Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Data Sources for this Paper5 year longitudinal study titled - “Literacy Squared”1,500 children; 120 teachersColorado & Texas7 school districts; 15 schoolsSpanish and English Intervention + Professional DevelopmentIntervention Components
Spanish Literacy InstructionOral ESLLiteracy Based ESL (with Oracy focus)Paired (simultaneous literacy instruction)Explicit Connections between Spanish & English
Conceptual Framework for Literacy Squared
Language of InstructionDichotomous Views (use Spanish or forbid its use - not HOW might we use it)
Quality of InstructionWhat strategies/methods are most effective to teach literacy either in Spanish or EnglishExplicit, Direct & Process Approaches
Explicit Connections between Spanish & EnglishTransfer is not always automatic
(August & Shanahan, 2006; Slavin & Cheung, 2003; Gersten & Baker, 2000; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders & Christian, 2006)
Literacy Squared Teacher Data
Survey Professional Development Assignments (gathered and analyzed)Observation of Instruction (2x year)
Literacy Squared TeachersPreparation
65% have Bilingual/ESL Endorsements25% are in the process of getting endorsements
Teaching Experience (Bimodal distribution)11 years mean teaching experience5 years (mode)
Professional TrainingSIOP, SDAIE, Sheltered Content TeachingESL Program Training (e.g. Avenues, Into English)No U.S. trained teachers had training in teaching Literacy in Spanish (5 had degrees from Mexico)
Teachers Voices Although few had formal training in “Methods of Teaching Literacy in Spanish” - the majority felt comfortable that they were doing well in this area;Over 90% felt frustrated with their ability to effectively teach ESL;100% cited their biggest area of need in professional development was helping children make ‘transitions’ from Spanish to EnglishWhen asked about ESL instruction, most cited a program (e.g. Avenues) rather than methods etc.All believed strongly in the benefits of bilingual instruction.
Our AnalysisTeachers verbalized a belief that Spanish literacy served as a ‘bridge’ to English.HOWEVER, our data indicated that:Teachers have internalized a belief that language interference was a major problem in teaching children to read and write in two languages.NOTE:Our teachers are well prepared, have endorsements, believe in bilingualism etc.¿Cómo estarán los demás?Issue is likely exacerbated with teachers with no ELL preparation.
Interference vs. InterlanguageInterlanguageAn intermediate form of language used by second language learners in the process of learning a language. Interlanguagecontains some transfers or borrowing from the first language, and is an approximate system with regard to grammar and communicating meaning. (Encyclopedia of Bilingualism, 1989).
Interference:Occurs in 2nd language acquisition when vocabulary or syntax patterns from a learner’s first language cause errors in second language performance. The term is used largely in the United States and decreasingly in the rest of the world because of its negative and derogatory connotations (Encyclopedia of Bilingualism, 1989).
In shortInterference assumes that one language interferes with learning a second language;Interlanguage assumes that one language scaffolds learning a second language and is a source of support.The majority of our teachers had never heard the term ‘interlanguage.’
Preparing Teachers to Use What Children Know to
Improve Classrooms for ELLs
Changing the paradigm of ‘the language barrier’ and ‘language interference’ to a more positive paradigm of ‘interlanguage.’Changing a phenomenon requires FIRST changing how we discuss the phenomenon.
Interference Paradigm in Reading
Teacher BeliefProhibition of Spanish use during English reading time (Spanish interferes)Our FindingReading Comprehension = understanding + oral productionIn 2nd language understanding (comprehension) is separated from production and comprehension may precede production.
Instructional ImplicationWe may be underestimating the reading ability of L2 children because we do not use Spanish as a resource.Instructional Suggestion:Read in EnglishAllow children to discuss readings in small groups or pairs in SpanishEncourage children to summarize their discussions in English (Moll & Diaz, 1985).
Interference Paradigm in Writing
Teacher BeliefChildren’s writing issues were caused by Spanish interference (especially in spelling)Our FindingSpanish is a scaffold not a barrier Spelling errors are as likely to be ‘typical’ of monolingual writers as to be influenced by SpanishMultiple strategies
Spanish influencedEnglish influencedRule governed and not random
Language as a ScaffoldSpanishContent - 5Punctuation - 3Spelling - 2
EnglishContent - 5Punctuation - 3Spelling - 1
Osos & Bonis: SpellingL1Febret - favoriteJi - heAi - IJuen - whenJim -himSou - soMach - muchIars - ears
CommonCrismas -ChristmasDanses - dancesMuves - movesWhit - whiteGevet - gave it
Instructional ImplicationTeachers need to be explicitly taught to analyze children’s writing from a bilingual lens and to analyze writing vis a vis the use of multiple strategies (Spanish influenced, English influenced, and code-switching).Children were not deficient in skills, they, in fact were using multiple skills from two languages in their writing.
Interference Paradigm in Code-Switching
Teacher BeliefChildren code-switching in writing is caused by lexical deficiency in one or both languages or interferenceOur FindingChildren’s code-switching was rare in writingCode-switching was generally conceptual and or contextualAt times children indicated they were aware of their code-switches.
Code-switching• Child puts quotation marks around words
that he writes in English, “clownfish,” “jellyfish”
• Child also notes that he read and learned from the signs in the aquarium: “Al lado del tanque, tenía un papel que desía….“jellyfish.” These signs in the aquarium were in English.
Instructional Implication: Code-switching
Teachers need to better understand the phenomena of code-switching and learn to describe when/how children code-switch instead of judging it.“The wider society tries to keep children’s worlds separate, with different codes for each context. Children, however, tend to synthesize their resources. Further, the availability of alternatives is a key aspect of growing up bilingual.” (Kenner, 2004, p. 59).
Conclusions• At times, we may be more limited than the
children in our ability to view the cognitive and linguistic strengths in emerging bilingualism/biliteracy in children;
• Preparing all teachers to be effective with ELLs will require more than new methods, classroom checklists, or a new and improved ESL program.
• Preparing effective teachers will require explicit preparation to enable teachers to understand stages of interlanguage and to use this knowledge in instruction.
