This article was downloaded by [Universitaets und Landesbibliothek]On 07 December 2013 At 0318Publisher RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number 1072954 Registeredoffice Mortimer House 37-41 Mortimer Street London W1T 3JH UK

Educational ReviewPublication details including instructions for authors andsubscription informationhttpwwwtandfonlinecomloicedr20

Challenges confronting teachers ofEnglish language learnersThi Diem Hang Khong a amp Eisuke Saito ba School of Education University of Queensland Australiab Curriculum Teaching amp Learning Academic Group NationalInstitute of Education SingaporePublished online 05 Mar 2013

To cite this article Thi Diem Hang Khong amp Eisuke Saito Educational Review (2013)Challenges confronting teachers of English language learners Educational Review DOI101080001319112013769425

To link to this article httpdxdoiorg101080001319112013769425

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor amp Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theldquoContentrdquo) contained in the publications on our platform However Taylor amp Francisour agents and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authorsand are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor amp Francis The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses actions claimsproceedings demands costs expenses damages and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content

This article may be used for research teaching and private study purposes Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction redistribution reselling loan sub-licensingsystematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden Terms ampConditions of access and use can be found at httpwwwtandfonlinecompageterms-and-conditions

Challenges confronting teachers of English language learners

Thi Diem Hang Khonga and Eisuke Saitob

aSchool of Education University of Queensland Australia bCurriculum Teaching ampLearning Academic Group National Institute of Education Singapore

The number of English language learners and limited English proficient studentshas grown exponentially in the United States over the past decades Given thehuge cultural and linguistic diversity among them educating this population ofstudents remains a challenge for teachers This paper aims to review the typesof challenges that educators face when teaching limited English proficient stu-dents in the US context Findings from existing literature show the obstaclesteachers confront are social institutional and personal in nature Although someresearch has emphasised stronger teacher education programmes as a solution toproblems related to the teaching and learning of these students theseprogrammes are insufficient for teachers to overcome all of the challenges theyface Concerted efforts by educators local and central administrators academicslocal communities and lawmakers are necessary

Keywords English language learners limited English proficiency languageminority teacher challenges

Introduction

The number of English language learners (ELLs) or limited English proficientstudents in the United States has grown exponentially over recent decades (NationalClearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2007 2011) These students aregenerally defined as those who are from non-English speaking families and experi-ence difficulties in understanding English (US Department of Education 1994)They are occasionally referred to as English learners (Sandberg and Reschly 2010)English as a second language students (Clair 1995) language-minority students(Grant and Wong 2003) or the more general term culturally and linguisticallydiverse students (Perez and Holmes 2010) For the purpose of consistency the termldquoELLsrdquo will be used throughout the present paper Although ELLs are an integralpart of the US educational system and can potentially benefit the countryrsquos futuregiven their tremendous cultural and linguistic diversity educating this population ofstudents still remains a challenge for many US teachers

The research hitherto has looked at various problems confronting ELL teachersHowever there is a dearth of studies that have systematically categorised theobstacles encountered by these educators in their daily practices Among the mostdocumented issues are inadequate teacher education and professional development(Abedi 2004 Clair 1995 Grant and Wong 2003 Nelson-Barber 1999 Zucker-Conde 2009) and assessment of ELLs (MacSwan and Rolstad 2006 Reeves 2004

Corresponding author Email hatrangvnugmailcom

Educational Review 2013httpdxdoiorg101080001319112013769425

2013 Educational Review

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) Although these issues should beurgently addressed the existing research does not represent the whole picture ofchallenges facing ELL teachers The issues with which they need to cope can bemuch broader and more complex and there is a need to capture a more completepicture of the challenges they face Therefore this paper aims to review the typesof challenges that educators face when teaching ELL students in the US contextDespite choosing a specifically US setting as the case for this review many of thechallenges discussed in its regard are of interest and relevance to readers in otherEnglish-speaking environments as well as those concerned with second-languagespeakers in other linguistic contexts Since the work of educating ELLs is not con-fined to ESL (English as a second language)bilingual teachers the scope of thisstudy extends to mainstream teachers who work with these students in regular lan-guage arts and content-area classrooms that is settings in which literacy skills andsubject content are taught entirely in English and where the majority of studentsare native speakers of English The paper attempts to answer two researchquestions

(1) What are the challenges facing ELL teachers(2) What can be inferred from those challenges

The paper is organised as follows The introduction is followed by a detaileddiscussion of the problems teachers face which we classify into three groupssocial institutional and personal challenges each of which is further divided intosubgroups The final section comprises the discussion and conclusion in which weattempt to elaborate on the significance of the challenges identified and providesuggestions for future studies

Methods

We used the online public access catalogue Educational Resource InformationCentre (ERIC) to retrieve a list of articles using various combinations of keywordssuch as ELLs LEP and minority students From these results we selected 50papers based on their focus on teacher problems After examining these papers thereferences that the authors considered highly relevant to the present study wereincluded in the literature review bringing the total to 60 These included bothempirical research and opinion papers with the former being the majority Opinion-based papers were incorporated because of the apparent under-documentation ofcertain problems in rigorous research The authors then read the literature high-lighted discussions regarding the challenges confronting ELL teachers and codedeach paper according to the steps for coding data suggested by Creswell (2008)Text segments conveying relevant ideas were identified and assigned codes for keyterms for example ldquonegative public feelingsrdquo and ldquopublic action against immi-grantsrdquo These similar codes were grouped together under more general codes suchas ldquosocietal attitudesrdquo and were then mapped out and collapsed into themes to illus-trate the general structure of the issues As a result three categories emerged withregard to the overall picture of the challenges that teachers face While the lowachievement and literacy of ELLs have been treated as major obstacles for theirteachers and do in fact challenge many US educators they are assumed as givenconditions in this paper and do not therefore emerge as the biggest issues

2 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Challenges

Social challenges

The growth and diversity of ELLs

According to a number of official reports (Camarota 2004 de Cohen and Clewell2007 Kindler 2002 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition2007 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011) thepopulation of ELL students in the United States has been constantly on the riseWithin a decade (1990ndash2001) the number of ELLs grew by 105 compared to amere 12 increase in the general school population (Kindler 2002) In the academicyear 2008ndash2009 more than 53 million ELLs were reported representing nearly11 of the total pre-kindergarten through K-12 (that is from pre-school to grade12) enrollment (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011)These students settle in various parts of the country with California being the statemost densely populated by ELLs (de Cohen and Clewell 2007)

ELLs in the United States come from diverse backgrounds (Futrell Gomez andBedden 2003 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 Kindler 2002 Perez andHolmes 2010 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) A large number of ELLs areimmigrants or children of immigrants and are disadvantaged in terms of theireducational attainment economic situation and social security compared to thenative US population (Camarota 2004) These students bring to the classroom aldquovariety of cultural backgrounds language proficiencies academic experiences andcognitive processesrdquo (Perez and Holmes 2010 41)

The rapid increase in the size and the great diversity of this student populationpose a challenge to their educators To work effectively with ELLs a need exists toreform educational policies curriculum materials and management as well asteacher training However US society and the educational system seem unpreparedfor this challenge thus many issues have emerged with regard to the teaching andlearning of ELLs in the United States

Societal attitudes

First ELLs are often considered problematic due to their cultural and linguisticdiversity (McLaughlin 1992) A growing body of studies depicts how localcommunities perceive these children and their families The White community hasparticularly demonstrated concerns about the impact and threat of an influx of immi-grants (Gitlin Buendia Crosland and Doumbia 2003 Stuart 2006 Valdeacutes 1998Vollmer 2000) These societal concerns have transformed into a popular belief thatnewcomers do not wish to learn English and they waste the investment the countrymakes in their education (Valdeacutes 1998) Furthermore minority groups such as Afri-can Asian and Latino Americans have frequently reported experiences of discrimi-nation and stigmatisation (Kim Wang Deng Alvarez and Li 2011 Rosenbloomand Way 2004 Stuart 2006 Zucker-Conde 2009) Especially increased discrimina-tion due to linguistic diversity is a serious problem (Stuart 2006) with Asian andLatino groups most likely to suffer (Fritz 2008) In addition ELLs face serious chal-lenges in order to survive in their new country In some cases adjustment problemsappear as the students feel overwhelmed (Kim et al 2011)

To a large extent these problems manifest an underlying ideology of American-isation according to which members of the minority must undergo a process of

Educational Review 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

becoming blind to differences (Reeves 2004) and assimilating into the dominantculture (Fritz 2008) This belief in Americanisation also seems to exist in ELL teach-ers generally influenced by dominant societal attitudes (Walker Shafer and Iiams2004 131) This in turn greatly affects the educational experiences of ELLs How-ever despite much research into societal attitudes toward ELLs there is a seriouslack of studies on how the influence of societal views challenges ELL educators

Federal state and district educational policies

Since 1964 in addition to several court rulings and non-regulatory guidance thefederal government has passed three acts stipulating requirements for ELLprogrammes Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Equal EducationalOpportunities Act of 1974 and Titles I and III of the No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) of 2001 Yet despite the emphasis placed on the importance of providingELLs with appropriate and effective instruction the content of these documents andtheir implementation at school level are questionable

First regarding the content NCLB does not require that teachers be trained towork with adolescent ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) Furthermore as Raganand Lesaux (2006 18) claimed the documents ldquotend to focus onmdashand even over-emphasizemdashEnglish language skills at the expense of academic achievementrdquoThere is also an issue with regard to Re-designated Fluent English Proficient(R-FEP) status In this system schools are supposed to support and track their stu-dents who are reclassified as R-FEP although initially identified as having limitedproficiency in English only for two further years The concern is that schools mayprioritise English language teaching in order to be rewarded with the reclassifica-tion of a larger number of students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006) As a result studentsrsquocontent knowledge and skills could be compromised preventing them fromtransferring smoothly to mainstream classrooms

Another shortcoming in federal law court rulings and non-regulatory guidanceis the absence of specific and concrete guidelines (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)Substantial autonomy is given to states and districts in implementing policy creat-ing a risk of a gap between the intent of federal policies and actual classroom prac-tice (Cohen Moffitt and Goldin 2007) In such cases federal policies are notnecessarily reflected accurately at the state and district levels in terms of reportingstudentsrsquo yearly progress and monitoring R-FEP students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)In connection with this issue Short and Echevarria (20042005) further describedthe mismatch between requirements for high-quality teachers under NCLBguidelines and actual practice

In addition to national laws and regulations teachers struggle with state-levelpolicies California and Florida serve as typical examples California which has thelargest number of ELLs in the United States (Gaacutendara et al 2003 2) passedProposition 227 in 1998 severely restricting the use of ELLsrsquo primary languages inclassroom instruction and instead providing a transitional programme of ldquostructuredEnglish immersionrdquo lasting usually just one year (Gaacutendara 2000) This led to asharp drop in the percentage of bilingual services available for ELLs from 29 in1997ndash1998 to 12 in 1998ndash1999 as well as in the number of bilingual teachersAlthough claimed as a success by the author of the initiative Proposition 227 failedto provide the long-term support necessary to prepare ELLs for the mainstreamclassroom and increased the risk of language-poor experiences (Gaacutendara 2000)

4 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In Florida although some exceptions are allowed the majority of ELLs have totake the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) a statewide assessment ofprogress during grades 3ndash11 (Florida Department of Education 2010) and to passthe FCAT or an equivalent test in reading and mathematics in order to obtain thestandard high school diploma (Florida Department of Education nd) Failure to doso prevents students from going to college regardless of how they performed inhigh school However research has pointed out the inappropriateness of the FCATfor many ELLs particularly those with low to intermediate levels of English profi-ciency Because these tests primarily measure proficiency in academic Englishrather than content knowledge ELLs can be greatly disadvantaged (Giambo 2010)Teachers can do little to change these policies and regulations which are oftendecided without teachersrsquo input (Gaacutendara et al 2005)

Institutional challenges

Teacher education

In all probability the biggest institutional obstacle for ELL teachers is inadequatein-service and pre-service training despite the importance of preparing teachers towork with ELLs (George 2009 Navarro 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011 Reeves 2006 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) According to a survey conducted by Walker et al (2004)87 of 422 mainstream K-12 classroom teachers did not receive any training inELL education Indeed not all ELL teachers are certified (Kindler 2002) or if theyare their certification is temporary (de Cohen and Clewell 2007) This lack ofteacher training programmes raises questions of the quality of instruction and theinadequacy of teachersrsquo understanding about how to handle second languageacquisition (SLA) (Clair 1995) the unique needs and issues of students from differ-ent backgrounds (Nelson-Barber 1999) the adjustment of coursework for ELLs(OrsquoBrien 2011) and working generally with ELL students (Ortiz et al 2006Reeves 2006)

Furthermore approximately 60 of deans of colleges of education admitted thelack of adequate focus on this matter in coursework of their teacher education pro-gramme (Futrell Gomez and Bedden 2003) Many teacher candidates are Whitemonolingual English speakers and the admission process for teaching programmesplace little emphasis on candidatesrsquo experience in multicultural contexts (Nelson-Barber 1999) In these aspects pre-service teacher training seems insufficient toequip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with ELL students

Further in-service teacher training is also problematic both quantitatively andqualitatively First teachers undergo little or no professional development withregard to working with ELLs (Clair 1995 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll2005) Thus many educators of ELLs have to depend largely on their own ofteninsufficient knowledge gained through daily work with students In terms ofquality interviews with nine ELL teachers working at high schools in Massachu-setts revealed that professional development particularly in teaching writing skillsdid not appropriately respond to the changes in teaching conditions regarding ELLstudents brought about by federal and state regulations (Zucker-Conde 2009)Moreover ldquoone-shotrdquo professional development programmes often lasting only afew days may not be able to develop the underlying beliefs and viewpoints of ELLteachers (Rueda and Garcia 1996) Simply providing teachers with a particulartechnique does not help them improve their fundamental practices Finally concerns

Educational Review 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) Although these issues should beurgently addressed the existing research does not represent the whole picture ofchallenges facing ELL teachers The issues with which they need to cope can bemuch broader and more complex and there is a need to capture a more completepicture of the challenges they face Therefore this paper aims to review the typesof challenges that educators face when teaching ELL students in the US contextDespite choosing a specifically US setting as the case for this review many of thechallenges discussed in its regard are of interest and relevance to readers in otherEnglish-speaking environments as well as those concerned with second-languagespeakers in other linguistic contexts Since the work of educating ELLs is not con-fined to ESL (English as a second language)bilingual teachers the scope of thisstudy extends to mainstream teachers who work with these students in regular lan-guage arts and content-area classrooms that is settings in which literacy skills andsubject content are taught entirely in English and where the majority of studentsare native speakers of English The paper attempts to answer two researchquestions

(1) What are the challenges facing ELL teachers(2) What can be inferred from those challenges

The paper is organised as follows The introduction is followed by a detaileddiscussion of the problems teachers face which we classify into three groupssocial institutional and personal challenges each of which is further divided intosubgroups The final section comprises the discussion and conclusion in which weattempt to elaborate on the significance of the challenges identified and providesuggestions for future studies

Methods

We used the online public access catalogue Educational Resource InformationCentre (ERIC) to retrieve a list of articles using various combinations of keywordssuch as ELLs LEP and minority students From these results we selected 50papers based on their focus on teacher problems After examining these papers thereferences that the authors considered highly relevant to the present study wereincluded in the literature review bringing the total to 60 These included bothempirical research and opinion papers with the former being the majority Opinion-based papers were incorporated because of the apparent under-documentation ofcertain problems in rigorous research The authors then read the literature high-lighted discussions regarding the challenges confronting ELL teachers and codedeach paper according to the steps for coding data suggested by Creswell (2008)Text segments conveying relevant ideas were identified and assigned codes for keyterms for example ldquonegative public feelingsrdquo and ldquopublic action against immi-grantsrdquo These similar codes were grouped together under more general codes suchas ldquosocietal attitudesrdquo and were then mapped out and collapsed into themes to illus-trate the general structure of the issues As a result three categories emerged withregard to the overall picture of the challenges that teachers face While the lowachievement and literacy of ELLs have been treated as major obstacles for theirteachers and do in fact challenge many US educators they are assumed as givenconditions in this paper and do not therefore emerge as the biggest issues

2 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Challenges

Social challenges

The growth and diversity of ELLs

According to a number of official reports (Camarota 2004 de Cohen and Clewell2007 Kindler 2002 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition2007 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011) thepopulation of ELL students in the United States has been constantly on the riseWithin a decade (1990ndash2001) the number of ELLs grew by 105 compared to amere 12 increase in the general school population (Kindler 2002) In the academicyear 2008ndash2009 more than 53 million ELLs were reported representing nearly11 of the total pre-kindergarten through K-12 (that is from pre-school to grade12) enrollment (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011)These students settle in various parts of the country with California being the statemost densely populated by ELLs (de Cohen and Clewell 2007)

ELLs in the United States come from diverse backgrounds (Futrell Gomez andBedden 2003 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 Kindler 2002 Perez andHolmes 2010 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) A large number of ELLs areimmigrants or children of immigrants and are disadvantaged in terms of theireducational attainment economic situation and social security compared to thenative US population (Camarota 2004) These students bring to the classroom aldquovariety of cultural backgrounds language proficiencies academic experiences andcognitive processesrdquo (Perez and Holmes 2010 41)

The rapid increase in the size and the great diversity of this student populationpose a challenge to their educators To work effectively with ELLs a need exists toreform educational policies curriculum materials and management as well asteacher training However US society and the educational system seem unpreparedfor this challenge thus many issues have emerged with regard to the teaching andlearning of ELLs in the United States

Societal attitudes

First ELLs are often considered problematic due to their cultural and linguisticdiversity (McLaughlin 1992) A growing body of studies depicts how localcommunities perceive these children and their families The White community hasparticularly demonstrated concerns about the impact and threat of an influx of immi-grants (Gitlin Buendia Crosland and Doumbia 2003 Stuart 2006 Valdeacutes 1998Vollmer 2000) These societal concerns have transformed into a popular belief thatnewcomers do not wish to learn English and they waste the investment the countrymakes in their education (Valdeacutes 1998) Furthermore minority groups such as Afri-can Asian and Latino Americans have frequently reported experiences of discrimi-nation and stigmatisation (Kim Wang Deng Alvarez and Li 2011 Rosenbloomand Way 2004 Stuart 2006 Zucker-Conde 2009) Especially increased discrimina-tion due to linguistic diversity is a serious problem (Stuart 2006) with Asian andLatino groups most likely to suffer (Fritz 2008) In addition ELLs face serious chal-lenges in order to survive in their new country In some cases adjustment problemsappear as the students feel overwhelmed (Kim et al 2011)

To a large extent these problems manifest an underlying ideology of American-isation according to which members of the minority must undergo a process of

Educational Review 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

becoming blind to differences (Reeves 2004) and assimilating into the dominantculture (Fritz 2008) This belief in Americanisation also seems to exist in ELL teach-ers generally influenced by dominant societal attitudes (Walker Shafer and Iiams2004 131) This in turn greatly affects the educational experiences of ELLs How-ever despite much research into societal attitudes toward ELLs there is a seriouslack of studies on how the influence of societal views challenges ELL educators

Federal state and district educational policies

Since 1964 in addition to several court rulings and non-regulatory guidance thefederal government has passed three acts stipulating requirements for ELLprogrammes Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Equal EducationalOpportunities Act of 1974 and Titles I and III of the No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) of 2001 Yet despite the emphasis placed on the importance of providingELLs with appropriate and effective instruction the content of these documents andtheir implementation at school level are questionable

First regarding the content NCLB does not require that teachers be trained towork with adolescent ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) Furthermore as Raganand Lesaux (2006 18) claimed the documents ldquotend to focus onmdashand even over-emphasizemdashEnglish language skills at the expense of academic achievementrdquoThere is also an issue with regard to Re-designated Fluent English Proficient(R-FEP) status In this system schools are supposed to support and track their stu-dents who are reclassified as R-FEP although initially identified as having limitedproficiency in English only for two further years The concern is that schools mayprioritise English language teaching in order to be rewarded with the reclassifica-tion of a larger number of students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006) As a result studentsrsquocontent knowledge and skills could be compromised preventing them fromtransferring smoothly to mainstream classrooms

Another shortcoming in federal law court rulings and non-regulatory guidanceis the absence of specific and concrete guidelines (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)Substantial autonomy is given to states and districts in implementing policy creat-ing a risk of a gap between the intent of federal policies and actual classroom prac-tice (Cohen Moffitt and Goldin 2007) In such cases federal policies are notnecessarily reflected accurately at the state and district levels in terms of reportingstudentsrsquo yearly progress and monitoring R-FEP students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)In connection with this issue Short and Echevarria (20042005) further describedthe mismatch between requirements for high-quality teachers under NCLBguidelines and actual practice

In addition to national laws and regulations teachers struggle with state-levelpolicies California and Florida serve as typical examples California which has thelargest number of ELLs in the United States (Gaacutendara et al 2003 2) passedProposition 227 in 1998 severely restricting the use of ELLsrsquo primary languages inclassroom instruction and instead providing a transitional programme of ldquostructuredEnglish immersionrdquo lasting usually just one year (Gaacutendara 2000) This led to asharp drop in the percentage of bilingual services available for ELLs from 29 in1997ndash1998 to 12 in 1998ndash1999 as well as in the number of bilingual teachersAlthough claimed as a success by the author of the initiative Proposition 227 failedto provide the long-term support necessary to prepare ELLs for the mainstreamclassroom and increased the risk of language-poor experiences (Gaacutendara 2000)

4 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In Florida although some exceptions are allowed the majority of ELLs have totake the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) a statewide assessment ofprogress during grades 3ndash11 (Florida Department of Education 2010) and to passthe FCAT or an equivalent test in reading and mathematics in order to obtain thestandard high school diploma (Florida Department of Education nd) Failure to doso prevents students from going to college regardless of how they performed inhigh school However research has pointed out the inappropriateness of the FCATfor many ELLs particularly those with low to intermediate levels of English profi-ciency Because these tests primarily measure proficiency in academic Englishrather than content knowledge ELLs can be greatly disadvantaged (Giambo 2010)Teachers can do little to change these policies and regulations which are oftendecided without teachersrsquo input (Gaacutendara et al 2005)

Institutional challenges

Teacher education

In all probability the biggest institutional obstacle for ELL teachers is inadequatein-service and pre-service training despite the importance of preparing teachers towork with ELLs (George 2009 Navarro 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011 Reeves 2006 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) According to a survey conducted by Walker et al (2004)87 of 422 mainstream K-12 classroom teachers did not receive any training inELL education Indeed not all ELL teachers are certified (Kindler 2002) or if theyare their certification is temporary (de Cohen and Clewell 2007) This lack ofteacher training programmes raises questions of the quality of instruction and theinadequacy of teachersrsquo understanding about how to handle second languageacquisition (SLA) (Clair 1995) the unique needs and issues of students from differ-ent backgrounds (Nelson-Barber 1999) the adjustment of coursework for ELLs(OrsquoBrien 2011) and working generally with ELL students (Ortiz et al 2006Reeves 2006)

Furthermore approximately 60 of deans of colleges of education admitted thelack of adequate focus on this matter in coursework of their teacher education pro-gramme (Futrell Gomez and Bedden 2003) Many teacher candidates are Whitemonolingual English speakers and the admission process for teaching programmesplace little emphasis on candidatesrsquo experience in multicultural contexts (Nelson-Barber 1999) In these aspects pre-service teacher training seems insufficient toequip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with ELL students

Further in-service teacher training is also problematic both quantitatively andqualitatively First teachers undergo little or no professional development withregard to working with ELLs (Clair 1995 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll2005) Thus many educators of ELLs have to depend largely on their own ofteninsufficient knowledge gained through daily work with students In terms ofquality interviews with nine ELL teachers working at high schools in Massachu-setts revealed that professional development particularly in teaching writing skillsdid not appropriately respond to the changes in teaching conditions regarding ELLstudents brought about by federal and state regulations (Zucker-Conde 2009)Moreover ldquoone-shotrdquo professional development programmes often lasting only afew days may not be able to develop the underlying beliefs and viewpoints of ELLteachers (Rueda and Garcia 1996) Simply providing teachers with a particulartechnique does not help them improve their fundamental practices Finally concerns

Educational Review 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Challenges

Social challenges

The growth and diversity of ELLs

According to a number of official reports (Camarota 2004 de Cohen and Clewell2007 Kindler 2002 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition2007 National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011) thepopulation of ELL students in the United States has been constantly on the riseWithin a decade (1990ndash2001) the number of ELLs grew by 105 compared to amere 12 increase in the general school population (Kindler 2002) In the academicyear 2008ndash2009 more than 53 million ELLs were reported representing nearly11 of the total pre-kindergarten through K-12 (that is from pre-school to grade12) enrollment (National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011)These students settle in various parts of the country with California being the statemost densely populated by ELLs (de Cohen and Clewell 2007)

ELLs in the United States come from diverse backgrounds (Futrell Gomez andBedden 2003 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 Kindler 2002 Perez andHolmes 2010 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) A large number of ELLs areimmigrants or children of immigrants and are disadvantaged in terms of theireducational attainment economic situation and social security compared to thenative US population (Camarota 2004) These students bring to the classroom aldquovariety of cultural backgrounds language proficiencies academic experiences andcognitive processesrdquo (Perez and Holmes 2010 41)

The rapid increase in the size and the great diversity of this student populationpose a challenge to their educators To work effectively with ELLs a need exists toreform educational policies curriculum materials and management as well asteacher training However US society and the educational system seem unpreparedfor this challenge thus many issues have emerged with regard to the teaching andlearning of ELLs in the United States

Societal attitudes

First ELLs are often considered problematic due to their cultural and linguisticdiversity (McLaughlin 1992) A growing body of studies depicts how localcommunities perceive these children and their families The White community hasparticularly demonstrated concerns about the impact and threat of an influx of immi-grants (Gitlin Buendia Crosland and Doumbia 2003 Stuart 2006 Valdeacutes 1998Vollmer 2000) These societal concerns have transformed into a popular belief thatnewcomers do not wish to learn English and they waste the investment the countrymakes in their education (Valdeacutes 1998) Furthermore minority groups such as Afri-can Asian and Latino Americans have frequently reported experiences of discrimi-nation and stigmatisation (Kim Wang Deng Alvarez and Li 2011 Rosenbloomand Way 2004 Stuart 2006 Zucker-Conde 2009) Especially increased discrimina-tion due to linguistic diversity is a serious problem (Stuart 2006) with Asian andLatino groups most likely to suffer (Fritz 2008) In addition ELLs face serious chal-lenges in order to survive in their new country In some cases adjustment problemsappear as the students feel overwhelmed (Kim et al 2011)

To a large extent these problems manifest an underlying ideology of American-isation according to which members of the minority must undergo a process of

Educational Review 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

becoming blind to differences (Reeves 2004) and assimilating into the dominantculture (Fritz 2008) This belief in Americanisation also seems to exist in ELL teach-ers generally influenced by dominant societal attitudes (Walker Shafer and Iiams2004 131) This in turn greatly affects the educational experiences of ELLs How-ever despite much research into societal attitudes toward ELLs there is a seriouslack of studies on how the influence of societal views challenges ELL educators

Federal state and district educational policies

Since 1964 in addition to several court rulings and non-regulatory guidance thefederal government has passed three acts stipulating requirements for ELLprogrammes Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Equal EducationalOpportunities Act of 1974 and Titles I and III of the No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) of 2001 Yet despite the emphasis placed on the importance of providingELLs with appropriate and effective instruction the content of these documents andtheir implementation at school level are questionable

First regarding the content NCLB does not require that teachers be trained towork with adolescent ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) Furthermore as Raganand Lesaux (2006 18) claimed the documents ldquotend to focus onmdashand even over-emphasizemdashEnglish language skills at the expense of academic achievementrdquoThere is also an issue with regard to Re-designated Fluent English Proficient(R-FEP) status In this system schools are supposed to support and track their stu-dents who are reclassified as R-FEP although initially identified as having limitedproficiency in English only for two further years The concern is that schools mayprioritise English language teaching in order to be rewarded with the reclassifica-tion of a larger number of students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006) As a result studentsrsquocontent knowledge and skills could be compromised preventing them fromtransferring smoothly to mainstream classrooms

Another shortcoming in federal law court rulings and non-regulatory guidanceis the absence of specific and concrete guidelines (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)Substantial autonomy is given to states and districts in implementing policy creat-ing a risk of a gap between the intent of federal policies and actual classroom prac-tice (Cohen Moffitt and Goldin 2007) In such cases federal policies are notnecessarily reflected accurately at the state and district levels in terms of reportingstudentsrsquo yearly progress and monitoring R-FEP students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)In connection with this issue Short and Echevarria (20042005) further describedthe mismatch between requirements for high-quality teachers under NCLBguidelines and actual practice

In addition to national laws and regulations teachers struggle with state-levelpolicies California and Florida serve as typical examples California which has thelargest number of ELLs in the United States (Gaacutendara et al 2003 2) passedProposition 227 in 1998 severely restricting the use of ELLsrsquo primary languages inclassroom instruction and instead providing a transitional programme of ldquostructuredEnglish immersionrdquo lasting usually just one year (Gaacutendara 2000) This led to asharp drop in the percentage of bilingual services available for ELLs from 29 in1997ndash1998 to 12 in 1998ndash1999 as well as in the number of bilingual teachersAlthough claimed as a success by the author of the initiative Proposition 227 failedto provide the long-term support necessary to prepare ELLs for the mainstreamclassroom and increased the risk of language-poor experiences (Gaacutendara 2000)

4 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In Florida although some exceptions are allowed the majority of ELLs have totake the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) a statewide assessment ofprogress during grades 3ndash11 (Florida Department of Education 2010) and to passthe FCAT or an equivalent test in reading and mathematics in order to obtain thestandard high school diploma (Florida Department of Education nd) Failure to doso prevents students from going to college regardless of how they performed inhigh school However research has pointed out the inappropriateness of the FCATfor many ELLs particularly those with low to intermediate levels of English profi-ciency Because these tests primarily measure proficiency in academic Englishrather than content knowledge ELLs can be greatly disadvantaged (Giambo 2010)Teachers can do little to change these policies and regulations which are oftendecided without teachersrsquo input (Gaacutendara et al 2005)

Institutional challenges

Teacher education

In all probability the biggest institutional obstacle for ELL teachers is inadequatein-service and pre-service training despite the importance of preparing teachers towork with ELLs (George 2009 Navarro 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011 Reeves 2006 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) According to a survey conducted by Walker et al (2004)87 of 422 mainstream K-12 classroom teachers did not receive any training inELL education Indeed not all ELL teachers are certified (Kindler 2002) or if theyare their certification is temporary (de Cohen and Clewell 2007) This lack ofteacher training programmes raises questions of the quality of instruction and theinadequacy of teachersrsquo understanding about how to handle second languageacquisition (SLA) (Clair 1995) the unique needs and issues of students from differ-ent backgrounds (Nelson-Barber 1999) the adjustment of coursework for ELLs(OrsquoBrien 2011) and working generally with ELL students (Ortiz et al 2006Reeves 2006)

Furthermore approximately 60 of deans of colleges of education admitted thelack of adequate focus on this matter in coursework of their teacher education pro-gramme (Futrell Gomez and Bedden 2003) Many teacher candidates are Whitemonolingual English speakers and the admission process for teaching programmesplace little emphasis on candidatesrsquo experience in multicultural contexts (Nelson-Barber 1999) In these aspects pre-service teacher training seems insufficient toequip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with ELL students

Further in-service teacher training is also problematic both quantitatively andqualitatively First teachers undergo little or no professional development withregard to working with ELLs (Clair 1995 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll2005) Thus many educators of ELLs have to depend largely on their own ofteninsufficient knowledge gained through daily work with students In terms ofquality interviews with nine ELL teachers working at high schools in Massachu-setts revealed that professional development particularly in teaching writing skillsdid not appropriately respond to the changes in teaching conditions regarding ELLstudents brought about by federal and state regulations (Zucker-Conde 2009)Moreover ldquoone-shotrdquo professional development programmes often lasting only afew days may not be able to develop the underlying beliefs and viewpoints of ELLteachers (Rueda and Garcia 1996) Simply providing teachers with a particulartechnique does not help them improve their fundamental practices Finally concerns

Educational Review 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

becoming blind to differences (Reeves 2004) and assimilating into the dominantculture (Fritz 2008) This belief in Americanisation also seems to exist in ELL teach-ers generally influenced by dominant societal attitudes (Walker Shafer and Iiams2004 131) This in turn greatly affects the educational experiences of ELLs How-ever despite much research into societal attitudes toward ELLs there is a seriouslack of studies on how the influence of societal views challenges ELL educators

Federal state and district educational policies

Since 1964 in addition to several court rulings and non-regulatory guidance thefederal government has passed three acts stipulating requirements for ELLprogrammes Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Equal EducationalOpportunities Act of 1974 and Titles I and III of the No Child Left Behind Act(NCLB) of 2001 Yet despite the emphasis placed on the importance of providingELLs with appropriate and effective instruction the content of these documents andtheir implementation at school level are questionable

First regarding the content NCLB does not require that teachers be trained towork with adolescent ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007) Furthermore as Raganand Lesaux (2006 18) claimed the documents ldquotend to focus onmdashand even over-emphasizemdashEnglish language skills at the expense of academic achievementrdquoThere is also an issue with regard to Re-designated Fluent English Proficient(R-FEP) status In this system schools are supposed to support and track their stu-dents who are reclassified as R-FEP although initially identified as having limitedproficiency in English only for two further years The concern is that schools mayprioritise English language teaching in order to be rewarded with the reclassifica-tion of a larger number of students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006) As a result studentsrsquocontent knowledge and skills could be compromised preventing them fromtransferring smoothly to mainstream classrooms

Another shortcoming in federal law court rulings and non-regulatory guidanceis the absence of specific and concrete guidelines (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)Substantial autonomy is given to states and districts in implementing policy creat-ing a risk of a gap between the intent of federal policies and actual classroom prac-tice (Cohen Moffitt and Goldin 2007) In such cases federal policies are notnecessarily reflected accurately at the state and district levels in terms of reportingstudentsrsquo yearly progress and monitoring R-FEP students (Ragan and Lesaux 2006)In connection with this issue Short and Echevarria (20042005) further describedthe mismatch between requirements for high-quality teachers under NCLBguidelines and actual practice

In addition to national laws and regulations teachers struggle with state-levelpolicies California and Florida serve as typical examples California which has thelargest number of ELLs in the United States (Gaacutendara et al 2003 2) passedProposition 227 in 1998 severely restricting the use of ELLsrsquo primary languages inclassroom instruction and instead providing a transitional programme of ldquostructuredEnglish immersionrdquo lasting usually just one year (Gaacutendara 2000) This led to asharp drop in the percentage of bilingual services available for ELLs from 29 in1997ndash1998 to 12 in 1998ndash1999 as well as in the number of bilingual teachersAlthough claimed as a success by the author of the initiative Proposition 227 failedto provide the long-term support necessary to prepare ELLs for the mainstreamclassroom and increased the risk of language-poor experiences (Gaacutendara 2000)

4 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In Florida although some exceptions are allowed the majority of ELLs have totake the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) a statewide assessment ofprogress during grades 3ndash11 (Florida Department of Education 2010) and to passthe FCAT or an equivalent test in reading and mathematics in order to obtain thestandard high school diploma (Florida Department of Education nd) Failure to doso prevents students from going to college regardless of how they performed inhigh school However research has pointed out the inappropriateness of the FCATfor many ELLs particularly those with low to intermediate levels of English profi-ciency Because these tests primarily measure proficiency in academic Englishrather than content knowledge ELLs can be greatly disadvantaged (Giambo 2010)Teachers can do little to change these policies and regulations which are oftendecided without teachersrsquo input (Gaacutendara et al 2005)

Institutional challenges

Teacher education

In all probability the biggest institutional obstacle for ELL teachers is inadequatein-service and pre-service training despite the importance of preparing teachers towork with ELLs (George 2009 Navarro 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011 Reeves 2006 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) According to a survey conducted by Walker et al (2004)87 of 422 mainstream K-12 classroom teachers did not receive any training inELL education Indeed not all ELL teachers are certified (Kindler 2002) or if theyare their certification is temporary (de Cohen and Clewell 2007) This lack ofteacher training programmes raises questions of the quality of instruction and theinadequacy of teachersrsquo understanding about how to handle second languageacquisition (SLA) (Clair 1995) the unique needs and issues of students from differ-ent backgrounds (Nelson-Barber 1999) the adjustment of coursework for ELLs(OrsquoBrien 2011) and working generally with ELL students (Ortiz et al 2006Reeves 2006)

Furthermore approximately 60 of deans of colleges of education admitted thelack of adequate focus on this matter in coursework of their teacher education pro-gramme (Futrell Gomez and Bedden 2003) Many teacher candidates are Whitemonolingual English speakers and the admission process for teaching programmesplace little emphasis on candidatesrsquo experience in multicultural contexts (Nelson-Barber 1999) In these aspects pre-service teacher training seems insufficient toequip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with ELL students

Further in-service teacher training is also problematic both quantitatively andqualitatively First teachers undergo little or no professional development withregard to working with ELLs (Clair 1995 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll2005) Thus many educators of ELLs have to depend largely on their own ofteninsufficient knowledge gained through daily work with students In terms ofquality interviews with nine ELL teachers working at high schools in Massachu-setts revealed that professional development particularly in teaching writing skillsdid not appropriately respond to the changes in teaching conditions regarding ELLstudents brought about by federal and state regulations (Zucker-Conde 2009)Moreover ldquoone-shotrdquo professional development programmes often lasting only afew days may not be able to develop the underlying beliefs and viewpoints of ELLteachers (Rueda and Garcia 1996) Simply providing teachers with a particulartechnique does not help them improve their fundamental practices Finally concerns

Educational Review 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In Florida although some exceptions are allowed the majority of ELLs have totake the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) a statewide assessment ofprogress during grades 3ndash11 (Florida Department of Education 2010) and to passthe FCAT or an equivalent test in reading and mathematics in order to obtain thestandard high school diploma (Florida Department of Education nd) Failure to doso prevents students from going to college regardless of how they performed inhigh school However research has pointed out the inappropriateness of the FCATfor many ELLs particularly those with low to intermediate levels of English profi-ciency Because these tests primarily measure proficiency in academic Englishrather than content knowledge ELLs can be greatly disadvantaged (Giambo 2010)Teachers can do little to change these policies and regulations which are oftendecided without teachersrsquo input (Gaacutendara et al 2005)

Institutional challenges

Teacher education

In all probability the biggest institutional obstacle for ELL teachers is inadequatein-service and pre-service training despite the importance of preparing teachers towork with ELLs (George 2009 Navarro 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011 Reeves 2006 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) According to a survey conducted by Walker et al (2004)87 of 422 mainstream K-12 classroom teachers did not receive any training inELL education Indeed not all ELL teachers are certified (Kindler 2002) or if theyare their certification is temporary (de Cohen and Clewell 2007) This lack ofteacher training programmes raises questions of the quality of instruction and theinadequacy of teachersrsquo understanding about how to handle second languageacquisition (SLA) (Clair 1995) the unique needs and issues of students from differ-ent backgrounds (Nelson-Barber 1999) the adjustment of coursework for ELLs(OrsquoBrien 2011) and working generally with ELL students (Ortiz et al 2006Reeves 2006)

Furthermore approximately 60 of deans of colleges of education admitted thelack of adequate focus on this matter in coursework of their teacher education pro-gramme (Futrell Gomez and Bedden 2003) Many teacher candidates are Whitemonolingual English speakers and the admission process for teaching programmesplace little emphasis on candidatesrsquo experience in multicultural contexts (Nelson-Barber 1999) In these aspects pre-service teacher training seems insufficient toequip teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to deal with ELL students

Further in-service teacher training is also problematic both quantitatively andqualitatively First teachers undergo little or no professional development withregard to working with ELLs (Clair 1995 Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll2005) Thus many educators of ELLs have to depend largely on their own ofteninsufficient knowledge gained through daily work with students In terms ofquality interviews with nine ELL teachers working at high schools in Massachu-setts revealed that professional development particularly in teaching writing skillsdid not appropriately respond to the changes in teaching conditions regarding ELLstudents brought about by federal and state regulations (Zucker-Conde 2009)Moreover ldquoone-shotrdquo professional development programmes often lasting only afew days may not be able to develop the underlying beliefs and viewpoints of ELLteachers (Rueda and Garcia 1996) Simply providing teachers with a particulartechnique does not help them improve their fundamental practices Finally concerns

Educational Review 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

have also been raised about the knowledge and expertise of trainers in someprofessional development programmes (Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005)

Teachers play a critical role in the education of ELLs Providing qualitypre-service and in-service teacher training programmes is necessary in order tocreate better learning experiences for ELLs in their struggle with a new languageThe lack of these programmes creates a further significant challenge for ELLteachers fewer teaching resources to support disadvantaged students

Tools and resources

The learning process of ELLs differs from that of students who only speak Englishbecause of their cultural and linguistic differences (de Jong and Harper 2005) How-ever individual schools and the educational system in general do not respondappropriately to this disparity in so far as they provide teachers with the samematerials for both types of students Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll (2005)pointed out that most schools use the same textbooks for both groups despite thedifficulty for ELLs to comprehend and indicated that there is ldquoa need for morehigh-interest and varied English language development materialsrdquo (Gaacutendara Max-well-Jolly and Driscoll 2005 9) In a study involving 33 high school social studiesteachers in Virginia (Cho and Reich 2008) bilingual instruction materials werereported as their most important support A clear curriculum with specific guidelinesis also crucial for addressing the conflict between providing meaningful learningopportunities and fast-paced lessons (Gersten 1999) Teachers have also demandedmore appropriate flexible and effective programmes for ELLs (Fritz 2008 Shortand Fitzsimmons 2007) and more rigorous research into ELL literacy (Grant andWong 2003 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)

Two further interrelated needs in ELL instruction are classification and assess-ment In order to provide appropriate services to ELLs as mandated by NCLB it isnecessary first to define who comprises the ELL population Yet the lack ofcommon and consistent criteria to identify ELLs (Short and Fitzsimmons 2007)means that there is no clear operational definition of this group In fact studies haveshown that classification of ELLs varies greatly across states districts and schools(Abedi 2005 Kindler 2002) This impacts on issues such as assessments andstudent accountability according to Abedi (2005 193) ldquoinconsistencies in ELLclassification may lead to problems in the inclusion of ELL students in the nationaland state assessmentsrdquo

Indeed assessment of ELLs has in general proven to be a difficult task (Abedi2002) There has been too much variation in assessment and testing including theuse of tests shown to be inaccurate (Reeves 2004 Tsang Katz and Stack 2008)inappropriate (Abedi 2005 Lopez Lamar and Scully-Demartini 1997 MacSwanand Rolstad 2006 Short and Fitzsimmons 2007 Soloacuterzano 2008) or invalid (PlattHarper and Mendoza 2003 Sandberg and Reschly 2010) According to Geisinger(2003) there are three decisions to be made regarding the assessment of ELLs testselection test administration and test interpretation and use Regarding the firstdecision ELLs are usually required to take standardised achievement tests whichtend to assess their language proficiency rather than content area knowledge andwhich are based on norms for native English-speaking students In terms of testadministration the most significant fact is that tests are often given in EnglishHowever Tsang Katz and Stack (2008) claimed that it would take five to six years

6 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

of instruction for ELLs to overcome the language demands of mathematics wordproblems on standardised tests Therefore immigrants who have been educated inthe United States for a shorter period may not be able to understand the linguisticcomponents of test questions including both structure and vocabulary (NationalCenter for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005)Thus there is a significant risk that test scores might not accurately reflect studentsrsquoabilities In some cases schools request that ELLsrsquo tests be administered in theirnative languages in order to avoid such inaccuracies However this does notprovide a complete solution because the languages of instruction and testing arethen different (Abedi 2005) A further concern is how test results are to be usedAs mentioned earlier in order to receive a standard high school diploma which iscritical for college admission students in Florida must pass high-stakes tests(Florida Department of Education nd)

The classification and assessment of ELLs is a complicated process particularlyin the interpretation of assessment because of ldquothe confounding of languages andcultural factors with assessment resultsrdquo (Abedi 2005 176) It is also difficult todistinguish between linguistic and cultural differences and specific disabilitiesamong these students (Ortiz et al 2006) Inadequate classification and assessmenttools consequently lead to the erroneous placement of some ELLs in specialeducation programmes This has led to cases of both referral of normal ELLs tospecial classes (Brown 2004) and delayed recognition of genuine learningdisabilities (Peacuterez Skiba and Chung 2008) In both scenarios inappropriate assess-ment seriously affects the education and lives of ELLs and may further result inmisinformation and unfair consequences for schools and teachers (Abedi 2005)

Time

Teaching language-minority students can be challenging The cognitive demand onthese learners is greater than that on native English-speaking students because theyare learning both language and the content knowledge simultaneously This meansthat teachers need to devote more time to ELLs However respondents to a survey(Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly and Driscoll 2005) stated that there was insufficient timefor them to teach ELLs the regular curriculum and help them develop their Englishlanguage skills while still attending to other studentsrsquo needs Some respondentsexpressed the need to spend time with ELLs in small groups or individually whichwas impossible due to tight school schedules The lack of time to support ELLstudents was also documented by Reeves (2006) Furthermore ELL teachers needmore time to reflect on their own practice (Cho and Reich 2008) in order todevelop their knowledge and beliefs concerning their work

Communication

Problems related to communication between teachers ELL students and theirfamilies have been documented in a number of studies (Cho and Reich 2008Gaacutendara et al 2005 National Education Association (NEA) 2008 OrsquoBrien 2011)The struggle to connect has several causes among which language barriers seem tobe the most significant (OrsquoBrien 2011) Many US schoolteachers are White andthey do not necessarily speak any language other than English Moreover fewteachers could learn the primary languages of all immigrant students given the

Educational Review 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

diversity However students and their parents often have too limited a proficiencyin English to communicate with teachers There is also a further risk of misunder-standing caused by differences between teachers and their students and the parentsof their students in cultural background and values

These linguistic and cultural barriers often make it difficult for teachers toinform parents about standards school expectations studentsrsquo progress and effec-tive ways of helping their children ELL teachers also experience problems inexchanging ideas and information with students Thus poor communicationbetween teachers students and their families hamper their collaboration in effortsto educate ELLs

School culture

Teachers of ELLs are members of the schools at which they teach Research hasindicated how institutions perceive and position ELLs affects teachers (Harklau2000) For example negative attitudes from administrators toward ELLs (WalkerShafer and Iiams 2004) may lead to unwelcoming attitudes among the staff whocome into daily contact with the students Not only ELLs but their parents alsoseems to be undervalued regarding their potential for contributions to childrenrsquos aca-demic success (August and Shanahan 2006) Institutional management presentsanother issue ndash collaboration among colleagues There seems to be little communi-cation between ELL teachers and regular teachers (Valdeacutes 1998) despite the factthat both are responsible for the overall education of ELLs More seriously main-stream classroom colleagues tend to deny this responsibility and assume it is solelythe work of ELL teachers It is understandable therefore that some ELL teachersfeel marginalised (George 2009) due to insufficient time for co-planning and inap-propriate deployment of their academic expertise Paradoxically teachers with thehighest number of ELLs receive the least support from their schools (OrsquoBrien2011) Clearly organisational culture and management influence ELL teachers insome cases contributing significant challenges to their daily work

Academic achievement and retention of ELL students

A further challenge that ELL teachers face would be how to improve the lowacademic achievement and high dropout rates of ELLs (Cho and Reich 2008Markham Green and Ross 1996 NEA 2008 Thompson et al 2002) The pressureis immense across grades and subjects ELLs perform significantly below theirEnglish-speaking peers For example in the 2005 National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress only 29 of ELLs scored at or above the basic level in reading foreighth graders compared to 75 of non-ELLs and a similar picture emerged inboth mathematics (National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment ofEducational Progress 2005) and social studies (Markham Green and Ross 1996)While ELLs performed well in special classes devoted exclusively to them theywere still easily surpassed by other students in regular lessons Perhaps due to thislow achievement as well as socio-economic factors the dropout rate among ELLsis also alarmingly high A final complicating factor is the powerful influence ofparental views toward schooling and cultural capital as built into their originalcultures All of these factors may place additional stress on teachers who have tomeet the tough requirements of accountability systems imposed on them by federal

8 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

guidelines (NCLB Act of 2001 Publication Number 107-110 2002) This issue willbe further explored later in this paper

Despite the urgent and legitimate needs of ELLs their access to educationalopportunities is paradoxically limited Valdeacutes (1998) showed that immigrantstudents in middle school had very little access to English as they were isolatedfrom their native English-speaking peers The English language with which theycame into contact seemed to be either artificial and without a meaningful context oroversimplified Moreover by being referred erroneously to special programmesthey lost the opportunity to experience an enriching and challenging curriculumthus decreasing the likelihood of them entering higher education and eventuallyhigher-paying jobs (Brown 2004)

Personal challenges

It is necessary to differentiate between some of the social challenges presented inthe previous section and the personal challenges faced by teachers of ELLs Thedistinction may be subtle at least in terms of the attitudes and assumptions held byboth society and teachers toward students since teachers are part of society and aretherefore likely to reflect its worldview In this section however ldquopersonalchallengesrdquo are understood as problems regarding individual teachers forced toconfront what they think and feel about their students and their work

Beliefs attitudes and assumptions

Teachersrsquo misconceptions related to both the learning and teaching processespresent an enormous obstacle to their ability to support ELLs effectively Typicalmisconceptions related to learning include the following (1) ELLs should be ableto acquire English quickly (McLaughlin 1992 Reeves 2006) (2) ELLs shouldavoid using their native language in order to acquire English (Phuntsog 2001Reeves 2006) (3) exposure and interaction will result in English language learning(Harper and de Jong 2004) (4) all ELLs learn English in the same way and at thesame rate (Harper and de Jong 2004 McLaughlin 1992) (5) the younger the childthe greater facility in acquiring English (6) children have acquired a second lan-guage once they are able to speak it (McLaughlin 1992)

These misunderstandings have been disproved by a number of studies Firstaccording to Tsang Katz and Stack (2008 19) ELLs ldquoneed five to seven yearsbefore they can attain the academic literacy necessary to negotiate in mainstreamclassroomsrdquo Indeed under certain conditions this period can be 10 years Secondthe studentrsquos use of their first language (L1) can facilitate second language (L2)learning (Cummins 2007) Third mere exposure to English does not result in inter-action (Harper and de Jong 2004 Valdeacutes 2001) and thus is insufficient for learninga language Fourth ELLs come from hugely diverse backgrounds with different cul-tures and languages They also start their schooling in the United States at differenttimes in their lives Thus it is impossible to generalise the same learning formulafor all language-minority students Fifth young learners may acquire better pronun-ciation in some cases but under controlled conditions adults can perform better(McLaughlin 1992) Finally achieving the ability to communicate orally is not thesame as acquiring academic literacy (Cummins 1980) which is critical for thegrowth and success of ELLs at school and in their future lives

Educational Review 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

In addition to misunderstandings about SLA many ELL teachers also holdmisconceptions regarding how they teach their students ldquoJust good teachingrdquoassumptions have been discussed in previous studies (de Jong and Harper 2005Harper and de Jong 2004 Nelson-Barber 1999 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004)While it is true that some strategies that have been effective for monolingualEnglish-speaking students can also work for ELLs (de Jong and Harper 2005) it isimportant to remember that the ways these two student populations learn are notexactly the same Therefore a practice that is effective for one group of learnersshould not be expected to produce the same results in another group adjustmentsare needed for the optimal benefit of ELLs as pointed out by August and Shanahan(2006) Another misconception regarding teachersrsquo teaching is that it deems suffi-cient to focus only on reading instruction oral proficiency can positively influenceELLsrsquo reading comprehension and writing as well (August and Shanahan 2006)Besides teachers tend to believe in non-verbal support as effective instruction (Har-per and de Jong 2004) In fact good practices such as activating prior knowledgeusing group learning process writing and using graphic organisers or hands-onactivities require clear guidance from teachers through oral communication

Teachersrsquo misconceptions about learning and teaching can lead them to inaccu-rate conclusions regarding the language ability intelligence and motivation ofELLs and can thereby negatively influence teachersrsquo attitudes toward ELLs andELL inclusion (Reeves 2006) Misconceptions also play a significant role in themisdiagnoses of learning difficulties and erroneous placement of ELLs in specialeducation programmes as discussed earlier (Brown 2004 Reeves 2006) thuslimiting their opportunities to keep up with their peers and enrich their learningexperiences If not adequately addressed these misconceptions can prevent teachersfrom responding fully to studentsrsquo needs and including ELLs within mainstreamclassrooms

The problem of teachersrsquo low expectations for ELLs particularly Latinos andother students of colour has been recognised for many years (Cavazos 2009Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010 Martinez 2003 McKeon 1994) Cavazos (2009)examined an English teacher who had radically different goals for two groups ofstudents Similarly Cavazos and Cavazos Jr (2010) documented how teacherstreated Advanced Placement (AP) and non-AP students Under the AP Programmehigh school students can take college-level courses which enhance their applica-tions for college and university admissions (Klopfenstein 2003) Cavazos and Cava-zos Jr (2010) argued that with the exception of some outstanding ChineseAmericans ELLs in US schools are generally perceived as low achievers unable towork on challenging material or the higher-level tasks given to native English-speaking students In addition ELLs are exposed to much simpler English for fearof their not understanding and many teachers believe that ELLs are not consideredcapable of going on to higher education (Cavazos and Cavazos Jr 2010) Whenteachersrsquo low expectations for ELLsrsquo academic potential are passed on to thestudents themselves their internalisation of such messages becomes a negativeself-fulfilling prophecy (Martinez 2003)

The negative attitudes of teachers are also reflected in their reluctance to workwith ELLs (Reeves 2006 Valdeacutes 1998) particularly those with limited Englishproficiency Other research has also noted the effects of ethnocentric bias (Rosen-bloom and Way 2004 Walker Shafer and Iiams 2004) and a feeling of distancebetween teachers and non-English-speaking students (Gersten 1999)

10 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Emotions

While the existing literature has explored institutional challenges confronting ELLteachers few studies have examined the emotions of teachers during the teachingprocess Markham Green and Ross (1996) and Gaacutendara Maxwell-Jolly andDriscoll (2005) found that teachers were frustrated about the slow academicprogress of ESL students and the wide range of English and academic levels intheir classrooms In addition the lack of necessary resources and support togetherwith an ambiguous curriculum can contribute to teachers feeling isolated and con-fused about the purpose of instruction (Zucker-Conde 2009) Furthermore somefeel overwhelmed by the volume of work and the pressure caused by mandates tohave students reclassified as R-FEP in a short space of time (Platt Harper andMendoza 2003) as well as by the added responsibility to prepare students for lifeoutside the classroom (Markham Green and Ross 1996) Another emotional aspectthat must be considered is the feeling of inefficacy Gersten (1999) has found thatteaching ELLs is so challenging that even initially confident teachers may begin tofeel disappointed in themselves for not being able to support students effectively Itis indubitable that the different often negative emotions that teachers experienceaffect the quality of their work and must be taken into account by future researchin order to improve the learning experiences of ELL students

Discussion and conclusion

ELLs are a special student population with unique characteristics in the US contextand their numbers have grown rapidly They bring a wide range of cultureslanguages and family and educational backgrounds to the classroom The work ofeducating ELLs therefore requires great effort on the part of teachers in respondingto them academically culturally and linguistically As discussed in this paper ELLteachers are challenged by a number of multi-faceted and complex issues

The obstacles confronting educators can be categorised as social institutionaland personal in nature although all three categories are interrelated From the eco-logical point of view (Bronfenbrenner 1979) teachers as individuals are influencedby their immediate colleagues and by the physical and social environment ofschools and teacher training colleges Teachers function as representatives of theseinstitutions which in turn closely reflect the concerns and expectations of the widersociety At the same time classroom practices are affected by the personal issues ofteachers and societal problems are reproduced and expanded in the classroomTypically the challenges that teachers face have been discussed more in terms ofinstitutional than social or personal matters but it is crucial that these three factorsare dealt with together within a comprehensive framework in order to respondappropriately to the situations of ELL teachers

Confronting these challenges does not only require significant efforts on the partof teachers schools and teacher training institutions social economic politicaland educational policies also have to be improved at national and state levels andlocal communities need to develop better understandings of ELLs and their familiesThe complexity of the problems involved in educating ELLs demands a concertedeffort by all stakeholders since the obstacles faced by ELL teachers are not merelytechnical aspects of how to educate this special population of students but arerather social economic political and cultural issues of a much wider scope Asmentioned earlier the majority of ELLs are immigrants or children of immigrants

Educational Review 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

and receive unequal treatment in the current system (Gales 2009) Many native UScitizens believe that these immigrants pose a challenge to cultural integrity nationalidentity and possibly to the future of the country (Huntington and Skerry 2000) Inother words there exists xenophobia among the US majority and this directly andindirectly affects the policy-making process Crawford (2004) observes that theUnited States has never adopted a comprehensive language policy built on thelinguistic strengths of language-minority students Such a situation would poseserious difficulties for ELL teachers

Contemporary ELL teachers are also faced with the challenge and responsibilityto transform their identity as teachers by reflecting upon questions about who theyare what types of students they serve and what their role as teacher demands USsociety is becoming more diverse than ever before in terms of culture ethnicityand language Simultaneously schools have become institutions to educate studentswho do not necessarily share a common background to live as equal citizens withone another The role of teachers regardless of whether they teach ELL studentsnow includes the aspect of mediator in helping new citizens to integrate into USsociety In order to fulfil their responsibilities in educating ELLs teachers need toreflect on their own ethnocentricity or negative biases regarding ELLs This is notan easy demand however it is crucial ELLs are not disadvantaged or in any wayblamed for attending English-speaking schools while not speaking English as wellas native speakers At the end of the day ELLs of whatever background needteachers to accept them ndash indeed they have few other people to rely on

Although the challenges that have been discussed in this paper are specific to aUS context they also have implications for other English-speaking countries suchas the UK Australia and Singapore as well as for other multi-ethnic societiessince the teachers in such countries may experience similar obstacles Furthermorethey signal those countries to take careful reconsideration of educational policy andits implementation as indicated by the discussion of these issues earlier

At the same time US school leaders and teachers can learn from multi-ethnicsituations in other countries For example the case of Japan deserves discussion interms of eliminating isolation in schools Japanese schools are similarly facing a risein newcomers from abroad due to the countryrsquos globalised economy Sato (2012)reports a school in which foreign and native students collaborate in every lesson todiscuss what they do not understand and to solve challenging tasks while the teach-ers regularly observe lessons and reflect on childrenrsquos wellbeing and learning inorder to support each child regardless of whether they are a newcomer or native Itis this kind of collaborative and caring culture that is needed in US schools to solvethe issues of educating ELLs

For this purpose a necessity exists for teachers ndash and probably researchers alsondash to fundamentally change their mindsets It matters greatly whether these profes-sionals consider ELLs to be problems or assets for the school community Byunderstanding the realities of their lives and sharing deeper understanding of ELLsit is possible for both ELL teachers and regular teachers to refine their perceptionsof such students To do so the entire community of teachers needs to be involvedin knowing and caring more about individual ELLs so that they can feel thesupport of the school as a whole and be engaged in learning

One possible direction for further research is to compare the challenges faced byUS teachers with those of educators in similar contexts outside the United StatesAlso necessary is closer examination of the challenges that ELL teachers encounter

12 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

when interacting with specific groups of students As mentioned earlier the issue ofteachersrsquo emotions has also not been explored extensively and offers fertile groundfor future research Moreover further clarification should be provided about howthe three categories proposed by the authors of the current paper are interrelatedThat is the framework of qualitative research should be made more comprehensiveso that researchers can consider the factors affecting ELL education as part of alarger picture Such qualitative research could then act as the basis for quantitativeresearch to measure how much these factors affect one another Through such avaried research project teachers can provide better educational experience andintegration for ELL students

ReferencesAbedi J 2002 ldquoStandardized Achievement Tests and English Language Learners

Psychometrics Issuesrdquo Educational Assessment 8 (3) 231ndash257Abedi J 2004 Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency in NAEP Classifica-

tion and Measurement Issues Los Angeles CA Center for Evaluation and NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing

Abedi J 2005 ldquoIssues and Consequences for English Language Learnersrdquo Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education 104 (2) 175ndash198

August D and T Shanahan 2006 Developing Literacy in Second-language LearnersReport of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and YouthMahwah NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Bronfenbrenner U 1979 The Ecology of Human Development Experiments by Nature andDesign Cambridge MA Harvard University Press

Brown CL 2004 ldquoReducing the Over-referral of Culturally and Linguistically DiverseStudents (CLD) for Language Disabilitiesrdquo NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1) 225ndash243

Camarota S A 2004 ldquoEconomy Slowed but Immigration Didnrsquot The Foreign-bornPopulation 2000ndash2004rdquo Centre for Immigration Studies httpwwwcisorgarticles2004back1204pdf

Cavazos A G 2009 ldquoReflections of a Latina Student-teacher Refusing Low Expectationsfor Latinao Studentsrdquo American Secondary Education 37 (3) 70ndash79

Cavazos A G and J Cavazos Jr 2010 ldquoUnderstanding the Experiences of LatinaoStudents A Qualitative Study for Changerdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2)95ndash109

Cho S and G A Reich 2008 ldquoNew Immigrants New Challenges High School SocialStudies Teachers and English Language Learner Instructionrdquo The Social Studies 99 (6)235ndash242

Clair N 1995 ldquoMainstream Classroom Teachers and ESL Studentsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 29(1) 189ndash196

Cohen D K S L Moffitt and S Goldin 2007 ldquoPolicy and Practice The DilemmardquoAmerican Journal of Education 113 (4) 515ndash548

Crawford J 2004 Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 5th ed LosAngeles CA Bilingual Education Services

Creswell J V 2008 Educational Research Planning Conducting and Evaluating Quanti-tative and Qualitative Research 3rd ed Upper Saddle River NJ Pearson Education

Cummins J 1980 ldquoThe Cross-lingual Dimensions of Language Proficiency Implicationsfor Bilingual Education and the Optimal Age Issuerdquo TESOL Quarterly 14 (2) 175ndash187

Cummins J 2007 ldquoRethinking Monolingual Instructional Strategies in MultilingualClassroomsrdquo Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (2) 221ndash240

de Cohen C C and B C Clewell 2007 Putting English Language Learners on theEducational Map The No Child Left Behind Act Implemented Washington DC TheUrban Institute

Educational Review 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

de Jong E and C Harper 2005 ldquoPreparing Mainstream Teachers for English LanguageLearners Is Being a Good Teacher Good Enoughrdquo Teacher Education Quarterly 32 (2)101ndash124

Florida Department of Education nd ldquoAbout the FCAT Web Brochurerdquo httpfcatfldoeorgaboutfcatenglishabouthtml

Florida Department of Education 2010 ldquo2010 Guide to Calculating Adequate YearlyProgress (AYP) Technical Assistance Paperrdquo httpschoolgradesfldoeorgpdf0910AYPTAP2010pdf

Fritz A 2008 ldquoEducational Philosophies and Teaching Styles of Oklahoma ElementaryPublic School Teachers of English Language Learnersrdquo Unpublished PhD dissOklahoma State University Stillwater OK

Futrell M J Gomez and D Bedden 2003 ldquoTeaching the Children of a New AmericaThe Challenge of Diversityrdquo Phi Delta Kappan 84 (5) 381ndash385

Gales T 2009 ldquolsquoDiversityrsquo as Enacted in US Immigration Politics and Law A Corpus-based Approachrdquo Discourse and Society 20 (2) 223ndash240doi 1011770957926508099003

Gaacutendara P 2000 ldquoIn the Aftermath of the Storm English Learners in the Post-227 ErardquoBilingual Research Journal 24 (1ndash2) 1ndash14

Gaacutendara P J Maxwell-Jolly and A Driscoll 2005 Listening to Teachers of English Lan-guage Learners A Survey of California Teachersrsquo Challenges Experiences and Profes-sional Development Needs Santa Cruz CA The Regents of the University ofCalifornia

Gaacutendara P R Rumberger J Marxwell-Jolly and R Callahan 2003 ldquoEnglish Learners inCalifornia Schools Unequal Resources Unequal Outcomesrdquo Education Policy AnalysisArchives 11 (6) httpepaaasueduepaav11n36

Geisinger K F 2003 ldquoTesting Students with Limited English Proficiencyrdquo In MeasuringUp Assessment Issues for Teachers Counselors and Administrators edited byJ E Wall and G R Walz 147ndash159 Greensboro NC ERIC Counseling and StudentServices Clearinghouse University of North Carolina at Greensboro

George C 2009 ldquoMarginalization or Collaboration First Year ESL Teachers and the MiddleSchool Contextrdquo Middle Grades Research Journal 4 (1) 25ndash52

Gersten R 1999 ldquoLost Opportunities Challenges Confronting Four Teachers ofEnglish-language Learnersrdquordquo The Elementary School Journal 100 (1) 37ndash56

Giambo D A 2010 ldquoHigh-stakes Testing High School Graduation and Limited EnglishProficient Students A Case Studyrdquo American Secondary Education 38 (2) 44ndash56

Gitlin A E Buendia K Crosland and F Doumbia 2003 ldquoThe Production of Margin andCenter WelcomingndashUnwelcoming of Immigrant Studentsrdquo American EducationalResearch Journal 40 (1) 91ndash122

Grant R A and SD Wong 2003 ldquoBarriers to Literacy for Language-minority LearnersAn Argument for Change in the Literacy Education Professionrdquo Journal of Adolescentsand Adult Literacy 46 (5) 386ndash394

Harklau L 2000 ldquoFrom the lsquoGood Kidsrsquo to the lsquoWorstrsquo Representations of EnglishLanguage Learners across Educational Settingsrdquo TESOL Quarterly 34 (1) 35ndash67

Harper C and E de Jong 2004 ldquoMisconceptions about Teaching English-languageLearnersrdquo Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 48 (2) 152ndash162

Huntington S and P Skerry 2000 ldquoThe Special Case of Mexican Immigrationrdquo TheAmerican Enterprise 11 (8) 20ndash22

Kim S Y Y Wang S Deng R Alvarez and J Li 2011 ldquoAccent Perpetual ForeignStereotype and Perceived Discrimination as Direct Links between English Proficiencyand Depressive Symptoms in Chinese American Adolescentsrdquo DevelopmentalPsychology 47 (1) 289ndash301

Kindler A L 2002 Survey on the Statesrsquo Limited English Proficient Students and AvailableEducational Programs and Services (2000ndash2001 Summary Report) Washington DCNational Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language InstructionEducational Programs

Klopfenstein K 2003 ldquoRecommendations for Maintaining the Quality of AdvancedPlacement Programsrdquo American Secondary Education 32 (1) 39ndash48

14 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Lopez E C D Lamar and D Scully-Demartini 1997 ldquoThe Cognitive Assessment ofLimited-English-proficient Children Current Problems and Practical RecommendationsrdquoCultural Diversity and Mental Health 3 (2) 117ndash130

MacSwan J and K Rolstad 2006 ldquoHow Language Proficiency Tests Mislead Us AboutAbility Implications for English Language Learner Placement in Special EducationrdquoTeachers College Record 108 (11) 2304ndash2328

Markham P S B Green and M E Ross 1996 ldquoIdentification of Stressors and CopingStrategies of ESLBilingual Special Education and Regular Education Teachersrdquo TheModern Language Journal 80 (2) 141ndash150

Martinez M D 2003 ldquoMissing in Action Reconstructing Hope and Possibility AmongLatino Students Placed at Riskrdquo Journal of Latinos and Education 2 (1) 13ndash21

McKeon D 1994 ldquoWhen Meeting lsquoCommonrsquo Standards is Uncommonly DifficultrdquoEducational Leadership 51 (8) 45ndash49

McLaughlin B 1992 Myths and Misconceptions about Second Language Learning WhatEvery Teacher Needs to Unlearn Educational Practice Report No 5 Washington DCNational Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning

National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress 2005ldquoThe Nationrsquos Report Card Reading and Mathematicsrdquo httpnationsreportcardgovread-ing_math_2005

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2007 ldquoThe Growing Numbers ofLimited English Proficient Students 199596ndash200506rdquo httpwwwncelagwuedufilesuploads4GrowingLEP_0506pdf

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition 2011 ldquoThe Growing Numbers ofEnglish Learner Students 199899ndash200809rdquo httpwwwncelagwuedufilesuploads9growingLEP_0809pdf

National Education Association (NEA) 2008 ldquoEnglish Language Learners Face UniqueChallengesrdquo NEA Policy Brief httpwwwneaorgassetsdocsmf_PB05_ELLpdf

Navarro A M 2008 ldquoBuilding Schema for English Language Learnersrdquo EducationResources Information Center httpwwwericedgovERICWebPortalcontentdeliveryservletERICServletaccno=ED514335

Nelson-Barber S 1999 ldquoA Better Education for Every Child The Dilemma for Teachers ofCulturally and Linguistically Diverse Studentsrdquo In Including Culturally and Linguisti-cally Diverse Students in Standards-based Reform A Report on McRELrsquos DiversityRoundtable I edited by Mid-continent Research Education and Learning (McREL)4ndash14 McREL httpwwwmcrelorgPDFDiversityNavarro 200897IR_DiversityRT1pdf

OrsquoBrien J 2011 ldquoThe System is Broken and Itrsquos Failing these Kids High School SocialStudies Teachersrsquo Attitudes towards Training for ELLsrdquo The Journal of Social StudiesResearch 35 (1) 22ndash38

Ortiz A A C Y Wilkinson P Robertson-Courtney and M I Kushner 2006ldquoConsiderations in Implementing Intervention Assistance Teams to Support EnglishLanguage Learnersrdquo Remedial and Special Education 27 (1) 53ndash63

Peacuterez B R J Skiba and C Chung 2008 ldquoLatino Students and Disproportionality inSpecial Educationrdquo Education Policy Brief 6 (2) 1ndash8

Perez D and M Holmes 2010 ldquoEnsuring Academic Literacy for all ELL StudentsrdquoAmerican Secondary Education 38 (2) 32ndash43

Phuntsog N 2001 ldquoCulturally Responsive Teaching What do Selected United StatesElementary School Teachers Thinkrdquo Intercultural Education 12 (1) 51ndash64

Platt E C Harper and M B Mendoza 2003 ldquoDueling Philosophies Inclusion orSeparation for Floridarsquos English Language Learnersrdquo TESOL Quarterly 37 (1)105ndash133

Ragan A and N Lesaux 2006 ldquoFederal State and District Level English Language Lear-ner Program Entry and Exit Requirements Effects on the Education of Language Minor-ity Learnersrdquo Education Policy Analysis Archives 14 (20) 1ndash29 httpepaaasueduojsarticleview91217

Reeves J 2004 ldquolsquoLike Everybody Elsersquo Equalizing Educational Opportunity for EnglishLanguage Learnersrdquo TESOL Quarterly 38 (1) 43ndash66

Educational Review 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13

Reeves J R 2006 ldquoSecondary Teacher Attitudes toward Including English-languageLearners in Mainstream Classroomsrdquo The Journal of Educational Research 99 (3)131ndash142

Rosenbloom S R and N Way 2004 ldquoExperiences of Discrimination among AfricanAmerican Asian American and Latino Adolescents in an Urban High Schoolrdquo Youthand Society 35 (4) 420ndash451

Rueda R and E Garcia 1996 ldquoTeachersrsquo Perspectives on Literacy Assessment andInstruction with Language-minority Students A Comparative Studyrdquo The ElementarySchool Journal 96 (3) 311ndash332

Sandberg K L and A L Reschly 2010 ldquoEnglish Learners Challenges in Assessment andthe Promise of Curriculum-based Measurementrdquo Remedial and Special Education 32(2) 144ndash154

Sato M 2012 Gakko Kenbunroku [School Visit Records] Tokyo ShogakkanShort D and J Echevarria 20042005 ldquoTeacher Skills to Support English Language

Learnersrdquo Educational Leadership 63 (4) 8ndash13Short D J and S Fitzsimmons 2007 ldquoDouble the Work Challenges and Solutions to

Acquiring Language and Academic Literacy for Adolescent English Language LearnersrdquoReport to Carnegie Corporation of New York Alliance for Excellent Education wwwall4edorgfilesDoubleWorkpdf

Soloacuterzano R W 2008 ldquoHigh Stakes Testing Issues Implications and Remedies forEnglish Language Learnersrdquo Review of Educational Research 78 (2) 260ndash329

Stuart A 2006 ldquoEqual Treatment as Exclusion Language Race and US EducationPolicyrdquo International Journal of Inclusive Education 10 (2ndash3) 235ndash250

Thompson M S K E DiCerbo K Mahoney and J MacSwan 2002 ldquoExito enCalifornia A Validity Critique of Language Program Evaluations and Analysis of Eng-lish Learner Test Scoresrdquo Education Policy Analysis Archives 10 (7) 1ndash46 httpepaaasueduojsarticleview286412

Tsang S A Katz and J Stack 2008 ldquoAchieving Testing for English Language LearnersReady or Notrdquo Education Policy Analysis Archives 16 (1) 1ndash26 httpepaaasueduojsarticleview26152

US Department of Education 1994 Summary of the Bilingual Education State EducationalAgency Program Survey of Statesrsquo Limited English Proficient Persons and AvailableEducational Services (1992ndash1993) Final Report Arlington VA DevelopmentAssociates

Valdeacutes G 1998 ldquoThe World Outside and Inside Schools Language and ImmigrantChildrenrdquo Educational Researcher 27 (6) 4ndash18

Valdeacutes G 2001 Learning and Not Learning English Latino Students in American SchoolsNew York Teachers College Press

Vollmer G 2000 ldquoPraise and Stigma Teachersrsquo Constructions of the lsquoTypical ESLStudentsrsquordquo Journal of Intercultural Studies 21 (1) 53ndash66

Walker A J Shafer and M Iiams 2004 ldquolsquoNot in my Classroomrsquo Teacher Attitudestowards English Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroomrdquo NABE Journal ofResearch and Practice 2 (1) 130ndash160

Zucker-Conde L 2009 ldquoBridging Worlds Advocacy Stigma and the Challenge of TeachingWriting to Secondary ELL Studentsrdquo Unpublished PhD diss University ofMassachusetts Boston MA

16 TDH Khong and E Saito

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

itaet

s un

d L

ande

sbib

lioth

ek]

at 0

318

07

Dec

embe

r 20

13