Castleberry ISDOne-Way Dual Language

Enrichment Program Handbook

Castleberry ISD

One-Way Dual Language Enrichment Program Handbook

Table of Contents

Part I: Introduction, Overview, Rationale and Purpose Part II: Dual Language Program Philosophy, Common Characteristics of Dual Language Programs, Goals/Benefits of Dual Language, Guiding Principles of Dual Language Part III: Legal Frameworks and Guidelines Part IV: The Gómez and Gómez Model Background Information Academic Features Conceptual Refinement Bilingual Learning/Resource Centers Bilingual Pairs Vocabulary Enrichment Language of The Day

Part V: Program Designs, Instruction, Research, Schedules Part VI: Assessments, One-Way DLE Curriculum Models, Effective Instructional Practices, Dual Language Campus Committee Part VII: Professional Development Part VIII: Monitoring of Program Implementation, Part IX: Resources

Part I

IntroductionThe Dual Language Enrichment Program began in grades K and 1 in Castleberry ISD in the year 2009-2010. The implementation of this new program has come about for several reasons.

To serve more Spanish/English Language Learners in their native language. To close the achievement gap between the ELL student and native English language

speaker. Most importantly, when a teacher values the cultural and linguistic attributes that an ELL

student brings to a school community, a stronger foundation for academic growth is provided for the learner.

Overview

In order to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse society, in particular ELL populations, educators must reexamine current educational practices for ELL students. Research consistently indicates that effective schooling for ELL students requires meaningful incorporation of their language and culture into the curriculum (Cummins, 1982, Garcia, 1996). The ineffectiveness of traditional practices such as Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE) in meeting the needs of ELL populations has led to alternative bilingual education models such as Two-Way or Dual Language models. Dual Language programs are perceived as enriching, challenging and additive when compared to Traditional Bilingual Programs that are viewed as remedial and subtractive. Dual Language programs continue to show great success in the education of ELL students. Collier and Thomas (1999) in their national study of well-implemented bilingual education programs cite the positive educational and social outcomes of ELL students when they are educated through a Two-Way or Dual Language model. The success of Two-Way language programs for ELL students is largely due to the curricular focus on academic, linguistic and affective factors. Strong parental involvement and administrator support for the Dual Language programs are also crucial elements in an effective bilingual education program.

Mission Statement

The mission of Castleberry Independent School District is to graduate all students as lifelong learners who will excel in our changing world and competitive workplace.

Rational and Purpose

The purpose of this handbook is to provide direction for the classroom teacher and other members in the planning, implementation and assessment in instruction for students in the Dual Language Enrichment Program. This Handbook is intended to inform school community members, assist in decision making, and serve as a framework for the effective practice and implementation of the district’s program. We will continue to add to and update this handbook as needed. We also encourage feedback and recommendations to us about adding additional sections that would make this Handbook more helpful to those implementing the district’s Dual Language Enrichment Program.

Part II

Dual Language Program Philosophy

“A Learner who has mastered reading, writing, and thinking in the L1 will transfer these academic skills and knowledge to the L2. The stronger the student’s L1, the stronger the academic and cognitive development of the student’s L2.”

Dr. Leo Gómez, Professor Dr. Richard Gómez Jr., Associate Professor Dual Language Enrichment- Central Administration Training

Common Characteristics of One-Way Dual Language Programs

Students are integrated during most content instruction. Students become proficient in two languages. Student achievement in English for all students is equal to or exceeds that of students

learning in English only.

(TABE Journal v.9 #1 Spring/Summer 2006)

Goals and Benefits of One-Way Dual Language Education

Goal #1: High linguistic proficiency in two languages Goal #2: High academic proficiency (content area) in two languages Goal #3: Positive cross-cultural attitudes; biculturalism

Dual Language Models of bilingual education are Additive Models (goal of biliteracy)

Additive models focus on enrichment, challenging curriculum and high expectations

Child’s first language (L1) is the target literacy (reading) language while acquiring and academically developing the second language (L2)

Child will receive formal reading instruction in the L1 only (PK-1) Child will learn to read in the L1 first

Benefits of Dual Language Enrichment: - Only instructional model that provides full closure of the academic achievement gap

between native English speakers and ELLs

- Bilingualism/bi-literacy for all children

- Both languages equally valued

- Not remedial; enrichment, challenging, additive

- Balanced bilingual (cognitive advantage)

- Children respect their own language & culture

- Children respect other languages & cultures

- Economic advantages for children

Guiding Principles of Dual Language

• Minimally, the program must be implemented Pre K-5

• Extensive exposure and use of the two languages through interactive settings in which students learn in bilingual pairs/groups

• Language development is attained through academic subjects

• Integration of content areas with language arts

• Separation of languages for instruction

• Equal consistency in the use of each language

• Total school climate should reflect a bilingual/bi-literate atmosphere

• Administrative support

• Instruction should challenge and empower students

• Qualified Bilingual or ESL teachers

• Active home school involvement

Part III

Texas Legislation: Bilingual/ESL and Dual Language Education

Bilingual/ESL: TEC (Sub Chapter B: Section 29.051 § 29.051. STATE POLICY. English is the basic language of this state. Public schools are responsible for providing a full opportunity for all students to become competent in speaking, reading, writing, and comprehending the English language. Large numbers of students in the state come from environments in which the primary language is other than English. Experience has shown that public school classes in which instruction is given only in English are often inadequate for the education of those students. The mastery of basic English language skills is a prerequisite for effective participation in the state's educational program. Bilingual education and special language programs can meet the needs of those students and facilitate their integration into the regular school curriculum. Therefore, in accordance with the policy of the state to ensure equal educational opportunity to every student, and in recognition of the educational needs of students of limited English proficiency, this subchapter provides for the establishment of bilingual education and special language programs in the public schools and provides supplemental financial assistance to help school districts meet the extra costs of the programs. Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 260, § 1, eff. May 30, 1995. Dual Language: TEC (Sub Chapter B: Section 28.0051 § 28.0051. DUAL LANGUAGE IMMERSION PROGRAM. (a) A dual language immersion program should be designed to produce students with a demonstrated mastery, in both English and one other language, of the required curriculum under Section 28.002(a). (b) The commissioner by rule shall adopt: (1) minimum requirements for a dual language immersion program implemented by a school district (2) standards for evaluating: (A) the success of a dual language immersion program; and (B) the performance of schools that implement a dual language immersion program; and (3) standards for recognizing: (A) schools that offer an exceptional dual language immersion program; and (B) students who successfully complete a dual language immersion program. (c) A school district may implement a dual language immersion program in a manner and at elementary grade levels consistent with rules adopted by the commissioner under this section. Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 925, § 2, eff. June 14, 2001.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB)Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Dual Language Enrichment Comparison

NCLB and AYP Dual Language Enrichment

• Implement effective research based ELL instructional models

• The most effective research based ELL model is DLE

• English AYP/Academic AYP • DLE more effectively meets English AYP and Academic AYP

• Can test in native language (L1) for up to three years to meet AYP academic progress

• NCLB accountability requirements for ELLs does not match research on SLA unless ELLs tested in native language

• Most ELLs are included in multiple AYP Categories

• Well prepared ELLs assist in AYP calculation for multiple AYP categories

• Graduation Requirement • DLE programs produce higher graduation rates

The Gomez and Gomez Model

Program Evaluators/Researchers Program Evaluators/Researchers

Dr. Leo Gómez, Associate Professor, The University of Texas Pan American (UTPA) Program Staff Development Consultants

Dr. Leo Gómez, Associate Professor, The University of Texas Pan American (UTPA)

Background Information

This Dual Language Model works well for areas where there is a high ELL student population.

The Gómez and Gómez DLE model was created originally for schools in the Rio Grande Valley in 1996.

This Dual Language enrichment model is currently being used in Texas, Washington, Nevada, and Kansas.

This particular DLE model is unique in the following ways: The languages of instruction are divided by subject rather than by time. Requires the use of Bilingual Learning Centers from Pre Kindergarten to 2nd Grade. Encourages the use of Bilingual Research Centers in grades 3rd thru 5th. Encourages the campuses to utilize the Language of the Day during the morning

announcements, morning activities, transition times, P.E., computer lab, and library time. The Gómez and Gómez DLE model supports both the academic and linguistic

development of the first language (L1) and second language (L2) language learners. Mathematics is taught in PK-5th grade in English providing Conceptual Refinement

support for Second Language Learners. Science and Social Studies are taught in PK-5th grade in Spanish only providing

Conceptual Refinement support for the Second Language learner.

Academic Features

Classroom Environment

Items in the classroom are labeled in both languages. Alphabets are created by the students and on display in the classrooms in both languages. Pair and individual students’ work is displayed in both languages. All instructional materials are accessible in both languages. Classroom Literature is accessible and equitable in both languages. Bilingual pairs are assigned and list is visible in the classroom. Bulletin Boards exhibit the language of instruction in a given content area. Classroom furniture is arranged to encourage interactive group activities.

Learning Centers and Research Centers are easily identified and accessible in the classroom.

Instruction and Learning

No translation, the teacher is consistent in the language of instruction. Teacher respects and communicates in the language of the day. Instruction provides students with authentic and meaningful opportunities to read and

write. Use of visuals, objects, and hands on learning is evident. Group and Individual accountability for learning is evident. Use of the higher levels of Blooms’ Taxonomy is evident. Minimal use of whole group instruction, activities focus on use of bilingual pairs or

groups. Evidence of the use of conceptual refinement and vocabulary enrichment.

Conceptual Refinement

Conceptual Refinement- is the instructional activity used in the Dual Language Enrichment Program that supports the comprehension of the academic content in the L2 and promotes content biliteracy in math, science, and social studies.

During Conceptual Refinement:

L2 students are homogeneously language grouped. Provided reinforcement for the last 15 to 20 minutes at the end of a lesson. Conceptual Refinement is conducted in the same language of instruction as the original

lesson. Students are provided additional opportunities to understand a concept they studied in

their L2.

Bilingual Learning & Research Centers

Bilingual Learning and Research Centers –are interactive learning activities that are subject based and support the language development of the L1 and L2 learner.

Bilingual Learning Centers: Goal is to allow students the opportunity to work in bilingual pairs. Activities must be self-directed. Students are to participate in the Bilingual Learning Centers for at least 30 minutes each

day. Bilingual Learning Centers are used in grades Pre-K through 2nd grade. Provide students the opportunity to utilize their first and second language in a supportive

and non-threatening learning environment. Allows for negotiation of content-area meaning between peers.

Provide students the opportunity to participate in self-paced independent learning where the teacher acts as a facilitator.

Bilingual Research Centers: These centers are cooperative learning project-based activities. These centers are utilized in 3rd through 5th grade. Can be done in a bilingual pair or group. Are content specific activities. Serve as a content resource area for all students. Are created and utilized in mathematics, social studies, and science.

Bilingual PairsBilingual Pairs –Is where an English dominant student is paired with a Spanish dominant student (to the extent possible) to ensure that students are learning in a supportive and cooperative learning environment for second language learners.

Bilingual Pairs: Is a vital component of the One-Way Dual Language Enrichment Model. Bilingual Pairs are utilized in all content area instruction, enrichment activities, and

participation in bilingual learning and resource centers. Pairings must be changed on a weekly or biweekly basis as needed.

Vocabulary EnrichmentVocabulary Enrichment –Is a vocabulary activity that focuses on language not conceptual development.

Vocabulary Enrichment:

Introduces specialized academic language in the student’s native language targeting concepts that the student studied in their second language.

Is done twice a week for 30 minutes. The activities are contextualized. These activities are designed to transfer knowledge learned in a student’s L1 to their L2

or vice-versa. Help ensure that students who study a subject in one language could successfully master

a test in that subject area in the L1 or L2.

Language of the DayLanguage of The Day (LOD) –Language that is not tied specifically to academic instruction and is to be alternated daily throughout the campus.

Purposes for LOD: Promote Bilingualism throughout the campus and encourage all school community

members to participate. Develop vocabulary in both languages ensuring biliterate students.

Program Designs

One Way Dual Language Enrichment Model: In a “one way” model, only Hispanic LEP students are included. The following design is used in Castleberry ISD:

Castleberry ISD

Self-Contained 1 Bilingual Teacher provides instruction in all subject areas in both languages for a group of all Hispanic ELL students. Language Arts will be in the child’s dominant language

Instruction

Subject Language of InstructionLanguage Arts In the student’s primary language

(PK – 1 L1 & 2nd – 5th E/S)Art/Music/PE EnglishMath EnglishSocial Studies SpanishScience SpanishBilingual/Research Centers Spanish and English

ResearchThe following are the pedagogical foundations for the One-Way Dual Language

• Program duration of 4-6 years: This is the amount of time needed to fully develop a second language. (Cummins, 1981; Swain, 1984)

• Adequate exposure to second language: In order to acquire a second language, children need sufficient exposure to that language in both formal (teacher-directed) and informal (with family and friends) situations. The type of exposure is as important as the amount. (Krashen, 1981)

• Focus on academic achievement: The program is designed to focus on subject matter as well as language development. Students are exposed to the same academic core curriculum as students in the regular program. (Cummins, 1979, 1981)

• Bilingual instruction through separate monolingual lesson periods: Separation of languages for instruction helps to promote language development. (Baker and De Kanter, 1981; Dulay and Burt, 1978; Legaretta. 1979, 1981; Swain, 1983)

• Positive and reciprocal instruction climate: The psychosocial environment in which students are schooled is important for scholastic performance. Positive interactions between students and teachers often result in improved educational outcomes for students. (Kagan, 1986)

• Home/School collaboration: Parents can have a significant influence on children's academic and social performance at school. Parent involvement at school and working with their children at home can lead to positive effects in children's classroom work and success. (Wong-Fillmore, 1983; Cummins, 1986)

• Quality of instructional personnel: Teachers trained in the areas of cooperative education, second language acquisition, and teachers that are knowledgeable of grade level curriculum objectives; and have native or native-like ability in both languages add to the success of this model.

• Increasing minority status: Developing self-esteem between both groups of students is important. Placing importance on the learning of Spanish (as well as English) adds to the positive self-esteem of our limited English speaking students. (Cummins, 1986)

Curriculum

Dual Language education is based on three important premises documented by research:

Additive Bilingualism Research clearly shows that language minority students best acquire a second language when their first language is firmly established, and that a second language is best developed by language majority children through immersion in that language. Neither group is at risk of losing their home language under these circumstances, thereby promoting additive bilingualism for both groups.

Transferability Knowledge learned through one language paves the way for knowledge acquisition in the second language. Students who learn content in one language are expected to demonstrate content knowledge in the second language once they acquire the language skills to express that knowledge.

Developing Biliteracy Students need to reach a certain level of native language proficiency in order to facilitate second language development. Long-term cognitive advantages of bilingualism will not accrue until the student has sufficiently developed both languages. This takes between 4 - 7 years.

Models of Bilingual Education

Additive/EnrichmentDual Language

- Two-Way- One-Way

Maintenance Bilingual-----------------------------------------------

Subtractive/RemedialTBE - Late Exit

TBE – Early ExitContent-Based ESL

ESL Pullout

Required Minimum Daily Instructional Times for Core Areas 2012-2013

ELA Math Social Studies Science RTI

ELA/Math

Kindergarten 115 min 75 min Integrated into ELA

and taught opposite Computers for 45 min weekly

45 minutes two times per week opposite of Computer

and integrated into ELA

45/30

1st Grade 115 min 75 min Integrated into ELA

and taught opposite Computers for 45 min weekly

45 minutes two times per week opposite of Computer

and integrated into ELA

45/30

2nd Grade 105 min 90 min 45 min two to three times weekly opposite of Computer

and integrated into ELA

45 min 30/30

3rd Grade 105 min 90 min 45 min two to three times weekly opposite of Computer

and integrated into ELA

45 min 30/30

4th Grade 105 min 90 min 45 min three times weekly opposite of Computer and

integrated into ELA

45 min 30/30

5th Grade 105 min 90 min 45 min three times weekly opposite of Computer and

integrated into ELA

45 min 30/30

DLE Sample SchedulesKindergarten

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

8:00-8:15 Language of the Day ActivitiesCalendar

8:15-9:05(50 minutes)

Planning

9:05-10:40(95 minutes)

SLA Core (95 min)L1

10:40-11:10 LUNCH(LOD)

11:10-11:30(20 minutes)

RecessL1

11:30- 12:00(30 minutes)

ScienceL1

ComputerLab (LOD)

ScienceL1

ComputerLab (LOD)

Science orComputer

Lab12:00-12:55(55 minutes)

Finish SLA Core and SLA Interventions/Conceptual RefinementL1

12:55-2:10(75 minutes)

Math CoreL2

2:10-2:40(30 minutes)

Math RTI/Conceptual RefinementL1

2:40-3:10(30 minutes)

Bilingual CentersL1 and L2

3:10-3:15 DismissalSchedule Notes:

Bilingual Centers should be 30 minutes. Time may have to be taken from Math and ELA Core to get the 30 minutes.

Ideally SLA is in the morning with SLA intervention/Conceptual Refinement to follow the SLA Core.

Please do not schedule Math directly after recess and it should be one continuous block of time.

Ideally, the Math Intervention/Conceptual Refinement should be scheduled directly after the Math Core.

Spanish Language Arts (SLA), Science, Social Studies = L1 (1st Language) Math=L2 (English) LOD=Language of the Day

Grade 1Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

8:00-8:15 Morning Procedures (Language of the Day)

8:15-10:10(115

minutes)L1

SLA /Science Integration

SLA /Social Studies/Science

Integration

SLA /Social Studies

Integration

SLA /Social Studies/Science

Integration

SLA/ScienceIntegration

10:10-10:55(45 minutes)

SLA Intervention/Conceptual Refinement

L1

10:55-11:25(30 minutes)

Lunch(Language of the Day)

11:25-12:20(55 minutes)

Math L2

12:20-1:10 Planning50 min

1:10-2:00(50 minutes)

Finish Math CoreMath Interventions/ Conceptual Refinement

L2

2:00-2:30 Computer Lab(LOD)

ScienceL1

Computer Lab

(LOD)

ScienceL1

Science/Comp Lab

2:30-2:50 Recess (Language of the Day)2:50-3:15 Bilingual Centers L1 and L2

3:15 DismissalSchedule Notes:

Bilingual Centers should be 30 minutes. Time may have to be taken from Math and ELA Core to get the 30 minutes.

Ideally SLA is in the morning with SLA intervention/Conceptual Refinement to follow the SLA Core.

Please do not schedule Math directly after recess and it should be one continuous block of time.

Ideally, the Math Intervention/Conceptual Refinement should be scheduled directly after the Math Core.

Spanish Language Arts (SLA), Science, Social Studies = L1 (1st Language) Math=L2 (English) LOD=Language of the Day

Grade 2Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

8:00-8:15 Morning Procedures / Language of the day / Vocabulary review

8:15-9:05 music/art PE library PE (A) music/art(B) PE(C) library(D) PE

9:05-10:15 Reading

10:10-11:00 Science (45 min)

11:00-11:30 Lunch (30 min)

11:30-12:00 Reading

12:00-12:30 RtI ELA (30 min)

12:30-1:00 ComputerLab

Social Studies ComputerLab

Social Studies Social Studies

1:00-2:15 Math Core (75 min)

2:15-2:45 Math RtI (30 min)

2:45-3:15 Bilingual Centers (30 min)

Bilingual Centers should be 30 minutes. Time may have to be taken from Math and ELA Core to get the 30 minutes.

Ideally SLA is in the morning with SLA intervention/Conceptual Refinement to follow the SLA Core.

Please do not schedule Math directly after recess and it should be one continuous block of time. Ideally, the Math Intervention/Conceptual Refinement should be scheduled directly after the

Math Core. Spanish Language Arts (SLA), Science, Social Studies = L1 (1st Language) Math=L2 (English) LOD=Language of the Day

Grade 3

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

8:00

Math90 min

8:158:158:308:459:009:159:309:30 Computer

Lab Social Studies ComputerLab Social Studies Computer

Lab10:0010:00

Reading80 min

10:1510:3010:4511:0011:1511:2011:20 Lunch

30 min11:5011:50 Reading cont’d

25 min12:1512:15 Reading RTI (30 min)12:4512:45 Math RTI (30 min)1:151:15 Planning

50 min2:052:05-2:15 Recess

2:15 Science (45 min)3:003:00-3:15 Dismissal

Grade 4 & 5Time

8:00-8:15

ELA/SLA (Social Studies Integrated 3x weekly)

8:15-8:308:30-8:458:45-9:009:00-9:159:15-9:309:30-9:459:45-10:00 Social Studies(2x) / Computer Lab (3x)10:00-10:1510:15-10:30 Reading Intervention10:30-10:4510:45-11:00 Lunch11:00-11:1511:15-11:30

Science11:30-11:4511:45-12:0012:00-12:15

Math

12:15-12:3012:30-12:4512:45-1:001:00-1:151:15-1:301:30-1:45 Math Invervention1:45-2:002:00-2:15

Encore2:15-2:302:30-2:452:45-3:003:00-3:15

Assessments

All students participating in the One-Way Dual Language Enrichment Program were pre-assessed with an oral language proficiency test-the Idea Proficiency Test (IPT).

In addition to oral language proficiency tests, students will also be assessed using Tejas LEE, TPRI (or any state approved test), teacher observations, grade-level checklist, hands-on evaluation, performances and participation in special projects, and samples of students' writing and students’ products showing an understanding of concepts taught. Research conducted by the National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning on two-way programs has found that students in these programs, on the whole, are performing at or above grade level (Cristian, Montone, Carranza, Lindholm, & Proctor, 1996). This is true despite the fact that some of these content courses are taught in the non-English language in two-way programs yet the tests administered to measure achievement are given solely in English.

Effective Instructional PracticesIn addition to a clearly defined structure of language allocation across the grade levels, the one-way bilingual program in Castleberry ISD incorporates effective instructional strategies and practices to ensure maximum language development in both languages. Some of the strategies include: Separation of Languages One of the distinctive characteristics of effective two-way programs is that the two languages are kept separate during instruction. In the Brownsville Independent School District’s Two Way Dual Language Program, language is separated by content areas. Students and teachers engage in periods of instruction (in content areas like math, science, social studies, and language arts) during which only one language is used, thus allowing the student’s depth of exposure to each language one at a time to develop independently, without the aid of translation. This feature of the program requires that teachers make content comprehensible and meaning accessible. Teachers take into account the developmental observation that students learning a new language often go through a period when they are able to understand before they are able or are ready to speak or write. Teachers and parents must keep in mind that their children may experience this "silent period," but, with time, the students will go from silence, to passive communication to active communication. Student-Centered Learning Many researchers have concluded that student centered strategies such as learning centers, interactive journals, shared reading, shared writing and literature studies are effective strategies for second language learners. The communicative nature of student-centered classrooms fosters the development of both first and second language competencies through a continual tie of the personal with the new. Students feel validated and empowered to extend their own learning and knowledge. In two-way bilingual programs, students have the opportunity to interact with "expert" speakers of a language while they engage in meaningful tasks, thereby facilitating language acquisition. Learning activities move from the whole to the part. Lessons began with large group instruction where students share their own observations or ideas so that the entire class can benefit from each other's ideas and language sophistication. Then the activity moves to small group or pairs for discussion and for further clarification. Every day, students have an opportunity to work in

pairs in the various learning centers set up by the teacher. Teacher facilitates instruction through scaffolding for individuals and the group through his or her careful questioning, validation, and language extensions.Sheltering Strategies Teachers must use an array of strategies aimed at making the content comprehensible, negotiating meaning, and introducing and reinforcing learning strategies and procedures. The teachers use visuals, manipulatives, realia, graphic organizers, slower speech, limited vocabulary, and other techniques to ensure that students acquire the concepts and the language necessary to perform required academic tasks successfully. Language and Content Integration Language development should be systematically integrated with academic development in order to maximize language learning. Instructional approaches that integrate content and language are likely to be more effective than approaches in which language is taught in isolation. Language develops alongside the content being studied. In a two-way classroom students are not studying Spanish or English. They are using Spanish to study science and social studies. They are using English to study math.Cooperative Learning Much of the research on bilingual education and second language acquisition indicates that language is learned through social interaction. The term "negotiation of meaning" is very descriptive when trying to understand the role of talk in language learning. In our two-way program, classrooms are set up with contexts that support interaction that in turn provides students with opportunities to contribute and negotiate through talk. Reducing the amount of "teacher talk" and increasing the interactions between learners further accelerates language and concept learning. In the classroom, teachers have set up many contexts where students talk in pairs, in small groups, and to the whole class. Group work is structured so that each student has a role or an assignment that positively affects the outcome of the group tasks. Group work also promotes a positive affective climate. This contributes to lowering the "affective filter" (Krashen, 1994) so that language learners take risks to communicate in their second language. For most activities, personal experience and background knowledge form the base from which new learning experiences emerge. In this way, each student is validated and the group forms a foundation of shared perspectives and experiences. This sense of group work also contributes to creating a supportive environment where risks can be taken and caring support received when needed. (Adapted from Howard & Christian, CREDE, 2002) Thomas & Collier, 2004 Language Distribution The teachers choose the language of instruction, alternating by time, topic, or person, with equal instructional time given to each language. Active/Discovery Learning The use of tangible objects that can be manipulated assists students in understanding abstract concepts. Cooperative Learning: Language minority and language majority students must work together to complete tasks.

One Way DLE Glossary of Terms

Term Definition

Academic Language……………………… Language used in the learning of academic subject matter in a formal school setting. This type of language includes specific academic terms and language for a given subject (TESOL, 1997).

Additive Bilingualism…………………….. An enrichment process in which students are able to acquire a second language without the fear of losing their native language or abandoning their own cultural identity.

Attrition…………………………………… Reduction in numbers usually as a result of resignation, or retirement.

BICS……………………………………… Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills; known as conversational language.

Biculturalism……………………………… Native like knowledge of two cultures; includes the ability to respond effectively to different demands of these two cultures (TESOL, 1997).

Bilingual Instruction……………………… Instruction given to students in two languages. The 2 languages usually entail the student’s native language and a second language.

Biliteracy…………………………………… Capabilities to read, write, listen, and speak with a native like skill, and attain comprehension in two languages.

Bilingual……………………………………School

An elementary school that offers a bilingual program in grades PK-3rd. In this program students receive reading and writing as well as content knowledge skills in Spanish while acquiring English. A district that has met the TEA required number of 20 Spanish-speaking LEPs in any elementary grade is required to offer this Bilingual Program Design.

Bilingual……………………………………Self-ContainedDesign

Self-contained classroom design of 22 students. The 22 students can be all ELL students or a mixture of ELL and Non-ELL students. In this design, all ELL students will receive part of their daily instruction in English and part in Spanish.

CALP……………………………………… Cognitive Academic Language ProficiencyCluster ……………………………………..Scheduling

Efficiently grouping ELL students in a class that is taught by an ESL certified teacher (no more than 12 students).

Code-Switching---------------------------------- The ability to used more than one language interchangeably within the same conversation or sentence (not effective).

Cultural Responsiveness…………………. The ability to respond to others with consideration, respect, and sensitivity because of an increased awareness of the need to recognize and respect cultural differences.

Exception………………………………….. An ESL class in which a bilingual program is not offered to Spanish and Vietnamese speaking ELL students due to a lack of state certified bilingual personnel.

Home Language………………………… Language or languages spoken in the home by the significant others in the child’s residence.

Homeroom Design………………………..Bilingual Programs(Current)

Self-contained classroom taught by a bilingual-certified teacher in grades PK-3rd. This classroom design was specifically intended for the Spanish-dominant ELL student. In this classroom setting students are taught in both Spanish and English, with a gradual increase in English instruction each year.

Immersion Education……………………. Children are taught a second language through subject-matter instruction in that language, with an emphasis on contextual clues and with lessons geared to students’ level of competence (Crawford, 1991).

Language Proficiency……………………... Is the level of competence at which a person is able to use language for both basic communicative tasks and academic purposes (TESOL, 1997).

Multilingualism…………………………… Is the ability to speak more than two languages; having proficiency in many languages (TESOL, 1997).

One-Way Dual …………………………….Language Design

Design where Spanish-speaking ELL students will receive instruction in Spanish and English. The goal of dual language is to develop biliterate/bilingual students who will graduate from the elementary grades meeting the state requirement English proficient.

One-Way Dual Language……………… Bilingual program where homogeneous groups of students (English language learners) are instructed in the TEKS in two languages.

Scaffold:…………………………………… Providing instructional support and guidance

in a manner that students can transition from being dependent solely on the teacher to an independent learner.

Team Modified…………………………………….Design

An instructional program in which students are taught by an ESL teacher and then sent to a Bilingual teacher for 30 minutes of Spanish Instruction.

Two-Way Dual……………………………..Language Design

Non-ELL students join their Spanish-speaking ELL peers in an integrated classroom. Both groups of students will be taught in both Spanish and English. (This is not currently implemented in CISD.)

Research for Parent Communication

Dual Language-Classroom Elements of the Gomez and Gomez Dual Language Enrichment ModelCastleberry ISD Program Observation Instrument

Teacher:__________________________________

Grade Subject Campus Strengths

Date: K 1 2 3 4 5 R M W S SS AVC CE JJEDual Language Classroom Environment

♦ Items in classroom labeled in both languages PK-5 (English: Blue/ Spanish: Red) Plenty of items labeled using color (appropriate to grade level) Items clearly labeled in both languages (vocabulary reviewed in LOD) Some items labeled at student eye level Word walls are separate and in both languages

♦ Student-Generated alphabet posted in both languages PK-5 Alphabet equally posted in both languages (vocabulary reviewed in LOD) Alphabet posted at student eye level Alphabets are student-generated /developed (appropriate to grade level

♦Student’s work prominently displayed in both languages Plenty of student work displayed in classroom Student work is displayed in both languages Student work is displayed in both languages in hallway

♦Instructional materials accessible and equitable in both languages Plenty of instructional materials available Materials accessible to students in both languages Materials equitable in both languages

♦ Literature accessible and equitable in both languages Plenty of reading books available Reading books accessible to students in both languages Reading books equitable in both languages Reading books are culturally relevant for children

♦ Clear and visible list of bilingual pairs List of assigned bilingual pairs clearly posted Pocket chart used to post bilingual pairs Bilingual pairs posted are color coded

♦ Bulletin boards correspond to language of instruction (LOI) in content area Bulletin boards posted are in LOI Appropriate content area bulletin boards represented Content area charts posted are in LOI

♦ Desks or tables arranged to promote interactive/group lessons Desks/tables used for bilingual pairs/groups Desks/tables arranged for face to face interaction Clear pathways for student travel to group activities

♦ Bilingual Learning Centers (PK-2)/ Bilingual Resource Centers (3-5) in both languages Bilingual Learning Centers (PK-2)/ Bilingual Resource Centers (3-5) well defined and clearly labeled Bilingual Learning Centers in Science, SS, Math and Reading have student based activities Extensive instructional/reading materials available in Bilingual Learning Centers/Resource Centers Effective management plan for rotation of bilingual pairs in Bilingual Learning Centers Bilingual Resource Centers used during content area instruction (project based activities 3-5)

Comments:

Instructional Process & Student Learning♦ Teacher consistent in language of instruction (LOI) ; no translation/clarification in L1

Teacher uses LOI for teaching Teacher aide uses LOI for teaching (if applicable) Teacher assists students in LOI Teacher aide assists students in LOI (if applicable)

♦ Teacher adheres to Language of the Day (LOD) [Circle LOD: M T W R F Spanish// English] Teacher follows LOD Teacher aide follows LOD (if applicable) Majority of students follow LOD Sign on door announcing LOD is correct

♦ Learners provided authentic, meaningful, opportunities to read and write (no dittos, worksheets) Lesson engages learners in reading/writing Lessons engage learners in creative, meaningful tasks Lessons engage learners in authentic, meaningful activities

♦ Learners use language of choice (PK-1); strongly encouraged to use language of instruction (2-5) Learners use language of choice (PK-1) Learners reminded to use LOI (PK-1) Learners are strongly encouraged to use LOI (2-5)

♦ Evidence of hands on meaningful learning, use of visuals, objects Lesson is hands on and cooperative Lesson use effective visuals, objects, realia Content learned is interesting and motivating Content learned is meaningful and relevant

♦ Evidence of group and individual accountability used for assessment Assessment includes informal kid watching Assessment includes individual, pair and group grades Opportunities for students to assess one another

♦ Lessons are challenging; go beyond comprehension level on Bloom’s Taxonomy Learning clearly challenged; ask questions Learning is at application level or higher Learners engaged in Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Lesson engages learners at grade level or higher

♦ Instructional grouping in bilingual pairs/bilingual groups; minimal use of whole group instruction Learners working and learning together Learners clearly support each other’s learning (one assignment) Appropriate pairing of learners in bilingual pairs/groups (H-M/M-L) Lesson goes from whole to small group learning in bilingual pairs/groups

♦ Evidence of L1/L2 Conceptual Refinement activity [Conceptual Refinement (CR) PK-2/Specialized Vocabulary Enrichment (SVE): 3-5]

Conceptual Refinement (CR) activities listed in daily schedule (PK-2) Consistent implementation of CR activity (PK-2) SVE activities listed in daily schedule (3-5) Consistent implementation of SVE activity (3-5)

Comments:

Helpful Websites

http://www.tabe.org/ - Texas Association for Bilingual Education http://www.emsd63.org/ - East Maine School District 63 http://www.dualu.org/ - Dual Language Teacher Training Curriculum

http://dlti.us/- Dual Language Training Institute http://www.texastwoway.org/ - Texas Two-Way Dual Language http://www.nabe.org/ - National Association for Bilingual Education http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/ - National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Programs http://www.thomasandcollier.com/ - Thomas and Collier Research

DLE training: Bilingual Websites

(Researched by Ana Largo-CISD DLE Teacher)

1. http://www.auladiez.com/ejercicios/index.html *muestra ejercicios de español interactivos como modismos, comprensión de la lectura.

2. http://educa.maisathode.com/ejemplos/Recursos%20de%20Lengua.html *practica interactiva de gramática, comprensión

3. http://www.bilingualplanet.com/ * materials for dual language classroom4. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/averroes/~cepco3/fondolector/justifica.htm *juego

interactivo para practicar comprensión de la lectura5. http://www.aplicaciones.info/poesia/poesia.htm *poemas interactivos con preguntas de

comprension.

Articles/Publications: Gómez, L. (2000). Two-Way bilingual education: Promoting educational and social change. The Journal of the Texas Association for Bilingual Education, 5 (1), Spring.

Gómez, R. & Gómez, L. (1999). Supporting dual CALP development among second language learners: The two-way model revisited. Educational Considerations Journal, 26(2) Spring

Gómez, L. & Ruiz-Escalante, J. (2005). Achieving equity through enrichment bilingual education. In M. Littleton, A. Pankake, & Schroth (EDs.) Administration and Supervision of Special Programs. Debuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt.

Gómez, L., Freeman, Y., & Freeman, D. (2005). Dual language education: A promising 50-50 dual language model, Bilingual Research Journal, 29(1)

Alecio-Lara, R., Galloway, M., Irby, B. J., Gómez, L., Rodriguez, L. (2004). Two-way immersion programs in Texas, Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1).

Thomas, W.P., & Collier, V.P. (2004). The astounding effectiveness of dual language education for all. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2:1, Winter 2004

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long term academic achievement. Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence, Santa Cruz, CA.

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1998). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: George Washington University, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education (NCBE)-Resource Collection Series.

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1997b). Two languages are better than one. Educational Leadership, 55(4).

Torres-Guzman, M. E. (2002). Dual language programs: Key features and results (No. 14). Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction Educational Program.

Valerio, M., Gómez, L., Gómez, R. (2001). Attitudinal shifts of teachers implementing a two way bilingual education program.