I'm also posting weekly reflections on a google group I set up, so sometimes I'll just cut and paste from that:
From my perspective, it seemed like the half day schedule (7:30 AM - 12 PM) made getting to know students really difficult in a team-teaching setup. Might want to consider eliminating having half-days for the first week next year? Next year, we need to be more strategic in getting ready to get to know a lot of children & fast....and to have them feeling completely at home in both of their classrooms. I knew this would be difficult but didn't proactively plan ahead well enough. Teachers are reporting that dividing language by teacher and never having to change languages is much easier than last year's language of the day approach. So glad we took the time to have our 3-day TWI institute as it really provided critical background knowledge for conversations this week.
Teachers are reporting lots of parent confusion with TWI. I need to schedule additional info sessions ASAP (interesting since every parent that registered has attending our introductory intro session--lots of time given to dual language. Must not have been clear messaging in the info sessions).
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Getting Personal
While I've known it for years, it becomes more and more apparent to me that language is a deeply personal issue and that our opinions on language and how it should be taught are rooted primarily in personal experience and mindsets. We met as a group of principals yesterday--the task was to bring drafts of our plans for a bilingual model for each school and to use a protocol to provide feedback to one another as we worked to make sure everyone's plans met the requirements of state education code. Every one of us is in a different place with respect to our bilingual models--as we should be....
First, because each of our schools has a unique combination of English and Spanish speakers. While we are all located in the Rio Grande Valley, it's fascinating to see the differences in numbers. For example, our North McAllen campus is only 15% ELL while our Brownsville campus is over 60% ELL. The rest of us are somewhere in between (my campus is 50% ELL). This DOES make a difference--for example, a two-way immersion bilingual program is simply not feasible as a school-wide model for IDEA Quest in McAllen, though the principal, Sharon, would have loved to launch one. They simply don't have enough ELLs to serve as Spanish language models.
Second, we each come to the table with vastly different personal experiences, opinions, and knowledge of bilingual ed and second language acquisition. Some really great questions came up--Dolores asked me to send her some of the questions that surfaced during our breakout session, so I thought I'd include them (and my two cents) :) here. The answers, obviously, represent some of my thinking around possible responses.
1) What if I don't speak Spanish? How can I coach Spanish teachers? How do I (or other non-bilingual teachers) participate in the language of the day?
First of all, Language of the day is just one small element of a bilingual approach. It definitely helps by 1) adding value to the minority language and 2) providing additional opportunities for kids to build more everyday basic vocabulary in both languages; however, it's not a deal breaker. In other words, you can have a bilingual program without it.
However, given that it does help a lot, if a school decides to include "language of the day" as part of their model, non-bilingual staff (just like monolingual students) can use the language of the day to the best of their abilities (this might just be a single Spanish word in an English sentence, phrases, or full conversations, depending on language proficiency) Modeling the learning of a second language can go a long way! :)
As far as coaching teachers instructing in Spanish, there are a few things to think about. First of all, if the lesson isn't comprehensible to you, chances are there students also not understanding. Excellent language teaching should always focus on "comprehensible input"--delivering instruction that uses the various modes of learning so powerfully that the concepts are clear in spite of a language barrier. If you have Spanish-speakers on your lead team--other admins or coaches--you can engage them in joint observations of Spanish instruction. They can help fill in any gaps--things you didn't quite understand.
2) I have only about 12 non-spanish speaking PK students....all the rest are Spanish-dominant. If we teach PK in L1, they're going to have to be in a bilingual classroom--how do I work that?
The 12 English dominant children would be in a classroom with 12 Spanish dominant students (they might be 12 of your ELLs that already come with high levels of proficiency in both languages or children with "off the charts" scores in Spanish). You'd have to really utilize a strong bilingual co-teacher (aide) here, so that a significant portion of the day is spent in small groups, so that ELLs spend substantive time learning the key content in Spanish, even though whole group activities may need to be English. In this sort of setup, you'd need to find as many ways to "sneak in" additional Spanish as possible--maybe the morning meeting could be in Spanish one day, English the next, etc.
3) I'm going to start with about 20 - 30 min Spanish daily and increase up the grades, introducing Spanish reading in 2nd grade for all students....what's wrong with that?
First of all, hats off for at least considering Spanish important enough to include in core instruction! To clarify what this approach really is....this is a "Teaching Spanish as a Foreign Language" approach that allows monolingual English speakers to learn to read first in their home language (allowing their brains to fully practice all aspects of reading, including high-level comprehension) but doesn't allow Spanish speakers to do the same. Unless parents are teaching them to read at home the same way we teach them at school, many of them will only go through the "motions" of reading--connecting letters and sounds without having the vocabulary required to really access the text's meaning. They may go for several years without their brains having sustained "practice" at reading for meaning, not just decoding and sounding out words that may or may not have meaning.
A "super quick" read on some of the basic theories/research that support the importance of initial literacy instruction in Spanish can be found in: http://www.ldonline.org/article/Effective_Reading_Instruction_for_Struggling_Spanish-Speaking_Readers:_A_Combination_of_Two_Literatures and other articles like this one.
4) Another program I worked in (where Spanish support existed but the focus was on English) was successful.
First of all, what do we mean when we say "it worked." We have to be careful (I do it too!) that we don't generalize without data to back up our conclusions. We need to be critical professionals who make decisions based not only on our own qualitative experiences but on approaches (our own & others'--especially in aggregate) that have shown sustained quantitative success. The "numbers" don't tell the whole story, but they do tell an important part of it. The research that we do have points overwhelmingly to increasingly higher student achievement in English when students have a strong and sustained foundation in their first language.
5) Many local districts have been unsuccessful with dual language.
The name of any model means very little if it's not being implemented properly. Some common errors made in local dual language (or any bilingual model) implementation might include:
6) I've taught too many middle school students who came out of bilingual programs with very low English proficiency.
Yep, the research is clear that not all bilingual programs are created equal--FAR from it! The bilingual programs that show the highest sustained achievement in English are those that include large amounts of instruction (at least half the day) in the home language while learning the second language--all the way to fifth grade. As noted in the answer above, if districts "cave" to testing pressure and don't do a go job with intial teaching, they are forced to spent large amounts of extra time in the language of assessment--this decision can hurt ELLs by spending too MUCH time in Spanish and not enough in English. There must be a careful balance and strict program integrity!
7) How will assessment work? Will HQ (central office) understand that language learning takes time?
By allowing Spanish dominant children to show proficiency in their strongest language on state assessments, it should actually BOOST achievement. Children can show their "true colors" sooner. At IDEA Mission, we do, however, assess in both languages in the classroom (depending on the language of instruction) as we must frequently monitor progress both language acquisition and mastery of content objectives. The goal should be on-grade-level achievement in the student's first language EVERY year, and on-grade-level achievement in the student's 2nd language in 3 - 5 years. The goal should be for every student to perform on grade level in every content area in English by 5th grade. This is where LPAC meetings take on a whole new significance--we've got to use those meetings to really monitor ELLs' progress and to use data to determine in which language is the student most likely to be successful for high-stakes state assessements.
8) I am firmly against separating bilingual students into their own separate classes--I believe that this is today's segregation.
(I personally believe the same!) :) One option is to choose a two-way model for your whole school (or offer a two-way "strand" for Spanish speakers and interested English speakers). You might also choose an approach that keeps homerooms heterogeneous but utilizes lots of small group instruction to ensure substantive L1 instruction. Remember though, the the #1 predictor for ELLs' success in English is their level of proficiency in their first language, so regardless of the "nuts and bolts" of any model, substantive and sustained L1 instruction in both literacy and content is a MUST.
I think also that this makes the late-transition model more attractive (if a school decides not to go with two-way)--it would allow upper elementary ELLs to spend much/most of their day in heterogeneously mixed classes as the amount of Spanish decreases (but is still there). I think Rosy & Sharon brought this up as a valid point. The sustained 50/50 one way model is ideal in terms of amount of Spanish used through 5th grade, but is it appropriate to keep students divided by language every year, especially in grades 3 - 5 when social relationships and peer acceptance becomes more and more important? Something to think about...
First, because each of our schools has a unique combination of English and Spanish speakers. While we are all located in the Rio Grande Valley, it's fascinating to see the differences in numbers. For example, our North McAllen campus is only 15% ELL while our Brownsville campus is over 60% ELL. The rest of us are somewhere in between (my campus is 50% ELL). This DOES make a difference--for example, a two-way immersion bilingual program is simply not feasible as a school-wide model for IDEA Quest in McAllen, though the principal, Sharon, would have loved to launch one. They simply don't have enough ELLs to serve as Spanish language models.
Second, we each come to the table with vastly different personal experiences, opinions, and knowledge of bilingual ed and second language acquisition. Some really great questions came up--Dolores asked me to send her some of the questions that surfaced during our breakout session, so I thought I'd include them (and my two cents) :) here. The answers, obviously, represent some of my thinking around possible responses.
1) What if I don't speak Spanish? How can I coach Spanish teachers? How do I (or other non-bilingual teachers) participate in the language of the day?
First of all, Language of the day is just one small element of a bilingual approach. It definitely helps by 1) adding value to the minority language and 2) providing additional opportunities for kids to build more everyday basic vocabulary in both languages; however, it's not a deal breaker. In other words, you can have a bilingual program without it.
However, given that it does help a lot, if a school decides to include "language of the day" as part of their model, non-bilingual staff (just like monolingual students) can use the language of the day to the best of their abilities (this might just be a single Spanish word in an English sentence, phrases, or full conversations, depending on language proficiency) Modeling the learning of a second language can go a long way! :)
As far as coaching teachers instructing in Spanish, there are a few things to think about. First of all, if the lesson isn't comprehensible to you, chances are there students also not understanding. Excellent language teaching should always focus on "comprehensible input"--delivering instruction that uses the various modes of learning so powerfully that the concepts are clear in spite of a language barrier. If you have Spanish-speakers on your lead team--other admins or coaches--you can engage them in joint observations of Spanish instruction. They can help fill in any gaps--things you didn't quite understand.
2) I have only about 12 non-spanish speaking PK students....all the rest are Spanish-dominant. If we teach PK in L1, they're going to have to be in a bilingual classroom--how do I work that?
The 12 English dominant children would be in a classroom with 12 Spanish dominant students (they might be 12 of your ELLs that already come with high levels of proficiency in both languages or children with "off the charts" scores in Spanish). You'd have to really utilize a strong bilingual co-teacher (aide) here, so that a significant portion of the day is spent in small groups, so that ELLs spend substantive time learning the key content in Spanish, even though whole group activities may need to be English. In this sort of setup, you'd need to find as many ways to "sneak in" additional Spanish as possible--maybe the morning meeting could be in Spanish one day, English the next, etc.
3) I'm going to start with about 20 - 30 min Spanish daily and increase up the grades, introducing Spanish reading in 2nd grade for all students....what's wrong with that?
First of all, hats off for at least considering Spanish important enough to include in core instruction! To clarify what this approach really is....this is a "Teaching Spanish as a Foreign Language" approach that allows monolingual English speakers to learn to read first in their home language (allowing their brains to fully practice all aspects of reading, including high-level comprehension) but doesn't allow Spanish speakers to do the same. Unless parents are teaching them to read at home the same way we teach them at school, many of them will only go through the "motions" of reading--connecting letters and sounds without having the vocabulary required to really access the text's meaning. They may go for several years without their brains having sustained "practice" at reading for meaning, not just decoding and sounding out words that may or may not have meaning.
A "super quick" read on some of the basic theories/research that support the importance of initial literacy instruction in Spanish can be found in: http://www.ldonline.org/article/Effective_Reading_Instruction_for_Struggling_Spanish-Speaking_Readers:_A_Combination_of_Two_Literatures and other articles like this one.
4) Another program I worked in (where Spanish support existed but the focus was on English) was successful.
First of all, what do we mean when we say "it worked." We have to be careful (I do it too!) that we don't generalize without data to back up our conclusions. We need to be critical professionals who make decisions based not only on our own qualitative experiences but on approaches (our own & others'--especially in aggregate) that have shown sustained quantitative success. The "numbers" don't tell the whole story, but they do tell an important part of it. The research that we do have points overwhelmingly to increasingly higher student achievement in English when students have a strong and sustained foundation in their first language.
5) Many local districts have been unsuccessful with dual language.
The name of any model means very little if it's not being implemented properly. Some common errors made in local dual language (or any bilingual model) implementation might include:
- uninvested/uninformed principals
- uninvested/uninformed teachers
- uninvested/uninformed parents
- uninvested/uninformed central office
- lack of patience--"pulling out" in fear that the long-term language learning process won't take place
- succumbing to testing pressures and putting the 2nd language "on hold" while preparing for TAKS, etc (for ELLs, this can result in "too much Spanish")
- poor program integrity (usually to transition them to English more quickly than the model calls for)
- bilingual teachers that are "bilingually certified" in word, but not necessarily expert in teaching language learners
- generally mediocre/poor teaching
6) I've taught too many middle school students who came out of bilingual programs with very low English proficiency.
Yep, the research is clear that not all bilingual programs are created equal--FAR from it! The bilingual programs that show the highest sustained achievement in English are those that include large amounts of instruction (at least half the day) in the home language while learning the second language--all the way to fifth grade. As noted in the answer above, if districts "cave" to testing pressure and don't do a go job with intial teaching, they are forced to spent large amounts of extra time in the language of assessment--this decision can hurt ELLs by spending too MUCH time in Spanish and not enough in English. There must be a careful balance and strict program integrity!
7) How will assessment work? Will HQ (central office) understand that language learning takes time?
By allowing Spanish dominant children to show proficiency in their strongest language on state assessments, it should actually BOOST achievement. Children can show their "true colors" sooner. At IDEA Mission, we do, however, assess in both languages in the classroom (depending on the language of instruction) as we must frequently monitor progress both language acquisition and mastery of content objectives. The goal should be on-grade-level achievement in the student's first language EVERY year, and on-grade-level achievement in the student's 2nd language in 3 - 5 years. The goal should be for every student to perform on grade level in every content area in English by 5th grade. This is where LPAC meetings take on a whole new significance--we've got to use those meetings to really monitor ELLs' progress and to use data to determine in which language is the student most likely to be successful for high-stakes state assessements.
8) I am firmly against separating bilingual students into their own separate classes--I believe that this is today's segregation.
(I personally believe the same!) :) One option is to choose a two-way model for your whole school (or offer a two-way "strand" for Spanish speakers and interested English speakers). You might also choose an approach that keeps homerooms heterogeneous but utilizes lots of small group instruction to ensure substantive L1 instruction. Remember though, the the #1 predictor for ELLs' success in English is their level of proficiency in their first language, so regardless of the "nuts and bolts" of any model, substantive and sustained L1 instruction in both literacy and content is a MUST.
I think also that this makes the late-transition model more attractive (if a school decides not to go with two-way)--it would allow upper elementary ELLs to spend much/most of their day in heterogeneously mixed classes as the amount of Spanish decreases (but is still there). I think Rosy & Sharon brought this up as a valid point. The sustained 50/50 one way model is ideal in terms of amount of Spanish used through 5th grade, but is it appropriate to keep students divided by language every year, especially in grades 3 - 5 when social relationships and peer acceptance becomes more and more important? Something to think about...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)