a ty ty a c ty fective r o s n erved language NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION language dropout literacy practice minori guide support exclusion English curriculum growing minority support guide Meeting the Unique Needs of Long Term English Language Learners A GUIDE FOR EDUCATORS By Laurie Olsen, Ph.D. exclusion practice curriculum support ractice minori guide support growing English minori language support dropout culture exclusion English practice curriculum wing growing study
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
a
ty
a
a
c
ty
a
c
ty
guidefective
gro
support
rosnerved
study teacher
exclusion ccess urg
pport
significant strong English bar
ctive growing
capacity act
supportu
term scho
derserved study
student
ondition
language dropout p
language
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
language dropout literacy
practice
minori
guide
support exclusion
English
curriculum
growing
minority
support
guide
Meeting the Unique
Needs of Long Term
English Language Learners
A GUIDE FOR EDUCATORS
By Laurie Olsen, Ph.D.
exclusion
practice
curriculum
support
ractice
minori
guide
support
growing
English
minori
language
support
dropout culture
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum
wing growing
study
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
The National Education Association is the nation’s largest
professional employee organization, representing over
3 million elementary and secondary teachers, higher
education faculty, education support professionals, school
administrators, retired teachers, and students preparing to
Educators need to understand the language demands of the
content they are teaching. This includes careful analysis of
the language-related demands of the texts and thoughtful
reflection on the discipline-specific discourse patterns and
vocabulary students need for the tasks assigned in class.
Lessons often need to include building background
knowledge related to key concepts, keeping in mind that
LTELs have gaps in academic background.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculu support
minorit
guide
support
growing
28
y
co a
m
It makes a difference when educators take time to teach
vocabulary and build meaning around those words—including
giving students time to apply, discuss, and write about them.
LTELs need explicit instruction in developing highly portable
vocabulary they will encounter in multiple academic settings.
7. Effective educators make connections, build relevance,
affirm language and culture, and maintain rigor.
The most effective classrooms for LTELs establish an
environment that affirms language and culture, invites
students to make connections between their life experiences
and the academic content, incorporates relevant issues and
material into the curriculum, and maintains high expectations
and intellectual rigor.
Much of the research literature related to language minority
youth cites the importance of “culturally and linguistically
responsive pedagogy” and “empowering pedagogy.”xiii
All students learn by making connections between
what they already know and the new information they
encounter. Pedagogy that encourages students to bring
their experiences, culture, heritage, and language into the
classroom maximizes learning by allowing students to build on
the full foundation of their prior knowledge.
Empowering pedagogy is participatory by design, requiring
educators to have high expectations and the ability to
communicate those expectations. Educators need skills
for building upon the familiar, scaffolding the unfamiliar
through explicit activities, eliciting student participation,
and responding to what students have to say. These skills
require educators to adapt, shape, select from, and add to
the curriculum/materials they are given, in response to their
students’ needs.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum support
support minorit
growing
29
y
d co
8. Effective educators check for understanding and monitor
progress.
It is important to keep a sense of urgency and focus about
the progress of LTEL students, using samples of LTEL student
work to reflect on their academic content and language
needs. As you monitor the progress of LTELs, consider issues
of active participation and engagement, as well as academic
work samples.
Check in regularly with LTELs about how they are doing and
what they need: include student self-assessments and goal-
setting in this process and encourage students to identify their
challenges, own their success, and figure out ways to move
forwards towards English proficiency and college readiness
goals.
Elementary School Strategies and Programs
that Prevent the Creation of Long Term English
Language Learners
The trajectory of a Long Term English Language Learner begins
in elementary school. Taking the necessary steps early enough
can help prevent an entire new generation of long term ELL
students. Successful elementary school programs offer high-
quality language development programs and strategies that are
consistent across grade levels.
English Language Development/English as a Second
Language. Dedicated, daily, and standards-based ELD/ESL
programs address the specific needs of students at each
fluency level and support instruction with quality materials
that focus on all four language domains—with a major
emphasis on building a strong oral language foundation;
using language for interaction and meaning-making; and
developing complex, precise, and academic language.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculu support
minorit
guide
support
growing
30
y
co a
m
Home language development. Programs that develop
students’ home language (oral and literacy) to threshold
levels are a strong foundation for developing English literacy
and academic success (at least through third grade, more
powerfully through fifth grade, and optimally, ongoing
throughout a students’ education). Teaching students to
read in their first language promotes higher levels of reading
achievement in English and provides students the benefits of
bilingualism.
Use curriculum, instruction, and strategies. Use resources that
promote transfer between English and the home language.
Enriched oral language development. Emphasize oral
language throughout the curriculum.
Modified instructional strategies and supplemental materials
provide access to academic content.
Program coherence and consistency. Provide coherence and
consistency of program across grades, including, wherever
possible, articulation and alignment with preschool.
High-quality literature. Provide students/LTELs with exposure
to high-quality literature and complex and expressive
language.
Common Core: Standards that Create New Urgency
for Long Term ELLs
The Common Core Standards have set benchmarks defining
college and career readiness in English Language Arts and
Mathematics—articulating high expectations for students and
driving a new era in curriculum, pedagogy, and assessments.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum support
support minorit
growing
31
y
d co
The standards are an opportunity to strengthen the schooling of
English Language Learners, but without attention to the specific
needs of ELLs, Common Core Standards could exacerbate
the barriers and achievement gaps that have characterized the
education of ELLs for too long—increasing the likelihood that
English Language Learners will become Long Term.
The language and literacy demands of the Common Core are
high and many English Language Learners are not achieving
even the current bar of English proficiency needed for academic
participation. As LTEL research has found, the focus on academic
language is inadequate, the provision of ELD/ESL has been
generally weak, and teaching and curriculum materials have been
insufficient for moving English Language Learners to the levels of
English needed for successful academic engagement.
Meeting the demands of the new standards will require an
increase in support for English Language Learners. Ramping
up instruction to raise English Language Learners to the bar of
linguistic complexity called for in the Common Core standards
will require a major intensification, strengthening, and focus on
English Language Development and scaffolding strategies across
the curriculum. Implementation of the Common Core will require
both investments in materials that more appropriately provide
the scaffold into academic rigorous text and changes in teaching
practices so that students are provided support for engaging
with more complex text.
Fortunately for educators who have Long Term English Language
Learners in their classrooms, the Common Core Standards align
with the instructional requirements of these students.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculu support
minorit
guide
support
growing
32
y
co a
m
The Common Core standards position academic language
development within the study of academic disciplines,
and call for attention to literacy and language across the
curriculum.
In addition to calling for an explicit focus on the vocabulary,
oral language, and discourse patterns essential to academic
participation, the new standards call on educators to develop
an understanding of literacy and language as they apply
across all curricular areas, and to utilize strategies to promote
active student engagement with language in the classroom
throughout the day.
The Common Core Standards call for collaboration and
teamwork, as a key component of instruction, and recognize
that students need to develop the skills for collaborative
engagement in academic work.
The Common Core Standards view language as action: a
vehicle for constructing meaning, negotiating meaning,
expressing ideas, and accomplishing academic tasks. This
understanding of the role of “language in action” necessitates
more project-based and inquiry-based teaching and learning
and the active use of language in the context of collaborative
work.
The Common Core standards call for an increased focus on
oral language, speaking, and listening.
The new standards call for developing speaking and listening
skills for all students, presenting ideas orally, and working
in groups to construct and negotiate meaning. Educators
are called on to structure opportunities and then support
students to actively engage in one-on-one, small group, and
whole group discussions.
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum support
support minorit
growing
33
y
d co
NEA members believe that Common Core State Standards
represent a game changer for students and public education
if we get implementation of the standards right. There is
overwhelming consensus among educators across the country
that the Common Core will ultimately be good for students
and education. There are significant challenges associated with
implementing Common Core, but the possibilities are far too
great for us to throw up our hands and say, “this is just too hard.”
As schools implement the standards, one imperative stands
out: educators are key to ensuring English Language Learners
have access to the Common Core Standards. To be successful,
they need planning time, support, and meaningful, well-
designed professional development that focuses on scaffolding
strategies to ensure access, differentiating instruction for
maximum participation, working with the linguistic demands of
academic text to build understanding of how English works, and
embedding language development across the curriculum.
34
y
co a
m
term ccess lang
act underse
support ndition
minorit support
guide ef sign fective growing
uage dropout
literacy
practice exclusion
English curriculu
HOW CAN POLICYMAKERS ADVOCATE
FOR LONG TERM ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNERS?
Policymakers must require and ensure the
implementation of high-quality programs,
curriculum, educator training, and supports for
English Language Learners and Long Term English
Language Learners.
Educators can make an enormous difference in the lives of Long
Term English Language Learners, as instructors and as advocates
for building the comprehensive programs LTELs require.
Schools can’t fully address the needs of LTELs, however, without
leadership and advocacy at the policy level.
The role of the district and state is to ensure high-quality
implementation of research-based programs for English
Language Learners. This requires addressing common
challenges, such as inadequate data and student information
systems, a shortage of educators prepared with the knowledge
and skills to effectively teach LTELs, lack of appropriate
curriculum and materials targeted for the LTEL population,
contradictory mandates and counsel, general lack of knowledge
about research on effective practices, and inadequate
assessment and systems to know how ELLs are doing or to
identify ELLs who are not adequately progressing.
Action Steps for Policymakers
To effectively serve the needs of LTEL students, policymakers
must take action on a variety of fronts:
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum support
support minorit
growing
35
y
d co
Provide clearly defined descriptions of effective research-
based program models, and disseminate research on
effective English Language Learner practices.
Support professional development initiatives (including
coaching) for teachers, education support professionals, and
administrators in the needs of English Language Learners,
understanding and implementing research-based program
models, and effective instructional strategies.
Invest in collaborative educator planning to facilitate the
development of coherent, articulated standards-based
curriculum designed to address the needs of English
Language Learners in the era of the Common Core.
Publish expectations of growth and achievement for English
Language Learners by length of time in program and by
proficiency levels, and create data and monitoring systems
that identify LTELs and that trigger supports for LTELs and
students at risk of becoming LTELs.
Provide clear language policy across the system.
Facilitate increased access to preschool programs designed
for English Language Learners and to high-quality early
foundations for dual language development and school
success.
In past decades, civil rights legislation and court action directing
schools to take affirmative steps on behalf of English Language
Learners were necessary because schools on their own were not
adequately addressing the needs of these students.
Federal and state laws, compliance monitoring, and protected
categorical funding have been critical to building and maintaining
some measure of response to English Language Learners in the
public schools.
36
language dropout
literacy
exclusion
English
practice
curriculum support
support minorit
growing
y
co a
m
language dropout
literacy
practice support
minorit
guide
support exclusion
growing
English
curriculu
This new era promises to focus more on state and local flexibility,
putting accountability into the hands of educators and school
boards—requiring all of us to take responsibility and be the voice
of accountability for this population. Until that happens, Long
Term English Language Learners will continue to be a presence in
schools across this nation.
Urgent Call to Action
English Language Learners are the fastest growing student
population in our nation’s schools, yet significant numbers
are being mis-served in school. What does that say about our
nation’s future?
Weak English Language Learner programs and practices that
proliferate across the country are foreclosing life options for
many students who struggle along, year to year, falling further
and further behind. It’s unacceptable that despite many years
in U.S. schools and despite being close to graduation age, so
many Long Term English Language Learners are still not English
proficient and have incurred major academic deficits. For them,
education has become a permanent dead-end.
The promising news is that this “permanent dead-end” is wholly
reparable. By better understanding the characteristics and needs
of the Long Term ELL population, schools can do a better job of
supporting their learning. We have the power to create policies
and programs and to mobilize at the federal, state, and district
levels to address the needs of LTELs in secondary schools and
to turn around the conditions in elementary grades that result
in the creation of long term failure. It is time to stand together
with English Language Learner communities and affirm, “Yes, our
schools are for you, too.”
37
d
term
support
SELECTED REFERENCES
August, D. & Shanahan, T. (eds.) (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Capp, R. & Fix, M. (2005). Immigrant Children, urban schools, and the No Child Left Behind Act. A report of the Urban Institute, Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute.
Lau v. Nichols. 414 U.S. 563 United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. January, 1974.
Lindholm-Leary, K. & Genesee, F. (2010). Alternative educational programs for English language learners. In California Department of Education (eds.) Research on English language learners. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education Press.
Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable Harm: Fulfilling the Unkept Promise of Educational Opportunity for California’s Long Term English Language Learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians Together.
Olsen, L. (2012) Secondary School Courses for Long Term English Language Learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians Together.
Olsen, L. (2013) The Sobrato Early Academic Language Model: A PreK-3 foundation of powerful language learning for English Language Learners. Cupertino, CA: Sobrato Family Foundation
Maxwell-Jolly, J., Gándara, P., Mendez- Benavidez, L., (2007). Promoting academic literacy among secondary English language learners: a synthesis of research and practice. Davis, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute, Education Policy Center.
Menken, K., Kleyn, T. & Chae, N. (2007). Meeting the needs of long term English language learners in high school (A report for the Office of English Language Learners of the New York City Department of Education). New York, NY: Research Institute for the Study of Language in an Urban Society.
Menken, K. & Kleyn, T. (2010, July). The long term impact of subtractive schooling in the educational experiences of secondary English language learners. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13(4), 399–417.
PROMISE Initiative (2010). “A Three-Year Pilot Study: Research Monograph.” San Bernardino, CA: San Bernardino County Office of Education.
Thomas, W. & Collier, V. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long term academic achievement: Final report. Santa Cruz, CA: CREDE.
Valdés, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools. New York, NY: Educators College Press.
ENDNOTES
iLau v. Nichols, 48FF.2d791, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth circuit, January 1973.
iiThe term “Long Term English Language Learners” is used because it identifies the key issue of how long English Language Learners have remained in United States schools without having attained English proficiency. It is always worrisome to create labels for groups of students that may result in tracking and blaming. The responsibility, having created the label, is to ensure that action is taken to address and remedy the conditions.
iiiIn California, according to the Reparable Harm report (Olsen 2010) 59% of the total secondary school English Language Learner population fits this definition of “Long Term English Language Learners.” The percentages vary across districts, however. Long Term English Language Learners comprise just 21% of one district’s secondary school English Language Learner enrollment, for example. But in two-thirds of the districts, more than half of the secondary school English Language Learners are Long Term English Language Learners. In 10 of the 31 districts, more than three out of four secondary school English Language Learners are Long Term English Language Learners. Little national data is available on Long Term English Language Learners, so it is difficult to ascertain whether patterns in California are unique or similar to the experiences in other states. Varying sources, using somewhat different definitions, provide some comparative context. A 2005 report from The Urban Institute (Capps, Fix, 2005) estimates that nationwide 56% of English Language Learners at secondary level were born in the United States. A 2001 report from the Dallas public schools reports that 70% of their secondary school English Language Learners were born in the United States, and notes that the “overall academic performance of Long Term English Language Learners does not continue to improve. They reach a ceiling in their levels of academic English attainment over time.” Research from New York City reports one out of three English Language Learners in grades 6–12 is a Long Term English Language Learner (Menken, Kleyn and Chae, 2010). And, a 2009 analysis from the Colorado Department of Education cites 23.6% of English Language Learners who have been in their schools for 6+ years. However, because definitions differ across all of these reports, these can only give a general ballpark picture for comparison.
ivMenken, K. & Kleyn, T. (2010)
vOlsen (2010) found three out of four California LTELs had gaps in ELL services, and Menken & Kleyn (2010) found half of their New York city sample had similar gaps.
viK. Lindholm-Leary and F. Genesee.
viiLindholm Leary, K. & Genesee, F. (2010); Thomas, W. & Collier, V., (2002).
viiiIn California, just 5% receive primary language instruction.
ixMenken, K. & Kleyn, T. (2010).
xMenken and Kleyn.
xiValdes, G.
xiiMaxwell-Jolly, Gandara and Mendes (2007) op cit.
xiiiThe PROMISE Initiative (2010); Meltzer, J. & Hamann, E. (2005); Olsen, L. & Romero, A. (2006); Cummins, J. (2000).
National Education Association
1201 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
www.nea.org
This document has been printed by Organized Staff Union Labor at the National Education Association 15420 | 3.2014 | ck