Data Loading...
Myths - Heinemann Flipbook PDF
Contents Acknowledgments xi Introduction xiii 1DEMOGRAPHIC MYTHS 1 Demographic Myth #1: The number of students who don’t
226 Views
87 Downloads
FLIP PDF 158.86KB
Myths a n d ■
■
Realities B EST P RACTICES FOR E NGLISH L ANGUAGE L EARNERS Second Edition
Katharine Davies Samway Denise McKeon
HEINEMANN • PORTSMOUTH, NH
Heinemann A division of Reed Elsevier Inc. 361 Hanover Street Portsmouth, NH 03801–3912 www.heinemann.com Offices and agents throughout the world © 2007, 1999 Katharine Davies Samway and Denise McKeon All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in a review, with the exception of the reproducibles (identified by the Myths and Realities, Second Edition copyright line), which may be photocopied for classroom use.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Samway, Katharine Davies. Myths and realities : best practices for English language learners / Katharine Davies Samway, Denise McKeon. — 2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-325-00989-6 ISBN-10: 0-325-00989-9 1. Linguistic minorities—Education—United States. 2. Limited English-proficient students—Education—United States. 3. Linguistic minorities—Services for—United States. 4. Education, Bilingual—United States. I. McKeon, Denise. II. Title. LC3731.S25 2007 370.117′50973—dc22 2006036333
Editor: Leigh Peake Production: Elizabeth Valway Production service: Denise Botelho Cover and interior design: Jenny Jensen Greenleaf Composition: House of Equations, Inc. Manufacturing: Steve Bernier Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 11 10 09 08 07 VP 1 2 3 4 5
Contents
Acknowledgments
xi
Introduction
xiii
1 DEMOGRAPHIC MYTHS
1
Demographic Myth #1: The number of students who don’t speak English is decreasing. 1 Demographic Myth #2: Most English language learners were born outside of the United States; most ELL students are recent arrivals to the United States. 2 Demographic Myth #3: Students who do not speak English are found only in large, urban areas. 3 Demographic Myth #4: Only teachers in urban areas can expect to teach ELL students.
5
2 ENROLLMENT MYTHS
8
Enrollment Myth #1: School districts are not obliged to enroll students who are not legal residents of the United States. 8 Enrollment Myth #2: School districts are allowed to charge tuition of students who are not legal residents of the United States. 9 Enrollment Myth #3: Schools should ask for proof of citizenship, resident visas, or Social Security numbers when enrolling second language (L2) students. 9
✷ v ✷
vi
✷
CONTENTS
3 NATIVE LANGUAGE (L1) INSTRUCTION MYTHS
12
L1 Instruction Myth #1: Teachers in English-medium classrooms should not allow students to use their native language as this will retard their English language development. 12 L1 Instruction Myth #2: Bilingual education is a luxury we cannot afford.
13
L1 Instruction Myth #3: When English language learners speak in their native language in English-medium classes, they are likely to be off-task. 16 L1 Instruction Myth #4: The native language of children who come from Spanish-speaking countries, like Mexico and Guatemala, is obviously Spanish. 19 L1 Instruction Myth #5: Many ELLs don’t speak either English or the native language well. They just don’t have much language. 22
4 MYTHS ABOUT ACQUIRING A SECOND LANGUAGE (L2)
25
Second Language Acquisition Myth #1: Learning a second language is an entirely different proposition from learning one’s own native language. 25 Second Language Acquisition Myth #2: Younger children are more effective language learners than older learners.
28
Second Language Acquisition Myth #3: Once second language learners are able to speak reasonably fluently, their problems are likely to be over in school. 30 Second Language Acquisition Myth #4: Learning academic English is equally challenging for all second language learners. 31 Second Language Acquisition Myth #5: If we focus on teaching the English language, learning in all areas will occur faster. 32 Second Language Acquisition Myth #6: Students from Asian countries are better English language learners and more academically successful than students from Spanish-speaking backgrounds. 35
5 LITERACY MYTHS Liter ac y Myth #1: Literac acy Because literacy is so important these days, we need to spend as much time as it takes during the regular school day teaching English literacy, even if it means holding off on content area instruction. 38
38
CONTENTS
✷ vii
Liter ac y Myth #2: Literac acy When teaching newcomers, it is best to hold off on reading and writing instruction until they have a pretty good grasp of oral English. 44 Liter ac y Myth #3: Literac acy ELLs need a strong foundation in L1 literacy before being introduced to L2 literacy. 47 Liter ac y Myth #4: Literac acy If we focus on teaching phonemic awareness, phonics, and how to decode in English and read fluently, ELLs will become successful readers in English. 51 Liter ac y Myth #5: Literac acy ELLs need to be given lots of writing exercises and practice with the parts of written language before being asked to write their own messages (stories, reports, poems, etc.). 57 Liter ac y Myth #6: Literac acy ELL children who come from literate homes are bound to do well in literacy. 60 Liter ac y Myth #7: Literac acy Because we need to hold high expectations for ELLs, they should be taught using mainstream materials, including the adopted reading textbooks. 64
6 PLACEMENT MYTHS Placement Myth #1: L2 students just need to be placed in an English-speaking environment and they’ll learn the language. That’s how my grandparents learned English. 71 Placement Myth #2: The academic success of English language learners is determined primarily by their ability to learn English. 75 Placement Myth #3: ELL students need only about one year in which to learn enough English to be able to succeed academically. Therefore, the emphasis should be on transitioning students out of special programs as quickly as possible. 78 Placement Myth #4: Until students learn English, there’s no point in trying to teach them content area subjects. 80 Placement Myth #5: ELL students should be placed in programs for students with handicapping conditions. 82 Placement Myth #6: English language learners who speak very little English should be placed with younger students so they can more easily learn English. 84 Placement Myth #7: ELL students can’t be expected to achieve to the same level as fluent Englishspeaking students, and teachers need to lower their expectations for English language learners. 87
71
viii
✷
CONTENTS
7 ASSESSMENT MYTHS
90
Assessment Myth #1: The only assessments that we need to do with English language learners are those that determine whether they are ELLs. 90 Assessment Myth #2: We teach everyone equally in our school, and we don’t need to know who is an English language learner and who isn’t. 98 Assessment Myth #3: Intake assessment tools, such as the Bilingual Syntax Measure (BSM) and the Language Assessment Scales (LAS), provide sufficient information for the appropriate placement and teaching of ELLs. 100 Assessment Myth #4: Placement centers are an expensive and not very useful alternative to initial assessment in schools. 104 Assessment Myth #5: Our teachers have to administer state-mandated tests each year. We can’t possibly ask them to do even more assessments, which take valuable time away from teaching and learning. 106 Assessment Myth #6: Given limited resources, it’s OK for districts to assess ELLs suspected of having a learning handicap in English only. 112 Assessment Myth #7: The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) doesn’t require ELLs to participate in measures of adequate yearly progress (AYP) because it would be unfair to hold these students to the same standards as monolingual English speakers. 114 Assessement Myth #8: Even if ELLs don’t speak English well, test accommodations allow for valid and reliable measures of students’ skills. 116 Assessment Myth #9: The main reason ELLs do poorly on high-stakes tests is because of poorly prepared or inexperienced teachers. 117
8 PROGRAMMING MYTHS Programming Myth #1: Research is unequivocal about the most effective program for English language learners. 121 Programming Myth #2: Researchers can’t agree on what’s the most effective program for ELL students. 128 Programming Myth #3: Newcomer centers are no longer a legal program option for ELL students. 132
121
CONTENTS
✷ ix
Programming Myth #4: It is best for ELL students to be pulled out of their regular education classes for English language instruction. 133 Programming Myth #5: It’s against the law to segregate students so we don’t offer special classes for English language learners, neither bilingual nor ESOL classes. We don’t want to be out of compliance with the law. 136 Programming Myth #6: English language learners are precluded from participating in Title I services and programs. 138 Programming Myth #7: Teachers of ELLs almost have to make it up as they go along—there are really no standards or curricular guidelines for teachers to follow. 138 Programming Myth #8: Because ELL students have access to ESL and bilingual services, they are rarely inappropriately placed in special education. 140
9 STAFFING/STAFF DEVELOPMENT MYTHS Staffing/Staff Development Myth #1: ESOL teachers must be able to speak a language other than English.
145 145
Staffing/Staff Development Myth #2: When hiring bilingual teachers, districts can assume that teachers who possess a bilingual credential are fluent in a language other than English. 147 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #3: We don’t have that many English language learners, so we don’t need to hire ESOL or bilingual teachers. 148 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #4: Staff development money and resources relating to the education of ELL students should be directed to the teachers as they are the people responsible for teaching them. 150 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #5: When considering staffing needs with regard to ELLs, we need to concentrate on the classroom teachers. 152 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #6: There’s no way we can provide intensive staff development on issues relating to English language learners—we don’t have the resources. 153 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #7: We need to focus our planning on the immediate situation posed by our English language learners; we can deal with long-term planning later. 157 Staffing/Staff Development Myth #8: English language learners learn more quickly when they are placed exclusively with teachers who are native speakers of English. 159
x
✷
CONTENTS
10 INVOLVING PARENTS AND THE COMMUNITY
162
Parent and Community Myth #1: We’ve tried to get our parents involved, but they don’t seem to care about how well their children are doing in school; if they did, they’d answer our phone calls and come to parentteacher conferences. 162 Parent and Community Myth #2: It’s impossible for us to involve parents of ELL students more as most of our teachers are monolingual English speakers. 166 Parent and Community Myth #3: It’s too much of a hassle and not worth the effort to visit students’ homes. Also, parents don’t appreciate these visits as they think they are being checked on. 168 Parent and Community Myth #4: It’s not worth sending home notices to families because the parents can’t read. 170
Conclusion
173
Resources
175
National Organizations
175
National Research and Development Centers
177
Professional Organizations
178
Not-for-Profit Advocacy Organizations
180
Local and State Educational Organizations
181
Online Resources
181
Glossary
183
References
187
Index
203
1
Demographic Myths
✷
demographic myth #1:
The number of students who don’t
speak English is decreasing.
✷
Language minority students, including English language learners (ELLs), are the fastest growing group of students in the United States today.
reality:
✷ background/overview ■ Enrollment figures for ELLs, as reported by State Education Agencies (SEAs) in the United States and territories, have reflected an upward trend over the last several years. The most recent figures available for the 2003–2004 school year indicate a 65 percent increase over the 1993–1994 school year. More than 5 million ELLs were enrolled in public or nonpublic elementary or secondary schools during the 2003–2004 school year, representing an increase of approximately 2 million ELLs over the past decade (NCELA 2005). The three states with the largest numbers of ELL students in 2003–2004 were California (1,598,535), Texas (660,707), and Florida (282,066). However, the states that have shown the highest rates of growth are unexpected and worth noting. A cluster of states in the Southeast showed dramatic growth over the decade—with South Carolina posting a 521 percent increase in ELL students; North Carolina, a 470 percent increase; Tennessee, a 471 percent increase; and Georgia, a 397 percent increase. ✷ 1 ✷
2 ✷ MYTHS AND REALITIES , SECOND EDITION
Also worth noting is that during the 1990s, growth in the number of immigrant children was substantially faster in secondary schools than elementary schools (72 percent versus 39 percent) (Capps et al. 2005). Spanish is the native language of approximately 76 percent of ELLs. The next highest language group is Vietnamese—spoken by 2.4 percent of ELLs, followed by Hmong (1.8 percent), and Korean and Arabic (1.2 percent each) (NCELA 2002). A further confirmation of this upward trend in the number of language minority students is that as of July 1, 1998, the number of Hispanic children in the United States outnumbered African American children, making Hispanics the largest minority group among children younger than eighteen (Jacobson 1998).
✷ ■ useful resources for demographic information Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Data User Services Division, Washington, DC 20033. See www.census.gov. National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, Education Information Branch, Capitol Place Building, Suite 300, 555 New Jersey Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20208-5641. (800) 424-1616 . See www.nces.ed.gov. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition, George Washington University, Washington, DC. See www.ncela.gwu.edu.
✷ ✷
Most English language learners were born outside of the United States; most ELL students are recent arrivals to the United States.
demographic myth #2:
Most English language learners were born in the United States. According to an analysis of 2000 Census Bureau data, nearly three-fourths of the school-age children of immigrants were born in the United States. The rest were foreign-born. Of those children born outside the United States, 38 percent were from Mexico and 25 percent from Asian countries. The rest were from Latin America, Europe, and other parts of the world.
reality:
✷ background/overview ■ All ELL students are not immigrants or recent arrivals. The majority of students who are English language learners were born in the United States. These students are children of immigrants. Those children who are foreign-born tend to be concentrated
DEMOGRAPHIC MYTHS
✷ 3
TABLE 1–1 Place of Birth and Length of U.S. Residence of LEP Students
Mean Percentage of ELL Students by Grade Level Place of Birth/Length of U.S. Residence
Elementary
Born in the United States
Middle
High Multilevel
Total
40.6
20.9
13.4
36.8
33.0
Born elsewhere but lived in the United States for at least five years
9.7
15.0
12.6
11.6
11.1
Born elsewhere but lived in the United States for one to four years
31.9
40.3
47.0
36.8
36.0
Born elsewhere but lived in the United States for less than one year
17.7
23.7
26.9
14.8
19.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Total Source: Fleischman and Hopstock (1993)
in the higher grades, and may present special challenges for secondary schools since foreign-born children tend to enter U.S. schools with limited English proficiency or with relatively few years of formal schooling in their home countries, often due to civil unrest, economic hardship (in other countries, students are often required to pay for schooling), or war (Capps et al. 2005). As Fleischman and Hopstock demonstrated in 1993 (Table 1–1), the percentage of ELL students born in the United States was highest in elementary school (almost 41 percent). But overall, the percentage of ELL students born in the United States is about one-third of the total number of ELL students. Most of these students were born into families where languages other than English are regularly (and sometimes exclusively) spoken in the home (Fleischman and Hopstock 1993). This trend continues today with 16 percent of all children in grades Pre-K–5 being second-generation U.S.-born citizens in 2000 and only 3 percent first-generation immigrants. In the higher grades (six to twelve), 12 percent of all children in 2000 were second-generation and 7 percent were first generation immigrants (Capps et al. 2005).
✷
demographic myth #3:
Students who do not speak English are
found only in large, urban areas.
✷
Students who do not speak English are found in many districts in the United States.
reality:
4 ✷ MYTHS AND REALITIES , SECOND EDITION
■ background/overview ✷ A large-scale study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education and published in 2003 found that approximately 6,400 of the 15,000 school districts in the country had ELL students enrolled, with the number varying from one to 321,000 in the Los Angeles Unified School District (Zehler et al. 2003). Approximately 50 percent of the 91,000 public schools in the United States enrolled at least one ELL. In 2001–2002, 2.6 percent of districts with ELLs enrolled five thousand or more ELL students. Together these districts accounted for more than half the ELLs in grades K–12. In contrast, 60 percent of districts with ELLs enrolled ninety-nine or fewer ELL students. These districts combined accounted for a total of only 2.8 percent of the total ELL student population (Zehler et al. 2003). The highest concentrations of ELLs and language minority students can generally be found in urban areas (NCELA 2005b). Table 1–2 shows the school districts with the top ten ELL enrollments. Notice that the percent of ELL enrollment varies dramatically as a proportion of the district’s total student enrollment. The vast majority of immigrants settle in large urban areas, but their numbers are increasing dramatically in rural areas, where 57 percent of immigrants (up from 48 percent in the 1980s) are of Mexican origin (Huang 1999). Agriculture, poultry processing plants, and meat packing firms are attracting immigrants to rural areas in record numbers. The growing numbers of ELLs in rural settings presents a different set of challenges. As Wrigley (2000) reports, “Rural communities do not generally have much experience with ‘outsiders’ of any sort. There are many rural areas where a majority
TABLE 1–2
Districts with Highest ELL Enrollments
Rank
District
ELL Enrollment
Percent ELL
1
Los Angeles, CA
321,149
43
2
New York, NY
129,286
12
3
Chicago, IL
82,849
19
4
Houston, TX
69,881
33
5
Miami-Dade, FL
67,211
18
6
Dallas, TX
52,271
32
7
Clark County, NV
46,183
18
8
San Diego, CA
40,818
29
9
Santa Ana, CA
37,016
60
10
Long Beach, CA
32,080
33
Source: NCELA (2005b)
DEMOGRAPHIC MYTHS
✷ 5
of the local residents have had little to no experience with people from other cultures. This can lead to fear and misunderstanding when immigrants begin to settle in an isolated community. In addition, small school districts tend to have less access to resources and bilingual people—both of which are essential to meeting the needs of the newly arrived language minority students and their families.”
✷
demographic myth #4:
Only teachers in urban areas can
expect to teach ELL students.
✷
About 50 percent of teachers—one out of two—can expect to teach English language learners sometime during their teaching careers.
reality:
■ background/overview ✷ As early as 1980–1981, the Teachers Language Skills Survey (a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education) showed that an estimated one-half of all public school teachers in the United States reported that they were currently teaching or had previously taught ELL students (O’Malley and Waggoner 1984). Given the dramatic rise in the numbers of language minority and English language learners since that time, one can only assume that percentage will increase. In fact, in 2003, almost 43 percent of all teachers K–12 reported that they were currently teaching an English language learner (Zehler et al. 2003). Although many English language learners spend most of their day in a regular classroom, regular classroom teachers often are unprepared to work with ELL students effectively. Early on, Penfield (1987) explored the attitudes and perceptions of 162 regular classroom teachers regarding ELL students, English as a second language (ESL), and the role of ESL teachers. Analysis of the responses showed that many teachers felt unprepared to teach ELL students effectively and had little knowledge of how to integrate content teaching and English language development. In fact, the regular teachers felt it was the job of the ESL teacher to teach both academic subject matter and ESL—believing that ESL teachers spoke the native language of each student and even taught in this language. Today, the situation has changed somewhat. In some states, such as Florida, all teachers must have some training that prepares them to work with ELL students (although what that training consists of is quite variable—from a single course, up to eighteen hours of course work depending on how many ELL students the district generally serves). Many teacher preparation programs (especially those that are accredited by the National Council of the Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE]) require graduating teachers to have some course work that speaks to the needs of English language learners. However, given the dramatic growth in the population of language minority students, it is difficult to tell if these measures will be enough in the years to come.
6 ✷ MYTHS AND REALITIES , SECOND EDITION
A recent large-scale study of teachers of English language learners in California (Gándara et al. 2003) showed that many teachers had little or no professional development designed to help them teach their ELL students and that the quality of training when provided was uneven.
■ ✷ scenario It is mid-April. Three preservice teachers, Deidre, Alva, and Michael, are having lunch together in the twenty-five minutes available between late afternoon and evening classes. They are talking about their heavy class load: Deidre: This program is just about killing me. I’m learning a lot, but I have no time for myself. Although what we’re learning in our second language acquisition class is interesting, it’s not at all useful to me. A couple of kids in my placement have Chinese names, but there’s not a single ELL kid. What good is this second language acquisition class to me right now? Or in the future? My principal has already told me that they have a job for me, and that’s where I’d like to work. I wish I could drop this class, just so I could have a bit more time for myself. Alva: I know what you mean, because I’m teaching a class of African American kids. One hundred percent of them are African American. It just doesn’t make sense to require that we all take this class. Michael: I’m not sure I agree with you. Maybe that’s because there are a few ESOL kids in my class, so it seems more relevant. But, how do you know you’ll always teach English-speaking kids? I’m not sure any district is immune to immigration. ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆
Mid-April one year later: Deidre, Alva, and Michael are completing their first year as teachers. They see each other at a new teacher staff development day sponsored by the county office of education. Again, the conversation turns to nonnative English-speaking students: Michael: Do you remember last year how we talked about whether we needed our second language acquisition course? I’ve been wondering about you both. How’s it going? Alva: Well, I knew that being a first-year teacher would be difficult, but I wasn’t expecting to be teaching ELL kids, also. Over the summer, my district decided to mix up the ethnic groups, I guess in some kind of a bid to get rid of
DEMOGRAPHIC MYTHS
✷ 7
segregation. So now I’ve got about a third of the class who speak a whole bunch of languages like Vietnamese, Portuguese, Croatian, and Farsi. It’s been hard and now I wish that I’d paid more attention to that course. Michael: I have kids who speak nine different languages and if it weren’t for our ESOL teacher, I think I’d be in desperate shape. But, she comes into my class every day and helps me out. I’ve gone back to our course reader over and over again. I’d have been lost completely without that course. Deidre: It’s still the same for me. Only English speakers. Though there’s talk of some families from Central America moving into the district. I heard that a local nursery has been hiring men from Central America and now they’re bringing in their families. But I don’t think that it’ll affect me as my school is in a pretty high-income area. ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆
Mid-April two years later: It is a Saturday and Deidre, Alva, and Michael are chatting together over coffee at a one-day institute on science and second language learners sponsored by a local technical assistance center: Alva: What on earth are you doing here, Deidre? I thought your school was an English-only school. Deidre: It was, but not any more. A lot of kids from El Salvador and Guatemala have moved into the district and our school has been designated as the site for the newcomer students. They spend half the day in a class for just newcomers, but then they spend the rest of the day with the rest of us. Plus, a local church is sponsoring refugees from Eastern Europe, Bosnia, I think. Michael: So does everyone have ESOL kids? Deidre: Just about everyone, though the upper-grade teachers don’t have as many right now. The irony is that my principal was thrilled that I had taken those second language acquisition courses and had the supplemental credential. I didn’t like to disappoint him and tell him that I hadn’t paid much attention. To be honest, though, a lot of what we learned in the program is coming back, so maybe I wasn’t so zoned out as I thought! It’s hard, though, particularly as I haven’t seen any good teachers who have experience working with second language learners. I’m lucky though because my principal is really supportive of us and we get materials and as much staff development as we want. And to think I had it all figured out!