SUBSCRIBE

Early Childhood Programs Failing English Learners


A policy brief from the Migration Policy Institute’s National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy finds that despite requirements under federal civil rights law to overcome language barriers, the country’s major early childhood education and care (ECEC) programs often fail to require collection of relevant data and/or adopt accountability measures that would allow them to ensure meaningful and equitable access to services for DLL children and their families.

The brief is accompanied by a series of fact sheets that offer data profiles of DLLs and their families in the 25 states with the largest DLL populations. The fact sheets offer data that can help ECEC policymakers and other key system actors improve program access and quality for these young children and their parents, whose ability to navigate services and interact with providers to whom they entrust their children is essential.

Key data elements include:

  • Size of the DLL population and DLLs’ share of all children ages 0–5
  • Top non-English languages spoken in DLLs’ households
  • Share residing in low-income households
  • Parental levels of education
  • Residential internet and computer access

The fact sheets reflect the differing realities by state—for example, while one-third of young children nationally are DLLs, the share rises to 59% in California and 49% in Texas. And while Spanish is the top non-English language in DLL homes nationwide and in many states, dozens of other languages are spoken, including Arabic and French in North Carolina, Russian and Chinese in Oregon, and Polish and Urdu in Illinois.

The policy brief explores federal and state efforts to implement language access policies in major ECEC programs: the Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG); the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program; Head Start; and state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs. It also discusses evidence of disparities in access to these programs and highlights opportunities to improve language access across early childhood services. Although these key federal early childhood programs contain some measures related to language access, their requirements are quite limited, often lacking specificity and accountability mechanisms. Broadly speaking, ECEC programs also do not require the collection and reporting of comprehensive data related to language access and serving DLL families.
The brief offers a series of strategies to bridge enrollment gaps for the nation’s nearly 7.5 million DLLs, who have the potential to thrive as multilingual and multicultural individuals given the appropriate supports. Among the recommendations are improved data collection and accountability mechanisms.

Access the policy brief at www.migrationpolicy.org/research/language-access-early-childhood.

Welsh Revival at World Cup

When Team USA drew with Wales in the group stage of the World Cup in Qatar, fans the world over were charmed by the famously tuneful Welsh singing voices, however few realized that their anthem was written 40 years ago “to remind people that we still speak Welsh against all odds,” as Dafydd Iwan told the Guardian.

Yma o Hyd (We’re Still Here) has become an anthem for “Welsh nationalists, Welsh-speaking culture, and the industrial working class of Wales,” says Martin Johnes, professor of history at Swansea University. Iwan, a Welsh-language folk singer and nationalist who was imprisoned by the UK in the 1970s for defacing English road signs and later went on to become leader of Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party, said that, “It felt like the message finally came through and crossed the language barrier.”

Wales qualified for the World Cup for the first time since 1958, but were unable to proceed beyond the group stage after being beaten by England 3-0.

Watch and listen to Iwan perform Yma o Hyd on below

The Role of Early Oral Language in Literacy Development


Supporting young children’s language and literacy development has long been considered a practice that yields strong readers and writers later in life. The results of the National Early Literacy Panel’s (NELP) six years of scientific research synthesis supports the practice and its role in language development among children ages zero to five.

The NELP was brought together in 2002 to compile research that would contribute to educational policy and practice decisions that impact early literacy development. It was also charged with determining how teachers and families could support young children’s language and literacy development. Outcomes found in the panel’s report (2008) would be used in the creation of literacy-specific materials for parents, teachers, and staff development for early childhood educators and family-literacy practitioners. Through its work, the NELP uncovered a set of abilities such as alphabet knowledge, oral language, or phonological awareness present in the preschool years that provides the basis for later reading success.

It also found that measures of complex and discourse- level skills are particularly strong predictors of reading success – a finding that is consistent with the fact that language is a complex, multidimensional system that supports decoding and comprehension as children learn to read. In our book Early Childhood Literacy: The National Early Literacy Panel and Beyond, we explore the NELP report, as well as newer research findings and the effectiveness of specific approaches to teaching early oral language development to establish a solid foundation for later reading comprehension.

Below we expand on concepts to help educators understand how oral language relates to reading comprehension, word reading, and language development; where Common Core State Standards factor into the equation; and what teachers can do to foster literacy development.

Laying Down the Building Blocks

Through its research, the NELP discovered that the more complex aspects of oral language, including syntax or grammar, complex measures of vocabulary (such as those in which children actually define or explain word meanings), and listening comprehension were clearly related to later reading comprehension, but that simpler measures of oral language (e.g., the widely used Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) had very limited associations with reading comprehension.

Put simply, readers must translate print to language and then, much as in listening, they must interpret the meaning of that language. Numerous studies support this approach by showing that word reading and language comprehension are relatively independent skills, but that each contributes significantly to reading comprehension. Simple measures of vocabulary in which children simply point to the picture of a word or name a picture are not strongly connected with later reading comprehension. Nevertheless, many studies have shown that vocabulary plays an important role in fostering reading development in the years before and during formal reading instruction.

The role of vocabulary is likely two-fold. The words, and the concepts that they represent, are obviously of functional importance in comprehension, and vocabulary might also support decoding or the translation of text into language. The NELP established phonological awareness as a key contributor to children’s ability to learn to read. Of course, phonological representations are part of the linguistic system and the ability to gain access to these representations may in part be a by-product of early vocabulary development (Metsala & Walley, 1998). Reading comprehension depends on language abilities that have been developing since birth. Basic vocabulary and grammar are clearly essential to comprehension because each enables understanding of words and their interrelationships in and across individual sentences in a text (Kintsch & Kintsch, 2005).

However, children who comprehend well go beyond word and sentence comprehension to construct a representation of the situation or state of affairs described by the text. In some theories, this is referred to as a “mental model” (Kintsch & Kintsch, 2005) and it involves organizing a text’s multiple ideas into an integrated whole, using both information from the text and the reader’s own world knowledge. To do this, successful comprehenders draw upon a set of higherlevel cognitive and linguistic skills, including inferencing, monitoring comprehension, and using text structure knowledge. Take the following story for example: “Johnny carried a jug of water. He tripped on a step. Mom grabbed the mop.”

The literal representation of the individual words and sentences does not enable the reader to integrate their meanings and construct a mental model. Successful comprehenders understand narrative structure and couple it with their knowledge to infer that Johnny spilled the water. They then understand why Mom grabbed a mop.

They also monitor their comprehension of stories-either written or spoken-and realize the need to make an inference (that Johnny spilled the water) to make sense of Mom’s response. High-level language skills used to create mental models of text are not exclusive to reading. In fact, children begin developing these language skills well before formal reading instruction in a range of language comprehension situations. For example, young children rely on knowledge of narrative structure to do things like follow a set of instructions, share their daily activities around the dinner table, or understand spoken stories, cartoons, and movies.

Assessing Early-Stage Development

The skills needed for reading comprehension come into play as students progress. In the early grades, for example, reading comprehension depends heavily on emerging word-reading skills. As children accomplish the ability to automatically and fluently read printed words, language comprehension begins to contribute more to individual differences in reading comprehension. Most children who score poorly on reading comprehension tests have difficulty decoding words and understanding language.

Those with poor word-reading abilities (i.e., poor decoders) lag behind their typically developing peers on reading comprehension measures in the early grades, even if they have good language development. However, those with poor language comprehension, in spite of relatively proficient word-reading ability, usually do not lag behind their typically developing peers on reading comprehension tests until they have had one or two years of reading instruction (Catts et al., 2005). It’s important to point out that what appears to be a decline in reading comprehension for poor comprehenders is not the result of declining language skills. In fact, these students’ language skills were already poor compared with their typically developing peers at the onset of schooling.

A recent report found that poor comprehenders in fifth grade (i.e., those with poor reading comprehension despite good word-reading abilities) evidenced weak language skills as early as 15 months of age (Justice, Mashburn, & Petscher, in press) compared with their agematched peers who went on to become good comprehenders and poor decoders, and NELP found that early language skills were predictive of later reading comprehension development, but much less so with early decoding skills.

Subsequently, many students who are labeled as “clinically language impaired” prior to, or just beginning, formal education in preschool or kindergarten, do not necessarily have problems learning to read initially (Catts, Fey, Tomblin, & Zhang) Their later “decline” in reading comprehension is thought to be related to the changing nature of reading comprehension assessments: the texts used to assess reading comprehension in the early grades require less complex mental models and very limited language processing, allowing those with weak language skills to answer basic comprehension questions as accurately as their typically developing peers.

In the later grades, however, reading comprehension assessments contain more difficult passages that require more complex mental models. Poor comprehenders lack the language skills needed to construct these complex mental models and begin to score more poorly on reading comprehension assessments when compared to their typically developing peers. Poor decoders with good language comprehension abilities may be able to compensate to some degree for their weak wordreading abilities in the later grades. That’s because even though they might struggle to decode all of the words, their language skills allow them to bootstrap their way to the text’s meaning, using their good language skills and rich knowledge of the world to help construct sufficient mental models to correctly answer comprehension questions (Stanovich, 1980).

Helping Children “Crack the Code”

According to our book, a key challenge facing the beginning reader is the ability to “crack the code” or, learning how written language maps onto spoken language. This is because better decoders devote greater cognitive resources to the processes involved in comprehending text. Children’s oral language skills serve as the foundation for both aspects of reading ability-word reading and language comprehension.

Because few preschool children can yet read words, we must look at precursor skills that develop into word recognition or decoding ability. Knowledge of the alphabet and phonological awareness are both strong predictors of later decoding and comprehension, and it is evident that teaching these in combination has a consistently positive impact on improving students’ later decoding and reading comprehension abilities. Rapid naming, knowledge about print conventions and concepts, the ability to write letters or names, and oral language skills were also good predictors, but teaching these has not consistently led to gains in reading success.

How the Common Core Factors into Literacy Development

With 46 states now working to implement the Common Core State Standards which include grade-specific K-12 standards in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language, educators may be required to adjust their lessons to align with the standards and assessments used to determine student progress. But what if the road to success with those standards begins when the student was an infant, toddler, or preschooler?

This question was clearly answered through the NELP’s extensive research, which emphasized the importance of print knowledge, phonological processing abilities and oral language skills as important predictors of later literacy skills, and with evidence that teaching these early on can have long-term benefits. Additionally, assessment of these early literacy skills is important for identifying children who are likely to need more intensive instruction to achieve success with literacy. By identifying and working with students across all literacy levels at a very early age, today’s educators can take a proactive role in ensuring that students meet or exceed standards across the board.

Making a Difference: The Teacher’s Role in Literacy Development

Interventions focused on fostering language aren’t easy to develop or implement. The interconnected and complex nature of language comes with a long developmental history and draws on a broad range of linguistic and cognitive capacities. Furthermore, interventions occur within a social context where motivational, behavioral, and social factors can impact the learning climate. Children’s attention to language input and their willingness to respond to it are affected by a host of factors, including their interest in the topic of the conversation, their relationship to the speaker, the number and identities of other conversational participants, and the setting.

Even more vexing is the fact that teachers — the most important source of language input in preschool classrooms — have a history of using language in ways that may not be consistent with the interactions found by research to be conducive to language learning. Teacher’s interactions that best encourage language learning include having conversations that stay on a single topic, providing children opportunities to talk, encouraging analytical thinking, and giving information about the meanings of words. For teachers, key considerations for instruction include the fidelity of the implementation (an extremely important aspect); teaching children letter names and sounds by performing phonological awareness tasks; and understanding that there is no link between curricula with a systematic and explicit focus (i.e. teacher-directed) and negative social-emotional outcomes for children.

Response to intervention in preschool holds promise for successful early language development but several key issues must be considered. For one, preschools often serve disproportionate numbers of children who need Tier 2 or Tier 3 services, which causes staffing concerns. Also, more research is needed on the effect of interventions for children from low-income families, children with disabilities, English language learners, and children from underrepresented ethnic groups. The NELP report, along with other studies of children’s early language development, suggests that early oral language has a growing contribution to later reading comprehension — a contribution that is separate from the important role played by the alphabetic code.

As such, improving young children’s oral language development should be a central goal during the preschool and kindergarten years. In the end, making strides in this area of a child’s educational development can begin with a very simple exercise shared book reading. Although various approaches have been found to improve young children’s language, the approach of shared book reading has gained the greatest research support thus far, particularly when such reading is carried out dialogically, that is, with much language interaction between the reader and the child.

Combining shared book reading along with other language activities with explicit decoding instruction in the context of a supportive and responsive classroom, can make the difference between a child whose literacy development is at or above standards or one who struggles with reading, writing, and literacy throughout his or her K-12 education.

References

Catts, H.W., Fey, M.E., Tomblin, B.J., & Zhang, X. (2002). “A longitudinal investigation of reading outcomes in children with language impairments.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 1142-1157. Catts, H.W., Hogan, T.P., & Adlof, S.M. (2005). “Developmental changes in reading and reading disabilities.” In H.W. Catts & A.G. Kamhi (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 25-40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Justice, L.M., Mashburn, A., & Petscher, Y. (in press). “Very early language skills of fifth-grade poor comprehenders.” Journal of Research in Reading. Kintsch, W., & Kintsch, E. (2005). “Comprehension.” In S.G. Paris & S.A. Stahl (Eds.), Current issues in reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 71- 92). New York, Routledge. Metsala, J. L., & Walley, A. C. (1998). “Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability.” In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 89-120). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Stanovich, K.E. (1980). “Toward an interactive- compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency.” Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.

Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D., and Christopher J. Lonigan, Ph.D., are the editors of Early Childhood Literacy: The National Early Literacy Panel and Beyond, available from Brookes Publishing Co. They are two of the nation’s top childhood literacy experts and served on the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP).

Ghana–Reflections from a Homegoing

Welcome Home
My journey to Ghana during the summer of 2022 started the year prior with me donating 100 copies of my book Qiana’s Braids (2020) to Brothers and Sisters in Christ Serving (BASIC) International, a nonprofit organization located in Ghana. BASIC is a global community committed to promoting literacy, economic empowerment, health, wellness, and social inclusion. Qiana’s Braids is about a little Black girl getting her hair braided for the first time in her mother’s African hair braiding salon.

As an author and educator for over 20 years, with the past 16 years working with linguistically diverse children and their families, this trip was an opportunity to connect with my African brothers and sisters. I knew that this journey to Mother Africa would enhance my knowledge of the continent and bring a heightened awareness of my own heritage, which quite frankly I had only experienced from a “textbook” lens.

As the plane descended on the beautiful continent of Africa, I could feel butterflies fluttering in my stomach. Once we landed, a group of beautiful Black men holding signs greeted us at the airport. With a soft but mighty voice and his chest pumped up, one embraced my daughter and me. Holding a bright yellow sign that read, “Welcome home, we are happy to have you,” I knew this trip would be life changing.

Our eight-day adventure took us from the big city lights of Accra, which is the capital of Ghana, to the “slave market” city of Salaga. Each morning was filled with an anticipation of growing, learning, and “becoming.”

Day 1: The Accra City Tour
Our first stop took us to the W. E. B. Du Bois Center for Pan African Culture, where we spent time in Du Bois’s personal library among his personal works. Next was the Black Star Gate, a monument in Independence Square, where my daughter and I took pictures from the top, overlooking melodic sounds from the local high school drum teams. They were preparing for Ghana’s Republic Day, which is celebrated on the first of July every year. This day commemorates the 1960 establishment of Ghana as a sovereign republic.

Day 2: Kakum National Park and Cape Coast
After a four-hour drive, we arrived at Kakum National Park. Kakum is home to over 40 large mammals and several species of birds. This tropical rainforest experience did not disappoint. One of the most powerful and moving experiences of this trip was our time at the forts/slave dungeons and castles in Cape Coast. To hear and see where my ancestors had endured the most unthinkable, most inhuman treatment moved me to tears and then anger. The many emotions of this visit were at times overwhelming. This particular experience challenged me to reflect on my own access to many things and my ability to move freely. As a Black American, I have benefited off the sacrifices of my ancestors that now meant something very different. The waters that boarded the castle were so choppy that you would see boaters grabbing on to the edges of their handmade wooden boats. If you stood quietly, the waters sounded like they were screaming. I mentioned this to our guide, and she explained that old storytellers would say how the waters would “cry” from all the death that had taken place in those waters.

Day 3: Home Cooking
Our next adventure led us to the colorful culinary class of Auntie Esi’s Kitchen. We drove through the dirt road village right up to the kitchen. Upon our arrival, Aunt Esi had aprons prepared for us. We each grabbed one and headed to our assigned cooking stations to experience authentic Ghanian food. From the purple onions being chopped up by my daughter to the bright red tomatoes that awaited their turn to hit the pot, I could not wait to wrap my lips around every single thing that was brewing and boiling. Aunt Esi was a kind and gentle soul. Her skin was beautiful and her energy matched. The “Aunt Esi” experience taught me the importance of not being wasteful and of holding on to family traditions. After cooking up traditional Ghanian dishes, we had an opportunity to take a glimpse into the life of local artisans and to work side by side with the Global Mamas. The Global Mamas are wives, mothers, grandmothers, and sisters who are entrepreneurs and leaders in their communities. We spent the evening making our very own African batik. Batik is a waxing, dyeing, and boiling of fabric.

Day 4: To the Water
The life-changing journey continued at our next stop, Donkor Nsuo, the Slave River. We walked the path of our ancestors and learned the importance of the mimosa plant and its role in notifying my ancestors of the slave hunters. The “sensitive plant,” as it has been coined, has medicinal properties and helped West Africans escape during the transatlantic slave trade. We ended our time at Donkor Nsuo by holding hands and singing “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” the Negro National Anthem, by James Weldon Johnson.

Day 5: Artists Abound
At the Ashanti craft villages, the sounds of manual weaving machines roared. The colorful threads bouncing back and forth brought life to the room. Each craftsman had their own store selling beautiful handmade pieces. There was a sense of pride and joy as each salesperson approached us to tell the story of their cloth. This experience reminded me of the day that my daughter and her classmates wore kente cloth during a Black History Month program. The labor that went into each piece of cloth made me proud.

Day 6: “Thousands Have Lived without Love, but Not One without Water,” H. Auden
Kintampo Waterfalls, a lush green land with water bouncing off the rocks, could be heard from as far as the edge of the street. We took the long trail over the waterfalls, where we could see children picking bright ears of corn for their families. There was also a lively soccer game happening. Families were eating, dancing, and playing music. The energy drew us immediately into a space of love, peace, and happiness.

Day 7: Wildlife
This was one of the most exciting days of our African adventure. We arrived at Mole National Park, where we saw West Africa’s finest animals. We were up before 7:00 a.m. to catch a glimpse of nature’s greatest creations. Elephants roamed through mint-filled fields, grazing on the spearmint of the land. There were spider monkeys jumping from branch to branch, enjoying the morning as we watched in awe. Our guide was careful not to disrupt the routines of the animals as they moved through their habitat freely. There was so much peace in watching the animals.

Day 8: Before We Go
Our last and most profound experience in Mother Africa was when we arrived in Salaga. Salaga is known as the slave market town. Our group met with the traditional village leaders. English is spoken widely, though Ghana is home to a number of Indigenous languages, such as Akan, Ewe, Ga, and Dagaare. While in Salaga, we participated in an atonement ceremony.
In the atonement ceremony, our feet were washed and the village leaders apologized for the role of their predecessors in slavery. The act of humility and the plea for forgiveness were offered as we sat and listened to the village leaders reading their proclamation of peace. This day also included a naming ceremony. On this day, I received my African name, Boresha, which means I am God’s gift.
The journey to Mother Africa was one that I will never forget. As an educator and language specialist, having an opportunity to experience African culture has enhanced my appreciation for diversity and history. This experience made me think not only of my own journey but also of the journey of my linguistically diverse students.
I wonder about their experiences in the US, in American schools, in their communities, and how they stay and feel connected to their countries of origin or cultures. This experience helped me to see myself as part of the story. While we cannot rewrite history, I am forever grateful to my ancestors and for the sacrifices that were made.

Chanda Boresha Austin is an author, an educator, a proud member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., and mother to an amazing, talented teenage daughter. A native of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, Chanda holds a BS and an MEd from Alabama A&M University and an EdS in school leadership from Cambridge College.

Identifying Equitable Intervention for MLLs


For multilingual learners struggling academically or with social–emotional learning, it can be difficult for educators to identify whether the primary challenge is language acquisition or an underlying learning disability. Proper identification of the actual challenge that is getting in the way is critical to providing them with the appropriate interventions to support improved outcomes. Unfortunately, this difficulty in accurately assessing whether a multilingual learner (MLL) is struggling with language acquisition or another learning challenge has led to both over-identification and under-identification of these students in special education, representing a misallocation of district resources and, for far too many MLLs, an education that fails to meet their academic and social–emotional learning needs.

Connecting the Dots for MLLs Can Be Complicated

Multilingual learners in the US represent a diverse tapestry of racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds and over 400 different primary languages. Moreover, they are served in different types of language programs, which impacts the rate of language acquisition as well as the quality of literacy and reading instruction. As a result, it can be particularly complex to accurately assess their academic and SEL needs, and this often requires a constellation of data and insights to inform decision-making.

There is a well-supported research base of best practices in distinguishing between learning acquisition and language-based learning disabilities, but implementation of these best practices is often problematic and inconsistent. In order to make the implementation of best practices for MLLs actually practicable, districts and schools need a responsive system that meets the unique needs of these students and the educators who serve them.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Multi-Tiered Systems of Support for MLLs

Multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) is a system-level framework for supporting all students holistically—academically, behaviorally, and social–emotionally. The MTSS framework comprises four core components: screening, progress monitoring, a multilevel prevention system, and data-based decision-making.

Typically, MTSS frameworks include three levels—or tiers—of support for instruction and intervention: Tier 1 includes school-wide core curriculum designed to meet the academic, social, emotional, and behavioral needs of all students. At Tier 2, schools provide small-group, consistent academic interventions or targeted behavioral supports using evidence-based interventions to support students. For students who are not responding to instruction and intervention at Tier 2, more intensive and individualized interventions are offered by a specialist at Tier 3. At all levels, it is crucially important that interventions offered are evidence based and culturally and linguistically responsive to students’ unique strengths and challenges.

Four Key Components of a Culturally and Linguistically Responsive MTSS

  • Use of a culturally and linguistically responsive curriculum
    Content should be student centered, valuing and utilizing the cultural and language experiences that MLLs bring to the classroom. This is also known as a strengths-based approach because it treats students’ multilingual backgrounds as assets in their education, rather than disadvantages or deficits.
    Teachers can make academic or social–emotional learning lessons more culturally responsive by using examples that are relevant to their students’ lives and experiences. This may require educators to modify the curriculum they are currently using or to find programs that are appropriate given their students’ language and cultural backgrounds, but the positive impact of doing so is well documented. Studies have shown that when students can see themselves in the materials, it can lead to higher levels of engagement and improved outcomes. When teaching SEL and setting behavior expectations, it is important for educators to be aware of the different cultural norms of their students and how that might impact their social and emotional behaviors or expectations. Giving students the opportunity to express their emotions and feelings in their first language might also help them with certain social–emotional skills, such as self-awareness, self-regulation, and their social problem-solving—often through translanguaging.
  • Provide ESL support across all levels of instruction
    For multilanguage learners, English as a second language (ESL) support should be provided in Tier 1, and not be restricted to the Tier 2 and 3 levels of instruction. This provides students consistent opportunities to practice their oral language skills, which supports and accelerates progress with language acquisition. It is especially important that ESL instruction is part of Tier 1 in schools and districts with high proportions of multilingual learners to ensure that the academic, social, emotional, and behavioral needs of these students are fully integrated into the core curriculum.
    One way teachers can incorporate ESL into core curricula is by offering more opportunities for small-group student discussions on topics of instruction—whether on academic or social–emotional learning topics. Another way that teachers can provide ESL support at Tier 1 is by exposing MLLs to grade-level reading materials and not just leveled readers. At the Tier 2 and 3 levels, MLLs should receive more targeted, small-group or one-on-one instruction to help bridge any gaps in language acquisition and literacy skills.
  • Use data to drive decision-making
    Universal screening is a critical component to any effective MTSS framework and should be done three times a year to measure progress. In order to accurately assess multilingual students, screening should be done in both English and their first language to get a clearer picture of whether students are struggling with language acquisition or whether an underlying learning need is impacting progress.
    For MLLs receiving Tier 2 or 3 support, regular progress monitoring should also be conducted in both English and the student’s first language. This will help ensure that students are progressing at the same rate in both languages. In order for this data to be actionable for educators, they need to be able to easily access the results from both language assessments as well as track students’ progress over time, and then make plans that support continued, differentiated intervention planning. In addition, district and school leaders need to be able to disaggregate these data by campus and grade level, as well as by different student demographics, to ensure that resources are being allocated equitably to support all students.
    The way in which data is collected and interpreted at the student, school, and district levels is key to successful implementation of culturally and linguistically responsive MTSS, but research shows that many schools do not have the necessary tools to view student data over time or to disaggregate it to look for trends across groups or schools.
    Here again, a system-level technology platform can turn this constellation of data points into manageable and actionable insights for educators and administrators.
  • Support collaboration across multiple stakeholders
    To provide MLLs with the academic, behavioral, and social–emotional learning support they need requires effective collaboration among a broad group of stakeholders including general education, special education, and ESL teachers, academic and behavioral specialists, students, and families. Achieving the kind of collaboration needed requires that all involved stakeholders have visibility into students’ strengths and needs, across all academic, behavioral, and SEL areas.
    In order to effectively collaborate, stakeholders need to be able to easily see which strategies are being used by other members of the team and to share observations on challenges and progress. Achieving the degree of multifaceted, multi-stakeholder collaboration needed to best support MLLs will be significantly streamlined and improved with an effective technology platform.

Systems-Level Technology Platforms Support Fidelity and Efficiency

When implemented with fidelity, a culturally and linguistically responsive MTSS program can ensure equitable and appropriate interventions for multilingual students struggling academically or with SEL. However, the promise of MTSS for MLLs is often limited by ineffective implementation due to incomplete or disconnected assessment data; lack of visibility at the student, classroom, school, or district level to see where progress is being made (or not) for groups of students; or cumbersome and noncollaborative approaches to selecting evidence-based and culturally appropriate interventions.

Fortunately, technology solutions exist that reduce or eliminate these obstacles for schools.

It is critical that all districts implementing MTSS identify a technology platform that streamlines data collection and visibility across stakeholders, supports educator and family communication and collaboration, and provides easy access to evidence-based interventions. For districts serving a high percentage of MLLs, it is particularly important to use a technology platform that fully integrates these components in a culturally and linguistically responsive framework.

Resources

Ortiz, A. A., Robertson, P. M., and Wilkinson, C. Y. (2018). “Language and Literacy Assessment Record for English Learners in Bilingual Education: A framework for instructional planning and decision-making.” Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 62(4), 250–265.
Martin-Beltran, M., and Peercy, M. M. (2014). “Collaboration to Teach English Language Learners: Opportunities for shared teacher learning.” Teachers and Teaching, 20(6), 721–737.
Counts, J., Katsiyannis, A., and Whitford, D. K. (2018). “Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners in Special Education: English learners.” NASSP Bulletin, 102(1), 5–21.
Hammond, Z. (2014). Culturally Responsive Teaching and the Brain: Promoting Authentic Engagement and Rigor among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students. Corwin Press.
Ford, B. A., Stuart, D. H., and Vakil, S. (2014). “Culturally Responsive Teaching in the 21st Century Inclusive Classroom.” Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 15(2).
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/infographics/pdf/REL_PA_Translanguaging_to_Support_Students.pdf
https://www.colorincolorado.org/article/helping-english-language-learners-succeed-multi-tiered-system-support-mtss
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1192519.pdf
Basaraba, D. L., Ketterlin-Gelle, L. R., and Sparks, A. (2022). “Addressing the Need for Spanish Literacy Assessments within the Context of Bilingual MTSS: Investigating the technical adequacy of ISIP Español for grades 3–5.” School Psychology Review.
Linan-Thompson, S., Ortiz, A., and Cavazos, L. (2022). “An Examination of MTSS Assessment and Decision Making Practices for English Learners.” School Psychology Review, 51(4), 484–497.
https://www.branchingminds.com/mtss-data-tracker
Eagle, J. W., Dowd-Eagle, S. E., Snyder, A., and Gibbons Holtzman, E. (2015). “Implementing a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS): Collaboration between school psychologists and administrators to promote systems-level change.” Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25(2–3), 160–177.

Dr. Essie Sutton is an applied developmental psychologist and the director of learning science at Branching Minds (www.branchingminds.com), a system-level K–12 education platform that connects data, systems, interventions, and stakeholders so that educators, administrators, and families can work together to support students’ holistic needs. Follow on Twitter @BranchingMinds.

Collaborative Planning: Never Having to Go It Alone


This experience gave me the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues I don’t usually get the opportunity to work with, and we were able to support and help each other to get through the first couple of weeks while we were still getting used to the online learning platforms.
Anonymous survey response

Online learning has allowed me more time to collaborate with colleagues and co-teachers. During the regular school schedule, we have no common planning time.
Anonymous survey response

Looking back over the past academic year, we are amazed at how educators from K–12 and higher education settings were able to reinvent how they delivered instruction via remote learning in such a short period of time. Although many teachers struggled at first with their own array of missteps, one consistent action we observed was how teachers overcame such challenges through virtual teacher collaboration. As we are coming out on the other side of this global crisis, you might be filled with pleasant anticipation and excitement, hoping for some new beginning, but full of trepidation as well. If so, you are not alone. Chances are the past years brought you and your colleagues closer together than ever before, and whatever you may be facing, you won’t have to figure it out on your own.

The seemingly insurmountable challenges that educators had to face had some silver linings. When we surveyed over 430 educators last year from around the US, we found that over 63% engaged frequently or very frequently in collaboration. We have seen a sharp increase in authentic, teacher-initiated collaborations—learning about technology tools together; sharing what works in remote or hybrid contexts via social media such as Twitter; advocating for meaningful instructional practices that acknowledge that all students have experienced disruptions and trauma, while some also lived through unimaginable tragedies. We have noted in particular how English language development (ELD) specialists worked with colleagues to determine the best strategies to use for online learning for English learners/multilingual learners (ELs/MLs) in spite of the difficulties many of these students faced with lack of technology and internet access. Here is how one teacher described collaborative efforts with fellow colleagues:

As the ELD specialist in my building, I worked really hard to serve the ELs not only directly but indirectly by collaborating with their teachers. Making sure the teachers felt seen, supported, and encouraged went a long way in helping the ELs get the support they needed in their content-area classes. I think I spent as much time working with teachers, counselors, social workers, and administration as I did with kids and families!

What Is Collaborative Planning?

Collaborative planning, or co-planning, is a process that supports the consistent, high-quality implementation of core content curricula while allowing general education teachers and instructional specialists (ELD teachers, special educators, academic interventionists) the opportunity to coordinate and refine their plans for instruction and assessment. When teacher collaboration works well, teachers are prepared to share:

  • Expertise in content, knowledge of literacy and language development, and pedagogical skills
  • Instructional resources, technology tools, and supplementary materials that are scaffolded and differentiated
  • Instructional strategies that represent research-informed and evidence-based best practices
  • Approaches to co-teaching—ways to group students and optimize classroom space for instructional delivery
  • Time, attention, and unwavering support for the practice of collaboration

When ongoing teacher collaboration takes place, the process often uncovers practices that support not only students with special needs but all students. The following is an account of how collaborative planning for the sake of English as an additional language (EAL) students impacted the way instruction was delivered to an entire grade:

EAL teachers collaborated with homeroom teachers in ways that we wouldn’t normally collaborate. This collaboration contributed to the success of our curriculum delivery. I teach with mentor sentences. We digitized this resource and continued to use it—not only with our EAL students but also with every fourth grader in our schools. Homeroom teachers recognized that our EAL students functioned at higher levels than students who did not attend EAL pullout classes. Our EAL team felt such pride at being asked to teach grammar lessons online to the whole grade level. We collaborated on making Kahoot! and Quizlet games. The kids LOVED learning vocabulary through the use of these games.

Teachers must regularly engage in collaborative planning—spending at least one planning period a week in collaboration with others—to build a professional dialogue about the range of needs that their students have as well as investigating the academic complexities and linguistic demands of the learning standards in core content areas. During co-planning, teachers rely on each other’s expertise and resources to accomplish the following:

  • Review the target standards and core curricular goals
  • Establish learning objectives and instructional procedures for reaching those objectives
  • Target the academic language development of all learners with special attention to ELs/MLs and other speakers of nonstandard English
  • Integrate individualized education program (IEP) goals into their lesson plans
  • Determine appropriate modifications and adaptations that will offer the necessary support to students who need them
  • Agree on formative assessment tools to be used to inform their instruction

It is critical for co-planning teams to negotiate the most effectual and achievable ways to integrate the instruction of both content and language for ELs/MLs in grade-level and content-area classes. This curricular integration has been even more challenging during remote learning, as one teacher describes as follows:

I think our teachers are working really hard, but the delicate balance between content and language can be difficult to master inside the classroom, and with learning being remote, it is a major challenge when you are unable to talk directly with the students during instruction. Right now, education feels like a one-way road, when we all know that people learn best through collaboration, conversation, and negotiation of ideas.

Requirements for Successful Collaborative Planning

Similar to cooking, baking, home repairs, or art projects, before you get started, you must have some ingredients, materials, and resources ready. When it comes to collaborative planning, we have developed the six Cs to identify the prerequisites for success with this endeavor: collaborators, collaborative time, clarity, consistency, continuity, and communication.

  • Collaborators. We need colleagues with whom we can co-plan—fellow educators who are committed to excellence and equity; have a willingness to share their knowledge, skills, thoughts, and ideas; and are inclined to learn and help others learn from them.
  • Collaborative time. We all must have ample time for collaborative planning for any meaningful and impactful teamwork to take place. We strongly advocate for school leaders to secure the logistics for common planning to create a professional context in which teachers regularly collaborate, whether they engage in co-teaching or not. If teachers do co-teach, co-planning becomes a nonnegotiable. If they don’t co-teach, co-planning becomes an urgency, a necessity, so that ELs/MLs can thrive in every class. We can’t emphasize enough that creating the logistical support for collaborative planning must be a top priority, and we cannot just put it on teachers to “find the time” to collaborate and co-plan for the sake of ELs/MLs.
  • Clarity. Teachers should be able to clearly define their expectations and objectives for collaborating with colleagues and also determine when they have accomplished what they have set out to do. Clarity is needed to determine what is to be expected from teamwork, professional engagement, and personal development that, in turn, will ultimately affect student growth.
  • Consistency. When working with ELs/MLs, we need to recognize that instructional standards and learning targets should be the same for all learners, even if the pathway to achievement requires some students to have a different amount of instructional time or types of support, such as scaffolds and differentiation to meet with success. In addition, instruction in the development of English language and literacy skills needs to be consistently integrated with content instruction in every classroom where ELs/MLs are being taught.
  • Continuity. Instructional continuity is consequential to favorable outcomes for ELs/MLs. It ensures that they are learning in programs that provide cohesive instruction, incorporate grade-level curricula, and are measured by appropriate standards and benchmarks for content and language and literacy development. Continuity rejects any disjointed, fragmented, skills-based, or happenstance curricula that are sometimes used in standalone or co-taught ELD programs. They contain no true integration of grade-level content and language learning and separate ELs/MLs from either the subject matter or the direct language instruction needed to excel in school.
  • Communication. Follow Jane Taylor’s (2015) effective communication strategies:
    • Actively listen. Withhold judgment, advice, and the need to speak.
    • Ask clarifying questions. Demonstrate your interest and willingness to engage in conversation.
    • Be clear and succinct. Respect each other’s time while allowing sufficient opportunities for discussion.
    • Paraphrase and summarize. Reflect back on what you have heard to ensure the correct information and ideas were exchanged.
    • Practice empathy. Share your feelings with one another to promote understanding and trust.
    • Provide feedback. Support an exchange of ideas by giving and receiving feedback from one another.
    • Be present. Avoid distractions, focus on the matter at hand, and fully enjoy your shared time together.

Clear, continuous communication and genuine support are critical factors in any collaborative partnership, as this teacher explains:
My co-teacher has been so amazing and supportive. She has been on Zoom meetings, telephone calls, emails, etc. for many tiring hours to make sure that she supports me as the class teacher. She supports the ELL students and parents and all of the students in our class with engaging activities and sharing stories. We truly have learned to work collaboratively and plan effectively together.

Essential Practices for Collaborative Planning

There are five essential practices for effective collaborative planning, as follows:

  • Curriculum development, mapping, and alignment
  • Data-informed planning and evidence-based instructional decision making
  • Co-planning frameworks, routines, and protocols
  • Planning for integrated language and literacy
  • Scaffolding for rigor, relevance, relationships, and research-informed instructional practices
  • When combined, these practices form an essential framework for collaborative planning to be sustained, effective, and achievable. Here is a brief summary on how to get started with each:
    • Curriculum development, mapping, and alignment for integrated instruction: Distinguish between curriculum mapping (to engage in documenting the taught or planned curriculum—backward and forward mapping) and curriculum alignment (to address the academic demand and linguistic demand of the core curriculum) and invest in the time for each of them.
    • Data-informed planning and evidence-based instructional decision making: Recognize the role that careful analysis of formative and summative assessment data play in collaborative planning. Take an asset-based philosophy on student assessment and data collection and use tools for progress monitoring, formative assessment, summative assessment, and benchmarks that are meaningful and authentic and that yield valid and reliable information.
    • Co-planning frameworks, routines, and protocols: Agree that collaborative planning requires time commitment and careful design as well as agreed-upon structures and routines, which create a strong basis for collaborative practices to yield desired outcomes. Collaborative planning may be implemented at three levels: collaborative grade-level teacher teams, interdisciplinary teaming, and co-teaching partnership planning.
    • Planning for integrated language and literacy development: Recognize that all students are ALLs—academic language learners—who need language- and literacy-rich learning opportunities and environments where core content and academic practices, as well as students’ social–emotional development, are integrated with English language development.
    • Scaffolding for rigor, relevance, relationships, and research-informed best practices (four Rs): Redefine scaffolding using four guiding principles (rigor, relevance, relationships, and research-informed best practices) in order to meet the specific needs of students without watering down the curriculum, by assuring culturally responsive education where all students see themselves reflected in what is being taught; by making connections between and among school community members—student to student, teacher to student, and teacher to families; and by the use of instructional strategies that make lessons comprehensible as well as motivate and engage all learners.

To increase the clarity of lessons, one teacher shared with us the following:
Chunk and visualize instructions; keep it simple; add a screencast. Less is more; learners value some one-to-one time; do not neglect oracy. Collaboration with teachers is crucial…

Evidence for Collaborative Planning

The value of collaborative planning is well supported by research coming from Carrie R. Leana’s (2011), Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan’s (2012), and John Hattie’s (2015, 2018) works on (a) human capital and social capital, (b) professional capital, (c) collaborative expertise, and (d) collective teacher efficacy. We are inspired by Michael Fullan and Joanne Quinn (2016), who suggest that “deep collaborative experiences that are tied to daily work, spent designing and assessing learning, and built on teacher choice and input can dramatically energize teachers and increase results” (p. 63). We believe that whether we return to physical classrooms or continue with some form of hybrid remote learning, teacher collaboration and collaborative planning are here to stay and will continue to grow stronger. As one teacher described it:
I will be collaborating with my colleagues till the end of this school year, over the summer, and in September as much as possible to develop materials that address students’ needs.

References
Dove, M. G., and Honigsfeld, A. (2018). Co-teaching for English Learners: A Guide to Collaborative Planning, Instruction, Assessment, and Reflection. Corwin.
Foltos, L. (2018). “Teachers Learn Better Together.” Edutopia. www.edutopia.org/article/teachers-learn-better-together
Friend, M., and Cook, L. (2012). Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School Professionals (7th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Fullan, M., and Hargreaves, A. (2016). Bringing the Profession Back In: Call to Action. Learning Forward.
Fullan, M., and Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts, and Systems. Corwin.
Hargreaves, A., and Fullan, M. (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School. Teachers College Press.
Hattie, J. (2015). What Works Best in Education: The Politics of Collaborative Expertise. Pearson. www.pearson.com/content/dam/corporate/global/pearson-dot-com/files/hattie/150526_ExpertiseWEB_V1.pdf
Hattie, J. (2018). “Collective Teacher Efficacy (CTE) According to John Hattie.” Visible Learning. https://visible-learning.org/2018/03/collective-teacher-efficacy-hattie
Honigsfeld, A., and Dove, M. G. (2019). Collaborating for English Learners: A Foundational Guide to Integrated Practices. Corwin.
Leana, C. (2011). “The Missing Link in School Reform.” Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_missing_link_in_school_reform

Andrea Honigsfeld is associate dean and professor in the School of Education and Human Services at Molloy College, Rockville Centre, NY.

Maria G. Dove is a professor in the School of Education and Human Services at Molloy College.

Their latest book is Co-planning: Five Essential Practices to Integrated Curriculum and Instruction (Corwin, 2022). Follow them on Twitter at @andreahonigsfel and @MariaGDove.

Multiliteracies and Multilingual Learners

Equipped with Miami Linguistic Readers, Camino de la Escuela, and my own ingenuity, my young multilingual learners and I dived into what we believed were sound biliteracy practices. These leveled reading programs developed eons ago were lifeblood to a novice teacher like me who had been trained in Spanish as a “foreign language.” Although in the mid-1970s Illinois was one of the first states to inaugurate “transitional bilingual education,” there were no endorsed university programs nor empirical research on biliteracy that had been conducted in the US.

Was I qualified to teach literacy in one language, let alone two? Absolutely not, but I had a wonderful relationship with my students and their families and together we reached great heights. Over the years and several degrees later, as I continued my career as a bilingual teacher and coordinator, I became subject to any number of literacy initiatives. All of these were touted as the cure-all for the ongoing decline in national reading scores, in particular for minoritized students (as determined by large-scale achievement tests in English). I eventually became disillusioned with vacillating literacy mandates that had little applicability to my multilingual learners.

As a dedicated educator, I had had it instilled in me that literacy is the hallmark of education and the unwavering mark of success in school. Although the pendulum of teaching models and methodologies has swayed over the years, the prevailing conceptualization of literacy seems to have remained steadfast. Historically, literacy has been equated with the following features. It has been:
Text bound, dependent on print
Reflective of standard language
Restricted to rule-governed forms of language
Monoglossic (where language is divorced from context and monolingualism is valued over multilingualism) and monocultural

 Despite this portrayal of literacy in the mainstream US, the reading wars over the most effective pedagogy for all students continue. Basically, for me, this conflict boils down to a polarity in linguistic thinking. Structural linguistics, which currently manifests as the science of reading, is perceived as a habit-formation process. It emphasizes language as a bound system of rules that consists of explicit connections among sounds, words, and sentences. At the other end of the continuum is sociocultural linguistics, which encompasses multiliteracies. It envisions the three Ls, literacy, language, and learning, as social activities that are situationally bound and geared to function, the overall purpose or meaning of a message. Sensitive to context, languages, and cultures, multiliteracies encompass a more comprehensive view of multilingual learners’ positionality as they seamlessly move across a variety of spaces.

The Backdrop of Multiliteracies

The new millennium brought substantive change to the world of K–12 literacy that reverberates to this day. The National Reading Panel report of 2000 established five pillars of reading instruction—phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension—which became the basis of federal literacy policy for the Reading First initiative under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002. Concomitantly, this reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act stripped bilingualism from its pages, thereby also creating a de facto monolingual national language policy (Menken, 2008).

In 2006, “Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth” (August and Shanahan, 2006) presented an extensive review of literacy-related research for this ever-growing group of students. Interestingly, it reiterates the findings of the prior panel, confirming the pillars of early literacy practices. However, it does go further in acknowledging that research on literacy instruction in the primary language has a positive effect on multilingual learners’ literacy achievement in English. Even though this analysis of literacy research centered on multilingual learners, it has been criticized as being filtered through a monolingual lens (Escamilla, 2009).

From Literacy to Multiliteracies

During this same time frame, the educational landscape was being transformed by a series of outside forces, which continue to inform the landscape to this day. Let’s reflect on how our lives have been altered over the past two decades. Radical changes have been brought about by two forces: 1) the sociocultural impact of natural phenomena, and 2) technological advances. These include (in no particular order):
Catastrophic events (9/11/2001, mass shootings, war)
Natural disasters (e.g., destructive hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes)
Physical and mental health crises
Racial and religious unrest
Technology tools (e.g., Chromebook, the tablet, cell phones)
Social media (e.g., TikTok, Snapchat, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram)
One-way (e.g., YouTube, Google, gaming) and two-way communication (e.g., email, texting, Zoom, Skype, WhatsApp, Viber)

How can we continue to superimpose traditional views of literacy onto a world that has undergone such a metamorphosis? Where do digital technologies that blend text, sound, and imagery fit into a narrow definition of literacy as we engage in social networking, blogging, podcasting, video making, even navigating a website? How can we envision and make sense of different content areas, such as when we build interactive maps and infographics or take virtual tours? How can we defend monolingual pedagogies when 70% of the world is multilingual and multicultural?

 Multiliteracies represent a relatively unique way of thinking and acting about the teaching of literacy within a social context for learning (New London Group, 1996). Born from a dual presence of exploding technology-associated text forms and increased linguistic and cultural diversity, multiliteracies expand the notion of literacy beyond the printed word to recognize different varieties of language and other sources of meaning. This shift also explicitly extends literacy from inside school to encompass students’ experiences at home and in the community. In essence, multiliteracies underscore how education must adapt to meet the needs of our multimodal society (Tricamo, 2021). 

 Multiliteracies offer varied ways to interpret multiple communication channels to meet the diversifying interests of students, especially those of our multilingual learners with their enriched linguistic and cultural understandings.

As mentioned, there are two unique aspects of multiliteracies. The first encompasses the influences of culture, gender, life experience, and subject-matter expertise on social contexts that enable learners to decipher different patterns of meaning and apply varying perspectives to new learning. Thus, with multiliteracies, every meaning exchange is considered a cross-cultural one that is sensitive to and reflective of the world of multilingual learners.

The second aspect of multiliteracies is connected to the characteristics of communications media and the new information age. That is, we make meaning in ways that are increasingly multimodal, where written-linguistic modes intersect with oral, visual, audio, gestural, tactile, and spatial patterns. Expanding literacy to multiliteracies advantages multilingual learners, not only by being inclusive of the social and cultural contexts of learning but also by being more accessible to students through a variety of inter-exchangeable and combinable modes.
The figure of intersecting circles is a graphic representation of the two “multi”s of multiliteracies (see https://newlearningonline.com/multiliteracies/visual-overview). In it, we see the interface between one’s life worlds (in social and cultural situations) and their many modes of communication. The interaction of different forms of communication with how they are socially situated foregrounds the interpretative nature of multiliteracies.

Two Major Aspects of Multiliteracies

Multiliteracies for Multilingual Learners

Simply stated, multiliteracies allow multilingual learners to comprehend and decipher the world from varying viewpoints. Their languages, cultures, and experiences are intertwined within a wide range of literacies and literacy practices (e.g., reading and writing along with gestures, visual representation, and digital communication). In school, multiliteracies are not confined to one class, though they are most typically associated with language arts, but in fact are integrated into every content area.

There is another set of “multi”s we may wish to apply to multilingual learners. As shown in the figure on the next page, we can see multiliteracies as an umbrella for both multiple languages, including their interaction during translanguaging (the natural dynamic flow and exchange between languages), and multimodalities (the combination of sensory and communicative modes to evoke meaning).
The learning potential of these interrelated resources that are engrained in multiliteracies is enormous for multilingual learners and their teachers. For example, multilingual learners who have opportunities to delve into content by viewing a video with bilingual captioning that comes with an accompanying pictograph are afforded access to a combination of visual, auditory, and textual modes.

Adding ‘Multi’s to Literacies, Lingualism, and Modalities for Multilingual Learners

Adapted from Gottlieb, 2021

In essence, in navigating multiliteracy spaces, multilingual learners are advantaged. Classrooms that intertwine multilingualism, multimodalities, and multiliteracies into curriculum, instruction, and assessment are privileged. Here…
Multiliteracies encompass multilingual learners’ understanding and creation of meaning from their interaction with multimodalities and multiple languages, including translanguaging practices, as vehicles for furthering learning.
Multiliteracies, by being inclusive of and embracing linguistic and cultural diversity, help shape the positive identities of multilingual learners.
Multiliteracies tap the language resources of multilingual learners along with different combinations of modalities—audio, visual, graphic, oral, kinesthetic, linguistic—to optimize literacy and learning experiences as the students interact with the world (Castro and Gottlieb, 2021).
Multiliteracies offer authentic choices for multilingual learners to pursue a range of pathways where multimodal resources combine with content and language to fortify deep learning.
Multiliteracies act as a springboard for educators who leverage bilingualism/multilingualism as an underlying trait and strength of multilingual learners as they crisscross multiple languages and cultures.

The Promise of Multiliteracies for Multilingual Learners

As a globally interconnected multilingual society, we are constantly expanding our dependence on technologies and related digital literacies. As a result, the rise of new literacies and multiliteracies has been constant, with everyone having to navigate increasingly richer and more complex media. Case in point, more and more secondary students are leading “tech-saturated lives,” with 95% using the internet, 78% having a cell phone, 80% having a computer, and 81% relying on social networking—and these data are pre-COVID (Watters, 2014). Given these facts, along with our witnessing of a multilingual turn where we have been reassessing the critical role of multilingualism in teaching and learning (May, 2013), multiliteracies should have staying power in our classrooms and schools.

Decades have passed since the inception of my career. The reading wars continue to rage and the literacy pendulum seems to be in perpetual motion. Our definition of literacy may have expanded, but to what extent have we witnessed research-based advances in (bi)literacy instruction for multilingual learners? I still await the magic bullet.

References

August, D., and Shanahan, T. (2006). (Eds.). “Developing Literacy in Second Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.” Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Castro, M., and Gottlieb, M. (2021). “Multiliteracies: A glimpse into language arts bilingual classrooms.” WIDA Focus Bulletin. Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
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, 41, 432–452.
Gottlieb, M. (2021). Classroom Assessment in Multiple Languages: A Handbook for Teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
May, S. (2013). (Ed). The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and Bilingual Education. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.
Menken, K. (2008). English Learners Left Behind: Standardized Testing as Language Policy. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.
Tricamo, L. (2021). Multiliteracies, Multimodalities, and Social Studies Education. Proceedings of GREAT Day, 2020, article 21. https://knightscholar.geneseo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1290&context=proceedings-of-great-day
Watters, A. (2014). “New Literacies in the Classroom.” http://hackeducation.com/2014/11/11/new-literacies-in-the-classroom

Margo Gottlieb, co-founder and lead developer of WIDA at the Wisconsin Center of Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, has had a long-standing career in multilingual education. Having presented and written extensively on classroom assessment for multilingual learners (see https://us.corwin.com/en-us/nam/author/margo-gottlieb), she is happy for readers to contact her at [email protected].

Celebrating International Education Week 2022

Nov. 14-18, 2022

International Education Week 2022International Education Week (IEW) is an opportunity to celebrate the benefits of international education and exchange worldwide. This joint initiative of the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of State highlights the value of global and cultural competencies and promotes programs that help U.S. students and teachers develop global skills for success in the 21st century. The Department of Education’s International and Foreign Language Education (IFLE) office and International Affairs Office (IAO) are highlighting several initiatives during IEW to celebrate the importance of international education. We encourage the participation of all individuals and institutions interested in international education. 

Long Term Programs Suit Remote Workers

Over the past two years, more and more of our work and school has shifted online. From the workplace, to college, to elementary classrooms, people have embraced the opportunity to work and learn remotely from the comfort of their own home—or somewhere else. The in-person model of work and education has been deconstructed as the main model of operation. While this new method may seem scary to those used to the old ways of doing things, with it comes a world of possibilities when it comes to not only how we work, but where we do it. With the onset of remote work and schooling, working from a foreign country becomes something that is more accessible, and opens up the opportunity to study the language of that country while being immersed in the culture.

One side effect of the shift away from in-person work and education, is that there is now a large chunk of people who can effectively work remotely and/or educate their children online from anywhere in the world. I did just that this year and took advantage of a rich experience while working remotely—immersion Spanish classes. Taking immersion Spanish classes has largely been limited to a short period of time, or to people who can take large swaths of time off, such as those in gap year or those who are retired. Not anymore! With the onset of remote work, immersion language schools can be enjoyed by an entirely new market. Over the past three months, I have been working full time at my job at Language Magazine—designing the book, having meetings with the team, updating our website, writing stories, managing print deadlines—all while taking immersion language classes in Costa Rica. Schools that are privy to digital nomads such as myself, families that work remotely with children, and university and graduate students taking coursework online can be ahead of the curve in marketing themselves to this group who can now take immersion language classes long term. Imagine—instead of students taking three weeks, they can stay for three months—or even three years.

Our world is getting more and more accessible with the onset of remote work and school, and long-term language immersion programs are a new and exciting perk. We are entering a post-COVID world, and people are eager to learn which immersion schools survived the pandemic, and even more so which schools offer features that remote workers and students look for, such as long-term housing options and strong wifi. From my experience working remotely while taking classes, I was able to experience Costa Rica—a rich and diverse country, with very different regions and schools offering strengths that can be highlighted—such as the incredible surf in Nosara, the fun and diverse community in Sámara, and the nature activities on the Caribbean. There is also a rich wellness culture in Costa Rica, and many schools like the ones I attended offer extracurricular activities such as yoga, surfing, and zumba.

As creative director and assistant editor here at Language Magazine, I worked in a hybrid model for my first five years—half my time in our in-person office in Malibu, and the other half remote. When COVID hit, we moved our operation fully remote, which luckily was relatively seamless as our team was already accustomed to hybrid remote work. For two years, I worked remotely out of my home in Los Angeles, but as global restrictions lifted so arose the opportunity to work from a foreign country. I have studied Spanish in the past (see Language Magazine Oct 2017, “Spanish on High” https://www.languagemagazine.com/2017/10/06/spanish-on-high/) However, with two years of fully remote work under my belt, I felt prepared to study Spanish and work remotely for a longer period of time, and settled on just under three months in Costa Rica. From my experience, I have outlined some tips for successfully participating in an immersion classroom while working remotely:

  • Internet Is Imperative—While it may seem obvious, it still must be stressed that having strong internet connection is paramount for successfully working remotely. Some countries, or regions of countries, have stronger internet connection than others. While in Costa Rica, I stayed at Nosara Spanish Institute in Nosara, Intercultura in Sámara, and Spanish at Locations in Puerto Viejo. Each of these three cities has strong internet connection as well as good phone service. I also recommend enabling the hotspot on your cellphone in order to have wifi connectivity from any location, although I do realize that this can sometimes be a pricey option.
    Each of the schools offered strong wifi at their campus, as well as wifi in the lodging. If opting for a homestay, I suggest speaking to the director of the school to ensure that the family has wifi, although most schools do indeed offer it.
  • Secure Housing—Almost every immersion school will offer some type of housing option through the school, and I highly suggest you take them up on that rather than trying to secure short or long term accommodations by oneself. At Nosara Spanish Institute, I stayed at their student housing Casa Mathias, which I highly recommend if available. Each room has a private bathroom and can be rented by the week through the school, not to mention that the house has strong wifi.
  • Time Management—One key advantage of immersion schooling is the intensive environment it cultivates by offering the opportunity to speak the target language for hours in the classroom. However, if you are juggling both remote work and immersion classes, it is important to allot sufficient time to each. Most immersion schools will offer an intensive class of four hours per day, or a less intensive two hours per day. At Nosara Spanish Institute, I opted for four hours the first week and two hours the subsequent two weeks, while at Intercultura and Spanish at Locations I opted for the four-hour classes as well. Looking back, I would suggest taking the two-hour option if working remotely to allow enough time for work, school, activities, and homework.
  • Communication is Key—Working remotely from a foreign country is an incredible experience, however it can be a delicate balancing act between school and work. Here at Language Magazine, we set times to have zoom check-ins, and if I was going on an excursion—for instance to Ostional to see the sea turtles hatching, a must do if in Nosara—I made sure to communicate with my team that I would be unavailable. One great thing about studying in Costa Rica, and Latin America in general, is that it is in a very similar time zone to Los Angeles, making work scheduling as seamless as if I were in the states.
  • Settle In—Another great thing about working remotely is the opportunity to stay in one single place rather than bouncing around traveling. When studying abroad, I suggest staying at one location for a longer period of time to have the experience of living in the place rather than being a tourist. By staying put, you open yourself up to forming longer-lasting connections with your teachers, classmates, and the locals. One of my favorite things was forming an early morning routine, whether it was yoga in Nosara, or surfing in Sámara, or going on long bike rides in Puerto Viejo.
  • Explore—Since most of my weekday time was spent either in class, working remotely, or doing homework, aside from my morning and evening routines I admittedly did not have much time to explore surrounding areas (although I did get to know each town very well). Each weekend I planned an adventure, and often I was able to make plans with friends I made from class or the student housing. Whether you’re going on a weekend trip with new friends or solo, I suggest getting out and visiting a nearby town or area to see more of the host country. One weekend, a friend and I traveled to Manuel Antonio, while another weekend I traveled to Corcovado National Park. These weekend trips infused my longer stay with the excitement of travel, and after the weekend was over, I was always ready to come back to my long-term accommodation. Many schools also offer daily or weekend trips with organized transportation to simplify planning.
  • Find Your Style—Each immersion school I went to had markedly different teaching styles. Nosara Spanish Institute offers friendly, personable instructors who teach students about current events, and had the most engaging materials. Intercultura offers well-structured class environments, exchanges with local students, and has the most organized style and beautiful campus. Spanish at Locations, on the other hand, offers incredibly clear and comprehensive grammar instruction in a small, tutor-like setting. Each school has its strengths, and personally I like having the variety. I would suggest deciding on what kind of learning environment suits you best, and searching for the specific program that offers that, or alternatively staying in a variety of schools to get a more diverse experience.

Conclusion

Working remote and taking immersion classes for three months was an exciting and eye-opening experience that I would suggest to any person who is able to work or take classes remotely. Learning the language in an immersion setting is unmatched, and my accent, comprehension, and conversational skills improved immensely over the time I spent in Costa Rica. A new world is emerging where more and more people are becoming digital nomads, and with that the opportunity to study foreign languages in an immersion environment is becoming more accessible. I implore any remote worker who is currently abroad to sign up for immersion classes if they haven’t already, and suggest workers in the US to dream big and consider working abroad while studying a foreign language.

Leanna Robinson is creative director and assistant editor at Language Magazine when she’s not surfing, doing yoga, or learning Spanish.

Supporting Our Youngest Dual Language Learners

California is home to more dual language learners (DLLs) than any other state, both in number and share. DLLs, or children learning English in addition to another language, represent over 50% of the state’s population between the ages of zero and five years and are one of the fastest-growing groups in California.

From 1998 to 2016, California public school instruction was required to be conducted in English only. This policy also influenced early learning settings, resulting in a workforce underprepared to serve the growing population of DLLs and their families. The passage of Proposition 58 in 2016 repealed bilingual education restrictions, reflecting a shift toward valuing bilingualism as an asset and honoring the critical connection of home language maintenance to one’s cultural identity.

In support of this shift, First 5 California launched the Dual Language Learner Pilot Study in 2017 to better understand how educators and systems can support DLLs and their families in early learning settings. Led by the American Institutes for Research (AIR), the DLL Pilot Study conducted 1) a statewide background study to understand the landscape of supports available for DLLs ages 0–5, 2) an in-depth study across 174 early learning programs in 16 participating counties to examine the relationship between current teaching practices and child and family outcomes, and 3) an expansion study of how participating counties used funds to scale strategies to support DLLs. This study sample included home- and center-based care settings; infant, toddler, and preschool-aged DLLs; and four language groups (Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, and Vietnamese). AIR released the final summary in June 2022, including policy recommendations based on their research findings in the areas of teaching strategies, family engagement strategies, and professional development.

Part of the study focused on understanding attitudes and beliefs around bilingualism and dual language learning. Among parents surveyed, 88% reported wanting their children to become bilingual. This sentiment was particularly prevalent among families with incomes over $100,000. Program directors in both home- and center-based settings shared similar beliefs—more than 80% of them recognized the importance of children developing their home languages. However, only 18% of centers and 15% of family childcare homes reported having specific DLL-focused policies and strategic plans. About a third of programs provided lending libraries or activities to support children’s at-home learning.

One explanation for these low levels of DLL-focused policies and plans may be that the state lacks a strong framework for identifying and assessing DLLs, especially assessments that can be used across multiple languages. Although California’s education code has a definition for DLLs, the term is used in a variety of ways, and what counts as a bilingual program varies.

This means that understanding and supporting DLLs becomes dependent on the provider’s personal knowledge and experience or the caregiver’s willingness and comfort with sharing information about the child’s language background with the provider. The 2021 signing of Assembly Bill (AB) 1363 aims to systematize the identification of and the collection of information about DLLs in the California State Preschool Program so programs can better support their learning and development. However, even if providers hold this knowledge, they might not be prepared to adequately support DLLs because it is not a required component of teacher training and competencies.

The in-depth study analyzed current teaching strategies used across the 16 sampled counties and their relationship to child outcomes. More home language use in early learning settings was associated with positive outcomes in both English and the home language for preschool-aged DLLs. As the authors state, the higher the frequency of Spanish spoken in the classroom, “the better children from Spanish-language backgrounds performed on Spanish vocabulary and oral comprehension, basic mathematics, bilingualism, literacy skills, executive functioning, social–emotional well-being, and English oral comprehension.” More exposure to Spanish did not have any negative effects on English skills. This pattern held somewhat for Cantonese- and Mandarin-language DLLs, where home language exposure was associated with improved bilingualism and vocabulary skills. For infant and toddler DLLs, more language input was only associated with more advanced linguistic knowledge and skills in that same language.

More exposure to Spanish did not have any negative effects on English skills. Classroom practices—such as books, songs, and basic phrases—that do not require teacher proficiency in the DLLs’ home language were also positively related to outcomes for Cantonese- and Mandarin-language DLLs, such as oral comprehension, English vocabulary, and bilingualism. These outcomes were not observed for Vietnamese-language DLLs, which the authors note may be due to the small number of classrooms with students who speak Vietnamese.
In addition, the study explored the connection between family engagement strategies and families’ attitudes and beliefs about bilingualism, as well as families’ support for learning at home. Families receiving positive messages about dual language learning and cultural diversity were more likely to value home language skills as an aspect of school readiness.

More frequent communication between programs and families was associated with more participation in classroom events and more engagement in at-home learning. Providing at-home learning activities in both the home language and English was associated with greater engagement in activities like reading and counting. Families enrolled in home-based care were less likely to receive these materials, but when they did, the materials were more likely to be in the families’ home language. Family outcomes were stronger when communication and materials were shared in the home language, but for educators who are not proficient in that language, any culturally and linguistically responsive

two-way communication with families of DLLs is valuable. A more in-depth summary of family engagement findings can be
found at https://californiadllstudy.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/DLL-Family-Engagement-Brief-508.pdf.

Both teaching and family engagement strategies can be bolstered through professional development opportunities. Currently, only 25% of educators across early learning settings are required to receive DLL-focused professional development, while 92% of
teachers indicate a need for more DLL-focused training.

Center-based educators were more likely than home-based educators to receive pay and have access to substitutes that allowed them to participate in professional development (69% to 29%, respectively). Teachers who received DLL-focused professional development viewed bilingualism as an asset and were more confident in their ability to support DLLs.

They were also more likely to use evidence-based teaching strategies for DLLs and engage with families in a linguistically and culturally responsive way, both of which are associated with positive outcomes for DLLs. These findings emphasize the importance of supporting DLLs’ home languages in the classroom, culturally and linguistically responsive family engagement practices, and having an early learning workforce that is adequately prepared to work with DLLs. The study reinforces the direction of current policies and programs in California. In addition to AB 1363 mentioned above, California’s Master Plan for Early Learning and Care emphasizes the need to support DLLs to advance equity in early learning. The Language Justice Initiative, which offers training and resources to the early education field to create more equitable learning opportunities for DLLs, recently launched a Multilingual Learner Teaching Certificate to develop teacher competencies to deliver a high-quality education for multilingual learners and families. California’s asset-based approach to supporting DLLs can be a model for other states. As the DLL population continues to grow, affirming and building on the assets they bring will be the only
way forward.

Nicole Hsu is a policy analyst on the Early and Elementary Education Policy Team at New America. She provides research and analysis on early childhood policies and programs that consider the broader communities and systems supporting child and family well-being, particularly for English learners and children with disabilities. During graduate school, Nicole served as a policy consultant for the Alameda County Early Care and Education Program, Sacramento City Unified School District, and the North Carolina Partnership for Children. She has also worked alongside families, educators, and healthcare providers at The Primary School, an integrated health and education school in East Palo Alto, CA. Nicole is a proud product of the California public school system and holds bachelor’s and master’s degrees from UC Berkeley. This article was originally published online by New America.

1...464748...332Page 47 of 332

Subscribe for exclusive content

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

Subscribe

LanguageMagazine 2023

Language Magazine