At the recent Modern Cockney Festival, celebrations concluded with the official recognition of Cockney as a community language by Tower Hamlets Council in East London.
A Pearly Queen
The month-long festival featured cultural traditions including an embellished ‘pearly Burka’ – homage to the Islamic community of East London and the historic Cockney ‘Pearly Kings and Queens’, and an open discussion ‘What does it mean to be a Cockney today?’.
The word Cockney itself dates back as far as 1362 and was traditionally only applied to those born within hearing distance of the bells of Mary-le-Bow Church, Cheapside, City of London. Due to housing, hospital access and modern ethnography however, this definition was rendered obsolete years ago.
The linguistic aspect of Cockney primarily denotes a dialect and accent, its own rhyming structure Cockney Rhyming Slang evolving with migration to London. Cockney vernacular began in the 1300s with references to Middle English, and continued to change while adopting phrases from Yiddish, Romani, and German in the 1800s.
Cockney Rhyming Slang fully materialized as a play on words in the 1840s, when East Enders (habitants of London’s East End) were trying to make a living through trading on the edges of legality and under-the-radar activity. They required an elusive method of communicating with passers-by without alerting the police, using phrases like bees and honey to mean ‘money’ and bottle and stopper – ‘copper’ (police officer).
In 2011, then-University of Lancaster academic Paul Kerswill predicted that Cockney accents “would disappear in 30 years.” He felt that while older people still spoke with the recognizable Cockney accent, this was no longer the case for a younger generation.
In the 12 years since, many Londoners feel ‘Cockenydom’ has evolved into something sentimental, while linguistically, Mulitcultural London English (MLE) has taken a stronghold in Greater London. MLE is characteristically similar to the Cockney accent and dialect, but has additional influences from other global languages reflecting modern immigration to London.
Andy Green and Saif Osmani, organizers of the Modern Cockney Festival, are embracing the change. Green says “The working class don’t have cultural institutions to fly their flag, and the festival was to explore what it means to be Cockney and to celebrate that. The association is historically a negative one.” He added that a current qualification for being a Cockney is really being a “non-posh” person with London heritage, rather than being born near any particular church. The criteria and sentiment extends to those in the counties surrounding London’s South East.
“Cockneydom spans far and wide. People [at the festival] identify as Bangladeshi Cockneys or Kent Cockneys. They all have some roots and culture in common, even if their community has had more influences,” he explained.
Dr Amanda Cole, a sociolinguist from the University of Essex, theorizes that the classic Cockney accent and dialect has migrated to Essex—the neighhboring county to London’s east.
She says, “I had this idea in my head that Cockney is not dead, it’s just moved to Essex. My feeling was that there was a real enclave of Cockney; just anecdotally, I felt there was a lot of Cockney spoken by young people.”
Cole’s grandparents were relocated to Essex in a slum-clearance program after the Second World War, along with thousands of other people living in dilapidated Victorian houses. She has spent the last six years studying accents in Essex and has found little evidence of significant change since the war.
In 2023, the classic characteristics of the Cockney accent, such as dropping the “t” in the middle of a word, or pronouncing “think” as “fink” and “milk” as “miwk”, are now seen as linguistically Essex features.
The notion of Cockney identity and borders will always be a contested issue, but Cole says a younger generation of Essex residents do not perceive themselves as Cockney, “As soon as they started moving to Essex, they began to consider their accent an Essex one. It happened very quickly. As soon as the community relocated, there started to be this reinterpretation of Essex. Though some people do still consider themselves to some extent to have a Cockney accent, this has rapidly been changing to identifying with an Essex one.”
With the advent of ChatGPT, Google Bard, Midjourney and Canva’s magic features, artificial intelligence (AI) is quickly becoming an integral part of our everyday lives, transforming industries and reshaping the way we work, learn and communicate. This rapid technological advancement highlights the importance of incorporating AI education into the curriculum not only to ensure that all students are well-equipped for their academic futures but also for workforce development.
With that in mind, it is crucial to consider underrepresented populations as these students are typically left out of the newest technological advancements.
AI Support for Teaching
AI has the potential to revolutionize the education sector by enhancing learning experiences, supporting teachers and offering more personalized learning opportunities for students. We must equip teachers with the knowledge and strategies they will need to use this new technology to improve and streamline everyday processes as well as classroom implementation.
Some areas in which AI can transform the classroom include personalized learning, ideation, adaptive learning, special needs education, bilingual education, gamification and immersive learning.
Personalized learning involves AI-powered systems that analyze students’ learning styles, strengths and weaknesses to create tailored lesson plans and suggest resources to serve their individual needs.
Adaptive learning platforms can adjust to each student’s progress in real-time, identifying gaps in knowledge, providing immediate feedback, and suggesting targeted interventions to help students master the material. AI can also help teachers automate administrative tasks, enabling them to focus more on instruction and student interaction.
Furthermore, AI-powered virtual tutors can provide round-the-clock support to students, while customized learning solutions can empower students with special needs to reach their full potential. Gamification and immersive learning experiences can make education more engaging, fun and memorable.
AI-driven language translation tools can break down communication barriers, enabling students and educators from different countries or with different languages to collaborate on projects and learn from one another.
All means all. Teaching students about AI is essential for developing digital literacy, critical thinking skills, and preparing students for future academic and career success. A basic understanding of AI systems enables students to engage and ideate with AI technologies safely, responsibly and ethically. Learning about AI also encourages students to analyze and evaluate question structure, complex information, question assumptions and consider the ethical implications of AI technology usage.
Moreover, AI is transforming the job market, with increasing demand for professionals skilled in AI and related fields. Teaching students about AI can help them develop the knowledge and skills needed to pursue careers in technology, data science and other in-demand industries. AI learning can inspire students to generate ideas and solutions, fostering creativity and innovation – essential skills in today’s competitive and evolving job market.
It is particularly important to not exclude AI education from underrepresented student populations. In fact, it is vital to integrate diversity, equity and inclusion within this domain to ensure that a broad perspective of values are embraced to combat digital bias and discrimination.
Providing students with access to AI education can help close opportunity gaps, ensure they have the skills and knowledge to compete in the global workforce, and create a more diverse pool of talent in AI and related fields. This diversity can lead to better problem-solving, creativity and innovation in the development of AI technologies and solutions.
AI education can empower underrepresented communities to leverage technologies for social good and drive positive change in their local and global contexts. Lastly, ensuring underrepresented populations are well-versed in AI positions them to contribute to policymaking and decision-making processes, shaping the rules and regulations governing AI applications.
Risks of Excluding Students from AI Education
Excluding any student group – either deliberately or by neglect – from learning how to leverage artificial intelligence can lead to several negative consequences, both for individuals and society at large. Following are some of the dangers associated with excluding students from AI education.
Digital divide – Excluding students from learning about AI can contribute to the digital divide, as they may not have the knowledge and skills needed to navigate AI-driven technologies in their daily lives. This can hinder their ability to access information, participate in the digital economy and engage with online communities effectively.
Biased AI systems – AI systems often are trained on data collected from human behavior, which can contain biases. For example, facial recognition originally was designed exclusively with white faces because the developers were not diverse. Excluding diverse perspectives from the development and design of AI systems can perpetuate or amplify existing biases, leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes for certain groups of people.
Wider skills gap – As AI becomes increasingly important in various industries, the demand for professional skills in using AI will grow dramatically. Excluding students from AI education can exacerbate the skills gap, making it more difficult for businesses and organizations to find the diverse talent they need to thrive in the AI-driven economy.
Economic inequality – Students who lack AI education may find it more challenging to secure well-paying jobs as many traditional roles may be automated or significantly transformed by AI. This can lead to increased economic inequality and limit social mobility for those who are not adequately prepared for the AI-driven job market.
Loss of creativity and innovation – A diverse workforce in AI and related fields leads to more creative problem-solving and innovative solutions. By excluding certain students from AI education, we risk losing the valuable insights and ideas that they could bring to the development of AI technologies.
Ethical concerns – As AI becomes more integrated into our lives, it is essential to have a diverse group of professionals involved in the development and regulation of AI systems to ensure ethical considerations are taken into account. Excluding students from learning about AI may result in a lack of diverse perspectives, leading to potential ethical issues and unintended consequences. It also leaves students unprepared to navigate ethical dilemmas.
To mitigate these dangers, it is essential to promote equitable access to AI education for all students, regardless of their background or socioeconomic status. This will help to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to benefit from the advancements in AI and contribute to a more inclusive and just society.
Hector Bojorquez is IDRA’s director of operations and educational practice. Comments and questions may be directed to him via email at [email protected]. Michelle Martínez Vega is IDRA’s chief technology strategist. Comments and questions may be directed to her via email at [email protected].
There’s an ongoing crisis in the field of linguistics: Global language experts estimate that, without intervention, about one language will be lost every month for the next 40 years.
In a new study, an international team of researchers reports that grammatical structure is highly flexible across languages, shaped by common ancestry, constraints on cognition and usage, and language contact. The study used the Grambank database, which contains data on grammatical structures in over 2400 languages. Grammar is simply the rules of a language: the words and sounds used and how they are combined and interpreted. Grammatical elements of a language include word order (if the subject goes before or after the verb), tense (present, past or future), comparatives (words that express “bigger” or “smaller”) and whether a language has gendered pronouns.
Grambank’s coverage spans 215 different language families and 101 isolates from all inhabited continents. “The design of the feature questionnaire initially required numerous revisions in order to encompass many of the diverse solutions that languages have evolved to code grammatical properties”, says Hedvig Skirgård, who coordinated much of the coding and is the lead author of the study.
The team settled on 195 grammatical properties, ranging from word order to whether or not a language has gendered pronouns. For instance, many languages have separate pronouns for ‘he’ and ‘she’, but some also have male and female versions of ‘I’ or ‘you’. The possible ‘design space’ would be enormous if grammatical properties were to vary freely. Limits on variation could be related to cognitive principles rooted in memory or learning, rendering some grammatical structures more likely than others. Limits could also be related to historical ‘accidents’, such as descent from a common language or contact with other languages.
The researchers discovered much greater flexibility in the combination of grammatical features than many theorists have assumed. “Languages are free to vary considerably in quantifiable ways, but not without limits”, explains Stephen Levinson, director emeritus of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen and one of the founders of the Grambank project. “A sign of the extraordinary diversity of the 2400 languages in our sample is that only five of them occupy the same location in design space (share the same grammatical properties).”
‘Unusual’ languages
Using Grambank, the team found they could identify “unusual” languages: those that stray further from the averages in variation typically found in language, which often have no known sister languages. But they also found there’s nothing particularly unusual about endangered languages compared with those that are not endangered.
“A lot of fairly ordinary languages, in terms of their basic grammar, happen to be endangered for a variety of reasons,” says Haynie. English, spoken around the world by 1.5 billion people, is actually “a pretty weird language” by Grambank’s standards. “Some of the places with more ‘unusual’ languages are places like Europe and Northern Africa—languages that we, as English speakers, tend to be more familiar with,” said Haynie.
The bigger takeaway for Haynie is that none of the languages in the data set are identical. Of all 2,400 languages and dialects in the data set, only five match up the same using the grammatical code used to document and analyze them within Grambank. Though vocabulary may play a big role in the mutual unintelligibility that linguists rely on to determine what counts as separate languages, Grambank shows that the grammatical “fingerprints” of languages are also typically unique, she said. “It means that every language is pretty darn special,” said Haynie.
Language loss
Language extinction has occurred throughout human history, but its speed has been accelerating due to social, political and economic pressures, says Haynie.
“The extraordinary diversity of languages is one of humanity’s greatest cultural endowments”, concludes Levinson. “This endowment is under threat, especially in some areas such as Northern Australia, and parts of South and Northern America. Without sustained efforts to document and revitalize endangered languages, our linguistic window into human history, cognition and culture will be seriously fragmented.” It’s as if, while mapping the human genome, scientists saw the genes themselves rapidly disappearing before their eyes. “Right now we’re at a critical state in terms of language endangerment,” added Haynie, noting the United Nations has declared this the International Decade of Indigenous Languages to try to promote language preservation, documentation and revitalization.
Genealogy versus geography
One element that has been “hotly debated” within linguistics for years is the relationship between genealogy and geography in the development of language. That is: Which features in language are inherited from family and culture (genealogy) and which are more likely to be shared through contact among neighbors (geography)?
The Grambank analysis found genealogy seems to be consistently more important than geography—meaning the faithful inheritance of ancestral language plays a stronger role in shaping grammar in languages still spoken today than who someone’s geographical neighbors were and how they talked, says Haynie.
While language crossover and bilingualism are well documented throughout history, this finding showcases how there is much we can still learn about human history and the ways we communicate in present day from the words of our ancestors. “It [Grambank] puts linguistics on an even footing with genetics, archaeology, and anthropology in terms of quantitative, large scale, accessible data”, says Gray. “I hope it will facilitate the exploration of links between linguistic diversity and a broad array of other cultural and biological traits, ranging from religious beliefs to economic behavior, musical traditions and genetic lineages. These links with other facets of human behavior will make Grambank a key resource not only in linguistics, but in the multidisciplinary endeavor of understanding human diversity.” One element that has been “hotly debated” within linguistics for years is the relationship between genealogy and geography in the development of language. That is: Which features in language are inherited from family and culture (genealogy) and which are more likely to be shared through contact among neighbors (geography)?
The Grambank analysis found genealogy seems to be consistently more important than geography—meaning the faithful inheritance of ancestral language plays a stronger role in shaping grammar in languages still spoken today than who someone’s geographical neighbors were and how they talked, says Haynie.
While language crossover and bilingualism are well documented throughout history, this finding showcases how there is much we can still learn about human history and the ways we communicate in present day from the words of our ancestors. “It [Grambank] puts linguistics on an even footing with genetics, archaeology, and anthropology in terms of quantitative, large scale, accessible data”, says Gray. “I hope it will facilitate the exploration of links between linguistic diversity and a broad array of other cultural and biological traits, ranging from religious beliefs to economic behavior, musical traditions and genetic lineages. These links with other facets of human behavior will make Grambank a key resource not only in linguistics, but in the multidisciplinary endeavor of understanding human diversity.”
The Grambank database is an open-access comprehensive resource maintained by the Max Planck Society.
On a recent visit to Italy, I was able to put my basic Italian language skills to the test. The ability I had to communicate with local folks confirmed a theory known to every language teacher—learning a language gives students the opportunity to connect with others in a deeply intrinsic way, which makes language acquisition an invaluable undertaking.
For students to get the most out of this experience, however, world language courses must be well designed. The courses must engage students in meaningful activities that cover a variety of pedagogical components of language learning, including cultural and historical aspects to help students reflect on the fabric that constitutes the overall foundation of any world language. In addition, courses must be challenging enough for students to achieve the cultural and language literacy skills they’ll need for success, but not so challenging that students will struggle and become frustrated with the course content.
Here are eight key recommendations for designing highly effective language courses that position students for success based on the experience of nearly three decades of designing and delivering highly effective online courses:
1. Build world language courses around a comprehensive set of standards
Ensuring high-quality outcomes begins with designing courses around a proven set of standards for what students should know and be able to do upon completing the course.
In developing our world language courses, we use the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages1 from the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) as the framework. This framework includes learning objectives organized within five areas of competency: Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities.
What’s more, our AP® world language courses use the Course and Exam Descriptions (CEDs) from the College Board2—which outline the learning expectations for AP® courses and describe how students will be assessed on the AP® exam—as an additional learning framework.
2. Use a “backward design” process
In backward design, course developers begin with the desired learning goals and work backwards from there to create appropriate assessments and learning experiences that will enable students to demonstrate those skills. This ensures that all lessons, performance tasks, and projects that students complete are aligned with the outcomes expected of them.
3. Make the courses accessible
To provide more equitable learning opportunities for everyone, world language courses should be designed in a way that empowers all students to succeed by building on individual student’s strengths.
At VHS Learning, we do this by incorporating the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Guidelines3 into our courses. UDL is an accessibility framework from CAST, the Center for Applied Special Technology, that guides the development of flexible and inclusive learning environments that can accommodate individual differences.
The UDL Guidelines call for giving students multiple ways to learn content, engage with course materials, and demonstrate their understanding. This enables all students to leverage their unique strengths and skills when completing a course.
4. Design course content around multiple modes of communication
ACTFL’s instructional framework calls for students to demonstrate competency in all three modes of communication: interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational.
Interpersonal communication is two-way communication in which students are having a discussion or exchanging information with others. Examples might include talking, texting, or signing. Interpretive communication is one-way communication in which students are receiving and interpreting information, such as listening to a podcast, reading an article, or watching a video. Presentational communication is one-way communication in which students are presenting information to others, such as writing an essay or giving a live presentation.
Effective world language courses give students multiple ways of learning and demonstrating competency in each of these three communication modes.
5. Choose authentic tasks and projects
Effective language courses have students learn and apply new language skills by performing authentic tasks and projects that have real-world relevance, such as leaving a voice mail message for someone, replying to an email, ordering a meal in a restaurant, having a conversation about a timely or relevant topic, or writing a letter to a friend.
From a motivational standpoint, students are more likely to see the value in what they’re learning with authentic performance tasks, as opposed to learning phrases for their own sake or answering questions from a textbook.
6. Scaffold the content by gradually building toward more complex tasks
In language courses, where skills build on each other in a cumulative fashion, scaffolding is particularly important for success. Students need to learn basic skills first, with plenty of built-in supports. As their skills progress, the content can gradually become more complex.
Course designers can scaffold the content by “chunking” complex skills or assignments into smaller, easily digestible parts and planning an appropriate scope and sequence that ensures students aren’t being given too much, too soon.
7. Incorporate a consistent student experience
In our world language courses, we make sure there is consistency in students’ workflows from one week to the next. Every lesson follows the same structure and format so that students know what to expect. This makes it easier for them to complete assignments, manage their time, and organize their thoughts—all while fostering a positive environment for their social-emotional development.
8. Use course feedback to improve
We use multiple methods to determine how well a course is working, including ongoing teacher feedback, end-of-course student surveys—and in the case of AP® courses—we evaluate the results from AP® exams. By analyzing AP® test results, we can compare our students’ performance on the exam against the global population of test takers, which is critical for understanding where we might improve our curriculum.
By following these eight recommendations, curriculum designers can ensure that world language courses are preparing students with the skills they’ll need for success in communicating effectively and engaging as global citizens.
Simone Aguilera is the World Languages Curriculum coordinator for VHS Learning, a nonprofit organization that has provided teacher-led supplemental online high school courses in a wide variety of disciplines for nearly 30 years.
The 15th annual ‘72 Hours of the Book’ festival recently took place in Guinea, filling a sports stadium with people eager to celebrate literature and literacy skills.
Publishers, writers, editors and readers from across West Africa took to the Guinean national sports stadium in Conakry on April 28, to promote literacy, reading culture and enrichment. According to World Bank figures, over half the population is illiterate and there is limited access to libraries.
Guinean novelist Bademba Barry said, “We Guinean authors have mobilized strongly to come together and promote this event”.
Despite a low literacy rate, Guinea holds on to a rich literary heritage and boasts more than a dozen publishing houses, some releasing works in French and the six Indigenous National Languages of the country: Fula (or Pular) Maninka, Susu, Kissi, Kpelle and Toma.
Fula – also known as Fulani, Fulah or Pular, is a Senegambian language spoken by approximately 25 million people as a set of varying dialects across West Africa. In Guinea, around 30% of the population speak Fula as a native language.
Most Guinean publishers however, struggle to raise funds for large production runs and therefore focus on foreign works.
However at the recent event, scenes were far from sparse and became a haven for industry professionals and readers to meet. Established authors took to the stage to expand their fan bases and readers eagerly awaited the chance to meet their favorite writers.
Kamano, an 11-year-old student in a children’s writing class, explained, “…what makes me come here is learning things with games… creating stories with things you yourself create out of your own imagination.
Ousmane El Hadj is a local author who has attended the festival to expand his readership for the last three years. He credits high attendance with efforts made by authors to display their works in many different languages throughout the event.
“I think it’s a great opportunity for authors to be seen,” he says. For those three days, the sole focus will be on books and reading.”
Luxury royal cupcakes, with purple velvet background, all cupcakes have a metal crown as a topper, including the royal crown, union jack flags decorate the cupcakes,
For the first time in history, the traditional languages spoken in the four home nations of the UK will become part of a coronation service.
Three Celtic languages: Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Welsh along with English, will form the official service at Westminster Abbey, for the crowning of King Charles’ III and Queen Consort Camilla.
After a greeting and introduction by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Kyrie Eleison (Lord have mercy) prayer will be sung in Welsh. It is expected that the hymn Veni Creator – Come Creator Spirit – will be sung, with verses in Scots Gaelic and Irish. An ancient hymn, Veni Creator has been part of coronation services in the British Isles since the 14th century, additionally used in Anglican ordination services when people become deacons, priests and bishops.
A Lambeth Palace spokesperson said: “After the sermon, the hymn Veni Creator – Come Creator Spirit – will be sung” “For the first time, we will hear this sung in the traditional languages of the nations of the United Kingdom: English, Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic.”
As a young man, Charles famously traveled to Aberystwyth University to learn the Welsh language under Welsh nationalist Dr Edward Millward. As heir, he was the first Prince of Wales in seven centuries to learn Welsh, and formally adopted the title by investiture at Caernarfon Castle in 1969.
Today, the Welsh language counts almost 540,000 speakers in Wales, while the number of Scots Gaelic speakers is approximately 60,000. Far outweighing the two, speakers of Irish in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland currently sit at approximately 1.9 million.
For at least a half-century, there has been a great deal of discussion about how children learn to read. While policymakers, curriculum developers, educational leaders, and those in the media have been using this discussion to drive headlines and policy, reading scientists across the world have been formulating questions and conducting experiments to find answers to specific questions regarding how the human brain learns to read. We are far from knowing all the answers, but the research does provide many important concrete understandings about how our brains acquire the complex process of turning marks on a page into language, as well as what to do when it has difficulty doing so. This vast, interdisciplinary body of scientifically based research, derived from thousands of studies conducted in multiple languages (see The Reading League, 2022, p. 6), is the science of reading (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 The Definition of the Science of Reading
For too many years, the science of reading accumulated in journals without benefiting those for whom it was developed—practitioners and students. Thankfully, it is now finally making its way into the work of educators and educational leaders, policymakers, and educator preparation programs and is sought by parents striving to find information on how to address their children’s reading difficulties. It is an exciting time for education, knowing that this research is finally being shared and used to build professional knowledge and guide practice in an effective way. Noticeable shifts are occurring across the country, even the world, and the positive data trends in schools that align their knowledge, materials, practices, and systems with the research of how students learn to read are causing many to take notice.
For some, however, the emergence of the science of reading seems like something new, and it brings uncertainty. Why are people using the word science along with reading? Do researchers know what it is like to be in a classroom? Why does a certain kind of research seem to be prioritized? Has this research included students exactly like mine? If not, can I trust it? And whom do I listen to? Confusion is leading to misunderstandings that have now become apparent in our national conversations. In 2021, a group of reading experts noticed misunderstanding arising and gathered to write the “Science of Reading: Defining Guide” (2022) to clarify the term the science of reading.
This resource provides a definition of what the science of reading is, what it is not (p. 9, see Figure 2), and how all stakeholders can understand its potential to transform reading instruction.
Figure 2 What the Science of Reading Is Not
Two of the most widespread misrepresentations about the science of reading from Figure 2 are described and clarified in the next two sections.
Misconception #1: The science of reading is a one-size-fits-all approach When educators undergo training in the science of reading, they often learn about areas of the brain that are used for skillful reading. They learn that unlike neural circuitry that we are born with to process language, instruction is required to build the circuitry that evolves in order to learn to read words on the page. Research-validated frameworks are presented to show that reading comprehension cannot take place if there is a difficulty reading words automatically or comprehending the words once they are read. They also learn about the foundational skills of word recognition (e.g., phoneme awareness, phonics, decoding, encoding) and the subskills of language comprehension (e.g., vocabulary, background knowledge, syntax, semantics). A good training will also include an understanding of language including phonology, morphology, grammar, and the reasoning behind particular spelling conventions. In addition to building this professional knowledge, educators are often prepared to select and use valid assessment data in order to provide differentiated instruction according to student need. Overall, this training allows educators to understand and recognize the individual needs of their students—the antithesis of “one size fits all.”
The Reading League and friends were privileged to recently engage in a series of meetings with the National Committee for Effective Literacy (NCEL). During these discussions, several participants posited that this misconception of the science of reading as a one-size-fits-all approach likely stems from poor implementation of the findings from the science of reading. In efforts to “do the science of reading,” schools often neglect the critical first step of building professional knowledge through ongoing, expert professional development. Instead, they are often quick to respond to the lure of publishers who claim their curriculum “are” the science of reading. In reality, published materials for teaching reading may only support a specific subskill, and meanwhile uninformed decision makers in a school believe they have checked the “science of reading” box. The research behind how skilled reading develops cannot be found in a one-size-fits-all box or by simply buying a new program. Knowledgeable, trained decision makers and educators will know better than to implement a program without consideration of how reading develops and how to differentiate instruction. It is our hope that experts will converge in this understanding to address this widespread problem together.
Misconception #2: The science of reading is a single, specific component of instruction, such as phonics There is no research or guidance to support the false claim that phonics is all a student needs to learn to read. There are several meta-analyses based on hundreds of scientifically based studies proving the essential nature of explicit phonics instruction in developing skilled reading. It is necessary, but not sufficient. In order to comprehend while reading, students must be able to connect the words, phrases, and texts to their meanings. Imagine, if you will, trying to read the entire alphabet as a word. We may have adequate decoding skills to stumble through it, but it will be meaningless.
There is a great deal of research from the science of reading that reveals the primary importance of building language comprehension to support reading comprehension. If reading is turning printed squiggles into speech, speech and language serve as anchors. This is done first through oral language as students acquire the ability to decode print, and later through both oral language development and learning through reading.
This discussion point is an important one to consider for English learners/emergent bilinguals (ELs/EBs). Many native-English-speaking children come to school with well-developed vocabularies. Emergent bilingual students who begin school in English-only settings also often come to school with well-developed vocabularies, although often not in the language of instruction.
It remains essential to build the same neural connections in their brains for decoding that all readers must build through explicit and systematic instruction in the subskills of word recognition. But this must be done with concurrent attention to building language comprehension, both in a student’s native language and in the language of instruction.
See The Reading League’s “Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines” (2022) for additional information on the evidence base for practices that support the development of both word recognition (decoding) and language comprehension.
The science of reading includes all learners There is a long list of questions that have yet to be answered in reading research that is specifically related to populations of students such as ELs/EBs. For example, how do we best determine student need authentically if assessments are not available in their home language? What’s the most effective way to use contrastive analysis of a student’s home language and the language of instruction to expedite instruction and intervention? How can we ensure students are gleaning information from the text once they are able to accurately decode the words on the page?
However, claims that a separate research base apart from the science of reading is needed for this specific population of students are not factual. For instance, the “Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth” (August et al., 2009) has been identified as part of a research base that is separate from the research that comprises the science of reading. If we acknowledge that the science of reading refers to the research of how all humans learn to read, we can come to agree that any experimental (scientifically based) research cited within the Literacy Panel’s report is in actuality a part of the body of knowledge that is the science of reading (see “Defining Guide,” p. 11, for more information).
Similarly, claims that there is no scientifically based research related to ELs/EBs (i.e., conducted on monolingual students only) are untrue and serve only to call into question the research base that the science of reading draws from. An example of this is disregarding the research that the framework used to describe the reading process is built upon (see Hoover and Gough, 1990) by giving the impression that the research did not include ELs/EBs. In actuality, however, the original research conducted for this particular framework was in border areas of Texas and included many students with varying skills of word recognition and language comprehension—both in English and Spanish.
The purpose of clarifying misconceptions and erroneous claims is not to be divisive but rather to demonstrate that we are all a united field that has the opportunity to benefit from the research that exists as a basis to better understand how to support all students. This collective evidence base must continue to be built upon, and more importantly, the research that is inclusive of and specific to ELs/EBs must be paid attention to as a significant part of the science of reading. Empirical research that helps us understand the needs of underrepresented populations such as ELs/EBs, students with disabilities, students who are deaf and hard of hearing, students who speak English language variations, and students with visual impairments must be included and prioritized in national discussions and when making policy decisions.
Moving forward together: Committing to scientifically based practices is essential but not enough The scientifically based research on reading instruction is a critical understanding that has not been historically provided to educators. It provides the knowledge that we must use to guide our instructional, curricular, and systems decisions. Currently, practices that run counter to how the brain processes print and language, such as three-cueing and leveled literacy, are still widely used in classrooms.
These fail to reliably build skills in word recognition and do not provide robust enough material to allow students to build the critical knowledge necessary to comprehend grade-level texts. These practices are preventing students from developing skilled literacy, and this is a main driver in the urgency in this movement. However, knowledge alone is not enough, and we must be humble and willing to listen to and learn from experts outside of our usual circles of information.
Whenever possible, it will be important for all within these discussions to push our collective thinking though a “yes, and” approach. We make a commitment to evidence-aligned practices and recognize the need to learn from external groups, particularly those representing historically marginalized groups of students. We must intentionally place dialogue on ELs/EBs as well as students who speak English language variations front and center in our discussions. We must build coalitions, move forward together, and create relationships that invite others in to share their opinions in an authentic, trusting, and truthful way. Together we can influence one another’s work for the better and address the challenges of misguided implementation.
The Reading League’s diversity statement includes the following language: “As a leader in our field, The Reading League is committed to furthering diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging within the science of reading movement itself, because certain communities [have] not yet seen themselves represented consistently and authentically. By calling ourselves a league, we assert that we are strengthened by the diversity of our perspectives, which will bolster our ability to advance our mission and realize our vision of literacy for all.” We have begun our first steps of reaching out to experts who work to support the needs of ELs/EBs, including representatives from the NCEL. We hope to continue to build trust and include the knowledge we have built from NCEL leaders in our materials, such as the benefits of bilingual education, the essential practice of assessing a student in their home language whenever possible, and the importance of dedicated time for English language development.
The Reading League has collaboratively built a summit along with members of NCEL to be held March 25, 2023, in Las Vegas, which will be a continuation of our purposeful discussions to build trust and find alignment. We hope these efforts will elevate the conversation that there needs to be a more intentional focus on ensuring the right of literacy for our nation’s multilingual citizens and students. We are here as a resource to reach out to before misinformation is spread to the field, and we are here to listen and learn to determine how our movement can better support the needs of ELs/EBs.
We welcome you to join us to further our understanding as we all work toward a common goal of a more literate, and biliterate, future. We are a better and stronger league when we work together.
References August, D., Shanahan, T., and Escamilla, K. (2009). “English Language Learners: Developing literacy in second-language learners—Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth,” Journal of Literacy Research
Hoover, W. A., and Gough, P. B. (1990). “The Simple View of Reading.” Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160.
Kari Kurto is National Science of Reading project director at The Reading League. For more information on The Reading League Summit, visit www.thereadingleague.org/trl-summit.
In a recent study published in the journalScienceAdvances, French researchers examined how bilingual people neurologically process their respective languages in written form.
The study carried out by a team of clinical neurologists, neuropsychologists and researchers, and funded by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche, found that a part of the brain called the Visual Word Form Area (VWFA) behaves differently for English-Chinese speakers compared to English-French speakers. It has also shed light on specific research towards different forms of bilingualism, with most accredited research comparing monolingualism and bilingualism.
There is much scientific evidence to credit bilingualism beyond its cultural and communication benefits. Being able to speak more than one language is proven to physically change the brain, including increased neuroplasticity and fightingcognitive decline.
In this particular case, researchers focused on writing systems among English-Chinese speakers and English-French speakers, and the participants’ brain activity was monitored using an fMRI machine in response to visual stimuli including letters, faces and houses.
Results showed that with both groups the VWFA responded to stimuli, however when English-Chinese participants read Chinese characters, distinct areas of the VWFA lit up in response.
The team subsequently discovered complex clusters of neurons specifically sensitive to the Chinese language in English-Chinese bilinguals. In English-French bilinguals, brain activity proved to be the same, regardless of language stimuli.
This research also supports working theories that the brain develops in response to an individual’s unique experiences.
Minye Zhan – a leading researcher on the project, explains that the team expected to find some neurological differences between “dominant English speakers, dominant French speakers, and balanced English-French speakers”. They found however that the 21 English-French bilingual participants did not demonstrate any cognitive processing differences, despite their dominance in one language over the other.
Zhan says “It’s the same system,” – “I dug hard and didn’t see any difference. It was a very big surprise.”
In the past, pinpointing brain activity has been a challenge for researchers. With new high resolution technology, such as the 7-Tesla fMRI used in this study, neuropsychologists can allow for more accurate results based on the clarity of images. Here, the researchers saw intensely detailed clusters of neurons when certain participants responded to Chinese. According to Zhan, it was “a galaxy, a constellation of areas.”
“The interesting part is that there are these word patches that process both languages, even different languages like English and Chinese,” Zhan continues. “They’re so different, but they are processed in the same area, although there are specialized Chinese-only language patches in the brain.”
The researchers noted that the cognitive response to Chinese stimuli overlapped with areas of the brain that allow facial recognition, suggesting that Chinese characters – made up of historically symbolic lines and strokes are processed in a visually similar way to faces.
For alphabetic languages such as English and French, part-based processing is more common. Individual letters, or letter combinations, are recognized and processed separately and then merged to form a coherent word.
The results of this study suggest learning Chinese – including the way reading is taught, might place unique demands on neural pathways, resulting in different connections – although the reasons behind the findings remain speculation for now and raise more questions.
Zhan says “So why do those special patches come up?” -“That we don’t know. We just observe them. So we report first and say that it needs more research.”
Under a new legislation, Italians who use English and other foreign words in official communications could potentially be fined up to €100,000 ($108,705).
The law has been introduced by Fabio Rampelli, a member of the lower chamber of deputies with open support from right wing Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and the Brothers of Italy party.
The legislation notes all foreign languages but has a particular focus towards extinguishing Anglomania or the use of English words, which the law draft states “demeans and mortifies” the Italian language—perhaps worsened by the fact that the UK is no longer part of the EU.
The bill is yet to be debated in parliament, but preliminarily requires anyone who holds an office in public administration to have “written and oral knowledge and mastery of the Italian language.”
It also strictly forbids the use of English in official documentation, including “acronyms and names” of job roles in companies operating around Italy.
A draft of the legislation, as reported by CNN, states that foreign entities would be required to have Italian language versions of all internal regulations, records, and employment contracts updated regularly.
The draft bill also states “It is not just a matter of fashion, as fashions pass, but Anglomania has repercussions for society as a whole.”
In the first article of the legislation it is specified that Italian must be the primary language used, even in offices or workspaces that deal with non-Italian speaking foreigners or partners. The second proposed article would make Italian “mandatory for the promotion and use of public goods and services in the national territory.”
Fines between €5,000 ($5,435) and €100,000 ($108,705) could be issued for ignoring this law.
The Culture Ministry of Italy would establish a separate committee under the new law, drawing focus on the “correct use of the Italian language and its pronunciation” in schools, media, commerce, and advertising.
A popular example of mispronunciation, such as saying “bru-shetta” instead of “bru-sketta” could become a punishable offense.
Other recent moves to safeguard the language include rules on how vegetarian and vegan food is described on packaging—with aims “to safeguard our nation’s heritage and our agriculture based on the Mediterranean diet,” according to Meloni’s Health Minister Orazio Schillaci.
In 1974 the Lau v. Nichols Supreme Court decision stated: “There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers and curriculum… for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education.”
Nearly 50 years later, we have concrete research, policies, and pedagogy to support and enhance the oral and written acquisition and development of English for English language learners and emergent bilingual learners (ELLs/EBLs). On Sept. 21, 2022, the Department of Education’s Office of English Language Acquisition presented a webinar called “Effective Literacy Instruction for Multilingual Learners: What It Is and What It Looks Like.” These are some of the data that they presented:
“One in ten students nationwide have a home language other than English and are learning English as a second language (English language learners/bilingual learners/dual language learners)
English language learners have been the recipients of many ‘reforms’ but research about them is rarely built upon when literacy reforms are created and implemented.
Outcomes have been disappointing. Gaps maintained.
We HAVE a strong research base upon which to build effective literacy approaches for ELLs.”
Based on the above statements, we do not need any reforms that seek to impose a one-size-fits-all remedy for our ELLS/EBLs. This is what Science of Reading (SOR) seeks to do.
Also as noted: “We HAVE a strong research base upon which to build effective literacy approaches for ELLs.” In fact, in 2006, the National Literacy Panel of Language-Minority Children and Youth’s findings included that:
The five National Reading Panel components of reading instruction (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension) were not sufficient for ELLs to become proficient readers;
Second-language speech and literacy development are different from monolingual development;
ESL/ELD is an important component;
The home language has an important role, as do cross-language interactions;
There is viability in dual language approaches;
Oral language is a foundation for
literacy;
Any approach must include the integration of the four domains of language;
Meaning making and comprehension play key roles.
The National Committee for Effective Literacy (NCEL) “uplifts research, policies, and practices to ensure that English learners/emergent bilingual learners leave school as proficient readers and writers in English—and preferably more languages—and who thrive and succeed in school and their communities.”
On their website, www.MultiLingualLiteracy.org, one can find a recent white paper, the OELA webinar, and other key resources including effective instructional practices and effective literacy models for ELLs/EBLs. Read their white paper to find out why a one-size-fits-all approach to reading instruction will not work for English learners and other multilingual children.
Next Steps
Provide professional development for teachers on effective instructional practices in language development and literacy for ELLs and EBLs.
Fund and conduct longitudinal research that documents ELL/EBL acquisition and development of beginning literacy in L1 and L2 instructional settings that include content areas.
Expand dual language and biliteracy programs
Dr. Barbara Flores is president of California Association for Bilingual Education.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
