New Chinese-Language Program for Canadian Labor Rights

The Toronto and York Region Labor Council (TYRLC) has released a series of videos aimed to help Chinese workers with limited proficiency with English confront worker’s rights, labor laws, and other work-related issues. The Toronto and York Region council is based out of Ontario, Canada, and “combines the strength of hundreds of local unions… [and whose] mandate is to organize and advocate on issues that are vital to working people throughout the region.”

Issues covered include how to deal with work-related injuries in relation of the responsibility of employers and employees, and also tips on how new immigrants can become health and safety experts. Other topics included are how to move from intermediary labor to a community worker organizer, and discussions to amend the labor law to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

“By sharing the stories of Chinese workers facing harsh workplace exploitation, workers can know that they are not alone in their struggles. Instead of saying any job is better than no job as how most immigrants console themselves, they can mobilize to find solutions, learning their rights and from each other,” said Jennifer Huang, Senior Organizer with TYRLC.

View some examples of the program below, or an archive of all episodes here.


Netflix Unveils New Spanish-Language Mexican Drama

Netflix has just released its new Spanish-language series, Ingobernable. Netflix has had its fair share of success recently in the Spanish-language department, most notably the 2015 Spanish-language drama Narcos, a crime drama filmed in Colombia that follows the story of drug kingpin, Pablo Escobar. Narcos was wildly successful with American audiences, and presumably proved to Netflix that English-speaking audiences are open-minded when it comes to content presented in Spanish. The online video service therefore rolled out the carpet again for a release of Ingobernable. The title means ungovernable in English, and is most likely referencing the tumultuous socio-political climate of Mexico that the show encompasses.

[Warning: spoiler alerts ahead.] The first episode opens with star Kate Del Castillo (who plays the character, Emilia Urquiza), looking over a hotel balcony after deciding to divorce her politician husband, President Diego Nava (played by Erik Hayser). The scene erupts into violence, as Diego Nava drags Emilia through the presidential suite, down a flight of stairs, and throws her against a wall, until they end up on the balcony where Diego falls to his death below. When Emilia awakes from the ordeal, a bloody gun has been placed in her hand, thus thrusting the viewer forward into the dramatic world of Emilia hiding from the people who framed her for her husband’s murder, along with the actual Mexican government.

The series, therefore, follows less the inner workings of the political world of Mexico, but rather the first lady. The show was shot and produced in Mexico City by Argos Comunicación, a production company that is known for its work in successful telenovelas. In the fashion of telenovelas, English audiences may find the first couple of episodes a tad melodramatic, especially as the backstory of Urquiza and Hayser is unveiled slowly, leaving Urquiza to do little more than appear secretive on screen. Still, as the plot expands throughout coming episodes, it will be interesting to see how English and Spanish audiences, alike, react to the Spanish-language drama.

March Edition

In this issue:

Helping Academic English Learners Develop Productive Word Knowledge
Dr. Kate Kinsella offers evidence-based instructional practices to advance students’ verbal and written command of critical words


Language Teacher vs. Acquisition Facilitator

Carol Gaab focuses on the learners in front of her, not on a method, a curriculum, or a plan

Multilingual Myth Busting
Kathy Stein-Smith uses linguistic and cultural knowledge as weapons in the battle against fake news

What does Good Blended Learning Look Like?
Stephen Noonoo shares best practices for blended learning programs that work


Bogotá, Better for All
Kristal Bivona is excited that the Colombian capital is becoming an even better destination for Spanish immersion





The Art of Teaching

M. Elhess, E. Elturki, and J. Egbert offer strategies to support creativity in the language classroom

“Our students aren’t creative,” claimed one of the language teachers in the professional development workshop. The other participating teachers nodded in agreement.

“How do you know?” asked the workshop facilitator.

The teacher hesitated. “Well,” she said, “I guess I don’t. We don’t ask them to do anything creative, mostly because we teachers are not creative either.”

The teacher in this real-life scenario was not only stating an assumption commonly held in many parts of the world but also pointing to a lack of professional development in an area that relates directly to student achievement in language learning. To address this issue, this article explains how supporting creativity in the language classroom can engage both teachers and students and provide opportunities for students to develop essential language and thinking skills. All humans have natural creative abilities, and this does not differ by culture, language background, previous education, or language level (Huh and Egbert, 2010; Torrance, 1962). Creative thinking is commonly understood as the process of thinking, acting, and/or producing differently, also known as divergent thinking. Producing art like Van Gogh and Shakespeare or inventing an electric car is considered creative because there is some aspect of novelty or innovation involved; however, creativity can also be found in much smaller outcomes, such as a child’s painting of a pink elephant or a language learner’s story about her superhero. Creativity can entail critical thinking and the assessment and validation of an issue, and it appears in making assumptions, generating new hypotheses, and developing analogical problem solving to come up with many different answers and possibilities. However, while critical thinking focuses on achieving a single answer or possibility (e.g., taking the train as the best way to escape traffic), creativity can employ critical thinking skills to seek different ways (e.g., driving different routes or flying a helicopter) to solve a problem. Creativity can also result from an inspired “Eureka!” moment; for example, when Percy Spencer observed a peanut butter candy bar melting in his pocket, it stimulated ideas that led to the invention of the microwave oven (Tweedie, 2015).

Guilford’s seminal article (1967) characterizes creativity as a process that produces numerous ideas (fluency), produces ideas of various types (flexibility), builds on and extends existing ideas (elaboration), and produces new ideas (originality). Examples of these aspects of creativity in the language classroom include:

Fluency: Brainstorming alternative words to describe a feeling (e.g., anger);

Flexibility: Changing the views, ideas, or actions of someone in a folktale;

Elaboration: Explaining in detail why humans should explore space;

Originality: Creating a product to solve world hunger.

Educators can focus on these four simple elements to develop and support creative thinking in language classrooms. Teaching and allowing for creativity in language classrooms, even in incremental doses, can result in better language learning and improved learner capability to address a variety of situations in life (Huh and Egbert, 2010).

Creativity, Engagement, and Language Learning

The ability to think creatively in general can facilitate students’ abilities to solve problems, to see alternatives, and to use language in new ways; more specifically, creative, open-ended tasks are often engaging for students, and student levels of engagement during language tasks is directly related to their language achievement (Reschly and Christenson, 2012). In the classroom context, learners can be engaged in creativity tasks when they participate in activities that are meaningful and have some real-life application, are given opportunities to interact with peers and others around the task, are challenged by the task, and receive sufficient support to complete the task. Since creativity can be included in any topic or task, language educators can provide a wide range of opportunities and choices for learners to utilize so they can use language in divergent ways.

For example, according to Jordan and Carlile (2013), creativity tasks can provide many opportunities for social interaction; in language classrooms, tasks can be based in collaborative work where learners are exposed to a variety of input and have opportunities to negotiate meaning in the target language (Egbert, 2009). In creating a novel work or solving an open-ended problem, language learners articulate new thoughts and ideas, express opinions, and make inferences, using language as the foundation. Because engaged language learners are typically focused on doing whatever they can to complete the task, this process generates opportunities for learning new concepts and language structures through recreating, paraphrasing, summarizing, and learning and using other skills needed to reach their goal. In this dynamic environment, students can be pushed past their current language abilities to express new meanings, “leading to greater linguistic intake and success in second-language acquisition” (Albert and Kormos, 2011, p. 90).

Creativity Tasks in the Language Classroom

A creative classroom environment, then, is active, safe, challenging, and motivating and provides engaging, open-ended opportunities for brainstorming, problem solving, interaction, collaboration, hands-on experience, and real-life applications. The teacher’s role is to support and extend learners’ creative thinking within a safe environment by, for example, encouraging them to think “outside the box,” elaborate on their responses, address the question from a different angle, and/or take a risk on something new. The following are some ways to nurture creativity in the language classroom:

Questioning Techniques

Teachers can support students’ active participation in the learning process by, instead of lecturing, posing purposeful questions that assist students in making connections, generating hypotheses, and arriving at a variety of conclusions. To model this, during the presentation stage of a lesson, the teacher can pose questions and then answer the questions in a kind of think-aloud, making reasoning visible to students. Whether it is a grammar, reading, listening, or speaking lesson, the teacher can model creative thinking to students by wondering.

Creative Responses to Assignments 

When creating an assignment, teachers can provide students with more than one format in which to complete the assignment; the teacher can also provide the choice for students to develop their own products. The same goes for assessment; teachers can leave room for creativity in how students demonstrate their understanding of a specific language skill or content item. For example, to demonstrate mastery of a learning objective, instead of writing sentences or completing a handout that contains the target grammar or vocabulary, students can choose to write a poem, a short story, a song, or another option to exhibit their knowledge. This supports the fundamental premise of creativity—that there are diverse paths and methods for expressing an idea—and creative pieces can also be much more engaging for the teacher to assess and discuss.

Hands-On Lessons and Collaboration 

As noted previously, instead of—or in addition to—completing worksheets with practice drills and fill-in-the-blank exercises, students need opportunities to manipulate language and content. Teachers can work with their students to design hands-on lessons that integrate role plays, drama, artwork, and other creative outcomes to support language production. Grammar and other skills can be integrated into creativity tasks. For example, students can work together to act out a reading to demonstrate reading comprehension; create a role play by manipulating a dialogue from the textbook/audio to practice speaking, vocabulary, stress, and intonation; describe objects or pictures that they find intriguing with adjectives to try to get peers to “buy” their product; reinvent stories by inventing new characters, plots, and endings to practice narration (fanfiction websites can be popular vehicles for doing this); or use imperatives to give someone directions to a place students make up. Larry Ferlazzo provides engaging ways to teach creatively while addressing creative thinking and language through the use of photographs in “Using Photos with English-Language Learners” on the Edutopia website (www.edutopia.org/blog/ell-engagment-using-photos, 2016).

Students as Partners in Teaching

Students can use creative thinking to teach and create activities and materials for their peers. Students can be responsible for explaining a specific learning outcome to class using any means they find effective. This is a great way for students to get a chance to be creative and learn the material well—as the old saying goes, “the best way to learn is to teach.” Student-led discussion, including debate, is another great way for them to question what they read, verbalize their reasoning, and expand their thinking through listening to other perspectives. Additionally, students can work in groups to create games on a particular topic and then play each other’s games. They can also be challenged to summarize an assigned topic/unit in a creative and effective way to help their classmates understand the material. Empowering students by treating them as partners in teaching can boost their engagement and help them become active thinkers.

Incorporating Technology 

In addition to creating and getting feedback on fanfiction at sites such as fanfiction.net, technology can be used in many ways to support teacher and student creative thinking and language. A simple example is to take advantage of brainstorming and graphic-organization software tools such as the Popplet app (available from the Apple Store) or those listed on Mashable (mashable.com/2013/09/25/mind-mapping-tools/#lQKnf6f_qkqr). These tools can be used to start projects or at any point in the process where more divergent thinking is needed. Students can also design comic strips using simple sentences (e.g., to practice the verb “to be,” subject pronouns, and object pronouns) with web sites such as Pixton (www.pixton.com) and MakeBeliefsComix (www.makebeliefscomix.com). They can think of creative ways to develop and use room escapes with Room Escape Maker (doctorfou.com/room-escape-maker) and similar sites, or they can create videos to explain a process, compare and contrast, or argue for/against a controversial topic. Wixie (www.wixie.com), Microsoft Word, and other programs with text, graphics, and audio capabilities can be used to create brochures advertising a hotel or business or a menu to practice food vocabulary. Students may even build a website using a free website builder such as Wix (www.wix.com) or Weebly (www.weebly.com) for their favorite team, hobby, or book character; in the process, they use various sentence types, grammar, and vocabulary. Teachers and students can make hilarious short videos for any task, from introductions to impromptu speeches, with blabberize.com. A quick search on Google for “ELL” and “creativity” produces links to all kinds of technologies that can support creativity and language.

Challenges and Solutions

There are a number of factors that can prevent creativity in the classroom. For example, a restrictive school environment and standardized instructions may make teachers think that there is little room for creativity. A lack of resources (e.g., technology, storybooks, photos) and time constraints can also limit the focus on creativity. More importantly, teachers may not consider themselves creative or have ever considered the importance of creativity in language learning, and so not address it. Cultural attitudes toward creativity may also play a role in how it is considered. For example, some teachers may believe that students who think out of the box are questioning the teacher’s authority; others may regard creativity as wasting time, or associate being imaginative with wrong answers. In addition, students may display different attitudes toward creativity (Green, 1993) when rote learning and teacher-based instruction are pivotal to the learning processes of their home countries.

To overcome challenges that educators may face when integrating creativity into the language classroom, the first step is for teachers to take it slowly. Creativity can be encouraged in small ways. Educators can bring up the idea of creative thinking with the class by discussing the conversation questions about creativity from the Internet TESL Journal (iteslj.org/questions/creativity.html). Another idea is to ask one open-ended question (one that does not have a right or wrong answer) in each class session and allow students to propose even the wildest ideas they can think of in response. A five-minute period when no criticism is allowed and all ideas are explored can be a great beginning to supporting creative thinking and language fluency. Another small step is asking a different student to tell a short story on an impromptu topic to the class (or a smaller group) each time the class meets. This can be a great warmup for the class, does not take a lot of time, and can engage students in learning during the rest of the lesson.

As students and teachers become more used to the creative-thinking process, they can apply the four elements described previously in additional ways. The internet has an amazing array of creative-thinking resources for educators, students, and parents; the use of these materials can save time and effort in lesson planning and implementation and provide ideas for incorporating creative thinking in even the most restrictive classroom environments.

In addition, educators at all levels need to have time and support to practice creative thinking themselves. This is important because teacher beliefs influence their pedagogy, and if they, like the teachers in the workshop in the opening scenario, do not believe that they or their students are creative, they are not likely to facilitate creative thinking in their classrooms. Workshops and professional development that demonstrate the ubiquity and importance of creativity, along with its centrality in language learning, could help in this regard.

Conclusion

Creative thinking is not language specific, so any chance that learners have to practice in any language can advance their ability. If creativity cannot be addressed sufficiently in the language classroom, learners can be encouraged to use their creative-thinking skills outside of the classroom as they participate in social media, make up and play games with friends, and even tell bedtime stories with their families. However, with guidance from educators who understand not only their own creative abilities but the importance of creative thinking to language learning, work, and life, students can become better problem solvers, employees, and global citizens.

References

Mohamed Elhess is an adjunct faculty at the College of Education at Washington State University. He teaches courses in the English as Second Language (ESL) endorsement. His research interests include student engagement, creativity, and addressing the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse learner.

Eman Elturki has a PhD in Language, Literacy and Technology from Washington State University and a master’s degree in TESOL from the University of Southern California. She teaches ESL and serves as the Curriculum and Materials Coordinator at the Intensive American Language Center of Washington State University.

Joy Egbert is professor of ELL and Education Technology at Washington State University, Pullman, where she coordinates the ELL teacher education programs. Dr. Egbert’s research and teaching focus on task engagement and computer supported language learning. She is the current Editor of TESOL Journal.

Virtual Learning a Reality

ATi Studios has released a virtual reality app for language education to combine the artificial-intelligence technology behind chatbots with speech recognition in virtual reality. Learn Languages VR by Mondly allows people to experience lifelike conversations with virtual characters, in 28 different languages. The new VR application is intended to realize virtual reality’s promise of rich, immersive, and automated educational experiences. The app offers instant feedback on pronunciation, suggestions that enrich learners’ vocabulary, and surprises that transform learning a language into a fun experience.

Mondly’s conversational voice chatbot for language learning was first released by the company in August 2016. The technology uses advanced speech recognition that understands millions of phrases and words in 28 different languages. To bridge the technologies behind its chatbot, speech recognition, and VR, the company had to develop a new automatic voice-detection system. Alexandru Iliescu, the CEO and co-founder of ATi Studios, spoke about the challenges involved: “The toughest challenge was to make the speech interaction feel natural in VR. Because VR is so immersive, we quickly realized that traditional speech-interaction models that require a tap or a voice command to enable speech recognition would kill the flow of the experience. So we developed our own automatic voice-detection system. It calibrates to the room’s background noise, and it ignores unintentional sounds. The result is amazing, the conversations with the virtual characters happen as naturally as real-life conversations—they just flow.”“Fluency in a language is not how many words you know, but how well you communicate with the words you do,” continued Iliescu. “Our goal with Mondly is to push the envelope of language learning with new technologies that drive our users to become better communicators and have richer life experiences. And the Oculus team and the virtual reality technology they’ve created offered us the perfect environment for achieving this goal. ”

Full list of languages: British English, American English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Romanian, Greek, Portuguese, Arabic, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Polish, Swedish, Turkish, Ukrainian, Vietnamese, and Thai. mondlylanguages.com

Help ELLs Scaffold

Drawp for School is a digital content-creation and collaboration tool with embedded language scaffolds for English language learners (ELLs). Teachers use Drawp to provide language-scaffolding support to assignments in any subject. Students can work on those assignments with text, voice, or sketched responses—individually or in groups. Drawp helps teachers generate comprehensible input for students for any assignment, and it encourages language-transfer skills. The language scaffolds were developed by the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE), and the Digital Scaffolding Tool for English Language Learners, Powered by Drawp for School was recently awarded support from the National Science Foundation.

The Drawp tool allows teachers to turn content objectives into language objectives. The software promotes student interaction with teachers and is easily incorporated into instructional time. Students can toggle between language scaffolds, which can be assigned by depth of knowledge and language proficiency. Drawp is ideal for all ELLs and is especially useful for newcomers, dual-immersion classrooms, and foreign language learners.

Drawp’s software is COPPA compliant, and no email is needed for students. The software is cloud based, allowing students to work from any location. Drawp is available for web, iPad, Android, Chromebook, Mac, and Windows and is integrated with Google and Dropbox.

drawpforschool.com

What Does Good Blended Learning Look Like?


Stephen Noonoo shares best practices for blended learning programs that work

During the past few years, blended learning has been hailed by schools worldwide as everything from the future of education to the conduit that will finally make true differentiated instruction a reality. And it is not all hype: the best blended-learning programs truly can move away from the lecture-based instructional model many of us grew up with and free educators to completely reimagine what learning looks like from the ground up. But setting up a new program is a tall order for even the most well-provisioned districts, and the monumental change can be difficult for leaders, who may look to technology as the solution instead of one part of an overall blueprint for success.

“The temptation for a district when they say they’re going to do blended learning, or these days, personalized learning, is to buy a bunch of tools and then ask educators to try and fit those into their practice,” says Julia Freeland Fisher, the director of education at the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, which specializes in research on blended learning. “Instead, we would encourage people to ask, ‘What’s the problem with practice you’re trying to solve?’”

With a core subject such as reading, that problem might be figuring out how to use a blended model to boost test scores for a subset of students or how to give teachers more time to do small-group instruction or guided reading. Part of the difficulty with planning blended-learning models is that there is no one-size-fits-all model, and it often looks different from district to district or even among classrooms. “It can be all over the map in terms of problems of practice,” says Freeland Fisher, whose institute recently released an interactive framework for designing blended-learning programs at blendedlearning.org. “But it always comes down to using technology to scale a new instructional model, rather than cramming it into your old model.”

While technology is a critical part of any blended-learning initiative, those with experience stress that it is far from the only aspect, or even the most important one. Even as technology helps provide new layers of differentiation that were not previously available in the old paradigm, good instruction and instructors are the true heart of blended learning. In other words, according to another expert in the field, Eileen Buckley Murphy, “We cannot over-charge software—no matter how adaptive and wonderful it may be on the label—with doing the job of a thinking human.” Buckley Murphy, a former district administrator who is currently CEO of ThinkCERCA, a blended-literacy program that focuses on self-paced and collaborative learning, adds, “The teacher’s role in creating the context in which it’s meaningful for the student to learn is still essential.”

Again, take reading as an example. The advent of adaptive software, which adjusts to emerging readers and presents content on their personal levels, helps students not only to learn to read but to complete lesson content as well, says Amanda Psarovarkas, a Texas educator who recently completed a two-year thesis in successful blended-learning models as part of her master’s in education technology at Lamar University. “It helps you to hit all the students on their level, and then do a very Vygotsky stepping ladder,” she said, referring to the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky, whose work posits that students learn concepts in progressive stages, provided they are receiving the right help from someone further up the ladder than they are, like a teacher or more advanced peer.

That instructor-led support is crucial to creating a program where students are not just using technology mindlessly to check off tasks but rather in conjunction with the support they receive from their teacher, says Buckley Murphy. “Some people have a view of blended learning that is all about leveraging technology to teach the kids, instead of teachers teaching kids,” she says. “When it comes to the skills hardest to teach, a true blend is required. The technology can’t just be for the students to learn from alone in isolation. It has to be technology that teachers can use to teach and that students can use to collaborate with together.”

Perhaps the most ideal approach, according to Psarovarkas, is one in which students are given freedom to learn in ways that suit them best and teachers are given the flexibility to work more closely with students as they see best. In this model, learning is “no longer something that’s done to the student,” she says, “but rather the student and the teachers are true partners in the relationship.”

Blending in Action

So what does a good blended-learning program look like, and how do schools go about creating it? In the case of Kyla Cook and Robyn Kendrick, both second-grade teachers at Stanton County USD in Kansas, it all starts with a strong foundation.

Cook and Kendrick have been teaching with each other for more than 13 years, and in that time they have blended a lot together. There is the formal blended-learning reading program that Cook and Kendrick co-run, which has been running strong for a few years at this point, but the pair have also blended the lines of their classrooms as well as their professional development and decision making about the program. In short, they do a lot of sharing.

“We have our own separate classrooms, but some of my students come into Robyn’s class for part of the day and some of hers come into mine,” explains Cook. “I don’t feel like I’m just responsible for my students but for mine and Robyn’s, and she feels the same. It helps with our collaboration. We feel like we’re in this together as a team.”

Both teachers’ classrooms are 1:1 with Chromebooks, and for about 90 minutes each day, students work in a highly structured reading program using a station-rotation model. Each day’s reading block begins with a review designed to make sure students have mastered previous skills before moving on to new ones. Then, there are about 15 minutes dedicated to whole-group instruction, during which a new skill—say, phonetic awareness or phonics—is introduced via a software program called Reading Horizons, which provides much of the structure during computer time. After the new skill has been introduced, students take their places at the large dry-erase boards around the classroom and write words as their teacher dictates to them. The dictation helps reinforce the new skill, but it also serves as baked-in formative assessment.

“What I like about the dictation is being able to see all the students at one time,” Kendrick says. “It’s the immediate feedback of being able to evaluate them and let them know immediately what their mistake is, and to give them a chance to give reasons for why they made the mistake.”

After a quick five-minute transfer, where the new skill is projected onto the board and discussed as a group one last time, students splinter off into small groups for their station-rotation time. Typically, Cook and Kendrick separate students into three groups based on comparative reading level; stronger readers are grouped together, as are emerging readers. One group stays with the teacher, who conducts a small-group lesson based on what those particular students need the most help with. Another will be on the Chromebooks working on a lesson based on the new skill introduced at the beginning of the block. Students in that group read independently, periodically taking short quizzes to measure their understanding. A third group works either as a group or with a paraprofessional, getting extra attention on developing their vocabulary and fluency skills. Every 20 minutes, groups switch.

“Since students are spending about 20 minutes by themselves at the computer, we spend a lot of time at the beginning of the year training the students on our expectations,” Kendrick says. “We teach them how to self-monitor through the computer program, and we show them what we expect out of them during our blended-learning model.”

Part of self-monitoring, she says, includes knowing exactly what lessons they should be working on for the day. “That is something that didn’t work well in the beginning: the kids just progressed at their own pace,” Kendrick says. “So some kids were struggling, and some were several lessons ahead of what we were teaching. And then we realized that to have the most impact, we needed the computer lessons to match what we were instructing in class.”

With older kids, both teachers agree, it might be a different story. But with second graders—kids as young as seven and eight—Kendrick and Cook want to be sure that the introduction of new skills is coming directly from them. “We want to be the ones that are providing that primary instruction, rather than the computer,” Kendrick says. “And then the computer is a supplementary or supportive piece for that.”

While computer time might be supportive, it is still a fundamental part of the program, both in getting students to improve their skills independently and in improving instruction for the teachers. Since every keystroke and assessment question is carefully logged in the Reading Horizons platform, Cook and Kendrick have a trove of data to fall back on, telling them how students are faring with new skills and where they might need additional supports.

“For those kids that know the skill, it differentiates within the computer program for them,” Kendrick says. When the software realizes the student is applying the skill readily and without much error, it moves him or her along at a faster pace. “They don’t have to go through every step that a struggling student does,” she says. “I love that it differentiates based on how they score on activities and whether or not it has to give them more practice.”

Later, the teachers go in and pore over that data, checking where students are struggling and readjusting their groups and teaching methods accordingly. “We’re looking at that data regularly so we know students aren’t over there for 20 minutes just playing around on the computer,” Cook says. When students become well acquainted with the routine after a few months, the teachers can begin to give students a little more freedom, and trust, during the day.

“Now that we’re halfway through the year, students are getting a lot more proficient at asking questions, and that’s a higher-level skill itself,” Cook says. Both teachers regularly use their data and observations to shift groups around, pairing strong readers with those who need extra attention on a skill.

“We teach them at the beginning: do not tell them the answers or their mistakes,” Cook says. “Ask them questions, so that they have to figure out where their error occurred and how they’re going to fix that. We tell the kids, ‘Now both of your brains are working.’”

For Cook and Kendrick, every year is different, bringing new students, new resources, and new challenges. Part of the success of their model, as they see it, is the inherent support that comes with co-planning and co-teaching. But they’ve also worked hard to keep their program flexible, while remaining intricately structured and timed almost to the minute during the reading block. “A lot of it was trial and error, but we definitely do not do the same thing every year,” Cook explains. “We as teachers have to look at it like this: each year, the students’ needs are different, so we need to be very flexible. We don’t change the whole model from year to year; we do minor tweaks. It’s constantly changing dynamics in our classrooms.”

Stephen Noonoo is a freelance writer and consultant covering the intersection of education and technology. He is based in Los Angeles.

Competition Launches Arabic Literacy Apps for War-Affected Syrian Children

Antura and the Letters and Feed the Monster, the two winners of the EduApp4Syria innovation competition, were announced today and then released worldwide as open-source Arabic literacy learning games. Both games are available for free download through Google Play and the App Store.
The EduApp4Syria competition was launched in January 2016 as a challenge to game developers and pedagogical experts around the world to create smartphone applications that can build foundational literacy skills in Arabic and improve psychosocial well-being for Syrian out-of-school children aged five to ten. Downloadable learning games such as these can be accessible to war-affected Syrian families, as smartphones are widely used.
Antura and the Letters (Google Play & App Store), developed by a consortium led by Cologne Game Lab, and Feed the Monster (Google Play & App Store), developed by a consortium led by Apps Factory, were selected from a field of 78 competitors from around the world by a jury of experts in game-based learning, literacy, psychosocial well-being, Syrian culture and Arabic language. The jury was led by Dr. Alf Inge Wang, a professor in game technology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and co-inventor of the learning game platform Kahoot! which just recorded its one billionth player. The selection process has involved several rounds of testing with Syrian children.
“All children have the right to education. We wanted to find new, effective and innovative ways to meet the critical need for literacy learning options for the estimated 2.5 million Syrian children whose education have been disrupted by six years of conflict. We must act now or we stand to lose an entire generation with huge long-term developmental effects,” said Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Børge Brende. “Norway is now looking into how we can develop the use of learning Apps in humanitarian crises further. We are hopeful that stakeholders in the private sector, governments and international aid organizations will embrace these as global learning resources. Every child that learns to read and write, have the potential to contribute positively to society,” the Minister said.
The competition sought highly engaging and user-friendly applications, so that young learners can stay focused and have a fun, positive and motivating experience playing the games with minimal adult supervision. Addressing the innovation challenge required a broad spectrum of expertise within the competing teams, including pedagogical, psychological and Arabic language expertise, as well as game development, publishing and marketing. Consequently, both the winning games are a result of collaboration between several institutions.
“Through this competition, we were eager to engage problem solvers from around the globe to develop an innovative, mobile solution to respond to the needs of displaced Syrian children who are out of school or struggling in new schools. These children, who are innocent victims of one of our generation’s greatest humanitarian crises, deserve our very best thinking and efforts to help them overcome the challenges of not being able to regularly attend school,” stated Richard Stearns, President of World Vision in the U.S.
The EduApp4Syria competition is funded by the Norwegian government and coordinated by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) in cooperation with:
· The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU);
· All Children Reading: A Grand Challenge for Development, a partnership of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), World Vision and the Australian Government;
· Mobile operator Orange;
· The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE).

In addition, UNICEF Ventures’ Office of Innovation will provide funding and serve as technical advisor for field testing of select applications.

For more information about the EduApp4Syria competition visit
www.norad.no/eduapp4syria
and www.AllChildrenReading.org. Follow the EduApp4Syria partners on Twitter: @NorwayMFA, @noradno, @ReadingGCD, @INEEtweets, @NTNU, @orange, @dfat.

Helping Academic English Learners Develop Productive Word Knowledge

Dr. Kate Kinsella offers evidence-based instructional practices to advance students’ verbal and written command of critical words

Vocabulary Knowledge and Overall Academic Achievement

Vocabulary plays a crucial role in all aspects of academic competence in K–12 schooling. Certainly, one of the most consistent findings in reading research is the extent to which students’ vocabulary knowledge directly supports their reading comprehension (Baumann and Kaméenui, 2004; Graves, 2006). In the primary grades, native speakers of English who have a vast number of words in their oral vocabularies can more efficiently sound out and recognize familiar words as well as comprehend and appreciate text passages. As students progress to the upper grades and tackle more varied and challenging narrative and informational selections, vocabulary range and complexity strongly influence text readability (Chall and Dale, 1995).

Native speakers of English with anemic school-based vocabulary and weak verbal abilities struggle with reading and related writing tasks, contributing to disappointing overall academic achievement beyond the primary grades (Biemiller,1999;

Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998). If words are not in children’s verbal repertoire, those children understandably have trouble mapping sounds to words in print and accessing relevant background knowledge as they move from relatively accessible narrative selections to a range of complex texts across subject areas (National Reading Panel, 2000).

Research focused on school-age English learners similarly correlates vocabulary knowledge with second-language reading comprehension and other measures of school success, including high-stakes test scores and writing proficiency (August and Shanahan, 2006; Carlo et al., 2005). In fact, depth of word knowledge proves to be the most reliable predictor of English learner academic achievement across grade levels and curriculum (Marzano, 2004; Saville-Troike, 1984).

Economics and Word Prowess

Economics has an undeniable impact on a preschool youth’s early vocabulary enrichment and school readiness. A preschooler entering kindergarten from a college-

educated, professional household is likely to recognize and readily use twice as many words as a classmate from a non-college-educated, working-class family. Of greater concern, the child with parents who have completed an advanced degree typically crosses the kindergarten threshold with quadruple the vocabulary base of a child from a welfare family (Flynn, 2006).

Since growing up in under-resourced households can seriously restrict children’s daily vocabulary exposure and usage, bolstering their command of words for social and academic contexts is an instructional imperative (Hart and Risley, 2003; Snow, 1991).

Receptive and Productive Knowledge

Knowledge of word meanings can be classified as productive or receptive. Productive vocabulary is the working set of words we use comfortably and regularly when speaking and writing. Receptive vocabulary is a broader spectrum of words we recognize in specific contexts or at least partially understand when listening or reading. A person’s command of individual words falls on a virtual continuum of understanding. Dale (1965) proposes four levels to characterize the extent of an individual’s word knowledge: (1) have never seen or heard the word before; (2) recognize the word, but don’t know what it means; (3) have partial understanding of the word and readily associate it with a topic or concept; (4) know the word well and can explain it and skillfully use it. We develop incremental knowledge of a word as we encounter it again with new contexts and word partners—other words that commonly accompany the target word.

What “Owning” a Word Implies

To actually “own” a word means, in fact, to know a great deal about it. To perform adeptly on contemporary assessments requiring complex text analysis and evidence-based constructed responses, students must recognize a critical mass of vocabulary and be able to competently deploy a toolkit of high-utility academic words they clearly own. Nation (1990) analyzed the layers of complexity involved consciously or unconsciously in truly knowing—not just recognizing—a word, including its spoken and written forms.

To illustrate, review Table 1 and consider what is implied in having an agile verbal and written command of the high-utility academic word analysis. For a middle school team to apply the word analysis in a formal science report in a sentence like the following, the young scholars require a wealth of conscious lexical knowledge: After a thorough analysis of the nutrition label, we determined that the fruit snack was unhealthy because it contained artificial coloring, sodium, and high-fructose corn syrup.

Table 1: In-Depth Word Knowledge: Analysis

Pronunciation: a • nal • y • sis

Spelling: a-n-a-l-y-s-i-s

Part of Speech: noun

Meaning: a careful study of something to better understand it or find out what it contains

Synonym: study; examination

Antonym: none

Register: It is primarily used in formal academic and professional communication.

Frequency: It is not commonly used in casual conversation or correspondence, but it is frequently used in formal academic and professional contexts.

Collocations (Word Partners): It is commonly used in tandem with the verbs conduct and offer and the adjectives careful, close, in-depth, and thorough.

Derivations (Word Family Members): (Verb) analyze; (adjective) analytical.

The Vocabulary Equity Challenge 

Educators serving English learners and economically disadvantaged youths with

vocabulary voids need to simultaneously shore up their receptive vocabulary and build their productive vocabulary toolkit. It is not essential or realistic for students to develop a proficient command of every word that appears within a unit of study. Many topic-focused and technical terms must be understood adequately to grapple with focal-lesson concepts and processes. However, in the grand scheme of linguistic priorities, the fact that a ten-year-old struggling to acquire academic English cannot effectively pronounce or write biome and habitat is less worrisome than the student’s inability to discuss similarities and differences between two species or their environments. Being able to compare and utilize correct sentence structure and vocabulary for this critical academic competency will be required across subject areas and grade levels, not just within this particular unit of study.

To propel youths with Swiss-cheese English proficiency to higher levels of vocabulary knowledge, teachers must establish priorities for more robust instruction and meaningful, supported application. Over the past two decades, mounting research has highlighted the benefits of planned, intentional vocabulary instruction to support literacy and content learning for all students, native English speakers and English learners alike.

According to the National Reading Panel (2000), effective instruction includes opportunities for incidental word learning through wide reading of texts, complemented by intentional instruction of high-priority words aligned with academic success. Increasing reading volume, with a balance of narrative and informational texts, enhances receptive word knowledge (Cunningham and Stanovich, 1998). However, exposure to words through independent reading does not equip students with the productive word knowledge or confidence to hazard applying new terms and phrases on their own. Marzano (2004) asserts that for students with less-developed English language skills, planned, explicit vocabulary instruction has a more pedagogically defensible track record of improving lesson comprehension and communicative competence than indirect or impromptu approaches.

Explicit Vocabulary Instruction to Build Productive Word Knowledge

Explicit, interactive vocabulary instruction has a clear goal of guiding students in gaining ownership of critical new words. The process of building productive word knowledge begins with actively involving students in reading, pronouncing, chorally repeating, and accurately copying a target word (Beck et al., 2002). To grasp a new academic word, students require an efficiently explained meaning framed in accessible language such as a familiar synonym, rather than a rambling and exhaustive formal definition (Stahl, 1999). Students whose first language shares cognates with English benefit from having parallel words called out, such as the Spanish and English cognates comparison/comparacíon from the common Latin root (Calderón, 2007).

Teacher-generated pictures and simple drawings help students formulate a mental model of the word meaning (Marzano, 2004), but abstract terms such as perspective or bias are difficult to convey in a single, simple illustration. Evocative example sentences can help students create their own vivid and memorable mental images while also helping them understand how the new word functions syntactically and grammatically in an academic statement. When illustrative example sentences strategically include common collocations or word partners, students are more likely to grasp how the word is actually used in academic contexts. Note how the written examples within the notetaking guide in Table 2 include common academic adjectives (major, key) that regularly partner with the high-use noun factor.

The vocabulary notetaking guide in Table 2 includes key elements that should be addressed when developing precise understanding of a high-utility academic word. Without an opportunity to see and pronounce the target word, explore relevant examples, and take some form of notes for review purposes, few learners will recall the meaning. The blanks provide opportunities for students to focus on engaging in repetition and listening comprehension while taking a few critical notes, including correctly copying the word and its cognate (if offered) and completing example sentences provided by the teacher to deepen understanding. The term factor is used widely in discussions of causes and effects in science and social studies lessons as well as news reports. It is a high-value, portable word for text analysis and constructed responses such as informative and argumentative writing. It therefore warrants more time and attention in terms of its formal introduction.

Moving from Basic Understanding to Capable Verbal Application of a Word

The sample vocabulary notetaking guide is a practical tool to present and reliably facilitate recording of essential information about a word. This reference tool effectively guides notetaking and discussion, but it does not ensure productive word knowledge. Neophyte academic-English speakers deserve carefully crafted opportunities to successfully flex their language muscles using a new word. Simply asking provocative questions will not elicit competent use of the word in a complete sentence. Imagine the following common classroom scenario. After introducing the meaning of the lesson term factor, the teacher strives to deepen understanding by asking “What factors do you consider when you pick out a new book to read at the school library?” After a lengthy pause, one fledgling volunteer offers “the pictures,” prompting a classmate to add “the author.” While conceptually on task, neither response demonstrates capable use of the word—that is, productive word knowledge. When encouraged to try to reframe a brief contribution in a complete sentence, the puzzled volunteer replies “It’s the pictures,” failing to comprehend the request for a more thoughtful response in academic register.

Form-focused and carefully scaffolded verbal exchanges equip English learners and reticent readers with the linguistic competence to successfully apply newly taught words (Coleman and Goldenberg, 2012; Dutro and Kinsella, 2010). Interacting with their teacher and peers in structured verbal and writing tasks using response frames enables less-proficient readers and English learners to take careful notice of how the new word operates grammatically. Carefully orchestrated initial practice using a sentence scaffold increases the odds that students develop accurate fluency, the ability to effortlessly produce error-free, contextually appropriate language (Dutro and Kinsella, 2010).

Response frames such as those included in Table 3 also equip the teacher with a concrete mechanism for verbal and written modeling. Simply offering a model verbal response to a lesson question places the burden for auditory processing and analysis on academic English learners. Rarely are they able to hold the modeled response in their short-term memories, deconstruct how it is being utilized, and effectively reconstruct a capable individual contribution. At best, they can recollect some of the content in the response, but not the linguistic elements such as sentence structure and grammatical nuances. If we intend to help them effectively utilize the word on subsequent academic response tasks, we owe it to them to offer more than verbal examples and encouragement.

Table 2: High-Utility Academic Vocabulary Notetaking Guide

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3: Sentence Frames for Scaffolded Verbal Tasks  

Target High-Utility Academic Word: factor

•  Sentence Frame (including the word but requiring appropriate content)

•  Not wearing ____________ is often a major factor in

skateboarding injuries.

•  The main factor in my decision not to go to the _______________________    was that I had __________________.

• Sentence Frame (requiring the correct word form and appropriate content)

•  One of the most important __________________when I pur-

chase a gift for a close friend is the _______________________.

•  One major ____________ that can contribute to a

(positive, negative; high, low) ___________ grade on a test is

____________________.

Developing Academic Writing Proficiency with High-Utility Words

For many teachers, the phrase teaching vocabulary conjures up an eclectic array of word sorts, matching exercises, crossword puzzles, concept organizers, and picture drawing. These random activities are typically silent, independent, and unmonitored tasks that might reasonably follow, but not replace, intentional instruction in word meanings and carefully orchestrated applications. Our most vulnerable language learners deserve more support in applying new words than a homework exercise requiring an independently drawn picture and related sentence.

As a long-time educator of striving readers and English learners, I have witnessed first hand the outcomes of their neophyte, ill-supported efforts. My own adopted son, John Carlos, joined our family from Guatemala at nearly four years old. With the Spanish and English proficiency of a toddler entering kindergarten, he struggled in two languages throughout primary and upper-elementary grades. I recall vividly and painfully his weekly earnest attempts to utilize a seemingly random array of words from a literary unit in original

sentences or a paragraph. Every week I resurrected every bit of patience and linguistic acumen I could to help him grasp disconnected words he barely recalled from English language arts lessons.

After helping him develop some basic understanding of a word, our next challenge was applying it in a sentence. When left to his own devices, his default was to write a brief phrase or sentence about our French bulldog, Polo. Polo is immortalized in countless three- to five-word sentences using vocabulary from numerous thematic units, ranging from loyalty and friendship to identity. Invariably, the brief, simple, and often grammatically inaccurate sentences contained no context whatsoever, nor did his recursive default picture of Polo. Table 5 (overpage) includes a couple of classic early writing and artistic efforts from his third-grade experience. My mounting frustration with the dearth of focused, supported academic-language instruction across elementary grade levels prompted me to write curriculum to help fellow educators engage in this crucial endeavor (Kinsella, English 3D, 2016; Kinsella and Hancock, Academic Vocabulary Toolkit, 2016).

I have every confidence that parents like myself of English learners and less-confident readers would welcome homework assignments that provided their children with more clearly scaffolded opportunities to practice new words in speaking and writing. The weekly crossword puzzle and list of words to include in original sentences do little to engender confident parental engagement or academic writing proficiency. Brief sentence-level frames such as those in Table 3 are ideal for initial verbal and written practice.

Writing frames and focused prompts such as those in Table 4 enable the teacher to orchestrate a brief, constructed multiple-sentence response. This scaffolded response can serve as a “we do it” task before students engage in an independent “you do it” comparable task, leveraging the text structure and rhetorical forms included in the preceding guided task. Opportunities for academic English learners to successfully complete brief, supported academic responses build the competencies for longer, independent tasks in ways that unleashed journaling and sentence generation do not.

Table 4: Scaffolded Writing Tasks

Target High-Utility Academic Word: factor

• Read the prompt. Construct a thoughtful response that includes relevant examples.

PROMPT 1: What are key factors a parent must consider before leaving a child at home alone?

Parents must consider several _______ before leaving a child at home alone. One key _______ is the child’s _____________. Another equally important ________________ is how _______ the child is.

• Read the prompt. Construct a three- to four-sentence response with transitions and examples.

PROMPT 2: What are key factors you consider when selecting a book from the school library to read for pleasure?

Table 5: A Third-Grade English Learner’s Independent Word Study

 

 

 

 

 

Concluding Remarks

Since word knowledge is such a potent and undisputed predictor of academic achievement, educators across grade levels and content areas cannot afford to leave vocabulary instruction to chance. Our most vulnerable scholars look to us to build their lexical foundations for the collaboration, text analysis, and skillful academic-response demands posed by our nation’s college- and career-readiness focus. With a unified school front to effectively teach critical words and structure competent applications, English learners and their under-resourced classmates can make the linguistic strides that will help them defy the odds and actualize their greatest educational ambitions.

References

August, D., and Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing Literacy in Second Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Center for Applied Linguistics.

Baumann, J., and Kaméenui, E. (2004). Vocabulary Instruction: Research to Practice. Guilford Press.

Beck, I., McKeown, M., and Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction. New York: Guilford Press.

Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and Reading Success. Brookline Books.

Calderón, M. (2007). Teaching Reading to English Language Learners, Grades 6–12. Corwin Press.

Carlo, M., August, D., and Snow, C. (2005). “Sustained Vocabulary-Learning Strategies for English Language Learners.” In E. H. Hiebert and M. Kamil (eds.), Teaching and Learning Vocabulary: Bringing Research to Practice. 137–153. New York: Wiley.

Chall, J., and Dale, E. (1995). Readability Revisited: The New Dale-Chall Readability Formula. Brookline Books.

Coleman, R., and Goldenberg, C. (Feb. 2012). “The Common Core Challenges for English Language Learners.” Principal Leadership. National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Cunningham, A., and Stanovich, K. (1998, Spring/Summer). “What Reading Does for the Mind.” American Educator, 22(1/2): 8–15.

Dale, E. (1965). “Vocabulary Measurement: Techniques and major findings.” Elementary English 42, 82–88.

Dutro, S., and Kinsella, K. (2010). “English Language Development: Issues and implementation in grades 6–12.” In Improving 

Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. California Department of Education.

Flynn, J. R. (2006). Where Have All the Liberals Gone?: Race, Class, and Ideals in America. Cambridge University Press.

Graves, M. F. (2006). The Vocabulary Book: Learning and Instruction. IRA.

Kinsella, K. (2016). English 3D: Course A, B, & C. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Kinsella, K., and Hancock, T. (2016). Academic Vocabulary Toolkit, Grades 3–8. National Geographic Learning – Cengage.

Marzano, R. (2004). Building Background Knowledge for Academic Achievement: Research on What Works in Schools. ASCD.

Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Newbury House.

National Reading Panel Report. (2000). Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction.

Saville-Troike, M. (1984). “What Really Matters in Second Language Learning for Academic Achievement?” TESOL Quarterly 18: 199–219.

Stahl, S. A. (1999). Vocabulary Development. Cambridge: Brookline.

Kate Kinsella, EdD ([email protected]) is an adjunct faculty member in San Francisco State University’s Center for Teacher Efficacy. She provides consultancy to state departments of education throughout the U.S., school districts, and publishers on evidence-based instructional principles and practices to accelerate academic English acquisition for language-minority youths. Her numerous publications and programs focus on career and college readiness for academic English learners and under-resourced youths, with an emphasis on high-utility vocabulary development, informational text reading, and writing across subject areas.

Language Magazine