Search

This paper reports on a mixed methods systematic classroom observation study as part of a federally funded project to improve instruction for English language learners (ELLs) in Indiana Dual Language Bilingual Education (DLBE) classrooms. Participating DLBE teachers received professional development through online ELL licensure and DLBE certificate coursework along with on-site sociocultural instructional coaching. Participants include 15 teachers (7 treatment DLBE teachers; 8 comparison non-DLBE teachers). We observed and video recorded each teacher's English language arts (ELA) block four times over 18 months to examine changes over time and determine the impact of the coursework and coaching on their instructional practices. Using the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP), we compare the scores of the two groups over time. We also provide analytic classroom vignettes for six of the eight SIOP components to illustrate how treatment teachers' instruction improved over time. The findings generally demonstrate that the treatment led to improvements in the overall quality of sheltered ELA instruction of the DLBE teachers, but also reveal areas in need of more attention within DLBE teacher professional development.

This brief report provides an analysis of 114 research articles across 27 issues published in the "Journal of Language, Identity, and Education" (JLIE) between 2015 and 2019 (Volumes 14-18). Analyses include word frequencies across titles, keywords, and abstracts; degree of integration of language, identity, and education in the published articles; research methodologies employed; and authorship and the geographical distribution of authors. We conclude with an analysis of findings related to the diversity of research settings, languages, and the research participants. The findings of this analysis were used to reflect on our past and inform the vision of the new JLIE Editorial team. We share these findings here with current readers and potential contributors to the journal.

This article reports the results of a survey of third-grade teachers of English Language Learners (ELLs) in Arizona regarding school language and accountability policies--Proposition 203, which restricts bilingual education and mandates sheltered English Immersion; the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB); and Arizona LEARNS, the state's high-stakes testing and accountability program. The instrument, consisting of 126 survey questions plus open-ended interview question, was designed to obtain teacher's views, to ascertain the impact of these polices, and to explore their effectiveness in improving the education of ELL students. The survey was administered via telephone to 40 teacher participants from different urban, rural and reservation schools across the state. Each participant represents the elementary school in their respective school district which has the largest population of ELL students. Analyses of both quantitative and qualitative data reveal that these policies have mostly resulted in confusion in schools throughout the state over what is and is not allowed, and what constitutes quality instruction for ELLs, that there is little evidence that such policies have led to improvements in the education of ELL students, and that these policies may be causing more harm than good. Specifically, teachers report they have been given little to no guidance over what constitutes sheltered English immersion, and provide evidence that most ELL students in their schools are receiving mainstream sink-or-swim instruction. In terms of accountability, while the overwhelming majority of teachers support the general principle, they believe that high-stakes tests are inappropriate for ELLs and participants provided evidence that the focus on testing is leading to instruction practices for ELLs which fail to meet their unique linguistic and academic needs. The article concludes with suggestions for needed changes to improve the quality of education for ELLs in Arizona. (Contains 2 figures, 16 tables, 13 footnotes, a copy of the telephone survey used in the study.)

This multisite qualitative case study explores ways in which instructional coaching focused on English language development (content) and teachers' individual beliefs (process) can help general education and dual language bilingual education elementary teachers work within and through perceived institutional barriers to improve their language and literacy instruction for designated English language learners (ELLs). In practice, much literacy coaching in schools is often finite and fidelity‐oriented yet coaching grounded in constructivism empowers and emboldens teachers to become agents of change. Using the Vygotsky Space theoretical framework, we draw on multiple data sources generated during classroom observations, sessions with an instructional coach, and postprogram interviews to examine how 12 teachers moved through the stages of appropriation, transformation, publication, and conventionalization over the course of a 2‐year period. Results show that teachers exhibited meaningful shifts in their beliefs and teaching practices for ELLs during their coaching experience, but that sharing and internalizing those changes are protracted processes. We also identified two additional phases in the Vygotsky Space cycle: prepublication, where teachers expressed desires and plans to share new ideas, and scale‐up, where teachers began to reach individuals and institutions beyond their initial context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although human beings communicate mainly through talking and listening, schools tend to spend little classroom instruction time helping ELLs develop their English oral language skills, writes Wayne E. Wright. In reviewing the research on ELLs' oral language development, Wright concludes that bilingual programs give ELLs the best opportunities to progress academically while they develop English proficiency--as long as these programs include ESL instruction and sheltered English content-area instruction that gradually increases across the years of the program. Teachers should bring ELLs into classroom discussions using open-ended and higher-order skills, enabling them to hear, learn, and use new vocabulary and language structures that are essential to language proficiency. To support ELLs as they participate in such discussions, teachers should provide extra wait time and adjust the way they talk, slowing down, speaking clearly, and using simple sentence structures. The most effective technique for helping students with their English language development, however, is to provide ample opportunities for them to interact with one another about meaningful curricular content.

Background: Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was launched in 2013 to provide financial support packages for people with disability to purchase supports and services to enhance independence. People with disability are required to develop a plan with the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA), the government department responsible for managing the NDIS. This scoping review aims to ascertain the level of research into people's experience of the NDIS planning process in these geographic areas. Methodology: Research publication databases were searched using a specific search string to identify research about people with disability and their families/carer's experiences of the NDIS planning process in regional, rural and remote regions of Australia. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was adopted to appraise the quality of the research publications. Research publications focused on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were additionally appraised using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool developed by the Centre for Excellence in Aboriginal Chronic Disease Knowledge Translation and Exchange. A thematic synthesis of the publications' contents was undertaken to ascertain people with disabilities and carers experience of the NDIS planning process. Results: Ten (N = 10) research papers were found that met the inclusion criteria. Two papers were policy reviews and reported on the improvements of the NDIS planning process since its conception. The analysis found the research archive focused on five themes: (1) healthcare workforce and NDIA staff; (2) NDIS package holders and carers lack of awareness of the NDIS; (3) cultural/socio‐economic barriers; (4) travel funding; and (5) emotional burden of the NDIS planning process. Conclusion: There are limited papers available that explore people's experiences of the NDIS planning process in regional, rural and remote regions of Australia. This systematic review illuminates the difficulties, barriers and concerns of people with disability and their carers about the planning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cambodian Americans are a fairly recent language minority group in the United States; most families arrived in the United States as refugees during the 1980s. Over the past 30 years, there has been great concern in the community regarding the maintenance loss of their native Khmer language. This article provides an historical and contemporary sketch of the Khmer language in the United States, and discusses implications for its future survival. Data are drawn and analyzed from the U.S. Census, the 2007 American Community Survey, and other statistical sources, in addition to research conducted in Cambodian American communities, and the author's experiences and observations as a (non-native) Khmer speaker. The findings indicate that the Khmer language is alive and well in the United States, and most school-age youth continue to speak Khmer, although few speak it with high levels of proficiency and few have literacy skills in the language given the lack of opportunities for Khmer HL education. Nonetheless, there are some positive factors that Khmer communities and educational institutions can draw on to ensure the future of Khmer as a HL in the United States. In the early 1990s, I attended a forum held at California State University, Long Beach sponsored by the United Cambodian Students of America. The distinguished guest speaker was Mr. Neou Kassie, a well-known Cambodian American and an outspoken human rights advocate. Mr. Neou began speaking elegantly and powerfully in Khmer, describing his advocacy work in Cambodia. A few minutes into his animated speech, one of the young college student leaders, with an embarrassed look on her face, interrupted him: "Excuse me Mr. Neou, can you please switch to English? Most of us are having a very hard time understanding you in Khmer." Cambodian Americans are a fairly recent language minority group in the United States; most families have been in this country for less than 30 years. However, as the vignette above illustrates, issues have already emerged related to the maintenance or loss of Khmer as a heritage language in the United States. Even within the first ten years of refugee resettlement, Cambodian parents and community leaders expressed concern at what they perceived as rapid Khmer language loss among their youth (Smith-Hefner, 1990). Nonetheless, Khmer continues to be widely used in Cambodian American families and communities across the United States, and there are some efforts to provide opportunities for the next generations of Cambodian Americans to develop and maintain their native Khmer language. The purpose of this article is to provide a historical and contemporary sketch of the Khmer language in the United States, and to discuss implications for its future survival. Data for this article are drawn from the United States Census, the American Community Survey, and other statistical sources, in addition to research conducted in Cambodian American communities, and my own experiences and observations as a (non-native) Khmer speaker. It is my hope that these analyses will be useful to policy makers, educators, and researchers, and also to Cambodian American community leaders, educators, and others who are actively working to preserve the Khmer language in the United States. In this article, we first will look briefly at the history of Cambodian American immigration to the United States, including the tragic events in Cambodia leading to the large exodus of political refugees. Next, we will explore demographic information related to Cambodian Americans and the Khmer language in the United States, followed by a discussion of Cambodian Americans' relationship with Cambodia. We then consider issues related to Khmer language maintenance and loss in the United States, including community and institutional efforts that provide opportunities for the learning and use of Khmer. The article concludes with a discussion of the future of Khmer as a Heritage Language in the United States. (Contains 16 tables and 14 notes.)

The "No Child Left Behind Act" establishes federal education policy for the United States, with a heavy focus on accountability through high-stakes testing. Provisions specific to English language learners (ELLs) include the mandate for their inclusion in state math tests, even for newcomer students enrolled for less than one year. Most ELLs take their state math tests in English with few, if any, accommodations. This study provides an analysis of this policy through the case of fifth grade newcomer Cambodian students in a Texas middle school. A linguistic analysis reveals that the language demands of the state math test far exceeds the language demand of the math work the students were able to do in school (with assistance). A content analysis of the fourth grade math textbooks used in Cambodia and the Texas school district reveals the American textbook had a much higher degree of alignment with Texas math standards, and far exceeded the Cambodian textbook in terms of depth and breadth of mathematical concepts and math problems for students to practice newly learned concepts. We argue that these analyses provide strong evidence that the Cambodian newcomer students were not afforded an opportunity to learn grade-level content before the test, and that the language demands of the test are beyond reasonable for newcomer students. We conclude with a discussion of implications for needed changes to U.S. federal policy which account for the linguistic demands posed by math tests, and which provide students opportunities to learn expected math content before taking high-stakes tests.

There is a growing recognition of the need for Americans who are proficient in languages other than English; however, there is a great disconnect between these needs, state English-only education policies, and current federal education policy as realized through the No Child Left Behind Act (NLCB) of 2001. These policies are moving the country in the opposite direction in terms of the needs for heritage language programs which can address students' and the country's linguistic needs. Drawing on eight years of research, this article presents the cases of a variety of in-school and after school Heritage language programs serving Khmer (Cambodian), Spanish, and Native American heritage language learners from California, Arizona, and Texas which have been eliminated or substantially weakened due to current federal and state language and education policies. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications for needed changes to policy which will encourage, rather than discourage, quality heritage language programs. (Contains 4 notes.)

NCLB is leaving English language learners behind because it defies logic and common sense, is internally self-contradictory, and sets AYP expectations that the subgroup cannot possibly attain. Although the U.S. Department of Education allows states to use a variety of strategies to avoid having a Limited English Proficiency (LEP) subgroup, few teachers and administrators are aware of these and spend precious time, energy, and resources preparing English learners for taking high-stakes tests. English language learners should be excluded from the regular state tests, at least until they have enough English proficiency to meaningfully participate. Instead of narrowly focusing on preparing English language learners for state tests, teachers should focus on meeting students' linguistic, cultural, and academic needs.

Arizona's Proposition 203 places restrictions on bilingual and English-as-a-second-language programs and essentiality mandates English-only education for English language learners (ELLs). This article provides an analysis of this initiative and the wide variations in its interpretation and implementation. Data sources include official policy and related documents, media coverage, and observations of key policy events. The findings provide evidence that Proposition 203 and its implementation are political spectacle, rather than democratic rationale policy making with true concern for ELL students. The analysis focuses on the components of the political spectacle framework evident in the initiative, its campaign(s), and its implementation, including the use of symbolic language, the use of plots and story lines, the creation of leaders (heroes) and enemies, the evoking of symbols of rationality, and distinctions between on-stage and off-stage actions. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications for English language learners in Arizona.