The Language-rich Classroom: A Research-based Framework for Teaching English Language Learners

Pérsida Himmele William Himmele

THE

Language-Rich



CLASSROOM

A Research-Based Framework for Teaching English Language Learners

THE

Language-Rich



CLASSROOM

A Research-Based Framework for Teaching English Language Learners

THE

Language-Rich

CLASSROOM

A Research-Based Framework for Teaching English Language Learners

Pérsida Himmele William Himmele

Alexandria, Virginia

1703 N. Beauregard St. • Alexandria, VA 22311‑1714 USA Phone: 800-933-2723 or 703-578-9600 • Fax: 703-575-5400 Web site: www.ascd.org • E-mail: [email protected] Author guidelines: www.ascd.org/write Gene R. Carter, Executive Director; Nancy Modrak, Publisher; Julie Houtz, Director of Book Editing & Production; Leah Lakins, Project Manager; Sima Jaafar, Senior Graphic Designer; Mike Kalyan, Production Manager; BMWW, Typesetter; Sarah Plumb, Production Specialist  2009 by ASCD. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from ASCD. Readers who wish to duplicate material copyrighted by ASCD may do so for a small fee by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923, USA (phone: 978-750-8400; fax: 978-646-8600; Web: www.copyright.com). For requests to reprint rather than photocopy, contact ASCD’s permissions office: 703-575-5749 or [email protected]. Translation inquiries: ­[email protected]. Printed in the United States of America. Cover art copyright  2009 by ASCD. ASCD publica‑ tions present a variety of viewpoints. The views expressed or implied in this book should not be interpreted as official positions of the Association. PAPERBACK ISBN: 978-1-4166-0841-7   ASCD product #108037   n7/09 Also available as an e-book through ebrary, netLibrary, and many online booksellers (see Books in Print for the ISBNs). Quantity discounts for the paperback edition only: 10–49 copies, 10%; 50+ copies, 15%; for 1,000 or more copies, call 800-933-2723, ext. 5634, or 703-575-5634. For desk copies: member@ ascd.org. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Himmele, Pérsida.   The language-rich classroom : a research-based framework for teaching English language learners / Pérsida Himmele and William Himmele.    p.  cm.   Includes bibliographical references and index.   ISBN 978-1-4166-0841-7 (pbk. : alk. paper)  1.  English language—Study and teaching— Foreign speakers.  I.  Himmele, William.  II.  Title.   PE1128.A2H525 2009   428.2'4—dc22

20  19  18  17  16  15  14  13  12  11  10  09   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12

2009010389

A Research-Based Framework for Teaching English Language Learners

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Acknowledgments Introduction:................................................................................................ A Schoolwide Effort. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . viii Introduction: A Schoolwide Effort..................................................................... 000

1.  ELLs: An Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1. ELLs: An Overview .......................................................................................... 000

2.  Developing Academic Language. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2. Developing Academic Language .................................................................... 000

3. C = Content Reading Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3. Content Reading Strategies ............................................................................. 000

4.  H = Higher-Order Thinking Skills. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

4. Higher-Order Thinking Skills ......................................................................... 000

5.  A = Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . 107 5. Assessment ........................................................................................................ 6.  T = Total Participation Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . 143 6. Total Participation Techniques .......................................................................

7. S = Scaffolding Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . 161 7. Scaffolding Strategies ....................................................................................... Conclusion: Planning Your CHATS Units ........................................................ Conclusion: Planning Your CHATS Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . 181 References .............................................................................................................. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000 . . . . . . 185 Index ...................................................................................................................... 000

Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

About the Authors ................................................................................................ 000

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

3

To Caleb and Gabriela, thank you for your patience and sacrifices during this long process. We are so blessed to be your parents!

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our appreciation to our editor Leah Lakins at ASCD. Wow, we are so appreciative of all of the time and energy you placed into helping us shape the book through the editing process. We are grateful to have gotten the opportunity to work with you. We also want to express our deepest gratitude to the faculty and staff of the School District of Lancaster in Pennsylvania. Thank you for your willingness to invite us into your inspiring classrooms, for the way that you enthusiastically embraced the framework, and for your commitment to purposeful planning for teaching in inclusive and multilingual settings. We especially want to thank Pat Schreibeis, Iris Ayala, Dr. Janette Hewitt, Keely Potter, and the administrative staff at the Office of Teaching and Learning for the time and energy that they put into seeing the framework implemented well through professional development. And finally, and most importantly, thank you God for the gifts of language and cognition.

vii

Introduction

A Schoolwide Effort

How many teachers in your school can say that they are comfortably prepared to teach in linguistically diverse classrooms? Although teacher preparation institutions may do a commendable job of preparing teachers to teach students with similar cultures and home languages as their own, too many teachers are flustered and unaware of what to do when they are thrown a curveball—namely, any student who does not fit the typical majority culture and home language. English language learners (ELLs) are a historically underperforming population that many mainstream classroom teachers seem least comfortably prepared to teach. In fact, several assumptions are often made when it comes to teaching ELLs. The first is that with a well-developed English as a second language (ESL) program, the needs of the ELL will be taken care of. The unfortunate truth is that ELLs too often spend the majority of their time in mainstream classes with few accommodations made for learning. This is especially true for low-incidence schools and schools that use the ESL pullout model of instruction. If ELLs are to be successful, this mind-set will need to change. Educating ELLs well must be a schoolwide effort, with everyone—administrators and faculty alike— understanding the importance of their role in the content learning and language acquisition process.

viii

Introduction: A Schoolwide Effort

The second assumption is that the world of ESL, with its many acronyms, can only be understood by those with highly specialized linguistic training. The fact is that although an understanding of the second-language acquisition process is important, teaching ELLs well does not require highly specialized linguistic training. Thomas and Collier (2002) found that teachers who were most successful at teaching in bilingual or multilingual settings were those who took a holistic approach to education that incorporated innovative strategies as well as a classroom that provided students with a socioculturally supportive environment. To teach ELLs well, every teacher, not just the ESL teacher, needs to understand how to help ELLs be successful. In sharp contrast to the second assumption, the third assumption is that teaching ELLs is really no different than plain old good teaching. Teaching ELLs does require good instructional methods, but by simplifying the process in this manner, we run the risk of forgetting the linguistic and academic scaffolds that must be provided on a daily basis for ELLs. It takes more than plain old good teaching. It takes linguistic scaffolding that is informed by an understanding of students’ language development. Although language development may best be done in the context of content and skilled instruction, the foundational under­ standings of language development must be front and center when it comes to developing both content and language at the same time. Again, every teacher, not just the ESL teacher, needs to understand how to help ELLs be successful. Oftentimes, it is the assumptions we make that cost us the most in terms of student achievement. It is these assumptions that lead to the historically low performance and high dropout rates of English language learners. In this book, we hope to facilitate a collaborative effort toward understanding the content and language acquisition process for ELLs. To that end, we describe a fivecomponent framework for supporting ELL growth in both content and language. The components are broken up into five areas around the acronym CHATS: C = Content reading strategies H = Higher-order thinking skills A = Assessment T = Total participation techniques S = Scaffolding strategies

ix

The Language-Rich Classroom

A Note on Terminology Used The term English language learner (ELL) has been criticized for its redundant use of the words English and language back to back. However, we’ve chosen to use English language learner because it has been commonly accepted among ESL practitioners and researchers, and, quite frankly, we like how it sounds. To us, it sounds better than “English learner.” So, in this book we use the term English language learner to identify students who are acquiring English along with another or other home language(s). ESL refers to the English as a second language program. Native English speakers describes students who have been raised speaking English as their native language, although we know that a deep analysis of this term would encompass bilingual students who may have grown up speaking two or more languages simultaneously. It may also include some bilingual students who may currently qualify or at one time qualified for ESL services. However, in this book, we use the term to describe students who, whether bilingual or not, do not qualify for ESL services.

x

1

ELLs: An Overview

As we’ll see in the section on the backgrounds of English language learners, this student population represents a highly diverse group of students and thus a special set of challenges for the educators and administrators who work with them. This chapter offers an overview of the characteristics of ELLs as well as the most pressing issues pertaining to them.

The Dropout Problem One of the greatest challenges that teachers of ELLs face with regard to bridging the achievement gap between these students and their native English-speaking peers is the development of academic language. If we look at statistics from 2002 graduation rates, the estimated dropout rate for whites is 29 percent and 44 percent for African Americans. For Latinos, the dropout rate is the highest at 48 percent (Greene & Winters, 2005). Richard Fry (2003), of the Pew Hispanic Foundation, found that of the 16- to 19-year-old Latino dropouts in his study, about 60 percent had poor English language skills, compared to 15 percent who had fluent English skills.

Academic Language We consider academic language in greater detail in Chapter 2. For now, if we were to take an honest look at the level of English language proficiency needed to do 1

The Language-Rich Classroom

well in school, or even the level needed to marginally pass basic 12th grade proficiency tests in reading, writing, history, and even math, and if we were to go a step further to look at the type of English one would need to be considered proficient enough to do moderately well on an SAT exam for college entrance, we would have to admit that ELLs face a daunting task. To succeed in school, they must acquire not just a conversational fluency but a deeper type of academic language that continues to develop long after many ELLs have been formally exited from ESL programs. In pullout ESL programs, too often the term exited from ESL sends an entirely wrong message to classroom teachers. Teachers will often assume that the ELL no longer needs linguistic support. In fact, students may need the most help after they exit the program, when all visible linguistic supports have been eliminated. In a nonbilingual ESL program, the best kind of support that we can offer ELLs is not solely linguistic but that of meaningful content and language together (Echevarria & Graves, 2003; Faltis & Hudelson, 1994; Freeman & Freeman, 2001). So then it is the classroom teacher, not just ESL specialists, who must have the ability and the responsibility to provide a critical bridge into the rich world of academic language development, which is most practically developed in grade-level and content-area classrooms. However, it is important to note that the process of creating an integrated language-rich environment is not likely to happen without informed and intentional planning on the part of the teacher. Cummins (1991) examined the referrals and psychological assessments of over 400 English language learners. He found that in many of the special education referrals, ELLs’ oral communicative language was more developed than their academic language. Although in many referrals language was seen as a possible problem area, others overlooked the topic of language altogether and suggested that the student had deeper problems stemming from learning disabilities. One referral addressed a student from Portugal: “Arrived from Portugal at age 10 and was placed in a second grade class; three years later in fifth grade, her teacher commented that ‘her oral answering and comprehension is so much better than her written work that we feel a severe learning problem is involved, not just her non-English background’” (p. 4). What is most notable in Cummins’s examples is the lack of accommodations, linguistic understandings, patience, and support given by school personnel for ELLs to acquire the second language. Cummins also noted referrals that demonstrated concern over learning disabilities as early as 2

ELLs: An Overview

the first year that the student arrived. In one example, a child was referred for special education services in 1st grade, with no mention of that child’s status as an English language learner. “PR was referred in first grade by the school principal who noted that ‘PR is experiencing considerable difficulty with grade one work. An intellectual assessment would help her teacher to set realistic learning expectations for her and might provide some clues as to remedial assistance that might be offered’” (p. 5). Cummins’s research led to a greater understanding of the differences between conversational and academic language and the impact each has on school performance. In the 1980s, Cummins’s acronyms of BICS (basic interpersonal communicative skills) and CALP (cognitive academic language proficiency) became self-contained words among the bilingual and ESL teaching communities, and these terms continue to remain so today. Cummins found that it often took children an average of two years to acquire the conversational language he called BICS. Consider BICS to be the type of conversational English you might hear students speaking on the playground or in the cafeteria. CALP is the type of language one would experience while reading a textbook or hearing a formal speech. CALP, or academic language, often took an average of five to seven years to acquire. Hakuta, Butler, and Witt (2000) confirmed Cummins’s findings on academic language development. In their study, academic language took about four to seven years to develop. Although they noted that because their study included only students who had been enrolled since kindergarten, their findings might have been underestimated. In fact, the amount of time for many ELLs to approach grade-level norms may be closer to a range of 7 to 10 years (Thomas & Collier, 2002). To summarize, conversational language is An In-Depth Look different from academic language. Students For criticism of and expansion on the concept need academic language to succeed in school. of academic language, refer to Valdés’s (2004) article cited in the references section Sound simple enough? Unfortunately, children of this text. rarely arrive with information that indicates If you are interested in additional articles on the level and extent of proficiency that they’re teaching ELLs and a quick look at BICS and CALP, with rebuttals to counterarguments, refer in the process of acquiring. And, they also to Jim Cummins’s Web site: www.iteachilearn. rarely come with information suggesting the com/cummins/. instructional approaches that would help them 3

The Language-Rich Classroom

succeed the most. Even though teachers may, on the surface, know the definitions of BICS and CALP, the differences between the two can become muddled when working with actual children. The distinction between the two can lead to big misunderstandings on the part of teachers who misdiagnose students as having reached a high level of English language proficiency, when in fact they have not. Students may have reached a level of English proficiency where they are able to communicate at a conversational level but need support to reach the levels of their native English-speaking peers in tasks that require academic language proficiency. Consider the following scenario. Let’s say that you are a 3rd grade teacher (Mrs. G.), and you’ve just come in after lunch and are approached by Mariana. Mariana came to the United States in the beginning of 1st grade and is struggling in your classroom. The following dialogue takes place. Mariana: Oh, man, Mrs. G., can you believe they had potator tots again for lunch today? That stuff is so nasty it makes me wanna barf. Teacher: Really, is it that bad? Mariana: Oh, I can’t tell you how bad. You know, not to be rude, but it looks like barf on a plate. Teacher: Oh, my goodness! That bad? Mariana: Worse! Teacher, ya gotta do something about that for us. Talk to the lunch lady or somethin’.

Now consider the same scenario again, but this time you are Mr. G. (to be genderfair), and your student is Mitsy. Mitsy’s parents are two lawyers living in the uppercrust section of town. Mitsy is a 3rd grade native English speaker who approaches you about the same problem. Mitsy: Uh, Mr. G., You wouldn’t believe. They had potator tots for lunch today. This has to be the gazillionth time in a row! Teacher: Is that a bad thing? Mitsy: Bad?! That stuff is so nasty! I look at it and I wanna puke! Teacher: Wow! It can’t be that bad. Mitsy: Huh? No, potator tots are so disgusting that people say they look like barf on a plate. And they do!

Hopefully, if we’ve made our point well, you didn’t notice much of a difference in the language use of Mariana and Mitsy. The fact is that we use a different type of discourse when we speak in conversations than we do when we are presenting formal speeches or writing papers. Both Mariana and Mitsy use slang, made-up words, and common expressions to get their point across. And both have effectively made their point. 4

ELLs: An Overview

In the context of a conversation, it’s hard A Note About Writing to see any difference between the linguistic Asking Mariana and Mitsy to complete a writing assignment provides a much clearer picture of competence of Mariana and Mitsy. But the fact the differences of academic and conversational remains there is a huge difference. Mitsy is at fluency that the two students have. Writing is the top of her class. Mariana is at the bottom. often a truer measure of academic language proficiency than speaking or even comprehenMitsy scores well on tests. Mariana scores sion in reading. Although Mitsy may not use a poorly. Mitsy’s rankings on standardized tests great deal of academic language in her speech, show that she is at about the 85th percentile she knows to pull it out in her writing. For Mariana, often what you get in writing is a in reading. Mariana is struggling at about the reflection of conversational competency. For 20th percentile. Yet, a teacher who isn’t example, words and word phrases that are intentionally assessing language development heard one way in oral language, but that appear differently in written text, are written in the way or investigating ways to understand Mariana’s they sound or appear in oral conversations. For language development might very well believe example, “could have” appears as “could of.” that because Mariana and Mitsy sound about Oftentimes, when a student has little or no experience with these words in written form, the same, there’s no reason that their the result will be the oral form in the student’s performance shouldn’t also be about the same. writing. Unfortunately, Mariana does not have Not only does the teacher become frustrated the academic language with which to explain her feelings of inadequacy in writing. She’s not with Mariana, but Mariana becomes frustrated likely to say, “Well, teacher, I haven’t really with school. If we are going to meet the needs developed a strong enough bank of academic of ELLs in our classrooms, then we have to vocabulary with which to effortlessly create writing activities that rely heavily on academic have a clearer understanding of the process language.” Instead, you’re more likely to hear of second language acquisition. Simple and Mariana say, “I hate writing.” ongoing assessment of academic language development should be practiced by all teachers who have ELLs in their classrooms. (We cover classroom assessment of language development and proficiency in more detail in Chapter 5.)

Dual Immersion Programs There is compelling evidence that prior literacy and schooling experiences in the home language are the most important factors that account for student success in the second language (Cummins, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1991; Fillmore, 2005; Krashen, 1996). The interdependence of literacy skills exists from one language to another for students who speak a home language with similar alphabetic foundations as that of English (e.g., Spanish), but it also exists for students who speak languages 5

The Language-Rich Classroom

with writing systems that are remarkably different from English (e.g., Arabic or Chinese) (Chan, 2004; Gottardo, Yan, Siegel, & Wade-Woolley, 2001). When a school’s ELL popula­tion is highly homogenous, bilingual education provides opportunities for students to continue cognitive development in their home language which has a positive effect on their academic development in the second language Cummins, 1980, 1991). Dual language immersion programs, often called two-way bilingual programs, offer a practical alternative to English-only classes. In dual immersion classes, both native English speakers and native speakers of another language are provided with an opportunity to continue experiencing cognitively intense concept develop­ment while they learn another language. In dual immersion programs half the students in the class are native English speakers and the other half of the class speaks the second language used in the program. Instruction is given in both languages at a predetermined ratio of time (e.g., 50 percent English, 50 percent Spanish) with­out having content be repeated. In dual immersion programs, English lan­guage learners and native English speakers enjoy the cognitive and social benefits of learning a new language. While we support bilingual programming as the most successful model for teaching ELLs, we also realize that in low incidence schools or schools with heterogeneous linguistic populations, bilingual programs are not always feasible. The challenge for teachers in these schools is to become mediators of compre­ hension for students of differing linguistic backgrounds in a way that provides all students with opportunities for meaningful access to academic language and content in English.

An In-Depth Look Interested in reading more about dual language immersion? For practical tools to help you run an effective dual language program, see Soltero’s (2004) Dual Language: Teaching and Learning in Two Languages. Soltero provides background on dual language programs, but probably the most helpful feature of her text is the way she provides the nuts and bolts for how to actually plan and implement the program well within your school district. This book would be a good read for members of a steering committee charged with establishing an effective program. Chapters are followed by questions that can be helpful in facilitating discussion among faculty. Another excellent text for understanding dual language is Dual Language Essentials for Teachers and Administrators, by Freeman, Freeman, and Mercuri (2005). The authors effectively lay a foundation for understanding how to implement dual language programs. They are ESL gurus, well respected among the ESL teaching community. This text is helpful for a thorough understanding of the theoretical foundations behind dual language programming.

6

ELLs: An Overview

CHATS and Language Development No matter what program model your school implements, the CHATS frame­work can be successfully implemented in bilingual, sheltered, or multilingual classrooms. It’s aimed at developing content and language through active learning at deep levels of thinking. It honors many of the principles used in sheltered instructional pro­ grams, in that “sheltered instruction is a means for making grade-level content, such as science, social studies, and math, more accessible for English language learners, while also promoting English development” (Echevarria & Graves, 2003, p. 53). It differs from sheltered instructional programming in that where sheltered class­ rooms are designed so that ELLs of similar linguistic levels make up the entire class (Krashen, 1992; Richard-Amato & Snow, 2005), our framework applies many of the principles of sheltered instruction for use in teaching and learning in mixed classrooms that include ELLs, students with special needs, and native English speakers. As you’ll notice, all students will benefit from the use of the framework. The CHATS framework works particularly well when used in a coteaching model, where in-class units are coplanned by the grade-level classroom teachers, the special education teacher, and the ELL teacher. During the units, targeted support is provided to students with special needs by the special education teacher, and students with linguistic needs are sup­ported in class by the ELL teacher. The 3rd grade team at Washington Elemen­tary School in Lancaster, Pennsyl­ vania, put this idea into practice. They presented their lessons to 48 students as two teachers combined their classes to successfully make optimal use of their time with the special education and ELL teachers. Lessons were so engaging that principal Dr. Janette Hewitt commented, “Usually when you’re sending children out to go back and respond, you get some laggers.  .  .  . Not one! And there were two classes together, so it was almost 50 children. Not one of them stopped any adult; they went right back to their seats, and they knew, they knew what they wanted to write.” Lessons were presented by any one of the teachers and included instructional strategies and approaches that foster engagement, language growth, and content learning. This was an ideal inclusive structure that allowed for students to learn together and from each other. It involved coteaching and coplanning on the part of the classroom teachers, ELL teachers, and the special education teachers. We truly believe that making a dent in the dropout problem for our ELLs will take a schoolwide effort, with the grade-level or content-area teachers just as 7

The Language-Rich Classroom

invested as the ELL teachers and special education teachers. However, the CHATS framework is based on best practices and incorporates sound methodology that has the potential to improve teaching and active learning wherever it is used, whether in classrooms that are cotaught or individually taught, and whether they consist of only ELLs, dual language immersion learners, or just a few ELLs in a grade-level class. Prior to 2007, the CHATS framework had been used with reported anecdotal success in individual classrooms in Pennsylvania, but during the fall of 2007, it became the district-adopted framework for the School District of Lancaster’s District Improvement Plan. The district is a small urban district in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, located about 1½ hours west of Philadelphia and 1½ hours north of Baltimore. It’s made up of 21 schools with approximately 12,000 students and 1,000 teachers. The 2007–2008 student population was 55.5 percent Latino; 22.7 percent African American; 19.5 percent Caucasian; and 2.3 percent Asian or other. Approximately 20 percent of the students received ELL services. During the 2007–08 school year, there was an increase in state standardized test scores for the district, as well as specifically for ELLs across the district. The adoption of the framework included training for all 1,000 teachers as well as for all administrators. Several of the examples throughout this book are of units created and shared by teachers in the School District of Lancaster; unless otherwise noted, all teachers, administrators, and schools mentioned in this book are from this district.

The Diversity of ELL Backgrounds Although programming is, in fact, an important issue to review when looking at meeting ELLs’ needs, it’s important to note that the instructional needs of ELLs vary with the types of schooling experiences that the students have had in their home countries. The impact of literacy skills and schooling experiences in the first language has a strong impact on academic development in the second language (Cummins, 1979, 1980, 1984; Fillmore, 2005; Krashen, 1996; Thomas & Collier, 2002). This factor is sure to produce differences in the needs of ELLs when compar­ing, for example, an ELL who is a refugee from a war-torn country, where conditions have caused schooling to be inadequate and often interrupted, to that of a wealthy diplomat’s child who has had the advantage of the very best education in the home country, oftentimes even including prior English instruction. While the student with limited formal schooling may be struggling with experiencing 8

ELLs: An Overview

everything for the first time, including the concepts connected to literacy development, the student who has had English instruction in the home country may be struggling most with developing an ear for the language as spoken by Westerners but may be somewhat familiar with written English. Olsen and Jaramillo (1999) provided personal case studies of immigrants they described as accelerated college-bound immigrants, students who were newly arrived in the ESL sequence, the underschooled, and the long-term limited Englishproficient. Freeman, Freeman, and Mercuri (2002) modified these typologies to describe three types of ELLs: the newly arrived with adequate schooling, the newly arrived with limited formal schooling, and the long-term English learner. Each ELL type has its own characteristics, which leads to unique student needs depending on the prior schooling of the student. Let’s take a closer look at each type.

The Newly Arrived with Adequate Schooling Freeman, Freeman, and Mercuri (2002) describe the newly arrived with adequate schooling as soon catching up academically. Although these students still face the challenge of learning new concepts, they get to simply relabel the concepts previously learned. The fact that they come with first-language literacy skills is critical. Because the development of first language literacy skills supports the development of second language literacy skills, for students with adequate prior schooling academic success comes much more easily than for students who have arrived with limited formal schooling or for long-term English learners. We all know these students. They’re the ones who learn English within just a couple of years and are at the top of their class within just a few more. In our own experiences, these students have stood out because they tend to learn the big words before they learn the little words. For example, they may end up saying something like this: “The book is so .  .  . eh, beautiful. Has fantasy and, eh .  .  . adventure, and I like very much. I will like to read more like this. You have?” They use words like fantasy and adventure but miss words like it and do. The reason makes perfect sense when you think of what the students already have acquired. They come with the academic concepts like fantasy and adventure in literature, and they simply relabel these words into English. The syntax, or sentence structure, will take them longer to acquire. Also, many students with adequate schooling have taken English language classes in their home countries or used English 9

The Language-Rich Classroom

textbooks. For these students, comprehension of verbal interactions takes some getting used to, because often their teachers have spoken with a heavy accent or have taught English primarily through the use of their first language. So these ELLs have some level of familiarity with the bigger words but have had little opportunity to listen to and converse with native English speakers. We’ve found that students with adequate schooling are more comfortable seeing both the written and spoken forms of what is said. They’ll often benefit from seeing you write things out on the board, rather than simply saying them. Though ELLs with adequate schooling may score poorly on standardized tests, they’ll often earn good grades and catch up rather quickly in the classroom when compared to students who have had limited formal schooling, or students who are not literate in their first language. Figure 1.1 shows Tuan’s (pseudonym) Vietnamese writing sample. Even without being able to read Vietnamese, a teacher can ascertain useful information from a first-language writing sample. The student’s written piece appears to be by someone who has had formal schooling. For example, the sample contains diacritic marks that can determine word meanings, indicating that the student has formally learned how to place these marks and is using them with some degree of success. On further investigation, through asking a Vietnamese-speaking colleague to translate the writing and tell what unique features point to formal schooling experiences, these initial assumptions are, in fact, correct. Being careful not to overgeneralize and adding information from additional assessments (see Chapter 5) would help us identify this student as being newly arrived with adequate schooling. This under­ standing has implications for instruction and helps us ask the right questions: Has the student been exposed to English in Vietnam? How much? What concepts and skills will most likely transfer from his prior schooling to English schooling?

Students with Limited Formal Schooling The second type of ELLs are students with limited formal schooling. Although Freeman and colleagues describe this category as newly arrived with limited formal schooling, in our description, we will be dropping the “newly arrived” qualifier simply because we’ve found that often students with limited formal schooling have been in English-speaking schools for some time, so that they are not necessarily “newly arrived.” We know several migrant families, for example, who have been 10

ELLs: An Overview

Figure 1.1 Tuan’s Vietnamese Writing Sample

Tuan’s first-language writing sample consists of several indications that hint toward Tuan being a recent arrival who has had adequate schooling in his home country. Even if teachers are unable to read Vietnamese, a great deal of information can be derived from a first-language writing sample.

enrolled for brief periods in several schools. But, prior to entering English-speaking schools, they had limited or no formal schooling in their home country. Regardless of whether they are newly arrived or not, students with limited formal schooling face immense hurdles in U.S. school systems. They have experi­ enced inadequate or interrupted schooling when compared to students raised in U.S. educational systems. They have little native language literacy to rely on when learning to read in English. And while the rest of the students have long passed the need for instruction in literacy, these students frequently are just beginning. According to Freeman, Freeman, and Mercuri (2002), their math proficiency is often considerably behind that of their peers as well. Being creative with programming is essential for students’ success if they have had limited formal schooling. They will find it very difficult to succeed in a traditional 11

The Language-Rich Classroom

pullout ESL program that leaves them to flounder in the grade-level classroom for most of the day without support. Bilingual programs work best for students with limited formal schooling. In the School District of Lancaster, additional one-on-one support has taken the form of volunteers from the local university’s teacher certifica­tion programs who work one-on-one or in small groups with the students using heavily scaffolded literature. Because their needs are so different from those of native English-speaking or other ELL peers, students with limited formal schooling really benefit from intensive one-on-one support. This is especially true the older the student is when he or she first arrives in Englishspeaking schools. Figure 1.2 shows Isabel’s (pseudonym) Spanish writing sample. Isabel has had very limited formal schooling in Spanish. Because her literacy skills in Spanish were significantly below grade level when she arrived, reading and writing skills in

Figure 1.2 Isabel’s Spanish Writing Sample

Isabel arrived in 5th grade having had very limited formal schooling. Now in 8th grade, her writing skills continue to lag considerably behind those of her peers in both English and Spanish.

12

ELLs: An Overview

English have progressed at a snail’s pace. A review of her Spanish and English reading and writing assessments indicates that she is functioning at about a 1st grade level in both Spanish and English, with her Spanish slightly more advanced than her English. Figure 1.3 shows Isabel’s English persuasive letter-writing sample where she was asked to tell about a school rule that she’d like to see changed. Both writing samples are indecipherable, though the Spanish one is stronger and begins with Isabel saying, “I remember the sea and I remember . . . .” The use of the ñ in the word niño indicates that she is familiar with the Spanish alphabet and would have benefited from continued cognitive and academic growth in Spanish. Teachers of students with limited formal schooling face significant challenges for several reasons other than the obvious lack of skills and exposure to schooling that students bring. • Very little research has investigated the cognitive toll of limited formal schooling on a student’s ability to learn in later years. Therefore,

Figure 1.3 Isabel’s English Writing Sample

Isabel’s English writing sample indicates that she is progressing slowly.

13

The Language-Rich Classroom

distinguishing between special needs and the cognitive costs of limited formal schooling is extremely difficult to do. Students with limited formal schooling are quick to be referred for special needs. But the question of whether a student would have qualified for special education services had their schooling been adequate is often impossible to answer. • Few schools are designed to provide the intensive support systems that students like Isabel will need to be successful. ESL pullout programs do not offer the extent of support that students with limited formal schooling will need. In addition, because the students spend most of the day in grade-level classrooms, with little attention given to their unique needs, they pass much of their time listening to “academic noise” of which they can make little or no sense. Targeted one-on-one support isn’t likely to occur unless teachers can become creative with tapping into community and school resources. Even schools in high-incidence states, such as California and Texas, don’t have many programs designed to support students with limited formal schooling. Needless to say, schools in lowincidence states are often deeply perplexed with how to teach students like Isabel. • Children with limited formal schooling may have parents who also have had limited formal schooling, adding an extra challenge to a teacher’s ability to support and extend the learning at home, past school hours. • Languages spoken by students who have had limited formal schooling are often varied. Some have arrived from refugee camps, where low-incidence languages are spoken; others speak more common languages like Spanish. When schools have students with limited formal schooling who speak a variety of languages, it’s difficult to design bilingual programs in one language that have enough of a representation to make the program feasible. Isabel would most likely benefit from native language literacy. Whether or not bilingual education is feasible in a district, Isabel would be a good candidate for additional in-classroom, one-on-one support provided by qualified community volunteers and university reading teacher candidates who simply need an invitation to come in and help out in the classroom. 14

ELLs: An Overview

Long-Term English Learners The third type of ELL is the long-term English learner. These students have been in the country for more than 7 years, the amount of time that Cummins referred to as the 5- to 7-year time frame for developing academic language and that Thomas and Collier referred to in the 7- to 10-year time frame for students not literate in the first language. These students may have even been born in the United States. They usually don’t sound like English language learners. In fact, they may actually also be described as native English speakers. They often speak fluent English— sometimes even more fluently than their home language. Although they may have started English schooling in kindergarten, their reading is behind that of their native English-speaking peers, and they often have little idea that language is even a source of academic challenge for them. The example in Figure 1.4 shows Raul’s (pseudonym) Spanish language writing sample describing the things he loves about Puerto Rico. Raul is an 8th grader who has been in English-speaking schools for seven years. His Spanish sample indicates first-language linguistic features that are lost or were never acquired, such as the use of incorrect articles and frequent spelling errors. Raul considers himself equally strong in English and Spanish. Standardized test scores indicate that he is considered a fluent English speaker but that his English reading performance is at about a 4th grade level. His English writing sample (Figure 1.5), though better than his Spanish piece, also lags considerably behind grade-level expectations. Thomas and Collier (1997) discuss the toll of having all—or, in Raul’s case, most—of a student’s schooling in the second language. “When comparing groups, English language learners who have received all their schooling exclusively through L2 might achieve 6 to 8 months’ gain each school year as they reach the middle and high school years, relative to the 10-month gain of typical native English speakers” (p. 35). Compounded annually, the loss of 20 to 40 percent of yearly academic growth over time can lead to overwhelming academic frustration for students. Raul’s situation is not uncommon. As a matter of fact, oftentimes ELLs will linger in ESL programs because they can’t pass the reading and writing portions of the standardized tests that states require to determine eligibility for being exited from ESL programs. Moreover, if given the same tests in their native language, students might even score worse than they would in English, because most of their 15

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 1.4 Raul’s Spanish Writing Sample

An analysis of Raul’s first language writing sample suggests that he has never acquired or has lost certain skills in his Spanish development.

formal schooling has been in English. Additionally, teaching long-term English learners poses several challenges for the following reasons: • Oftentimes students are conversationally fluent, and it’s not obvious to most teachers that the student needs linguistic supports. • Long-term English learners often have come to believe in their own aca­ demic inferiority. Over the years they have met with repeated poor academic performance and may attribute their lack of success to fixed innate inability (see Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007; Schunk, 1989, 2003). • In most traditional programs, long-term English learners have often been exited from programs that offer linguistic supports. They no longer officially qualify for linguistic services for which other ELLs qualify. And although the ESL programs, as designed, may have ceased meeting their needs (especially in the case of a pullout ESL program), ELLs are 16

ELLs: An Overview

Figure 1.5 Raul’s English Writing Sample

Having spent most of his learning in English-speaking classrooms, Raul’s English reading and writing skills are stronger than his Spanish reading and writing skills. His reading and writing skills in English may lag behind those of his grade-level peers, but evidence indicates that he has mastered important reading and writing skills that, with focused scaffolding, can promote academic success. Raul would benefit from the CHATS-type strategies discussed in this book.

mainstreamed into classrooms with teachers who’ve had little or no training on how to make adaptations or scaffold instruction in the gradelevel or content-area classrooms.

Other Types of ELLs Within the three distinctions of the types of ELLs that schools will encounter— newly arrived with adequate schooling, those with limited formal schooling, and 17

The Language-Rich Classroom

long-term English learners—are a host of other distinctions that can greatly affect school success. Consider, for example, newly arrived students with adequate schooling who may have been significantly behind grade level in their countries of origin or who, in contrast, may be gifted. Either of these scenarios will have a great impact on student success. Also, the timing of the student’s arrival might have significantly affected the quality of the instruction that he or she received. Take Luci, a 9th grader with limited formal schooling. Luci may need targeted literacy development, but in many programs, she isn’t as likely to get literacy development in the 9th grade to the same degree she would have had she arrived a few years earlier. While she may have been at an advantage had she arrived in the 9th grade with adequate schooling, with limited formal schooling, she is now at a disadvantage. Additionally, on top of the three distinctions made by Freeman and colleagues, depending on program and teacher quality, other ELLs have arrived with adequate prior schooling but are placed in programs where they never really have a fair shot at success. That is, they don’t receive meaningful and targeted interventions at the level where they would have most benefited once they arrived. To further complicate matters, you also have ELLs in any of the three categories with legitimate special needs in their first language. Trying to determine this in a second language is a challenging task, especially when trying to diagnose needs for students who speak low-incidence languages. Because students won’t always neatly fit within the three distinctions described in this chapter, it’s extremely important for educators to understand the importance of administering simple assessments, such as the first-language writing sample, aimed at determining what the student’s former schooling experiences were like, what the student’s strengths are, and what the areas of need might be. Chapter 5 contains a template for conducting a first-language writing sample and explains classroom assessment for ELLs in more detail.

Meeting the Challenge with CHATS The challenge before us is to prepare every classroom and content-area teacher to teach in a way that supports both linguistic and academic development, so that all students can benefit from grade-level classrooms. That’s where CHATS comes 18

ELLs: An Overview

in. CHATS helps teachers make their content meaningful, rigorous, and accessible to both ELLs and native English speakers in their classroom. The CHATS framework will be useful to all three of the main types of ELLs described here, although of the three, the ones who will probably benefit the most are the long-term English learners. The students with limited formal schooling will benefit, too, but they will still require additional intensive support. One advantage in using CHATS is that it benefits all students, not just ELLs. The framework’s strategies will engage English language learners, students with special needs, and native English speakers alike, while providing the extra scaffolds that ELLs need to participate meaningfully and actively in the classroom. Within the School District of Lancaster, even students considered gifted were more engaged as a result of the relevant and authentic teaching that came about through the use of CHATS.

19

2

Developing Academic Language

The CHATS framework is meant to empower teachers who haven’t been formally trained in ESL with planning tools that make content comprehensible to their English language learners. At the same time, it provides ELLs with opportu­nities to build up their academic language in a place where they will most likely find it—the content classroom. Before we delve into each component of the CHATS framework in the following chapters, let’s examine academic language and the special issues it can raise with our English language learners.

Defining Academic Language At no point do English language learners wake up one day to discover that they suddenly have acquired academic language. The process of acquiring academic language is complicated and ongoing. Cummins (1991) discusses the complexity of classifying communicative activities by how cognitively intense they are and by the degree to which the surrounding context supports comprehension of what is communicated. Activities can be cognitively demanding, such as taking a science exam, or cognitively undemanding, such as chatting with a friend about afterschool plans. They can also be context embedded, such as picking out flavors at an ice cream parlor. The context of having the ice cream openly displayed and being able to point to items helps in communicating the message. Or, activities can be context reduced with few contextual supports, such as reading a study about the 20

Developing Academic Language

neurological processes affected by eating too An In-Depth Look much ice cream. If in fact a study like that For a readable, interesting, and detailed review of the many linguistic facets of exists, we imagine that it would be hard to academic language, refer to Scarcella (2003), read, with few contextual supports. cited in the references. Academic language is multifaceted, and For a look at the prism model, a holistic view of language acquisition that considers many theorists have tried to accurately the interdependence of sociocultural define the term and discuss its complexities. processes, language development, academic Most would agree that the concept of aca­ develop­ment, and cognitive development, refer to Ovando, Collier, and Combs (2003). demic language is too complex to describe in one sentence. For those interested in a more in-depth study of academic language, we have included some citations in the text box of this section. However, for the purpose of keeping this text relatively readable (with a disclaimer that we recognize its simplicity), we’ll try to fit the concept of academic language into one sentence: Academic language is the language of books. It is the type of language necessary to successfully participate in, comprehend, and communicate in cognitively demanding and context-reduced, age-appropriate activities. According to Chamot and O’Malley (1994), academic language is not usually learned outside the classroom setting. Think about the impact of this statement, if in fact it’s true. It lays a tremendous responsibility on teachers, because if academic language is more likely to be taught only in school, then it becomes imperative that we as educators go out of our way to teach it and to help students develop it. But what exactly does “it” look like? Does academic language consist of the contentspecific words that are likely to emerge in particular classes? For example, in science, would the words be science-specific terms like electron, proton, and neutron? The answer is a combination of yes and no.

Vocabulary Coxhead (2000) developed an academic word list consisting of words that were not among the first 2,000 high-frequency words used in text. Examples of words on the academic word list are albeit, despite, principle, and style. There are 570 word families in all. Coxhead’s research provides important insights in helping us examine the types of words that are problematic for ELLs. Try to define words like albeit, despite, principle, and style for ELLs, and chances are they’ll be more 21

The Language-Rich Classroom

stumped than if you’re trying to define words like solid, government, and parallelogram within the context of your content presentation. Academic language is the language of books. It includes content-specific vocabulary as well as non-content-specific vocabulary. It’s unlikely that you’ll hear students or even adults using these words within playground conversations. But whereas the non-content-specific vocabulary words may stump ELLs, most middle-class native English speakers probably have heard these words in readalouds, encountered them in books they’ve read, or heard them in the contexts of listening to adults speak in “fancy” English. An English language learner, in contrast, is likely to have difficulty not only with the content-specific words, which the teacher has made a point of explaining to all students, but the noncontent-specific words that carry enough impact as to make academic reading incomprehensible. It’s no wonder that ELLs will often read an entire page in their texts and not have a clue what they just read. They’ve mastered the decoding, but not being able to understand the “in between” words has rendered the text incomprehensible. Worse yet, during their several years in English-speaking schools, they’ve grown accustomed to reading without understanding, so that the lack of comprehension really does not cause them the same annoyance or reason to complain that it would for a native English speaker. Consider the following text taken from a 5th grade history text used in a nearby elementary school: A gentle, modest man, Grant brought a quiet dignity to the White House. During the Civil War, he had disliked the fancy trappings of high military rank. As president, he refused to take advantage of his position. When he received a $20 speeding ticket for driving his carriage too fast, he paid it. Yet Grant was not able to impose his standard on other members of the Republican Party. Despite his promise of peace, Grant’s presidency was plagued by political conflicts, corruption, and scandal. (Viola, 1998, p. 646)

In this text, which words do you think would be problematic for ELLs? For example, let’s imagine Tran, an ELL at about the intermediate level of development in his fluency. If we were to replace every word or concept that he might find incomprehensible in this text with the word BLAH, it is very possible that Tran, who has been deemed a fluent English speaker according to the school’s exit criteria, would read that same text in the following way (humor us, and read this out loud for effect): 22

Developing Academic Language

A gentle, BLAH man, Grant brought a quiet BLAH to the White House. During the Civil War, he had disliked the fancy BLAH of high military BLAH. As president, he refused to take BLAH of his position. When he received a $20 speeding ticket for driving his carriage too fast, he paid it. Yet Grant was not able to BLAH his BLAH on other members of the Republican Party. Despite his promise of peace, Grant’s presidency was BLAH by BLAH BLAH, BLAH, and BLAH.

Imagine reading an entire page in the same way. Could you do it? You could probably decode your way through such a passage, but the real question is how much of the text could you understand? In light of the impact of non-contentspecific academic language, it is perfectly understandable why many ELLs have strong decoding skills but weak comprehension in reading. Though the academic word list was designed for university students, it gives insight into the types of words that often trip up ELLs at any grade level when they are reading content texts. We assume that it is the content-specific words that will cause readers to stumble, but all readers, not just ELLs, are introduced to many content-specific words at about the same times. Instead, it’s the non-content-specific words that support and enhance comprehension of the text enough so that students simply decode their way through the text as opposed to reading for understanding. Thus, any program aimed at helping bridge the achievement gap between ELLs and their native English-speaking peers must include strategies that support the cognitive and metacognitive content-reading processes for ELLs and struggling readers in a way that enhances content understanding as well as vocabulary development. We’re not saying that schools should get rid of textbooks. After all, well-written textbooks, like the one used in this example, provide opportunities for academic language development as well as potential stumbling blocks. But we do need to find innovative ways to support ELLs in their understanding of and ability to be successful in content reading, and we need to be strategic in how we use the textbook, supplementing our content reading with additional high-interest nonfiction resources.

Grammatical Nuances When it comes to content reading, it’s not just the vocabulary that’s confusing. Informational texts are written using different grammatical patterns than what students have experienced in their picture books and chapter books. Sentences that make frequent use of the passive voice, relative and insubordinate clauses, and unfamiliar speech patterns are plentiful in informational texts that tightly 23

The Language-Rich Classroom

condense information. Take the example given earlier: “Despite his promise of peace, Grant’s presidency was plagued by political conflicts, corruption, and scandal” (Viola, 1998, p. 646). Because this sentence contains several bits of important information couched in the passive voice and begins with an introductory prepositional phrase, it leaves students struggling with more than just unfamiliar vocabulary. For example, it includes the following information densely packed into one sentence: Grant made promises of peace. Grant’s presidency was plagued. Political conflicts plagued it. Corruption plagued it. Scandals plagued it. Fang (2008) describes the differences in the types of linguistic nuances inherent in a science excerpt on DNA as compared to a fictional text. Arguing for the importance of teachers preparing students in the art of expository reading, he discusses the following ingredients that can hamper comprehension for students: • Technicality: those words that are, and aren’t, content-specific and that take on a new meaning when placed in the context of a particular sentence, such as the word plagued in the excerpt on Grant • Abstraction of nouns, such as the word trap, now made trappings in the seg­ment that reads “He had disliked the fancy trappings of high military rank” • Density: tightly packed information made more complicated through the use of lengthy complex noun forms • Authoritativeness: the tendency of informational texts to sound “much more distanced, impersonal and authoritative” (Fang, 2008, p. 481) compared to the more comfortable everyday language of most fiction In students’ production of formal texts (e.g., expository writing), the grammatical nuances of English pose an even greater challenge. According to Scarcella (2003), “the grammatical component of academic English entails all the knowledge of the grammar of everyday English and, in addition, knowledge of additional structures such as parallel clauses, conditionals, and complex causes” (p. 15). Scarcella goes on to discuss the complicated features inherent in the production of academic English by addressing various features such as noun phrases, modality systems, and, in this particular quote, verb systems. The grammatical component of academic English also entails expanded features of the English verb system. Students need to learn that knowing a verb means knowing all of its forms (word families) as well as common grammatical collocations. This means that they must learn that the 24

Developing Academic Language

word assume can be used in a range of ways and has a finite verb form (assume) and a noun form (assumption). They must learn that verbs such as sanction are generally transitive and require objects (He could not sanction her behavior) and that verb + preposition combinations (fixed expressions such as I disagree with you and He discriminates against her) cannot be changed. For example, it is not possible to disagree against or discriminate with a person. (Scarcella, 2003, p. 16)

To help ELLs be successful in content-area reading and writing, we must prepare them to be able to effectively wade through a great deal of linguistic information in order to understand the author’s purpose. Part of this can take the form of helping students become aware of their need to deconstruct complex noun phrases, as well as transform and paraphrase written text (Fang, 2008). Teaching the grammatical nuances of informational text in isolation, however, would be a daunting task for both teachers and students. Many best-selling authors themselves are probably not explicitly aware of the linguistic features of their own informational texts. Teachers are likely best served, then, by frequently exposing students to authentic, meaning­ ful experiences with these types of texts, as opposed to trying to explicitly teach all of the grammatical forms students will encounter in English.

Lack of Exposure The fact that the language in informational texts seems foreign to many students is not helped by the low prevalence of informational texts in most classrooms, especially in the primary grades. Duke (2000) examined the use of informational texts in 20 first grade classrooms. She discovered that, on average, only 3.6 minutes per day were spent with informational texts. Even more disturbing was the fact that in classrooms of students mainly from neighborhoods of low socioeconomic status (SES), the average daily exposure dropped to 1.9 minutes, with noticeably less informational text present on the classroom walls and other surfaces. These findings are cause for concern both because of the missed opportunity to prepare students for informational reading and writing they will encounter in later schooling and life, and for the missed opportunity to use informational text to motivate more students’ interest in literacy in their present lives. Of particular concern is the fact that informational text was particularly scarce in the classrooms in low-SES settings. In this study, students with less socioeconomic capital were offered fewer opportunities to develop this important form of semiotic capital—the ability to read and write informational texts. (Duke, 2000, p. 220)

The same point holds true about reading in general. Not only are students not exposed to informational texts early on, but the time spent on actual reading 25

The Language-Rich Classroom

during reading instruction may be significantly less for those students who struggle the most with reading. Gambrell, Wilson, and Gantt (2001) found that during reading instruction, good readers spent more time actually reading in school, whereas poor readers spent more time learning about how to read and practicing isolated sounds and words outside the context of meaningful stories. This observa­ tion leads us to wonder what type of motivation we are instilling in poor readers when our focus is so disconnected from what the purpose of reading really is: to understand, enjoy, and learn from great books. To quote our daughter, a 3rd grade student, “I love to read, but I hate learning to read.”

Acquiring Academic Language Academic language is the language of books. Books are where we can consistently find academic language spoken, modeled, and strategically embedded in exciting stories. Oftentimes, we educators don’t even use academic language on a regular basis in our teaching. So, if we’re going to immerse our students in academic language, we must immerse them in books. Chamot and O’Malley (1994) discuss the unlikelihood of academic language being taught at home, but for those of us who do school-like activities at home with our children, academic language is, in fact, taught at home.

Family Read-Alouds School-like discussions and family read-alouds provide a wealth of contextually rich academic language that, over time, familiarizes students with academic words that, because of their abstractness, are difficult to teach and to remember outside a meaningful context. Words like aghast, signal, clustered, furiously, lashing, churning, and froth might all be considered academic-type words, and all are found in the following excerpt from James and the Giant Peach (Dahl, 1961): They all watched, aghast. And now at a signal from the leader all the other sharks came swimming in toward the peach and they clustered around it and began to attack it furiously. There must have been twenty or thirty of them at least, all pushing and fighting and lashing their tails and churning the water into a froth. (p. 56)

Not exactly vocabulary likely to be found in playground conversation, is it? Families who read aloud together are introducing children to academic language regularly, so that by the time students see it in academic texts, they’re familiar enough with the meaning that they maintain comprehension. Even if native 26

Developing Academic Language

English speakers may not actually be ready to Recommended Resources use these words in their own speech, they’re The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research (2004) by Stephen D. Krashen. at least familiar enough with them to under­ Krashen summarizes the findings of numerous stand them in the context of a paragraph. studies done across the globe on the effects They may even experiment with these words that leisure reading has on students’ develop­ ment in reading fluency, reading compre­ in their speech or academic papers. For hension, writing, grammar, vocabulary, and example, our 8-year-old daughter recently spelling. This book is a must-read for all corrected us by saying, “Well, technically, I teachers. A language acquisition guru, Krashen writes in a light style that makes the research have two of them.” She then paused and digestible. In addition to the main text being asked, “What does technically mean?” She an easy read, all main points are summarized had experienced the word in different in the margins. This book provides wonderful topics of discussion for a faculty book circle. contexts, like books and conversations, and could understand text in which it appeared. The Read-Aloud Handbook (2001) Her attempts to try it out on us met with by Jim Trelease success, and she now uses the word frequently. Mention the name of this book to reading teachers, and chances are they’ve read it! It We use the term peripheral vocabulary has sold over a million copies and discusses because students have only a vague underthe numerous research-based benefits that stand­ing of what the words mean and how to read-alouds hold for children. This book is readable and a great classroom resource. As use them. Peripheral vocabulary is made up parents, what we love most about this book of words that are currently on that student’s is the treasury at the end that describes surelinguistic radar. They are understood within hit read-alouds by grade appropriateness. Our copy has about 40 sticky notes attached, a meaningful context, so that seeing these attesting to its usefulness. words in an academic reading doesn’t disrupt the flow of comprehension. Peripheral vocabulary becomes active vocabulary when the student fully understands its meaning and is able to successfully use it in his or her own speech or writing. The fact is that most fiction is full of academic language, particularly in the descriptive portions of the texts. Fiction is also where peripheral language is built and where academic language can most naturally and painlessly be acquired. Krashen (2004) makes an argument for this in his must-read book called The Power of Reading. He reviews numerous studies written on the impact that free voluntary reading (i.e., reading self-selected books for pleasure) has on reading fluency, reading comprehension, vocabulary, grammar, spelling, and writing for children internationally, when compared to traditional skill-based instruction. “In 51 out of 27

The Language-Rich Classroom

54 comparisons (94 percent), readers do as well as or better on reading tests than students given traditional skill-based instruction” (Krashen, 2004, p. 3). His review provides compelling evidence that significant time set aside on reading for pleasure is essential for leaps and bounds in the language development process for ELLs. Trelease (2001) makes similar arguments in his classic book The Read-Aloud Handbook (first introduced 1979), where he discusses the importance of the readaloud in raising readers and in fostering language development. He also reviews studies punctuating the significant impact that reading has on standardized reading test scores. Those in the 90th percentile read on average 37.8 minutes a day, whereas those in the 10th percentile read on average 1.1 minutes a day (p. 108). Parents typically assume that substantial time is being set aside in school to read. Is that true of your school? If so, great! But both Trelease and Krashen discuss the lack of reading that’s taking place in schools and society today. And over and over in our university classes, teachers complain An In-Depth Look that with the pressure to raise student test For a look at how one elementary school scores, there is simply no time for reading. teacher modified the silent reading experience by including scaffolds and increased structure Additionally, conflicting reports have lessened during her independent reading times, see some people’s trust in the role of free reading on Heidi Trudel’s (2007) article “Making Dataacademic development. But eliminating free Driven Decisions: Silent Reading.” reading opportunities in the classroom has the potential of driving a greater wedge in the achievement gap, since only certain types of students, not necessarily your ELLs, are likely to benefit from the readaloud experience or experience opportunities to quietly read when they go home.

A Personal Example of the Power of Read-Alouds Students come to school with vastly different literary experiences. Studies provide evidence of a strong positive correlation between read-aloud experiences and vocabulary development (Meehan, 1999; Roberts, 2008; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002; Sharif, Ozuah, Dinkevich, & Mulvihill, 2003). We’ve witnessed this phenomenon firsthand with our own children. The first chapter book that we read to our daughter Gabriela was The BFG (which stands for the Big Friendly Giant) by Roald Dahl (1982). We chose it because we’re partial to Dahl’s books and because The BFG starts fast. In other words, by the end of the first chapter, children are hooked. Gabriela was beginning 28

Developing Academic Language

kindergarten, and we thought it would be an appropriate time to begin reading chapter books. Sure enough, she became fully engaged and comprehended what was being read. One night, we decided to continue reading The BFG, only this time Caleb, our very active 3-year-old, would be joining us. We figured it would be an interesting 45 seconds or so before Caleb would start “losing it.” But, two and a half hours later, we finished The BFG, and both Caleb and Gabriela had sat for the entire time in an oversized armchair completely enthralled. Caleb’s steady flow of questions (“Is the queen going to be mean, Mommy?) assured us that he was following along and comprehending. We were amazed! We found one particular question especially intriguing. Gabriela interrupted during a climactic point in the story for some clarification. The Big Friendly Giant had “peered cautiously around the corner.” “What’s ‘peered cautiously’?” Gabriela asked. We explained this term to her, elaborating with a mime to demonstrate what peering cautiously might look like, and then we reread the section and continued with the book. Here was a 5-yearold asking what peered cautiously meant. Recommended Resources Both of these books take the work out of That’s academic language! It’s not often that searching for great read-alouds. children on the playground talk about how they peered cautiously around the corner. Hey Listen to This: Stories to Read Aloud (1992) by Jim Trelease Now, compare the literary and linguistic If you teach younger children, then you’ll want experiences of children who are frequently a copy of this book. Trelease provides excerpts read to and those of a child who has never or whole texts from 48 wonderful read-alouds that teachers can read to children ages 5 enjoyed a read-aloud prior to entering through 9 (although some stories could be school. Although we want to avoid the read to older children). He also shares risk of setting up unfair and uninformed interesting insights into the lives of the authors, along with suggestions for further generalizations and stereotypes, we also reading. want to make it perfectly clear that the concept of reading to children nightly is Read All About It! Great Read-Aloud Stories, Poems and Newspaper Articles for Preteens not a universally shared tradition that is and Teens (1993) by Jim Trelease unaffected by issues of poverty, equity, and For teachers of adolescents and teens, this access to information. To assume that all book has some wonderful selections taken from a variety of genres that can be read when students come to school with similar literary there are just a few minutes in the class period experiences is sure to set up both students to spare. and teachers for frustration. 29

The Language-Rich Classroom

Increasing Exposure to Academic Language Whether at home or school, opportunities abound for increasing students’ exposure to academic language. Let’s explore a few in the following sections.

Speaking It We don’t sound like the books we read. For the most part, even adults speak in conversational English. But what would our speech sound like if we focused on building academic language, so that students could acquire non-content-specific academic vocabulary in ways that made the language comprehensible? What if we peppered our communications with sophisticated language made comprehensible by the context of the situation or embedded synonyms in our sentences to make what we say comprehensible to students? What if we took advantage of every opportunity to teach academic language? For teachers to increase exposure to academic language, it’s important that they develop a mind-set where almost any verbal interaction is an opportunity for developing academic language. Teachers should make an intentional effort at speaking using academic language within a context that makes the meaning clear to students. Here are two suggestions for doing this: • Use synonymous tags. Use academic language (non-content-specific “fancy” words), and then buffer it with a synonymous tag that makes the meaning clear to students. For example, say, “What are some ideas for categorizing your words? How can you make categories, or different groups?” • Embed in meaningful contexts. Use academic language in such a way that the meaning of the words is obvious to students because of the context, as in “I’m sorry that you injured your knee. Let’s get a bandage.” Three 3rd grade teachers at Washington Elementary—Quirine Gladwish, Krista Grimm, and Roseann Sinkosky—decided to drench their students in selected academic vocabulary from the book The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane (DiCamillo, 2006). At the end of the unit, Grimm made the following observation: “If we used it, they used it. If we talked a lot using a certain vocabulary word or we kept coming back and using it, it would show up in their journals.  .  .  .We deliber­ ately used big words and then consistently revisited the words we wanted them to know.  .  .  . We repeated them in ways within the context of different activities.” 30

Developing Academic Language

In addition to speaking the words, these teachers also took every opportunity to present the words in written activities that would remain posted on the walls and thus be seen repeatedly. According to Gladwish, “We always made sure to use the vocabulary that we had highlighted in the summary in the time line. Vocabulary was repeatedly revisited.” The result of these efforts were student journal entries peppered with beautiful academic vocabulary used correctly by ELLs and native English speakers alike. For example, Kelvin had arrived in English-speaking schools in 1st grade knowing no English. Now in 3rd grade, he wrote, “Edward is a rabbit with penetrating blue eyes. . . . Edward was mortified when Amos and Martin took his clothes off.” Native English speakers also benefited. David, a non-ELL, wrote, “I think Edward is a self-centered rabbit, because he only cares about himself, his clothes, his eyes, his ears and his bendable elbows. I think Pellegrina is the person Edward is comforted by, because Edward thought her eyes were like stars.” Sean, also a native English speaker, wrote, “Edward feels despair. Edward feels hollowness.” Teacher Krista Grimm also noted that words like smug and conceited, which the teachers had used to describe Edward, were now being used by students to describe one another when experiencing conflicts on the playground during recess. DiCamillo’s books are great tools for developing academic language, because of the rich context in which she places these normally difficult words and the range of personalities that allow for in-depth discussions using higher levels of thinking. Keely Potter, a literacy coach, and Brianne Mull, a 4th grade teacher, also placed an intentional focus on certain words in the story The Tale of Desperaux (DiCamillo, 2003). Before reading each section, Potter selected certain words on which to ask the 4th grade class to focus, including aspiration, outrage, tragedy, and integrity. She wrote these words on strips of chart paper before reading each section and introduced them to the class by first reading the sentence in which they appeared. She then asked students to use the words when they referred to the story. “I would ask them to use our words. So, if they were going to say he was nice, they would end up saying, he had a lot of integrity,” Potter said. I told them at the beginning, “We’re going to speak these words and we’re going to write these words, so everything we do is in the context of using these words in the book.” .  .  . I set it up at the beginning of Desperaux, showing them what it means to conform, showing them what it means to be prejudiced, showing them what symbolism is and light and dark. Those to me were really big-big ideas, and so I gave it to them, and then I talked off of them. And 31

The Language-Rich Classroom

­ rianne’s idea was that they would have their own individual word walls, A–Z, on paper to B plug those in.

When asked whether she noticed if learning the words in class had transferred into usage outside the classroom, Potter immediately replied, “Absolutely.” Then she told the story of how the ELL teacher of a student at the beginning levels of language development stopped her to tell her how surprised she was to hear the student, who normally struggled with basic conversational skills, toss in the words conform and empathetic in her discussion during ESL class. “It floored her that they were able to just pull those things out,” Potter said. “So just that whole idea of immersing them and using it, so that they can own it, and they can understand it, and all of it was done with me modeling the vocabulary first before the reading.” The following excerpts from literary essays written by ELLs attest to the use of the academic language targeted by Potter and Mull. The use of imagery is also pronounced. He treated her like a princess, because he felt empathetic.  .  .  . He betrayed her and felt very guilty and sorrowful inside.  .  .  . She probably felt despair, but when her dad came back she felt like the light came back to her.—by Daniella Antoinette only cares about her looks and called Desperaux a disappointment. Antoinette made Desperaux feel sad and betrayed.—by Lois I believe that in The Tale of Desperaux, prejudice is a big theme.—by Idalia The Tale of Desperaux is not just a book. It is a book that inspires you and has life. Desperaux was born a non-conformist. He was born with his eyes open and no other mice were born like that.—by Norberto

Creating language-rich classrooms involves students hearing the language in contexts that are comprehensible and have engaged their emotions through the use of activities that are relevant and authentic. This approach leads to an excitement among the students, who then want to write and use the language in a way that allows them to express and celebrate their emotional attachment to the learning. Dr. Janette Hewitt, the principal at Potter and Mull’s school, describes the experience in this way: Here you have a class of students with special needs and ESL students, who usually we have not seen achieving at the rate and at the height that they were achieving after using the CHATS process. So, children, because of the way that they were exposed to the vocabulary, were allowed to explore it together as a class and with their teachers and with each other, by reading it, by using it in their own language, and in their writing responses.  .  .  . Sitting there and listening to them, 32

Developing Academic Language

it really was .  .  . you know, I get chills just now sitting here thinking about it, because of the way in which they were able to express themselves. It was almost like they were released from the way they had minimally responded before in their writing.

Listening to Audiobooks Another great way of exposing ELLs to academic language is to use grade-level fictional audiobooks at in-class listening centers as well as for homework. ELLs can usually understand more than they can read. This is especially true for long-term English learners and those with limited formal schooling (as described in Chapter 1). Audiobooks provide an opportunity to expose ELLs to the non-content-specific academic language that is plentiful in fiction but that the students may not yet be capable of reading on their own. Although some teachers may view audiobooks as a type of “cheating” that doesn’t promote print decoding and fluency development, just the opposite has been found to be true. Use of audiobooks has been positively linked to student motivation to read (Bomar, 2006; Cardillo, Coville, Ditlow, Myrick, & Lesesne, 2007); increased vocabulary, writing skills, and comprehension (Patten & Craig, 2007); greater verbal fluency (Cardillo et al., 2007); and an increased use of reading strategies (Littleton, Wood, & Chera, 2006). Beers (1998) found a heightened interest in reading as well as increased comprehension and engagement in Houston, Texas, classrooms that used audiobooks. She quotes a middle school teacher who recounted the following: It was incredible. By February some of the kids were wanting to take the books home at night so they could keep reading to see what was happening. By the end of that year, all 23 of the kids in that reading skills class had come up about two grade levels in their reading and all had better attitudes toward reading. Audiobooks made the difference for those kids. (p. 32)

More and more audiobooks are being added to public library systems, as well as to school libraries. The growing popularity in the use of audiobooks and the respect given to them as academic tools can be seen in the recent decision by the American Library Association to grant awards to outstanding audiobooks for children and young adults. The Odyssey Awards, first presented in 2008, look for excellence in narration, sound quality, background music, and sound effects. Audiobook publishers typically employ actors who add expression and different voices to the readings that aren’t typical in a classroom or home read-aloud. Recently, on a road trip with the family, we listened to HarperCollins’s unabridged audiobook version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (Lewis, 2000). The 33

The Language-Rich Classroom

actor who read the story, Michael York, did so with a creative expression so rich and engaging that at times when the Lion spoke, we all jumped! Here’s an example of the type of vocabulary embedded in an adventurous story like this one: Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back, into the stillness and the darkness before Time dawned, she would have read there a different incantation. She would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack, and Death itself would start working backward. (Lewis, 1978, p. 163)

When it comes to ELLs who are conversational, as well as for struggling readers, audiobooks provide a read-aloud experience that can hook students on books much more efficiently and effectively than providing reading materials that are at their reading level. Ivey and Fisher (2006) describe 15-year-old Luke, who was reading at below a 1st grade level. After receiving a copy of Dan the Flying Man, a book typically used in kindergarten, he read the title and asked, “Do you think he’s on drugs?” (p. 17). This article addresses the dilemma of students having world knowledge that far surpasses their ability to read. This is a common problem with ELLs whose reading and language skills are trumped by their interests and world knowledge. Finding suitable reading materials that will get such students hooked on reading can be very challenging. Audiobooks are one solution because they present exciting, age-appropriate stories loaded with beautiful academic language that can be painlessly acquired through listening and comprehending grade-level literature that engages students’ interests. At Ross Elementary School, audiobooks were made available to parents to sign out through parent resource centers. The audiobooks were meant to be used at home as alternative homework assignments Recommended Resources that would provide more “bang for the buck” For a free audiovisual literary experience, than if a teacher gave overly challenging try logging on to www.storylineonline.net. This is a great Web site with popular storybooks homework for which many parents could not read aloud by famous actors and actresses. As provide support. During a Latino-focused stor­ies are read, the story­book pictures are parent workshop, where approximately 20 laid out on your computer screen with specific emphasis placed on certain aspects of a parents participated, parents were asked to picture at a time. The Web site is sponsored by sign out an audiobook and report on it the the Screen Actor’s Guild Foundation and is following week. Books ranged in complexity very nicely done. from Frog and Toad Together (Lobel, 1972) to 34

Developing Academic Language

Frindle (Clements, 1996) to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (Lewis, 1978). Parents reported back the following week that they enjoyed the audiobooks just as much as their children had. At a reunion dinner eight months later, several of the parents mentioned that they still frequently signed out audiobooks from the parent resource center and popped them into the CD or tape player to listen to while they ride with their children in the car. Camille Hopkins, principal at Ross, has observed that the real benefit of audiobooks is that families who wouldn’t typically partake in read-alouds are now exposing children to books they might otherwise miss. Jackie Martin-Hair, principal of Wharton Elementary School, decided to implement a schoolwide book club using the audiobook version of The Tale of Desperaux by Kate DiCamillo (DiCamillo, 2003b). For a few minutes every day, all activity at Wharton ceased while an audiobook chapter was played over the school’s announcement system. Every child and every adult was given a copy of the book to keep, including the building secretary. Everyone was asked to silently read along while the audiobook played. At the end of the chapter, selected 4th or 5th grade students, who had been trained in the art of asking great questions, modeled a brief book club dialogue over the announcement system and then left the students with a “question to go.” Examples of questions included: “What do you think Migg hopes for, and how will she achieve it?” and “Why is hope ridiculous, wonderful, and powerful?” These questions to go allowed all students an opportunity to reflect on and discuss important issues with their classmates. Jackie Martin-Hair’s motives were simple, “I want children to value books.  .  .  . This approach hooks kids that wouldn’t normally be hooked. One little guy, who can normally be a little bit of a challenge, said to me, ‘Mrs. Hair, I love the book, don’t you love Desperaux? It gave me goosebumps.’ ” In summary, audiobooks immerse students in comprehensible academic English in a motivating way that also has a positive impact on reading performance and attitudes about reading. Audiobooks “enable students to internalize the basic structure of a narrative, exemplify the structural difference between written language and oral language, decode printed text, provide a speech model, and help improve English pronunciation” (St. Onge, Scalia, & Vega, 2008, p. 48). As these experiences build students’ peripheral vocabulary, their comprehension in content-area reading will also be positively affected. 35

The Language-Rich Classroom

Appreciating the Power of the Home Language Although this book is focused on helping students develop academic English, it’s important to reiterate that the home environment plays a critical role in attaining this goal as well. We’ve already discussed the value of family read-alouds. Now let’s explore further how we can facilitate home environments that foster academic language development at home. Believe it or not, the best way to do that is to encourage and applaud the use of the primary language in the home. This goal is not just a politically correct wish of ours. It’s grounded in solid research. As discussed earlier, we know that students who arrive in English-speaking schools with several years of adequate prior schooling in their home language are the students in the best position to excel academically. We also know, according to studies looking at long-term student performance, that students in well-constructed bilingual programs, specifically dual language immersion programs, outperform students in ESL programs. So, what are low-incidence schools to do if their populations of ELLs make bilingual education impractical, because of the wide variety of languages represented? One approach is to recognize and strategically work toward enlisting parents’ support. We do parents a disservice by making it seem that we have it all under control. The fact is we need them! Many parents are willing to provide support, but they simply don’t know that support is needed in the first place or how to go about providing it. We’ve witnessed many programmatic changes to ESL programs in area schools in the Northeast, where we now live. In Pennsylvania, one of those changes is a state-mandated parent orientation that all districts must provide to parents of English language learners. In compliance with this new regulation, several districts took the route of providing a PowerPoint “tour” of the ESL program, introducing parents to the ESL curriculum, ESL teachers, and useful tidbits of information to help families cope with the transition to the American school system. We love the idea of a parent orientation night, but we advocate a much different approach to its implementation. We see parent orientation night as an opportunity to impress on parents the importance of continuing the learning process at home in the home language and to offer examples of how to do so. We also see it as an opportunity to enlist parents who speak the home languages of our students as volunteers in the learning process during school hours.

36

Developing Academic Language

Both of our children are enrolled in a Spanish immersion program where their schooling is given almost entirely in Spanish from kindergarten to 5th grade. Neither of them spoke Spanish prior to entering school. Few, if any, of their class­ mates spoke Spanish as a home language, as is the case for most of the children who have ever been in the program. The program has existed for over 13 years, and students have generally done well in school once exited into all-English programs at 6th grade. Why do they do well on exit? Because parents assume the role of teachers at home. English literacy is never actually introduced until 3rd grade, but most of these students are literate in English by the end of 1st grade, due primarily to efforts in the home. In other words, it is the parents who are providing a dual language immersion program for the children, where only a Spanish immersion program exists at school. As people well versed in the culture of American schooling, the parents of students in this program, for the most part, understand the role of literacy and its effect on our children’s future success. As educators, we need to let parents of ELLs in on this secret. Parents ought to be introduced to what the research says about the importance of the home language. We desperately need their help in the home language, especially in schools where bilingual programming is impractical or impossible. If ELLs Need to Learn English, Why Encourage Parents to Speak to Them in the Home Language?

In our workshops, we’re struck by how often educators indicate that they’ve assumed that parents should speak to their children in English in order to support their English development in school. Research does not support this idea. In fact, research overwhelmingly supports the fact that the stronger the academic language development in the first language, the easier and faster the transition will be into English (Cummins, 1979, 1980, 1984; Fillmore, 2005; Krashen, 1996; Thomas & Collier, 1997, 2002). Actually, if you think through this concept logically, it should make a whole lot of sense for several reasons. First, transfer theory, or the linguistic interdependence principle proposed by Cummins (1991), points to the interdependence of English and the home language. Studies that support transfer theory (Lindsey, Manis, & Bailey, 2003; Ordonez, Carlo, Snow, & McLaughlin, 2002; Thomas & Collier, 1997, 2002) demonstrate how proficiency transfers from the home language to the second language. The stronger

37

The Language-Rich Classroom

a child’s foundation in the home language, the stronger and more quickly he or she will acquire a second language. This is true regardless of native language similarities or dissimilarities to English (Chan, 2004; Gottardo, Yan, Siegel, & Wade-Woolley, 2001; Thomas & Collier, 1997). In addition, evidence suggests that maintaining the home language reading skills increases reading skills and vocabulary in English (Pichette, Segalowitz, & Connors, 2003; Roberts, 2008). Second, Krashen (2003) provides a useful representation of language acquisition in his “input hypothesis.” He uses the concept of i + 1, saying, “If i represents the last rule we have acquired, how do we move from i to i + 1, where i + 1 is the next structure we are ready to acquire? The input hypothesis claims that we move from i to i + 1 by understanding input containing i + 1” (p. 4). So, the input has to be just slightly above the level of language acquisition that the student currently has for the student to acquire new language. Not too far below (i – 10), or the student learns nothing; and not too far above (i + 10), or the student has no comprehension of what is being said. If this hypothesis is true (and in light of theories by Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget), then ELLs’ parents, who oftentimes speak very little English themselves but who can be truly helpful in their children’s language acquisition process, will need to communicate using English slightly above the level that their children already have. In our experience, most parents of ELLs wouldn’t be able to do this. If parents speak English, the English that they speak is minimal. What’s more likely is that students will surpass their parents’ levels of English acquisition within a very short time. If we are asking parents to speak to their child in English and the English that parents use amounts to i – 10, then that scenario is clearly not going to help the child. Plus, we’ve probably compounded the problem by inadvertently making parents feel disempowered and even guilty over being unable to help their child. On top of that, we sever parent-child communication if parents are made to feel guilty for communicating in the home language. We know of several children in the intermediate and secondary grades who are unable to speak to their parents in their home language. Instead, the parents speak to their children in Spanish, and the children respond in English. That’s fine for giving a child

An In-Depth Look For a reader-friendly article that provides snapshots of students’ experiences as well as strategies for bringing the home language into the classroom through student-created materials, refer to Cummins et al. (2005).

38

Developing Academic Language

commands or asking basic questions, but this type of interaction will only go so far. At some point, the desire to have an important, analytical conversation will be hampered by the limited comprehension of academic vocabulary that the child and parents have in their weaker language. Instead, we ought to encourage continual primary language growth at home in ways that support the ability of students to think critically and participate in deeply analytical conversations at home and in the home language. Third, think about how many concepts you’ve learned where language was critical to understanding them. For example, you understood the basic concept of pain without needing the label pain attached, so in the case of pain, the concept was not so linguistically dependent. But what about the concept of democracy or photosynthesis? Would these concepts have been developed for you without the aid of language? Probably not. These concepts are linguistically dependent in that they require quite a bit of context set up before they can be understood. Compared to pain, the term democracy takes a lot more explaining. For a student who has developed these concepts and terms in the home language, all a teacher has to do is support them in relabeling the terms—for example, relabeling from democracia to democracy. Simple translation is all that’s required. But for a student who has Recommended Resources Reading A–Z is an electronic subscription service never developed the concept and is only that, for about the same price as 10 trade paper­ conversationally fluent, the concept is not backs, gives teachers access to over 2,000 likely to be as easily learned. When we fiction and nonfiction printable books in English, Spanish, and French. This resource provides an withhold first-language development from easy way of sending Spanish literature home. students by encouraging English use in the Because the books also come in English, books home, we also withhold important concept that are read at home can still be revisited in the classroom, even if you don’t speak Spanish. development. Thomas and Collier (1997) Vicki Legath, a teacher at Burrowes Elementary advise that “it is extremely important that School, especially loves the nonfiction readers cognitive development continue through a for building background knowledge on highly engaging topics. “I gave my students ‘Bedside child’s first language at least through the Book Baskets’ which they kept at home to store elementary years” (p. 43). Concepts, like their take-home readers. I know it was a helpful many other linguistic skills, transfer from tool for encouraging and reinforcing reading.” All of the ELL teachers in our district have a one language to another. subscrip­tion. For more information on Reading All of these reasons point to one conclu­­ A–Z, check out its Web site: www.readinga-z.com. sion: we should encourage parents to use 39

The Language-Rich Classroom

and maintain the home language. We do students a grave disservice when we strip them of their use of the home language by encouraging their parents not to use it. On the contrary, we should be making overt, intentional efforts at promoting literacy in the home language by stocking our libraries with primary language resources aimed at facilitating and furthering this effort at home. We’re always surprised by how few teachers and administrators know this fact. If this is the case in your school, then do your students a favor by spreading the word.

Incorporating Relevance and Authenticity Students learn best when they want to learn. So, it goes without saying that an important aspect of our jobs as educators is to get students to want to learn. We can do that by injecting our curriculum with authenticity and relevance. In this book, we will define relevance as the students’ understanding that the information they’re learning is important to them for their own intrinsic reasons. We will define authenticity as the ability to immerse the students in real-world experiential activities. Let’s consider a class learning about persuasive letter writing. The teacher will want to strategically embed this topic in a unit that she believes will so impassion students that they will want to try writing effective persuasive letters. As a result of this authentic real-world activity, they see the relevance in learning to write persuasive letters well. This authenticity provides a perfect opportunity for a teacher to demonstrate effective and ineffective ways to write persuasive letters, and for students to excel in the art of persuasive letter writing for real-life purposes. Jennifer Reinhart, assistant principal at Washington Elementary School, said the following after visiting a lesson designed using these CHATS principles: It was an internal desire, an internal change, and it was almost like they could have cared less that I was there. You know, a lot of times they want to run up and show you what they’ve done. But it wasn’t like that. It was an internal motivation for them. They wanted to get down on paper what they were thinking about. They were driven to do that, but they didn’t have to show it to anyone, because it was meaningful for them.

Over the years, authenticity and relevance have become the focus of dropout prevention initiatives in the nation as well as worldwide (Klein, 2008; Rumberger, 2008; Young, 2008). These studies report relevance as one of the critical measures for stemming the flow of dropouts in schools where teachers present materials in meaningful ways. 40

Developing Academic Language

Several studies have cited a lack of relevance as a major cause for students dropping out. In the report entitled The Silent Epidemic, a study that surveyed 470 dropouts nationwide, close to half (47 percent) of teens cited boredom and disengagement as the number one reason for dropping out (Bridgeland, DiIulio, & Morison, 2006). Similarly, in Tanner’s (1990) study, dropouts “objected to particular teachers, teachers in general, specific subjects, the irrelevance of the curriculum as a whole.” Tanner quotes one male respondent as saying, “I’m never going to go to Spain or use what I learnt about Spain or Europe or nothin’. I’m never going to be there, so why should I know about it?” (p. 80). The first of five recommendations in The Silent Epidemic to prevent dropout states, “Improve teaching and curricula to make school more relevant and engaging and enhance the connection between school and work.” The report goes on to say that, of the students surveyed, “four out of five (81 percent) said that there should be more opportunities for real-world learning and some in the focus groups called for more experiential learning” (Bridgeland et al., 2006, p. iv). This need was echoed by another study with high school students in Virginia where researchers found that “high school students in this sample had a clear preference for instructional activities that could be described as ‘authentic.’ They described their preferred instructional strategies as ones that were hands-on, and that contained opportunities for debate and discussion” (Certo, Cauley, Moxley, & Chafin, 2008, p. 32). In this study, researchers found an unintended negative consequence of a heavy emphasis on broad curricular coverage to meet academic standards: “the quality of instruction is less engaging to students” (p. 26). Several students also used the word rushed to describe the pace at which material was being introduced. According to one student, “They [the teachers] have really rushed us. You know how I said I like to take my time to learn what they’re doing? There’s none of that with the SOL [Standards of Learning]. It’s just push, push, push all year long, and no breaks or anything like that” (p. 33). Yet, the acquisition of skills doesn’t have to come at the cost of authenticity. Purcell-Gates, Duke, and Martineau (2007) studied the impact of authenticity and explicit teaching on learning to read and write. Authentic activities engaged students in meaningful reading and writing, such as the creation of a brochure as requested by a nature preserve after a class trip. In authentic classrooms, informational science texts were read, not just for the purposes of learning to read 41

The Language-Rich Classroom

or to answer questions at the end of a chapter, but “to acquire information about the natural world that one needs or wants to acquire for other than school-only purposes (e.g., other than passing a test or answering comprehension questions)” (p. 15). In addition, these researchers found that it was the degree of authenticity to which 2nd and 3rd grade children were exposed that was “impressively related to their degree of growth in their abilities to both comprehend and produce such texts.” These findings led the researchers to “support the theoretical claim that language forms are best learned within the context of authentic use” (p. 41). Although authenticity and relevance are important for meaningful teaching, it’s often difficult for content teachers in the secondary grades to step back and see that their students don’t quickly share their passion for the content area being taught. Gus Patukas, a literacy coach at J. P. McCaskey High School, explained how CHATS has helped content teachers step outside their sole focus—content— to shift toward helping students see the relevance in the content: In secondary schools, the teachers focus on the C—the area of specialty. That’s why they became teachers, because they love their content. But the good thing about the framework is that in order to teach well, the content is one piece to consider. So, you could love mathematics, but in order to teach it well, you have to plan with the five components in mind. For example, you can know the Battle of the Bulge or the Spanish Armada Conquest, chapter and verse, but when you’re a student sitting in a classroom, you’re thinking ‘Who cares? What reference does that have to me? How should I think about that?’ CHATS reminds teachers of the different areas that they have to address in their effective teaching of their area of specialty.  .  .  . I’ve seen more engagement on the part of the teachers and the students using this method.

Teaching in authentic and relevant ways requires that we trust that every student has an inherent need and desire to learn and connect with a deeper understanding of life and the world around us. It expects that we create high expectations and allow students to pursue questions that will immerse them in real-life learning. Typically, it is the type of education that we think of when we think of gifted education. However, such instruction is what education ought to be for all students, whether they are ELLs, have special needs, or are native English speakers. Jennifer Reinhart, the assistant principal of Washington Elementary, described this phenomenon when discussing her observations of teachers using the CHATS framework. You read in research here and there where they tell the teacher “This is the gifted class,” and it really may be a special education class or a class of low achievers, and because she believes that to be true, they end up doing amazing. To me that’s what this was. It was the teacher’s belief 42

Developing Academic Language

s­ ystem. And I felt like when I walked into those classes .  .  . [teachers] talked to them in a way that they truly believed these are really intelligent kids. I wanted my children to be in those classes. They didn’t talk down to them because they were language learners. They maintained the high expectations, they modeled it, and then they got it.

CHATS: Five Tools for Supporting Academic Language Growth in the Classroom The CHATS framework helps teachers effectively meet the needs of ELLs, students with special needs, and native English speakers in mixed multilingual classrooms. Each letter in the acronym represents an important ingredient in making content and language accessible to ELLs: C = content reading strategies H = opportunities for higher-order thinking skills development A = assessment that is in the hands of the teacher T = total participation techniques S = scaffolded instruction Thomas and Collier (1997) found that students whose teachers had experienced intensive staff development programs in current approaches with ELLs progressed more quickly over the long term compared to students in classes taught using traditional methods. The successful approaches encouraged students to work collaboratively and interact in a socioculturally supportive environment. In contrast, “when English language learners (ELLs) initially attend segregated, remedial programs, these students do not close the achievement gap after reclas­ sification and placement in the English mainstream. Instead, they maintain or widen the gap in later years” (Thomas & Collier, 2002, p. 313). In light of research like this, the CHATS framework provides teachers with theoretically sound ways to create active, rather than passive, classrooms where teaching is based on best practices that help all students simultaneously develop language and comprehend content. Each of the following five chapters will focus on one of the components in the framework, with examples of how teachers can use them in their planning.

43

3

C = Content Reading Strategies

In CHATS, the C stands for content reading strategies, because it is within the content reading that students will experience much of their frustration and where gaps in comprehension of academic language are most noticeable. The C portion of the five-piece framework aims at supporting ELLs and native English speakers alike, so that they can experience success with informational texts. We are pretty convinced that children do not come to school with a burning passion to conjugate a verb or an overwhelming desire to write a persuasive essay. The things that matter to them are usually not related to how grammar works or how to identify a prefix and a suffix. Instead, the things that matter to them are questions of wonder related to how the world works. What happens to the water in puddles after it rains? What makes volcanoes erupt? How come that boat can hold so much weight and not sink? Ask elementary-age children what their favorite subject is, and many will say science. Investigate a little further as to the amount of science taught in their class­ rooms, and you’ll often be disappointed by what you discover. The same can be said for social studies in elementary classrooms. As the pressure to perform well on standardized reading and math tests increases, the spotlight on the things that matter to many students becomes dimmer and dimmer. Yet, content classrooms like science and social studies often contain some of the best opportunities for language acquisition. 44

Content Reading Strategies

Content and Language Together Language is best acquired in the content classroom. Hakuta, Butler, and Witt (2000) investigated the amount of time to acquire academic language and concluded that the expectation of English acquisition happening through short-term, intensive, language-focused programming is misguided and unrealistic. “A much more sensible policy would be one that sets aside the entire spectrum of the elementary grades as the realistic range within which English acquisition is accomplished, and plans a balanced curriculum that pays attention not just to English, but to the full array of academic needs of students” (p. 14). Attention to “the full array of academic needs” of our students is precisely what the CHATS framework aims to give. Language becomes a natural by-product of well-planned, interactive, and engaging content lessons presented in ways that facilitate the acquisition of academic language. With appropriate teacher scaffolding, ELLs in the grade-level classroom can encounter rich academic language development opportunities that are often absent in pullout ESL programs, which frequently focus on making students conversational. Unfortunately, what’s likely to happen once ELLs exit pullout programs is that they will have reached their highest level of academic performance at the point of exit. After exit, their performance becomes stagnant or even slips. Moreover, the achievement gap between ELLs and native English speakers described in Chapter 1 is not closed but instead widens (Thomas & Collier, 2002). English language learners who have attained conversational proficiency and have been exited from ESL pullout programs are often seen by teachers as not needing linguistic support once they pass the most obvious initial stages of language development. In other words, at the point where many students struggle most with the demands of the academic curriculum, they no longer receive the linguistic supports necessary for success. Often these students are summarily dumped in grade-level classrooms and written off as no longer needing support in language development, when in fact the need for support is just as great, if not greater. What’s called for is a schoolwide effort toward providing the necessary scaffolds for success for all students (see Chapter 7 for more on scaffolding). Our goal in CHATS classrooms is to bathe students in academic language and complex linguistic features in ways that are relevant and authentic, so that acquiring 45

The Language-Rich Classroom

academic language and proficiency in reading and writing becomes, for the most part, a by-product of the activities inherent in our classrooms. The two elements contained in the C portion of the CHATS framework consist of the following: • Comprehension strategies: Teacher-mediated comprehension of informational texts • Metacognition: Student-mediated comprehension of informational texts Both of these elements function best under the umbrella of authenticity and relevance. In Chapter 7 on scaffolding, we discuss in greater detail some strategies for engaging student interest in meaningful topics of study.

Comprehension Strategies: Teacher-Mediated Comprehension Because academic language is more likely to be found in books than in the imprecise language of conversations or even teacher lectures, it’s vital that teachers use content reading strategies in their lessons and teach students how to use them. Teachers can provide activities that help students focus on comprehension of texts as opposed to simply decoding their way through texts. In this section, we present and explain teaching strategies for helping students make sense of informational texts. These strategies provide for both individual comprehension and student interaction.

Found Poems Found poems (initial developer unknown) are an excellent way of placing the focus on comprehension once students have completed an initial reading of a content passage. Here’s How Found Poems Work

1. Ask students to underline 50 words that were significant to understanding the passage. Or, simply ask students to choose any set number of words or sentences from a passage. 2. Ask students to write the words on a separate piece of paper. They can record them using no frills or adding creative touches by repeating phrases. The resulting list of words (isolated or chosen from connected phrases) is then the found poem.

46

Content Reading Strategies

3. Ask students to share their poems with at least two others with whom they normally don’t sit. Here are examples of completed found poems based on readings about the Declaration of Independence and Frederick Douglass (original readings from which found poems were derived, Viola, 1998, pp. 212, 404–405). The Declaration of Independence It began with the statement that all people have certain rights. People create governments to secure rights. The king had not allowed laws necessary for the public good. Congress promised to support independence with their lives, fortunes and sacred honor. Frederick Douglass Freedom bound—Barely 16 Freedom bound—Headed for trouble Freedom bound—Learned to read Freedom bound—A slave—had to be broken Freedom bound—Edward Covey Freedom bound—Violence Fear and Overwork Freedom bound—Frederick—Received his first flogging Freedom bound—Broken in body, soul, and spirit Freedom bound—Not afraid to die Freedom bound—Fought for two hours—Covey gave up Freedom bound—The turning point Freedom bound—Escaped Freedom bound—A free man!

Why Found Poems Are Good for ELLs

Found poems are a low-risk activity for ELLs. Students get to the essence of what the article is all about with just a few key words. The focus is entirely on the students’ comprehension of the text, as opposed to their writing ability. Once students have initially read the text, the activity facilitates a review of the text and asks students to analyze the words and their significance to the main point of the passage. The final product makes it clear to teachers whether students understand what they’ve read. Both ELLs and native English speakers are likely to experience the same type of success with this type of poem, with minimal need for editing. As students share

47

The Language-Rich Classroom

their poems with others, they quickly catch on that they can add artistic flair to their poems simply by repeating a certain phrase, as with the phrase freedom bound in one of the example poems.

Content-Based “I Am” Poems “I am” poems (initial developer unknown) are typically used as a way for students to introduce themselves and for teachers to build community in the classroom, but they are also great ways of getting students to think about content in meaningful ways. Here’s How “I Am” Poems Work

1. After students have finished a reading, assign a historical figure or scientific object on which to write an “I am” poem. I am (two characteristics you have) I wonder (something you’re curious about) I hear (an imaginary sound) I see (an imaginary sight) I want (a desire) I am (the first line of the poem repeated) I pretend (something you pretend) I feel (a feeling about something imaginary) I touch (an imaginary touch) I worry (something that really bothers you) I cry (something that saddens you) I am (the first line of the poem repeated) I understand (something you know is true) I say (something you believe in) I dream (something you believe in) I try (something you really make an effort about) I hope (something you hope for) I am (the first line of the poem repeated)

48

Content Reading Strategies

2. Ask students to share their completed poems with at least two others with whom they normally don’t sit. Science Example

Social Studies Example

I am a dormant volcano I wonder when my time will come I hear a rumbling beneath the earth’s surface I see the clouds out of my vast crater I want to explode! I am a dormant volcano

I am a wealthy Pompeii villager I wonder what the future of this great city holds I hear an explosion I see pumice, ash and panic I want to escape this catastrophe I am a wealthy Pompeii villager

I pretend I could shoot lava out of the earth I feel the heat beneath me I touch the land all around I worry I will never breathe fire I cry because I want to breathe fire I am a dormant volcano

I pretend I have a secure future I feel sad that I may not be remembered I touch the freshly painted frescoes I worry that no one will ever see them I cry for the children I am a wealthy Pompeii villager

I understand that it has been hundreds of years I say, come on magma, join me I dream that I will fill the earth I try to explode I hope I can someday feel again I am a dormant volcano

I understand that our city will vanish I say: We must run! I dream that one day, we’ll be found I try to think about the good times I hope that some will escape I am a wealthy Pompeii villager

Why Content-Based “I Am” Poems Are Good for ELLs

“I am” poems are another low-risk activity that doesn’t require outstanding skills in expository writing. Completed poems give evidence of student comprehension and allow students to synthesize what they have learned into a writing piece that engages their emotions. Once again, the focus is placed on comprehension of concepts learned. And whereas asking students to share what they’ve learned may result in blank stares, the prompts in the “I am” poems elicit responses from students so that what they’ve learned is simply “drawn out” of them. The poems also allow students to place themselves in the shoes of historical figures or to deeply understand and analyze scientific concepts.

49

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 3.1 Handout of Concept Cards

Volcano

Erupting

Lava

Hot Melted Rock

Mountain

Blast

Rock

Ash

Deadly Gases

Destructive

Deadly

Earth’s Crust

Planet

Hardened Rock

Create New Land

Magma

Cools

Lava

Dormant Volcanoes

Explosion

Active Volcanoes

Ring of Fire

Pacific Ocean

Extinct Volcanoes

Concept Mapping Developed by Novak and Gowin (1984), concept mapping has been researched primarily in the area of teaching science. Studies linked to concept mapping attest to its effectiveness in helping students deeply understand scientific concepts (Güvenç & Ün Açikgöz, 2007; Kelly, 2007; Kinchin, 2000; Martin, 1994; Starr & Krajcik, 1990). In addition to science, we have found concept mapping to be helpful in teaching any content area with students from grades 3 through adult­ hood, although its use has been studied with younger students who have also benefited (Stice & Alvarez, 1987). Here’s How Concept Mapping Works

Note: You’ll need scissors, glue sticks, and a teacher-prepared handout of concept cards (Figure 3.1).

50

Content Reading Strategies

1. Ask students to cut out their concept cards and arrange them into categories. It is useful to designate one card as the concept map title. In the example in Figure 3.2, the title is “Volcanoes.” If your classroom still has an overhead projector, it also helps to make a transparency of the cards and model placement of the title and a few subcategories. 2. Once the students have categorized their concept cards, ask them to share their concept map with two other people. Remind students that concept maps can be different and still be “right.” Figure 3.2, for example, shows concept cards that could have been placed in several different places and still have made sense. 3. After interacting with peers, students can make any final changes and then glue down their concept cards. 4. Students should connect the categories with words and phrases so that they can read through the concept map without ever leaving the page. Why Concept Mapping Is Good for ELLs

Concept maps are excellent tools for taking the focus off simply reading complex passages and placing it instead on understanding what students are reading, and on the connections inherent in what they are reading. The best part of concept mapping, we believe, is found in step 4. The first thing that we notice when students receive a handout of concept cards is that they usually have a vague understanding of how the cards fit into categories. But when students are asked to complete step 4, connecting the cards using words or phrases, this is usually when students will refer back to the text, using it as a resource to guide them in understanding the precise nature of the relationships between the concepts. For ELLs, writing the linkages is a scaffold for informational writing, though concept maps are useful for any type of student. By the time students are finished with the concept maps, they have a very good understanding of what they’ve read and can coherently explain it to others. The map can also serve as an assessment tool for teachers and as a reference or study guide for students. A variation to the teacher-created handout of concept cards is to give students blank cards and have them create their own concept cards based on the themes in the readings that they feel are the most important.

51

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 3.2 Volcanoes Concept Map

52

Content Reading Strategies

Guided Reading Procedure (GRP) The guided reading procedure (Manzo, 1975, cited in Manzo & Manzo, 1990) is an activity that gets students to interact and review informational texts that they’ve read. The material is reviewed four times and thus represents a great use of class time for the teacher. The procedure for GRP, with some modifications, is as follows. Here’s How the Guided Reading Procedure Works

1. In small groups of three or four, students read the passage. When they’re finished, they turn the passage over. 2. The small group identifies things that they remember about the passage. The scribe takes notes with about 10 facts identified (or whatever number seems reasonable). 3. The reading is again flipped over, and the group verifies the information and corrects any misinformation. Members add any new information that they feel was important but left out. 4. The group then places the information in the sequential order in which it was presented. This step forces them to discuss the events or concepts and solidify the concepts in their mind. 5. The group decides what the main point of the article is and narrows it down to one sentence, which the scribe writes down. This step causes students to analyze the importance of what they’ve learned and narrow it down. Why the Guided Reading Procedure Is Good for ELLs

The GRP allows students to collaboratively review what they’ve read four different ways. It emphasizes comprehension of informational reading and allows students to go back and fix any misunderstandings or forgotten parts. Manzo and Manzo (1990) provide this tip for teachers who are uncomfortable with silence: “In a typical GRP lesson, students may say little or nothing on the first invitation to recall and recite what they have read.  .  .  . If you can force yourself to wait silently for a few (seemingly interminable) seconds, the flow of the language and thought will begin” (p. 207).

Responding to Headings The SQ3R Study strategy, developed by Robinson (1946), asks students to survey a reading, turn headings into questions, read to find answers, recite the 53

The Language-Rich Classroom

answers out loud, and then review what they’ve learned in the form of notes. This frequently used strategy met with success in many classrooms when it was not overused (the same would be true for any strategy). We’ve adapted it here to simply focus on turning the headings into questions and then, in pairs or small groups, reviewing responses to the questions. Here’s How Responding to Headings Works

1. Ask students to turn the headings into questions and then write the questions down on the left side of a T-chart. 2. Students read to answer the questions, filling in their answers on the right side of the T-chart (Figure 3.3). 3. Students share answers in small groups of two to four. Why Responding to Headings Is Good for ELLs

Strong readers will naturally go through this process as they read. Headings alert readers of what to expect, but not all readers understand this important fact. Turning the headings into questions causes ELLs to read for a purpose. By writing down the questions and the answers, ELLs maintain their focus while reading. The ensuing interactions with classmates allow students to verify and fine-tune how they answered their questions.

Written Conversations Written conversations (Daniels & Zemelman, 2004) are a great way of getting students to interactively react to what they’ve read. Everyone participates at the same time, making this a total participation technique, as well as a great way to debrief what students have read. Here’s How Written Conversations Work

1. In small groups of three or four, students read the text and then do a quickwrite (see Chapter 6) of approximately three minutes regarding anything related to what they just read. Tell students that they may keep it informal and ignore perfect spelling and grammar in this context. 2. Each student passes his or her paper to the left. Now, each person should have a peer’s quick-write. Ask all students to read their classmate’s quickwrite and respond in writing (no talking). 54

Content Reading Strategies

Figure 3.3 Responding to Headings

Responding to Headings Headings into Questions

Answers to Questions

Source: Adapted from “SQ3R Study Strategy” in Effective Study by F. P. Robinson, 1946, New York: Harper.

55

The Language-Rich Classroom

3. After the notes have been circulated and added to by each group member, the papers are passed to their original owner and read by the owner. Students are then given liberty to talk about the quick-writes and the reading materials. Why Written Conversations Are Good for ELLs

This activity is engaging and allows for students to have a means of expression. All students get to react to what they’ve read at the same time, and all students get to process collectively what they’ve learned. Daniels and Zemelman (2004) call this activity “legalized note-passing.” Just when students think they have nothing more to say, they read a peer’s response, which elicits more feedback from them. At the end of the activity, it’s always exciting to get the original note back and see how others have responded.

Historical (or Literary) Role-Play A historical role-play lets students place themselves in the shoes of whomever they are studying. The role-play prep sheet scaffolds the experience by prompting students to find essential information for effectively conducting their role-play. Here’s How the Historical Role-Play Works

1. Assign small groups of students to a specific event centered around a theme that’s being studied. Try to find images that will help the characters visualize their role. For example, the theme might be the American Revolution, and the event might be the crossing of the Delaware River, with the image being the famous painting George Washington Crossing the Delaware by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze. 2. Provide students with the prep sheet (Figure 3.4) and ask them to research the information surrounding the event, so that they can re-enact a specific point in history with historical accuracy. 3. At the end of the role-play, the teacher or another student can act as a “Meet the Characters” talk show facilitator, asking questions from the prep sheet or taking questions from audience members. 4. Once students are ready to present, give all of the other students a presentation grid (described next in this chapter), so that they can record 56

Content Reading Strategies

Figure 3.4 Historical Role-Play Prep Sheet The historical figure I will be role-playing is

.

This person was alive around the years

.

Most memorable events in this historical figure’s life:

Little-known facts about this historical figure:

The defining moment in this historical figure’s life:

My favorite and least favorite qualities about this person:

If I could change history by having this person do something different in his or her life, I would choose to change . . .

Is there someone with whom your character didn’t get along, who will also be appearing in the role play? Explain why the historical figures didn’t get along and how your character will respond to seeing this person in the role play.

What are three open-ended questions that you would like to be asked by the facilitator? The facilitator may not actually ask you these questions but might find them helpful.

57

The Language-Rich Classroom

essential information about the characters and ask any pertinent questions at the end of the role-play. Why the Historical Role-Play Is Good for ELLs

This activity engages students in wanting to know the facts, events, and personalities surrounding the event that they will be role-playing. As students become excited about playing their roles well, they end up reading a variety of informational texts to gather needed information. Students often end up going above and beyond what simple textbook readings would have required of them, remembering the events in more detail than if they had simply read about them.

Presentation Grids Have you ever noticed that while one small group of students is presenting on a topic, the rest of the class sits disengaged and uninterested? Presentation grids scaffold the experience for the nonpresenters so that they can actively collect valuable information about the presentation, instead of passively observing. Here’s How Presentation Grids Work

1. Create a presentation grid that contains questions that would apply to any of the presenters. If the presentation is a role play, the nonpresenters can look for characteristics of the historical figures being presented. If the presentations are related to another content area, such as science, then the nonpresenters can be looking for common elements that are to be present in all of the presentations (e.g., hypothesis; findings). 2. While a person or group is presenting, nonpresenters “collect data” by filling in the boxes of the grid with information related to the prompts on the top of the grid (see Figure 3.5). 3. If the nonpresenters have empty boxes, then at the end of the presentation, they have something from which to ask the presenters pointed questions. Questions should also be recorded as the presentations take place. Why Presentation Grids Are Good for ELLs

It’s hard to listen in your second language. Presentation grids help all students remain actively engaged in the presentations, as all have a specific task to do. The 58

Name

Name

Name

Name

Name

Character and Dates

Presentation Grid

Figure 3.5

Famous Events That This Person Was Involved With

Most Memorable Event(s) in This Person’s Life

Interesting or LittleKnown Facts About This Person

Presentation Title and Type ___________________________________ Questions I Have for This Person

Content Reading Strategies

59

The Language-Rich Classroom

grids keep students focused on what’s being presented and allow for students to develop and record questions as they think of them.

List-Group-Label The strategy of list-group-label (Taba, 1967) is an excellent way for teachers to assess prior knowledge so that they can then plan to build on a group’s prior knowledge before a unit begins. The original activity has been slightly modified in our instructions. Here’s How List-Group-Label Works

1. In small groups of four or so, students have a set time (e.g., 10 minutes) to brainstorm 30 words or concepts that they think deal with the topic to be studied. One student in the group is the scribe and writes down the words or concepts on a piece of paper, without any discussion on the topic. 2. Students then group the words or concepts into categories. Words are circled or highlighted using different-colored crayons or markers to indicate found categories. Every word must be placed in a given category, and no two words can share categories. This guideline encourages students to discuss the concepts. Note: If you don’t have crayons or markers, students can simply write out their words in lists of like categories. 3. After every word is placed in a category, students produce a key in the corner of the paper where a label or title is provided for every category and the color that it represents. 4. After reading the assigned passage, groups revisit their lists and verify that the terms were, in fact, relevant to the topic and a good fit for the categories that they had originally chosen. If they weren’t, the terms are crossed out or modified so that they fit with the topic. 5. Small groups can then conclude the activity by sharing their categories with the class. Why List-Group-Label Is Good for ELLs

List-group-label provides several benefits for teachers and students. With a diverse class with diverse experiences, this activity allows the teacher to quickly determine what the students know about the topic and what misunderstandings 60

Content Reading Strategies

need to be addressed. The collective knowledge and interaction between the students in the groups also set the stage for the topic to be more formally introduced by the teacher. There are several ways to do this activity. If the teacher believes that students have very little background knowledge on a topic, then a whole-class brainstorm can be done, where the teacher writes the students’ ideas (right or wrong) on the blackboard. Then students are broken up into smaller groups and make categories by working off the list from the blackboard. Although this approach is more common, our suggestion of having small groups originate the lists may provide more interaction and contributions from ELLs. When students are asked to create a list of words, their first reaction is often to simply sit and stare at each other. But as soon as a few contributions are made, this reaction triggers thoughts in others, and before they know it, the groups have completed their list. Students are often surprised by how much they know about a topic. English language learners can feel empowered by making contributions that serve the group’s purpose.

Relevance Wheel There’s usually a reason for the things we ask students to learn while they’re in school. Usually that reason is because the topic has deeply influenced their life or has the potential to do so. The relevance wheel is a simple strategy that we developed for helping students see the connections between what they are learning in science or social studies and where they are now. It begins with a graphic initiated by the teacher at the chalkboard and completed by the students individually and discussed in small groups. It requires whole-group modeling the first few times that it’s done in a classroom, and then the teacher can gradually release more responsibility to the students to add their own information to their relevance wheels in subsequent lessons. Here’s How the Relevance Wheel Works

1. Write the event at the center of a wheel and ask students to tell of the outcomes of the event. Write these outcomes on the spokes of the wheel. Figure 3.6 shows a relevance wheel with World War II as the event in the center and with some of the major outcomes listed on the spokes. In 61

The Language-Rich Classroom

science, the center of the wheel would be the topic at hand (e.g., soil), with discov­eries (soils on the bottom of hills get more water than soils at the top) listed on the spokes. The outer edge of the wheel is where students can address how the discoveries might affect them (which might be better soil for planting a tree?). 2. Ask students to individually hand-copy the wheel on paper and reflect on and write in the outer edge of the wheel the direct effect of the outcomes on their way of life. 3. In small groups, the students reflect on how the event has affected them.

Figure 3.6 Relevance Wheel

62

Content Reading Strategies

Why the Relevance Wheel Is Good for ELLs

As discussed in Chapter 2, all students need to be able to see the relevance in what they are learning. The relevance wheel causes these connections to be made clear. The interaction between the students also brings to light new insights where relevance may not be clear when it comes to some of the topics being studied. Additionally, with diverse classrooms come diverse perspectives. Discussions on personal relevance can lead to students having an opportunity to experience broader viewpoints and experiences than those shared by others with a similar culture.

Causal Chart Causal charts are simple tools for helping students see the relationships between a cause and its effect in history, science, and literature. We’ve included two examples of causal charts, one for science teachers (Figure 3.7) and one for history teachers (Figure 3.8). Figure 3.7 Scientific Causal Chart Topic: Scientific Discoveries Possible Impact on Our Lives

63

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 3.8 Historical Causal Chart Event in History: Causes

Results

Effects Today

Here’s How the Causal Chart Works

1. Ask students to list the events or discoveries on the left side of the chart. 2. Ask them to think through results and effects, noting these on the right side. Why the Causal Chart Is Good for ELLs

Causal charts allow students to understand the relevance of scientific discover­ ies or historical events in their lives today. In the history example, the causal chart takes the cause and results a step further by asking students to reflect on the unresolved issues and effects that are present today.

64

Content Reading Strategies

Time Lines Too often, history lessons seem disconnected from each other. Time lines visually facilitate students’ understandings of the flow of events in history. Here’s How Time Lines Work

1. Choose a specific number of events to have students prioritize. Ask students to write the number on the space left blank in the directions of their time line activity (Figure 3.9). They should choose the most significant events from their unit and put them in sequential order. 2. Ask students to draw a symbol that represents each event and then tell why they felt the event was important enough to include. 3. Students think about and record their predictions in the bottom box for how this event affected later events in history. 4. Once time lines are completed, students share them in pairs or small groups, followed by a whole-class review. 5. Start a time line chain of events by selecting one student’s time line (choose a different student every time) to hang on the wall. Add to the time line after every unit, by hanging a different student’s time line next to the last one chosen or by taping the ends of their old time lines to their new ones, so that they fold out accordion-style. Review all of the time lines sequentially, empha­­sizing connectedness as you begin or end another unit. By the end of the year, you should have a sequential time line that spans the period allotted to your course, and students will have reviewed previous events several times over the span of the semester or year by repeatedly revisiting the time line. Why Time Lines Are Good for ELLs

By having to narrow the choice of important events down to the five or six most important events in the readings or units, ELLs are being asked to weigh and evaluate the significance of each event in history. The creation of a symbol to represent that event further causes students to analyze and evaluate how this event might be captured in a nonverbal format. By predicting how the events affected later events in history, students are asked to think critically about how nothing happens in isolation. This historical event will surely affect later events. Historical events have benefits and consequences that are often felt for hundreds and thousands of years.

65

66

Prediction: In the box below, tell how you think these events affected later events in history.

Instructions: Create a time line using the most important events in this reading. Next to each date, create and draw a symbol for each event, and tell why it is important.

Time Line Activity

Figure 3.9

The Language-Rich Classroom

Content Reading Strategies

Although units and courses tend to follow each other in sequential order, students often fail to see the connectedness between these events. This may especially be true for ELLs who are unfamiliar with the history that U.S. schools deem important enough to cover and who are hearing of the events for the very first time. By connecting the event into a meaningful context of events that preceded and followed these outcomes, students are encouraged to understand the big picture and the relevance of why the event is significant in the context of history.

The Informational Book Table An easy way to get ELLs and all students excited about reading informational texts is to introduce the topic as a unit and then set up an informational book table in the back of the room for students to leisurely browse during free moments. The informational book table should have several library books covering the topic to be learned. The books may contain similar content to what’s in a content textbook, but the fact that they feature beautiful photography and art and are attractively displayed makes them much more appealing to students. Student choice is another feature that makes these books more popular than typical textbooks. Edmunds and Bauserman (2006) found that children tended to want to discuss expository texts that they had chosen, as opposed to books or text that had been assigned. In their study on reading motivation, “76% of the children shared expository text that they had chosen themselves, and only 14% of the children shared expository text that had been assigned by a teacher.  .  .  . It appears the children were motivated to read when they were given an opportunity to decide which expository text they would like to read” (p. 418). In our own experiences setting up book tables, we’ve noticed that as students become engaged in a topic, they will voluntarily pick up and sign out an informa­ tional text sitting in the back of the room and read it at leisure, at home, or during silent reading times. They excitedly share new discoveries from their books with the rest of the class. This is true whether they’re learning about spiders, rainforests, specific events and authors, or anything presented as a larger theme. Motivation to read is high when well-written informational texts are attractively displayed and introduced within an exciting context of wanting to know more about a topic that students find relevant. 67

The Language-Rich Classroom

Quotable Quips A quotable quip is a one-sentence critique like those found on book jackets promoting books. Although this idea, originally presented by Edmunds and Bauserman (2006), is not a content reading strategy, it is a strategy for increasing student motivation in reading and for allowing students to briefly interact in writing about informational texts that they’ve read. As such, we think it’s a great idea worth mentioning as a way of promoting the reading of informational texts. We suggest it as a way of encouraging written interactions among students in classrooms using informational book tables (the previous activity described). Here’s How Quotable Quips Work

1. Attach a long thin sheet of paper (about 4" 2 11", like those used for grocery lists) to the inside cover of informational texts sitting on the informational book table. 2. Show students examples of the style of commentary typically made on DVD covers (“Entertainingly Hilarious!”) or book jackets (“If you liked Harry Potter, you’ll love The Dragons of Who-ville”), and explain that comments they make regarding the texts (“Check out the mega-creepy spider on page 46!”) can be added to the existing quotable quips. 3. Share quotable quips whenever there’s a break of a few minutes between transitions. Here’s Why Quotable Quips Are Good for ELLs

This activity adds motivation for any type of student. But a specific benefit for ELLs is that the quip is a low-risk activity. It doesn’t require mastery of informa­ tional writing skills, it allows for written interaction among classmates around the topic of expository texts, and it motivates and encourages students to read and share interesting parts of the text. Teachers can highlight quotable quips fairly quickly, whenever they have a two- to five-minute break in the day.

The Trifecta Trifecta is a term we use whenever all students are required to use the three domains of speaking, reading, and writing in any activity. You’ll notice that most of the activities described so far require that students overtly use at least these 68

Content Reading Strategies

three domains of language. Most strategies ask students to first read information, then write about it, and finally talk about it. This trifecta allows ELLs to review the content in multiple ways and refine and add to their understanding of the content being learned. As a teacher, it’s always a good idea to view your activities through this lens after initial planning. Ask yourself, “Do students get to read it, write it, and speak it?” If not, chances are you can maximize content learning and language acquisition for your ELLs by adding the missing domain.

Metacognition: Student-Mediated Comprehension In our classes at Millersville University, we often have students get into groups and play the popular card game Concentration. After a suitable amount of time, we stop to tally up the results to see who got the most pairs. Inadvertently, one person has most of the pairs, and one has very few pairs. When we ask why or how the winner knew where the pairs were, that person explains the use of a specific strategy to determine where the cards were. The strategy might be visualizing the cards and their locations after the card has been turned back over, keeping track of the last six cards and their locations, or even using a mnemonic device. The student who got the fewest pairs usually says, “I just tried to memorize them.” The reason that one student did better than the others is because of the use of a strategy that worked for that student. This point is true in K–12 classrooms as well. Students who are successful at reading informational texts are usually those who have found success with a specific type of strategy or a series of strategies that they’ve come to use regularly. How are you making your way through this book? Are you writing in it? If so, do you have a unique note-taking style? Are you reading word for word, or are you flipping from graphic to graphic? Did you start with the table of contents and skip to the chapter you thought would be most relevant? Chances are that you attack informational texts with a strategy that has served you well, as evidenced by your current station in life—the fact that you’re reading this informational text by choice (we hope). In this section, we address metacognition, or students’ understanding of how they learn best. We’ll provide ideas for ways to help students notice and make connections between what is in their texts and what is in their heads. We’ll also look at ways students can analyze their own methods of learning and how they 69

The Language-Rich Classroom

process information through strategies such as note taking and self-assessment in learning logs. We would love to include a tidy three-step plan that magically allows for students to understand their own processes of learning, but unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Metacognition involves different processes for different students. It requires that students individually analyze how they learn best and what has worked for them in the past. Oftentimes, it’s the questions we ask, as opposed to the solutions, that can help students understand their own learning better.

Self-Awareness Garner (2008) discusses the importance of helping students uncover and develop their own cognitive structures or ways of processing information. “Too often, we give students preprinted graphic organizers or preset criteria to classify information rather than letting them discover patterns based on criteria of their own. Thus, we deprive them of the opportunities to develop their cognitive structures” (p. 36). One thing that we can do for all students is help them develop their internal observation skills that allow them to reflect on understandings related to how they learn best and why certain tasks are difficult for them, and how they might be able to tackle a challenge. Our goal should be to help students develop a reflective awareness of the learning process. We also ought to teach students to trust their instincts when something is just not right in a reading and to stop and question why it doesn’t feel right. It may sound rather unstructured to help students develop such a sense of self-awareness, but because no one strategy works for every student, it’s important to help students monitor their own comprehension by asking questions and providing time to reflect on the process of learning. Part of this sense of self-awareness may involve students’ understanding of the process of language acquisition and of their own progress in language development. Yara Graupera-Richardson of Burrowes Elementary School helped her students understand the process and the difficulty that goes along with learning a second language. She actually presented her ELLs with language acquisition theory, so that they were able to discuss the differences between basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP). She believes that this approach has helped them in their motivation to develop academic language and in their understanding that they are, 70

Content Reading Strategies

in fact, capable of learning, whereas previously she’d felt as though students had been attributing low performance to lack of innate ability. The one thing that really made a difference this year was letting the children know about their language proficiency levels up front.  .  .  . That’s a big thing with ELLs. A lot of times they feel like they are stupid in the regular classroom, and they think that’s why everything is so hard for them. But, this year they’ve understood “No, you’re not stupid; you just need more time to learn the language.” Even that statement is reassuring. They know how to develop CALP, too; they say, “I just need to read more”; and they say, “These are CALP words—I have to remember these.” .   .   . I think that’s the best thing I did this year, and it was so simple.

The understanding of academic language proficiency and the impact that this proficiency has on performance is usually something known by teachers alone. Part of developing metacognition with ELLs, however, relies on their being able to assess and analyze their own progress and to be able to take proactive steps toward learning. Too often, long-term English learners have come to believe that they are somehow academically inferior to other children who have experienced more success than they have, with seemingly less effort. This is also true for many other struggling students who have withstood repeated failure in schools.

Self-Efficacy The first myth that we should make every effort to debunk with students is that school success is all about innate ability. Our focus should be on effort, persever­ ance, and strategies. The phrase “You’re so smart” ought to be banned from every teacher’s vocabulary and way of thinking. As teachers, we want to place emphasis on self-efficacy, or the effort and strategies that students use, as opposed to innate ability or lack of innate ability. Our daughter came home one day muttering the dreaded phrase “I’m bad at math.” When we investigated the reasons for her struggling, we found that her poor performance was usually due to her rushing through math assignments, missing key information in problems, and not going back to double-check her work. So, we worked on two things: taking her time and checking her work. At no point did we want to validate the false and damaging assumption that she was “bad at math.” Being “bad at math” assumes two things: (1) you were born bad at math, and (2) there’s nothing you can do about it. When Gabriela came home a few weeks later announcing that she had gotten a 100 on her math test, this is the conversation that ensued: 71

The Language-Rich Classroom

Gabriela: Dad, I got a 100 on my math test! Dad: Awesome! Why did you get a 100 on your math test? Gabriela: Because I took my time. Dad: And? Gabriela: And because I checked my work. Dad: High five. You did a great job!

It was tempting to say “Gabriela, you’re so smart!” But it was important to keep the focus on the effort and strategies that she’d implemented. The success that Gabriela experienced, and continues to experience, was empowering. Through that experience and others like it, she is coming to realize that success is more about effort and perseverance than innate ability. Much has been written on the topic of self-efficacy, the belief that one is capable of learning and performing at a certain level. Studies have found that the degree of self-efficacy that children have predicts healthy learning habits, student motivation, and learning (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007; Bong, 2008; Schunk, 1987, 1989, 1991, 2003). In the research of Blackwell and colleagues, the belief that intelligence is fixed and that there is little that students can do to affect performance resulted in a downward trend in student performance. The decline in performance was reversed when 7th grade students were provided an intervention during an advisory period, where students learned how the act of learning physiologically changes the brain and that students are ultimately in charge of this process. Once these 7th graders were taught that intelligence is malleable, the effect was increased motivation and improved performance. The researchers concluded that “this finding supports the contention that it was the incremental theory message [the belief that intelligence is malleable as opposed to fixed] in particular that was responsible for the achievement benefit .  .  . and confirms that even a brief targeted intervention, focusing on a key belief, can have a significant effect on motivation and achievement” (Blackwell et al., 2007, p. 258). This was a principle included in a parent workshop we conducted at a local suburban school, during which we discussed the importance of parents teaching their children that success is more about effort and perseverance than innate ability. Even though we felt this point was only a minor part in our presentation on learning in a second language, we were repeatedly thanked by parents weeks after the workshop for the importance of this message. We even received e-mails referring back to this nugget of information. What we hadn’t realized was that 72

Content Reading Strategies

many of these parents viewed intelligence as fixed (either you have it or you don’t). Elisa Simms (pseudonym), a parent who attended that workshop, reported the following: It was just like a light bulb went off in my head for what I needed to do to flip the switch for my son. One son sort of had this innate ability to figure things out and a natural curiosity. He figured out how to read at a very early age, and he was reading everything. My other son, on the other hand, had to learn what steps he needed to take to make progress. So, he has learned through his successes that if you work a little harder and you take it a step at a time, working through a problem is the best way to achieve the end result that you want.  .  .  .  Until I attended that workshop, I didn’t understand that I needed to take a strategies-type approach with him. The workshop gave me the opportunity to analyze the difference between what their God-given talents are and the stepping stones that they need to achieve the same success.

We ought to make this point very clear to all parents—and to teachers, too: research shows that students who believe they can control their own learning processes end up doing just that and, as a result, do better in school. So, how do we teach students to take control of their own learning? In the 7th grade study, it was a matter of the teachers explicitly teaching that intelligence is malleable. Schunk (2003) found that self-evaluations of learning progress also have a positive effect on self-efficacy and motivation. In other words, as the process of learning is brought into focus and students are asked to self-assess and reflect on themselves as learners, their self-efficacy increases, and they are more motivated to learn. This increased self-efficacy then was shown to positively affect their choice of tasks, effort, motivation, and achievement. As discussed earlier, it’s up to teachers to deliberately bring this self-assessment process into the classroom. An issue for teachers is that many students do not spontaneously self-evaluate their capabilities. One way that teachers can highlight progress is to have students periodically assess their progress in skill acquisition. When performance improvements become salient, students will feel efficacious and motivated to learn and thereby learn better. For students who are not proficient in making self-evaluations, teachers may need to give them prompts for assessing performance and gauging goal progress (e.g., “How much better do you think you are in dividing fractions now compared with how you were when the lesson began?”). (Schunk, 2003, p. 165)

Once students have had an opportunity to self-assess, goal setting should follow. Figure 3.10 contains several prompts for learning logs. These prompts allow students to reflect on their understanding before or after a content reading activity. Teachers can choose the most appropriate one for the activity at hand and focus on one or two of these questions at a time. 73

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 3.10 Learning Log Prompts

 1. Did I understand this reading?  2. If so, what helped? If not, why not?  3. What were some strategies that I used or that I should have used to understand this reading?  4. What made this reading easy or difficult?  5. Did I take notes that I can refer back to?  6. What text features (graphs, pictures, bold print) did I notice or fail to notice?  7. How did these help me, or how might they have helped me?  8. How do I learn best?  9. Where am I in terms of my language development? 10. What helps my language development? 11. If reading is good for my language development, what can I do to become a more avid reader? 12. Why is this reading important? 13. How can I use what I am learning later in life? 14. What do I want to become as an adult? 15. How can I get there?

Once students have had an opportunity to reflect on and respond to the prompt, then small-group followed by whole-group sharing is a way to provide cognitive models of people who’ve figured out certain tricks or strategies for understanding the learning. Schunk (2003) encourages teachers to “make extensive use of models in the classroom. Especially important are cognitive models who verbalize their actions and thoughts as they work on a task” (p. 169). Individual goal setting can follow these interactions. After students have responded to a prompt and shared their reflections, they can set individual goals for their own learning. For example, if a student took no notes, perhaps this is a goal that can provide success for this learner later. Figure 3.11 follows a similar line of reasoning. It’s a template for a content reading strategies log that allows for students to think through how the strategies they used (or didn’t use) affected their understanding of the content-area reading. 74

Content Reading Strategies

Figure 3.11 Content Reading Strategies Log

Text _________________________

Subject _______________ 3 Poor

3 Fair

Date __________ 3 Good

3 Great

My understanding of this reading was:

As I read, I used these strategies in my head or on paper:

A strategy that I think might have helped me understand the reading better:

Predictions that I made as I read:

Questions that I still have:

This topic is important because:

For students who didn’t use any strategies, this template prompts them to think through the strategies that might have been useful. If filling out this template is followed by small-group sharing, then strategies can be modeled and shared by peers. 75

The Language-Rich Classroom

All students eventually face situations where they simply don’t understand what they’re reading. But students who are successful do something about their lack of understanding. They find ways to remedy the situation, while others will not. We want to facilitate the understanding of this active learner role for all students, most especially for those who have bought into the understanding that they lack intelligence and that their poor performance is the result of something that is unchangeable. Based on what research says regarding self-efficacy, we encourage teachers teaching preschool through grade 12 to do the following: 1. Explicitly address the power of effort and strategies on student performance. Explain that intelligence is malleable, not fixed. 2. Model strategy usage, through peer sharing or teacher think-alouds (where the teacher models out loud questioning, clarifying, predicting, and using text features that a strategic reader might use). 3. Allow for students to self-assess their learning (both their successes and failures) and the impact of strategies on their performance. 4. Facilitate the process of goal setting and continual self-evaluation for students through prompted learning logs. 5. Celebrate student effort and the increased use of effective strategies by making note of growth that students record in their logs and by addressing this progress with individual students. It’s important to reiterate that strategy instruction like that suggested here can begin in the preschool years. We vividly remember observing a kindergarten classroom where students were asked to reach into a paper bag and correctly identify the number of objects in the bag. We initially thought this lesson was going to take very little time, but then we watched the first six students put their hands in the bag and seemingly call out any arbitrary number that they could think of. After six erroneous guesses, the seventh student put his hand in the bag and, taking a bit longer than the other students, correctly identified the number of items. Instead of moving on with the lesson, the teacher asked, “Tommy, how did you know what the correct number was?” Tommy then explained his strategy for determining the correct number of items. As you might guess, he had put his hand in the bag, pushed all the objects to one side of the bag, and then counted the 76

Content Reading Strategies

objects one by one as he moved them from one side of the bag to the other. The reason that Tommy got the correct answer, while his classmates did not, was not that he was smarter than the others. It was his use of a strategy. By asking students to share, teachers can provide students with peer models using effective strategies and then allow opportunities to use their classmates’ strategies as well or to understand the need to develop their own.

Note Taking: Not Just for Lectures Note taking is not just for lectures. How often today, for example, have you written yourself a note? We’re guessing you’ve written at least one, perhaps on your calendar or a sticky note, or even in this book. Chances are you take notes to help you remember something. The truth is, for efficient learners, note taking is extremely effective in helping process thoughts and remember what’s been read. In a study of 502 medical school applicants, the students who couldn’t produce any notes taken during their medical school entrance exam were the students who obtained the lowest scores. And the students who had summarized or made concept maps scored better than those who had simply underlined or copied verbatim what they had read (Lahtinen, Lonka, & Lindblom-Ylänne, 1997). What does this mean? Summarizing texts and processing learned information in symbolic relationships, such as in the use of a concept map, requires students to interact with the text and make it their own by repackaging it. One thing that teachers can do is to highlight effective note-taking strategies when they notice students who are adept at interacting with the text and producing “repackaged” notes regarding what they have read. By occasionally asking individ­ ual students to share their strategic note-taking techniques using an overhead projector or the chalkboard, teachers provide other students with models for how to individualize their note-taking techniques as well. Students can practice summarizing in the margins of texts or using a graphic organizer like the one in Figure 7.1 (see p. 164) to process and summarize what they have learned. Students can also learn to prioritize the importance of concepts presented in text by using a simple encoding strategy like the one in Figure 3.12. No matter what encoding system is used, it’s important to emphasize to students that they should try to personalize it as much as possible. If they find it hard to remember the use of the question mark and instead seem to gravitate toward 77

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 3.12 Text Encoding

H ! Place a star by concepts that you think are very important. If the concept is extremely important, add an exclamation point. Since this concept is pretty important, summarize the concept in a few words in the margin. The rest can be underlined.

3 Place a check mark next to concepts that are somewhat important. Underline the concept in the text.

? Place a question mark next to concepts that confuse you. Underline the concept using a squiggly line. Or, if you disagree with the concept, explain why you disagree in the margin.

placing sad faces next to a concept, then allow them to do so. If the text is a schoolowned book or a photocopy, then students can use sticky notes to attach to the text. The point is to encourage students to interact with the text as opposed to passively reading it. Our job during direct instruction is also to get students to repackage and process what we say. So, remind students to try to minimize, or at least supple­ ment, the verbatim copying that they do in lectures by attempting to summarize during note taking. We should allow them times to stop and process what is being taught through teaching strategies such as quick-writes or pair-shares (see Chapter 6). These process points are important when teaching students of any age, from primary through adulthood.

Vocabulary Throughout this text, we’ve highlighted the difficulties that ELLs can experience with the type of vocabulary found in informational text. Many readers may assume, then, that the best way to help students approach this hurdle is to explicitly teach all of the vocabulary that students might encounter. Think of how overwhelming this task would be, especially if these words were taught outside meaningful contexts in isolated vocabulary lessons. Even if it were a doable task, the question is, would tackling individual words really be effective? We doubt that, outside of a relevant 78

Content Reading Strategies

and meaningful context, most students would even remember these words. In the following excerpt, Dr. Janette Hewitt, the principal of Washington Elementary, contrasts vocabulary taught in isolated pullout lessons with those taught in integrated lessons where ELLs, students with special needs, and native English speakers were learning together through the vehicle of a story they loved: The Tale of Desperaux (DiCamillo, 2003a). They’re all together and they’re learning with each other, and it just raises their awareness and their use of that language because they’re all using it together to communicate about a story they’re in love with. What I see when a teacher uses a canned curriculum aimed at certain vocabulary is that they’re learning a story for just that lesson, with that vocabulary. So, it doesn’t get used and reused in any other setting. So, I really question whether or not that type of lesson is really going to help our ESL learners, or if it’s even confusing them more, because they don’t have any other opportunities to use the word merchant ever again.

So, how do we approach the teaching of Recommended Resources vocabulary with ELLs? Carlo and colleagues Robert Marzano and Debra J. Pickering’s book Building Academic Vocabulary: Teacher’s (2004) shed some light on this important Manual (2005) provides practical ideas for question. In a study on vocabulary growth teaching academic vocabulary. The book with 254 participants in 5th grade, the contains a simple six-step process for teaching new vocabulary, ideas for graphic organizers, teaching of non-content-specific academic and blackline game templates that can be vocabulary had positive impacts on reading used across content areas. The accompanying comprehension for both native English DVD, A Six-Step Process for Teaching Vocabulary (ASCD, 2005), can be very helpful speakers and ELLs. However, it wasn’t simply in allowing teachers to see demonstrations of the memorization of isolated words and vocabulary lessons that integrate the six-step their meanings that made a difference but the process in their choice of elementary or secondary settings. study of vocabulary learning strategies and the student’s ability to analyze word meanings. According to Carlo and colleagues, “Teaching new words was subordinated to the goal of teaching about new words—various kinds of information about words that could help children figure out word meanings on their own” (p. 205). This point is significant. Students weren’t just storing words; they were learning how to figure out word meanings using vocabulary learning strategies. Also, as opposed to the 20 or more words that are often assigned by language teachers, researchers chose to focus on fewer words weekly (12–14) and to focus on things like • contexts to figure out word meanings, • use of new words in different contexts, 79

The Language-Rich Classroom

• cognates in Spanish, and • analysis of morphological structure for cues to meaning. The researchers concluded that such strategies could have ongoing value to children who encounter unknown words in semantically rich contexts, who understand enough of the context to use contextual information in analyzing word meaning, and who remember to use them. Their value at least in the short run was, in fact, confirmed by our finding of a significant impact on reading comprehension. (p. 205)

The new vocabulary log in Figure 3.13 is one way of allowing students to analyze words and their contexts for word meanings. To summarize, without adequate supports in content-area reading, too many ELLs will continue to decode their way through texts with little or no comprehension of what they’ve read. ELL success in the content area is facilitated by the effective use of strategies used in lessons that are authentic and relevant. Because students are likely to experience much difficulty with reading in the content areas, teachers of multilingual classrooms ought to act as a mediator of comprehension between the student and the text by using comprehension strategies that help students focus on meaning in their reading. Teachers should also help students develop meta­ cognitive strategies that will allow them to continually self-assess, embrace selfefficacy, and set future goals for becoming better content readers.

80

New Vocabulary Log

Figure 3.13

Content Reading Strategies

81

4

H = Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Picture your brain as a room full of file cabinets. Someone asks you, “How old are you?” You grab the file and give it to, or withhold it from, the person who asked the question. Another person asks a deeper question: “How has your perception of war been affected by the generation in which you were born?” Wow! You can’t just open one file and hand it to the person. Now you’ve got to open up several files. Some files may be related to the various major events that have affected your generation, your generation’s perceived current attitudes about war, other generations’ perceptions about war, and your own views about war. You’ll have to make correlations between the different files that you open, draw some conclu­ sions, and maybe even develop new theories to which you hadn’t previously given much thought. This whole process is going to take some time, furrowing of the brows, perhaps a hand to the chin, a far-off gaze, and, finally, a brilliant (though slow and perhaps hesitant) response that is uniquely linked to your experiences and the files you’ve opened. As educators, regardless of our area of specialty, our ultimate agenda should be to get students to really think about content and its relevance toward life—that is, to engage in higher-order thinking. But achieving this goal isn’t likely to happen without deliberate and consistent planning. Our teaching can serve to continuously cause students to regurgitate simple forgettable facts, or it can cause students to engage in deeper inquiry that requires that they open up files, make connections, 82

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

ask questions, and enjoy dialogues not only outwardly with each other but inwardly with themselves. This is a critical piece to developing both language and cognition with our English language learners. When we talk about developing higher-order thinking skills, we are talking about helping students move from shallow understandings to deeper under­ standings that allow them to connect new learning to prior learning, previous experiences, and the world beyond the classroom. As described with the file analogy, these connections often require students to analyze and evaluate events, society, responses to questions, and previously learned concepts in relation to the new concepts just learned. But developing higher-order thinking skills is not a guaranteed outcome in teaching. It demands intentionally setting up learning opportunities that require students to make connections and demonstrate deep understanding of a topic. “Like strenuous movement, skillful thinking is hard work. And as with athletics, students need practice, reflection and coaching to think well. With proper instruction, human thought processes can become more broadly applied, more spontaneously generated, more precisely focused, more complex, and more insightful” (Costa, 2008, p. 21).

Asking Bigger Questions: Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Benjamin Bloom (1956) created his taxonomy of educational objectives, in which he described cognitive intensity, more than 50 years ago. Though Bloom’s taxonomy may seem dated, its simple ability to explain shallow versus complex thinking still makes it a popular and useful reference tool in classrooms today. We’ll be using Bloom’s taxonomy as we explore concepts related to higher-order thinking and the relationship between language and cognition. Bloom’s taxonomy explains six levels of understanding, from knowledge through evaluation. The following paragraphs explain the six levels, with the first three levels entailing lower-order thinking skills and the last three levels, higherorder thinking skills. Even if you’ve studied Bloom’s taxonomy before, read through at least the last four levels of these descriptions (especially application, synthesis, and evaluation), because they often seem to be misunderstood among educators, and understanding the difference is important for developing questions aimed at higher-order thinking. Critical thinking is most likely to take place when we create 83

The Language-Rich Classroom

questions and activities that require the type of thinking described in the last three of the six levels. If we are going to help students develop problem-solving and reasoning skills, we must use activities and tasks that require higher-order thinking skills. In doing so, we’ll also do a much better job of coaching children in their development and acquisition of academic language.

Lower-Order Thinking Skills Knowledge: Being Able to Remember Facts and Recall Ideas

Bloom (1956) describes knowledge as the lowest level of abstraction. It involves “remembering, either by recognition or recall, of ideas, material or phenomena” (p. 62). Bloom also uses the analogy of a file. In a knowledge-type question, the trick is to find in the task a signal, cue, or clue that opens the file that the teacher is looking for. If a student is asked a question requiring knowledge, all the student really needs to do is find the file, pull it out, and hand it to the teacher. An example of a task requiring knowledge is the question “Who was the 16th president?” Comprehension: Being Able to Understand in a Way That You Can Summarize or Retell What Was Taught

Comprehension is when students can demonstrate a limited understanding of what was taught but not evidence of a deep grasp of the topic or the implications of certain concepts on other aspects of life. Students don’t need to show that they understand connections between new concepts and other concepts learned. Summarizing and retelling stories are common examples of activities that require comprehension. Application: Being Able to Apply an Abstract Concept in a Concrete Situation

Bloom refers to application as “the use of abstractions in particular and concrete situations” (p. 205). Application is often confused with synthesis. Whereas synthesis requires students to consolidate what they’ve learned into something new that hadn’t existed before, application often requires students to simply apply as they’ve been instructed to do. Application doesn’t involve the creativity that synthesis requires. The teacher, not the student, provides the

84

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

abstractions. With application, it’s a matter of telling a student something like “Here’s the abstract formula or grammatical rule. Now show me that you can use it in the following concrete problem or sentence.”

Higher-Order Thinking Skills Analysis: Being Able to Understand the Internal Components of Learned Material and How They Fit Together or Affect One Another

Bloom describes analysis as “the breakdown of a communication into its constituent elements or parts such that the relative hierarchy of ideas is made clear and/or the relations between the ideas expressed are made explicit” (p. 205). When students are analyzing, they’re examining different components of what’s being learned, looking at more than merely definitions. In other words, they’re opening several files, some that were not even given by the teacher, and making connections to see how these files fit together. A teacher might ask, “How, if at all, has democracy affected the way that our school is run?” Students have to put their heads and experiences together not only to define democracy but to connect its impact, or lack of impact, on the different events that happen during the school day. Synthesis: Being Able to Consolidate and Connect Learned Material to Create Something New

Bloom defines synthesis as “the putting together of elements and parts so as to form a whole. This involves the process of working with pieces, parts, elements, etc., and arranging and combining them in such a way as to constitute a pattern or structure not clearly there before” (p. 206). As already noted, synthesis is commonly confused with application. The distinct difference between the two is that with application, students apply abstract concepts to defined situations. Results for all students usually look the same. With synthesis, students take what they’ve learned and create something that is new to them. An example of synthesis might be if a teacher were to ask students to create a rule or formula that will consistently allow them to solve the area of a rectangle, given certain bits of known information. In this case, the abstractions are offered by the students as opposed to being provided by the teacher.

85

The Language-Rich Classroom

Evaluation: Being Able to Evaluate Something Based on What Has Been Learned

Evaluation seems to be one of the most misunderstood levels on Bloom’s taxonomy. It is not simply asking a student to give his or her opinion. Instead, using evaluation, students realize that their opinion must be based on learned information. Bloom defines evaluation as “quantitative and qualitative judgments about the extent to which material and methods satisfy criteria” (p. 207). The criteria would be the concepts learned. For example, at the end of a unit on trees, a nonevaluation-type task might be the teacher asking students to determine what their favorite tree is and explain why. This task can be fun, but it doesn’t require evaluation. A student might answer, “A pine tree, because I like triangles.” But if the teacher were to ask students to evaluate and explain which trees, given a few choices, would be more suited to survive in their state, students are then required to evaluate what they’ve learned about the adaptation of trees as well as the environment of the state in which they live. Simply expressing an opinion does not require evaluation. The opinions or judgments must demonstrate evidence of an integration and consolidation of what was learned.

Properly Channeled Empathy Teachers face many challenges when asking bigger questions of their students. Although one challenge is certainly language, another comes in a much more subtle form, by way of empathy. Though we generally view empathy as a very good thing, when poorly channeled, it can often lead to low expectations that directly limit the types of learning opportunities to which ELLs are exposed. The fact is that poorly channeled empathy can lead to underestimating and undervaluing the contribu­tions that students may bring to the classroom. Consider the following illustration where a teacher asks students to explain the elements of what makes a pattern a pattern: Teacher: Now, I have here a pattern. Maria [an ELL], which color pattern block goes next? Maria: Blue. Teacher: Excellent job, Maria—you knew that the next color should be blue. All right, Connor [a native English speaker], tell me why would the next color be blue? Connor: ’Cause it’s a pattern. Teacher: Uh-huh. What makes it a pattern, Connor? Connor: It goes over and over. 86

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Matthew [a native English speaker]: It repeats itself! Teacher: Great! Now, Daphne [a native English speaker], if we were to change this color to green, could it still be a pattern? Daphne: (pause) Yes. Teacher: How? Daphne: Because you could make it red, blue, red, green, red, blue, red, green. Teacher: OK, let’s try it. [Places the blocks on the overhead] Red, blue, red, green, red, blue, red, .  .  .  .Which one comes next, José [an ELL]? José: Green. Teacher: Green. Good job!

This example illustrates poorly channeled empathy. The ELLs were asked the closed questions that required one-word responses, while the native English speakers got the open-ended questions that required higher-order thinking. In observing several mathematics activities during our own research in Southern California, we noticed this same approach. Providing opportunities for students to answer questions that required higher-order thinking was easier said than done. Due to their empathy of the students’ perceived linguistic abilities, it was common for the teachers to end up reducing more complex questions to less cognitively demanding questions. In fact, when 40 teachers in linguistically diverse classrooms were interviewed regarding how they made a linguistically dependent, hands-on math program comprehensible to ELLs, 20 indicated that they skipped the verbally dependent interview questions altogether, “many of them feeling that they were unfair to English language learners, and others feeling they were impractical” (Himmele, 2001, p. 79). This information is significant because, in this conceptually rich math program, the interview questions were supposed to act as a bridge from the concrete exploration of mathematical principles to the abstract understandings of bigger mathematical principles that could be applied to other situations. Without the crossover, students ended up simply playing with manipulatives. Verplaetse (1998), in her observations of ESL students and teacher interactions, found that teachers tended to do the same thing. “Teachers issued more directives to and asked proportionately fewer questions of their ESL students than of their EP [English-proficient] students. They also asked their ESL students fewer high-level cognitive and open-ended questions” (p. 25). Concern over language ability and whether the students could actually handle answering questions that required higher-order thinking was expressed by many teachers. In Verplaetse’s interviews, teachers tended to underestimate the ELLs’ language competency, and “teachers 87

The Language-Rich Classroom

expressed concern with the amount of time it took ESL students to respond in teacherstudent interactions. . . .Teachers wanted to protect students from unnecessary embar­ rass­ment” (p. 28). Verplaetse was not working with teachers who were deliberately trying to cheat their students of oppor­tunities for developing higher levels of thinking. In fact, she was working with middle and high school teachers who had been identified as being sensitive to ELLs’ needs. Teachers’ empathetic reactions toward their students were often what ended up causing them not to venture toward allowing students time to process and think through big issues that require time and thought. In our own research, one teacher echoed the expressed sentiments of others by saying, “If I keep probing and probing, I can sense their frustration” (Himmele, 2001, p. 80). The result, for at least 20 of 40 teachers, was that they were less likely to ask ELLs the types of questions that might help these students cross over from concrete experiences to abstract understandings. In addition, assessments that relied heavily on observation and anecdotal records failed to provide ELLs with the opportunities that might have challenged and extended their thinking beyond mere observations of final products. Properly channeled empathy can lead to creating classroom environments where students are free to take risks and where opportunities for developing higher levels of thinking have been heavily scaffolded. Empathy is a critical ingredient necessary for relating to students, but it should also lead teachers to purposefully design opportunities for ELLs to think through questions and activities that require higher levels of thinking. Our task is to present these stra­te­ gies in a context where students can be successful as opposed to eliminating these opportunities altogether in order to do what we feel will protect students from unnecessary embarrassment. We can find other ways to protect the students from unnecessary embarrassment, but it shouldn’t be by way of eliminating

Recommended Resources The Power of Our Words: Teacher Language that Helps Children Learn by Paula Denton, EdD (NEFC, 2007). This book explores how teacher language can establish a foundation for building a cohesive classroom community. It lays the foundation for creating a safe, positive classroom environment where children are free to talk and where they learn to listen to each other’s unique perspectives. The book explores the power of open-ended questioning, the solicitation of multiple responses, and tips for articulating questions that serve as cues to deeper thinking. It’s a wonderful book for developing higher order questions and for developing a classroom environment where students’ voices are valued.

88

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

opportunities for developing higher-order thinking. It begins with the teacher’s belief that students can, in fact, reach these levels of understanding when lessons are adequately scaffolded. It is imperative that we give access to the same curric­ulum to all students, includ­ ing our ELLs. That can only take place when classroom teachers give the same opportu­ nities to develop higher-order thinking skills to all students.

A Caution About Open-Ended Questions

Teacher Spotlight ESL teacher Barbara Mitchell began imple­ ment­­ing the CHATS framework into her planning at the beginning of the year and found an immediate increase in student engagement, both cognitively and emotion­ ally. She also found a renewed passion in her own teaching. “The bottom line of what it has done for me is that I’m still as passionate about teaching in April as I was in August. I just love teaching, and it has a lot to do with using CHATS. Kids don’t cut class anymore. When they can begin to partici­ pate in the way that they do, they begin to feel successful. And, they feel much better about themselves.”

It’s important to understand some hidden obstacles that will need to be overcome in asking open-ended questions. As discussed earlier, poorly channeled empathy can lead to ELLs not being exposed to the same challenging learning opportunities as their native English-speaking peers. In some cases, by the time ELLs are conversa­ tional, many have become accustomed to not being asked the big questions. Some have even learned to tune these out. This problem will take some undoing on the part of the teacher. Also, just because teachers decide to ask bigger questions that aim at developing higher-order thinking doesn’t mean that students will actually be prepared to answer such questions. Asking questions and getting suitable answers both require inten­tionality. Questioning activities need to be scaffolded to facilitate student success.

Rippling Questions When big questions that aim to engage higher-order thinking are asked of the whole class, it’s often the students who speak only English that will raise their hands first. In fact, frequently it’s only these students who will raise their hands. If a question is significant enough that all students benefit from reflection on it, then teachers should consider structuring the question so that all students have an opportunity to consider the question. This approach requires individual reflection times, or inner speech. According to Vygotsky (1986): 89

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 4.1 Ripple Questioning

Individual Reflection Time

Small Groups

Share with Whole Class

It was shown that speech movements facilitate reasoning. In a case of a difficult cognitive task involving verbal material, inner speech helped to imprint and organize the conscious thought. The same cognitive process, taken now as a sort of activity, benefits from the presence of inner speech, which facilitates the selection of essential material from the nonessential. And finally, inner speech is considered to be an important factor in the transition from thought to external speech. (p. 3)

Allowing ELLs an opportunity to reflect on questions aimed at higher-order thinking through the use of “inner speech” ought to be part of the lesson planning process. Figure 4.1 illustrates how teachers may ripple questions so that all students will be afforded an opportunity to be successful in answering them. Visualize pebbles being tossed into a pond. The pebbles represent the question, first targeted toward each individual student responding, and then progressing outward toward small groups, and finally engaging the whole class. So, our questioning should be framed in three outwardly moving steps: 1. Individual reflection: students are given time to individually reflect on the question in a written quick-write or journal.

90

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

2. Pair or small-group reflection: students work in pairs or small groups to interact and share what they came up with during their individual reflection. 3. Whole-group reflection: the pairs or small groups share with the whole class. Rippling questions allows all students to respond to questions aimed at higher levels of thinking, and it avoids the traditional problem of the teacher having an animated conversation with one or two eager students while the rest of the class sits disengaged. By ensuring individual thinking time before asking an ELL to share with the whole class, the student has much-needed time to process both the question and the answer. Providing an opportunity in the second step for sharing individual reflections in pairs or small groups gives ELLs an opportunity to be successful in expressing their ideas first in a low-risk setting. It also lets them listen to others’ reflections on the topic and to become emotionally involved with the topic. Finally, the third step gives the ELL a chance to sum up the group’s thoughts to the whole class, which is much less intimidating than being called on coldturkey. After sharing with a small group, ELLs may be more willing to share their idea with the whole class, particularly because their idea has already met with success. If students are given time to gather their thoughts before sharing them, they will be more likely to have something to say. Tips for Rippling Questions

Not every question can be given the type of attention and time that this threestep sequence of rippling questions requires. We realize that sometimes teachers will simply want to call out a question to the whole group. In those cases, it still only takes two to three minutes for students to do something as simple as a pairshare after the question is posed to the class. Simple steps like pair-shares and quick-writes take only a few minutes of class time and significantly increase student engagement. The great thing about quick-writes is that no preparation is needed, and they can be inserted into a lesson during an unexpected teachable moment. Every student has to respond to the question, even if only one or two get to share their response with the class. Students have an opportunity to silently reflect on and analyze their thoughts in writing through the process of inner speech. When it comes time for step 3, processing or sharing the information as a whole group, the ground rules listed in Figure 4.2 allow the classroom to function

91

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 4.2 Ground Rules for Whole-Group Debriefing

You should all practice these rules: • Look at and listen to whomever is speaking. • Raise your hand to volunteer or comment after your peer has spoken (not during). • Treat others in the same way you would want to be treated when it’s your turn to talk. • Be willing to learn from each other.

as a community and facilitate the process of students learning from each other in a respectful environment. These ground rules let students feel as though each of them has something valuable to share.

Scaffolding Higher-Order Thinking Skills Scaffolding is discussed in detail in Chapter 7, but here we’ll describe additional strategies that can help encourage students to use higher-order thinking skills.

Key Rings and Podiums The classroom of Barbara Mitchell, an ESL teacher at J. P. McCaskey High School, exemplifies an environment with the proper scaffolds in place to ensure student success. Mitchell is responsible for delivering the high school English curriculum to students at the early stages of English language development. “Every day, we have to help each one of them feel successful in some way. Otherwise, they come in and say they can’t do it and they don’t.” Mitchell introduced her students to bigger questions by getting them used to asking bigger questions of each other. At the beginning of the year, she decided to celebrate each of their birthdays by spotlighting each student in a class interview. Each student was given a key ring with the six levels in Bloom’s taxonomy labeled. Each level had question starters from which the students could ask questions of one other. Students had to ask questions from each of the six levels, meaning that only one question could be asked from the knowledge level. Although students struggled at the beginning of 92

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

the year, they later became more adept at asking questions that required higherorder thinking. Mitchell recalls the initial challenge with this activity: At the beginning of the year, it was really hard, because they just wanted to say, “Well, how old are you? Where were you born? What do you want for your birthday?” But only one person could ask that kind of question, and it is just amazing, now! They don’t struggle nearly as much. As a teacher we have to teach them how to go to that level. People say it’s unrealistic. I think it’s because of low expectations. They can learn to go to that level.

To further encourage higher-order thinking, Mitchell asked her father to build a wooden podium so that students could stand at the podium and defend their answers. While verbally defending answers also proved initially to be a challenge, both linguistically and cognitively, students eventually became very adept at this task—so much so that some would ask to go to the podium to defend their reasoning.

Interviews In her book Classroom Interviews, Rogovin (1998) relates her experiences of using interviews in primary classrooms. Through the interviews, students are introduced to how to initiate discussions aimed at a greater depth by asking openended questions rather than questions aimed at one-word answers. Students are exposed firsthand to various multicultural perspectives and given opportunities to develop questions for those interviews. Working with 3rd and 4th graders, we decided to try classroom interviews. Students were asked to invite a guest, which usually ended up being a parent. Invitation letters were sent, and dates were set for each classroom interview. Students were given tutorials on how to ask effective interview questions. Closed question starters that produced only one-word answers were introduced and modeled, and then contrasted with big questions—open-ended questions that provided listeners with details about the interviewee’s life and worldview. Each student received a cheat sheet (Figure 4.3) to paste onto their steno pads and use as a reference during their interviews. In our delivery, we deliberately used big words like elaborate, detail, and accomplishment in the pre-interview discussions, to get students comfortable with them. We also made class books, as well as a gift book for each of the interviewees, describing highlights of the interviews. Though Rogovin was working with early elementary students and we were working with 3rd and 4th graders, this strategy can be implemented at any grade level. It provides 93

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 4.3 Interviewing Techniques for Student Journalists

1. Avoid yes/no questions or questions that look for one-word answers. 2. Use “big questions” that will get you answers with a great deal of detail. Start questions with these phrases: Tell us about . . . . In what ways . . . ? Tell us about your ________________________ in life. best . . . worst . . . scariest . . . funniest . . . most important . . . proudest . . . greatest accomplishment biggest regret Tell us about your hopes for ____________________? the community your children the school the future List other great questions here: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 3. When you get an opinion, politely ask for reasons to back it up. For example: Mr. Jones: I think the neighborhood needs a community center. Student Journalist: What makes you say that? or, Would you please elaborate on that?

94

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

students with practice in asking questions aimed at gaining in-depth information that would be missed with closed questions requiring one-word answers.

Big-Picture Lesson Design Wiggins and McTighe (2005), in their book Understanding by Design, describe the importance of seeing the big picture when planning lessons. In their backward design model, they suggest a three-step planning sequence: 1. Identifying desired results 2. Determining acceptable evidence 3. Planning learning experiences The best questions originate from an Recommended Resources understanding of the importance of and Understanding by Design (2005) by Grant P. Wiggins and Jay McTighe. the relevance of the content being taught. For those who are unfamiliar with the model, Uncovering the enduring understandings, Understanding by Design would provide great as they’re called in Wiggins and McTighe’s fodder for a faculty book group. It causes teachers to examine the core of what is work, is critical for developing a deeper important in what they teach, the “enduring understanding of the content being understandings” that students should walk presented and for the development of away with, and how teachers can design learning opportunities around these. For essential questions aimed at helping students teachers aiming to tap into higher-order develop a deep rather than surface level of thinking, Understanding by Design provides learning. It’s difficult to aim questions at thought-provoking ideas. higher-order thinking if a teacher isn’t aware of the enduring understandings that should be gleaned from his or her lessons. Having the end in mind facilitates the development of these bigger questions to foster a deeper understanding of whatever content is being taught. The Problem with Verb Lists

We’re sure you’ve seen verb lists—another tool designed to help teachers take a big-picture view and plan lessons aimed at developing higher-order thinking skills. These tools provide easy one-word starters so that teachers can design activities at certain levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. As common as they are, verb lists don’t always help teachers engage in big-picture lesson design. The verbs work well if the 95

The Language-Rich Classroom

teacher understands the elements around higher levels of thinking. The problem is that if teachers don’t have a deep understanding of these levels, then the verbs can be misleading. For example, using who as a question starter can lead to either higher- or lower-order thinking. “Who wrote the Gettysburg Address?” will result in a response at about the knowledge level, whereas “Who had a greater impact on our economy?” will more likely lead to students thinking at the analysis level. As another example, the verb create, which is often linked to synthesis, can lead to either synthesis or application, depending on how it’s used. The activity “Create a pulley system” might provide a better feel of application than synthesis if students are only duplicating what was previously modeled for them. Synthesis would only come after students have learned all about a certain concept and can consolidate their thinking into a finished product that is unique to them. If educators really want to develop lesson activities at higher levels of thinking, rather than relying on verb lists, they should get to know the elements of the different levels in Bloom’s taxonomy and implement them into their daily lessons. Then verb lists can help educators generate more ideas, as opposed to being used in place of a deeper understanding of Bloom’s taxonomy. To further encourage higher-order thinking, teachers should have their essential questions (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) prepared ahead of time, so that they can facilitate students’ deep understandings of the topic being discussed. It’s also important to let students know what to expect. A teacher might say, “After three minutes, I’ll ask you to stop writing and be prepared to share your writings with a partner.” As much as possible, teachers should try to let discussions be student driven (i.e., allow for more student talk than teacher talk). Consider letting the students call on their peers to respond to what they have shared.

Wait Time One of the first things that teachers of ELLs must keep in mind is that wait times should be increased. The typical three- to five-second wait time may need to be doubled for an ELL. In actual classrooms, wait time has been found to be sorely lacking. Gambrell (2001) found that, on average, teachers asked students a question every 43 seconds and gave approximately a 1-second wait time after posing such questions. “Of most concern was the finding that significantly more think-time was given for text-based questions [questions with obvious answers, explicit in the 96

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

text] than for scriptal questions [with not-so-obvious answers, textually implicit]” (p. 79). What’s even more disturbing is that those in “average and below average groups were asked significantly more text-based than scriptal questions.” Tina Witmer, a 2nd grade teacher in Southern California, refused to stop probing during her large-group discussion times in math. She was certainly empathetic and kind, but she also created an environment of high expectations within a culture of discovery, where students were free to make mistakes. When she asked a question that required higher-order thinking skills, she gave the students time to process their thinking, and then she waited for their response. The longest recorded wait time in her class was 36 seconds! Yes, unusually long, but the student emerged victorious, feeling comfortable enough to walk up to the overhead projector and demonstrate his thinking by moving pattern blocks to justify his answer. Witmer’s wait times weren’t usually this long, but she regularly allowed her students time to process questions and think through their solutions— something that in our task-oriented society educators can often forget to do. Although silence can make us uncomfortable, it is important to remember that the ELL has to process first the words in the question, which may take longer than for a student who speaks English only; then process a solution to the question; and, finally, figure out how to verbalize this response in a second language. This means we must deliberately allow for longer wait times after asking big questions. Remember our earlier discussion of properly channeled empathy. Being successful in something that is complex and Asking Bigger Questions deep poses much more interesting challenges 1. Increase wait time. to students than being successful at simple 2. Provide individual reflection time to gather things. So, in the case of higher-order think­ thoughts and to jot these down in a quickwrite (a brief time of two to five minutes for ing, being truly empathetic toward ELLs will students to compose thoughts in writing). mean under­standing what the students really 3. Detox old habits. Get students to expect to need (higher-order thinking skills), and then be asked bigger questions, by not jumping in with the answer. Give students time to providing effective and concrete scaffolds think through a question and then come (e.g., rippling questions, longer wait times) back to them. that will help students be successful in these 4. Offer students opportunities to interact with peers in pairs or small groups before meaningful classroom inter­actions. This asking them to share responses with the perspective is very different from one that whole class. seeks to help students avoid the discomfort 97

The Language-Rich Classroom

of a challenge. Instead, being empathetic in this way means we’re helping our students overcome and even welcome a challenge.

Critical Readers and Writers: Analyzing the Author’s Craft Everyone has an opinion, a perspective, a worldview, and prior experiences that deeply influence the views that they hold and how they express those views in writing. An important aspect of encouraging students to become critical readers is to help them develop their ability to analyze the ways that authors effectively influence others, whether by manipulating our feelings to get us to like or dislike a fictional character or by swaying our opinions through carefully written nonfiction. Analyzing authors in this way also helps students become critical writers them­ selves as they anticipate opposing arguments and write with these in mind. Figure 4.4 contains prompts for helping students think through the author’s point of view. As students read, teachers should ask them to stop periodically and identify the author’s assumptions. Students engage higher-order thinking skills as they reflect on what the opposing arguments or viewpoints might be and how someone with a

Figure 4.4 Prompts for Author Analysis

 1. What is the author’s viewpoint or position?  2. What do you know about the author that may have affected his or her viewpoint? (For example, in what part of the world does the author live?)  3. What do you want to know about the author?  4. Can you trust this author’s viewpoint? Why or why not?  5. What are some assumptions that the author makes?  6. Reflect on what the opposing arguments or beliefs might be.  7. H  ow did the author use words to affect your feelings (for example, to make you like or dislike a character)?  8. What specific words evoked specific feelings?  9. How is this style similar to or different from things you have read in the past? 10. How can you use this style in your own writing? 1 1. Who is the author’s intended audience? How do you know?

98

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

different perspective might respond to the author. Once students understand the author’s position, it may help them to do the following: 1. Identify the author’s position. 2. Determine the assumptions inherent in the text they just read. 3. Examine the author’s bias and its effect on the validity of the statements made. 4. Reflect on what the opposing arguments or beliefs might be. Figure 4.5 is a chart to help students think through an author’s perspective and possible opposing beliefs or arguments. Similarly, when writing their own position papers, students can use this chart to anticipate opposing views and address these in their writing.

Language and Cognition It’s important to consider the relationship between using higher-order thinking skills and developing academic language. Is it a causal relationship? Does academic language lead to higher-order thinking skills? Or do higher-order thinking skills lead to academic language? Vygotsky’s (1986) writings lead us to believe that the relationship between academic language and higher-order thinking is reciprocal. Academic language develops as a result of activities that nurture higher-order thinking, and the reverse is also true: higher-order thinking is further challenged and grows as a result of the developing language. Although Vygotsky is well known for his theories on the zone of proximal development (the idea that the learner is brought to his or her next level or potential level of development through problem solving and interaction with more capable peers or adults), he also studied the interfunctional relationship between language and thought. What he had to say more than 70 years ago is still highly significant in our understanding of the development of higher-order thinking skills and language today. The relation of thought to word is not a thing but a process, a continual movement back and forth from thought to word and from word to thought. In that process, the relation of thought to word undergoes changes that themselves may be regarded as development in the functional sense. Thought is not merely expressed in words; it comes into existence through them. Every thought tends to connect something with something else, to establish a relation between things. Every thought moves, grows and develops, fulfills a function, solves a problem. (Vygotsky, 1986, p. 218)

99

100

What evidence does the author use to support his or her point of view?

Author’s Point of View:

Assumptions Chart (Author Analysis)

Figure 4.5

What does the author assume is true?

What are some opposing beliefs or ­arguments that might be posed?

The Language-Rich Classroom

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Words influence thoughts, and thoughts Recommended Resources cause the words to evolve, taking on bigger Critical Pedagogy: Notes From the Real World by Joan Wink, 2005. This book explores meanings as thoughts and words exchange in relationships between teacher beliefs and a back-and-forth relationship. Add to this classroom practices in a way that stirs up the language input that is acquired through reflection. Within this readable book, Joan Wink highlights the power that teachers interaction with more linguistically profi­ have in changing the classroom, and cient peers in verbal interchanges brought eventually society. Wink is a fan of Vygotsky about as a result of bigger questions, and and reflectively explores the relationship between language and thought. Though the both language and cognition benefit. Through concepts are heavy, Wink uses personal practice in activities that promote higherstories to make the book easy to understand order thinking, language doesn’t just express and enjoyable. our thoughts—it questions our thoughts, interacts with our thoughts, extends our thoughts, refines our thoughts, brings completion to our thoughts, and gives birth to new thoughts. According to Vygotsky, this interfunctional relationship between language and thought is one of the things that make us uniquely human. Animals communicate, but they can’t express the depth of meaning that humans can as a result of the interaction between language and thought. “A frightened goose suddenly aware of danger and rousing the whole flock with its cries does not tell others what it has seen but rather contaminates them with his fear” (Vygotsky, 1986, p. 7). Chamot and O’Malley (1994) stress the importance of teaching cognitive academic language skills, specifically to English language learners, in order for them to be able to perform at higher levels of thinking. “Academic language fosters thinking. When students listen and read to acquire new information and understanding, and when they speak and write to express their thoughts, interpretations, and judgments about what they are learning, they are using language as a medium for thinking. Academic language skills are an integral part of higher level thinking” (p. 44). The manipulation of speech is another acquired skill that is important in students’ ability to answer big questions. As students interact and become passionate about topics that engage their reasoning skills, they are more likely to pick up ways of manipulating speech so that they convey deep thoughts. It’s not just learning individual units of words. Students learn to manipulate speech to 101

The Language-Rich Classroom

convey (and interact with) bigger thoughts. The practice in back-and-forth dialogue with respected peers, and the confidence to say something insightful and meaningful, is integral in developing higher-order thinking. Partaking in this process is in itself empowering, and the classroom is an ideal place to do so. Content provides the perfect vehicle, as long as it can be connected to personally meaningful concepts. All of this takes practice and exposure to answering bigger questions as well as interactions with more capable peers. Jane Hershberger, a school administrator and former ESL teacher, designed a high school course to help ELLs develop strategic reading and writing skills. Actually, her 82-minute class was aimed at helping long-term English learners become successful in school, but Hershberger decided to devote a large chunk of time to literary analysis. After visiting her class, we noted the depth of student discussion and engagement during the reading of the book Tuesdays with Morrie (Albom, 2002). We commented on her ability to move ELLs beyond the literal and into discussions that required higher-order thinking skills. She responded, “The more complex it is, the better they do. The deeper the topic, the more engaged they become, because it’s interesting, for goodness sake! .  .  . They’re so ready to be taken seriously!” The students understood the responsibility that they had been handed when they were each being asked to analyze the author’s perspectives and motives and to make connections to their own worlds, and they did so gladly. Hershberger’s class was rigorous, but because students felt like what they were learning was authentic and relevant, they were willing to do the work. Expectations were kept high, and the students knew that their teacher trusted them and believed that they had the ability to meet high expectations.

Peripheral Language As discussed in Chapter 2, we refer to peripheral vocabulary as that stored bank of vaguely understood, untapped, non-content-specific vocabulary that has never or rarely been attempted. We refer to active vocabulary as the words that are owned and used by the student either verbally or in writing. These are words that the student is already using regularly. Classroom interactions that require higher-order thinking provide perfect opportunities to use peripheral language in verbally defending one’s answers. Furthermore, as peers hear each other using words in a context that is understood, and within low-stress verbal interactions, they add to 102

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

their own bank of peripheral and active language. This phenomenon happens every day in the form of slang. We acquire slang through verbal interactions with peers. In a similar way, students can solidify their understandings of academic vocabulary through verbal interactions in contexts where they understand what is being said. But this isn’t likely to happen when we engage only a few students in activities that require higher-order thinking, as is commonly done when a big question is asked of a class and a volunteer is called on to answer the question. The interaction may be meaningful to the volunteer, but most of the class remains disengaged. Total participation techniques (see Chapter 6) are critical for getting all students to interact and become involved in this process of developing both language and cognition.

Connections for Relevance and Meaning Let’s go back to the example of picturing our brains as a room full of file cabinets. Our task is to engage students in activities that require them to make connections by opening files that would not necessarily have earlier been considered relevant to their understanding of the topic. The more files that need to be opened, the better. Consider this statement on which students are asked to reflect and respond: “The American Revolution has had a profound impact on my personality.” We’ve used this prompt many times in our college classes, and students’ first reaction is usually to say that the American Revolution hasn’t had any effect on their personalities. But as opposing arguments are posed by peers and as evidence is weighed, most come to a different conclusion. The reason that they come to a different conclusion is because connections are made with existing files that they hadn’t initially opened. Our job is to get students to have to open up many files before they feel that they have adequately addressed a question. We can provide opportunities for developing language and cognition at the same time by engaging students in topics that link to their prior experiences and require them to open up personal files that they hadn’t considered before. Take, for instance, the following quote from a high school student enrolled in a Mexican American studies class that engaged her language, spirit, and mind: “Until this class, yeah, I knew who César Chavez was. Yeah, they named a street over this guy. Big deal. But I never knew what he did. I never knew about the farmworkers, about our civil rights movement which was a civil rights movement” (PBS Home 103

The Language-Rich Classroom

Video, 1998). This student had been interviewed during a documentary aimed at gaining insight into the problem of the high dropout rates of Latinos in U.S. schools. Her comments throughout the documentary drip with a seemingly newly awakened reality to the fact that she has something important to say. And she does. It’s also evident that the Mexican American studies class played an important role in her coming to this realization and to the development of her unique sense of voice. In her own words regarding the class, “It has made me a proud Chicana. It has made me want to strive for more” (PBS Home Video, 1998). Developing this sense of voice in the classroom must be intentional. It requires asking bigger questions and allowing the students time to process questions, meaning longer wait times for questions asked aloud and reflection times where students can record their thoughts on paper and through small-group interactions before sharing with the whole class.

Thinking Big in the Content Classes As noted, content classrooms are the perfect vehicles for developing both language and cognition together. History, for example, lends itself well to the critical analysis of an author’s perspective. Although the comfort zones for some history teachers may be the accumulation of knowledge (“When was the first American colony founded?”) and comprehension (“Summarize what happened”), this content area has the potential to offer so much more by way of analysis and evaluation. For history teachers to effectively lead students to higher levels of thinking, they must keep in mind the enduring understandings (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) that they hope students will walk away with. For Jim Weidemoyer, the history department liaison for McCaskey High School campuses, “The most important things that I hope my history students leave my classroom at the end of the year with is an idea of what the American society has gone through .  .  . that makes our society what it is today.” Having in mind the overall purposes for what they are teaching allows history teachers to introduce and revisit the critical questions that will lead to students’ critical thinking regarding historical events and their impact on modern society. In science, teacher comfort zones seem to be in the area of acquiring knowledge (“Here’s the principle” and “Here’s why it works”). According to Diane Patton, a science curriculum coordinator, however, so much more can be done than the 104

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

simple transmission of knowledge in teaching science. “Science isn’t finished,” she said. “We still have theories and facts that are being changed. So, students have to be allowed opportunities for that collaborative talk in the classroom so that they’re more able to ask questions. Science continually asks questions.” Done well, science is bursting with opportunities for analysis, synthesis, and student inquiry-based learning. The same is true for mathematics, where the comfort zones tend to be in the rote application of knowledge (“Here’s a problem. Here’s how you solve it. Now, you try it.”). Mary Leer, an elementary mathematics coordinator, believes that “if rote [application] without understanding worked, we wouldn’t have so many math-phobics that are my age or even younger. I was taught rote, and a lot of other people my age were taught rote. When you think about it, if it worked, we wouldn’t be in this situation. So, why would we go back to it?” Helping students develop critical thinking skills in mathematics focuses on the processes involved and a deeper analysis of how things work rather than a rote application of knowledge. Figure 4.6 offers content-based bookmarks that contain questions aimed at helping teachers think through their lessons and develop their own essential questions as they plan. The bookmarks can be photocopied and taped onto the insides of teacher plan books.

105

106

Critical Historians  Why did this event happen?  What were possible hidden motives behind the cause of this event?  Why is this important to know today?  What was the long-term impact?  How does this affect society today?  How does this affect you today?  How were later events affected by this event?  What are the parallels between this time period and the society we live in today?  Who were the real winners because of this event?  Who lost out?  What other parties benefited or are benefiting from this event?  How might the outcome have been different?  Why is this event remembered?  How is this event viewed by other participants receiving less focus?  What might be an opposing view of this event?  What do others say about this event?

Content-Based Bookmarks

Figure 4.6

Critical Scientists  Make as many connections as you can to this finding and the world around you.  What is affected by this finding?  What bigger things have come about as a result of this discovery?  How can this finding lead to other discoveries or improvements in the way we live?  Does it always work this way? What happens when something else is introduced?  Can you justify your claims with evidence?  How is this relevant to life today?  How should humans respond to this finding?  How has your thinking about this topic changed?

Critical Mathematicians  How and why does it work?  Does it always work?  When doesn’t it work?  What other ways could you solve this problem?  Is this the most efficient (easiest) way of solving this problem?  What would happen if . . . ?  Why is this important?  How has this been used in real life?  How can this be used to simplify life?  Make as many connections as you can to this finding and the world around you.

Deep and Open Questions for Narrative Stories  If you had to tell a friend what this story was about, what would you say?  Were there more important parts to the story?  Was there a moment in the story that you felt was a real turning point (or very important to the way the story ended)?  Why was it a turning point?  How would the outcome have been different without this event taking place?  How did the story make you feel?  What in particular made you feel this way?  How did the author use language to make you feel this way?  What kinds of images, or pictures, were in your mind as we (you) read?  How did the author use certain words to help you form these images?  How did the author make you like (dislike) a certain character in the story?  How did the author surprise (not surprise) you as you were reading?  How did this author write differently than ___________ (another known author)?  Would you choose to read a story by this author again? Why or why not?  Would you choose to read this type of a story again? Why or why not?

The Language-Rich Classroom

5

A = Assessment

As we mentioned in Chapter 1, it is important to see efforts at improving instruction for ELLs as something pertaining not only to ESL specialists but to all teachers of ELLs. In pullout-type programs, the ELL spends more time in the content-area classroom than with the ESL teacher. The classroom provides rich content-based opportunities to develop academic language that are often absent in ESL pullout classes. In sheltered classrooms (where classroom teachers focus on language and content development), language assessment is also critical. Regardless of the program model(s) that your district uses, it’s imperative that classroom teachers have a working knowledge of language development, of their responsibility in the process of language development, and of ways to assess the linguistic proficiency levels of their students. This chapter provides classroom teachers with tools for informally assessing the linguistic proficiencies of the ELLs in their classrooms. Tools for checking ELL progress will also be presented for fine-tuning the assessment and monitoring of ELLs who have been exited from or are in the process of exiting ESL programs.

Assessment in the Hands of the Classroom Teacher In too many districts, the language assessment of ELLs is left up to assessment specialists often housed in separate buildings, or it’s done by a solitary individual who then summarizes the student’s language proficiency in a single letter or 107

The Language-Rich Classroom

indicator meant to describe the develop­ mental stage for the students’ teachers. Oftentimes, little or no elaboration comes with the score a student receives, and ESL and classroom teachers alike find themselves going weeks, or longer, without really having an accurate measure of the student’s linguistic proficiency. We’ve spoken to several ESL teachers who don’t know the proficiency test used by their district or the meaning behind the letter designations that accompany the students who arrive in their programs. And who can blame them? The arbitrary scores do little to inform their teaching. Wouldn’t it be helpful if these scores were placed in a meaningful context? In Chapter 2, we discussed the importance of teaching at what Krashen (2003) calls i + 1. This description means that for optimal language acquisition to occur, the student should be given linguistic opportunities that are just slightly above his or her current instructional level. This idea is similar to that of Vygotsky’s (1986) zone of proximal development. But doing i + 1 well hinges on our knowing what i is. In fact, we believe that much of classroom teachers’ frustration is due to their not understanding their students’ current levels of proficiency. Many schools conduct formal language assessments for each ELL on a regular basis, once or twice a year. We highly recommend that teachers themselves be administered the test at least once, so that they can get a feel for how the test is conducted and what the scores mean. Sitting through a formal language assess­ ment test often takes no more than 20 minutes. We’ve assigned this project in our college class, and we often administer the tests in groups. Most teachers are thankful for the experience, having gained a much richer understanding of the standardized proficiency scores and a deeper appreciation for what ELLs experience in their classrooms.

Recommended Resources Literacy Assessment of Second Language Learners by Sandra Rollins Hurley & Josefina Villamil Tinajero (2001). With 10 wide-ranging articles written by reputable authors like Jim Cummins, Alma Flor Ada, and Isabel Campoy, this book is a wonderful resource for any practitioner who has questions ranging from assessment of reading and writing to the assessment of parent programs and ELLs with special needs.

First-Language Writing Samples We cannot emphasize enough the importance of teachers getting a feel for a student’s academic development in the first language. This piece is so critically 108

Assessment

essential in understanding what students’ needs are and how best to help them. One of the very first things that we try to do with our own ELL students is get a first-language writing sample to gather information related to first-language schooling. When we could make our message known by translating or asking another student to quickly interpret, we would ask students to write in their first language telling us what they missed most about their home country. Regardless of how much they were able to write or whether they were even able to write anything at all, the writing sample provided vital information regarding firstlanguage competence and schooling (see Figure 5.1, and also refer again to Chapter 1). The first objection that we get from teachers when we suggest the practice of collecting first-language writing samples is that if the teacher doesn’t speak or read the student’s first language, then the first-language writing sample will be useless. But we have found that regardless of whether or not we could read the firstlanguage writing sample, we were still able to glean very important information from it. For example, a first-language writing sample from a Mandarin-speaking student who filled a complete page with beautifully formed, orderly characters leads us to believe that the student has had formal schooling that has probably been quite adequate. On the other hand, if students write very little and the little that they’ve written doesn’t seem to follow any orderly visual flow, this leads us to ask Benefits of a First-Language Writing Sample further questions regarding prior schooling • Saves you months of trying to figure things out. This is especially true when working with experiences. students who have limited formal schooling. Either way, after getting the writing • Allows you to place emphasis on concepts sample, we always try to find a person who that are most needed. For example, if a can read the student’s first language and student is literate in Spanish, you can give little or no emphasis to the topics that will translate the writing for us. Whether it be transfer (concepts of print, decoding, and the school custodian, a substitute teacher, fluency) and give more emphasis to things or another teacher within the district, we like vocabulary development, so that when students read, they can understand what it is have found that they often confirm what we they’re reading. already suspected. The first-language • Allows you to focus on the critical question writing samples that were presented in “What does this student need?” This question Chapter 1 can give you a feel for how this should drive everything—from lesson planning to instructional delivery to assessments. might be true for you as well. 109

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 5.1 First-Language Writing Sample

Name ____________________________ Grade Level _____ Date _________________ Language spoken at home:

Student’s dominant language:

Grade at which student entered English-speaking schools:

Note: Please ask a translator or class peer to translate the following prompt, or you can create your own prompt, as appropriate. Instructions: Write what you remember about your home country. What are some things you miss most?

______ minutes Record the actual amount of time that it took to complete this writing sample (suggested: five minutes).

110

Assessment

Knowing that a student has had few academic experiences or limited formal schooling might point to a need for intensive support and creative ways of giving this student individual attention whenever possible. Though we want to be careful not to overgeneralize, the first-language writing sample provides an initial feel for students’ academic performance in their native language. For students with limited formal schooling, the differences in writing are often quite noticeable compared to pieces written by students with more formal schooling. Knowing a little bit about students’ educational backgrounds helps inform teaching. A student with an exten­sive schooling background may simply be in the process of transferring knowl­edge from the home language to English, whereas a student with limited formal schooling may be seeing the concepts taught in these lessons for the very first time.

Stages of Language Acquisition In the following sections, we discuss different stages of linguistic development (see Figure 5.2 for an overview). These are followed by sample interviews of students at each of the five stages (pseudonyms have been used throughout). A more detailed set of informal language assessment indicators appears later in the chapter (see Figure 5.4) and can be used to conduct informal language assessments of your students. As you read the descriptions of the stages and the examples of student conversations, keep in mind that the descriptions are given with the assumption that students have overcome shyness and are speaking to the best of their ability. Similarly, when you conduct your own informal assessment interviews, remember that the students should feel comfortable enough with you or the interviewer so that the language samples will be typical of the students’ capabilities and everyday language.

Stage 1: Emergent Stage The emergent stage describes students who are newly arrived to English-speaking contexts. Students at this stage may be experiencing what Krashen (2003) calls a silent period, a period of days to months when ELLs may say nothing at all or no more than a few words or phrases. At the emergent stage, students are not yet at the point where they can carry on a conversation. Typically, their comprehension of English is actively developing, even though they are not able to demonstrate this through speaking, reading, or writing. English language learners at the emergent stage are usually able to understand more than they can communicate. 111

Listening

Speaking

112 Stage 2 Beginning The student can understand teacher prompts with minimal rephrasing. Lectures without a great deal of contextual supports are mostly incomprehensible to this student.

The student can respond in short sentences. The student’s speech has noticeable grammatical errors. The student uses gestures, facial expressions, and nonverbal cues to get his or her message across.

Stage 1 Emergent

This stage describes the student progressing from no comprehension of English to comprehension of simple sentences with the frequent need for rephrasing of teacher prompts.

This stage describes the student who is completely unable to speak in English progressing to one who can speak in comprehensible, two- or three-word sentences like “Girl cry.”

The student’s answers are kept brief with little or no elaboration unless prompted. The student speaks in fragments and has not yet developed a sophisticated vocabulary. Grammatical errors do not interfere with the message.

The student is able to comprehend and participate in a conversation with minimal misunderstandings. The student finds it very difficult to comprehend lectures without the use of scaffolds (e.g., graphic organizers).

Stage 3 Intermediate

Stage 4 Advanced

The student includes some elaboration in his or her speech with minimal teacher prompting. The student is beginning to use clichés and idioms. Grammatical errors are minimal and do not interfere with the message.

The student is able to comprehend and participate in a conversation with few or no misunderstandings. The student is able to listen attentively to lectures and, with some support, can form an outline or summary of many of the main points.

Language Assessment Indicators

Language Assessment Indicator Reference List

Figure 5.2

The student is able to answer open-ended questions in detailed, comprehensible responses. Some evidence of sophisticated vocabulary is evident in this student’s speech samples. The student is likely to use clichés and idioms.

The student can comprehend a conver­sation with few or no mis­ understandings. The student is able to demonstrate his or her ­comprehension of class discussions, lessons, and lectures without the use of scaffolds.

Stage 5 Achieving Academic Fluency

The Language-Rich Classroom

Writing

Reading

Stage 2 Beginning This stage describes a student whose reading fluency and compre­ hension are considerably behind those of his grade-level peers. Content area reading poses a significant challenge for a student at this stage of language development. The student may be able to write two or three simple sentences. The student is more able to write about ­concrete events than expository type pieces. Grammatical and ­spelling errors interfere with the message being conveyed.

Stage 1 Emergent

This stage describes the student who is not yet demonstrating understanding of sound/ symbol relationships progressing to one who is able to sound out simple words.

This stage describes the student who is not yet demonstrating an ability to write anything in English progressing to one who can write ­simple words or have letter-sound correspondence and can write simple words as they are dictated.

The student’s writing is comprehensible. Mecha­ nical errors often ­disrupt the flow of the message being ­conveyed. The student, most likely, does not enjoy the writing ­process, as good writing relies heavily on academic language.

The student may be able to decode readings but has minimal comprehension of academic texts without the support of scaffolds (e.g., graphic organizers). The student is able to read, but, because of the effort involved in comprehending text, may not enjoy it.

Stage 3 Intermediate

Stage 4 Advanced

With the use of a ­scaffold, the student is able to clearly organize his or her thoughts into cohesive and well-­ transitioned paragraphs. The student is able to add descriptiveness to writings. Writing is becom­ing less of a feared and avoided topic.

The student is able to read in all genres. This student is becoming more and more successful in his or her ability to read and summarize what has been read in academic texts without a scaffolding tool. The student may or may not choose the option of using a scaffolding tool.

Language Assessment Indicators

Language Assessment Indicator Reference List

Figure 5.2 (continued)

The student is able to clearly organize thoughts into a multiparagraph essay. The student writes in cohesive, well-transitioned paragraphs. Writing competency is at or is approaching grade-level expectations.

The student is able to be successful in reading and comprehending academic texts without the use of a scaffolding tool. The student is able to independently read and comprehend ­chapter books that are age-appropriate or approaching ageappropriateness.

Stage 5 Achieving Academic Fluency

Assessment

113

The Language-Rich Classroom

The following are two interviews with students at the emergent stage of language development. Emergent Stage—Elementary Grade Interview with Daisy, a 3rd grader from Laos Interviewer: What’s your favorite thing to do? Daisy: (Shrugs) Interviewer: You don’t have a favorite thing to do? Daisy: (Shakes head) Interviewer: OK, what is your favorite thing to do in school .  .  . (three-second pause) your   favorite subject .  .  . or class? Daisy: (Four-second pause) Writing. Interviewer: Why is it writing? Daisy: Is good. Interviewer: Do you write well .  .  . nicely? Daisy: Mm-huh (yes). Interviewer: Do you like books? Daisy: Mm-huh (yes). Interviewer: What kinds of books? Daisy: (Shrugs and waves hand in front of her) Books? Interviewer: Tell me, what is your favorite book? Daisy: (Three-second pause) The Time Wrap Toy (actual book is Time Warp Trio, currently   being read aloud in class) Interviewer: Tell me a little about the book. Daisy: Is good.

Emergent Stage—Secondary Grade Interview with Marisela, a 10th grader from Colombia Interviewer: How long ago did you arrive from Colombia? Marisela: Six month ago. Interviewer: Did you speak any English there? Marisela: Uh-uh (no). Interviewer: Do you feel like you’ve learned a lot of English? Marisela: Mm-huh (nods). Interviewer: What made your parents move to Richmond? Marisela: (Asks for clarification) Why? Interviewer: Yes, why did they come here? Marisela: Eh, no money. Interviewer: And so, they had a job here .  .  . (three-second pause) you think? Marisela: (Nods)

Analysis of Emergent-Stage Interviews In the first example, there is some evidence that Daisy was able to understand at least parts of the questions asked, even though it took her time to formulate her 114

Assessment

responses, and she kept her responses to open-ended questions very short. She didn’t have enough fluency in English to elaborate on answers to open-ended questions. Her listening comprehension at the time of the interview was greater than her ability to articulate her responses. In the second example, Marisela looked intently at the interviewer as she was interviewed, as if needing to see the interviewer mouth the words or searching for some contextual cues the interviewer might use in her interview. The interviewer spoke slowly and articulated each question clearly. In both interviews, the interview was completely dependent on the interviewer having prepared questions. The students didn’t have enough English proficiency to take the conversations onto a limb or to open up discussion on other related topics.

Stage 2: Beginning Proficiency This may be a very frustrating stage for students as they try to express their deep understanding of concepts but are hindered by a limited vocabulary in English. At this stage, because listening is an active process of translation from their first language, students’ attention may drift to unrelated things. They won’t be able to listen to long, decontextualized speech. Students greatly benefit from what Cummins (1991) calls context-embedded instruction, where the students are learning in highly contextualized and engaging environments through the use of hands-on and discovery learning. Students at this stage may be able to understand the main ideas of fictional chapter books that are read aloud with the support of inflection, occasional pictures, and questions for clarification. Even if students aren’t able to read and understand chapter books on their own, they may be able to pick up the main points as they’re being read aloud, because students’ listening comprehension at this stage usually far surpasses their ability to explain what they know verbally or in writing. And, as discussed in Chapter 2, read-alouds provide an enjoyable and effective way of developing language. Beginning Proficiency—Elementary Grade Interview with Cindy, a 3rd grader from Laos Interviewer: Do you like books? Cindy: Yeah. Interviewer: What is your favorite book?

115

The Language-Rich Classroom

Cindy: (18-second pause) Junie B. Jones. Interviewer: Why is that your favorite book? Cindy: ’Cause she’s funny. Interviewer: What things does she do that are funny? Cindy: She holler and (11-second pause) she hide in school. Interviewer: Do you read a lot? Cindy: Uh-huh. Interviewer: What’s your favorite Junie B. Jones book? Cindy: Junie B. Jones and the Stupid Smelly Bus. Interviewer: What’s it about? Cindy: She hate the bus. Interviewer: Why? Cindy: She get sandwich .  .  . in her head. Interviewer: Why does she get a sandwich on her head? Cindy: (10-second pause and shrugs) Interviewer: Can you tell me a little about school? Cindy: Think school is fun. Interviewer: What do you like about school? Cindy: Do math and reading. Interviewer: What don’t you like about school? Cindy: Social science. Interviewer: Why? Cindy: ’Cause I don’t like writing.

Beginning Proficiency—Secondary Grade Interview with Miguel, a 9th grader from Puerto Rico The class had finished reading the chapter book Holes by Louis Sachar. Interviewer: How did you like the book? Miguel: (Shrugs) Interviewer: Were you able to read the book? Miguel: Is boring. Interviewer: Were you able to understand it? Miguel: Some things. Interviewer: Can you tell me about your friends? Miguel: (Five-second pause) Interviewer: Do you have a lot of friends here? Miguel: Yeah, a lot of friends Interviewer: What are they like? Miguel: Marta and Delia, she’s my best friend, Delia. Interviewer: What do you do together? Miguel: Talk and .  .  . listen to music .  .  . and go shopping. Interviewer: Do you like to shop? Miguel: Uh-huh (yes). Interviewer: Can you tell me about your family?

116

Assessment

Miguel: They are special to me, and good, and I love them. Interviewer: That’s great! Do you remember when you got here? Miguel: (Asks for clarification in Spanish) The fecha .  .  . date? Interviewer: Yes. Miguel: August 29th. Interviewer: How did you feel when you first got here? Miguel: I was sad, but I like now.

Analysis of Beginning Proficiency Interviews In both examples, the students clearly understand the questions being asked. Both Cindy and Miguel are able to carry on a conversation with less effort than students at the emergent stage. However, because of the obvious effort that it takes them to answer the questions, it’s still noticeable that the students are in the process of acquiring competency in English. Students with beginning proficiency still don’t have the vocabulary necessary to carry on effortless conversations. Students benefit from the use of nonverbal scaffolds, such as the use of graphic organizers that the students can use as springboards for expressing their understanding of concepts. At this stage, the students actively go through a translation process, thinking first in their native language and then translating key words that are similar to or known in English. Although student errors are easy to overlook in the context of a conversation, they are much more noticeable in the students’ writing. It’s no wonder that students like Cindy dislike writing, where the effort is so often placed on exactness and the mechanics of speech.

Stages 3 and 4: Intermediate and Advanced Proficiency Knowledge of what goes on at these stages is critical for teachers. These stages are the most misunderstood stages of language development where students are least likely to receive support because of their seeming fluency in English. Because conversational language is not as difficult for students at the intermediate proficiency stage, teachers may believe that the student has acquired enough English fluency to succeed in school. Minor grammatical errors are easily overlooked when students are speaking within the context of a conversation. Students at this stage appear to have acquired English because their verbal English, at first glance, seems to be comparable to that of native English speakers. It is at these stages that students may be referred for special education services when, in fact, developing academic fluency is an area that must be addressed. As discussed 117

The Language-Rich Classroom

in Chapter 2, academic language is the language of books and the type of language found in textbooks and school-related exercises. Because the concept of academic proficiency is often overlooked, student failure and teacher frustration are both high at these stages. Although students with intermediate and advanced proficiency seem to speak well with others and can make themselves understood, careful analysis of their oral and written language indicates that these students often speak and write in fragments as opposed to paragraphs. Here’s the key to identifying students at the intermediate proficiency stage: Although conversational language differs from written language (even for native English speakers), fluid conversation is dependent on context for students at this stage. Therefore, when asked an openended question, the students seem to need a great deal of prompting to explain themselves. Students at the intermediate proficiency stage have often become accustomed to using “I don’t know” as an acceptable answer. Depending on their first-language experience, they are in the process of developing the language and the higher-order thinking skills that allow them to answer open-ended questions. The real difference between native English speakers and ELLs comes not in oral language samples but in performance on writing tasks and reading tasks. Students at the intermediate proficiency stage have difficulty understanding non-contentspecific academic words in academic texts. They lack the comprehension of sophisticated textbook language even though their oral skills are good enough that they may be seen as talkative or even disruptive. By the time students reach the intermediate and advanced proficiency stages, many have been exited from programs that offer needed linguistic and academic support. As a result, they are left to struggle in contexts that rely on academic language. These students are often mistakenly seen as slower learners and consequently may be retained or end up dropping out of school altogether. Intermediate Proficiency—Elementary Grade Interview with Mariana, a 3rd grader from Puerto Rico Interviewer: What kinds of books do you like to read? Mariana: I like to read chapter books. Interviewer: Do you find them hard? Mariana: (Shakes head) Interviewer: What is your favorite book?

118

Assessment

Mariana: Junie B. Jones. Interviewer: Why? Mariana: Because she’s funny in the book. Interviewer: How is she funny? Mariana: She spits on her shoes to clean it. Interviewer: Yuk! Can you tell me about your friends? Mariana: Michaela. Interviewer: What about her? Mariana: She’s my best friend. Interviewer: What makes her your best friend? Mariana: Sometimes she’s kind of silly. Interviewer: Can you tell me about school? Mariana: School’s my favorite, to study. Interviewer: How come? Mariana: Because you get to learn so many things. Interviewer: Tell me, how would you spend your perfect day? Mariana: Probably, you get to do a special thing. Interviewer: Like what? Mariana: Like build something or paint something. Interviewer: What would you do? Mariana: I would play with my friends. Interviewer: Like how? Mariana: Like, just, I don’t know.

Intermediate Proficiency—Secondary Grade Interview with Marcos, a 10th grader from Honduras Interviewer: How did you like the book The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (read aloud in   ESL class)? Marcos: Yeah, I like it. Interviewer: What did you like about it? Marcos: About like the witch. Interviewer: What did you like about the witch? Marcos: Like, how she treat the other guys and the other guys that work for her, how she treat   them. Interviewer: Tell me about the kinds of books you like. Marcos: Um, wait, actually, like I don’t read that much, so, I don’t know. Interviewer: Do you read when the classes make you? Marcos: Sometimes. Interviewer: You read books sometimes? Marcos: When I get bored I like to read. Interviewer: What kinds of things do you like to read? Marcos: I read, uh, like truth stories. Interviewer: Oh, like biographies. Marcos: Yeah, something like that.

119

The Language-Rich Classroom

Interviewer: OK. Tell me how you would spend a perfect day. Marcos: I get to play with my friends. Interviewer: What would you play? Marcos: I get to go, like, play basketball and play soccer. Interviewer: What do you do after? Marcos: Then I go to my house. Interviewer: Mm-hm? Marcos: I do my homework, then watch TV for a little bit. Interviewer: What’s your least favorite subject in school? Marcos: Math. Interviewer: Why math? Marcos: It’s kind of difficult. Interviewer: What’s difficult about it? Marcos: ’Cause, from my country to here it’s kind of different subjects.

Analysis of Intermediate Proficiency Interviews The conversational examples of Marcos and Mariana suggest that both are at the intermediate proficiency stage. The students’ answers are easy to understand, and their grammatical errors are easy to overlook without seeing them in writing. Grammatical errors are present but do not necessarily interfere with understanding the message that the students are trying to convey. The students’ answers could not be understood in isolation. That is, if a third party were to catch pieces of this conversation, he or she would have to hear the question to fully understand the students’ answers. At this stage, the conversation is highly dependent on contextual supports such as teacher prompting (note that both of the students need to be prompted at every step). In addition, the students understand more than what is evident in their explanation. They settle for simple, uncomplicated ways of explaining themselves. They speak in fragments. This fact is not as obvious as it was for the students at the beginning proficiency stage, who might have reverted to their first language, and the challenges of language development are easier for teachers to overlook at this stage. Neither Marcos nor Mariana shows evidence of having developed a sophisticated level of vocabulary, although their vocabulary is growing. We’ve included con­ versational examples, but academic language proficiency is most easily seen in comprehension of academic texts and in student writing samples. At this stage, the students need a great deal of meaningful and painless exposure to academic language. The easiest way to do so is probably through reading engaging fiction and nonfiction in order to process academic language in meaningful contexts. 120

Assessment

Advanced Proficiency—Middle Grade Interview with William, a 6th grader from Germany Interviewer: What is your favorite subject? William: Uh, math. Interviewer: Why math? William: Because like there’s, like, problem that are easy, and there’s a lot of stuff that you could   do that’s, kind of, like hard, And, like, your teacher helps you with it, and the other stuff, like,   it’s hard for me, I don’t know why. Interviewer: Do you like science and history? William: Well, I like them too, ’cause I like science, social studies, and what else, um, we have   six, I think, well, we do reading and stuff like that, so I mostly like all the subjects, but I really   like math the most. Interviewer: What is hard for you? William: In the subjects? Interviewer: Yeah. William: Um, I think, like, social studies is the hardest. Interviewer: What about PE, gym? William: I think it’s the funnest in all of them. Well, we do, we do, like, not subjects—it’s like we   go to music, we go to art, and I think we go to computer lab. Interviewer: Do you like books? William: Yeah. Interviewer: What kinds of books do you like? William: I like Harry Potter. I like, um, zoo books, like about animals and stuff. I like ghost   books. Interviewer: What kinds of things do you do in school? William: Well, we do, I go to ESL. We go to computer lab on Cycle Day 5 and, um, and I have to   go to the library to exchange books every Cycle Day 1. Interviewer: Tell me how you would spend a perfect day? William: Uh, I don’t know, there’s a lot of stuff to say, but I’ll do something nice to my mom and   I’ll help her. Interviewer: Like how? William: And if it’s dusty, like a broom, when you sleep, it was like dusty on the floor, not inside   the house, because I live in an apartment, and if it’s dusty on the floor, then I sweep it off for   them, and then they don’t have to sweep it.

Advanced Proficiency—Secondary Grade Interview with Irma, a 10th grader from the Dominican Republic Interviewer: What did you think of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe? Irma: I don’t know. Interviewer: Were you able to understand it? Irma: Yeah, I understand it, ’cause, I know English. Like there’s another student there that just   came from PR, so I’ll be feeling like they don’t know English at all. Interviewer: Do you feel funny about that—about being in the same ESL class? 121

The Language-Rich Classroom

Irma: No, I don’t feel funny, it’s just—I know enough English, it’s just like I could speak more   English than Spanish, ’cause I’ve been in the United States since I was in kindergarten. Interviewer: What is your favorite subject? Irma: Um, I don’t got one. Interviewer: Is it because you like them all or don’t like any? Irma: Oh, no, I like them, some of them, ’cause some of them are hard, so .  .  .  . Interviewer: Which do you like most? Irma: Like, I like math, um, science, we got biology, that’s like my favorites. Interviewer: Are there subjects that you don’t like? Irma: ’Cause some of them are hard, like social studies.

Analysis of Advanced Proficiency Interviews For students like William and Irma, grammatical errors still occur, but they are minimal and don’t interfere with the meaning conveyed. Students at this stage were more likely to ask for clarification when they didn’t understand a question. Students also elaborated without being prompted. However, there is very little sophisticated, non-content-specific academic vocabulary in their speech samples. Students at the advanced proficiency stage still benefit from the CHATS strategies described in this book.

Stage 5: Achieving Academic Fluency The main difference between students at the achieving academic fluency stage and those at earlier stages is that students now can perform well in linguistic contexts that don’t offer a great deal of nonverbal support. Students’ reading comprehension and writing are becoming comparable to those of their native English-speaking peers. Students at this stage often provide detailed answers, peppered with sophisticated non-content-specific academic vocabulary, and they’re able to anticipate the next question and answer it. They speak in longer, more compacted sentences and paragraphs, and they need only a minimal prompt to explain themselves. The students understand that open-ended questions should be answered with details, and they can do so without much hesitation. Achieving Academic Fluency—Elementary Grade Interview with Eduardo, a 5th grader from Cuba Interviewer: What is your favorite subject? Eduardo: History

122

Assessment

Interviewer: Why history? Eduardo: Because you could learn, like, a lot of stuff from the past, like, uh, ancient stuff that   you can’t, like, learn in other places. Interviewer: Do you like books? Eduardo: I like the boxcar children. Interviewer: What do you like about that? Eduardo: They’re always, like, on an adventure, different types. Interviewer: Do you like TV? Eduardo: Yeah, I watch cartoons sometimes. I watch dramas. Sometimes I watch whatever   is on. Interviewer: How do you feel about ESL? Eduardo: Yeah, it pretty much helps ’cause in ESL we learn like, um, reading strategies and learn   how to write better. Interviewer: Can you tell me a little about your friends? Eduardo: I have a couple of friends. Most of them are my age. They mostly like the stuff that I   do—that’s how I usually find my friends, you know. Interviewer: Can you tell me a little about school? Eduardo: School is OK. I like it, and yet I don’t like it. Like, I like most of the teachers here.   They’re pretty nice. They teach you good things. They help you. Interviewer: Are there things you don’t like? Eduardo: Sometimes you have to do a lot of work. A lot of homework, and a lot of work in class,   and sometimes, they don’t give you a lot of time, just, like, a week to finish a big project.

Achieving Academic Fluency—Secondary Grade Interview with José, a 10th grader from Nicaragua Interviewer: Can you tell me about your favorite book? José: Right now, I think my favorite book was called Holes (by Louis Sachar). Interviewer: What’s it about? José: It’s about these kids, well, it’s actually just one main character. About a kid, and he was in   the wrong place at the wrong time, so he got in trouble. And he was accused of stealing some   shoes, I think it was, something like that, and they took him to a prison, it was not practically a   prison—it was like a temporary place to keep kids, and he was gonna be there. It was called a   lake, but it wasn’t a lake or anything like that. It was just a desert, out in Texas. Interviewer: What did you like about the book? José: I liked how they portrayed his trials, about kids coming up to him and bothering him,   and then at the end, he ended up leaving the place because he wasn’t guilty. And, what was  ­interesting was that his grandfather, his great-grandfather, had left some things, and his great  grandfather had the same name as his, and he got to take this suitcase of his. Interviewer: That sounds like a neat story. Can you tell me a little about your friends? José: Friends? In which way? Interviewer: What are your friends like? Are they generally Latino? José: Well, I get along a lot with the Hispanics, but I also have a lot of American friends. They’re   whites, like they say.

123

The Language-Rich Classroom

Interviewer: What do you like to do with them? José: Well, first of all, in school there’s not much free time, but if I’m at school, I talk with my   friends and hang out, or if it’s at home, I, like, go swimming with my friends or things like that.

Analysis of Achieving Academic Fluency Interviews In the case of Eduardo, sophisticated vocabulary characteristic of achieving academic fluency is evident in words like ancient, adventure, drama, strategies, and yet. In the case of José, such vocabulary is exemplified in words like accused, guilty, temporary, portrayed, and trials. Students at the achieving academic fluency stage can address details and verbally clear up misconceptions, such as Eduardo explaining his attitude toward school by saying, “I like it, and yet, I don’t like it.” Similarly, José was able to provide clarification when he felt as though he might have led the interviewer to a false impression: “Well, first of all, in school there’s not much free time, but if I’m at school .  .  .  .” One noticeable difference between the advanced and early language learners we’ve described here is that the advanced language learners took greater ownership of the conversation by asking for clarification when asked a vague question. It’s almost as if their linguistic confidence had developed to the extent that they knew that they were owed a better question. At this stage, the students’ answers could be understood in isolation. If a third party were to catch pieces of these conversations, he or she would not have to hear the interviewer’s question in order to understand the student’s answer.

Samples of Conversations with Native English Speakers For the sake of comparison, here are samples of interviews with monolingual native English speakers. Interview with Emma, a 2nd grader Interviewer: Tell me about school. Emma: Well, I don’t like school, because it’s a lot of work and I miss my family. Interviewer: Is there anything you like about school? Emma: Uh, yes, I love gym. Interviewer: Why? Emma: Because I like sports, and gym is very close to sports. Interviewer: Tell me about your family. Emma: Well, I like my dad cause he’s fun, but Mom’s a little boring, and, uh, my brother James is   really, really annoying. Interviewer: Mm-hm?

124

Assessment

Emma: Mmm, my mom likes to go to furniture stores, and Dad always is fun, so when Mom   goes away it’s really fun, and then when Dad goes away it’s really boring. Interviewer: Are there things you like to do with your family? Emma: I like to go bike riding with my dad, and this is the only one, but I like to go to TJ Maxx   and the pet store with my mom. OK, we never go to the pet store, but I would like that. Interviewer: How would you spend a perfect day? Emma: I would play outside with my friends, and I’d go bike riding, maybe to the ice cream   store, and then I’d just sit in my house, doing, like, fun activities. I mean, I’d like to read. I’d go   in my house and read, I mean .  .  . yeah. Interviewer: Anything else? Emma: Um, no. Interview with Lauren, a 10th grader Interviewer: Tell me about your friends. Lauren: What about ’em? Interviewer: Can you tell me what you do with them, what you look for when you’re looking for   friends? Lauren: Oh, OK, well, we hang out a lot, probably at their house, like, or at the mall, all those   kinds of things, you know, movies, and I’d probably look for .  .  .  . The most important is, like,   honest and trustworthy, and you have to know that you can depend on them, and if you tell   them something that they’re not supposed to tell anybody, that they won’t tell. Interviewer: OK? Lauren: You know what I mean, and they can’t bore you to death, either. I can’t stand boring   people. You know, an interesting personality. Interviewer: How would you spend a perfect day? Lauren: I would probably have to spend my perfect day with my friends, and just doing stuff   that I like to do, like softball and stuff, I don’t know, and do something different. Like, I get   bored doing the same stuff all the time. Like, go somewhere different, really plan and really do   something, like, spontaneously. Interviewer: Can you tell me a little about your family? Lauren: Uh, well, my brother’s annoying. My family is important, I mean, they get annoying   sometimes, they’re there for you, but sometimes you wish they weren’t. But, hey .  .  .  .

Analysis of Interviews with Native English Speakers Much of what was said for the students at the approaching academic fluency stage is true for the native English speakers in these samples. As is the case with advanced speakers learning English as a second language, the native English speakers were more likely to ask for clarification when asked a vague question. They often elaborated in their responses, answering more than the question asked. Both Emma and Lauren responded to minimal prompts (“OK?” and “Mm-hm?”) with more elaboration. They peppered their conversations with sophisticated vocabulary or non-content-specific academic words for their age group. For 2nd 125

The Language-Rich Classroom

grader Emma, those words were evidenced in her use of activities and annoying. (Interestingly enough, both Emma and Lauren describe their brothers as “annoying”—but that’s a cultural discussion we’ll leave for another book.) For 10th grader Lauren, sophisticated vocabulary was evidenced in words like trustworthy and spontaneously. It is important to note that even in the context of conversations with native English speakers, there are still grammatical errors.

Interviews and Informal Language Assessment Indicators Because audio recordings offer rich information on oral language long after the interview ends, we’ve included in Figure 5.3 a set of interview questions for your own audio recorded interviews. You may elaborate on these in order to get about a three-minute language sample, and of course you can always think of your own questions that link your literacy or content-area goals with your language assessment goals. Jeanne Oakes, ELL teacher at Burrowes Elementary, uses wordless picture books as prompts for oral language samples which she records and catalogs using her computer’s standard recording capabilities. (Wordless books are also available from Reading A–Z, mentioned in Chapter 2). What amazed her most about listening to each student’s recordings back-to-back was the amount of growth that had not been as obvious through day-to-day interactions. According to Oakes, “In the recordings, it became obvious to me how the sophistication of word-usage improved over such a short period of time [4 months].” The informal language assessment indicators in Figure 5.4 can assist you in keeping informal records of observable language behavior that might inform your teaching. We recommend that the indicators be filled out about three times a year and serve as one of multiple sources of assessments included in each ELL’s portfolio. The indicators allow you to keep records regarding ELL growth in listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

Monitoring Tools Effective monitoring of your exited students is a critical aspect affecting students’ long-term school performance. The federal government requires that we monitor English language learners for two years after they have been exited. Unfortunately, for too many districts, monitoring means very little in terms of systematic record

(text continued on p. 135)

126

Assessment

Figure 5.3 Interview Questions for Recorded Oral Language Samples Name _____________________________ Instructions: Use two or three questions that are open-ended and allow for the student to elaborate. Try to record approximately three minutes of dialogue. If the student answers with one-word answers, rephrase the questions so that you can gather as much information about the student’s oral language proficiency as possible. However, keep in mind that even one-word answers provide you with information on the student’s oral language development, and these can be used as a basis for comparison with later assessments done with the same student. If you feel that recording the interview would dramatically affect the results, you can jot down anecdotal notes during the interview or immediately after.

 1. W  hat is your favorite thing to do at recess time? (Ask the student to elaborate on how he or she performs this activity.)

 2. Do you like books? Why or why not? Tell me about the kinds of books you like.

 3. Tell me a little bit about your favorite subject.

 4 What’s your least favorite subject? Why is it your least favorite?

 5. Tell me about the kinds of things you like to watch on TV.

 6. Tell me about your favorite book.

 7. D  id you have fun the last time you went to PE (gym class)? Why or why not? What’s your favorite thing to do in PE (gym class)?

 8. What’s your favorite kind of music? How do you feel when someone tells you that they don’t like _______ (your favorite kind of) music?

 9. Tell me about your friends.

10. Tell me about your family.

1 1. Tell me about school.

12. How would you spend a perfect day?

127

128

Listening Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________

Speaking Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________

Student’s dominant language: Reading Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________

Writing Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________ Stage #_____ Date _________

Grade at which student entered Englishspeaking schools:

Note: Students from countries or locations that require English as a course of study, or that use a similar writing system as is used in English, may have reading and/or writing skills that surpass listening and speaking skills.

Reading oC  an the student read in his or her native language? oY  es o No o The student is not able to demonstrate understanding of letter-sound relationships. o The student can identify his or her name in print. o The student can identify friends’ names in print. o The student can sound out many simple words. o The student can sound out English words but may not know the meaning of the words that he or she reads. o The student can read and understand simple sentences of about five or fewer words.

Speaking oT  he student is using native language to communicate. o The student is experiencing a “silent period” and is not yet producing speech utterances in English. o When asked, the student will tell you his or her name and basic personal information. o The student can answer yes and no to simple questions. o The student can identify a handful of objects in the room by naming the objects. o The student forms incomplete but comprehensible sentences consisting of two or three words, such as “Girl cry.”

Listening

o The student is not yet demonstrating comprehension of simple questions or commands. o The student relies on verbal and nonverbal cues for understanding what is spoken. o Student shows comprehension of simple questions and commands by answering in the native language, gesturing, nodding, or using other nonverbal cues. o While being read to, the student is able to show comprehension of simple stories through nonverbal means such as pointing to pictures. o The student is able to physically follow through on commands such as “Pick up the pencil.” o The student can identify common objects in the room by pointing to them.

Stage 1: Emergent

Note: Students from countries or locations that require English as a course of study, or that use a similar writing system as is used in English, may have reading and/or writing skills that surpass listening and speaking skills.

oC  an the student write in his or her native language? o Yes o No oT  he student is not demonstrating an ability to write anything in English. oT  he student can write his or her name using letters of the alphabet. oT  he student can copy basic letters and words. oT  he student can write simple words. oT  he student understands lettersound relationships and can write simple words as they are dictated.

Writing

Place a checkmark and the date near the skills as they describe the student. You do not have to check every indicator. Feel free to skip to the page that best describes this student’s language proficiency. Students may be at different stages for each of the four domains (listening, speaking, reading, and writing).

Stages and Dates

Language spoken at home:

Student’s Name ____________________________

For use by Classroom Teachers of ELLs in Grades 2–12

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4

The Language-Rich Classroom

oT  he student’s vocabulary is still limited. o The student responses are kept short (four to seven words). o The student’s speech has noticeable grammatical errors. o The student, who at one time seemed unable to carry on a conversation, is now heard laughing with and conversing with friends. o The student volunteers to answer direct (usually not openended) questions in class or is able to answer when called on. o The student is not likely to elaborate on answers given without prompting. o The student is beginning to use question words, although the questions may not be grammatically correct (“Where is?” instead of “Where is he?”). o The student can explain his or her thinking through the support of facial expressions, gestures, and simple sentences. o The student may revert to his or her first language when confused, animated, or frustrated.

Speaking

Writing

Attach a nonedited writing sample for each marking period that the student is in your class (include at least three per year). You can also add an edited copy if you feel it helps to give a clearer picture of the student’s writing ability.

Can the student write in his or her native language? oY  es o No

(continued)

o The student can write two or three simple sentences. o The student’s writing has noticeable grammatical errors that interfere with the message conveyed. o The student’s writing has numer­ ous spelling errors that interfere with the message conveyed. o The student is able to write about concrete events as Note: The students from countries opposed to expository writing. or locations that require English as This includes a cohesive a course of study, or that use a beginning, middle, and end. similar writing system as is used in o The student can explain his or English, may have reading and/or her thinking in the content areas writing skills that surpass listening using simple sentences. and speaking skills. Note: The students from countries or locations that require English as a course of study, or that use a similar writing system as is used in English, may have reading and/or writing skills that surpass listening and speaking skills.

Can the student read in his or her native language? oY  es o No o The student is considerably behind his or her grade-level peers in reading fluency. o The student is considerably behind his or her grade-level peers in reading comprehension. o The student participates in silent reading times. o The student can read simple picture books. o The student has considerable difficulty with comprehension of content-area reading. o Comprehension of non-contentspecific academic vocabulary poses a significant challenge for this student.

Reading

Stage 2: Beginning Proficiency

Please refer to the additional comments page for additional prompts.

o It is difficult for you to carry on a conversation with this student without your need for restating what you have said. o Since listening is an active process of translation at this point, the student’s attention often drifts to nonrelated things. o The student can listen to a beginning chapter book read aloud with the support of intonation and feeling and occa­ sional pictures, and be able to get the gist of the story. o The student can retell a story using simple vocabulary or pictures. o The student is able to follow along in lessons that are context embedded and show comprehension by providing simple input. o The student’s ability to com­ prehend what he or she has heard noticeably surpasses his or her ability to speak, read, or write.

Listening

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

Assessment

129

130

Please refer to the additional comments page for additional prompts.

oW  riting is not yet as fluid as that of native English speakers. Mechanical errors often disrupt the flow of this student’s writings. o The student’s overall writing is comprehensible, regardless of grammatical errors. o Spelling errors are becoming less common and do not interfere with the message conveyed. o The student is able to paraphrase ideas. o The student writes about abstract as well as concrete concepts. o For the most part, this student does not enjoy most types of writing activities.

Attach a nonedited writing sample for each marking period that the student is in your class (include at least three per year). You can also add an edited copy if you feel it helps to give a clearer picture of the student’s writing ability.

oT  he student is able to read fictional books but may not enjoy the process of reading. o The student reads aloud with minimal mistakes. o The student can “get through” a chapter reading in a content area text but has minimal comprehension without the help of scaffolds. o The student is able to read chapter books and some gradeappropriate material (though may choose not to do so). o Through the use of well-chosen scaffolds, such as graphic organizers, the student is able to successfully summarize what has been read in academic texts, although without scaffolds, this remains a difficult task. o The student is able to participate in silent reading times.

Writing Can the student write in his or her native language? o Yes o No

Reading Can the student read in his or her native language? o Yes o N  o

Speaking oF  or the most part, the student’s answers are kept brief, with little or no elaboration on the topic. o Answers are not self-contained. In other words, a third party’s understanding of a student response would be dependent on that third party having heard the question. o Grammatical errors are present but do not necessarily interfere with the message that the student is trying to convey. o The student settles for simple, uncomplicated ways of explaining complex concepts. This fact is not as obvious as it was for the students at the beginning conversational stage, who noticeably struggled with vocabulary or reverted to their first language. o The student speaks in fragments (much more so than a native speaker) and has not yet developed a sophisticated level of vocabulary, although his or her vocabulary may be growing. o The student is able to give an oral report with the help of organizers.

Listening

Stage 3: Intermediate Proficiency

oT  he student is able to comprehend and participate in a conversation with minimal misunderstandings. o The student can comprehend engaging read-alouds with minimal support. o The student is able to take notes in class, with the use of a scaffold, such as a graphic organizer and highlighted key points. o There is evidence that the student understands more than what is evident in his or her explanations and writings. o The student, for the most part, understands jokes and humor (though he or she may not use them in his or her speech). o The student understands some figurative speech, idioms, and metaphors.

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

The Language-Rich Classroom

Please refer to the additional comments page for additional prompts.

(continued)

o With the use of a scaffold, the student is able to clearly organize his or her thoughts into cohesive and welltransitioned paragraphs. o Mechanical errors are common in first drafts, but the student is able to identify most of these errors through editing. o The student is able to write a multiparagraph persuasive paper explaining his or her thinking. o The student is able to add descriptiveness that enhances his or her writings. o With some guidance, the student is able to complete essays and research reports using sophisticated publications such as textbooks, newspapers, and encyclopedias. o Writing is becoming less of a feared and avoided topic.

Attach a nonedited writing sample for each marking period that the student is in your class (include at least three per year). You can also add an edited copy if you feel it helps to give a clearer picture of the student’s writing ability.

o The student is able to participate in and remain on task during silent reading times. o The student is able to independently read fictional chapter books that are approaching ageappropriateness with minimal difficulty. o The student can participate in small-group discussions centered around the analysis of a particular book, though this student may benefit from writing his or her thoughts beforehand, using some type of a scaffold. o Though the student may have preferences, he or she is able to read from a variety of genres. o This student is becoming more and more successful in his or her ability to read and summarize what has been read in academic texts without a scaffolding tool. The student may or may not choose the option of using a scaffold.

Writing Can the student write in his or her native language? oY  es o No

Reading Can the student read in his or her native language? oY  es o No

Speaking oT  he student is beginning to use clichés and idioms in conversation. o The student answers in longer sentences that can be understood within the context of the conversation. o With clarification and prompting, the student is able to verbally explain his or her thinking in a way that is understood. o The student volunteers to answer questions and gives his or her opinion in class. o Although the student may always have an accent, the student makes very few grammatical mistakes. o When the student makes any grammatical mistakes, they are not severe enough to interfere with understanding the message. o The student’s conversation is becoming less dependent on contextual supports such as teacher prompting. The student is able to answer open-ended questions with minimal prompting. o The student is experimenting with more sophisticated vocabulary.

Listening

Stage 4: Advanced Proficiency

oT  he student is able to comprehend and participate in a conversation with few or no misunderstandings. o The student can comprehend engaging read-alouds with minimal support. o With the help of prompts, the student is able to verbally, and/ or in writing, demonstrate his or her comprehension of class discussions, lessons, and lectures. o The student is able to take notes based on his or her in-class learning but benefits from the use of a scaffold. o The student is able to listen attentively to longer lectures and, with some support, can form an outline or summary of many of the main points. o The student understands jokes and humor. o The student understands figurative speech, idioms, and metaphors.

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

Assessment

131

132 oT  he student is able to clearly organize thoughts into an ageappropriate multiparagraph essay. o The student writes in cohesive and well-transitioned paragraphs. o The student writes multiparagraph essays using longer sentences that are tightly packed with information. o The student is able to complete essays and research reports using sophisticated publications such as textbooks, newspapers, and encyclopedias. o The student is able to write a persuasive paper. He or she is able to explain his or her thinking, articulate what he or she knows, and defend his or her point of view.

Attach a nonedited writing sample for each marking period that the student is in your class (include at least three per year). You can also add an edited copy if you feel it helps to give a clearer picture of the student’s writing ability.

o This student is able to be successful in reading and comprehending the vocabulary in age-appropriate academic texts without heavy reliance on a scaffolding tool. o The student is able to indepen­ dently read and comprehend chapter books that are ageappropriate or approaching age-appropriateness. o The student is able to partici­ pate in small-group discussions centered on the analysis of a particular book. o Though the student may have preferences, he or she is able to read and comprehend a variety of genres. o The student is able to partici­ pate in and remain on task during silent reading times.

Writing Can the student write in his or her native language? o Yes o No

Reading Can the student read in his or her native language? o Yes o No

Speaking oT  he student is able to answer open-ended questions in detailed, comprehensible responses (though it is important to note that even native English speakers do not speak in complete sentences). o Understanding the student’s response is not dependent on contextual supports such as teacher prompting. The student is able to give self-contained responses that can be under­ stood by a third party without having heard the question. o The student needs only a minimal prompt to explain him- or herself. o The student elaborates on a topic without being asked to do so. o The student’s speech is peppered with sophisticated vocabulary (non-contentspecific academic vocabulary). o In conversations, the student is able to clarify misunder­ standings by elaboration or asking another student to clarify him- or herself. o The student is able to use clichés, idioms, metaphors, and figurative speech in conversation.

Listening

Stage 5: Achieving Academic Fluency

oT  he student is able to compre­ hend and participate in a conversation with few or no misunderstandings. o The student is able to demon­ strate understanding of comprehension of narrative texts read aloud in class. o The student is able to dem­on­ strate his or her comprehen­sion of class discussions, lessons, and lectures. o The student is able to take notes based on his or her in-class learning (in the first or second language), as would be gradeappropriate. o The student is able to under­ stand jokes and humor. o The student is able to under­ stand figurative speech, idioms, and metaphors.

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

The Language-Rich Classroom

oA  lthough the student may always have an accent and may always make certain grammatical errors, the student’s grammar does not interfere with the message conveyed. oT  he student is able to explain his or her thinking and articu­ late what he or she knows.

Speaking

Please refer to the additional comments page for additional prompts.

Listening

Reading

Stage 5: Achieving Academic Fluency (continued)

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

(continued)

o The student is able to write using some sophisticated vocabulary (non-contentspecific academic vocabulary). o The student uses idioms, metaphors, and figurative speech in writing. o The student is able to “paint a picture with words,” using descriptive speech. o The student’s writing has few grammatical and mechanical errors. The student is able to edit his or her own work. o Writing is no longer a feared and avoided topic. o Older students are able to include disclaimers and enhancers such as • though, • in fact, and • while.

Writing

Assessment

133

134 Please keep records as they inform you regarding this student’s • ability to carry on a conversation with minimal prompts; • ability to verbally interact with peers; • ability to answer closed (direct) questions in class; • ability to answer open-ended questions in class; • progress in speaking ability. Date_______________

• ability to understand commands; • ability to follow during interactive lessons with contextual supports; • ability to follow during lectures and lessons with minimal contextual supports; • progress in listening comprehension.

Date_______________

Speaking

Can the student write in his or her native language? oY  es o N  o Please keep records as they inform you regarding this student’s * * * * *

Please date and include copies of writing samples. Date_______________

Can the student read in his or her native language? o Yes o No Please keep records as they inform you regarding this student’s • reading fluency; • reading comprehension; • content-area reading; • reading preferences; • reading progress. Please date and include titles of books read. Date_______________

areas of concern in writing; areas of progress in writing; attitudes about writing; narrative writing; expository writing.

Writing

Reading

Additional Comments

Please keep records as they inform you regarding this student’s

Listening

Student’s name ____________________________

Informal Language Assessment Indicators

Figure 5.4 (continued)

The Language-Rich Classroom

Assessment

keeping and follow-up support. Because classroom teachers are unaware of monitored students’ status and their responsibility to these students, and because ESL specialists are often preoccupied with the needs of ELLs on active status, typically very little support and attention, if any, are given to monitored ELLs. This lack of attention is often detrimental to ELLs’ long-term success, as they receive the least support when they need it the most. As noted earlier, Thomas and Collier (1997) found that “students being schooled all in English initially make dramatic gains in the early grades, whatever type of program students receive, and this misleads teachers and administrators into assuming that the students are going to continue to do extremely well” (p. 34). On exiting, after just a few years of exposure to ESL or bilingual programs, ELLs can fall progressively behind the achievement levels of their native Englishspeaking peers with an ever-growing achievement gap year after year. “Thus, an achievement gap that was partially closed in elementary school becomes wider with each passing year” (Thomas & Collier, 1997, p. 35). Just to keep up at the same pace as native English speakers, ELLs need to make more than one year’s progress in a year. Thomas and Collier (1997) calculate the progress needed in a typical 10-month school year to be 15 months, or 50 percent more than for native English speakers. Compound this problem with the absence of any additional academic and linguistic support or teacher understanding of the impact that language has on long-term school success, and it’s easy to see why Latinos who are learning English as a second language drop out of school at higher rates than any other group of students (Fry, 2003; U.S. Department of Education, 2002). If we hope to influence ELL success over the long term, then we must address the problem of improving our efforts toward monitoring student progress. We must make targeted efforts toward in-class support aimed at developing the academic language that our students need to succeed in school and in life. Effective monitoring is not difficult to do. The monitoring tools included in Figures 5.5 and 5.6 are designed to painlessly facilitate this process. They are meant to be filled out at the end of each marking period so that progress can be compared with that of previous marking periods. If a decline in progress is noticed, then support can take the form of meeting with the student to determine sources of difficulty, helping the student self-assess, and setting goals for future learning.

(text continued on p. 141)

135

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 5.5 ESL Monitoring Tool: Elementary Grades Note: Special thanks to Sandra Dunn, Laura Topakbashian, and Barbara Almstead from the Lower Merion School District for their helpful feedback on this tool. Name Grade at which student entered English-speaking schools Primary Language

Grade Level ESL Exit Date

In the boxes below, indicate range or average grades that this student received during each marking period. 1st

2nd

3rd

4th

Using the scale below, rate this student’s performance, in comparison to native English speakers, in each of the areas indicated: Marking Period

Well Below Average

Below Average

Average

Above Average

Well Above Average

Listening Comprehension (understanding of lessons; ability to take notes) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Speaking (ability to share in class, answer questions, participate in large- and small-group discussions) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Content-Area Reading (ability to understand and show comprehension of content-area texts) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

136

Assessment

Figure 5.5 (continued) ESL Monitoring Tool: Elementary Grades

Marking Period

Well Below Average

Below Average

Average

Above Average

Well Above Average

Content-Area Writing (ability to show understanding of concepts in written form) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Computational Math (participation; cooperation; working with others; asking questions) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Conceptual Math and Word Problems (sharing comments; asking questions; taking notes) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Science 1st 2nd 3rd 4th History 1st 2nd 3rd 4th (continued)

137

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 5.5 (continued) ESL Monitoring Tool: Elementary Grades

Marking Period

Well Below Average

Below Average

Average Social Skills

1st 2nd 3rd 4th Effort Toward Performance 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Marking Period 1st

2nd

3rd

4th

138

Comments Regarding This Student’s Overall Progress:

Above Average

Well Above Average

The Language-Rich Classroom

Assessment

Figure 5.6 5.5 Figure ESL Monitoring Monitoring Tool: Tool: Middle Elementary Grades ESL and High School Note: Special thanks to Sandra Dunn, Laura Topakbashian, and Barbara Almstead from the Lower Merion School District for their helpful feedback on this tool. Name Student Grade at which student entered English-speaking schools

Subject/ Period/Grade Level Subject/Period/Grade Level ESL ESLExit ExitDate Date

In the boxes below, indicate grades that this student received during each marking period. 1st

2nd

3rd

4th

Using the scale below, rate this student’s performance, in comparison to native English speakers, in each of the areas indicated: Marking Period

Well Below Average

Below Average

Average

Above Average

Well Above Average

Listening Comprehension (understanding of lessons; ability to take notes) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Speaking (ability to share in class, answer questions, participate in large- and small-group discussions) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Content-Area Reading (ability to understand and show comprehension of content-area texts) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th (continued)

40

139

The Language-Rich Classroom

Content-Reading Strategies

5.5 Figure 5.6 (continued) Elementary Grades ESL Monitoring Tool: Middle and High School

Marking Period

Well Below Average

Below Average

Average

Above Average

Well Above Average

Content-Area Writing (ability to show understanding of concepts in written form) 1st 2nd 3rd

4th

Social Skills (participation; cooperation; working with others; asking questions) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Active Engagement (sharing comments; asking questions; taking notes) 1st 2nd

3rd 4th

Effort Toward Performance in This Academic Area 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Overall Academic Achievement in This Subject Area 1st

2nd 3rd 4th

41

140

Assessment

FigureClassroom 5.6 (continued) The Language-Rich ESL Monitoring Tool: Middle and High School Marking Period

Comments Regarding This Student’s Overall Progress:

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

Declining performance should not automatically lead teachers to readmit the exited student into an ESL program. Depending on the school’s program, the ESL support may no longer be adequately designed to meet the student’s linguistic and academic needs. Exited students benefit from integrated content classrooms that make use of strategies like CHATS. Classroom teachers and ESL specialists who want to facilitate the academic success of exited students can explore the following suggestions to support the academic growth of their students: 1. Schedule a conference with the student. Facilitate the self assessment process for the student. Ask probing questions and help the student determine what works best for him or her. 141

The Language-Rich Classroom

2. Schedule a conference with the student’s other teachers (e.g., content teachers, ESL teachers). Make CHATS-based suggestions as needed. 3. Schedule a conference with the student’s parents. Ask parents about what additional support they can provide at home. 4. Develop goals and a plan that can be revisited and monitored by the ESL specialist, the student, and the classroom teacher. 5. Make adjustments to the student’s schedule and status based on results from the interventions listed above. These forms are especially useful for secondary teachers, who typically need to document progress for more than 100 students. The forms are also useful for ESL teachers who may or may not see students in the context of grade-level or contentarea classrooms.

142

6

T = Total Participation Techniques

In our years of observing classroom teachers and student teachers, one thing we’ve noticed is that implementing Total Participation Techniques (TPTs) tends to be the most common suggestion we make. In many cases, we’ve found that the teacher has done a beautiful job of planning a lesson, but only a few students actually bene­fited from the time and creativity expended in creating the lesson. And the few students who benefit are those who tend to be the most vocal and regularly participate, anyway. Quality discussions are held using high-order thinking skills, but the only participants are those with a lot of practice answering big questions at higher levels of thinking. Many of the students are passively disengaged or, in some cases, actively disengaged and causing problems. Not surprisingly, ELLs are often the students who have been unintentionally left out. TPTs aim to remedy this situation by creating opportunities within our lessons for all students to dem­ on­strate active engagement at the same time. Because of the high accountability placed on student participation, we have noticed that teachers who consistently use TPTs have better classroom management. Implementing TPTs is a critical piece in an ELL’s learning experience, but it also maximizes the time spent learning for all students. Your ELLs will benefit, and so will everyone else. And because they increase active engagement, TPTs spice up lessons that require that students show evidence of learning. In our experience in overcrowded classrooms, calling on individuals was not an option. Nor was 143

The Language-Rich Classroom

waiting until students finished projects or performed badly on a test before we realized that they had not learned certain concepts. Teachers have to think on their feet and create ways for all students to process and demonstrate understanding at the same time. Even while teaching in higher education, we’ve noticed that we had to write our TPTs in red in our lesson plans and include them at frequent intervals, just so we’d remember that no matter how old students are, they still need an opportunity to actively process what has been presented and create linkages between what they collectively know and how that is related to concepts presented in class. TPTs allow students to do just that. It’s important to plan for the implementation of TPTs in lessons, and the more experience that you have with them, the more you’ll be able to insert one as soon as you notice disengagement. For Sarah Strybos, a primary language arts teacher, total participation came while she was thinking on her feet during a lesson on phoneme segmentation. When she noticed that students were becoming disengaged in the mouthing and counting of sounds, she quickly asked them to stand up and count the sounds using their heads, shoulders, stomachs, and knees. She obtained an instant assessment, as students quickly became engaged in the lesson and kinesthetically demonstrated the number of sounds in each of the words being called out. For Marcus Waller’s 5th grade lesson on the three branches of government, TPTs were an instant opportunity for a “do-over.” After noticing that few, if any, of his students were truly understanding the concepts behind the three branches of government that he had already spent several days introducing, Waller decided to quickly implement a strategy that we had discussed in our university class. He quickly asked students to take out a sheet of paper, fold it in three, and write out the names of one of the three branches of government on each of the three different sections. “Hold up the branch of government that you think would most likely deal with the situation that I am describing.” Again, instant engagement as well as assessment resulted, as students now had a reason to look through their resources to figure out which of the three branches would apply. This activity also comprised a great opportunity for students to verbally interact as they defended the reasoning behind their choices. In Dr. Judith Lingenfelter’s undergraduate diversity class at Biola University, the continual implementation of TPTs caused enrollment in her class to be consistently 144

Total Participation Techniques

high. Lingenfelter moved desks to the perimeter of the room, because students would have very little need for them during the semester. When explaining diversity in terms of placement on two axes that represented value systems, instead of lecturing about it, she created a room-size grid using tape and string. Then she posed questions that required students to find their value, stand on the point on the x- and y-axes that corresponded, discuss their position with those around them, and explain their positions in relationship to those standing on opposite sides. In this way, Lingenfelter was able to introduce concepts and allow students to personally link those to their own experiences. Over 30 students were simultaneously developing their understandings behind these complex concepts. Whether planned or not, implementing effective TPTs requires that teachers continually ask themselves these questions: • “Will all of my students learn during this lesson?” • “How will I know?” • “What can I do to get instant evidence that all students are engaged and processing the concepts that are being presented?”

How TPTs Help English Language Learners TPTs support ELLs’ linguistic and academic growth by facilitating the process of active engagement in any content area. For students who have become accustomed to not participating in classrooms, whether by gradual conditioning on the part of teachers or because an ELL lacks the linguistic confidence to participate, TPTs allow for low-risk interaction with peers and the content being presented. While ELLs often unintentionally get left out of typical whole-group comprehension checks, TPTs ensure active participation and accountability. It’s important to remember that it is easy to tune out presentations when chunks of those presenta­ tions are not understood because the lessons are being delivered in the student’s weaker language. TPTs allow for intermittent pit stops that ensure comprehension and engagement.

Creating a Community TPTs offer an additional benefit in that they have the power of creating class community and of socially integrating ELLs (or students with special needs) in a 145

The Language-Rich Classroom

classroom where they are more likely to quietly sit in a corner and not be noticed by their peers. In Lingenfelter’s college classes, students commented that as a result of her classroom community, they found it difficult not to greet a peer when passing by each other on campus outside of class. Lively classroom discussions resulted in students better knowing each other and becoming a community. In contrast, when ELLs are integrated into grade-level classrooms that have little commu­nity established, they are often disengaged. Norrid-Lacey and Spencer (2000) studied this situation by following 70 Latino immigrant students at an urban high school from a 9th grade ESL program through 12th grade. What was clearly lacking in the transition to the content classrooms for these ELLs was a bridge ensuring their success and acceptance in the mainstream classroom. Of the 70 students, only 2 were main­streamed into regular classrooms, and only 17 graduated. Oftentimes it was not just their academic and linguistic abilities that prevented their success in the mainstream classroom, but even more damaging was that they experienced ridicule and a sense of social isolation outside the ESL program. Whether it was actual or perceived, “the ESL students were socially segregated from the rest of the student population, minimizing opportunities for the English learners to develop relationships with the other students or to strengthen their English language” (p. 45). One student reported, “This year I had a regular class. I went a few times but there were gringos and everything and I didn’t like it. Everybody just spoke in English. My English isn’t that good” (p. 50).

Recommended Resources Active Learning Handbook for the Multiple Intelligences Classroom by James Bellanca (1997). This book presents 200 strategies for engaging students through active learning and reflection. Most of the activities fall under the category of TPTs, grouped thematically by multiple intelligences. This is a wonderful resource formatted in a way that makes it easy for busy teachers to use. We highly recommend this book as a way to support planning that engages all students.

Building Confidence Even more than the linguistic ability and its effect on class participation is the perception common among ELLs that due to their difficulties in articulating responses, they feel that they aren’t as smart as their English-speaking peers. TPTs can alleviate this fear and build academic confidence that can help integrate ELLs into the classroom community. 146

Total Participation Techniques

During a workshop on using TPTs, we had teachers participate in a line-up, where they shared the results of a quick-write with a colleague lined up opposite them. When it was time to debrief this activity, one Korean teacher stated that she is normally apprehensive about sharing in a large group, but the quick-write and line-up activity did two things for her: (1) it prepared her to have something meaningful to share, and (2) it gave her practice expressing and refining her view in a less stressful format than with the entire class, so that by the time for wholegroup sharing, she was less apprehensive and more willing to share. She also noted that due to her language skills not being as strong as her native English-speaking teaching colleagues, she always felt as though she didn’t have something really smart to say. But during that activity, she found that her answer or perspective was just as good as theirs. That’s what we believe TPTs can do for ELLs and all students: they place students in low-risk situations that require active engagement and increase their confidence as well as ownership of the course in which they are participating.

Remaining Focused One more important thing for teachers to understand regarding the challenges that English language learners face in content and grade-level classrooms is the difficulty expended in actively listening in a second language. It’s so easy to “tune out” when what you hear requires such active focus, especially if you first have to translate and process what is being said into your home language. TPTs allow teachers to make every minute count in a classroom, and they provide insurance against the tuning out that would normally occur when students are trying to actively focus in a second language. TPTs also can help students in the retention of concepts in the form of movement. Sousa (2006) discusses the linkages between movement and long-term memory. His research on how the brain learns indicates that the cerebellum, the area responsible for movement, acts to support other brain functions such as attention, impulse control, and cognitive processes in the frontal lobe. According to Sousa: The more we study the cerebellum, the more we realize that movement is inescapably linked to learning and memory.  .  .  . Armed with the knowledge that movement is connected to cognitive learning, teachers and administrators need to encourage more movement in all classrooms at all

147

The Language-Rich Classroom

grade levels. At some point in every lesson, students should be up and moving about, preferably talking about the new learning. (pp. 231, 233)

Whether carefully planned or impromptu, TPTs can do the following for English language learners and all students: • Provide evidence of active engagement on the part of ELLs and all learners. • Offer assessment opportunities within the lesson. • Maximize the time spent learning for all students, by increasing time on task. • Spice up lessons as the focus is taken off of the teacher and placed on students. • Build community among students within the classroom through student interactions. • Build linguistic and academic confidence among ELLs as they interact with their peers in nonthreatening ways. • Provide movement in learning-focused activities that reinforce retention of important concepts.

TPTs for Any Lesson Many of the activities described in Chapter 3 could also be called TPTs. These include the graphic organizers presented, concept mapping, presentation grids, and written conversations. The following are additional examples of TPTs that can enhance the delivery of any lesson.

Pair-Shares Pair-shares are common in elementary classrooms. But this forced reflection time is important for learners of all ages, even adults. Here’s How Pair-Shares Work

1. Present a topic for consideration. 2. Ask students to share their thoughts about the topic with the student sitting next to them, the student across from them, or a peer preselected for them. 148

Total Participation Techniques

Here’s Why Pair-Shares Are Good for ELLs

Pair-shares let students stop and reflect on what they have learned. This mental pit stop is critical for ELLs, because you want to increase the number of comprehen­sion checks throughout a lesson. A pair-share also serves as a quick comprehension check for students for whom comprehension may need additional bolstering through peer explanations and individual reflection time. We encourage you to get in the habit of using pair-shares frequently, especially since they require no preparation. As soon as you notice disengagement or feel as though students need an opportunity to process what they’re learning, add a quick pair-share prompt that allows the students to think about and discuss the implications of what they’re learning.

Quick-Writes Quick-writes are another opportunity for students to pause and process their thinking, this time in writing and within a certain interval of time. Here’s How Quick-Writes Work

1. Provide specific open-ended prompts for students to write about, or simply ask students to write about what they have learned. 2. Give students a certain amount of time to do their quick-writes. For example, after a science lesson on electrical circuits, a teacher may ask students to pull out a piece of paper and write for three minutes on the reason electricity flowed or did not flow during the demonstration activity. During a social studies lesson on the importance of the Industrial Revolution in America, a teacher might ask students to take five minutes to write about how they feel the Industrial Revolution affected the balance of world power in history. Or, as shown in Figure 6.1, students can be asked to summarize their understanding of the day’s presentations. Here’s Why Quick-Writes Are Good for ELLs

Quick-writes are another activity in which ELLs benefit from additional time to gather their thoughts and process what they will be sharing in English. They provide a wonderful way of getting students ready to participate in a pair-share, share-out, or any other TPT. 149

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 6.1 Closing Quick-Write Prompt

So then, if I understand you correctly, you’re saying that . . .

Date _______________________

Topic ____________________________________

Quick-Draws Quick-draws get students to process what they’re learning through symbolic representation. Though the concept may seem elementary, we’ve tried this activity in our college classrooms. It’s harder than it looks and requires that students really understand a concept before they can make a visual representation of it. Try drawing a picture of “democracy.” Could you do it without an accurate under­ standing of the term? The quick-draw also serves as a quick formative assessment for teachers who collect the drawings after students have had a chance to share in small or large groups. Here’s How Quick-Draws Work

1. At a predetermined point, ask students to stop and draw a word or a concept. 2. Students respond by drawing on scrap paper or in subject-specific journals.

150

Total Participation Techniques

For example, if you’re teaching on the constitutional amendments, you might ask students to sketch symbols that they believe would accurately represent, say, the first three amendments to the U.S. Constitution. You might suggest that they use symbolism in their quick-draws and then ask them to share in small groups. If you’re teaching on the topic of flight, you might ask students to sketch a diagram that shows how planes fly. Even teaching concepts as complex as President Roose­ velt’s New Deal can use the quick-draw strategy. As students complete their quickdraw, they question and refine their thinking in order to be able to demonstrate their deep understanding of this complex topic. Here’s Why Quick-Draws Are Good for ELLs

Words are optional with quick-draws, which may be ideal especially for ELLs first learning English. Quick-draws also let ELLs “double-swipe” their “cognitive cards.” In other words, students must have first understood the lesson topic and then be able to represent their understanding in a nonverbal way.

Three 3s in a Row This is a wonderful activity, similar to some of the Bingo scavenger hunts that children do as a getting-to-know-you activity. Here’s How Three 3s in a Row Works

1. Choose nine concepts for students to review, and write these in the boxes of a prepared handout (see Figure 6.2). Students are asked to complete all nine boxes after interacting with nine different peers. 2. Ask students to do the following: a. Find someone who can explain to them what is asked for in the box (one person per box). b. Ask the student who helped them to explain the answer to only initial the box. c. Then the students should paraphrase and write their classmate’s answer in the box. 3. Conduct a whole-class review where students can share answers. We have two cautions about this activity. First, be sure to ask students to be descriptive in their boxes. They shouldn’t be responding in one-word answers. 151

152 Can discuss the relationship between academic language and the dropout problem Initials ______

Can discuss how taking first-language writing samples might inform their teaching, even if they don’t speak the student’s first language Initials ______

Can describe how they might help students develop skills in metacognition Initials ______

Can explain two strategies for increasing student exposure to academic language Initials ______

Can describe two ways to scaffold content Initials ______

Can describe the rationale behind authenticity and relevance in teaching Initials ______

Can explain why ripple questioning is helpful for students Initials ______

Can describe two students for whom CHATS may have worked Initials ______

Can give two content reading strategies for making content comprehensible Initials ______

Instructions: Find someone who can explain what’s asked for in the box (find one person per box). Ask him or her to initial your box and tell you the answer. Then you should write the answer in your box. Note: You are the only person who should be writing answers in your boxes.

Three 3s in a Row

Figure 6.2

The Language-Rich Classroom

Total Participation Techniques

Second, make sure you don’t allow students to write anything other than their initials on their classmates’ papers. Otherwise, you end up having students who simply pass their papers around the room to collect answers. To avoid this “short­ cut,” be sure to explicitly spell out, verbally and in the directions on the handout, that students are only allowed to write their initials in classmates’ boxes. By asking students to paraphrase their classmates’ answers, you ensure that everyone learns all nine concepts. Here’s Why Three 3s in a Row Is Good for ELLs

By the time that ELLs complete the Three 3s in a Row, they will have processed the concepts at least three times: first, when the teacher presented it; second, when they listened to their classmate explain it; third, when they had to paraphrase the concept and write their summary in the box. This activity allows ELLs to negotiate their understandings of the topics in nonthreatening ways—through interactions with peers. The completed product serves as an excellent assessment of student understanding or as a springboard for whole-class discussion.

Hold-Ups A hold-up is a quick activity that can be used anytime you would like stu­dents to understand the differences between options. Hold-ups allow teachers to monitor comprehension. In an earlier example, a hold-up was done using the three branches of government, when 5th graders demonstrated confusion. In addition to being planned within lessons, hold-ups can easily be done as an impromptu activity where students can quickly take out a sheet of paper and write down the various options in large letters, rip each option out, and use them in a hold-up. Here’s How Hold-Ups Work

1. Give students a printout with four to six answer options. For example, in Figure 6.3, the options are True, Not True, True with Modifications, and Unable to Determine. 2. After a prompt or a question, ask students to hold up the option they believe is the best choice. Pose statements or scenarios that either have 153

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 6.3 True/Not True Hold-up Cards

TRUE

NOT TRUE

TRUE WITH MODIFICATIONS

UNABLE TO DETERMINE Based on Information Learned

a clear true or false answer or have answers that can be debated and modified to be either true or false. The handout in Figure 6.3 can also be used with student predictions at the beginning of units, based on the pictures in their text. Teachers can create predictive statements or students can create them, and the teacher can select some predictions to be used with a True/Not True hold-up at the beginning of the unit or as a comprehension check throughout or at the end of the unit. Here’s Why Hold-Ups Are Good for ELLs

Hold-ups allow for critical thinking opportunities within lessons. For example, during a unit on birds, a prediction was made that “Bald eagles have white heads and white tails.” Students can vote on this statement, holding up the appropriate True/Not True response. At first, the most obvious response may be “True,” but 154

Total Participation Techniques

usually a few observant students will hold up “Not True” or “True with Modifica­ tions.” The ensuing dialogue between those who voted “true” and those who did not can lead to a fine-tuning of the statement so that it is made true: “Mature bald eagles have white heads and white tails.” Teachers who have tried this activity tell us that as students practice voting with True/Not True cards, an increasing number of students will start being more cautious about jumping to a conclusion. They’ll critically evaluate statements and look for loopholes and exceptions to what may seem true at first glance. This reflection time is especially important for ELLs.

The Networking Session The networking session is a truly simple activity with the extra benefit of needing very little advanced preparation, other than the essential questions or prompts that the teacher has prepared. It’s a learning opportunity that also builds community in the classroom. Here’s How the Networking Session Works

1. Ask students to respond individually to a prompt or a question in a quick-write. 2. Ask them to find someone they haven’t spoken to that day and share their response with that person. 3. After a specified period of time, ask students to find someone else they haven’t spoken to that day and do the same. Here’s Why the Networking Session Works for ELLs

In networking sessions, ELLs who tend to be isolated or tend to speak only to their same-language peers are required to find someone they haven’t spoken to that day. All of a sudden, the least popular students become very popular as they are less likely to have conversed with others that day. If students complain that they have spoken to everybody, then congratulate them on their social skills and ask them to find someone they have spoken with the least that day, or modify their task in some other way. During teaching at the university level, we sometimes notice that students have been sitting for too long, so, instead of asking a question that may have been intended for a spin-off to a lecture or presentation, we’ll pose it as a networking 155

The Language-Rich Classroom

session. In other words, we’ll still ask the question, but before moving on, we ask students to respond in a quick-write and then “network.” This approach imme­ diately engages the students in active reflection on what will next be introduced through a lecture or PowerPoint presentation. It also allows students to hear the views of several others in class. One thing we always tell our students is that they must get out of their seats. The physical movement wakes them up and gets their cognitive juices flowing. “Because trading a few minutes of teacher talk for a movement activity can actually increase the amount of learning retained, it could be a very worthwhile investment of time” (Sousa, 2006, p. 240).

Four Corners Four Corners lets your students verbally interact regarding a specific topic or prompt. Doing so allows for opportunities to reflect on content and engage in peer dialogues that require and develop higher-order thinking skills. Here’s How Four Corners Works

1. Give students four somewhat opinionated prompts. For example, a Four Corners activity might include the following prompts: a. Of all the presidents that took office after Abe Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt was the most influential. b. The New Deal granted equal power among the classes in America. c. Franklin D. Roosevelt played one of the most influential roles in the outcome of World War II. d. Franklin D. Roosevelt would never be elected in a society like we have today. 2. Students then select a prompt to which they should respond. If too many students choose the same response, split that group into smaller groups, so that every student’s view can be heard. 3. Provide the students with 5 to 10 minutes to individually prepare for their group discussion. 4. After time is called, students break up into groups designated to one of four corners where they can discuss their reactions to the prompt (each corner corresponds to one of the prompts). Students should discuss or record on chart paper the varying positions held by the members of the group.

156

Total Participation Techniques

5. In a large-group format, students from each corner prepare to present their positions while the students from the other corners (who are not presenting at the time) prepare to ask questions. Why Four Corners Is Good for ELLs

The verbal interaction inherent in this activity can lead to deeper engagement in the topic and great comprehension. ELLs have a relatively low-risk context in which to share their opinions, within the small groups of each corner.

The Likert Scale The Likert scale is a simple scale often used in surveys to determine people’s level of agreement or disagreement with a particular statement. In this activity, students stand at certain locations and discuss their reasons for choosing their answer. Here’s How the Likert Scale Works

1. Similar to the Four Corners activity, prepare a survey with a set number of prompts (perhaps five) that clearly lean toward one point of view or another. Use Likert scale options such as: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. Note: Stick to topics focused on content learning. Steer clear of politically charged topics that can create discomfort or feelings of censorship among classmates. 2. Ask students to determine their level of agreement with the statements by completing their survey. 3. Post the following response options along the walls of the classroom: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. 4. Students walk to the area where their Likert scale choice is posted. 5. Together in the respective groups, students articulate their reasons for choosing their options. This includes the middle option of “Neutral”— students should have a reason articulating why they are neutral based on what they have learned. Students can have time to discuss their rationales for making their choices and to prepare to report out to the class. One student per group can serve as a group reporter to speak for the group.

157

The Language-Rich Classroom

Here’s Why the Likert Scale Is Good for ELLs

Likert scales are an engaging way of reviewing complex concepts that have been covered in readings. As students are asked to take positions, they must think critically. By doing so, they emotionally connect with topics and get opportunities to listen to opposing views that they may not have considered before.

Explain It to Your Neighbor Very similar to a pair-share, this TPT can be used to review complex concepts. It helps stem any confusion or misunderstanding before real frustration sets in and students tune out. Here’s How Explain It to Your Neighbor Works

1. As soon as students seem confused about a concept, take a few minutes for students to pair up and explain the concept to their neighbor or to generate questions to help clarify what they don’t understand. 2. Pairs then join into groups of four, review what they know, and ask each other the questions that they generated in pairs. 3. After groups have met, review the concept, address any outstanding questions, and continue with the lesson. Here’s Why Explain It to Your Neighbor Is Good for ELLs

This activity allows ELLs to discuss what they know about a topic or actively address their lack of understanding by generating questions that will help clarify their confusion. For students who join another group that can actually answer their questions, students get an opportunity to hear the content presented by a peer in a conversational tone. On the other hand, for ELLs who can answer and clarify peer misunderstandings, this activity allows them to feel like an expert in something related to the topic. This activity allows for the clarification of concepts in the middle of a lesson, before the lack of understanding snowballs into disengagement. By taking a pitstop to do this simple comprehension check, teachers can engage a class in a topic with which they were previously confused or disengaged. This comprehension check also gives teachers useful assessment information with which to modify future instruction that will enhance student learning. 158

Total Participation Techniques

Transparency Sheets Nowadays, overhead projectors are less common in the classroom, having been largely replaced by Elmo Visual Presenters that project onto a screen objects or anything in print. Whether classrooms have overhead projectors or Elmo machines, the principle behind transparency sheets is still useful. Here’s How Transparency Sheets Work

1. For classrooms without an Elmo machine, give students a transparency sheet stapled to only one corner of a white sheet of paper. 2. Students can work out math problems or create quick-draws to be shared with the class on the transparency side of the stapled set. 3. When it comes time for sharing, students flip back the white sheet and proj­ ect their work or quick-draw onto the overhead projector while explaining their thinking to the class. (For classrooms with an Elmo, students can share concepts with peers using plain paper projected on the Elmo.) 4. Students who didn’t get a chance to use the overhead can share with a partner or in small groups. Here’s Why Transparency Sheets Are Good for ELLs

This activity can be messy, but students love it! They especially like playing the role of teacher and having their math problem or quick-draw projected for the whole class to see. In that way, it’s highly engaging. Because of the added motivation of sharing, students do their best and try to outdo each other with quick-draws and the creativity that they use to solve math problems. To minimize the mess, have a stack of paper towels handy and run one side of the stack through water, or sit one end of the stack in a paper cup full of water. Then when it comes time to hand out wet paper towels, students do not individually have to get their paper towels. You simply pass out the dampened paper towels as if they were any other handout. Keep one end dry, to wipe off any water droplets that might form from excess water.

Total Participation as a Mind-Set Using TPTs ought to be a mind-set. In other words, teachers should no longer be looking for students who can answer questions; teachers should be looking for 159

The Language-Rich Classroom

all students to process and reflect on questions. In addition to individually processing what they are learning using TPTs, students get to interact and learn from each other. One example of a simple TPT that we observed recently was when Keely Potter, a literacy coach, asked students to explain the possible meanings of a poem the class had just read. She asked students to raise their hands if they could tell her. Two hands immediately shot up. But instead of calling on them, Potter explained that she saw the two hands up and wanted everyone to have a chance to think about the poem, so she repeated the question and asked students to raise their hand as soon as they had something to share. Slowly, one by one, more hands went up, until after about a 30-second pause, nearly all the hands were raised. Even the students whose hands were not raised were reading the poem. This type of communal learning is critical for ELLs who will take longer to process what they’re thinking when they must translate the text first. When followed by a pairshare activity, a TPT like this means that all students get an opportunity to share their thinking. Instead of accepting the first eager Recommended Resources student’s answer, which only makes the How the Brain Learns by David A. Sousa teacher and that one student feel great (2006). This book sounds like it could be a real cerebral about themselves, we need to judge learning challenge, but it is actually very readable! Our by the actions of the class as a whole. Total copy has at least 50 sticky notes attached that participation techniques require that all highlight relevant best practices. Sousa takes his own advice in how the book is written and students prove that they are actively engaged formatted, with teaching applications tied to all in the lesson. Adapting a mind-set of major concepts, colorful text, and diagrams regularly injecting TPTs into lessons will help and pictures supporting the research that he highlights. This would be an excellent book for our students develop both academic language a truly brain-based study group that you could and attain greater comprehension of the also practically apply to teaching and learning. content being presented.

160

7

S = Scaffolding Strategies

During our first trip to China in 1990, we stopped off in Hong Kong. It was a lovely metropolitan city with a feel of “movers and shakers” all around. Welldressed businesspeople walked quickly along the busy streets, interacting on cell phones and with colleagues alongside them. The city seemed the model of efficiency, except for its construction system. To the novice (and we admit we know nothing about construction), the scaffolding on the modern buildings stuck out like a sore thumb. Beautiful modern buildings seemed to be draped in Pixy Stix that crossed in every direction. On closer inspection, small “things” seemed to be moving along the scaffolding. On even closer inspection, those “things” turned out to be .  .  . people! That’s right—construction workers were actually scaling buildings on these Pixy Stix structures called scaffolds. The scaffolds turned out to be made of bamboo, and construction workers and window cleaners seemed to show no hesitation in starting from the bottom, with no safety harnesses, and climbing upward often 20 stories or more. We were amazed by scenes like this as we watched people quickly scale buildings in an unfamiliar way. And apparently we’re not the only ones mesmerized by the stark contrast between Hong Kong’s construction system and the city’s modern feel. An Internet search using the terms Hong Kong and scaffolds will get you thousands of sites, many with pictures, all addressing this unique aspect of Hong Kong culture. Had the lower scaffolding been nonexistent, workers would have needed a crane or an elevator to take them 161

The Language-Rich Classroom

to the higher scaffolds. On the contrary, there were no artificial supports in allowing these workers to scale buildings. It was all done on their own strength through the help of scaffolds. When we think of helping second-language learners in language arts and the content areas, often the expectation is that with virtually no support, our students can indeed learn to scale buildings on their own. When students don’t, this performance is often attributed to a lack of effort or cognitive ability. In fact, what is missing is the scaffolding structure that allows students to go from the bottom floor to the top floor through small steps that are supported. For example, a common expectation for students past the 3rd grade is that they’ll be able to write multiparagraph expository essays. Just the idea of the end product is enough to make some ELLs wince. Teachers complain about how frequently they hear comments like “I don’t like to write,” “I don’t know what to write about,” or “How long does it have to be?” They may even hear the dreaded “I can’t!” from students who have gotten used to the feeling of failure on unscaffolded assignments. If teachers feel that any assignment is valuable enough to assign, then it is imperative that they place proper attention on the types of supports necessary to pave the way for student success.

The Big Picture When thinking about scaffolding for tasks, having an end picture in mind is as essential as having a starting point in mind. Teachers of ELLs will want to think through the following three questions in relation to the various proficiency levels represented in their classrooms: 1. What do I want my students to be able to do? 2. What can they currently do? 3. How can I build a bridge from question 2 to question 1? Having a starting point in mind requires ongoing formative assessments that are part of everyday practice. For students who have difficulty verbalizing their thoughts or putting them in writing, teachers may want to progress from written phrases by using a graphic organizer to help students pull out the essential components that they can then use as a scaffold with which to write. For example, if students are being asked to respond to an author’s perspective, the assumptions 162

Scaffolding Strategies

chart in Chapter 4 (Figure 4.5) can provide manageable steps to help students think through the assumptions and biases that an author holds and then form a response to that author. The ability to scaffold activities assumes that the teacher is aware of the needs of the students and that ongoing opportunities for assessments are in place. Understanding in what areas Juan will most likely experience difficulty requires that we know what Juan is good at and in what areas he struggles. We also have to be careful not to “overscaffold” and get in the way of what would happen naturally. Oftentimes, when we overscaffold, we end up restricting the creativity of the end product. Scaffolding is entirely a matter of providing manageable steps to get a desired end product. So, if students are expected to write a story or an essay, and we believe that creating quick-draws (described in Chapter 6) is the tool with which they are currently most comfortable, then we start with quick-draws and move on to corresponding phrases, which then develop into topic sentences, which then move on to paragraphs.

Graphic Organizers Graphic organizers are probably the first thing most teachers think of when they think of scaffolding understanding. These tools provide an opportunity for students to process their thinking with few assumptions made on the teacher’s part. They can be an excellent way to help students think on their own. They can also be cumbersome for those who don’t need scaffolds. Throughout this book, we’ve provided several graphic organizers to support learning. In addition, a look through free Web sites such as www.readingquest.org will provide numerous others that are well explained and ready to print. One of the reasons that we believe that graphic organizers such as concept mapping have been strongly supported in the research (as discussed in Chapter 3) is that they allow students to connect concepts visually, through self-talk, and through peer interaction. This is the strength of effective graphic organizers that help students think through the main ideas being expressed in a text. The graphic organizer in Figure 7.1 is aimed at scaffolding students’ ability to process what they’re learning by reminding students to reflect at certain designated points in their reading of the text. The designated points at which students should stop and 163

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 7.1 Content Reading Scaffold The Most Important Thing to Know from This Paragraph/Page/Chapter (circle one): __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

My Thoughts About This Paragraph/ Page/Chapter (circle one): ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence.

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence.

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence.

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence.

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence.

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

Try to narrow this down to one sentence. If you had to summarize this section/chapter/book in about three sentences, what would you say? Use the back of this paper to write your summary.

164

Scaffolding Strategies

reflect can be determined according to the students’ needs and be indicated at the top of the page. Although this kind of graphic organizer can be overused and end up being an encumbrance for students who no longer need it, it can also serve as an aid for students who are so used to simply decoding their way through text that they fail to comprehend what they’re reading. Asking students to choose which designated stop point would best facilitate their comprehension once they have self-assessed provides for more ownership of their learning. Once this graphic organizer has served its purpose, to get students to pause, understand, and do more than simply decode text, we would ask students to stop using it. In most classrooms of varying abilities, only a small group of students might benefit from this type of scaffold, and through a process of selfassessment and conferencing with that small group of students, students can begin to understand the process of learning and begin to analyze the learning aides that work best for them.

Engaging Emotions: Scaffolding Interest If students don’t personally care about what they are learning, then much of what we teach will fall flat, and retention will be greatly diminished. Sousa’s (2006) information processing model details how the brain deals with information from the environment, in the form of the five senses. “If the learner attaches sense and meaning to the learning, it is likely to be stored” (p. 39). Sousa goes on to note that “how a person ‘feels’ about a learning situation determines the amount of attention devoted to it. Emotions interact with reason to support or inhibit learning” (p. 44). So, one of our goals ought to be to create learning experiences that engage students’ emotions. “Students are more likely to gain greater understanding of and derive greater pleasure from learning when allowed to transform the learning into creative thoughts and products” (p. 41). Barbara Mitchell, an ESL teacher at J. P. McCaskey High School, knows this intuitively, and her teaching aims at winning over hearts as well as minds. During her unit on Robert Frost with early language learners, she knew that she would first have to make students want to learn about Frost. She predicted that her predominantly Spanish-speaking class of recent arrivals would want very little to do with Frost or his poetry. An interview with 12th grader Johandeiry confirmed this view. Johandeiry described her initial reactions to Frost’s poetry at the beginning of the unit: “I don’t like Robert Frost. He was an old man and, I don’t 165

The Language-Rich Classroom

want to learn about him.” When we asked her what changed her mind, she described that it had been taught in “little pieces.” Mitchell had interjected opportunities to investigate Frost’s personal life using the Internet. The fact that he had owned chickens and was a baseball coach gave him rapport with students who realized he wasn’t just a stuffy intellectual to whom they could not relate. Mitchell especially played up the love story between Frost and his wife. Students became emotionally attached and wanted to know what the symbolism meant behind his poetry. They were given opportunities to ask questions on sticky notes that were posted on a “Wonder Wall.” They also were invited to write their own poetry reflecting on their Wonder Wall questions. In response to the prompt “So what really happened in the poem ‘Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening’ (Frost, 1961)?” students were asked to imagine, speculate, and create their own story about the writer’s intentions. Cerenela wrote, “He promised his girlfriend that he would eat with her at her house. He also promised her that he had something special for her. He needed to keep his promises and get on time to his girlfriend’s house.” Mitchell had intentionally planned for students to become emotionally connected to Robert Frost. A similar process of engaging emotions was evident for the 3rd grade team at Washington Elementary. When teachers Krista Grimm, Roseann Sinkosky, and Quirine Gladwish introduced the story The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane (DiCamillo, 2006), the students at first couldn’t connect with the main character. Grimm told us, “They thought, ‘Why are we reading this?’ They didn’t like him. He was self-centered, vain, and smug. ‘He thinks he’s all that!’ they’d say.” But through the process of engaging the class in Edward’s inner world, through the use of picture walks (described later) and other scaffolds, students became hooked. Grimm noted that “they had been pulling for him in the entire book. By the end, we were all in tears.” In describing the power of good literature, Sinkosky stated,

Recommended Resources Worksheets Don’t Grow Dendrites: 20 Instructional Strategies that Engage the Brain by Marcia L. Tate (2003). Tate’s book is broken up into chapters that are themed by overall strategies, such as the use of storytelling. The 20 strategies engage student interest as well as scaffold understanding. Within each chapter, Tate provides examples of how the strategies can be used to teach even complicated concepts. The chapters end with templates for thinking through linkages between the highlighted strategy and the specific standards being taught. This is a great resource to have on hand for the everyday lesson planning targeted at brainbased learning.

166

Scaffolding Strategies

“That’s what good books do to you—they draw you in.” This profound statement is more than just about good books. It’s about good teaching. Good teaching draws you in. This type of instruction requires an investment in helping students discover the inner workings of characters, authors, and concepts that involve all five of the CHATS components over time.

Setting the Stage: Using the Internet The Internet provides wonderful opportunities for increasing engagement and interest in topics. For example, for the subject of volcanoes, a traditional approach would be to ask students to read the science chapter and answer the questions at the end of the chapter. Unfortunately, as much as this type of dry teaching is discouraged in teacher preparation courses, when it comes to observing teachers in practice through quick visits and nonscheduled informal observations, we’ve found this type of teaching to still be prevalent. The goal of simply making it through the curriculum by the end of the year stifles any thoughts of engagement and teacher creativity. But providing authentic purposes for learning requires that we set the stage for students to simply want to know the material. So, for our sample topic of volcanoes, a quick Internet search using the words news, story, and volcano produced three intriguing stories regarding recent discoveries of volcano activity. One in particular, a BBC News story, included live video taken of volcano activity on the slopes of Mount Merapi in Indonesia, a moving graphic slide show of why volcanoes erupt, and blogs of concerned friends and relatives recounting personal experiences of those familiar with the area. One blogger posted this firsthand experience: “When I was a kid, the eruption didn’t affect us directly, but the whole town was covered by thick, gray ash and we spent hours to sweep it off our roof and garden” (BBC News, 2006). Other stories sure to generate student curiosity were “Giant Deep-Sea Volcano with ‘Moat of Death’ Found” (Lovett, 2006). Another consisted of a press release describing the first evidence of an under-ice volcanic eruption in Antarctica (British Antarctic Survey, 2008). These images, projected on a screen in many of today’s technologically fitted classrooms, would be sure to generate more student interest than traditional methods relying solely on packaged curricula, where the goal is simply to “cover the material.”

167

The Language-Rich Classroom

Scaffolding Through the Use of Visuals Sousa (2006) encourages a multisensory approach to teaching. He discusses the importance of teaching to the whole brain. “Although the two hemispheres process information differently, we learn best when both are engaged in learning.  .  .  . We catch more information with both hemispheres processing and integrating learning” (p. 194). Consequently, Sousa suggests that we deal with concepts verbally and visually. He encourages the use of diagrams, visual cues, and scenes from videos that contain maximum meaning, as a springboard to discussions and as a way to engage students in learning.

“Reading” the Painting and Picture Walks Williams (2007) practiced the art of reading paintings in her primary classroom as an activity of visual literacy. Beginning with modeled think-alouds and stretching into their own stories, she asked students to study the paintings. “As a whole class, we brainstormed what we saw and then wrote questions about the painting. Who are the two figures on the bridge? Why are they meeting at night in the cold? Are they friends or enemies? What would be so urgent as to bring them outside at this late hour? Where could this painting take place? (p. 638).” These experiences allowed Williams to rethink the traditional definition of literacy to include inquiry centered around visuals. This same depth in inquiry can serve as an effective scaffold and source of engagement when working with students in the content area. Picture walks are commonly used with young students to prepare them for a picture book that they are about to read. Pictures are first shown to students in order to allow them to predict and become engaged in the story or concepts to be introduced. We propose picture walks for content texts in a similar way. We are fortunate in that modern textbooks come heavily laden with beautiful photog­ raphy, copies of paintings, diagrams, and pictures already enhancing many of their pages. Copyright law allows for educators to make one copy of a picture in the text (not exceeding 10 percent of the text) for use in their classrooms (Becker, 2003). It may even be worth sacrificing one copy of a text for cutting out the images in order to use them in picture walks. An effective scaffold for introducing or revisiting textbook themes is to scan, color-photocopy, or cut out images from a packaged text and tape them around 168

Scaffolding Strategies

the room, asking students to examine the images in small groups. Teachers either can ask students to generate questions, similar to what Williams did in her picture readings, or create prescribed questions for students to consider as they examine the pictures. Student-generated questions can be posted on sticky notes around the images, or students can answer and discuss thought-provoking questions that the teacher has given them. During the 3rd grade team’s readings of The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane (DiCamillo, 2006) at Washington Elementary, the teachers were struck by the artistic beauty of the illustrations. They decided that they would implement the picture walks for chosen sections of the text, by displaying only the pictures in sequential order around the room before the story would be read. Certain pictures were misleading, and because the children became so heavily invested in the story, they wanted to know whether the pictures indeed predicted the outcome they hoped for, or whether there was more to the picture, as was the case with one picture that turned out to be a dream. While the first picture walk produced basic, factual responses from students, once the students became hooked on the story, their questions, descriptions, and predictions became more complex. During the second picture walk, students were prompted to delve deeply into what they saw in the pictures. According to one of their teachers, “They analyzed the pictures: ‘Look, he’s walking. Where do you think he’s going? Look at the mood, the colors. Describe it. What do you think is happening?’” Opportunities like this one allowed for engagement and drew students in, whereas simple text readings might not have done so. Lack of depth is a common problem in content textbooks. For example, social studies textbooks often eliminate differing perspectives and affective issues for the sake of coverage. This narrow and shallow coverage presents extra challenges for ELLs who already come with a possible disadvantage of not having the prior grade’s content to act as a foundation for the current year’s material. Using scanned textbook pictures in a picture walk allows students to have an opportunity to stop and reflect on the people, emotions, and the impact of the historical events on the lives of those that experienced them firsthand. Asking students to attach comments or questions using sticky notes actively engages students in processing what they see and allows students to revisit and collectively address initial questions and impressions. 169

The Language-Rich Classroom

Pictorial Input One of the most visually engaging activities that we’ve experienced is the pictorial input activity introduced by Brechtel (2001) in her book Bringing It All Together. By using Pictorial Input, students are captivated by an image developing before their eyes while the teacher provides the linguistic background to the picture. As the teacher traces an image that has been faintly penciled in on chart paper, vocabulary and important concepts are introduced alongside, allowing students to hang what is being taught onto visual pegs. Teachers don’t need to be even remotely artistic, since images are first projected onto paper using an overhead projector and penciled in on a large piece of paper, without the students’ knowledge. As the teacher traces the image in front of the students, using a thick marker, students sit mesmerized as a beautiful image appears. Even the academic vocabulary that teachers hope to target is penciled in on the chart paper, so that the teacher remembers to add these in. This image, coupled with the accom­ panying descriptions that embed the academic language relevant to the topic, provides for a hard-to-forget experience, even after students discover the trick behind the teacher’s artistic skill (i.e., that the image is only being traced). This activity is highly engaging and effective even when used with challenging content, because the image and the vocabulary develop right before the students’ eyes. And imagery is used as a scaffold for meaningful, context-embedded vocabulary. Roseann Sinkosky used this activity repeatedly in teaching her social studies unit on the American Revolution. Her image of a “red coat” soldier and the description of his life and the times helped prepare students for their upcoming trip to Philadelphia. Sinkosky noticed a distinct difference between this history unit and the science unit that she also taught. “I think it’s because they just didn’t live with it [the science material] enough, it wasn’t in their space enough, and these visual kinds of things put it in their space. And, it’s not just words—it’s connected to an experience they’ve had as a class.” The power of the pictorial input technique is that students experience the words meaningfully linked to images developed right in front of them.

Inducing Mental Imagery: Understanding Starts with Images One of the crucial processes that occurs when good readers read is that of generating mental imagery. Without generating mental imagery, comprehension is 170

Scaffolding Strategies

nonexistent. Luckily, explicit teaching in mental imagery is not all that complicated. The major problem presents itself in assuming that all readers naturally create mental images when they read. This may be far from the truth for struggling readers. Cohen’s (2007) case study of Mario, a struggling 17-year-old reader, notes the following: “His strengths were clearly in decoding, not in meaning-making. When asked what he had read, the answer ‘I don’t know’ was very quick leaving his lips. It was clear to me that he needed help with creating images in his mind of what he was reading to help him comprehend, not just decode” (p. 168). Cohen spent time thinking aloud with Mario and practicing the act of monitoring comprehension by asking him to describe the mental images that he encountered and reminding him to create a television in the mind as a way of monitoring comprehension. Though it took some practice, Mario did develop the ability to see mental images while he read, and Cohen’s interactions with him, more than a year later, indicated that he had developed into a capable reader. This simple process of mental imagery is not something that all readers, especially struggling readers, do. In fact, according to Cohen, “Mario told me that he never knew that he was supposed to do this [create mental images] when reading” (p. 168). Gambrell and Bales’s (1986) study with 4th and 5th graders provides evidence that simply reminding students to induce mental imagery can have a positive impact on their monitoring and comprehension in reading. In their study, subjects received simple instructions reminding them to “make pictures in your mind to help you understand and remember what you read” (p. 458). The control group didn’t receive an explicit reminder to induce mental imagery; instead, they were directed to “do whatever you can to understand and remember what you read” (p. 458). The subjects who were reminded to use mental imagery significantly outperformed the control group in their ability to identify both explicit and implicit inconsistencies in text. Mental imagery during reading is critical for English language learners. Not only does imagery lead to comprehension, but it also allows ELLs to expand their vocabulary, by hearing words in context that are comprehensible within a good story but that might otherwise be incomprehensible when taken out of that context. According to Sousa (2006), “the research evidence is clear: Individuals can be taught to search their minds for images and be guided through the process to select appropriate images that, through hemispheric integration, enhance learning 171

The Language-Rich Classroom

and increase retention. When the brain creates images, the same parts of the visual cortex are activated as when the eyes process real world input” (p. 230). Additionally, ELLs’ verbal fluency may be more developed than their reading fluency. Their interests and oral fluency may far surpass the level assumed in the books that they can read fluently. And the vocabulary in the books that they can read fluently may be so simple as to not provide enough of a challenge and enough exposure to academic language embedded in good stories. This is where readalouds (see Chapter 2) coupled with the strategies to induce mental imagery are a simple practice that can support ELLs’ comprehension and vocabulary development. In an effort to induce imagery during a read-aloud of James and the Giant Peach (Dahl, 1961) in a 2nd grade multilingual class, we asked students to practice visualizing what was read. During one section, we asked students to create mental images based on the following description of Aunt Sponge and Aunt Spiker: Aunt Sponge and Aunt Spiker were sitting comfortably in deck-chairs nearby, sipping tall glasses of fizzy lemonade and watching him [James] to see that he didn’t stop work for one moment. Aunt Sponge was enormously fat and very short. She had small piggy eyes, a sunken mouth, and one of those white flabby faces that looked exactly as though it had been boiled. She was like a great white soggy overboiled cabbage. Aunt Spiker, on the other hand, was lean and tall and bony, and she wore steel-rimmed spectacles that fixed onto the end of her nose with a clip. She had a screeching voice and long wet narrow lips, and whenever she got angry or excited, little flecks of spit would come shooting out of her mouth as she talked. And there they sat, these two ghastly hags, sipping their drinks and every now and again screaming at James to chop faster and faster. They also talked about themselves, each one saying how beautiful she thought she was. Aunt Sponge had a long-handled mirror on her lap, and she kept picking it up and gazing at her own hideous face. (Dahl, 1961, pp. 5–7)

We gave students a picture frame template for them to draw what they imagined the aunts looked like. Then we reread the section, so that the students could check their illustrations to see whether they wanted to add anything, but also to once again expose them to the rich vocabulary embedded in comprehensible sentences. Although the students pleaded to see the illustrator’s version of the two aunts, we didn’t let them see it until after they had completed their portraits and briefly discussed it with a partner. Almost all of the students were adding final touches to the images that they had drawn as we reread the description of Aunt Sponge and Aunt Spiker—a perfect opportunity to focus on the vocabulary embedded in the author’s descriptions. We then showed them an 172

Scaffolding Strategies

enlarged copy of the illustrator’s version. All together, this activity amounts to a five-minute detour in the read-aloud that serves to engage learners in the process of generating mental imagery.

Theatre of the Mind The theatre of the mind template (Figure 7.2) is a simple tool to help students demonstrate evidence of using mental imagery during read-alouds or as an independent tool to be sent home with audiotaped chapter books. Here’s how we use the template: Before reading, we show the template and explain that good readers see mental pictures as they read (similar to that of a movie or a dream), and we ask students to practice creating mental images as we read. Before reading, we let them know that at the end of each chapter or section, they will have two minutes to quickly draw what they saw in their mind’s eye while we read the story. We read a chapter or an appropriate segment and then ask students to take two minutes to do a quick-draw. After two minutes, we ask students to pair up and share their drawing and a verbal explanation with their partner. This step is helpful for ELLs who might have missed certain important details because of a misunderstanding due to their lack of English vocabulary. This pair-share allows students to compare and cross-check their comprehension. We then ask a few students to share with the class and call on others who had differing pictures to share. We then read the next chapter and follow the pattern until we feel that the students are hooked or invested in hearing the rest of the story. At that point, we stop using the quick-draw and pair-share scaffolds. The theatre of the mind template in Figure 7.3 allows for students to jot down phrases, words, or sentences to capture the most important theme in the segment of the book that had just been read. It can be used as a scaffold for summaries, a study of story features, or writing activities that will follow. We usually ask students to add any writing after they have shared the pictures with their partner. This way their summaries can be combined with any missed elements shared by their partner. It is important to note that both types of templates can also be used effectively in the content area, especially with excerpts from historical fiction aimed at boosting engagement and interest. Figure 7.4 shows a template filled in by a student. It’s only partially completed, however, because by the time the student completed the fourth picture, we felt that

(text continued on p. 177)

173

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 7.2 Theatre of the Mind Template

174

1

2

3

4

5

6

Scaffolding Strategies

Figure 7.3 Theatre of the Mind Template with Space for Captions

1

2

3

4

5

6

175

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure 7.4 Completed Theatre of the Mind Template

176

Scaffolding Strategies

she was hooked. There was no longer any need to remind her to induce mental imagery, and by that point, the graphic organizer had served its purpose. Taking the quick-draws any further, by asking her to continue sketching after every chapter, would have disrupted the flow of the story and defeated the purpose for which the scaffold was intended: to induce mental imagery. Once the scaffold was no longer needed, we eliminated it.

Student- and Text-Generated Images McCrudden, Schraw, Lehman, and Poliquin (2007) examined the use of causal drawings on the understanding of content among university students. They found that those who had read the text and studied the causal drawings understood the content better than those who had only read. In fact, in a second experiment, students were given either the text or a causal drawing. The researchers found no difference in understanding between the two. So, actively focusing student attention on the diagrams that are meant to support student comprehension can indeed go a long way in improving their comprehension. Comprehension may be even further improved by having students generate their own imagery, such as in the use of quick-draws. Student-generated visual images have the effect of focusing student attention on comprehension as opposed to simply decoding. When students are asked to create a visual representation of something that they’ve learned or read, they go through the process of creating a mental model as they read in a more active way than simply directing their attention to pictures and diagrams that have been prepared for them in the text. In Van Meter, Aleksic, Schwartz, and Garner’s (2006) study, participants who were asked to create their own illustrations of what they had read in a science text, and then to compare this illustration with the features on the provided illustrations, had equal or better comprehension than those who were simply asked to read the text and inspect the provided illustrations. To create their own visual representations, students have to actively and deeply understand a concept. This activity can really help students solidify what they know and then repackage it in the form of a visual representation.

Scaffolding Understanding Through the First Language Allowing students to process their thinking first in their native language and then in English is an excellent way to get the cognitive juices flowing. This can also be 177

The Language-Rich Classroom

accomplished through strategically pairing students with bilingual peers who can help support the ELLs’ language growth. For example, Tiffani Peoples, a teacher at Washington Elementary, strategically paired two high achievers in order to scaffold the learning for the one who was in the process of learning English. According to Peoples, the two students were thought to qualify for gifted services, and one frequently used academic English in her speech, providing a model of the vocabulary for the other student, who had deep understanding of concepts but lacked the English vocabulary to go with them. Peoples’s pairing of the two was strategic. She explained, “Evelyn [pseudonym] is gifted, and those two are on the same level of thinking, but Yaritza [pseudonym] has only been in the country for a year and half. Yaritza needs that extra help with the vocabulary, which Evelyn models for her.” Yaritza’s thoughts are deep and complex, and during their interchanges, Evelyn provides Yaritza with the vocabu­ lary to express her deep thoughts in English. During the unit on The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane (DiCamillo, 2006), ESL teacher Krista Grimm strategically paired early language learners with peers who were fluent in both Spanish and English. “Since I know both classrooms, I was able to pair them with someone in another room, so that in the middle of the chapter where they had to turn and talk to their partner, some of our stronger bilingual students could translate their Spanish thinking into English.” Early arrivals were also given the benefit of a Spanish read-aloud experience from their bilingual ESL teacher. By the time they came back to the classroom, they could understand the discussion around the book and could participate along with their more proficient peers. Inviting small groups to process their thinking in their native language and then come back and translate their ideas into English is an excellent way to get students to deeply think through concepts, without the frustration of fumbling for the right words. Take, for instance, this example from Critical Pedagogy: Notes from the Real World (Wink, 1997). Students were studying the U.S. Constitution in a multilingual classroom. The teacher asked the students to do the following: Rewrite the Preamble using your own language. Look at the Preamble, pick it apart and put the thoughts back together with any language that you want to use. Words like everyday talk at home, or outside of school, Spanish, English, Cambodian, Lao. Use street language if you want. Use any language, but just demonstrate the thoughts of the Preamble. Afterwards, in your groups, redo it in English, so that I can understand. (p. 87) 178

Scaffolding Strategies

In this example, students were allowed the opportunity to use thought processes such as comprehension, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis, all at the same time without the initial pressure and stress of doing so in English. Once students have participated in this process, then the translation of their deep thinking becomes a simpler task. As this example and the earlier ones in this chapter indicate, the process of scaffolding learning takes an investment on the teacher’s part to know his or her students and to develop manageable steps to achieve the desired outcomes. The process involves scaffolding interest by engaging emotions as well as scaffolding understanding through the use of graphic organizers, visuals, imagery, and first-language support. The investment, however, is sure to engage students in meaningful, relevant activities that produce both interest and increased understanding.

179

Conclusion Planning Your CHATS Units

We hope that you have found this text useful in your goal toward making learning comprehensible and meaningful to all students in your multilingual classroom. Our goal was to provide you with a framework designed around research-based best practices and classroom-tested strategies for teaching English language learners. This lens for delivering content also provides a perfect vehicle for devel­ oping language. Thus, the classroom can be an optimal place for fostering the academic and linguistic skills that ELLs need to succeed in school and in life. This is especially true when units are coplanned and cotaught as a collaborative effort among classroom teachers, ELL teachers, and special education teachers. Delivery of effective lessons that will meet the needs of all students requires purposeful planning that includes many of the principles described in this book. As you plan, we encourage you to encode your lesson plans so that you’ve included the C, H, T, and S components. Although the A (assessment) component may not take the form of actual activities in every lesson, it should serve as a driving rationale for the rest of the activities that you choose. Assessment of linguistic needs ought to be a continuous process that allows you to design learning experiences and to scaffold them from practical starting points. Assessment of linguistic proficiencies also helps you determine what kinds of outside support you will need to maximize learning in the classroom.

181

The Language-Rich Classroom

When the School District of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, adopted the CHATS framework as a part of its District Improvement Plan, our intent was that it would be used mostly in grades 3 through 12 in content classrooms and in whole-class contexts. However, when we interviewed literacy coaches and teachers, it became clear that it had been successfully used by teachers at all levels and areas of specialty, including vocational education teachers, who continually aimed at interjecting higher levels of thinking in their classroom interactions, as well as preschool teachers, who aimed at exposing students to informational texts and strategically highlighting how text features can support comprehension. As our interviews progressed, we found that our best tactic was to simply smile and pretend it had been our idea all along to include the wide span of grade levels and areas of specialty in the CHATS planning process. What we discovered is that although some of the strategies may not be appropriate for all classes and grade levels, the principles are universal across grade levels and areas of specialty. Even in preschool, children need comprehension tools to make sense of informational texts, and content still provides the engagement that a simple focus on language acquisition does not. In vocational education, students need to be able to competently read informational text and be able to make analytical connections between theory and practice in their content area. Before we end the book, we want to leave you with unit- and lesson-planning worksheets that can serve as reference tools in designing units that integrate the five components of the CHATS framework (see Figures C.1 and C.2). By now you’ve undoubtedly noticed that sometimes the components overlap. For example, a content reading strategy may be a TPT and a scaffold all at the same time. Don’t worry too much about how you label the strategies you use, so long as they result in increased student learning. We encourage you to start with the unit planning worksheet and roughly plan out your unit, thinking of which strategies might best fit with certain topics. After you’ve laid out your unit, then move on to planning individual lessons. Remember that making a dent in the ELL dropout rates will take a schoolwide effort, so the more colleagues you can collaborate with as you plan your lessons and deliver your instruction, the better. Attaining linguistic and academic competence is daunting for many ELLs. We nonetheless believe that this goal is perfectly achievable through strong teaching practices that are informed, purposeful, relevant, and authentic. We hope the CHATS framework will help you create just such practices in your own classroom. 182

Conclusion: Planning Your CHATS Units

Figure C.1 CHATS Unit-Planning Worksheet Content Reading Strategies Aim for: Authenticity and relevance Increased overall exposure Comprehension Strategies: Found poems Content-based “I Am” poems Concept mapping (Novak  & Gowin, 1984) The GRP (Manzo & Manzo, 1990) Responding to headings Written conversations  (Daniels & Zemelman, 2004) Historical role plays Presentation grids List-group-label (Taba, 1967) Time lines Causal charts The Relevance Wheel Informational book table Quotable quips  (Edmunds & Bauserman, 2006) Metacognitive Strategies: Teaching Self-Efficacy Self Assessments Learning log prompts Content reading strategies log New vocabulary logs Goal Setting

Scaffolding 1. What do you want your students to be able to do? 2. What can they currently do? 3. How can you build a bridge from question 2 to question 1? How will you engage emotions? Scaffolding Techniques: Use of graphic organizers Use of related stories found on the Internet Picture walks Pictorial input (Brechtel, 2001) Inducing mental imagery Theatre of the mind Use of student- and text-generated images Scaffolding understanding through the L1 Others

Higher–Order Thinking Planning: Develop your unit’s enduring understandings and essential questions (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) Develop your daily essential questions aimed at higher-order thinking (Bloom, 1956) for each activity. Delivery Strategies: Ripple your questions. Set in place respectful “Ground Rules for Debriefing.” Continually analyze author’s viewpoint. Use the critical content-area bookmarks if you get stuck.

Assessment Which of your students need linguistic support? Where is each of your students in terms of his or her linguistic development (linguistic stages and ELL typologies)? Have you obtained first-language writing samples for each ELL? What does each student need? How will you document growth for individual students? How might collaboration with the ELL teacher and special education teacher provide more meaningful learning experiences for your students? Will you need additional university volunteers for students who have limited formal schooling?

Total Participation Techniques Do your daily lessons provide opportunities for instant evidence of total participation? Do the TPTs allow for a deeper under­ standing of concepts, interaction, and peer modeling of higher levels of thinking? Activities: Pair-share Quick-write Quick-draw Three 3s in a Row Hold-ups Networking sessions Four Corners The Likert scale Explain It to Your Neighbor Transparency sheets Others

183

The Language-Rich Classroom

Figure C.2 CHATS Lesson-Planning Worksheet Lesson: _______________________________________________

Content Reading Strategies: What strategies will you use to support content reading comprehension? Will students self-assess and set goals for their own learning in this lesson? If so, what prompts or tools will you use?

Higher-Order Thinking: What essential question(s) (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) aimed at higher-order thinking (Bloom, 1956) will drive your lesson? What will you do to ensure that all students get an opportunity to reflect on, respond to, and share responses to your question(s)?

Assessment: For which students will you assess linguistic growth during this lesson? Will any of your students need additional scaffolds? Do you know individual students’ linguistic stages of development?

Total Participation Techniques: What TPTs will you use to ensure that all students are engaged and learning?

Scaffolding: What visuals, graphic organizers, and other supports will you use to scaffold engagement and understanding?

184

Date: ___________________

Objectives & Lesson Sequence:

References

Albom, M. (2002). Tuesdays with Morrie. New York: Random House. ASCD. (2005). A six-step process for teaching vocabulary: Elementary and secondary. Alexandria, VA: Author. BBC News. (2006). Red alert for Indonesia volcano. Retrieved June 26, 2008, from http://news. bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4767805.stm Becker, G. H. (2003). Copyright: A guide to information and resources (3rd ed.). Lake Mary, FL: Author. Beers, K. (1998, April). Listen while you read: Struggling readers and audiobooks. School Library Journal, pp. 30–35. Bellanca, J. (1997). Active learning handbook: For the multiple intelligences classroom. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007, January–February). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1, Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans, Green. Bomar, L. (2006, May–June). iPods as reading tools. Principal (NAESP National Association of Elementary School Principals). Bong, M. (2008). Effects of parent-child relationships and classroom goal structures on motivation, help-seeking avoidance, and cheating. Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 191–217. Brechtel, M. (2001). Bringing it all together: Language and literacy in the multilingual classroom. Carlsbad, CA: Dominie Press. Bridgeland, J. M., DiIulio, J. J., Jr., & Morison, K. B. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Civic Enterprises. British Antarctic Survey. (2008). Press release: First evidence of under-ice volcanic eruption. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_ release.php?id=341

185

The Language-Rich Classroom

Cardillo, A., Coville, B., Ditlow, T., Myrick, E., & Lesesne, T. (2007). Tuning in to audiobooks: Why should kids listen? Children and Libraries: The Journal of the Association for Library Service to Children, 5(3), 42–46. Carlo, M. S., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C. E., Dressler, C., Lippman, D. N., et al. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 188–215. Certo, J. L., Cauley, K. M., Moxley, K. D., & Chafin, C. (2008, April–May). An argument for authenticity: Adolescents’ perspectives on standards-based reform. High School Journal (University of North Carolina Press), 26–39. Chamot, A. U. & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive academic language learning approach. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Chan, A. W. (2004). Syntactic transfer: Evidence from the interlanguage of Hong Kong Chinese ESL learners. Modern Language Journal, 88(1), 56–74. Clements, A. (1996). Frindle. New York: Simon & Schuster. Cohen, J. (2007). A case study of a high school English language learner and his reading. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(2), 164–175. Costa, A. L. (2008, March). The thought-filled curriculum. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 20–24. Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251. Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14(2), 175–187. Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press. Cummins, J. (1991). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California Office of Bilingual Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 51–82). Los Angeles: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University. Cummins, J., Bismilla, V., Chow, P., Cohen, S., Giampapa, F., Leoni, L., et al. (2005, September). Affirming Identity. Educational Leadership, 63(1), 38–43. Dahl, R. (1961). James and the giant peach. New York: Puffin Books. Dahl, R. (1982). The BFG. New York: Puffin books. Daniels, H., & Zemelman, S. (2004). Subjects matter: every teacher’s guide to content-area reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Denton, P. (2007). The power of our words: Teacher language that helps children learn. Turner Falls, MA: Northeast Foundation for Children, Inc. DiCamillo, K. (2003a). The tale of Desperaux. New York: Scholastic. DiCamillo, K. (2003b) (Audiobook). The tale of Desperaux. New York: Listening Library. DiCamillo, K. (2006). The miraculous journey of Edward Tulane. Cambridge, MA: Candlewick Press. Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202–224. Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching Englishlanguage learners with diverse abilities (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Edmunds, K. M., & Bauserman, K. L. (2006). What teachers can learn about reading motivation through conversations with children. The Reading Teacher, 59(5), 414–424. 186

References

Faltis, C., & Hudelson, S. (1994). Learning English as an additional language in K–12 schools. TESOL Quarterly, 28(3), 457–468. Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the fab five: Helping students cope with the unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate grades. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487. Fillmore, L. W. (2005). The effects of educational policies and practices on home languages and learning. In A. Lopez (Ed.), Latino early literacy development: Strategies for lifelong learning and success (pp. 29–40). Retrieved July 17, 2008, from http://www.nclr.org/content/ publications/download/34207 Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2001). Between worlds: Access to second language acquisition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (with S. Mercuri) (2002). Closing the achievement gap: How to reach limited-formal-schooling and long term English learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman, D. E., Freeman, Y. S., & Mercuri, S. P. (2005). Dual language essentials for teachers and administrators. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Frost, R. (1961). Stopping by woods on a snowy evening. Retrieved July19, 2008, from http:// www.internal.org/view_poem.phtml?poemID=103 Fry, R. (2003). Hispanic youth dropping out of U.S. schools: Measuring the challenge. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center Report. Gambrell, L. B. (2001). The occurrence of think-time during reading comprehension instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 77(2), 76–80. Gambrell, L. B., & Bales, R. (1986). Mental imagery and the comprehension-monitoring performance of fourth- and fifth-grade poor readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 454–464. Gambrell, L. B., Wilson, R. M., & Gantt, W. N. (2001). Classroom observations of task-attending behaviors of good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Research, 74(6), 400–404. Garner, B. (2008, March). When students seem stalled. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 32–38. Gottardo, A., Yan, B., Siegel, L., & Wade-Woolley, L. (2001). Factors related to English reading performance in children with Chinese as a first language: More evidence of cross-language transfer of phonological processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 530–542. Greene, J. P., & Winters, M. (2005). Public high school graduation and college-readiness rates: 1991–2002. Education Working Paper No. 8. New York: Center for Civic Innovation at the Manhattan Institute. Güvenç, H., & Ün Açikgöz, K. (2007). The effects of cooperative learning and concept map­ping on learning strategy use. Educational Sciences Theory and Practice, 7(1), 117–127. Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute Policy Report 2000-1. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Himmele, P. (2001). Math reform and English language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Intercultural Studies, Biola University, La Mirada, CA. Hurley, S. R., & Tinajero, J. V. (2001). Literacy assessment of second language learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Ivey, G., & Fisher, D. (2006, October). When thinking skills trump reading skills. Educational Leadership, 64(2), 16–21. Kelly, M. J. (2007). An organizational tool for all. NEACT Journal, 16(1), 14–17. Kinchin, I. M. (2000). Concept mapping in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34(2), 61–68. 187

The Language-Rich Classroom

Klein, R. (2008, March). Engaging students around the globe. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 8–13. Krashen, S. D. (1991). Bilingual education and second language acquisition theory. In California Office of Bilingual Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 51–82). Los Angeles: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University. Krashen, S. D. (1992). Fundamentals of language education. Torrance, CA: Laredo Publishing. Krashen, S. D. (1996). Under attack: The case against bilingual education. San Francisco: Alta Publishing. Krashen, S. D. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann/Libraries Unlimited. Lahtinen, V., Lonka, K., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (1997). Spontaneous study strategies and the quality of knowledge construction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(1), 13–24. Lewis, C. S. (1978). The lion, the witch and the wardrobe. New York: HarperCollins. (Original work published 1950.) Lewis, C. S. (2000). The lion, the witch and the wardrobe. New York: HarperCollins/Harper Audio. (Original work published 1950.) Lindsey, K. A., Manis, F. R., & Bailey, C. E. (2003). Prediction of first-grade reading in Spanishspeaking English language learners. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 482–494. Littleton, K., Wood, C., & Chera, P. (2006). Interactions with talking books: Phonological awareness affects boys’ use of talking books. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 382–390. Lobel, A. (1972). Frog and toad together. New York: HarperCollins. Lovett, R. A. (2006, April 14). Giant deep-sea volcano with “moat of death” found. Retrieved June, 14, 2008, from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0414_ 060414_ volcano.html Manzo, A. V., & Manzo, U. C. (1990). Content area reading: A heuristic approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Martin, D. J. (1994). Concept mapping as an aid to lesson planning: A longitudinal study. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 6(2), 11–30. Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2005). Building academic vocabulary: Teacher’s manual. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., Lehman, S., & Poliquin, A. (2007). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 367–388. Meehan, M. L. (1999). Evaluation of the Monongalia County schools’ Even Start program child vocabulary outcomes. Charleston, WV: AEL. Norrid-Lacey, B., & Spencer, D. A. (2000, November). Experiences of Latino immigrant students at an urban high school. NASSP Bulletin, 84(619), 43–54. Novak, J. D. & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press. Olsen, L., & Jaramillo, A. (1999). Turning the tides of exclusion: A guide for educators and advocates for immigrant students. Oakland, CA: California Tomorrow. Ordonez, C. L., Carlo, M. S., Snow, C. E., & McLaughlin, B. (2002). Depth and breadth of vocabulary in two languages: Which vocabulary skills transfer? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4) 719–728. 188

References

Ovando, C. J., Collier, V. P., & Combs, M. C. (2003). Bilingual & ESL classrooms: Teaching in multicultural contexts (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. PBS Home Video. (1998). The Merrow report, lost in translation: Latinos, schools and society. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from http://www.pbs.org/merrow/tv/lost/ Patten, K. B., & Craig, D. V. (2007, June). Ipods and English language learners: A great combination. Teacher Librarian. 34(5), 40–44. Pichette, F., Segalowitz, N., & Connors, K. (2003). Impact of maintaining L1 reading skills on L2 reading skill development in adults: Evidence from speakers of Serbo-Croatian learning French. Modern Language Journal, 87(3), 391–403. Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1) 8–45. Richard-Amato, P., & Snow, M. A. (2005). Academic success for English language learners: Strategies for K–12 mainstream teachers. New York: Longman. Roberts, T. (2008). Home storybook reading in primary or second language with preschool children: Evidence of equal effectiveness for second language vocabulary acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 103–130. Robinson, F. P. (1946). Effective study. New York: Harper. Rogovin, P. (1998). Classroom interviews: A world of learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Rumberger, R. W. (2008, February). Solving California’s dropout crisis: California Dropout Research Project policy committee report. Santa Barbara: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute and the Gervirtz Graduate School of Education at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Sachar, L. (2000). Holes. New York: Scholastic Inc. Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. Technical Report 2003-1. Irvine: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57(2), 149–174. Schunk, D. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and cognitive achievement: Implications for students with learning problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(1), 14–22. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 207–331. Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 159–172. Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J. A. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five year longitudinal study. Child Development, 73(2), 445–460. Sharif, I., Ozuah, P. O., Dinkevich, E. I., & Mulvihill, M. (2003). Impact of a brief literacy intervention on urban preschoolers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 30(3), 177–180. Soltero, S. W. (2004). Dual language: Teaching and learning in two languages. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Sousa, D. A. (2006). How the brain learns (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (1990). Concept maps as a heuristic for science curriculum development: Toward improvement in process and product. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 987–1000. Stice, C. F., & Alvarez, M. C. (1987, December). Hierarchical concept mapping in the early grades. Childhood Education, pp. 86–96. St. Onge, B., Scalia, S., & Vega, L. F. (2008, January). Addressing adolescent literacy. District Administration, 44(1), 46–51. 189

The Language-Rich Classroom

Taba, H. (1967). Teacher’s handbook for elementary social studies. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Tanner, J. (1990). Reluctant rebels: A case study of Edmonton high school drop outs. Canadian Review of Sociology & Anthropology, 27(1), 74–94. Tate, M. L. (2003). Worksheets don’t grow dendrites: 20 instructional strategies that engage the brain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence. Trelease, J. (1992). Hey listen to this: Stories to read aloud. New York: Penguin Books. Trelease, J. (1993). Read all about it! Great read-aloud stories, poems, and newspaper articles for preteens and teens. New York: Penguin Books. Trelease, J. (2001). The read-aloud handbook. New York: Penguin Books. Trudel, H. (2007). Making data-driven decisions: Silent reading. The Reading Teacher, 61(4), 308–315. U.S. Census Bureau (2008). The 2008 statistical abstract. Retrieved July 17, 2008, from http:// www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/ancestry_language_spoken_at_home. html U.S. Department of Education, National Center of Education Statistics. (2002). The condition of education 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Valdés, G. (2004). Between support and marginalization: The development of academic language in linguistic minority children. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(2/3), 102–132. Van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 142–146. Verplaetse, L. S. (1998, Autumn). How content teachers interact with English language learners. TESOL Journal, pp. 24–28. Viola, H. J. (1998). Why we remember: United States history. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934.) Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Williams, T. L. (2007). “Reading” the painting: Exploring visual literacy in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 60(7), 636–642. Wink, J. (1997). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world. New York: Longman. Wink, J. (2005). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc. Young, D. (2008, Summer). Improving Alabama’s graduation rates. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin.

190

Index

Note: The letter f following a page number denotes a figure. academic language defining, 20–21 grammatical patterns of, 23–25 overview, 1–5 vocabulary of, 21–23 academic language development. See also specific CHATS components additional resources on, 3, 21 assessing proficiency in, 4–5 CHATS and, 6–8 content classrooms and, 45–46 educational background, effect on, 9–18 higher-order thinking skills and, 99, 101–104 increasing exposure for, 30–40 success elements for, 5–6 time requirements for, 25–26 time requirements in, 3, 28 academic language development, methods of audiobooks, 33–35

academic language development, methods of (continued) cognition, 99, 101–104 context embedding, 30 conversation, 30–33 emotional engagement, 32 family read-alouds, 26–29 synonymous tags, 30 using relevance and authenticity, 40–43, 103–104 using the home environment, 36–40 writing activities, 31 academic word list, 21–23 active focus with TPTs, 147–148 Active Learning Handbook for the Multiple Intelligences Classroom (Bellanca), 146 analysis, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 85 application, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 84–85 assessment additional resources on, 108 first-language writing samples in, 108–111, 110f 191

The Language-Rich Classroom

assessment (continued) involving teachers in, 107–108 monitoring tools, 126, 135–142, 136–138f, 139–141f authenticity, incorporating, 40–43, 61–63 author analysis, 98–99, 98f, 100f BICS (basic interpersonal communicative skills), 3–4 Bloom’s taxonomy, 83–86 bookmarks, content-based, 106f book table, informational, 67 CALP (cognitive academic language proficiency), 3–4 causal charts, 63–64, 63f, 64f CHATS framework. See also specific components components of the, 43 coteaching model in the, 7–8 lesson design, 181–184 overview, 6–8, 18–19 sheltered instruction vs., 6–7 success and the, 8, 43 cognition and language, 99, 101–104 communicative activities, classifying, 20–21 community, creating with TPT, 145–146 comprehension, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 84 concept mapping, 50–52, 50f, 52f confidence building with TPTs, 146–147 content reading comprehension strategies, 44–45. See also reading content reading comprehension strategies, student-mediated additional resources on, 88 introduction, 69–70 note taking, 77–78, 78f self-awareness, 70–71 self-efficacy, 71–77, 74f, 75f vocabulary, 78–80, 81f

192

content reading comprehension strategies, teacher-mediated causal charts, 63–64, 63f, 64f concept mapping, 50–52, 50f, 52f found poems, 46–48 guided reading procedure (GRP), 53 historical or literary role play, 56–58, 57f “I am” poems, 48–49 information book table, 67 list-group-label, 60–61 presentation grids, 58–60, 59f quotable quips, 68 relevance wheel, 61–63, 62f responding to headings, 53–54, 55f time lines, 65–67, 66f trifecta, 68–69 written conversations, 54, 56 content reading strategies log, 74–75, 75f conversation. See also speaking academic fluency stage of language development, 122–124 conversational vs. academic language, 3–5 emergent stage of language development, 114–115 to increase academic language development, 30–33 with native English speakers, 124–126 proficiency stage of language development, 115–122 written, 54, 56 coteaching model in CHATS framework, 7–8 Critical Pedagogy (Wink), 101 dropout rates and prevention, 1, 40–41 dual immersion ESL programs, 5–6, 36–40 emotional engagement, 32, 165–167 empathy, properly channeled, 86–91, 97 encoding systems, 77–78, 78f

Index

English language learners (ELL) background diversity of, 8–9 defined, x distinctions within categories, 17–18 dropout statistics, 1 limited formal schooling students, 10–14, 12f, 13f long-term English learner, 15–17, 16f, 17f newly arrived with adequate schooling, 9–10, 11f evaluation, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 86 experiential learning, 40–43 explain it to your neighbor, 158 family read-alouds, 26–29 first-language writing samples. See also writing assessment and, 108–111, 110f limited formal (Lil) schooling students, 10–14, 12f, 13f long-term English learner, 15–17, 16f, 17f newly arrived students with adequate schooling, 9–10, 11f found poems, 46–48 four corners, 156–157 Gladwish, Quirine, 30, 31 goal setting, learning logs for, 73–74, 74f grammatical patterns of academic language, 23–25 graphic organizers, 163–165, 164f Graupera-Richardson, Yara, 70–71 Grimm, Krista, 30, 31, 166, 178 guided reading procedure (GRP), 53 headings, responding to, 53–54 Hershberger, Jane, 102 Hewitt, Janette, 7, 32–33, 79 Hey Listen to This: Stories to Read Aloud (Trelease), 29

higher-order thinking skills additional resources on, 88, 95, 101 author analysis, 98–99, 98f Bloom’s taxonomy of, 85–86 introduction, 82–83 in language and cognition, 99, 101–104 scaffolding of, 92–98 higher-order thinking skills, developing conversation for, 101–102 peripheral language in, 102–103 properly channeled empathy in, 86–91, 97 verb lists and, 95–96 history, teaching, 104 hold-ups, 153–155, 154f home environment and academic language development, 26–29, 36–40 How the Brain Learns (Sousa), 160 “I am” poems, 48–49 informal language assessment indicators, 128–134f informal language assessment interviews. See also interviews academic fluency stage of language development, 122–124 emergent stage of language development, 114–115 proficiency stage of language development, 115–122 suggested interview questions, 126, 127f information book table, 67 inner speech, 89–90 input hypothesis of language acquisition, 38, 108 Internet for engagement, 167 interviews. See also informal language assessment interviews with native English speakers, 124–126 scaffolding strategies, 93–95, 94f techniques for student journalists, 94f

193

The Language-Rich Classroom

key rings and podiums, 92–93 knowledge, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 84 language context embedded, 30 conversational vs. academic, 3–5 at home, using primary language, 36–40 peripheral to active, 102–103 thought and, 99, 101–104 language acquisition content classrooms and, 45–46 input hypothesis of, 38, 108 language acquisition stages academic fluency, 122–126 emergent, 111, 114–115 overview, 112–113f proficiency, 115–122 learning emotional engagement and, 165–166 movement and, 147–148 relevance and authenticity in motivating, 40–43, 61–63 self-efficacy and, 72 learning disabilities, 2–3 learning logs, 73–74, 74f Leer, Mary, 105 Legath, Vicki, 39 lesson design, big-picture CHATS unit planning, 181–184 content-based bookmarks, 106f scaffolding strategies, 95–96, 162–165 teacher comfort zones and, 104–105 Likert scale, 157–158 listening informal language assessment indicators, 128–134f language acquisition stages and, 112f monitoring tools, 136f, 139f whole-group debriefing ground rules, 92f list-group-label, 60–61 194

Literacy Assessment of Second Language Learners (Hurley and Tinajero), 108 lower-order thinking skills, 84–85 Martin-Hair, Jackie, 35 mathematics, teaching, 105 mental imagery, creating when reading, 170–177 metacognition strategies for students additional resources on, 88 note taking, 77–78, 78f self-awareness, 70–71 self-efficacy, 71–77, 74f, 75f vocabulary, 78–80, 81f Mitchell, Barbara, 89, 92–93 monitoring tools, 126, 135–142, 136–138f, 139–141f movement, relationship to learning, 147–148 native English speakers conversation with, 124–126 defined, x networking session, 155–156 nonbilingual ESL programs, 2 note taking, 77–78, 78f Oakes, Jeanne, 126 open-ended questions, 89, 93 oral language samples. See informal language assessment interviews pair-shares, 148–149, 173 parents, methods for engaging, 26–29, 34–35 Patton, Diane, 104–105 Patukas, Gus, 42 pictorial input activity, 170 picture walk, 168–169 poems, using for comprehension, 45–49 Potter, Keely, 31–32 The Power of Our Words (Denton), 88

Index

The Power of Reading (Krashen), 27 presentation grids, 58–60, 59f primary language, encouraging use at home, 36–40 pullout ESL programs, 2, 45, 107 questions additional resources on, 88 asking bigger, strategies for, 92–93, 97, 101–102 interviewing techniques, 93–95, 94f open-ended, 89, 93 properly channeled empathy when asking, 86–91, 97 rippling, 89–92, 90f wait time before answering, 96–98 quick-draws, 150–151, 173 quick-writes, 149–150, 150f quotable quips, 68 Read All About It! Great Read-Aloud Stories, Poems and Newspaper Articles for Preteens and Teens (Trelease), 29 The Read-Aloud Handbook (Trelease), 27, 28 read-alouds, 26–29, 172–173 readers, critical, 98–99, 98f, 100f reading. See also content reading comprehension strategies to acquire language, 25–29, 68 author analysis and, 98–99, 98f, 100f elements affecting comprehension, 24 informal language assessment indicators, 128–134f language acquisition stages, 113f mental imagery, creating when, 170–177 monitoring tools, 136f, 139f scaffold example, 164f text encoding while, 77–78, 78f reading, motivating through audiobooks, 33–35 foreign language take-home readers, 39

reading, motivating through (continued) free voluntary reading, 27–28, 67 quotable quips, 68 relevance and authenticity, 40–43 reading the painting, 168–169 real-world learning, 40–43 reflection, 89–92, 90f Reinhart, Jennifer, 42–43 relevance, incorporating, 40–43, 61–63, 103–104 relevance wheel, 61–63, 62f responding to headings, 55f rippling questions, 89–92, 90f role-play, historical or literary, 56–58, 57f scaffolding additional resources on, 166 big-picture lesson design and, 95–96, 162–165, 164f emotional engagement with, 165–167 higher-order thinking skills and, 92–98 importance of, 45 introduction, 161–162 mental imagery in, 170–177 using native language in, 177–179 visuals for, 168–177 scaffolding tools graphic organizers, 163–165, 164f interviews, 93–95, 94f key rings and podiums, 92–93 pictorial input, 170 picture walk, 168–169 presentation grids, 58–60, 59f reading the painting, 168–169 student-generated images, 177 theatre of the mind, 173, 174–176f, 177 wait time, 96–98 science, teaching, 104–105 self-awareness, 70–71 self-efficacy, 71–77, 74f, 75f sheltered instruction, 6–7, 107 195

The Language-Rich Classroom

Sinkosky, Roseann, 166–167 social integration with TPT, 145–146 socioeconomic status, reading time and, 25–26 speaking. See also conversation informal language assessment indicators, 128–134f language acquisition stages, 112f monitoring tools, 136f, 139f special education services, 2 synthesis, in Bloom’s taxonomy, 85 text encoding, 77–78, 78f theatre of the mind, 173, 174–176f, 177 thought and language, 99, 101–104 three 3s in a row, 151–153, 152f time lines, 65–67, 66f total participation techniques (TPTs) additional resources on, 146, 160 benefits of, 143–148 building confidence using, 146–147 creating community with, 145–146 introduction, 143–145 maintaining focus using, 147–148 using as a mind-set, 159–160 total participation techniques (TPTs), activities, 150f explain it to your neighbor, 158 four corners, 156–157 hold-ups, 153–155, 154f Likert scale, 157–158 networking session, 155–156 pair-shares, 148–149 quick-draws, 150–151 quick-writes, 149–150

196

total participation techniques (TPTs), activities (continued) three 3s in a row, 151–153, 152f transparency sheets, 159 transfer theory, 37–38 transparency sheets (TPT activity), 159 trifecta, 68–69 two-way bilingual programs. See dual immersion ESL programs Understanding by Design (Wiggins and McTighe), 95 verb lists, 95–96 visual literacy tools, 168–177 vocabulary of academic language, 21–23 learning strategies, 78–80, 81f peripheral to active, 27 vocabulary log, 81f wait time, 96–98 Weidemoyer, Jim, 104 Worksheets Don’t Grow Dendrites (Tate), 166 writers, critical, 98–99, 98f, 100f writing. See also first-language writing samples developing academic language through, 31 informal language assessment indicators, 128–134f language acquisition stages, 113f monitoring tools, 136f, 139f written conversations, 54, 56

About the Authors

Dr. Pérsida Himmele is an assistant professor in the education department at Millersville University in south­ eastern Pennsylvania. She has served as the ELL coordinator for curriculum and professional development for the School District of Lancaster and as a consultant to school districts and the Pennsylvania Department of Education. She has a Ph.D. in Intercultural Education and has been a teacher in bilingual and multilingual classrooms in New York and Southern California. She has served as a consult­ ant and teacher trainer for educational projects in the United States, China, Nepal, Argentina, and Tonga. Pérsida is Puerto Rican and was raised on Bustelo coffee. Dr. William Himmele is an assistant professor and coor­ dinator for the ESL certificate program at Millersville University in southeastern Pennsylvania. He is a former speech and ESL teacher in New York and Southern California and has served as a teacher trainer and an educational consultant for various school districts and educational projects in the United States, Puerto Rico, Chile, Fiji, Trinidad & Tobago, Korea, China, Nepal, and Thailand. He earned an M.A. in TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) and a Ph.D. in Intercultural Education. Bill is a lifelong Buffalo Bills fan and keeps hoping for a brighter day. Pérsida and William have been married for over 20 years and have two beautiful and compassionate children. They can be reached via phone at (717)823-3788 and via e-mail at [email protected] and [email protected]. 197

Related ASCD Resources: The Language-Rich Classroom At the time of publication, the following ASCD resources were available; for the most up-to-date information about ASCD resources, go to www.ascd.org. ASCD stock numbers are noted in parentheses. Print Products Classroom Instruction That Works with English Language Learners by Kathleen Flynn and Jane D. Hill (#106009) Classroom Instruction That Works with English Language Learners, Facilitators Guide by Jane D. Hill and Cynthia Linnea Bjork (#108052) Classroom Instruction That Works with English Language Learners, Participant’s Workbook by Jane D. Hill and Cynthia Linnea Bjork (#108053) Content-Area Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-Based Lessons for Diverse Language Learners by Douglas Fisher, Nancy Frey and Carol Rothenberg (#108035) Getting Started with English Language Learners: How Educators Can Meet the Challenge by Judie Haynes (#106048) Managing Diverse Classrooms: How to Build on Students’ Cultural Strengths by Carrie Rothstein-Fisch and Elise Trumbull (#107014) Meeting the Needs of Second Language Learners: An Educator’s Guide by Judith LessowHurley (#102043) Research-Based Methods of Reading Instruction for English Language Learners, Grades K-4 by Sylvia Linan-Thompson and Sharon Vaughn (#108002) Mixed Media Strategies for Success with English Language Learners (ASCD Action Tool) (#706088) Videos and DVDs How To Get Started with English Language Learners (one 15-minute DVD) (#608032) Maximizing Learning for English Language Learners (one DVD with a facilitator’s guide) (#603326) Raising the Literacy Achievement of English Language Learners (one DVD with a facilitator’s guide) (#606122) PD Online English Language Learners in the Mainstream: Strategies that Work (ASCD PD Online Course) (# PD05OC48) The Whole Child Initiative helps schools and communities create learning environments that allow students to be healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged. To learn more about other books and resources that relate to the whole child, visit www.wholechildeducation.org. For additional resources, visit us on the World Wide Web (http://www.ascd.org), send an e-mail message to [email protected], call the ASCD Service Center (1-800-933-ASCD or 703-578-9600, then press 2), send a fax to 703-575-5400, or write to Information Services, ASCD, 1703 N. Beauregard St., Alexandria, VA 22311-1714 USA.

Education

T

oday’s multilingual classrooms challenge even the best teachers’ skills. As teachers strive to help all students reach their full potential, the needs of English language learners (ELLs) can seem overwhelming. In The Language-Rich Classroom, educators and consultants Pérsida and William Himmele present a five-part, research-based framework—CHATS— that teachers can use to help ELLs, as well as other students, attain greater language skills and deeper content comprehension. This field-tested framework includes diagnostic tools, comprehensive overviews of second-language acquisition, and teaching techniques to boost language learning in any classroom. The CHATS framework provides teachers with C = Content reading strategies, H = Higher-order thinking skills, A = Assessment tools, T = Total participation techniques, and S = Scaffolding strategies The book contains helpful planning worksheets, assessment logs, and scaffolding tools. Teachers will also find more than 25 classroom and team-building activities and specific tips about how these activities benefit ELLs. The Language-Rich Classroom is an invaluable resource that will help teachers foster greater gains in students’ language development, increase their comprehension across all subject areas, and build classrooms that are engaging and welcoming to students of all cultures.

Alexandria, Virginia USA Browse Excepts from ASCD Books: www.ascd.org/books

STUDY GUIDE ONLINE

“When [teachers] started experimenting with CHATS strategies, they saw instant results, in terms of students’ understanding and engagement. That enthusiasm just propelled them forward into trying out other strategies…They’re able to reach kids that they didn’t know how to reach before. Teachers are feeling empowered.” Dr. Janette Hewitt, Principal, Washington Elementary School

“The bottom line of what it’s done for me is that I’m still as passionate about teaching in April as I was in August. I just love teaching, and it has a lot to do with using CHATS. Kids don’t cut class anymore. When they can begin to participate in the way that they do, they begin to feel successful. And, they feel much better about themselves.” Barbara Mitchell, ELL Teacher, J.P. McCaskey High School