As we go through our courses this summer, it has become extremely apparent to me how important it is that we all, as Providence teachers, earn our ESL certification. I am learning a great deal about our MLL population and what it takes to help them to become English proficient. English Language acquisition or learning (whichever you call it) is crucial for our students. Our job, as ESL educators, is to guide them, coach them, help them to reach proficiency in English, but it is so much more than that. We also have a responsibility to help them navigate the cultural divide between school culture and home culture, but in a way that celebrates their home culture, making that culture and language an asset in learning a new language. My job as an educator is to increase classroom conversations so that my MLL students move from relative silence to conversation!
As I head into my 28th year of teaching in Providence, I am comforted that many of the classroom strategies and routines that I have established are called out in the texts that we read. In Breaking Down the Wall: Essential Shifts for English Learners' Success, we recently read about the importance of "classroom conversation practices" (89). Soto and Singer argue that "Students learn language by using language, and ELs learn the academic language of school but using the academic language of school" (90). They suggest three strategies that are high yield for EL students- Think-Pair-share, Frayer model and Reciprocal teaching.
All three of these are VERY familiar to Providence teachers, or at least they should be if they, like me, have been in the district for more than 5 years. Getting our students to speak more in class, especially academic conversations are critical. I use Socratic Seminar quite a bit in my classroom (and many different forms of it). I find that I like being the outsider, listening in to conversations. But I think this year, I will try to focus more of my observations on those MLL students that I have- to listen for what they say (or don't say), and think about the supports that they need in order to speak up and not stay silent.
Grouping students, of course, is really important. I always try to group students heterogeneously, unless I have a really good reason to group them homogenously. I've always had level 3 and 4 MLL students in my classes (at least the last 6 years, and probably before that, but before that, a lot of them weren't identified properly). I think the difference now, is that I plan to use those home language survey results to make sure that my language learners (and some may not be identified MLLs and some may be exited MLLs) are grouped with native English speaking peers. We watched a really great classroom video in our Curriculum class "Integrated ELD in ELA Classroom" where the teacher talked about grouping kids. She said it was "important for an English Language learner student to be grouped with somebody who is proficient in the language so that way they're hearing that academic register from a fellow peer." In other words, it isn't enough for the teacher to speak to students using academic language- they also need to hear it from their peers.
I've been also thinking that it would be important to have someone in their group who they might be able to communicate with in their home language- to help them "BRIDGE" (class notes on Ausubel's Subsumption Theory) between the languages if they need it. In order for a learner to really learn something, they have to attach it to something they already know. The theory suggests that learners have preexisting Cognitive Structures that they can then attach new learning to (and if they do, they'll remember if better). This is kind of what we do when we use a KWL chart- connect previous learning to new learning. So if a student knows some concept or idea in Spanish, then we can attach the English to that. But this can't happen if we keep separating our MLLs (level 1 and 2) from our regular ELA classrooms. They're fully integrated into math, science, social studies and the electives, but not in ELA. I think right now, that's because most of our ELA teachers are not ESL certified, but three of us may have emergency certs this year. So for now, the 1s and 2s are in their own classes, without native speaking students. I am not part of those conversations about scheduling the MLL students- I am the ELA Teacher leader. The ELL TL and Literacy coach are part of those conversations. I just hope that I will be ready when they finally do make out departments fully integrated!
Another strategy that the textbook suggests we use to improve our classroom conversations is the three step "Engage, Observe, Support" model (105). This is a protocol to use within the classroom The idea is that we engage with students, providing the supports they need for their conversations in the classroom. Then we observe the students in their conversations and gather whatever data we can while they are having those conversations (this might be during group work using the Frayer model, for example). Then the teacher should review the data collected and either add or remove the supports- whatever is appropriate- so that students can be more successful. This might mean that a student who sat silently during the group work might need sentence frames to help her figure out how to start speaking up. Maybe a student needs to respond using pictures instead of words. It really depends on what the teacher observes. All in all, it's about gathering data to inform practice- which is what all teachers do constantly- sometimes I change my lesson up between periods because something didn't quite work. I change groupings all the time- trying to find the fit for the activity. I change my scaffolds and supports - looking for new ones all the time.
Finally, the chapter in the textbook also refers to some teacher actions that can be taken to collect more data- ELL Shadowing (92), and the Open Inquiry (105). Both of these strategies are about collecting information. In the shadow, teachers follow an ELL student for a couple of hours taking note of language struggles and inequities that the student faces. I can see where this kind of teacher activity can have a real impact, if it is done right. We have to use the kind of impartial process that we use for our learning walks in the district. When teachers come back to discuss, we have to make sure that classroom and teacher names are taken away, and that we focus on what is going on with the students. The second action, Open Inquiry, involves teacher collaboration and using the 5 step process mentioned in the text (106). Again, these conversations help us to refine our understanding of what is is like to be an EL student and help us as educators to be more reflective, and to try new strategies in the classroom. As a TL, I am committed to the practice of peer observations. I am lucky that I work with an amazing group of educators who are ALWAYS willing to open their doors to others. I can see using the OI strategy with my department to help us to improve our work with MLLs. I know that our new principal will probably have his own way to doing things like that, but I will be ready with a couple of suggestions if he asks.
One last note. The TED video- "How language shapes the way we think" -was fascinating- Boroditsky showed examples of 5 different ways that language can shape that we think. They were all fascinating, but the one that really struck me, and it seems obvious now that she pointed it out, is how grammatical gender can shape how we view something. We just studied grammatical gender in our Linguistics class on Language process. But the idea that a word like "bridge" can be masculine or feminine, and that German speakers will use more "feminine" words to describe a bridge because of its grammatical gender, while Spanish speakers use "masculine words- wow.
Like wow. I never thought about that. I think we have holdouts in English. We think of the "moon" as feminine. But I've always thought that was because of mythology- Diana is the moon goddess. We describe the moon as being shimmering and round and has soft light. Whereas the "sun" is bright and hurts. It "beats" down on us. These are all masculine ideas. I really don't know how to apply this knowledge to my MLLs except that this awareness might help when students are expressing themselves or writing. But again- it is a bridge between home and school culture that we should be more aware of so that we can help our students to traverse back and forth in a positive way.
Like wow. I never thought about that. I think we have holdouts in English. We think of the "moon" as feminine. But I've always thought that was because of mythology- Diana is the moon goddess. We describe the moon as being shimmering and round and has soft light. Whereas the "sun" is bright and hurts. It "beats" down on us. These are all masculine ideas. I really don't know how to apply this knowledge to my MLLs except that this awareness might help when students are expressing themselves or writing. But again- it is a bridge between home and school culture that we should be more aware of so that we can help our students to traverse back and forth in a positive way.
