee.

Senator Jeff Irwin, a Democrat from Ann Arbor who has pushed for years for bills to address reading instruction for students with dyslexia, said the legislation would help all kids who have trouble grasping early literacy instruction.

“I’m not here to argue that phonics is the only fundamental skill,” said Irwin during the hearing. “And I’m not here to argue that it’s the only thing that we need to be teaching kids. I’m here to argue that it is a fundamental skill, and it is a thing that we must be attending to, and that by failing to attend to it, we miss a lot.”

Michigan schools currently are not required to follow a set reading curriculum and are able to select their own under local control. The state provides some guidance on using evidence-based programs. The bills would add more direction to schools on approaches teachers should use.

Collaboration Is Key to Successful UDL Implementation


In our first article in this series, the universal design for learning (UDL) principles (CAST, 2024) were introduced as a much-needed framework to respond to learner variability, more specifically to dually identified English learners we referred to as multilingual learners with exceptionalities. Firmly rooted in the sociocultural tradition that language develops through meaningful interactions and grounded in the UDL principles of multiple modes of engagement, representation, and action and expression, the integration of UDL guidelines has been found to benefit students with disabilities or learning support needs, as well as multilingual learners with and without exceptionalities.

As UDL is already present in many classrooms across the US and internationally, we further advocate for a collaborative approach to its implementation. When a group of educators who share students also share instructional beliefs and practices, with consistent application, the UDL design principles can provide multiple access points for learning. 

Why is it persuasive to turn to UDL?

For teachers of multilingual learners with exceptionalities, academic success can be achieved when combining UDL principles and collaborative practices. Therefore, the design of lessons must take place with all learners in mind, especially those with diverse academic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds. Language and literacy development is also enhanced when cooperation, coordination of services, and impactful, intentional collaboration on behalf of all students are part of the instructional process. We are inspired by Amanda Kibler (2023), who offers a compelling argument that all students deserve rightful presence (not merely inclusion) and educational dignity (not merely support). Following on from the work she and her colleagues did (2019) studying the complex relationships between classroom characteristics, linguistic integration, and teacher practices, Kibler (2023) further noted that schools must create the most expansive learning environment (not merely the least restrictive environment).

We also know that no teacher can accomplish all that alone.

With an increased number of multilingual learners with exceptionalities in schools today, the time has come for all educators—teachers, specialists, administrators, and support personnel—to fully embrace collaboration, combine professional expertise, and integrate already successful strategies such as UDL to meet the needs of all students.

Think about your current students and consider which of them are exceptional learners who may require special education programming and related services, or those who may need to be challenged further and recognized for their giftedness. Remember that some multilingual learners with exceptionalities may also be classified as twice exceptional. Students need to be the recipients of all services to which they are entitled. So, the question now becomes: How can we collectively create a balanced, equitable approach to serve all students, including multilingual learners with exceptionalities?

Where to begin?

Many multilingual students are at the intersection of diversity and exceptionalities, and program models and instructional practices may not have caught up with this intersectionality. The field of education seems to find challenges in understanding and recognizing the multidimensional aspects of students’ identities, including students with disabilities and newcomers first learning to speak a new language. In UDL Guidelines 3.0 (2024), there is a new emphasis on identity as part of variability (CAST, 2024).

It is time to raise the question of how to best create what Jung (2023) refers to as a universally welcoming environment. In closer examination of learning environments, we noticed that teachers prepared with a special education background might not be knowledgeable about language proficiency levels, typical stages of language acquisition, or best strategies for students with limited or interrupted formal education (SLIFEs). The inverse seems true as well. Teachers prepared for working with student populations learning English as a new or additional language—or even a third or fourth language—may not have been introduced to strategies for the broad spectrum of diverse learners, many of whom are classified within the special education continuums.

What we propose is that we begin (or more intentionally continue) to collaborate and permanently break down the silos. We invite you to refer to Table 1 and self-assess by identifying what is already being implemented in your own context and by selecting short-term and long-term goals.

The list in Table 1 is by no means complete and final: it could and should be augmented with additional strategies, and as such, we encourage you to adapt it for your own needs. What we firmly advocate for, though, is to make certain that UDL is considered a common denominator for lesson planning and instructional practices for all students. Why so?

The UDL dimensions of engagement, representation, and action and expression will support grade- and age-appropriate expectations for all students.

UDL may be honored along with other asset-based approaches and theoretical frameworks when creating engaging lessons with multiple access points and opportunities for students to authentically connect with the learning targets.

Who collaborates with whom on behalf of multilingual learners with exceptionalities?

Collaboration is a fluid and complex process, but without clear guidelines, many teachers are not always sure how to proceed. We believe it is a co-generative process formulated by participation and interactions from various school personnel, often including the general education teacher, the special educator, the language development specialist, and others who directly interact with multilingual learners with exceptionalities. Different communities may have specialized terms, such as teacher, consultant teacher, or coach. Regardless of the formal titles, the intention for collaborators is to work together, rely on each other, share with each other, and capitalize on each other’s strengths.

Consider the following list and reflect on what collaboration may look like in each of the scenarios in which teachers work in partnership with colleagues.

Recognize that some collaborations may be regularly scheduled and sustained, while others may only occur occasionally or on an as-needed basis.

  • Grade-level teachers (at the elementary level)
  • Content-area teachers (at the secondary level)
  • ELD teachers and special educators
  • Bilingual and dual language educators
  • Educators specializing in speech–language pathology; behavioral, occupational, and physical therapy; mental health; and so forth
  • Librarians and special area teachers (music, art, physical education, health science, and so forth)
  • Teaching assistants and paraprofessionals
  • Instructional coaches
  • Instructional leaders and administrators
  • Parents or guardians
  • Community liaisons or other members of the larger linguistic community

Let’s recognize that UDL might be the common frame of reference, but collaboration may look different in different settings. Regardless, the goal is always to act in the best interest of the students, while also tapping into and enhancing the collaborating educators’ collective wisdom and impact.

How can we align UDL dimensions and collaborative practices?

In a universally designed classroom, teachers share content knowledge and skills while ensuring that learning is meaningful, appropriately assigned, authentic, and engaging for all students. The updated 3.0 UDL dimensions acknowledge that learning may look different in every classroom, but the fundamentals are universal. Teachers, no matter where they work or with what population of students, can count on consistent UDL guidance. This is helpful since educators often change grades, schools, districts, and even certifications. But UDL and collaborating conversations around UDL can remain steady. We agree with Allison Posey (2024) that there are some common elements that teachers can rely on when planning with UDL in mind:

All learners knowing the goal (and we believe teachers as well)

Intentional, flexible options for all students to use

Student access to resources from the start of the lesson

Students building and internalizing their own learning (para. 11)

When working collaboratively with colleagues, you may work in a range of configurations but share a commitment to providing evidence-based best strategies and optimal learning outcomes. When teaching multilingual learners with exceptionalities, the goal is to give significant attention to academic skills, linguistic growth, and multiple access points to learning based on identified needs. We recognize that sometimes teachers are in a shared classroom simultaneously and implement well-established co-teaching strategies. At other times, there may be coordinated teaching efforts. We define this as the times that two or more educators may collaboratively plan and assess their students, monitor student progress jointly, even carefully align curricular and instructional goals—but may not be in the same classroom at the same time. We refer to both types of practices as collaborative teaching—the students may be shared, but classroom space may not (Honigsfeld and Cohan, 2024). In Table 2, we offer key practices both for coordinated teaching and co-teaching, with a word of advice. These recommendations are flexible and may be applicable to a range of configurations, including bilingual and dual language classrooms.

How can we make this work?

You might find the strategies in Table 1 and the key collaborative teaching practices in Table 2 highly ambitious. They are indeed. Here are three helpful hints for collaboration within a school, whether educators are co-teaching or employing elements of coordinated teaching:

Engage in collaborative curriculum planning and alignment so there is a mutual understanding of the yearly goals that will be achieved.

Offer sustained professional learning opportunities for UDL and other approaches that support multilingual learners and are attended by all participating teachers.

Put student engagement and agency first—collaborate with your students and their families through the UDL lens as well.

Teachers who engage in collaborative practices benefit from research-based strategies that recognize the academic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds of their multilingual learners. This underscores the value of universal design for learning as a vehicle for important learning dimensions such as enhanced engagement, representation, and action and expression.

Asset-based practices such as UDL will support teachers whether they are co-teaching, coordinated teaching colleagues, or specialists. The UDL principles will support the instruction of multilingual learners while recognizing the importance of access and equity.

References

CAST (2024). “UDL: About the guidelines 3.0 update.” https://udlguidelines.cast.org/more/about-guidelines-3-0/

Honigsfeld, A., and Cohan, A. (2024). Collaboration for Multilingual Learners with Exceptionalities: We Share the Students. Corwin.

Jung, L. A. (2023). Seen, Heard, and Valued: Universal Design for Learning and Beyond. Corwin.

Kibler, A. (2023). “Why Ecologies Matter: Critical and dialogic perspectives on instruction, assessment, and policies impacting multilingual youth.” Keynote presentation. Improving Instruction, Assessment, and Policies for Secondary English Learners Across the Content Areas, May 8, 2023, Washington DC.

Kibler, A. K., Molloy Elreda, L., Hemmler, V. L., Arbeit, M. R., Beeson, R., and Johnson, H. E. (2019). “Building Linguistically Integrated Classroom Communities: The role of teacher practices.” American Educational Research Journal, 56(3), 676–715.

Posey, A. (n. d.). “Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A teacher’s guide.” www.understood.org/en/articles/understanding-universal-design-for-learning#What_does_UDL_look_like_in_the_classroom?

Dr. Audrey Cohan is senior dean for research, scholarship, and graduate studies at Molloy University, New York. She began her career as a special education teacher in New York City working in self-contained and resource-room settings. She has been at MU for 29 years and has served as professor, chairperson, and interim dean. The textbook Serving English Language Learners (2016) earned the Textbook & Academic Authors Association’s Most Promising New Textbook Award.

Dr. Andrea Honigsfeld is a TESOL professor at Molloy University, NY, author/consultant, and sought-after international speaker, whose work primarily focuses on teacher collaboration in support of multilingual learners. She is the co-author/co-editor of over 30 books, eleven of them best sellers. 

Emilia Pérez’s Spanish Ignites Criticism


The most-nominated non-English film in Oscar history, Emilia Pérez, may be set in Mexico with a Spanish script and song lyrics, but it was largely filmed in France and written by non-Spanish speakers, which has led to backlash from Mexicans who feel that the movie trivializes the country’s ongoing struggle with organized crime.

The Spanish language used in the film has also been criticized. Héctor Guillén, a Mexican screenwriter and producer, told the New York Times, “The dialogues are completely inorganic—what the characters are saying doesn’t make sense.” Despite being nominated for the Academy Award for Best Song, songwriters Clément Ducol and Camille have even been accused of relying on autotranslate.
Recent drama about comments made by star Karla Sofía Gascón has shifted attention away from director Jacques Audiard’s own controversial comments, in particular an interview with the filmmaker in which he called Spanish “a language of the poor.” “Spanish is a language of emerging countries, a language of modest countries, of poor people, of migrants,” he told the French site Konbini back in August of last year.

Using languages other than Frech is not a departure for Audiard. Emilia Pérez is told through languages that are foreign to the director—primarily Spanish with English sprinkled in. The director’s previous work includes Les Olympiades, which featured French and Mandarin, and Dheepan, whose characters spoke Tamil, French, and English. “For me, there’s a music to language,” Audiard recently told W Magazine. “Not knowing the language gives me a quality of detachment. When I’ve directed in my own language, I get stuck on the details.” Speaking with French newspaper Le Monde about his decision not to write a musical in his native language, he was far more blunt: “[French is] absurd… an embarrassing language.”

During a news conference before the film’s release in Mexico, where it has flopped at the box office, Audiard said he apologized if he handled a delicate subject “too lightly.” In a different interview, he said that “cinema doesn’t provide answers; it only asks questions, but maybe the questions in Emilia Pérez are incorrect.” (He has also said that he didn’t study Mexico much before making the film.)

Fostering Community and Belonging

At the close of 2024, the Haitian Creole Language and Culture Program that I founded at the end of 2023 in Indianapolis, capital of the great state of Indiana, entered its second phase with a new wave of excitement and partnership. Researchers, language students, experts of all kinds have already manifested for the new session, which started on September 30, 2024. I briefly sampled the Creole program in a recent conversation with eminent linguist Albert Valdman, Rudy Professor Emeritus, and distinguished professor Kevin Rottet, both from Indiana University Bloomington, and the reception was overall positive; those present argued the “project is worth pursuing,” given the growing segment of the Haitian population throughout the great Hoosier State and the need to improve the narrative painted of Haitian immigrants in the Midwest following the unfortunate dynamics in the current US political climate against them.

Prior to the meeting, prolific Indigenous scholar and mentor Dr. Serafín M. Coronel-Molina, director of the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies (CLACS) within the Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies at Indiana University Bloomington, had praised the program by highlighting its means of empowerment and inclusiveness. “Teaching Haitian Creole language and culture goes beyond mere preservation; it empowers a nation, expands educational and economic opportunities, and promotes a more inclusive society both locally and globally,” he stated.

The points of inclusivity and increasing opportunities are at the core of the program, and they may be two of the most common reasons learners are attracted to start the learning journey of a foreign language. We should also remember Dr. Coronel-Molina was one of the first to join the project with a very important grant via CLACS to cover the operational costs of the summer 2024 session.

How has this program reshaped my presence, values, and beliefs of the world?
I started the program with the aim of having a medium to grow people’s knowledge of and sharpen their skills in the Creole language and culture, which resonates in countries like Haiti and states like Louisiana. That was the precept or the goal at its inception. However, one week after the flier for the summer class was sent out and the fact sheet published on Indiana University’s website (https://events.iu.edu/clacs/event/1455940-haitian-creole-language-and-culture summer-program), a very decent number of people reached out to be enrolled in the class. At the end of June 2024, the program registered almost 50 students from different corners of the US, and we added a new beginner class online, which makes it three adult classes—two beginner and one intermediate. An Indy-based center for wellness requested an invoice for seven people from the organization with the comment: “my coworkers want to learn Creole to better connect and assist the Haitian population in Indianapolis.” That day, I came home to whistle the news in the ears of Eliza Corneille, my ride or die, and she was not surprised at all. “I anticipated the outcomes,” she said. The level of surprise came with me fighting the imposter syndrome by downplaying the importance or potential impact of the program. Later, other families requested on social media and by email a Creole children’s class. I was reluctant in the beginning to create a new course because we were already in the middle of June and the opening of a children’s class would require specific logistics, new teachers, and facilities. I sincerely thought we were not ready, but the call for children to learn Haitian Creole was greater than my own self. On the Saturday morning of June 29—with support from Partners in Literacy Haiti, an organization that focuses on early literacy development of children in Creole reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and the Haitian Association of Indiana—we launched the Creole children’s class with eight students in person and two online from New York City. For five weeks, those young scholars from different backgrounds and walks of life, and different language proficiencies, learned to count, introduce themselves, and sing Bouki and Malice’s songs, which cover the pantheon of the Haitian folktales. Those children were guided by three wonderful instructors, Evelyn Pierre, Sarah Fox, and Naitile Fehrenbacher.

A nine-year-old girl who is not of Haitian descent bumped everyone’s hearts on the first day of the program. Her family drove nearly 60 miles on Saturday mornings to bring her to the Creole class. Following her mother’s account, her goal was to acquire enough proficiency in the language to be able to communicate with her new neighbors. Gracefully, her family listened to her heart. Among these new neighbors, there were young Haitians who caught her eye and had a different life story to narrate. For this little girl, “otherness” does not exist in her world, nor would she like to create it. She seems to embody the cultural sensitivity one needs to break barriers and act for a better world.

Overall, the summer session was a success with 43 Creole language active learners, under the guidance of three instructors (Rochenide St Preux, Evelyn, and me); the coordinator of the Creole club, Junior Mesamours; and two volunteers: Sarah Fox and Naitile Fehrenbacher. One Saturday, the city of Indianapolis deputy mayor Judith B. Thomas even stopped by our Creole children’s class to meet our young learners and share insights on the importance of early literacy for child development—very sweet memories with someone who cares deeply for the growth of our children.

From a Student’s Perspective
After the program, I reached out to two students, one online and one in person, to learn from their experience with the program.

Q1: After completing the summer session, do you think you acquired enough skills to engage in conversations with peers?

R1: “After completing the Haitian Creole Language and Culture Program, I feel that I have acquired the skills necessary to engage in basic conversations with my Haitian peers about daily routines, my home, and my likes and dislikes.”

R2: “I have been learning multiple languages from a very young age, including English, Spanish, and French. Of all the language classes I have taken, Haitian Creole was the first that encouraged me to construct sentences from day one. I was pleasantly surprised to find myself exchanging greetings with my classmates by the end of the first session. This approach helped me gain confidence in my speaking abilities early on, as it emphasized practical, real-time use of the language. While I still have much to learn, the summer session provided me with a solid foundation in both vocabulary and grammar, enabling me to engage in conversations. It also deepened my understanding of Haitian culture and gave me the tools to continue improving through practice and further study.”

Q2: We know learning a language also involves grasping cultural nuances and boosting confidence. Do you think the program reached these goals?

R1: “The program has provided me with a solid understanding of Haitian culture, particularly regarding cultural expectations and communication methods. I believe it successfully met its goals of teaching me about Haitian society and culture. I now feel confident about discussing cultural dynamics, some aspects of history, and the structure of the language. This class has not only expanded my knowledge beyond just language comprehension but also given me the confidence to communicate effectively, knowing that I understand what I’m saying.”
—Naitile Fehrenbacher, double major in criminal justice and psychology with a minor in international studies at Indiana University Bloomington

R2: “While I never wanted class sessions to end, my favorite part of each class came at the conclusion when our instructor, Rochenide St Preux, played videos of popular Haitian stories or songs. These moments allowed us to experience the language in a cultural context and made the lessons more immersive. Rochenide also shared fun facts about Haiti throughout the class that deepened our understanding of the country’s rich history, traditions, and customs. These cultural insights not only made learning more enjoyable but also helped us appreciate the broader significance of the language in everyday Haitian life. I hope that a similar program is offered next summer!”
—Johanna Cajina, communications manager at the Cisneros Hispanic Leadership Institute at the George Washington University, who recently completed her MA in international affairs from the same institution.

Like Lauren Collins, a correspondent for New Yorker magazine, said, “learning a foreign language is a quietly revolutionary act.” I think this sentence resonates even more with learning Creole, the language of the former enslaved people, from where the “Négritude stood up for the first time and proclaimed its faith in its humanity,” to repeat the great poet Aimé Cesaire in Notebook of a Return to the Native Land.

Websder Corneille (wecorne@iu.edu) is the founder and director of the Haitian Creole Program and adjunct lecturer in Haitian Creole language and Haitian studies at Indiana University.

Ending the Reading Wars, Pt. 1

This and the next article in this series try to get at the question of how oral language and written language differ. I believe this question has been at the heart of many, if not most, of the disagreements we’ve had about how to help people learn to read. There are three principal sections, the third one started here and then finished in the next article:

• How the issue was first defined nearly 50 years ago—whether learning to read is natural or unnatural—was unfortunate and misleading.

• A suggested distinction is likely to be more productive: the difference between the two is that learning to read is harder than learning to understand oral language one is exposed to at birth or relatively soon after.

• The evidence for the difference between oral and written language (including differences in how we learn to comprehend each) comes from converging bodies of knowledge. Human evolution and child development perspectives are presented below. The next article in this series will be devoted to the neuroscientific evidence that learning to read requires creation of connections in the brain that do not exist at birth.

Learning to Read: Natural Vs. Unnatural
Nearly a half-century ago, Ken and Yetta Goodman wrote that “the acquisition of literacy is merely an extension of natural language learning for all children… [T]he naturalness of children learning to read and write comes from their active participation in the communication process—their motivation to comprehend what the printed word is trying to ‘say.’”1

They went on to describe “eight essentials of beginning reading instruction based on a natural language thesis.”

A few short years later, Phil Gough and Michael Hillinger disputed the Goodmans, countering that learning to read is an “unnatural act.” The “average child,” they wrote, “normally endowed and normally taught, learns to read only with considerable difficulty. He [sic] does not learn to read naturally…, despite his evident facility at learning and despite having previously mastered what would seem to be the hardest part of reading (i.e., learning an unknown language).”2

Thereupon followed a feature of the reading wars still with us to this day. Rob Tierney and David Pearson’s recent monograph, available at their open-access website, provides the most up-to-date example when they “fact-check” (meaning dispute) the claim that “learning to read is an unnatural act.”3

Is Natural Vs. Unnatural the Real Issue?
My online dictionary defines natural as “existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.”

The Goodmans’ choice of the word natural and Gough and Hillinger’s direct challenge unnatural were understandable but fateful. Both terms were used imprecisely, leading to misinterpretations, miscommunication, and a source of contention in this perennially contentious field.

The Goodmans did not intend to signify that natural meant learning to read “exists in or [is] caused by nature,” without human intervention, as if it were a natural waterfall or natural selection. They explicitly disavowed this, saying their position was “not Rousseauian”:

“When we use the term natural learning, we do not regard the process as one of unfolding in an environment free of obstructive intrusions. Teaching children to read is not putting them into a garden of print and leaving them unmolested.”

Similarly, Gough and Hillinger didn’t literally mean that learning to read was unnatural like plastic flowers, or bizarre like aberrant behavior. What they meant was that “children do not easily learn to read” and that “children almost never learn to read without instruction.”

Unfortunately, natural and its direct negation unnatural were successful rhetorical tropes but advances in precision and understanding, not so much. The embattled pair took on a life of its own in the discourse and disputations surrounding reading and reading education over the past nearly five decades.

Note, however, that there was an important point of agreement between the Goodmans’ position and Gough and Hillinger’s: Learning to read did not happen spontaneously. It required human intervention. Somebody, or somebodies, had to do something for children to learn to read. Children do not learn to read, in the Goodmans’ lovely and slightly hallucinatory phrase, by “putting them into a garden of print and leaving them unmolested.”

Ken and Yetta Goodman and Gough and Hillinger certainly had very different visions of what needed to be done to teach children to read, but there was no daylight between them that learning to read didn’t just happen by itself. In this sense, despite their diametrically opposed and seemingly irreconcilable paper titles, all agreed that learning to read is not actually natural in the literal sense that reading “exists in nature” and is “not caused by humankind.”

But neither is there anything unnatural about learning to read, just as there is nothing unnatural about learning how play a saxophone, strike a yoga pose, weave a basket, or bake a cake. They all involve learning how to engage in human-invented activities. Tierney and Pearson put it this way in their online monograph:

“[L]earning to read may not be specifically wired in the same way we have come to accept the specificity of the wiring for learning one’s oral language. But, as nearly as we can fathom, it is as natural or unnatural as learning anything else we learn.”

If learning weren’t natural to humans, it’s hard to imagine how human societies could last,4 just as the failure to learn, another natural human attribute, leads to their demise. The difference between learning to understand oral language and learning to read print cannot be that one is natural and the other is not.

Is there, then, a distinction that more accurately and helpfully captures the difference between the Goodmans’ perspective on learning to read and Gough and Hillinger’s?

Learning to Read Is Harder Than Acquiring a First Oral Language, Because It Is Not Intuitive
The issue has to do with a fundamental fact (I’ll go out on a limb and call it a fact) that is not discussed precisely nor appreciated fully: oral language and written language are different. Of course they are related. But they’re not the same thing. They are acquired differently and perceived differently. These differences have implications for teaching children, or anyone, to read.

The distinction between oral and written language is particularly important for multilingual learners (MLs). When these students are in English-medium instruction, which is where the large majority of them are, they must learn to read in English as they simultaneously learn the language. The challenge is significantly greater than it is for students who already know English as they learn to read it—which, as Gough and Hillinger pointed out, is challenging enough. The situation is different when ELs are in a bilingual program where they learn to read in a language they already know. I’ll address these issues in a separate article.

The key idea that distinguishes learning to understand oral and written language is that humans are born primed and ready to make sense of oral language, aka human speech—language we hear. We are not born primed and ready to make sense of written language, aka print—language we see.

We need to learn, and generally be taught, that print carries meaning and how to “decode” it (I know this is a trigger word for some, so for now please interpret it metaphorically if that won’t interrupt the flow) in order to make sense of it. From birth, we seem to know intuitively to pay attention to human speech. At some level we seem to understand that speech carries meaning as it enters through our ears and registers somewhere in our brains. In contrast, until we learn, observe, or are taught—all three, actually—we have no idea that print is something that requires our attention or carries meaning.

As Gough and Hillinger emphasized, learning to read—that is, being able to understand written language that we must see—is harder than learning to understand oral language, which you hear and to which you are exposed even from before birth or shortly after. Learning to understand written language requires making linguistic and cognitive connections in the brain that are not unnatural, but neither are they necessarily easy to make.

Evidence for the Differences between Oral and Written Language and Their Acquisition
Several strands of evidence support the distinction I am making between oral and written language.

Begin with oral language—more precisely, human speech. Speech is not language itself but how language is conveyed orally. It’s the spoken expression of language. Human speech has been around since the human species emerged. No one knows exactly when speech5 or language6 emerged. The possible range is enormous, but a half-million years ago seems to be a roughly median estimate. Regardless, communicating language via speech is part of our human evolution.

In contrast, writing systems—“the physical manifestation of a spoken language”—appeared on the human scene much more recently, about 5,000 years ago in Mesopotamia.7 (For a more in-depth, academically rigorous account, see the classic text by Jack Goody.)8 Writing is literally a human invention, not something that evolved with our species.

The first written languages—Sumerians’ cuneiform and Egyptians’ hieroglyphics— used symbols to represent tangible concepts.

Phonetic, or alphabetic, writing systems—where written symbols represented the oral language’s sounds rather than tangible objects or concepts— came along 1,500 years later. One was courtesy of the Phoenicians. If you ever talk or think about phonics, phonetics, or phonemic awareness, you can thank the Phoenicians by way of the Greeks— phonetic is from the Greek word phonein, which means “to speak clearly.”

Independently, writing also developed in China and Mesoamerica. All human societies and cultures have oral language and use speech to communicate it.9 According to the Linguistic Society of America, there are no known alingual societies.10 In contrast, although most human societies have written language, there have always been those that do not, even since the invention of writing systems around the world.

At the individual person level, we see an analogous distinction. From birth, infants will respond to human speech, meaning orient to it rather than startle (the response sudden loud noises elicit), more than to other types of sounds.11 Further, infants’ preference for attending to speech predicts their later oral language skills.

The same is highly unlikely to be true for written language, although to my knowledge it has never been tested directly. The human face is the visual stimulus infants orient to most.

Think about the implications of all this. Starting from birth, learning to understand oral language appears to be intuitive. Learning to understand written language is not.

As a result, children will usually acquire fully functional age related abilities in an oral language (as noted by Gough and Hillinger, e.g., comprehending thousands of spoken words and sentences made up of those words) simply by being in a context where they hear and use the oral language. Instruction is rarely required, but obviously modeling and feedback contribute to oral language development.

In contrast, although being in a context where they see and are able to use print helps children develop reading skills, this alone is insufficient for acquiring functional reading skills equivalent to the oral language skills acquired by being in an oral-language-speaking context.

There are certainly documented cases of children in print-rich, or at least print-friendly, contexts who read early or seem to learn to read “naturally.” But to my knowledge there is no evidence that exposure to print and opportunities to use it will, alone, typically enable children to read and comprehend thousands of written words and sentences made up of those words, in a way that is comparable to what they can comprehend orally when in a context where they hear and use oral language.

The differences are not because understanding oral language is more “natural” than understanding written language. The difference has to do with making sense of written language— reading—is more challenging to learn because it is less intuitive. Neuroscience provides a very plausible explanation for why this is so.

Notes/Links
1. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED155621.pdf
2. www.jstor.org/stable/23769975
3. https://literacyresearchcommons.org
4. www.jstor-org.stanford.idm.oclc.org/stable/177651?seq=1
5. www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/09/05/219236801/when-did human-speech-evolve
6. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/language-in-the mind/201502/how-old-is-language
7. www.worldhistory.org/writing/#google_vignette
8. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Interface_Between_the_Written_and_th/TepXQMN6lfUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Goody,+Jack.+(1987).+The+Interface+Between+the+Written+and+the+Oral.+Cambridge+University+Press.&pg=PR8&printsec=frontcover
9. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-esc-culturalanthropology/chapter/language/#:~:text=All%20human%20cultures%20have%20not,from%20one%20culture%20to%20another
10. https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/whats-difference-between-speech-and-writing
11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6467219/

Claude Goldenberg is Nomellini and Olivier Professor of Education, emeritus, in the Graduate School of Education at Stanford University. A native of Argentina, his areas of research and professional interest have centered on promoting academic achievement among language-minority children and youth. Prior to Stanford, Goldenberg was professor of teacher education, associate dean of the College of Education, and executive director of the Center for Language Minority Education and Research (CLMER) at California State University, Long Beach.

He has taught junior high school in San Antonio, Texas, and first grade in a bilingual elementary school in the Los Angeles area. He co-authored Promoting Academic Achievement among English Learners: A Guide to the Research (with Rhoda Coleman; Corwin, 2010) and was co-editor of Language and Literacy Development in Bilingual Settings (with Aydin Durgunoglu; Guilford, 2011). He was on the National Research Council’s Committee for the Prevention of Early Reading Difficulties in Young Children and on the National Literacy Panel, which synthesized research on literacy development among language-minority children and youth.

This article and many more are available at https://claudegoldenberg.substack.com.

Study Finds Large-Print Books Boost Literacy and Social–Emotional Health

New research released by Thorndike Press from Gale, part of Cengage Group, suggests that 87% of teachers saw a positive impact on their students’ reading success when they made the switch to large-print books.

The study was conducted independently by Project Tomorrow, a reputable education nonprofit, on behalf of Thorndike Press, to better understand the potential role of large-print books in supporting students’ literacy development. The study examined the impact of students reading large-print-formatted books on their reading engagement and achievement levels. Approximately 1,500 students in grades 4–12 and 56 teachers and librarians across 13 US elementary, middle, and high schools participated in the study.

“When a simple change in format can lessen distractions, increase the time students spend reading, and improve participation in classroom read-alouds, the impact is enormous,” said Julie A. Evans, EdD, the chief executive officer of Project Tomorrow. “Large-print books are easy to integrate across the curriculum in ELA, social studies, history, and in any library collection—and teachers don’t require any additional training to use them.”

Thorndike’s large-print books contain the exact same text as standard editions but offer a number of features designed to encourage reluctant or struggling readers to keep reading, including a 16-point font in high-contrast black ink, more space between lines and paragraphs, and high opacity paper that keeps large-print books similar in size to standard-print editions.

Key findings about the effectiveness of large print include:
The inclusion of large-print texts in classroom reading activities supports literacy development for all students.
Among participating teachers, 71% reported that reading large print improved Lexile scores by two grade levels among their students who had been reading at grade level, as did 59% of those teaching students who had been reading below grade level.

When asked if large-print books increased reading comprehension levels for specific student profiles:
• 77% of teachers agreed it did for below-grade-level readers;
• 55% of teachers saw increased comprehension among students diagnosed with ADHD.

An overwhelming majority of teachers also found that large print benefited students who:
• have reading comprehension challenges (82%)
• are easily distracted when reading (85%)
• are anxious about reading (91%)
• are learning English (76%)

Students’ access to large-print titles for schoolwork reading increased their engagement in learning and enjoyment in reading.
Among students in grades 6–12 who took part in the study, 89% said they enjoyed reading large-print books. Almost half of high schoolers reported that they were more engaged in large-print books than others they read for schoolwork.

Teachers value the large print as an easy to-integrate reading intervention within their instructional practices.
Bringing large-print books into their classrooms did not require any teacher professional development, changes in curriculum, or adjustments to teaching practices. Of the teachers in the study, 100% said it would be valuable to have more large-print titles easily accessible by students in their classrooms or libraries. At the same time, 86% of the teachers said they would recommend large print to other teachers to support students’ literacy development.

Reading large-print texts for schoolwork supported students’ emotional and mental health and their self-efficacy as readers.
Teachers made these observations:
• Large-print books decreased stress and anxiety about reading for school: 81% of below-grade-level readers 58% of students with ADHD 58% of students reading at grade level
• Saw greater confidence in reading abilities: 87% of below-grade-level readers 55% of students with ADHD 71% of students reading at grade level
• Noticed increased participation in classroom read-aloud activities: 87% of below-grade-level readers 63% of students with ADHD 52% of students reading at grade level

Students believe that access to large print books will support enhanced learning.
A robust 75% of grade 6–8 students and 86% of grade 9–12 students requested more access to large-print books in school. When asked if they thought their reading skills would improve with large print books, 62% of sixth to eighth graders predicted they would.

Anding added that as part of her “fighting any form of screen” as a distraction from reading, she’s doing anything she can to make the library more user-friendly, especially because she has many students arrive at her middle school having never been to a library.

“The findings from the Project Tomorrow study reveal that large-print books serve as a simple yet powerful transformative learning tool that can significantly reduce barriers to reading,” said Sabine McAlpine, vice president of Thorndike Press at Gale. “They demonstrate that these books offer a ‘no-lift’ intervention that helps educators facilitate improved reading fluency and enjoyment without the need for new technology or extensive training. This approach not only engages with students better but also helps them build lifelong confidence in their reading abilities.”

www.gale.com/thorndike/ylp-research

Deadline Extended for French Heritage Language Program Proposals

The deadline for proposals for the French Heritage Language Program (FHLP) has been extended to March 17, 2025.

Supported by Villa Albertine and the Albertine Foundation, FHLP provides grants of up to $30,000 for institutions to create French classes and cultural experiences for K-12 students from Francophone backgrounds.

“Through innovative pedagogical and community-building activities, FHLP supports students in strengthening their French language skills, empowering them to maintain a crucial link to their heritage, succeed academically, and opening doors to future educational and career opportunities,” says Villa Albertine.

Why apply?

  • Receive financial and pedagogical support to develop FHLP programs
  • Access curriculum catalogs and instructional resources
  • Join a national network of FHLP educators and schools
  • Expand French language education for heritage speakers across the U.S.

Who can apply?

  • Public K-12 schools
  • School districts
  • Community-based organizations
  • Nonprofit organizations working in education

Key Dates

  • Applications Open: December 16, 2024
  • NEW Application Deadline: March 17, 2025
  • Results Announced: April 14, 2025

How to Apply

  • Submit your application by March 17, 2025
Apply Here

Need More Information?
View the recording of the informational webinar, which was held on Tuesday, January 7, 2025, from 6:00-7:30 PM EST to get insights on the application process and best practices.

For any questions, please contact:
Yann Gaboriau, FHLP Coordinator – yann.gaboriau@albertinefoundation.org

123...339Page 2 of 339

Subscribe for exclusive content

Language Magazine is a monthly print and online publication that provides cutting-edge information for language learners, educators, and professionals around the world.

Subscribe

LanguageMagazine 2023

Language Magazine