SUBSCRIBE

Recommendations for Long-Term English Learners

Ten years after their groundbreaking publication Reparable Harm called attention to California’s long-term English learners (LTELs), Californians Together has released Renewing Our Promise, a research and policy report by Manuel Buenrostro and Julie Maxwell-Jolly, PhD, that focuses on supporting LTELs.

This report is a call to action to use the information and policy gains of the last decade to accelerate improvement for these students. In particular, the English Learner Roadmap offers key guidance to school districts for improving outcomes for EL students—including LTELs and those at risk of becoming LTELs. The 80-page report makes recommendations to improve outcomes for EL and LTEL students in significant and long-term ways, including the following:

  • Educator Preparation and Professional Learning. Stronger educator preparation and ongoing professional learning for all educators to understand and work effectively with EL and LTEL students across the curriculum, including time for collaboration. This is aligned with principle three of the EL Roadmap focused on “system conditions that support effectiveness,” including capacity building for leaders and teachers.
  • Resources and Planning. Focused resource allocation, goal setting, and planning that address the specific needs of ELs and LTELs. This is aligned with principle three of the EL Roadmap focused on “system conditions that support effectiveness,” including investing adequate resources, and principle four focused on “alignment and articulation within and across systems.”
  • Curriculum and Instruction. Education programs that provide all ELs and LTELs the supports they need without segregating them into tracks are based on curriculum and instruction that is accessible, engaging, culturally relevant, and rigorous and attend to the socioemotional well-
  • being of students along with their language and academic needs. This is aligned with principle two of the EL Roadmap focused on “intellectual quality of instruction and meaningful access.”
  • Data, Assessment, and Accountability. Data on LTELs and students at risk of becoming LTELs that are accessible, included in the accountability system, and useful for a variety of purposes. The data are used for planning effective instruction, designing professional learning, monitoring student progress, and communicating with students and their families about successes and needs. Another effect of using data and assessments is to hold the system accountable for meeting the needs of ELs and LTELs, including schools, districts, and the state. This is aligned with principle three of the EL Roadmap focused on “system conditions that support effectiveness,” including assessment, and principle four focused on “alignment and articulation within and across systems.”
  • Engagement, Relationships, and Student Focus. Frequent communication and meaningful engagement (centered on listening and learning) with students, their families, and communities to create relationships of trust. This is aligned with principle one of the EL Roadmap focused on “assets-oriented and needs-responsive schools.”

The report concludes, “It is time to be bold and recommit to improving outcomes for ELs and LTELs. The pandemic has shed a glaring light on the gaps in student opportunity that have existed for years—and the influx of state and federal funds creates an opening for us to address these gaps. Now is not the time for complacency but for using these policy gains and new resources to redouble our efforts and accelerate progress so that the seeds of progress sown over the past decade bear fruit in the next.”
www.californianstogether.org

Practical PD


In the midst of the pandemic, teachers are stretched incredibly thin. In addition, districts are taxed with extra time spent on contact tracing and social–emotional needs of the students and staff. Needless to say, finding time for professional development that is systematic and job embedded can be a daunting task, especially while navigating needs for concurrent instruction and shortages of substitute teachers.
Here in District 73.5, an approximately 1,100-student district just outside the Chicago city limits, leaders had to find creative ways to provide teachers with professional learning opportunities to support the 250+ students with linguistic needs, covering 60+ languages. Here are some of the ways the district has kept the spotlight on professional development during the pandemic.

Two-Minute Tuesdays
During weekly meetings, teachers and staff are able to volunteer to share a “two-minute tip.” This could be a technology tip or a strategy to incorporate into a current lesson. The goal is to offer all teachers the opportunity to share their own practices as well as an opportunity to learn something new from a fellow teacher. 

Coming off a year of virtual learning, teachers across the building saw an increased need to support students who are multilingual due to the nature of remote instruction. Our middle school linguistic resource teacher took this opportunity to share strategies specifically geared toward supporting these students across the school day. Topics included content-specific strategies to support students in subjects such as math, science, and social studies and in academic vocabulary development. Each of these strategies supported teachers in working with students by providing applications that could be used the very next day. 

Mini-Conference 
The district has a longstanding practice of early release time once a week for professional development. Recently, three or four of those after school times have been designated as mini-conference days in which staff share their expertise with their colleagues. The purpose of this is to build the internal capacity of the organization and provide opportunities for teacher choice. Topics range from equitable instructional practices to cooperative learning structures.

Hybrid Book Clubs
Our hybrid book clubs are a COVID carryover. This year so far, district teachers have engaged in three different book clubs. The use of video conferencing provided teachers opportunities to engage in professional learning at a time that was convenient for them (in person after school or evenings virtually). In addition, District 73.5 has piloted a book club for English language (EL) teachers during the school day that connected EL teachers across the district through video conferencing.

Book clubs provide teachers with opportunities to learn together, problem solve collectively, and build relationships across the district. 
Professional learning opportunities are at the heart of the District 73.5 improvement plan. Ensuring our adult learners have opportunities to continue to improve and enhance their craft makes for a more robust learning environment for our students. In addition, providing educators with differentiated professional learning opportunities in which they had voice and choice to participate provided them with agency during uncertain times. 

Lyla Nissan is the English language coordinator in Skokie School District 73.5. Lyla has her Assyrian bilingual endorsement, and she also speaks Arabic. As coordinator, Lyla has used her multilingual experience to connect with families in the district.

Dan Swartz is the director of curriculum, instruction, and assessment in Skokie School District 73.5. In addition to his work with the school district, Dan is an executive board member of the Illinois Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents and a graduate of ALAS’s Superintendent Leadership Academy (SLA Cohort X).

Pretext for Learning


Our school systems are structured around the simple plan that students learn to read for the first few years and then they read to learn. This basic strategy has been so ingrained into the psyche of educators that it is rarely questioned, but it may be time to reevaluate it to take into account the increased use of educational technology, changes in what we perceive as literacy, developments in our understanding of learning styles, and how different young minds work. Before any review, one step we can take is to encourage young learners to produce more creative writing and to use their devices to express themselves in text.

The ability to read in any language, and especially English in the US, is essential for success in school and probably in life, but writing is just as important. Of course, the two are interdependent, but all too often, young learners are not given enough time nor the explicit instruction needed to develop their writing skills. By experimenting with their creative writing, students will understand more about literary devices and their reading will improve, as will their comprehension. Overcoming the fear of starting to write on a blank page or screen is in itself a major milestone that can open the floodgates of opportunity to writing persuasive essays, lyrics, research papers, poetry, emails, novels, letters, reviews, and reports.

Not only does writing boost memory and encourage imagination but it also can help children understand their feelings, deal with trauma, and allow their voices to be heard. For many people, it’s far easier to write about emotions and feelings —be it on paper or a screen—than to talk about them, and sometimes the very act of putting experiences and upset into words is enough to start the healing process. Writing is a very valuable tool in the social–emotional learning process.

Timetables, curricula, and literacy targets restrict many teachers’ ability to allocate the time and resources to writing that they may desire. Far from being a dying art, writing is probably more popular now than ever, so one way to encourage students to write may be to capitalize on the texting obsession and ask students to text more elaborately. Predictive text can be used for guidance as long as students are made wary of its pitfalls and encouraged to check suggestions.

Traditionally, writing instruction follows reading instruction and is not given the same attention, based on the presumption that good readers make good writers, which is often the case, but writing is more proactive and can change lives in different ways from reading. It’s a vehicle for expression and creativity with endless potential that deserves more emphasis in our schools.

Literacy in Spanish and English


Building early literacy skills is imperative for all students, especially the five million English learners (ELs) being educated in today’s public schools. The mastery of these skills—including oral language, phonological awareness, phonemic awareness, and use of phonics—helps ELs develop the strong reading foundation needed for grade-level learning and success across all subject areas. Whether these early literacy skills are taught in students’ first languages or the target language of English, they are critical to ensuring students’ long-term success.

By the Numbers: The Need to Support ELs
Data shows Hispanic students experienced greater unfinished learning in reading, as well as math, over the last two years due to the pandemic. The Understanding Student Learning: Insights from Fall 2021 report found schools serving majority Hispanic students saw almost double the amount of unfinished learning in third-grade reading and math over these two years as compared to schools serving majority White students. The percentage of Hispanic students who are behind grew by 14 points, according to i-Ready Assessment data.
Californians Together also cites that of the 1.15 million EL students in California alone, 200,000 of these students are classified as long-term English learners (LTELs)—EL students who have been in US schools for six or more years without reaching the levels of English proficiency needed to be reclassified.3 Another 130,000 ELs in the state are considered at risk of becoming LTELs, according to the organization.
These numbers reinforce the immediate need to address foundational reading skills with EL students. So, what exactly can educators do to support ELs when it comes to their early literacy development?

Understanding the Differences
The Overview of Reading white paper in development by Curriculum Associates delves into the many aspects of teaching reading in both English and Spanish. It, importantly, reminds educators that:

  • Learning to read is not an automatic process
  • Reading requires learning the codes of the language
  • There are distinct differences between early literacy development in Spanish and English

To effectively teach reading in both Spanish and English, it is first important for educators to really understand the distinct differences between the two languages—especially since the two languages can appear fairly similar. Likewise, it is important for educators to teach these differences to students.

To begin with, English has 26 letters in the alphabet and 44 phonemes or sounds, whereas Spanish has 27 letters and 22–24 phonemes.
The white paper describes English as “an opaque language” that is highly irregular and does not have a one-to-one grapheme–sound correlation. For example, the letter a has many sounds, as in above /ə/, pat /æ/, late /eɪ/.”

Spanish is described as “a more transparent language,” meaning that “the correlation between a letter and sound is regular, one-to-one, and highly consistent.” An a is always /a/, for example.

Focusing on Phonological Awareness
The white paper goes on to say that the languages’ different phonologies can impact students’ phonological awareness, or their ability to “identify and manipulate various pieces of oral language, such as sentences, words, syllables, and individual sounds.”

With this in mind, educators should always try to remain authentic to the phonology of each language when teaching. Educators should also work to deliver intentional, explicit, and systematic instruction to support biliteracy. And, for skill development, educators should provide opportunities for students to make cross-language connections and develop metalinguistic knowledge. Implementing an appropriate scope and sequence focused on phonological awareness can effectively support this type of instruction. To support ELs and literacy instruction in dual-language classrooms, a phonological awareness scope and sequence should ideally:

  • Address the skills students need to be successful in both Spanish and English
  • Include lessons that focus on one skill at a time
  • Provide the opportunity for educators to instruct on these skills and time for students to practice these skills
  • Continually build upon skills and understanding students learned in prior lessons
  • Keep students engaged and focused throughout the learning process

The scope and sequence should also include lessons that focus on one phonological awareness skill—such as rhyming, blending, segmenting, isolating, manipulating, and stressed syllable—at a time to help support and accelerate students’ progress. When choosing high-quality lessons, educators should additionally look for ones that feature:

  • High-utility, grade-appropriate words
  • Opportunities for blending letter sounds and syllables
  • Engaging, alliterative text
  • Decodable text experiences for students
  • Culturally relevant stories and illustrations

In early Spanish reading instruction, it is effective to teach students about vowels first. Once these letters are mastered, educators can move to high-frequency consonants. This helps students more easily decode words and apply letter–sound associations to words with target sounds as they read.

Providing Support in Both Languages
In addition to the strategies above, it is important to remember that emerging bilingual students do best when they are supported in both English and Spanish. The study “English Reading Growth in Spanish-Speaking Bilingual Students: Moderating Effect of English Proficiency on Cross-Linguistic Influence” found students whose native language is Spanish and who had early reading skills in Spanish showed greater growth in their ability to read English.

According to the study, students who spoke Spanish and had stronger Spanish reading skills in kindergarten also performed better across time.

These findings further reinforce the need—and benefit—of educators teaching reading in both languages. Since some literacy skills can transfer across languages, educators can help students use what they have mastered in Spanish to support reading in English, and vice versa.

For example, once students learn that the prefix im- means “not” in both Spanish and English, they will quickly be able to add more words—such as impossible/imposible and impatient/impaciente—to their reading vocabulary.

Teaching students to read is a complex process. And teaching EL students to read in two languages at the same time can undoubtedly provide additional complexities. However, by delivering explicit and systematic instruction and utilizing the right strategies and resources, educators can help ELs develop the strong reading skills—in both Spanish and English—needed for ongoing success.

Links
National Center for Education Statistics (2021). “English Language Learners in Public Schools.” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf
Curriculum Associates (2021). Understanding Student Learning: Insights from Fall 2021. www.curriculumassociates.com/-/media/mainsite/files/i-ready/iready-understanding-student-learning-paper-fall-results-2021.pdf
Californians Together. Long Term English Learners. https://californianstogether.org/long-term-english-learners
Relyea, J., and Amendum, S. (2019). “English Reading Growth in Spanish- Speaking Bilingual Students: Moderating Effect of English Proficiency on Cross-Linguistic Influence.” https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cdev.13288

Claudia Salinas is the vice president of English learning at Curriculum Associates and the regional manager for Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas. She is responsible for helping school leaders meet the needs of their English and struggling learners by bringing research-based professional development, assessments, and standards-based instructional materials into school districts.

Naps May Boost Early Literacy

Child napping on pile of books

The ability to map letters to sounds is considered an important indicator of early literacy skills. Previous research shows that letter sound mappings in kindergarten is strongly associated with later reading success and some children later diagnosed as dyslexic may show poor letter-sound knowledge in the preschool years. However, there is little known research about the relationship between sleep, memory development, and literacy skills.

A new study published in Child Development provides initial evidence that daytime naps could be beneficial for preschool children’s learning of letter-sound skills. The research, conducted by scholars at Macquarie University in Australia, the British universities of Oxford, York, and Sheffield investigated whether a daytime nap supports preschool children’s ability to learn letter sounds and to transfer this newly learned knowledge to the recognition of printed words.

“Having a nap after learning might facilitate the capacity to utilize newly learned information in a new task,” said Hua-Chen Wang, lecturer in the School of Education at Macquarie University. “We found a positive nap effect on children’s learning of letter-sound mappings, and in particular, using that knowledge to read unfamiliar words.”

Thirty-two preschool children in Sydney, Australia (Mage = 4 years;3 months) were taught letter-sound mappings in two sessions: one followed by a nap and the other by a wakeful period. Learning was assessed by explicit letter-sound mappings (“Which sound does this letter make?”) and knowledge generalization tasks (“Here’s Tav and Cav, which one is /kav/?”). Results from the knowledge generalization task showed better performance after a nap than after wake. However, no nap benefit was found for explicit letter-sound knowledge. This study provides initial evidence that naps could be beneficial for preschool children’s learning of letter-sound mappings.

Each child participated in seven sessions over two to four weeks which included the following:

  • Pre-test: To establish baseline levels of letter-sound knowledge.
  • Letter-sound mapping training: Held a week apart under both “nap” and “no-nap conditions.”
  • Post-tests: To assess learning once after a nap and once after a period of wakefulness. To examine whether any effect of nap on learning was maintained, knowledge was also reassessed one day later. Each session assessed letter-sound mappings and using explicit learning (e.g., “Which sound does the letter C make?”) and knowledge generalization tasks (e.g., “Here’s Tav and Cav, which one is /kav/?”).

The authors predicted that if a nap benefits letter-sounds skills, then children who napped would perform better on both the explicit learning tasks (e.g., children were asked to produce or recognize the letter sounds they learned earlier) and knowledge transfer tasks (e.g., children were asked to identify unfamiliar words containing the letter sounds they learned earlier). The findings showed that napping did appear to positively affect performance on the knowledge transfer test. This nap benefit was maintained the following day.

The authors acknowledge that because the study was conducted at daycare centers instead of in a laboratory (to make the children more comfortable), they were unable to measure physiological features of sleep such as rapid eye movement (REM) and how they are related to the sleep benefits. This would be an important direction for future research. The authors also note that since the nap effect was only found in generalizing letter-sound knowledge to recognizing printed words, but not on the explicit learning measures, future research on this topic with a larger sample size is recommended.

“The research provides initial evidence that naps facilitate the acquisition and application of letter-sound mappings, abilities that are crucial to early reading development,” said Anne Castles, professor of Psychological Studies at Macquarie University. “These findings may have implications for creating the optimal conditions for the acquisition of this fundamental literacy skill in preschool children.”

This project was funded by the Australian Research Council.  

Summarized from Child Development, Nap Effects on Pre-school Children’s Learning of Letter-sound Mappings by Wang, H.C., Castles, A., Robidoux, S., (Macquarie University), Gaskell, M. G., (University of York), Nation, K., (University of Oxford), and Weighall, A., (The University of Sheffield). Copyright 2022 The Society for Research in Child Development, Inc. All rights reserved.

The Three Elements of Reading Comprehension

We’ve all heard that when students can read on grade level by the end of grade three, their academic path forward is greatly facilitated. As a result, many states have enacted policies and testing requirements to support just that: reading on grade level by the end of third grade. We even refer to our youngest students as “pre-readers” and talk about students transitioning to being “independent readers” in elementary school. Does that mean we stop there? Have we fully supported students in becoming lifelong readers when they are performing well in grade three? Certainly not.

The ability to read is a lifelong skill, a foundation from which students can accelerate their learning, develop new capabilities, and successfully navigate life no matter which path they choose. But supporting true reading comprehension means re-envisioning literacy education as a multiyear journey that begins in the early years but continues indefinitely.

Re-envisioning Literacy Education
Helping students navigate this journey requires that educators deeply understand the elements of reading comprehension. Rather than being a single skill, comprehension is dependent on a variety of skills that can be summarized as a trifecta of decoding, vocabulary, and knowledge. Each area must be cultivated, supported, and nurtured as students move from first recognizing the sounds and shapes of letters to becoming truly literate.

It begins with decoding and the ability to sound out words. But, if a student sounds out a word they’ve never heard, they haven’t achieved comprehension. This is where vocabulary comes in. Likewise, having heard a vast number of words won’t help a student if they don’t know how to associate the sounds with letters. Then, beyond both of these, comprehension also often requires background knowledge. The ability to decode the words Berlin Wall does not mean that the student understands the historical reference to that structure. For true comprehension, they need all three.

The literacy journey should be well supported across all grade levels, but the practices with older students and the role of other content-area teachers are not clearly articulated. Far less training or support for literacy is found in the later grades. This imbalance partially stems from a lack of investment. In the early 2000s, for example, grants from Reading First pumped billions of dollars into kindergarten through third grade. However, there was no parallel grant program of any scale for literacy in fourth grade and above, contributing to the polarity we see today.

This is not to say that investments in early grades are wasted. Literacy cannot be built on shaky foundations.

Students must learn to decode and pronounce words. But stopping there hinders students’ ability to reach higher levels of literacy. In addition to a sturdy foundation, students must also have ample opportunities to build their vocabulary and add to their general knowledge. When a young person is equipped with decoding abilities, a robust vocabulary, and broad contextual knowledge, they’ll be highly literate.

We must continually acknowledge both the elements and the length of the journey to literacy. A pragmatic approach could be to envision literacy acquisition as having two phases: what educators should do for students before they have learned the mechanics of reading, and what educators should do for students after. Both areas offer opportunities for improvement.

Phonics Vs. MSV: A History of Miseducation of Young Readers
Let’s first focus on the before. In our very first lessons with students, we must focus on phonemic awareness. Why? Because young children often don’t hear the individual sounds within words. It can be hard for adults to remember this because, for most of us, it has become second nature. Grasping the phonemes is the beginning.

Teachers initially introduce sounds so students can start to hear their individual characteristics. Only after that can a student move on to learning letters and associating sounds with letters. For optimal growth, the focus here must be on the letters, but some widely accepted teaching practices send students off track.

Many teachers have been taught to follow the acronym MSV, also known as the three-cueing system. This instructional practice teaches students to read through using meaning to figure out what a word is, then looking at sentence structure and visuals (pictures on the page). In lessons, this can show up as students looking at pictures to guess a word, skipping over unfamiliar words, or memorizing the shape of a word.

Many teachers follow this method because they have been told it works. Trainers, teacher educators, district leaders, and even well-respected researchers have time and again held up MSV as best practice. The approach seems reasonable and no other alternatives are presented, so they continue to push forward.

Harmful Effects of MSV
The problem is that the practice distracts students from where they should be focused—on the words—by emphasizing other elements on the page.1 Learning to decode words establishes the foundation. Once students learn to decode words, they can build the ability to recognize more and more of them by sight and instantly associate them with sound and meaning. It’s a skill, called orthographic mapping, that strong readers and high-performing students develop. Understanding the connection between seeing a word and its details, its sequence of letters, and its pronunciation is part of learning comprehension, growth, and mastery. But when students are shifting their focus to other elements on the page or even suggesting words and meanings that make sense but aren’t actually on the page, they are encoding poor reading habits and slowing their development of essential orthographic mapping. Reliance on MSV and cueing is likely contributing to low proficiency rates in reading. According to the most recent data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 37% of high school seniors were proficient or advanced in reading.2 Measures for fourth graders are similar. About one-third (35%) of students in fourth grade were below the basic reading level.

Updating Classroom Practices
Helping teachers access, understand, and put into practice the science of reading is essential to improving reading rates.3 Access starts with teachers’ colleges and districts updating the research on which they rely. Some teachers are continuing outdated practices because they are the only solutions presented for teaching students to read. Teacher educators, administrators, and classroom teachers themselves must commit to only using research-proven ideas about how to teach reading—and then hold each other accountable.

The importance of explicit and systematic phonics instruction has been validated by an extensive research base and is the key to the first leg of the journey to literacy, supporting students before they have learned the mechanics of reading.

Accelerating Vocabulary Acquisition
We can now transition to the second phase of the journey: what students need after they’ve learned the mechanics of reading. Once the foundational skills of reading (such as phonics and decoding) are in place, there is tremendous value in time spent on vocabulary and knowledge expansion. Let’s first explore vocabulary.

Fluency in reading is supported by exposure to as many words as possible, as frequently as possible. The introduction of different vocabulary words, even before students are taught to read them, can be an effective step. Hearing a variety of words and the sounds that comprise them through conversations and being read to gives students the chance to recognize the sounds and patterns.

Then, once students are capable of independent reading, they can acquire vocabulary more efficiently through wide reading than through any direct instruction on vocabulary. This is not to say we should not directly teach vocabulary. We should, and there are ways to make that process as efficient and effective as possible. But researchers estimate that we can only directly teach students about 400 words per year,4 and to be college and career ready, students need to add a minimum of 1,500 words to their vocabulary annually.

Achievement Gap Vs. Knowledge Gap
This brings us to the final element of the comprehension trifecta: knowledge. Most educators are aware of the tight correlation between reading ability and socioeconomic status. But why do more affluent students typically read better? Is it because they truly have better skills in reading? Or is it some other advantage?

An extensive body of research has validated that the more general knowledge a student has, the better they do on reading tests. This often leads to higher high school graduation rates, college completion, and earning potential. We tend to reference “achievement gaps.” But what if it’s not an achievement gap but a knowledge gap?

Reframing the gap exposes the biases built into it and its true nature. We can see that students who have opportunities to acquire more knowledge about the world— whether that be broader access to subjects at school or, more importantly, opportunities outside of the classroom like wider travel and more varied experiences—gain an advantage on tests because of the knowledge they acquire. And who are the children with more of these opportunities? Those from higher-income families.

So the question for educators then becomes how to introduce students to broad content from an early age—in a sense, how to embrace the idea that knowledge and literacy are the same.5

Doing so will require breaking the assumption that more time on English language arts improves literacy scores. In fact, one recent study showed that students made greater gains when they had more time with social studies topics than when they were given more instruction on reading strategies.6 Yet, in response to No Child Left Behind and in an effort to raise literacy rates, many schools cut the time students spend in the arts and other subjects to increase time in ELA.

To achieve higher rates of literacy and set students up for a lifetime of success, educators must embrace the three factors of comprehension and engage with their interconnections.

Links
1. www.apmreports.org/episode/2019/08/22/whats-wrong-how-schools-teach-reading
2. www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/achievement/?grade=4
3. www.renaissance.com/edwords/science-of-reading
4. www.guilford.com/books/Bringing-Words-to-Life/Beck-McKeown-Kucan/9781462508167
5. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/knowledge-literacy
6. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/resources/social-studies-instruction-and-reading-comprehension

Dr. Gene Kerns (@GeneKerns) is the chief academic officer at Renaissance. He is a third-generation educator and has served as a public school teacher, adjunct faculty member, professional development trainer, district supervisor of academic services, and academic advisor at one of the nation’s top edtech companies. He has trained and consulted internationally and is the co-author of three books. He can be reached at [email protected].

National Library Week is in Full Swing

National Library Week began on April 3 and this year’s theme is “Connect with Your Library.”

According to the American Library Association’s website, this year’s theme “promotes the idea that libraries are places to get connected to technology by using broadband, computers, and other resources. Libraries also offer opportunities to connect with media, programs, ideas, and classes—in addition to books. Most importantly libraries also connect communities to each other. Overall, the theme is an explicit call to action—an invitation for communities to join, visit, or advocate for their local libraries.”

The honorary chair of National Library Week 2022 is actress-comedian Molly Shannon, whose mother was a librarian. In a statement on serving as chair, Shannon said:

“I am so honored to serve as honorary chair of National Library Week for 2022. My mom was a librarian. She encouraged kids to read. So, the work of librarians and libraries has such a special place in my heart.

“Libraries are places where communities connect—to things like broadband, computers, programs and classes, books, movies, video games, and more. But most importantly, libraries connect us to each other. Supporting National Library Week in this role allows me to connect to my mother’s memory and all the librarians out there. Thank you for everything you do.”

First observed in 1958, National Library Week was a joint initiative of the ALA and the American Book Publishers. Upon learning of research which suggested Americans were reading less, the two formed a nonprofit called the National Book Committee and set out to encourage more Americans to read. To drum up public support, the then-director of National Library Week, John S. Robling, touted it as “an outstanding opportunity to reach non-readers and make present readers more active readers.” He cautioned, however, that its success hinged on the participation of librarians across the country.

Decades later, librarians continue to design inspirational programming around National Library Week.

This year, the ALA encourages library lovers to:

  1. Visit your library
  2. #UniteAgainstBookBans
  3. Participate in the #MyLibrary promotion on social media
  4. Follow your library, ALA, and I Love Libraries on social media

How have you and your students commemorated National Library Week 2022? Leave us a note in the comments section!

Could Universal Dyslexia Screening Misclassify English Learners?


A bill in California’s state legislature would make dyslexia screening universal for young students in the state’s schools. Senate Bill 237 was introduced last spring but has faced several roadblocks in its passage, including opposition from the California Teachers Association. Although the legislation would certainly make dyslexia assessments—which, at the moment, are not mandatory—more widespread, specialists who work with English language learners (ELLs) worry that a universal screening for dyslexia could misidentify ELLs as being at risk for dyslexia.

Under SB 237, California students from kindergarten through second grade would undergo a mandatory dyslexia screening, starting in the 2022–2023 school year. If passed, the bill would give the State Board of Education until June 30 to create a list of approved dyslexia screening tools for local educational agencies to administer to their students.

Currently, dyslexia screenings are typically only administered to students when a teacher raises some sort of concern about their reading ability—this often occurs around third grade, though detecting risks for dyslexia earlier can allow students to achieve better learning outcomes.

However, if dyslexia screenings are mainly geared toward native English-speaking children, advocates argue that ELLs will be left behind. While the language of SB 237 designates that dyslexia screenings ought to be “evidence-based” and “culturally, linguistically, and developmentally appropriate,” a report from EdSource outlined concerns from several skeptics, who believe the bill could do more harm than good, at least for ELLs.

“As a reading specialist, I think we need to exercise extreme caution so as to not create a policy that is potentially detrimental to historically marginalized groups of students,” said Lillie Ruvalcaba, a teacher in Los Angeles County who works with ELLs.

Historically, students who don’t speak English as a native language have been disproportionately placed in special education programs, hence the cause for concern.

However, state-funded research will hopefully develop assessments that are suitable for ELLs as well. Governor Gavin Newsom—who has dyslexia himself—has placed a strong emphasis on dyslexia and reading education during his tenure as governor. Earlier this year, his proposed budget set aside about $10 million for dyslexia research at the University of California, San Francisco. This research will include the development of dyslexia screenings for young children whose primary language is English, Spanish, or Mandarin Chinese. Still, these screenings wouldn’t account for ELLs whose primary language is one of the several other languages spoken widely throughout the state. However, supporters of the bill note that screenings would not necessarily diagnose children with dyslexia but rather identify students who may need additional help in literacy development.

A Superpower Hidden in Plain Sight

How can educators ensure that emerging bilingual students are well served in their schools, and how can we as educators foster linguistic diversity as an asset rather than as a problem?

Who Are Emergent Bilinguals?
As of fall 2018, 10.2% of public school students in the US were identified as English language learners (ELLs), double the number recorded in 2003.1 At 75%, the majority of ELLs have Spanish as their home language, followed by Arabic and Chinese, which make up 2.7% and 2% of total ELL students respectively. Other languages commonly spoken by ELLs are Vietnamese, Somali, Russian, Portuguese, Haitian, Haitian Creole, and Hmong (out of the over 400 languages spoken by students in the US). By 2025, 25% of K–12 students are projected to have a first language other than English.

I use the term emergent bilingual to refer to students typically categorized as “ELLs” to acknowledge that they are more than their ability to use English. The term was coined in 2008 by Dr. Ofelia García in an effort to bring focus to the unique linguistic potential of students who are learning English as a second language at school, rather than defining them by something they may lack. Learning and accessing more than one language is a strength, so using this terminology helps me take actions based on this reality.

Emergent bilingual students bring with them the potential to develop high metalinguistic awareness (the ability to consciously think about language) and communication, memory, decision-making, and analytical skills. And these students are bicultural as well as bilingual. They come from a variety of cultures, ethnicities, and nationalities and may be exposed to perspectives and traditions different from the dominant culture. Their cultural experiences are a gift, not just to them but also to those around them.

While English is now established as the dominant language in the US, North America has always been a place of linguistic and cultural diversity. As such, a path toward educational equity must include both effective English instruction and respect for and celebration of the beautifully diverse home languages and cultures represented among our student populations.

Despite North America’s linguistic diversity, the US has a long history of systemic discrimination against speakers of languages other than English, including and especially in the education sphere. This discrimination is fueled by racist and xenophobic ideas and an insistence on emphasizing English for what are presented as pragmatic or patriotic reasons.

Federal, state, and local governments have taken an active role in erasing minority languages in favor of English, beginning with the intentional eradication of many Indigenous languages through coerced English-only boarding schools starting as early as the 17th century. Language policies and norms have been used since then to privilege one group over others and to exert social, intellectual, and economic control. Enslaved Africans were isolated from their native languages; later, non-English European languages faced discrimination until the mid-20th century; meanwhile, Indigenous languages and the languages of the increasing number of immigrants from Asian and Latin American countries were considered inferior, and speakers of those languages were (and many still are) pressured to assimilate. Even now, racist and xenophobic ideologies cause people to organize against the use of languages like Spanish in the US and to antagonize people who use their home language.

Clearly, for students to navigate US society, it is important for them to learn English. But it is also important to understand that the disruption of children’s learning and love of their home languages often means weakening their ties to their families, communities, and cultural identities, and that this disruption has been built into our education system deliberately. Forcing linguistic assimilation causes more than a loss of language skills; it shakes the foundations of students’ sense of belonging and self-worth, both crucial to being ready to learn at school. In the case of many Indigenous languages, it is also a matter of the survival of the language and its unique features and ways of thinking.

Instead of forcing assimilation, we should be supporting emergent bilingual students in their learning using research-based, empathetic, and respectful methods that uphold students’ language rights.10 Fortunately, there have been some positive policy developments to this effect, especially following the passage of the Civil Rights Act. The 1968 Bilingual Education Act, which granted federal funding to school districts wanting to establish programs for students with limited English proficiency, was the first instance of the US government officially acknowledging the need for non-English-speaking students to receive specialized support.11 Another example is the San Francisco court case Lau v. Nichols, in which Lau argued that students of Chinese ancestry did not have equal access to the English language instruction required for academic success in an English-language classroom.12 The district federal court ruled that California school districts with federal funding must provide English language instruction to all non-English-speaking students. However, with the rise of English-only movements in the 1990s, efforts to secure bilingual education in the US have not often been successful, and many emergent bilingual students remain reliant on a monolingual model of education.

Benefits of Multicultural Education
Why is it so important for us to be aware of who our emergent bilinguals are and what they bring to the classroom? In order to better prepare our young people for the increasing diversity that they will encounter both inside and outside of their classrooms, it is paramount that we cultivate educational environments within which culturally responsive instruction is incorporated at all levels of learning and a greater sense of multicultural awareness and inclusion is actively being fostered to address the individual, unique needs of every student.
In many ways, the core of a multicultural education is to promote mutual respect among diverse individuals in the classroom. We can do this first by taking time to get to know our students and giving them a safe space to be themselves. This requires clear, consistent communication with students throughout the course of the year with regard to what it means to be culturally sensitive and inclusive of all cultures, beliefs, and languages. We must also take conscious steps to include diversity in classroom lessons. Teaching diversity exposes students to various cultural norms and social groups, preparing them to become better citizens in their communities by increasing their capacity for empathy, understanding of lessons and people, openness to new ideas, feelings of confidence and safety, and ability to flourish in a diverse workplace in the future (Drexel University School of Education, n.d.).

The idea here is to be present for our students in such a way that they can learn to be present not only for themselves but also for one another.

Supporting Emergent Bilingual Literacy
Reading is the foundation for all future learning—the ability to read transforms lives and empowers children and communities to reach their full potential. Research shows that students who read at grade level by fourth grade have a greater opportunity to succeed in school and beyond. This is particularly true for emergent bilingual students, who, as a group, statistically appear to be trailing behind non-emergent-bilingual students. This gap has much larger implications when taking into consideration how those without high school diplomas will, on average, experience both lower wages and higher unemployment rates than those with diplomas. These gaps have lasting impacts on minority and immigrant-background communities, from reduced family earnings to poorer health and increased incarceration rates (Sugarman, 2019). An analysis done by the Education Week Research Center found that emergent bilinguals are largely underrepresented in gifted and talented programs, despite some studies suggesting that children who grow up bilingual have greater cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skills than monolingual children (Sparks and Harwin, 2017).

What, then, are some ways in which we can better support the early literacy skills of our emergent bilingual students in the classroom, while also taking into consideration the assets that they already have?

First, as educators and leaders in education, we can reflect upon the ways in which linguistic discrimination may show up for students. We can’t start a journey of transformation without acknowledging where we currently stand. Second, we can acknowledge that we may not be able to transform overnight. We must have grace with ourselves and others and make a consistent effort to apply more inclusive practices for the benefit of all our students, and particularly our emerging bilinguals.

Now, more tangibly, instruction of foundational literacy skills (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension) should be adapted to better suit the needs of our emergent bilingual learners. For example, when supporting students with building up their early phonological awareness skills in English, we can make modifications to our approach by allowing time for more practice with sounds that could potentially cause some confusion due to their nonexistence in or perceived similarity to another sound in their native languages.
Phonics instruction itself should also always be explicit and systematic and should provide the student with exposure to appealing reading materials in varied genres—including texts in which the student can identify with and relate to the characters and narratives (Irujo, 2016). At Reading Partners, we have made it a priority to ensure that the books in our curriculum and the books we send home with our students reflect and celebrate diversity and empower students who see themselves represented in the books they read.

Moving on into reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, and comprehension (which is the ultimate goal of literacy instruction), we should be prepared to think about how all these elements come together to support one another and focus on practices that may need modification to better fit the needs of our emergent bilingual readers.

One such practice would be asking students to read aloud to increase their reading fluency. Since emergent bilinguals may be self-conscious about their oratory language, it is a good idea to instead replace repeated readings (in which a student reads the same passage aloud multiple times) with a choral reading (where the student reads aloud together with the teacher or another student) or an echo read (when the student reads the same passage aloud after the teacher or another student reads it) to increase their confidence and not discourage the student from trying.
Keep in mind that reading speed, accuracy, and expression will reflect the reader’s speaking fluency in the target language. In addition, we should be cognizant that vocabulary can be particularly difficult for emergent bilinguals, even for quite proficient learners, and can affect both their reading fluency and their comprehension of a text. Emergent bilinguals need more vocabulary instruction, different vocabulary teaching techniques for instruction, and different vocabulary words than their native-speaking peers (Irujo, 2016).
For a country with a checkered history of language suppression and English assimilation, it’s high time we recognize emergent bilingualism for what it truly is—a superpower, if only we as a society are willing to value and cultivate it.

References
Drexel University School of Education. (n.d.). “The Importance of Diversity and Cultural Awareness in the Classroom.” https://drexel.edu/soe/resources/student-teaching/advice/importance-of-cultural-diversity-in-classroom
Irujo, S. (2016). “What Does Research Tell Us about Teaching Reading to ELLs?” Reading Rockets. www.readingrockets.org/article/what-does-research-tell-us-about-teaching-reading-english-language-learners
Rosetta Stone Education. (2020). “Emergent Bilinguals Are the Future.” www.lexialearning.com/sites/default/files/RSE_Migration_Assets/emergent-bilingual-white-paper-final.pdf
Sparks, S. D., and Harwin, A. (2017). “Too Few ELL Students Land in Gifted Classes.” Education Week.
Sugarman, J. (2019). “The Unintended Consequences for English Learners of Using the Four-Year Graduation Rate for School Accountability.” Migration Policy Institute.

Links
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf#:~:text=The%20percentage%20of%20public%20school,%2C%20or%204.5%20million%20students
www.languagemagazine.com/2021/06/17/words-matter-the-case-for-shifting-to-emergent-bilingual
www.lexialearning.com/sites/default/files/RSE_Migration_Assets/emergent-bilingual-white-paper-final.pdf
www.languagemagazine.com/2022/01/19/english-hegemony-as-an-issue-of-justice
www.visualcapitalist.com/the-countries-with-the-most-linguistic-diversity
https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google/com/&httpsredir=1&article=1103&context=his_fac
https://katemenken.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/language-policy-and-social-control-encyc-of-bilingual-ed-copy.pdf
www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50550742
www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/half-the-world-is-bilingual-whats-our-problem/2019/04/24/1c2b0cc2-6625-11e9-a1b6-b29b90efa879_story.html
www.linguisticsociety.org/sites/default/files/lsa-stmt-language-rights.pdf
www.britannica.com/topic/Bilingual-Education-Act
www.britannica.com/topic/Lau-v-Nichols

Adeola Whitney is CEO of national early literacy nonprofit Reading Partners.

A Two-Way Information Highway

Being informed is empowering. For both educators and researchers, being informed allows us to make decisions with confidence and to participate in professional communities with discernment. Nobody disputes the importance of being informed. The question is: who should be informed of what? When it comes to the relationship between second language acquisition (SLA) research and pedagogy, we think of research informing practice more often than the other way around. It is important that practice inform research as much as research informs practice.

What exactly is research-informed pedagogy?
The term research-informed has become as overused and misinterpreted as the label communicative, so let me start by addressing what I do not mean by it.

I do not mean justifying practices based on cherry-picked studies. We should think of results as clues to be interpreted in context, as opposed to directives to be followed without question. I also do not mean relying only on the latest publications. While it is true that research continually gives us clues that confirm, question, or add to what we know so far, we should not discount the contributions of an article based solely on when it was published. Some ideas do not have expiration dates. Last but not least, I do not mean dogmatically following any particular scholar to the point of dismissing the ideas of anyone with a different name. Our teaching should be guided by fundamental principles of SLA, not famous people in SLA.

What I mean by research-informed is a principled approach where we can justify why we do what we do while understanding what “research shows,” what it has not shown yet, and what it might not ever be able to show. I put “research shows” in quotation marks because it is another phrase that needs some dissection. As soon as I hear someone say “research shows,” I immediately wonder: what research? Published research is inevitably biased. Not everything that has been researched has been published, not everything that should get published is published, and it is debatable whether everything that gets published should be published. The second question that comes to mind is: what does it really show? Research shows our own interpretation(s) of the data. Two scholars can look at the same results and see various degrees of support for different conclusions.

A third question is warranted when the phrase “research shows” comes up in the context of which practices are most beneficial or effective: for what? The research-backed benefits of instructional interventions are dependent on what we are measuring, as well as what we are not measuring. Above all, is that what we want to know? For example, if a study shows “benefits” of a particular instructional method when it comes to accuracy on a grammaticality judgement test, how useful would those findings be for your own instructional goals? Personally, I am interested in “benefits” that are measured by unassisted performance on communicative tasks, as opposed to mastering forms in isolation.

Who informs whom?
The main concern has been and continues to be about helping teachers apply research findings in the classroom. Ellis (1997) pointed out the shortcomings of expecting teachers to do as researchers say with little regard to context. Even if we agree that “it is only when [teachers] have tried out some of the pedagogical applications suggested by SLA research that they will understand what it really means for their own teaching context” (Lightbown, 2003, p. 10), going from “do as we say” to “try what we say” does not fully address what happens after teachers have tried out what researchers say. At what point does practice inform research? Bridging the infamous gap should entail movement from both sides.

A consequence of prolonged unidirectional communication is that, at some point, everyone feels unheard. On the one hand, researchers become frustrated when practice appears to ignore decades of research. On the other hand, teachers feel alienated when their practical concerns do not seem to be a priority to researchers. The chasm widens as each side dismisses the other on the basis of being uninformed (i.e., “teachers don’t know the research,” “researchers don’t know what happens in the classroom”). Even the false dichotomy of relying on “experience” versus “research” to guide pedagogical decisions highlights how divided we are. A teacher’s experience in the classroom should not be discounted as a source of information to make pedagogical decisions, just like decades of research should not be dismissed as being something applicable only under ideal conditions.

Part of the frustration from both sides possibly stems from expectations that remain perpetually unmet. What exactly is the effect we are expecting research to have on classroom practice? And how fast? Being aware of research might be the catalyst for reflection, and it may not always translate into tangible, immediate changes to our practice. By the same token, teachers’ expectations of research also need some adjustment. The instructional context and conditions under which studies are carried out will likely never be identical to our own classrooms. We should balance caution and curiosity as we inform ourselves of what “research shows.”

How can we go from dismissing to dialoguing?
Making findings accessible through summaries like those in the OASIS database (Marsden et al., 2018) is indeed needed, but I would suggest going a few steps further. We need greater acceptance of new formats and venues. Writing 5,000–8,000 words does not make one’s ideas more valuable. The mold is hard to break, but I know I am not the first to question the hierarchical ranking of discourses we have come to accept. Will uploading a video on YouTube ever be considered as significant a contribution as presenting at an academic conference?

Another desperately needed change in perceptions has to do with the unfounded stigma of action-based research being less “serious” than other types of research. This issue is not new or exclusive to SLA (Stewart, 2006), but it is certainly long overdue for addressing in our field. Studies focused on student performance in the classroom, as opposed to acquisition (the Holy Grail), should be accepted as equally rigorous and important as psycholinguistic or laboratory studies. Practical applications are as valuable as theoretical implications.

In addition to these two shifts in perception, there are a number of concrete ways in which we can go from dismissing to dialoguing, including but not limited to:

• Classroom-based studies co-created and co-authored by researchers and teachers. The classroom should not be merely a data collection site but rather should inform multiple aspects of the research design, especially the assessment measures.

• Incorporating the topic of action research within language teacher education programs. Madel (2021) outlines a series of steps to encourage educators to conduct research themselves and thus debunk the myth “that SLA research is beyond reach for the classroom practitioner and only reserved for those in academic settings” (Madel, 2021, p. 35).

• Podcasts by teachers and for teachers, where research findings are discussed and researchers are interviewed. Some current examples of this idea are the Motivated Classroom podcast, hosted by Liam Printer, and the World Language Classroom podcast, hosted by Joshua Cabral.

• Videocasts that connect the dots between SLA research and teaching. A great example of this idea was the series Musicuentos Black Box a few years ago. Currently, my own YouTube channel, “Unpacking Language Pedagogy,” provides videos with concise yet contextualized summaries of articles that address issues directly relevant to the classroom. Steve Smith’s YouTube channel also features short screencast presentations about various aspects of second language learning and teaching, called “Continuing Professional Development (CPD).”

All in all, the relationship between SLA research and pedagogy should emulate two key aspects of two-way information-gap tasks. First, each interlocutor has information that the other one needs. Teachers and researchers need to understand each other’s contexts and engage in a purposeful exchange of information.

Second, everyone is working toward the same concrete outcome. In the words of Pica (1994), “as teachers and researchers, we cannot work in isolation from each other if we are to help our students meet their needs and accomplish their goals” (p. 49). Indeed, the students’ success is our common goal.

References
Ellis, R. (1997). “SLA and Language Pedagogy: An educational perspective.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 69–92.

Lightbown, P. (2003). “SLA Research in the Classroom/SLA Research for the Classroom.” Language Learning Journal, 28(1), 4–13.

Madel, R. (2021). “Classroom Teachers’ Role in Bridging the Research Gap in SLA: A guide for conducting classroom research.” Pennsylvania Language Forum, 92, 30–45.

Marsden, E., Alferink, I., Andringa, S., Bolibaugh, C., Collins, L, Jackson, C., Kasprowicz, R., O’Reilly, D., Plonsky, L. (2018). Open Accessible Summaries in Language Studies (OASIS) [database]. www.oasis-database.org

Pica, T. (1994). “Questions from the Language Classroom: Research perspectives.” TESOL Quarterly 28(1), 49–79.

Stewart, T. (2006). “Teacher–Researcher Collaboration or Teachers’ Research.” TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 421–429.

Dr. Florencia Henshaw is the director of advanced Spanish at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She is an award-winning educator who has published and presented nationally and internationally on various topics related to language pedagogy. Her upcoming book, Common Ground: Second Language Acquisition Theory Goes to the Classroom (co-authored with Maris Hawkins), aims to help educators visualize how to put principles into action.

1...646566...332Page 65 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