formative assessments of reading or writing

Teacher Researchers Investigating Successful Strategies for Educating English Learners

A Final Report for the University of California Language Minority Research Institute

Jointly prepared by

Pam Castori Oneta Edmonds Shirley Fagout

Carol Halbe Heera Kulkarni

Michelle Parsons Nancy Salm

FaraLee Wright

❖

With special thanks to

Janet Papale for her collaborative editing expertise Thu Pham for her excellent administrative support

Emilio Soltero for his research assistance

Co-sponsored by the UC Linguistic Minority Research Institute and

The Center for Cooperative Research and Extension Services for Schools (CRESS) School of Education

University of California, Davis

Contents

Introduction by Pam Castori i

Teacher Research Abstracts vii

Teachers' Studies:

Writing and Reading Proficiency

Shirley Fagout The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 1

Michelle Parsons Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom 25

Nancy Salm To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 33

Content Acquisition in a Discipline

FaraLee Wright The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 51

Oneta Edmonds How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 63

Programmatic Constructs for EL Students

Heera Kulkarni Parent Participation: A Positive Power for English Language Learner Student Achievement 75

Nancy Salm The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 99

Carol Halbe Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 139

Cross-Study Analysis: Findings and Conclusions by Pam Castori 177

References 181

i

Introduction

What can teacher researchers discover about the achievement of their English

Learners, and how can what they learn make a difference beyond their own

classrooms? These are questions our collaborative research team set out to

investigate two years ago as a UCLMRI-sponsored group began its work.

We wondered. . . "How can student/teacher-generated assessment rubrics impact EL students'

performance in writing?”; "How do language routines affect student learning?"; "What have I

learned in the past four years as our school continually explored new curriculum, strategies, and

ideas to provide challenging academic curriculum for long-term English Learners?" These are a

few of the questions teacher researchers participating in the UC LMRI/CRESS-sponsored Teacher

Research group investigated during past two years.

The goal of this collaborative research team was to use teacher research to systematically investigate

issues of achievement for EL students (deliberately not using data associated with high-stakes

testing) and to organize the teacher research studies in a way that would be of interest to classroom

teachers as well as educational researchers and policy-makers. The group, consisting of seven

experienced teacher researchers who work in classrooms composed of at least 50% English

learners, was recruited by and collaborated with faculty from the Center for Cooperative Research

and Extension Services for Schools (CRESS) located within the School of Education at the

University of California, Davis. Teachers generated individual research questions based on the

teachers' own student populations, curricular goals, observations, and burning issues, and they

worked on their studies within the context of their local teacher research groups and also met as a

cohort throughout the two years at UC Davis. Each of the resultant teacher research studies

addresses a particular setting, a research question, methods, results and conclusions.

Two overarching research questions drove our work:

(1) What can teacher researchers discover about the achievement of their EL students, drawing on multiple measures and data sources other than high-stakes test scores;

(2) How can what this team does and discovers be made accessible and useful to classroom teachers and the broader educational community?

ii

We believe research fueled by the questions, knowledge, and struggles of classroom teachers

should play an important role in helping to shape the research agendas and policy decisions of

universities and other institutions. Though a modest effort, the thoughtful work of this group may

spur other teacher research efforts around the issue of EL achievement. Collectively these efforts

serve not only the students and families that benefit directly from these teachers’ investigations, but

also the larger educational community.

Theoretical Frameworks: Motivators and Modalities

Motivating Ideas for Our Work: “When we narrow the program so that there is only a limited array of areas in which assessment occurs and performance is honored, youngsters whose aptitudes and interests lie elsewhere are going to be marginalized in our schools. The more we diversify those opportunities, the more equity we are going to have because we are going to provide wider opportunities for youngsters to find what it is that they are good at.”

(Elliot Eisner, 2001)

Starting from our belief that diverse opportunities for students to demonstrate their abilities,

knowledge, and perspectives yield a more complete picture of the students’ academic achievement,

our research project was guided by the following premises:

• Because of the overwhelming challenges facing California’s English learners their success in school has become increasingly difficult. Many of these challenges are associated with high- stakes testing (Rumberger, R.W. & Gandara, P. 2000). Alternative approaches to documenting and demonstrating academic achievement for English learners are sorely needed. We suggest that depending primarily upon test scores (in particular “high-stakes”1 test scores) for arguing for change in educational practice and policy promotes and supports the usefulness and status of these tests. In collaboration with university staff, experienced teacher-researchers investigated and reported alternative ways (approaches other than high-stakes testing) to demonstrate student learning, literacy, proficiency, and achievement of English learners.2 These

1 The recent AERA position statement concerning High-Stakes Testing in Pre K-12 Education (in the November 2000 issue of Educational Researcher, 29:8, pp. 24-25)terms “high-stakes” as achievement test results which carry serious consequences for students or for educators. Additionally, it warns that if high-stakes testing programs are implemented in circumstances where tests lack sufficient reliability and validity for their intended purposes, there is potential for serious harm. Students may be placed at increased risk of educational failure and dropping out. The dependence on high-stakes test results of English learners in California for determining programmatic needs and opportunities for these students is of grave concern to teachers, many of whom note first-hand the harm to students that results. 2 In the article, “Fighting the Tests: A Practical Guide to Rescuing Our Schools” in the January 2001 edition of Phi Delta Kappan Alphie Kohn observes, “the people who work most closely with kids are those most likely to understand how harmful standardized testing is.” We suggest that these teachers also understand what other kinds of approaches to assessment more accurately demonstrate a students abilities and knowledge.

iii

investigations document and articulate challenges as well as insights into teaching and assessment approaches that lead to success for English learners.

• Teacher learning must be at the heart of any effort to improve education in our society (Sykes, 1996). Teacher Research is the systematic and intentional inquiry about teaching, learning, and schooling carried out by teachers in their own school and classroom settings. It may take the form of empirical research (collection, analysis, and interpretation of data) or conceptual research (theoretical/philosophical work or the analysis of ideas) (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993).

Teacher research offers opportunities for the educational field to learn, first hand, from reflective

practitioners about alternative and effective approaches to assessing learning––and in the process to

assessing teaching. Our goal was to craft a publication using frameworks similar to the collections

of teacher research studies complied by Sweeny and Tobin (2000) and by Peitzman (1990).

Teacher Research Literature about Academic Achievement for English Learners

A usual review of the literature about teacher research/action research reveals a very limited pool of

published studies related to ESL. A cohort in Pennsylvania has published several studies. Three of

these studies address issues of interest to our group: phonemic awareness in a multi-level ESL

classroom (A. Barton, 1999); the teaching of grammar in an advanced ESL class (T. Shenk, 1999);

and ESL issues via telecommunications (Strunk, S. & Fowler-Frey, J. 1996). A set of action-

research studies organized around language, discourse, and learning science (Sweeney & Tobin,

2000) may also prove useful to those teachers focusing on achievement indicators in a particular

content area (e.g. geometry and social studies). An additional teacher research study presents an

evaluation grid as one means of quantifying qualitative information through attentive listening and

observation (J. Isserlis, 1990). Though many resources offer rich ideas about alternative

approaches to assessing achievement for EL students (see "Multiple Measures" bibliography in our

original proposal), teacher research studies about academic achievement for English Learners

published in traditionally accessible ways (e.g. ERIC searches) are few and far between—the pool

is small. Though it is likely many other teacher research studies have been done within the many

teacher research networks, access to these studies is difficult and ferreting them out within the

context of these networks/programs takes significant time (Marion and Zeichner, 2001). For this

reason, publishing our work via traditional avenues has been a primary goal.

Why Teacher Research?

Simply put, teacher research is the systematic and intentional inquiry about teaching, learning, and

schooling carried out by teachers in their own school and classroom settings (Cochran-Smith, Lytle,

1993). However, when one considers the ways in which this might occur and the range of

iv

possibilities for the outcomes, questions regarding the position of this body of information with

respect to educational research at large arise. A slightly more detailed and cryptic description of

teacher research is described in a resource our community has found to be incredibly useful

(MacLean and Mohr, 1999).

When teachers become teacher-researchers, the traditional descriptions of both teachers and researchers change. Teacher-researchers raise questions about what they think and observe about their teaching and their students' learning. They collect student work in order to evaluate performance, but they also see student work as data to analyze in order to examine the teaching and learning that produced it. To plan and prepare lessons for their students - lessons that address the needs assessed in their work -- teacher-researchers also assess their own interpretations of the reasons for the students' performance.

So what is teacher research? It is research conducted by teachers as they go about their daily work. It is enmeshed in the context of the classroom…

For this particular research project, the overarching goal was to use teacher research to examine the

academic achievement of EL students within the rich and thick context of individual teachers'

classrooms, thinking, and worlds. What emerges are not only ideas and questions regarding the

initial overarching research question, but issues, realities, passions, and biases of classroom teachers

grappling to make the core curriculum accessible to all children. From the academician's point of

view, teacher research has immense value because its findings represent realities, explorations, and

investigations from the heart of the field—from classroom practice itself. From teachers' point of

view, teacher research, first and foremost, is a way to help them see their own work—their own

thinking about teaching and learning—unfold in a new light. "Teacher research is a welcoming way

for us teachers to ask questions about our students, our practices, and our materials. It provides us

a way for us to figure things out for ourselves, rather than depending on outsiders to tell us what we

‘should’ or ‘shouldn't’ be doing" (Dabisch, 2001). Student work becomes more than an indicator

of what a student might know, think, or be able to do. It becomes data to be looked at from a variety

of points of view and by others who may see things the researcher does not see; it becomes a

mechanism for deep reflection about the teacher's own effectiveness as a curriculum planner and as

a teacher interacting in intimate ways with his/her students.

Research Methods for Individual Studies and Group Process

Each member in the LMRI cohort drew from his/her experience as a teacher researcher to develop

an individual research question and approach to his/her investigation, which often includes an

v

intervention. Each research study draws on multiple data sources, including but not limited to the

following:3

• existing sources, such as samples of student work, portfolios, concept maps, projects, grades, and other records;

• tools for capturing student interactions such as teacher and student journals, audio-tapes, video-tapes, photographs, observational checklists/rating scales;

• tools for questioning, such as interviews, written surveys, focus groups.

In addition, each study addresses the following general questions, which offer a framework for the

research process and an organizational scheme for the teachers’ research reports:

Setting and background: Describe your research setting. What assumptions or observations are motivating your research?

Research question/issue: What are you interested in finding out about? Consider whether your question is researchable given the data to which you have access. Try framing your question in different ways. What other resources might inform your research question/issue?

Design of the study: Describe your research plans. What steps/activities are key to your investigation?

Data sources, organization, and analysis: What information are you collecting, using, and generating? How are you organizing and looking at it? How will you make sense of the different data sources in light of your research question? What other questions are raised by the data?

Results: What did you (are you) finding out? How does the data you have collected and analyzed support your findings?

Conclusions: Findings, new questions, theory building, ideas … Why is this important? How can what you have learned be useful in other situations? What additional research needs to be done? (Castori, 2002)

During Year 1 the teachers came together as a community to identify individual researchable

questions and to pursue initial data collection and analysis. As a group, we refined the research

questions we were collectively pursuing:

(1) What kinds of obstacles do teachers and EL students confront as they work together to increase achievement?

(2) What kinds of strategies do teachers find particularly effective with EL students? Do patterns in effective strategies emerge across the different studies?

(3) What can we discover about the different factors (in addition to teaching strategies) which enable or inhibit students’ progress?

(4) What kinds of recommendations can we make for change?

3 Sagor, R. (1992). How To Conduct Collaborative Action Research. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

vi

After review of the preliminary drafts submitted in June of 2002, we collaboratively generated an

action plan for year 2 for each teacher, including refining/refocusing the research questions,

gathering more data, rethinking the data analysis, reorganizing the papers, and general editing and

revision. In the spring of 2003 the studies were compiled for a presentation at the LMRI

Conference; however, editing and revising continued through the summer of 2003. Through Spring

and Summer 2003 the entire research team met to consider the studies as a collection, identifying

common themes and issues.

The resulting seven teacher research studies that follow fall into three categories: three focus on

language literacy in terms of reading and writing proficiency, two emphasize academic literacy in

terms of content acquisition in a particular discipline, and three investigate programmatic factors that

enable or inhibit achievement for EL students.

vii

LMRI Teacher Research Study Abstracts

WRITING AND READING PROFICIENCY

Shirley Fagout

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing

How can student/teacher generated assessment rubrics impact students' performance in writing?

I am a first grade teacher working with Hispanic students who attend a high-poverty low- performing school. Since every year I noticed that students are not successful in expository writing, I began to research "best teaching practices in writing" to help my students to improve. This research turned into a two-year study on the effects of using student/teacher generated assessment rubrics on student performance in writing. I used multiple indicators of student success, including observations, district test scores, and in-depth analysis of pre- and post- samples of student work, and discovered that this kind of rubric was very effective in helping my students to improve their writing.

❖

Michelle Parsons

Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom

How do my first grade ELL students acquire and use the necessary strategies of writing in order to write? What are the "necessary" strategies and is there an order to how they should be taught?

Since writing is a part of nearly every assignment in my 1 st grade Title 1 classroom, I investigated

how different writing strategies worked with my ELL students. From my observations it seems that children learn the most from hands-on experiences that involve multiple modalities and from a combination of free-form writing that attaches them to subjects they find interesting and intensive practice of basic skills.

❖

Nancy Salm

To Read or Not to Read (Silently)

Could a program of sustained silent reading (SSR) be benficial to the students in my high school English ELD class? What would the students themselves think about such an intervention?

In an effort to help my ELD students improve their reading skills I piloted a Sustained Silent Reading program as part of my English class. I document the progress of this program over two years and consider its effectiveness by looking at test scores and surveying my students. I was pleased to discover that my students did improve their reading scores on district assessments and that the student themselves had very positive things to say about this intervention.

❖

viii

CONTENT ACQUISITION IN A DISCIPLINE

FaraLee Wright

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class

What were the externally imposed obstacles faced by my high school ELL mathematics students? What could I discover about how to most appropriately place these students, what kind of texts to use, and what kind of classroom interventions made a difference?

It was my quest to discover why this year's Pre-Geometry EL students were struggling with the content and not making progress as students had in prior years. I found that between years, there were significant discrepancies between the pre-requisites for the course, the students' preparation levels in different years, and the texts adopted. I used informal case studies to focus in on the obstacles faced by specific students. I reached several conclusions regarding how to most appropriately place EL student in high school mathematics classes.

❖

Oneta Edmonds

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning?

How do language routines effect student learning?

In my World Civilization class with SDAIE students, the dramatic obstacles that I encountered started with an overcrowded class. Since the techniques I had previously used were not successful, I had to come up with new ways to make the curriculum work for the students. I incorporated strategies such as active student involvement in reading aloud, vocabulary lists, and Lingo Bingo game questions/cards. I gathered data in the form of student surveys, chapter test results, and teacher journal entries to see what effect these strategies had on student achievement. When the students started seeing changes in their test results, they became more involved with their learning.

❖

ix

PROGRAMMATIC CONSTRUCTS FOR EL STUDENTS

Heera Kulkarni

Parent Participation: A Positive Power for English Language Learner Student Achievement

What is the relationship between active parent participation and ELL student achievement? What kinds of parent programs are there throughout the country and how are they succeeding?

During the first year, as a classroom teacher, I collected data from my classroom regarding student achievement, which included the results from various assessments, the rate of homework returned, reading logs, etc. I also collected data for parent involvement such as attendance at Open House and parent-teacher conferences and completion rates of parent-child projects at home. As I analyzed the data, I discovered a significant link between parent involvement and student achievement. During the second year, as a resource teacher at another school site in the district, I examined various parent involvement programs carried out successfully by other schools around the nation.

❖

Nancy Salm

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program: One School’s Search for a Challenging Academic Program

to Meet the Language and Literacy Needs of its Long Term English Learners

What can I learn by examining the progress of our schools ELD program over four years, starting with its inception? What kinds of interventions in reading and writing seem to work best?

Hoping to give a lens into one district’s efforts to shape an effective ELD program and to show the struggles I went through to better serve my students, I recorded my observations of my classroom experiments with reading and writing programs from the inception of our ELD program. By studying test results, student work, and response from the students themselves, I look specifically at the development of a sustained silent reading program and at different efforts to teach academic writing.

❖

Carol Halbe

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners

Are there advantages to integrating English Learners for content area classes that outweigh the academic and social challenges integration into the main stream presents? What do English Learners experience in high school and how do these experiences affect their academic performance? How do the students themselves articulate their concerns?

In this two-year qualitative study, I explore the perceptions of both teachers and students through surveys, interviews, classroom observations, student focus groups and a case study that offers a look at one female student from Pakistan. Student-raised concerns about social issues, group work, asking for help, and discrimination paint an up close and personal look at what it feels like to be an English Learner. Collectively, their stories can provide grounding for changes that better meet the needs of this growing student population.

❖

1

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing

by

Shirley Fagout

An Introduction and Overview In my quest to become a more effective teacher, I continually reflect on my instruction and try to

find ways to better meet my students’ educational needs. I am a first grade teacher working with

Hispanic students who attend a high-poverty low-performing school. All of the twenty students in

my class are Spanish dominant English Language Learners (ELL) in the second year of the

“Alternate Bilingual K-3 Program” offered at the school. Almost all of my students either meet or

exceed first grade academic standards in Reading and Math in Spanish as indicated by my school

district and the state. Until recently writing was the only content area where my students were not

meeting the district’s required level of proficiency.

Before I started my research, every year I noticed that my first graders struggled with writing,

groaning and expressing their displeasure every time they had a writing assignment. Since I have

always had a great love for writing, it saddened me to hear their negative responses and protests. I

fervently desired to help my students become more successful with writing, even if I did not yet

understand how to accomplish this. After a period of trial and error, I almost gave up because all

the evidence seemed to indicate that it was not possible for first graders to write better. The first

grade teachers I talked to accepted their students’ performance and advised me not to expect any

better. Then I visited an elementary school in Davis and saw how well those first graders wrote. A

ray of hope began to flicker in my heart again: it was possible for first graders to produce better

expository writing than did my students. I asked myself why these students with high socio-

economic status could do what my students could not do. The answer was clear: they had been

taught because their parents and teachers knew that they could write well and expected them to do

so. Realizing that the only differences between my students and these were money and education, I

vowed to offer my students the instruction they would need to make them perform academically as

well as the students whose parents were more affluent and educated. My quest to help my students

become more successful in writing began in earnest!

Once I believed that it was possible for my first graders to meet or exceed state standards in writing,

I began to question my instructional practices instead of blaming the students for their poor

performance. I came to understand that my students may not have understood what was expected

to make a piece of writing truly work and that most language arts programs did not give them

enough time to practice writing. Consequently, students needed an effective tool to guide them

2 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

when they wrote and to help them effectively assess their own writing, and they needed to practice.

Since the grading system that was used by the school district did not effectively tell the parents how

they were doing, my EL students’ parents also needed an authentic tool to learn about their

children’s progress. Thus, I turned from the teacher-created rubrics that I had always used to a

student-generated rubric, and this experiment turned into a two-year study on the effect of using

student-generated assessment rubrics on student performance in writing, where I used multiple

indicators of student success. I guided students to make a list of what a paper that met the standard

requirements should look like, and the ideas the students generated became components of the

rubric. Because it was made up of their ideas using their words, the students felt ownership of the

rubric, and like a roadmap it told them what they needed to do each time they wrote. My two years

of research have shown me that student-generated assessment rubrics can remove the mystery from

writing, give students (and parents) an efficient and more authentic tool to assess their work, and

profoundly impact students’ performance in writing.

Teaching the Writing Process Writing is critical to student’s academic success because it allows them to show what they really

know. Many students even admit, “I didn’t even know what I thought until I read what I wrote.” I

came to recognize that when students improved their writing, they improved in all other curricula

areas and were able to raise their academic achievement on standardized tests. This knowledge

compelled me to find ways to “raise the academic bar in writing” for my students.

For three years, I focused my professional development and research on writing. I learned and

taught students writing strategies such as the Writing Process, Writer’s Workshop, the Ole Project

Writing strategies and the Six Traits of Writing from the Area 3 Writing Project. I tried many

other strategies that I learned from talking with other first grade teachers in my district or from

attending conferences.

Teaching first graders the Writing Process proved to be the best tool to help them learn how to

write a narrative and to begin to see themselves as writers. After introducing each step of the

Writing Process (prewriting, first draft, author’s chair, revision, editing, and publishing) one by

one, I showed the students how to apply the theory by doing each step with them: selecting a

writing prompt that the students can easily relate to; modeling how to use a mind map as visual

organizer to record the key ideas related to my prompt during the pre-writing stage; demonstrating

how I developed my ideas from the mind map to create the first rough draft of my story;

dramatizing how I shared my first draft with a buddy to get their feedback to make my story better;

showing how to revise my work using the guidelines indicated in the rubric; having an adult do the

final editing to make sure my story was ready for the final step of publishing; rewriting my story to

make it able to be read to the class, to be taken home and read to their parents, and to be included in

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 3

the class library’s tub of Student Authored Books. After it was published, the story that I wrote

with the students became the anchor paper and was laminated and posted with the teacher created

visuals demonstrating each of the six steps of the Writing Process. To give the students multiple

opportunities to write daily in class with feedback, we also experimented with interactive dialogue

journals, written responses to literature, and Writer’s Workshop.

Nevertheless, no matter what I did, the majority of my students were still not even meeting grade

level writing standards. Having seen the success of the first graders at high performing schools, I

refused to give up my quest, convinced that my students could meet or exceed grade level writing

standards if only I could find the key to success.

Discovering Rubrics and Refining my Research Question In the summer of 2001, attending a workshop by Larry Ainsworth from the Center for Performance

Assessment, I learned about using “student-generated, teacher-facilitated rubrics” as an authentic

assessment tool. I was not convinced that this strategy could impact my students’ writing because I

had been using a rubric as a scoring guide for many years, and it had not really improved their

writing. However, it was explained to me that the “teacher- and district-created rubrics” that I had

been using are different from the student-generated ones which the current research shows do

improve student’s academic performance. So, since I was desperately seeking an effective tool to

improve my students’ writing, I decided to experiment with “student-generated, teacher-facilitated

writing rubrics.” Using such a rubric during summer school with third grade English Language

Learners, I was able to see its effectiveness in helping these older students to improve their writing.

I continued to wonder if using student-generated rubrics could also help my first graders meet or

exceed the required level of proficiency. So in August 2001, determined to research its

effectiveness, I implemented this kind of writing rubric in my own first grade class.

Data Sources and Collection I began to collect data from the first day of school when my students wrote in their journals and

compared this first writing with other samples taking monthly to observe changes over time. Then,

I assigned a monthly writing prompt to become part of the students’ portfolios. My principal

implemented monthly school-wide writing prompts to measure the students’ progress on a monthly

basis. Additionally, the district assigned the annual district-wide writing prompt in May which is

compared to the students’ writing from the previous year to ascertain growth and identify areas of

concern that need to be addressed the next year. Finally, I gathered data from student-authored

books and from other writing assignments. The data that I gathered helped me to assess my

students’ performance and to measure their growth over time.

4 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

Students Constructing Rubrics: Teamwork! My goal for the construction of the rubric was for the students to generate all the ideas based on

what they had learned about writing; my job was simply to be the facilitator. Beginning the process

during a class meeting where the students and I sat together on the carpet, I asked them to tell me all

that a first grader should do when writing. Then, I told them that when people write they need rules

to guide their writing and invited the students to share what they felt should be included in a paper

for it to be a “good” story. I used leading, guiding, and viewpoint-soliciting questions to stimulate

my students to recall what authors do during the Writing Process and to come up with the

standards-based criteria or components of the rubric according to their knowledge of what we had

studied about writing conventions and strategies. I explained that I would record their ideas for

them to use as a guide when they wrote in the future, and this guide that we were creating together

was what is called a rubric. I made sure that the students clearly understood this concept and

encouraged them to share this information with their family members at home. I was diligent about

validating the student’s responses and allowing their ownership of the rubric as they would be more

willing to buy into something they created for their personal use. Throughout this conversation

with my students, I consciously tried to avoid using subjective language such as “good” and to

strive for “objective language”— specific, understandable, and matched to task directions. Below

are examples of a teacher-created and a student–created rubric for comparison:

Teacher-created Rubric

Exemplary/Excellent • Superior work that is a model paper. • Paper fully addresses the prompt. • Paper displays strong beginning, a fully developed middle and an appropriate closure.

Proficient • Challenging level all students can achieve with multiple opportunities for coaching. • Paper shows a weak beginning, middle and end. • Paper is missing some details. • Paper addresses the prompt.

Not Yet Meeting the Standard(s) • Student clearly does not understand expectations of task and requires coaching, intervention

and additional time. The student may be progressing toward proficiency but he/she still requires additional instruction or opportunity to revise work.

• Paper lacks beginning, middle and end. • Paper barely addresses the prompt. • Paper conveys a general idea but lacks detail, facts, and descriptions.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 5

My 1 st

Grade Student-Generated Writing Rubric

Exemplary/Excellent • Begins with capital letters. • Uses a period at the end of a sentence. • Puts the accents where they are needed. • Leaves spaces between words. • Spells the words correctly. • Writes with lots of details. • Draws pictures. • Uses good handwriting. • Does not copy others work. • Uses sight words.

Proficient • Starts sentences with capital letters. • Puts periods at the end of each sentence. • Leaves spaces between words. • Uses good handwriting. • Writes a lot. • Uses sight words. • Writes the words correctly. • Drawing matches the story.

Not yet meeting the standards • Does not use capitals to begin a sentence. • Does not use a period at the end of a sentence. • Does not write the words correctly. • Does not leave spaces between words. • Writes too little to be addressed. • Does not use details. • Does not draw pictures.

Also, I taught my students how to use the Writing Process and focus on the necessary skills related

to Conventions in Writing; Ideas and Content; and Organization and Focus, which are three of the

Six Traits in Writing. They were given multiple opportunities to write for different purposes daily.

Using the Student-generated Rubric In class I used the rubric as a scoring guide to focus student attention on what was needed to

improve their writing, checking off each criterion present and highlighting each criterion absent,

providing help or instruction as needed, and allowing students to revise work using specific

6 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

feedback. Since it was important for students to develop the custom of referring to the rubric when

they wrote, I gave them a personal copy to keep in their writing folder. Before they were required to

use it with their writing, I modeled how I used it to revise and improve my writing the way I was

expecting them to do later on.

After editing their own writing, the students were taught to do peer editing using the rubric as a

scoring guide before turning in their final draft for me to edit. Letter and number grades are not

very meaningful to first graders; therefore, I used a grading system that would make sense to my

students. As different symbols for the highest (“A”) level of the rubric, we chose five stickers, a

star, a meat and cheese pizza, or two-color smiling face. The middle or proficiency (“B-C”) level

of the rubric was designated by three stickers, a cheese pizza or a one-color smiling face The lowest

level (“D-F”) was symbolized by one sticker, a pizza with only sauce, or a sad face. Visual

representations of these grading symbols were posted in the classroom next to the samples of the

anchor papers beside the poster of student-generated rubric that was already laminated on chart

paper. The students were encouraged to use these scoring guides to assess and revise their written

work daily. (See Appendix I for samples of grading symbols and anchor papers.) Our goal was

“proficiency” – where all criteria were met.

I’ve summarized the procedures I used to create rubrics in the chart below:

CREATING A STUDENT-GENERATED ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

• Narrow down the multiple state standards to essentials which I call “the need to know” standards versus the ones that are only “nice to know”—these became my “Power Standards”;

• Unwrap or dissect these power standards to determine the “big ideas” expressed in the standards to guide my instruction and assessments and to identify the critical skills I needed to teach and;

• Create essential questions, which invited my students into the learning process through personal inquiry;

• Guide my students to create a rubric that contains all the skills that they need to know to master the targeted standards;

• Copy on chart paper the students’ interpretation of what was required for them to become proficient in meeting or exceeding the standards at each of the three levels of the three point rubric we used;

• Make together (teacher with students) anchor papers to provide a practical model of what the writing should look like at each level of the rubric, showing them exactly what they should do to achieve the “grade” they wanted for each paper and demonstrating adequately how to incorporate all the writing strategies, skills and state standards that I had taught;

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 7

• Represent the different levels of achievement on the rubric with symbols or objects that are more meaningful to the students to help them to determine if their work was below, meeting or exceeding the standards.

Results of Using the Rubric: Student Attitudes—Enthusiasm, Proficiency, Empowerment

The students were very enthusiastic about creating the rubric because they had ownership of it as it

had been developed using student ideas and language. Indeed, they had taken so much

responsibility for the creation of the rubric, the students were quick to correct me if I tried to change

their wording. They no longer protested loudly saying “Oh no” each time they were instructed to

write; neither were they in doubt about how to write because they had the anchor papers and the

rubric as models to guide them and to make the assignment more concrete and realistic. The

students became quite proficient at using the rubric to edit their work. Since their copy was in the

form of a checklist, they knew how to refer to it checking off each item done. If students made

mistakes and failed to catch them using the rubric to self-correct, when they brought their writing to

me, all I had to do was to point to the rubric and ask if they had used it. Sometimes when I was

editing a student’s writing with discouraging errors, all I had to do was look at the rubric and read

out aloud to the student what s/he had written, and s/he would immediately take back his or her paper

to fix the error. When I walked around the room, I saw students helping each other to edit, bluntly

saying things such as “You did not put a period at the end of the sentence,” “You did not spell this

word correctly,” “You didn’t include the middle or the end of your story.” Indeed, the students

were empowered to see themselves as the experts in writing!

Results of Using the Rubric: Writing Performance

From my observations of the students’ work I noticed that the length of the students’ writing

prompts increased from half a page to a minimum of one page each time they wrote. The samples

collected of the students’ writing showed a tremendous improvement in penmanship. Over time, as

the students more and more used the rubric to assess their writing, I began to notice that their

writing was improving far beyond what I was accustomed to and what was customarily “the norm”

for first graders. For example, about 75% of the students were using capital letters to begin writing

and ending with a period. Almost all of the students were spelling the high frequency words

correctly by referring to the pocket chart where they were kept for reference.

All the students made growth in writing and met the grade level expectations on the district-wide

annual writing prompt. The students’ writing prompts were scored by 3 different teachers, and then

the average of the three scores given by the teachers became the final score that the students

received. The maximum score possible was 15 points on the district 1-3 grades writing rubric, and

8 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

first graders are not expected to gain more that 7-10. However more than 90% of my students

scored 10-14 points, and only 1 student scored 7 points. (Parents could also witness their progress,

as after grading, the students’ monthly writing prompt samples were posted in the classroom, and

parents were invited to measure their child’s growth by comparing and contrasting writing from the

beginning and end of the year.)

Supporting Data: A Sampling of Student Work Over Time

I gathered a series of samples to analyze at the end of the year (all of which were also to be used to

help the child’s parents measure his or her growth in writing over time). I decided to focus on

work from three students, one high, one average, and one low. The high student started off first

grade knowing her letters and having the ability to read and write some words in her native Spanish

language; the low student barely started with the ability to write letters or indicate any space between

them. I analyzed the samples by using the rubric and charting changes in the students’ writing

from sample to sample. Additionally I noted the changes in the students’ attitude and enthusiasm

for writing over the course of the year. Below are samples from each of the three students’ journals

from the beginning of the year, when the students are encouraged to write without any specific

directions so the teacher can see exactly what each student was able to do without any prompting,

and from the end of the year. The first graders are Spanish-dominant and just learning English and

consequently are not required to write in English. I will later include samples from these same three

students in their second grade year to show their

continued success and improvement.

STUDENT 1 (high-achieving):

sample 1, beginning of 1st grade

Student 1 came to first grade being able to write

fairly well in Spanish. However, she was still

having problems with leaving spaces between the

words and placing the letters correctly where they

should go above, on, or below the lines. Her work

also indicated that she didn’t yet have mastery

over the use of capital letters or details.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 9

STUDENT 1 (high achieving): sample 2, end of 1st grade

Toward the end of the school year, Student 1

showed significant growth in her writing,

demonstrating appropriate use of capitals, mastery

of spacing, and a sense of detail. There was also

significant difference in the amount the student

wrote as compared to the beginning of the

year. This student would self-assess her writing

and tell me she deserved an excellent score

because she saw that she had all the eleven

standards that were stipulated for a paper to be

considered exemplary. The most outstanding

error in this paper was the incorrect spelling of the

English word “baby”; I chose not to do any

modeling to correct the error because this was the

student’s attempt to write words in English, and

she was doing it phonetically the way she spells in

Spanish.

STUDENT 2 (average-achieving): Sample 1, beginning of 1st grade

At the beginning of the school year, Student 2, an

average student in all other academic areas, was

struggling with writing. He did not use capital

letters to begin sentences or leave spaces between

the words. He used initial letters to represent the

whole word and wrote only two lines in the twenty

minutes time that was allotted for this writing

activity.

10 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

STUDENT 2 (average-achieving): Sample 2, end of 1st grade

Toward the end of the school year, this

student had showed significant growth in

his writing. Even though he did not write

this paper using a lot of details as the rubric

required, this paper shows that the student

had mastered spacing between the words,

had spelled all his words correctly, and was

using capital letters appropriately. His

parents now had tangible proof of his

growth in writing when they collected the

end of year samples.

STUDENT 3 (low achieving): Sample 1, beginning of 1st grade

In the beginning of the year, student 3 was

clueless about writing. She would cry and

refuse to even make the effort to write.

Since she loved to use the computer at

school, the only one to which she had

access, I encouraged her to write about that.

By September 2001, she produced what is

shown in this sample, but she wrote very

little, and she alone could decipher the string

of letters.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 11

STUDENT 3 (low-achieving): Sample 2, end of 1st grade

By April 2002, this student had progressed

considerably and had developed such a love for

writing that she would write me letters at home

and ask to stay in during recess to write.

Although she still had lots of difficulties with

writing (for example, being so conscious of

leaving spaces between words that she would

leave spaces where they were not necessary), she

had mastered most of the eleven standards

indicated by the rubric to write an exemplary

paper. She still had a few spelling mistakes, but

one could read what she had written easily.

Findings and Conclusions from Data—Year 1

On analyzing the data I collected, I was thrilled to identify the following findings:

• My students had made tremendous growth in writing over time in the areas of conventions, ideas, and content.

• All of them had mastered using capital letters to begin the writing; some of them even became proficient in using a period at the end of a sentence, which none of my students had ever done before since this was considered a second grade skill.

• They were able to write to the prompt using details to support their main ideas.

• Their stories had a clearly identified beginning, middle and end.

• Most of the students were applying the strategies they learned about good writing that were outlined on the proficient level of the rubric.

• Five of the students used the rubric to produce exemplary papers.

I had undeniable evidence that student-generated rubrics do impact the writing of first graders in

positive ways and are effective tools that students can use to guide or evaluate their drafts.

12 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

Demystifying the grading process, the rubric clearly established the criteria the students needed to

follow to be successful in the assigned task. It provided specific feedback that better helped them to

evaluate their writing and gave the students valuable reasons for revising their work to attain the

result or grade they desired. The rubric motivated my students to work harder to produce better

quality work that met or exceeded grade level. By the end of first grade 19 of my 20 students had

acquired proficiency in the skills that were targeted when we created the rubrics. I feel that the

student-generated rubric was the instructional practice that made the difference in their writing; it

could not have been mere coincidence that the first year I used this kind of rubric my students were

successful. When I shared my findings with other teachers at my grade level who had implemented

student-generated rubrics in the middle of the school year, their students also experienced success

in writing.

YEAR 2: WAS OUR YEAR 1 SUCCESS A FLUKE?

During the second year of my research, I wanted to continue to gather data to test the validity of the

assumption that student-generated rubrics result in improved academic achievement. If the findings

of the research confirmed my hypothesis, then the student-teacher generated rubric could be used as

an authentic assessment tool that would be effective for Language Minority Students. I followed a

two-pronged approach: (1) I looked at this year’s second grade (last year’s first grade) to trace

their continued progress; and (2) I looked at this year’s first grade in the same manner I had looked

at last year’s to ascertain if last year’s success had been a fluke.

Prong 1: My former students were now in second grade with a new teacher, who had used student-

generated rubrics for the first time the previous year. Interested in finding out how this rubric

would impact the students’ writing, she worked with her students to develop a rubric appropriate for

second grade standards. As they began to use it in class, she found continuous modeling was not

necessary since the current second graders had become quite proficient in using a rubric by the end

of first grade. Throughout the year, she collected the writing samples required to measure the

growth (since second graders are bi-literate, samples were therefore collected in both languages).

Using the data she had gathered, I could zero in on the progress of the same three students I had

followed in Year 1.

Prong 2: At the same time, my current students in first grade and I would create a rubric together

for me to collect data to observe the way it would impact their writing in first grade. I began to

collect samples of the students’ writing from the first day of school. I also began to teach the state

standards in writing to allow the students to understand what was expected before introducing them

to the Writing Process and giving them multiple opportunities to write daily. The students were to

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 13

engage in Free Voluntary Writing or Daily Individual Writing because the more they practiced

writing, the more they would be able to develop proficiency. It was necessary to teach, model,

reteach, and post visuals of the five steps that constitute the Writing Process. I gave ongoing mini-

lessons to give multiple opportunities to practice using the rubric to assess and improve their written

work. Samples of the students’ writing from the first week of school were posted on the class

bulletin board, and one sample was added monthly.

Analysis of Year 2 Data—How Last Year’s First Graders Performed in Second Grade

From an analysis of the samples collected from the writings of the same three students from last

year’s first grade, one high, one average and one low-performing, I observed the following:

• all of the students showed growth in writing;

• the students from last year had begun to write in two languages.

It must be noted, however, that the students didn’t get as many meaningful opportunities or time to

write as they did in first grade because they spent approximately three hours daily doing the Open

Court Language Arts Program.

STUDENT 1 (high achieving): SAMPLE 3, beginning of 2nd grade

In November of the second year of the study, this student had transitioned from only writing in

Spanish and had begun to write in English also. The subject for this piece was very familiar to her,

14 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

and it was an easy one to use English grammar. This student had become quite proficient at using

the second grade rubric and was producing a well written paper which demonstrated appropriate use

of punctuation. There was one misspelled sight word (“becaus”), but it did not alarm the teacher

because the student had spelled it correctly once before.

STUDENT 1 (high-achieving): SAMPLE 4, middle of 2nd grade

In January 2003, this student was writing about something that had happened on the playground

between her best friend and another classmate. The English required was more complex than in the

above piece and required the use of more involved grammatical structures in English. Consequently

the student had more spelling and grammar mistakes even though she still had lots of details, good

punctuation and a mastery of capitals. She had not yet become proficient in using paragraphs.

However, as this student progressed during the school year, her writing improved over time with the

use of the rubric.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 15

STUDENT 2 (average-achieving): SAMPLE 3, beginning of 2nd grade

By November 2003, student 2 had begun to write in English. His paper was fairly well written.

The topic was easy and familiar which contributed to his success. He had problems with the first

letter and, when asked, didn’t know why he wrote the capital “N” to begin the piece. He had a few

spelling errors (name and buy) but he had details, wrote a fairly good amount, and used capital

letters and periods appropriately. He still used “and” repeatedly instead of commas. Nonetheless,

this sample of his writing in English was encouraging.

16 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

STUDENT 2 (average-achieving): SAMPLE 4, end of 2nd grade

Towards the end of the school year, Student 2 had improved considerably in writing in English.

The topic was not familiar to him; he had done an investigation about the “leopard,” and he was

writing his report to show what he had learned. Even though this paper had spelling mistakes, it

showed a reasonable amount of growth in his writing in English about a subject that was more

cognitively demanding for an ELL. The teacher noted that the student was focussing more on the

content that the mechanics when he wrote this paper, but she noted as well that the student

continued to improve in writing while he used the rubric and anchor papers.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 17

STUDENT 3 (low-achieving): beginning of 2nd grade:

At the beginning of year two, this student was still not ready to write in English as she was still

misspelling high frequency words in Spanish. She still had not mastered using a period at the end

of each sentence nor the use of commas. However, she had come a long way: she was using a lot

of details; she wrote a greater amount in the time allotted; and she did not have negative feelings

about writing.

18 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

STUDENT 3 (low achieving): SAMPLE 4, middle of 2nd grade

Student 3’s attempt at writing her paper about a more challenging subject shows that she still had a

long way to go to produce an exemplary paper, but she was on her way. Spelling and punctuation

were her biggest problems, and over time she would improve in those areas. It is important to note

the difference in the amount she wrote at the beginning of the first grade versus second grade. She

was still low in her writing skills, but she was no longer clueless. She knew where she wanted to go

and the rubric showed her how to get there. The teacher was interested in the content more than the

format, and she could celebrate student 3’s success in this area.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 19

STUDENT 3 (low achieving): SAMPLE 4, middle of 2nd grade

This is a sample of Student 3’s writing in English later in the school year. Her growth in writing in

one month from November to December can easily be seen by comparing Samples 4 and 5. She

had improved in the use of punctuation as indicated by her attempts to use a period at the end of

each sentence. She had fewer spelling errors even though she still had problems with the use of

capital letters.

Year Two Results—This Year’s First Grade

I chose to look again at before and after writing samples from my new first grade class, again

following a high-, average- and low-achieving student. In the second year, all the first graders

started with knowledge of capitals and periods, maybe because the kindergarten teacher had

implemented a rubric-system the prior year. The first sample below is from one of their first

journal entries, the last from their end-of-year district assessment.

20 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

STUDENT 4 (high-achieving): SAMPLE 1, beginning of 1st grade (2nd year)

This student was high-achieving in all

academic areas; however, his first writing

sample did not reflect his academic strength.

His writing here, though legible, was brief

and without detail. He began by using a

capital letter and a period, but by the end of

his paper he had stopped using these. He

had problems writing the letter “j” and one

spelling error.

STUDENT 4 (high-achieving): SAMPLE 2, end of 1st grade (2nd year)

This student made outstanding progress in

writing throughout the year. He included details

to make his topic more interesting. This

assessment shows a clearly defined beginning,

middle and end. He showed improvement in his

use of punctuation even though he had yet to

achieve mastery. He still made some errors

characteristic of native Spanish speakers, writing

a “b” for a “v.” But overall his paper is

impressive, especially since during assessments

students don’t have access to the “word wall”

(a classroom reference).

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 21

STUDENT 5 (middle-achieving): SAMPLE 1, beginning of 1st grade (2nd year)

At the end of one month in first grade, this

student was able to produce writing that was

fairly legible and understandable. She knew

about beginning a sentence with a capital

letter and ending with a period, but she had a

few spelling mistakes and not much detail.

STUDENT 5 (average-achieving): SAMPLE 2, end of 1st grade (2nd year)

This paper showed Student 5’s growth in writing.

She did not misspell the sight or high frequency

words as required by the rubric, even though she

had problems determining when to use a “b” or

“v,” “s” or “c” when she wrote the words

“maravilloso,” “uise” and “senti.” It was

impressive to see how she attempted to use a

period after each complete thought and to begin

the next sentence with a capital letter. She was

now able to add details which increased the

amount she wrote and the quality of her content.

22 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

STUDENT 6 (low-achieving): SAMPLE 1, beginning of 1st grade (2nd year)

This student’s September writing sample

shows clearly what he could do after being

in first grade only since August. He knew

that he had to start writing using capital

letters and end with a period. He wrote the

words he knew how to spell and used

random letters to indicate the other words.

He still had problems with spacing, and only

he could read what he had written.

STUDENT 6 (low-achieving): SAMPLE 2, end of 1st grade (2nd year)

This sample shows his growth in writing by

the end of the school year; it’s now legible

with fewer spelling errors, and he was even

trying to use a period at the end of each

sentence. He had successfully met the

district’s requirements to be on grade level.

The Impacts of Student-Generated Assessment Rubrics on Students’ Writing 23

Conclusions My second year of research again left me thrilled with the success created by student-generated rubrics. It is natural that a child improves month to month, but with the rubrics, the improvement took place faster and with less effort. If you know exactly what you’re supposed to be doing, it’s easier to do it—as though you have a road map of where you’re going. A summary of the benefits of these rubrics follows:

Benefits of Student-Generated Rubrics for Students • Rubrics motivate students to better understand and produce quality work. • Rubrics give students accountability. • Rubrics give the students ownership. • Rubrics de-mystify the grading process. • Rubrics let students know if they have met or exceeded the standards. • Rubrics identify what “proficient” work looks like.

Benefits of Student Generated Rubrics for Teachers • Rubrics allow teachers to communicate their expectations to the students. • Rubrics provide structure for students. • The focus questions make instructional choices easier. • Rubrics allow teachers to use task-specific criteria to assess student’s proficiency of

both content and skills. • Instructional objectives, instructional activities, and the performance task are aligned. • Student discussions and self-reflections provide the teacher with useful feedback about

instruction. • Increased student engagement increases student motivation and participation. • Observing students during peer assessment provides valuable insights regarding student

learning and group interactions.

Student-generated rubrics become a promising assessment tool, providing useful, quantitative data on clear, carefully selected qualitative criteria. Because they require more precision about criteria

for evaluation, rubrics provide better feedback than the current system. Rubrics bring an end to the disheartening experience we have all had: of turning in an assignment without really knowing

whether the teacher will think it is excellent or shoddy.

I felt that I had successfully achieved what I had set out to achieve when I began this research.

However, the students writing had improved so much that some observers questioned whether

“those students,” referring to my Mexican American Spanish speakers from a high poverty low

performing school, could produce that high quality written work. Familiar with the way first

graders usually write in English, they found it hard to believe that the writing my students did on

the district-wide writing assessment was done without help. From that time, I have had to have

another teacher with me in my classroom when my students take their writing assessment to

prove that I do not cheat! Nonetheless, I myself deeply trust that my students’ success was real

and that the rubric had successfully impacted my students’ writing.

24 SHIRLEY FAGOUT

GRADING SYMBOLS and ANCHOR PAPER for EXCELLENT WORK: complete pizza, happy face, star, 5 stickers

GRADING SYMBOLS and ANCHOR PAPER for PROFICIENT WORK: pizza (sauce, 1 topping), happy face, 3 stickers

GRADING SYMBOLS and ANCHOR PAPER for BELOW PROFICIENT: pizza (only sauce), sad face, 1 sticker

25

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom

by

Michelle Parsons

Focus on Writing

Writing is part of nearly every assignment in my classroom from responding to literature, to

problem solving in math, to explaining what the “life skill” of the month means, to recording

observations from a science lesson, to describing art projects. Children even write to students

who have left our school. Beginning on the first day of school, they also have “free” journals

where they can write to their choice of topic. For two years I have observed my students as they

wrote, with a special eye for English Language Learners (ELL), recording my reflections along

the way and pondering some key questions. How do ELL acquire and use the necessary

strategies of writing in order to write? What are the “necessary” strategies, and is there an order

for how they should be taught? What kinds of assessments provide the most useful and reliable

feedback ? I also recorded my thoughts on the effects on my classroom of specific district

choices: the presence or absence of aides; new curricular programs; and the kinds of assessments

given.

School Background

Teaching 1st grade for the last seven years and kindergarten for four years prior at the same

school, I’ve seen many changes that have impacted what and how I teach. One of 52 elementary

schools in the suburban district, our school has an enrollment on average of 700 students in

grades K-5. The biggest change in our enrollment has been the increase of second language

learners. Six years ago we had approximately 125 children who were learning English as a

second language. This year, 2001-2002, we had 321 ELL who spoke 15 languages, mostly

Spanish (256 students). Spanish speaking families have been our source of the largest growth of

ELL. The next highest percentage of ELL speaks Russian or Ukrainian (40 students). For two

years, prior to Proposition 227, our school had an articulated bilingual program where there was

a Spanish-speaking teacher at each grade level although many other classes would also have

some ELL. For the following two years because of the continuing growth of Spanish speakers,

these same classes were made up of mostly Spanish ELL where English was the required

language of instruction. Still most every other classroom had some ELL. This year all ELL

were placed evenly across the classrooms. Although 28 our of 32 teachers were CLAD or

BCLAD certified, not all of us understood how, nor had the materials, to teach ELL to ensure

26 MICHELLE PARSONS

students’ growth in English as well as in all curricular areas. During this same time frame

standards for every grade level were introduced, which provide what the outcomes should be for

every student by the end of each school year. Without materials to teach to the standards and

with a norm-referenced test to administer to every 2nd-5th grader regardless of English

proficiency, we found providing a rich curriculum toward these goals a monumental task.

Year 1: Notes on Ways to Teach Writing to ELL

My Class Background and Focus

My classroom this year consisted of eight English only, ten Spanish, one Arabic and one

Ukrainian student with levels of English proficiency from 0 (no English) to 5 (Fluent English)

amongst the ELL. Only three children (EOL) moved away and were replaced with two EOL and

one FEP Spanish learner—a very stable class. Over the year I would reflect on the strategies I

tried and how they worked, and I would observe students’ writing, both in their journals and on

district assessments, noting what they could do, what they needed to know, and what I needed to

teach next.

Strategy One: Journals

I introduced journal-writing on the very first day of school. I modeled thinking aloud about a

specific topic, then writing several short sentences, and rereading them. Next the students took a

minute or two to think and then shared with someone sitting next to them an idea they had for

writing. When they finished sharing ideas, they wrote for less than ten minutes. Then, the

children made a circle on the carpet, and those who wanted to share their writing did so. What

they wrote in this journal was their choice, and for the first trimester they could focus on drawing

a picture, using only a pencil, with whatever letters, words, sentences they wanted to add.

(Several sentences were required in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters before drawing a picture.) To

assure the students their only job during journaling was to write whatever they wished, I never

used it for any specific assessment. However, the journal provided the best information on how

much children were using the strategies that were being taught, what mechanics as well as

content students needed help with, or what they could be encouraged to try. I only wished that I

could stay with a specific time block every day for journaling, but this activity got pushed aside

for other curriculum requirements. By the last trimester, the children might write in their journals

only once a week and generally didn’t get to share it.

Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom 27

One of the earliest writings for one of my ELL, who had arrived in the United States the last

month of kindergarten, was his copying of the alphabet that was posted on a wall. He wanted to

share it but was shy. Another student who spoke English and Spanish talked to him in Spanish,

translating what he said as he said it, one word at a time. This partnership continued the first

trimester. He next drew pictures and told his story to his partner one word at a time as she

translated. Several other ELL could communicate in English but had difficulty writing, even

drawing, in their journals. Their letters weren’t formed properly, if at all, and no words were

recognizable. Other ELL had a complete sentence with a detailed drawing. In some cases,

English Only Learners (EOL) were at the same developmental stages as ELL.

Strategy Two: Integrated Writing

I often paired science activities with writing. In September we watched butterflies hatch as we

read The Hungry Caterpillar. To help build self-confidence in writing, the children copied word

for word the story as I wrote on the overhead. One sentence was required, and a second one was

offered for those who wanted. We recorded observations of the butterfly in our journal and

wrote when we let them go. In early October we walked to our neighborhood park and then,

using our senses, we wrote about our observations again in our science journal. Our next field

trip was to the Pumpkin Farm, and when we returned the children completed a writing

assignment with the use of a web (a sort of pictorial outline) on the board. Many of the students

were able to complete this work and had several sentences on their paper. I evaluated their work

with the use of our district’s writing rubric based on a rating of 1-4 in each of content and

conventions. The students’ work, including that of the ELL, ranged from 1-3 in both areas.

Strategy Three: Mini-Lessons on Mechanics

I continued to incorporate writing whenever I could. Mini-lessons on mechanics occurred daily

when we discussed our word-of-the-day. The student-of-the-day made a sentence with a word

that I wrote on chart paper the first part of the year. During the second part of the year, the

student-of-the-day did his/her own writing on the chart. The students could usually tell me when

to use a period and when to capitalize sentences during these mini-lessons, but when they went

to write, they just wanted to write! So many of the students were writing more than I was

requiring that I had difficulty in having them rewrite to correct errors. My idea of correcting pre-

made sentences into their spelling journal just didn’t transfer over into their assignments either.

Supports for Writing: Resources

During the year I was given a Hampton Brown kit of reading materials centering on themes and

including writing activities. Although designed for ELL, it seemed best suited to newcomers to

28 MICHELLE PARSONS

English. One way to use these materials would be in small groups, and I was encouraged to give

this a try since I would have a student teacher the second part of the year. Unfortunately, she had

requirements from her program, which didn’t include small groups. I did use one theme with the

whole class and found it very similar to what I had been using in the past.

For a very short time I had an aide who spoke Spanish work in my room twice a week for thirty

minutes. When she moved, she was never replaced. Therefore, the only help I had were my

students who could speak English and Spanish fluently, and I relied on them often to translate

directions and to interpret when the limited English-speaking students needed help. However, I

believed this puts a lot of pressure on the student helper, so I limited how much I asked.

Assessments: Under What Circumstances Did Students Write Best?

At the end of the trimester in November, as part of our district-wide assessment the children

were asked to write all they knew about an apple using their senses. Although we hadn’t done

this in the past, this time our grade level team of six teachers agreed to leave a web up on the

board for the children to use. We were at first excited when we were scoring the students’ work

because we could read their stories, but then we saw that most of their writings were very

similar, just a step up from copying. We decided to only use a limited word bank on the board

from then on.

At the end of the second trimester we once again had a district-wide prompt, a difficult one based

on the Itsy Bitsy Spider story—we were studying the Arctic and not spiders. The prompts that

the district devises coordinate well with the reading program that the majority of schools use, but

the timing doesn’t usually work for Success For All schools. With some connections made to

previous kinds of stories, the students were able to write another adventure for the spider. The

content score for most of my students moved up, but I can only imagine what they could have

written if it had been more connected to what they were actually learning at the time.

For the last district-wide prompt of the year, there wasn’t time for the grade level team to switch

with each other to score our students’ writing which was disappointing. However, everyone felt

their students didn’t write much. The prompt, which asked the children to choose someone who

was important to them and tell what makes them important, proved quite difficult for first

graders. Although some children wrote, others did not. This prompt seemed especially difficult

for the ELL, and their sentences were stilted. In comparison when my class wrote about each

season there was more depth. They included what the weather was like and what they liked to

do during that season. Everyone could find something that they liked to do in each season and

Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom 29

really added details. One ELL who did not write at the beginning of the year and who did not

write on the last prompt wrote five sentences about summer. The ELL who was copying the

alphabet at the beginning of the year wrote at least five sentences for each season. He also

remembered all the conventions. My most fluent ELL wrote several pages on her favorite season

and a full page for each of the other seasons.

Conclusions from Year 1 and Next Steps

First grade standards include selecting a focus for writing, using descriptive words when writing,

writing brief narratives describing an experience, writing brief expository descriptions, all to

include basic punctuation and grammar. A particular order within their writing is not required.

Thus it seems important to balance encouraging detail and focussing on mechanics. From my

observations of student writing this year, children learn the most from hands-on experiences that

involve multiple modalities. Since hands-on learning actively engages students, they are excited

to write; when they can write from these experiences, their writing has details. They also need

“free” journals to express themselves on topics of their choosing. The more they write and are

appreciated for what they write, the more they want to write. Mechanics are also important. It is

hard for students to spell at the beginning especially if they are limited in what they can read, but

they want to spell correctly. Thus, they need resources available for their use—a simple

dictionary in their desks and multiple picture dictionaries in the writing area. I encourage them

to help each other and often write words or phrases for them to copy. In first grade vocabulary is

very important not only to ELL but to EOL, and more time for language building is essential in

all content areas.

YEAR 2: FACING INCREASED CHALLENGES TO IMPROVING WRITING SKILLS

This Year’s Students

My class this year included eleven English second language learners whose primary language

was Spanish, and seven English only students. In February, five students had already left my

classroom and been replaced by new students. Four of those who left were grade-level proficient

and had provided great modeling for the other students. Two of the current students were

repeating first grade and were English only. Two other students, who speak Spanish, repeated

kindergarten. I wasn’t quite prepared for how lacking in basic skills my new students would be

and how much I would need to revise the curriculum to meet their needs. I think what amazed

me the most was the reluctance of this group of children to write. Usually their beginning-of

–the-year journal gets filled quickly with letters, words, sentences, and/or pictures, and they are

30 MICHELLE PARSONS

excited to try out what they know. This year, sharing ideas about what they wanted to write

about didn’t seem to motivate them to put anything down on paper, and even their attempts at

drawing were very limited. After several lessons I realized that it wasn’t just reluctance that was

preventing them from writing; they didn’t know how to make words and sentences—for a couple

of students even making letters was difficult. In order to meet their needs, I knew that I would

have to revise my lessons.

Revisions

At the beginning of the year I put baskets of books on each of the five tables where the students

sit. The children wrote in their journals each day. Within a few weeks some of the children

asked to copy the words from the books, and I agreed since copying from a text is a beginning.

As a result, more writing occurred on the pages. It was difficult when the children wanted to

share their writing since for the most part they couldn’t read the words. I made sure to recognize

their efforts and at the same time to encourage them to try to write the sounds they could hear in

the words they wanted. At the beginning of the second trimester they received a new journal.

This time they could not copy from the books and actually had to write first before drawing a

picture. Although they still were really struggling to find the words that they wanted, I could see

that they wanted to write. In fact, I would set the timer for ten minutes, and they would ask for

more time when the timer went off!

I wanted them to love to write and to see writing as a way to communicate to others what they

knew and what they liked, but I knew that they needed instruction on basic skills. In January, I

gave each student a primary Quick Write dictionary so when they asked how to spell a word, I

could have them find it. I also wrote words in the dictionary that they asked for. To more

explicitly teach letters and sounds, each day my Star-of-the-Day chose a high frequency word

that the class orally spelled and then was put into a sentence. I wrote the sentence as the students

watched. At the end of each week, the children were given a spelling test on those words

introduced during the week. I worried about how much to help students and how much to let

them try on their own. How often should I help them write words? When should I stop writing

the words on the paper for those who couldn’t remember what the letter was or who couldn’t get

started writing? Since there wasn’t a systematic curriculum for writing, let alone writing for

ELL, I continued to read current literature and attend workshops.

Assistance

I’ve come to realize that when students needs are so diverse, having extra help in the classroom

is invaluable. A Phase 3 student teacher began the year with us and was with us four days a

Reflections on the Teaching of Writing in a 1st Grade Title 1 Classroom 31

week. Centers have always been difficult for me for a variety of reasons, but I thought I would

try to implement them this year because of the help that I would have. We divided the students

into two groups, and beginning the end of September we met with them twice a week for thirty

minutes. Since our focus was to develop language skills, we played games: number Bingo; flash

cards with high frequency words; making a sentence with “who, what, where” cards; picture

lotto. In February I had a new student teacher. The children were then in four groups: one group

works on the computer, another works in their spelling books, and the other two groups work

with the teachers. We did more explicit writing activities that include copying sentences that

they generate, making high frequency mini-books, extension of theme-related literature, and

organizing information.

Beginning in October, I was provided a Spanish-speaking aide twice a week for thirty minutes

who worked with two students who were having the most academic difficulty. Since he came

during math, that became their focus. He not only translated the concepts that I was teaching so

the children were getting content information in their own language, but also instructed them in

the concepts that they were missing. These children’s gains in math performance I directly

attribute to his intervention. Unfortunately, he left the end of January, and his position has yet to

be filled. We do have several Spanish-speaking staff members who are willing to help translate

at conference time and who will translate phone calls. This has been invaluable for

communicating with the parents my concerns and my compliments of their children. Having

support for second language learners is still a major concern.

Concerns with the New Programs and a Call for Curricular Integration

All of our programs are time-intensive and separate from each other and from other content

areas. Right now the math program is focused on skills and some development of concepts and is

quite fast-paced. It is systematic, but there are multiple concepts to be taught. Our reading

program, Success for All, is the biggest obstacle for me. For ninety minutes a day the students

are heterogeneously grouped and receiving instruction in how to read by a variety of teachers.

Although many children do learn how to read, this program is separate from the rest of the

curriculum, and as I found in Year 1, students learn best when the curriculum is integrated.

Children remember, and use, vocabulary more when it is connected to learning. However, some

programs have proved very useful; in January I began implementing Systematic Instruction in

Phonemic Awareness, Phonics and Spelling (SIPPS) which our district adopted for children who

are struggling to learn how to read. For thirty minutes three days a week I worked with children

who didn’t seem to be making progress in our regular reading program. I started at lesson 1, and

as we progressed, I added other students who I thought would benefit from that lesson. I hoped

32 MICHELLE PARSONS

that since SIPPS was very systematic, more students would start making connections in

letter/sound/word recognition and transfer this learning into their writing.

Big Ideas, Reflections, and Next Steps

Through my two years of reflecting, I’ve noted certain district choices that can positively or

negatively impact my teaching:

• aides are truly invaluable because they allow for individualized assistance;

• programs (like Success For All) that keep teachers from being able to integrate writing into other content areas can have costs to teaching and to student involvement;

• programs (like SIPPS) that systematically break down reading tasks can be very useful for children who are struggling to learn how to read;

• assessment prompts need to be grade level appropriate and timed to coordinate with whatever programs are being used.

The experience of looking in depth at how I teach writing has assured me that many of the

activities I use are working for my students. Below are listed successful strategies:

• striking a balance between free-writing and skill acquisition;

• free-writing and sharing to allow students a non-pressured context for beginning to enjoy to write;

• focussing on mechanics in a systematic, non-threatening way (including the SIPPS Program) and using activities in other content areas to build vocabulary;

• integrating writing tasks with lessons in other curricular areas to capitalize upon the excitement generated by hands-on activities;

• using a variety of assessments to inform my teaching.

There doesn’t seem to be one specific way of teaching writing to ELL but rather a combination

of ways, always focusing on what they can do and what they need to be able to do next, and

always balancing the activities which keep kids interested with the teaching of skills they need to

acquire.

33

© 2002 CRESS Center, UC Davis

To Read or Not to Read (Silently)

by

Nancy Salm Woodland High School

Woodland Joint Unified, Woodland, California

To read or not to read (silently)—that was the question I asked myself as I looked at the reading test results for my ELD (English Language Development) students as the 1999 school year began, and that was the question that would govern my teacher research over two full years.

The School and the Students After teaching mainstream English for 7 years, in the fall of 1999, I accepted a full-time position at Woodland High School, not knowing what I was in for. The class I was hired to teach was a new offering entitled “ELD 5: Reading and Writing.” Previously, there had been only 4 levels of ELD in the district, and ELD 4 students also took an English SDAIE (Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English) class. The fifth and highest ELD level was developed to meet a perceived need in ELD students’ language development as SDAIE English classes were not considered to be enough exposure to English. I was told that the students in the new ELD 5 class had not yet passed reading and writing tests that would allow them to be re-designated from LEP (Limited English Proficient) to FEP (Fluent English Proficient) and that the course was for remedial students. The truth was far from that; the situation was new for many of the students, most found themselves suddenly placed in ELD with no input or request, and they all ‘hated’ me for it, taking their righteous anger and frustration out on me.

ELD 5 students were what is known as “Long term LEP’s,” due to circumstances beyond their control. Many of them had lived in the United States all their lives, yet didn’t speak English until going to kindergarten. Their academic skills were poor in both English and Spanish (about 98% were native Spanish speakers). However, these students had not been redesignated, and were not going to be, until they’d passed the district redesignation standards. As compared to their lower level ELD counterparts, most of my ELD 5 students’ reading and writing skills were low because they’d never received academic instruction in their primary language. Many of them still suffered from transference (using structure reflective of their first language to construct sentences in English) in their writing and were not performing up to grade level in reading, due to a severely limited English vocabulary.

All students were tested for English skill level during the fall semester of 1999 and were re- designated as soon as they became eligible. The criterion for re-designation consisted of having a grade of “C” or above in core courses and passing the IPT (Idea Proficiency Test) Reading Test, the IPT Writing Test, and an oral language test (SOLOM). Students were moving in and

34 NANCY SALM

out of my classes throughout the fall semester, as they were either re-designated or had been previously overlooked for ELD classes. Resentment ran high throughout the ELD program as students struggled to make sense out of the testing and re-designation process and were placed in a new class they’d never requested.

Toward a Question Early in the semester, I realized that many of the students had not passed the IPT Reading Test, the test used for re-designating students in reading. It was important that students pass the test before the Spring semester, as the new district criteria for re-designation in reading mandated that on the Stanford 9 Achievement Test students score at the 36th percentile or above in overall reading if they’d lived in the United States less than five years, and 26% or above if they’d lived here more than five years. In looking at my students’ previous year’s SAT 9 scores, I found that most of them had scored below 10% in total reading. For many of my students, a passing score on the IPT was a less challenging and more realistic goal. Even so, many of them failed the test in September. With assurances from the bilingual coordinator that students would be retested in reading starting in late November and continuing through mid-January when the new re- designation criteria would be implemented, I continued to ponder the best way to “jump-start” students’ reading skills.

In my early years of teaching, I’d developed a form for SSR (see Appendix I) that was based on information I’d received in two reading courses at the University of Iowa. My goal was to incorporate into the form the research on what good readers unconsciously do as they read into an easy to use format. I wanted students to make predictions about what they were reading, and left a space for them to write predictions in, along with space for an answer as to whether or not their prediction was correct. I also wanted students to practice asking questions about the plot and why characters did certain things, making comments that related the story to their own lives, and finally briefly summarizing the pages they’d read in each reading period. However, eventually, I had abandoned SSR and the reading logs, largely due to student resistance and a nagging feeling that I was not being true to all the compiled data that taught that SSR was a time for reading and reflecting—with no place for writing. So now, fired up about the new possibilities for teaching students these skills and strategies, I found the old form and made a few minor adjustments (see Appendix II). I had to do something to help the students pass the reading test required for redesignation! The stakes were higher this time, but I was a more experienced teacher. Plus, I had an advantage in that many students wanted to be re-designated and were anxious to pass the reading test as soon as possible. I vowed that this time I would not give up on SSR!

For now, my research question was limited to “Would a program of sustained silent reading (SSR) be beneficial to the students in this particular class,” and I knew I could use the district’s placement test as one source of data. I would discover over the course of my curricular

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 35

experimentation other forms of data; especially the students’ own evaluations of what they had gained from SSR.

Beginning Sustained Silent Reading I introduced the concept to students by passing out an assignment sheet that detailed all the aspects of SSR. I made an overhead of the log they’d be using and modeled the process by reading aloud, then writing my predictions, comments, questions and summary on the overhead, and discussing why I’d written each answer. I informed students that they would be reading a total of two books each semester, deliberately making the point values large to encourage student participation (150 points per book read, for a total of 300 points per semester, out of an average semester total of 1800-2200 points). I also stressed the value of choosing a book that was interesting to them and not too easy or too difficult, and I made every Monday SSR day. I assigned one reading log per week at home, to be brought to school on Monday, and checked logs periodically, giving 10 points for each one completed as a tangible reward for completing the work in class.

I managed to plead, threaten, beg and cajole enough that most students eventually brought reading books. Some students bought into the concept immediately and brought their book every week and continued reading at home. They were motivated to get out of ELD; many of them wanted to go to college, and ELD did not meet requirements for UC and CSU English credit. Other students in this group wanted to take elective classes but didn’t have room in their schedules as ELD took the place of the elective. Whatever their motivation, most of the students who made the effort and “bought in” to what I was telling them actually read and enjoyed some of their book selections. For some, it was the first time they’d taken reading seriously. However, in each class I had a hard-core group of students who refused to read or choose a book—the students who’d given up on the system ever helping them, sadly deciding it was too late. Unless they were disruptive, I gave them a magazine or a book from my collection and told them to READ, and they usually cooperated enough that they didn’t disturb the class. A few actually read a book, but most never did.

The First Test and Some Encouraging (and Unexpected!) Research Results When students were retested in late November, eight of my approximately 85 students passed the reading test, making them eligible for re-designation. For these eight students, their diligence had paid off. Thrilled, I asked Leo why he thought he had passed the reading test this time, when only three months ago he’d not passed. He paused, as if he wasn’t quite sure he wanted to respond, and then said, “That’s the first book I’ve ever finished reading in my whole life.” He paused again, then added, “And I actually understood it.”

As my heart leapt with joy, I asked, “Why do you think you were able to understand this book?” He said, “Even though I didn’t like doing them, I think it was because of the reading logs.

36 NANCY SALM

Writing about it [the book] helped me to understand.” After hearing Leo’s response, I asked each student who’d passed the reading test to write me a paragraph or two, explaining why they felt they’d passed. The responses I received were encouraging; almost all students thought the reading logs had helped them to pass the test. Leo, the student who’d finally read a book in its entirety, wrote, “SSR is cool. The first day we tried this was kind of difficult for me. But in time I got used to it and I got into the book and I thought it was interesting. Anybody can like reading if that person likes the book. The reading logs I don’t like because I have to stop and write a log. But I think it’s a good way to think about the book and see if you get the book.” Santiago told me, “I think that SSR is helping us a lot, well at least it is helping me very much. I remember when I first got in this class I wasn’t as good at reading. I’ve been doing all my SSR logs and I think it helped me pass my reading proficiency test.” Veronica wrote, “What I think that helped me the most was the sustained silent reading where we had to read and then we had to write about what we read.” Oracio agreed with her, but for a different reason, “The logs are really helpful. They tell you where you are when you stop, like a record of the story.” Martina was the only one of the eight who felt reading logs were not helpful: “I don’t like the reading logs. They are boring, and I think they don’t work. I’d rather just take notes.”

In early January, wanting to continue investigating whether to read or not to read—whether SSR was worth suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous student behavior!—I sought out the Bilingual Resources Coordinator in order to look at the changes in student’s scores from September to December. Unfortunately, in December, the scores from the September reading tests had been replaced in the computer with the new scores, making it impossible for me to see the actual growth of each of the eight students reflected numerically. However, I was able to record the eight students’ latest scores on the test:

1. Leo 45 2. Oracio 48 3. Veronica 43 4. Martina 44 5. Santiago 41 6. Nell 45 7. Ignacio 41 8. Andrew 45

The highest non-passing score is 40; therefore several students gained 5 or more points during the first semester. As evidenced by the scores, some students made large gains, especially Oracio, Leo, Andrew, and Nell.

The Undiscovered Country—Student Test Results and Thoughts Aft er r eading and r efl ect ing on the responses of the st udent s who’d passed the IPT r eading test and studying t hei r scor es, I deci ded t o pol l al l students i n m y ELD classes about t hei r feeli ngs on S ustained Si l ent Readi ng and readi ng logs. I asked t hem t o wri te about SSR i n their dail y journals,

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 37

and t hen kept copies of their r esponses. S t udent r eact i on was mi xed, though most seemed to think t hat SS R and reading l ogs wer e hel pf ul, but I di dn’ t reall y int er pr et thi s data unti l l at er . For now I wanted “cold, har d facts. ” I began to think of ways to measure students through t est ing. As the distr ict was no l onger using the I PT Reading T est as a re- designati on test or i n any ot her off ici al t esti ng capacit y, I cont act ed t he bi l ingual coor dinat or at t he hi gh school and asked her if we coul d give the I PT reading t est s to t he st udent s at the end of t he school year , and she agr eed to admi nister t he t est i n May 2000. At t hat tim e a t ot al of 43 students were r egi st er ed in m y t wo EL D cl asses. ( By t he second semester, enough st udent s in my E L D 5 cl asses and another teacher ’s E L D 5 classes had been r edesignat ed that t wo of my E LD 5 cl asses were cancel led f or the rem ai nder of t he year .)

In an effort to compare pre- and post- scores, I decided to look only at students who took the reading test in both September or November of 1999 and again in May of 2000, a total of 22 students. I looked at the two scores and noted whether or not there was a gain, loss or no movement. Then I divided students into groups based on how many of the four sets of reading logs each student turned in. It is important to note, however, that all ELD 5 students were enrolled in a SDAIE English class during the entire school year, and some students did read books but did not turn in any reading logs or turned in incomplete sets of logs.

Unfortunately, the clear and resoundingly positive results I’d hoped for did not materialize. I felt I had to interpret them all “loosely”; although the students had been encouraged to take the test seriously and most seemed to, it was the end of the year, and they were tired of taking tests (over the course of the year they’d taken three District writing assessment tests, three re-designation writing tests, a primary language writing test, the SAT 9 and the IPT Reading at least once before). However, even if the results were not as uniformly positive as I had hoped, in looking at these students overall, I found that of all students who improved three points or more, five out of eight had completed three or four logs of the four logs required. Only six out of twenty-two showed no improvement.

In an attempt to interpret the data, which I hoped would give me some direction as to what to do in the ELD 5 classes next year, I went back to student written responses when I queried them as to their thoughts and feelings on SSR and reading logs and looked at these comments in four groups. (I have not edited the comments or the syntactical errors, but I did correct student spelling.)

Students with Four Reading Logs Completed

Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Jessica 37 34 -3 2.05 Irene 41 43 +2 3.35 Cesar 37 40 +3 2.73

FIGURE 1: 4 BOOK LOGS COMPLETED

38 NANCY SALM

The three students listed in this table were all hard-working students with GPA’s of 2.3 and above. Two of the three received final semester grades of “A” in ELD 5; the third student earned a “B.” Cesar, a highly motivated student who wanted to go to college (+3 gain) said, “Reading logs in my opinion may help like when you are reading something interesting and you want to summarize the story to make it short. To make myself better in reading is to read more and more.” Jessica (-3 loss) disagreed: “I think that the reading logs are not working. The reason why I think this is because you’re really into the story and then you have to stop to write about it and it’s not helping.” Although a motivated, hard-working student, tired of being tested all the time, Jessica might not have taken the test seriously; she knew she’d already passed it.

Students with Three Reading Logs Completed

Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Oscar 31 32 +1 2.81 Paco 37 37 0 2.61 Diego 41 42 +1 1.47 Belinda 39 41 +2 2.79 Adriana 30 38 +8 2.00 Sara 35 39 +4 2.25 Rosanna 34 40 +6 1.45 Cristina 40 43 +3 2.18 Mari 38 40 +2 1.94

FIGURE 2: THREE READING LOGS COMPLETED

Students who turned in three complete sets of reading logs throughout the course of the year were also conscientious students who tried hard. The lowest GPA in this group was 1.45, which I believe was due to this student’s extended winter vacation in Mexico; he was much more capable and hard working than what his GPA reflected. Most were around 2.2. The highest GPA in the group was 2.81, shared by two students. Almost all students in this group were enthusiastic about the reading, and many were also enthusiastic about the logs. One of those students, Cristina (+3 gain), felt that, “When I read I feel that I’m learning more…the reading logs are cool because it helps you know what the story is about and lets you keep track so you won’t forget…” Paco (no change) said, “With the reading logs it helps me remember the story well so I won’t have to read it twice.” Oscar (+1) wrote, “SSR it helps me a lot because it’s good for a person that doesn’t know how to read good.” Sara, who had a +4 change in her reading score, and who worked hard all year, said, “Reading is fun. It really helps me a lot. The reading logs really don’t help me on anything. I think logs are not important to do because we still learned.” Adriana, who also worked hard this year and had the most impressive gain in her reading score (+8), didn’t comment on reading logs but said, “I like reading in this class because you give us the chance to relax and rest and experience with different stories.” I’d like to think that I was instrumental in helping Adriana develop a love for reading, but I think she already had an appreciation for a good book. She was able to score so high a gain because she read a lot in class, and probably also at home. Ultimately, she was redesignated.

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 39

Students 1-2 Reading Logs Completed

Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Lupita 37 35 -2 1.50 Jesus 44 44 0 2.39 Mario 40 42 +2 1.43 Ray 42 44 +2 2.03 Leticia 35 34 -1 2.61 Alicia 38 43 +5 2.58

FIGURE 3: 1-2 READING LOGS COMPLETED

Table 3 students, who turned in either one or two complete sets of reading logs, were generally student with higher absence rates and less dedication to school, or at least the ELD class. The high GPA in this group was 2.61; two students’ GPA’s were just above 2.0, the rest, well under 2.0. Students in this group could be good students but were generally not consistent in completing and turning in any of their work. Some, like Leticia, who lost one point on her reading score, also seemed to have lost interest in school during the second semester of the year. She wrote, ‘I think that reading is all right,” but didn’t write about logs. Jesus, (no change) a student who’s been in the United States for a little over three years, told me that, “SSR is helping me a lot because the first time I took the [reading] test I didn’t pass it. But I kept on reading and I passed the second time I took it.” Most SSR days, Mario (+2 gain) brought a book and read it, but he was sporadic at completing logs and turned one in late only when he realized he needed to do logs to pass the class. In writing about SSR and logs for me, he revealed why he rarely completed the logs, “Reading logs are very complicated to me. I would like very much if we could do a brief summary…instead.”

Students with No Reading Logs Completed

Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Franco 36 33 -3 1.33 Guillermo 28 33 +5 1.50 Fred 34 38 +4 1.81 Alejandra 29 30 +1 0.00

FIGURE 4: NO READING LOGS COMPLETED

Finally, only one student included in Table 4 wrote anything for me when I asked the class to comment on SSR. These students seem to be disenfranchised from the entire educational system. The highest GPA in the group was 1.80. Guillermo, a very capable RSP student, who gained five points on the IPT test, said, “Sometimes I feel good about reading. Reading… is helping me a little bit more than what it used to…I can read a little quicker. I understand the words better.” (This group of students was very frustrating for me, as they all had the capability to learn but chose not to. If any of them improved their reading capabilities, as their scores indicated they did, then perhaps my efforts did bear some fruit...)

40 NANCY SALM

Pondering Too Precisely on the Event: End of Year Reflections So what did I learn in completing this research? I learned that if I didn’t give up and kept pushing students I could “force” some of them to improve. I learned that most students thought the reading logs were of value, even though they didn’t particularly enjoy completing them. I learned that you can do everything and anything you can imagine in an effort to help students, but as one boy told me, “You can’t make me learn.”

Even though I was unable to get cooperation and buy-in from all students, I believe that the ones who participated in SSR and put forth effort were rewarded with success, whether that success was in their IPT reading test score, their upcoming SAT 9 scores or an ability to understand more as they read. (I later checked these SAT 9 results and found them, generally indicative of growth. To view these results, please see Appendix III). For those students who put forth effort, reading logs and SSR were helpful. Was I going to use the reading logs again? Absolutely!

To Read (Silently) or Not to Read—That is Still the Question! In 2000-01, my second year at Woodland High, still “hooked” into SSR question, I wanted to continue to explore using SSR and investigating students’ responses, partly just to see how this approach would pan out with a different set of students.

Alas, Poor Students: A Sea of Troubles With the ELD 5 students, I did not let up on SSR. We read every Friday. I decided to try a new concept: having students choose the number of pages read and then giving the grade based on the number of pages (Appendix IV). I notified parents of the plan to try to enlist their support (Appendix V). The second week of school, I took students to the library to check out a book (Appendix VI). I had them make reading logs out of binder paper and construction paper, which I collected every day and kept in a folder in the room (see Appendix VII). Despite these efforts, at the end of the 1st semester, it was clear that having SSR only once a week was not providing most students with an opportunity to read on a regular basis. Many of them would take their books home and then forget to bring them on Monday. Others would check a book out from the library and then have to return it before completing it. In reviewing student reading logs, I felt very frustrated as the logs were getting shorter and shorter, or were only being completed sporadically; most were not reflecting any growth in thinking and analyzing text, and few students seemed to be putting any effort into them.

I didn’t want reading to be a negative for the students; I wanted them to enjoy reading. Plus, the SAT 9 testing was scheduled for May, and it was already the end of January. Since I felt like the program as I’d designed it was going nowhere, I decided to make a drastic change in the format, and have the ELD students read every day during the 2nd semester. When I announced the new procedure, moans and groans filled the room and drowned out the few smiles I saw. But I pressed on. I told students that their books would now be kept in the classroom. Every day, they

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 41

were to come in, get their books, get their reading logs, sit down and read quietly for 20-25 minutes, and also to fill out one reading log. I explained that I’d be checking reading logs every 1-2 weeks and told students that they’d be graded on the number and quality of logs turned in.

Did things go perfectly? No. Did I get an idyllic setting of quietly intense students hunched over their desks, eager eyes avidly soaking up the knowledge in the books opened before them? No. What I did get was several students who became totally engrossed in their books, a few more who grudgingly admitted that they were reading interesting books, and the rest reading most of the time. In both ELD class periods, there were again a few who wouldn’t read, but those students would sit quietly and not disrupt others. Eventually, I was down to only one student in my 6th period class who refused to read, but by the middle of the year he was keeping a book in the drawer and putting it on his desk every day, along with the rest of the class. Julian was one of the many long-term disenfranchised LEP students, for whom the system had broken down long ago. A senior who could not graduate because he had only about 100 credits, he still came to school every day, perhaps for the social aspects. I’d like to think that maybe, since all the other kids were reading, he thought maybe he’d try it, but I don’t know. The book he chose looked easy, but Requiem for a Heavyweight is anything but that. Yet, I think he actually read a few pages; at least I caught him looking at the pages a few times.

Enterprises of Great Pitch and Moment: Students’ Responses to SSR By mid-March, after we’d been reading every day for about five weeks, the students seemed to be in a bit of a slump. I decided to get their written input on doing SSR every day. After all, if it wasn’t helping them, why continue? I grouped student responses according to the grade they received in the class. The first group is the “high” group, students earning an A or a B in the class. The “medium” group is those who received C and high D’s. The “low” group consists of those students who had grades of D- and F. I have included some of the responses here.

Eight students are included in the first set of responses from the “high” group. All of them said that reading every day was helping them. Only two students said it was boring to read every day, but even those two thought it was helpful. Pamela wrote, “I think that SSR is very good. It helps me develop my skills on reading and writing…I really enjoy when I read the 15 minutes at the beginning of the period.” Ricardo stated, “I think it’s a good thing that you make us read for the first 20 minutes. I think it helps me with my reading and writing skills.” Finally, in this group, I’ve included Inez, a senior, who said, “I think the reading every day is good for our English level. Is helping me in all because I can speak and write more clearly.”

Inez is special to me. English was hard for her; I’d had her last year in ELD 4. I almost kept her in ELD 4, but she was trying hard and I thought she could handle the ELD 5 curriculum. On the last day of school, she still hadn’t passed the District Reading Proficiency test, which was required to graduate. That day, she came to class looking as though she was about to cry and

42 NANCY SALM

accompanied by her counselor, who asked if she could come take the reading proficiency after her final. I agreed, and noting how distressed she was, I gave her a pep talk. I told her to take her time, use the skills I taught the class about how to figure out what words mean if you don’t understand them and to remember that she could do it! After she performed her final (a PowerPoint presentation based on a book read during SSR this semester), I sent her off with more words of encouragement and a prayer in my heart, but I couldn’t help but wonder if I’d done the right thing by advancing her to ELD 5. Happily, Inez passed the Reading Proficiency that day, and at the graduation ceremony I took her picture as she got her diploma and cheered as she walked by.

The second group, the mid-range or “medium” group, consisted of seven students who responded to my question about reading. Three were very positive: comments ranged from Elias’ practical one, “I think that reading every day is a good idea because that way is the only way anyone will read and no one will read in their homes,” to Rita’s enthusiastic response, “I think it’s a very good idea. I think it really helps me a lot and I enjoy it a lot. I think it’s nice that we do that because I think we improve in our reading and writing.” Three of the seven in the group commented that SSR every day was boring, but all three agreed it was helpful. Only Serena disagreed: “I think it will be okay reading but I don’t like it at all, I’m sorry but I hate it so bad.” Interestingly, though, she did complete about half of the reading log assignments.

In the final group, “low” achieving students, I only received three responses, but these too were very positive. Marianne wrote, “ I think we should just read three days a week because every day we get tired of it. And it does make a difference.” Rodney, a student who did little of the assigned class work, told me that, “I think it is a good idea to read because it helps me out a lot. So we should read every day OK. I like to read its OK.”

I was actually surprised by the student’s responses. I had not expected to get such positive feedback from them. Although not every student in both classes responded, those who did were overwhelmingly positive about reading every day and recognized that it was helping them. I, however, still wasn’t sure until one day the Bilingual Coordinator came to my room to schedule testing for my students, and I proudly showed her some samples of student writing I’d just received. I was excited about the content, but she noticed and pointed out that the student’s spelling was much better than last year. After she said that, I realized she was right. I had also noticed this improvement but hadn’t made the connection that it might be from SSR. It was exciting to see that SSR was having a positive impact on student learning, in more than one area of English acquisition. The final pay-off for most of the students, though, is still probably years away.

My ELD students and I have all been through a lot together, and I have enjoyed developing rapport with these students, learning about their families, hopes and dreams. Torn between two

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 43

worlds, the Mexico of their yearly holiday visits and the US, where they’ve spent most of their lives, they do not feel fully accepted in either world. SSR has been part of my way of teaching them to survive in the academic world and perhaps, through their improvement in English skills, to gain a little more acceptance.

Next year, ELD 5 will be divided by grade level. I will be teaching seniors, an opportunity I am anxiously awaiting, because I will have known most of my students for two years. They’ll be a challenging group, because they will be the ones who will not have met the criteria for re- designation. I will continue to explore new ways to increase student reading comprehension, but more importantly, to instill a love for reading in them. Whatever topic I pursue for teacher research next year, Sustained Silent Reading will continue to be near and dear to my heart and a strong force in my classroom. And finally, the answer to the question, to read or not to read (silently), is READ!

Nancy Salm is in her third year of teaching English Language Development 5 at Woodland High School in Woodland, California. Prior to WHS, she taught high school English for seven years in the Stockton Unified School District. Currently in her third year of Teacher Research, Nancy enjoys the camaraderie of her fellow researchers, especially teachers from departments she normally doesn’t spend time with, such as Art and Science. Her favorite activity is curling up in front of the fire with a good mystery novel.

44 NANCY SALM

APPENDIX I

SUSTAINED SILENT READING JOURNAL

TITLE of Book:______________________________ Author:____________________

Date:_______________ Pages Read:_____________ Your Name:____________

Prediction(s):

What happened?

Questions:

Analysis of character or event (Why someone did what they did—not directly stated):

Comments (your personal response/ something you can relate to):

Summary:

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 45

APPENDIX II

Sustained Silent Reading Journal Log #_____

TITLE of Book:______________________________ Author:____________________

Date:_______________ Pages Read:_____________ Your Name:____________

Prediction(s):

Questions and Comments:

Summary (include answers to your predictions):

46 NANCY SALM

APPENDIX III

NAME GPA 1999 SAT 9 2000 SAT 9 2001 SAT 9 Change(s)

1. Jessica. 2.21 37 34 Senior -3

2. Irene 3.45 21 24 30 +3, +6

3. Cesar 2.65 7 11 Senior +4

4. Oscar 2.29 8 5 Senior -3

5. Paco 1.78 7 6 18 -1, +12

6. Diego 2.03 16 17 26 +1, +9

7. Belinda 2.6 2 No score Senior

8. Adriana 2.0 15 55 +40,

9. Sara 2.31 7 1 1 -6, 0

10. Rosanna 1.5 5 10 Senior +5

11. Cristina 2.19 19 29 +10,

12. Mari 1.94 5 Senior N/A

13. Lupita 1.69 6 6 10 0, +4

14. Jesus 2.28 3 7 14 +4, +7

15. Mario 2.03 4 Senior N/A

16. Ray 1.42 6 11 Senior +5

17. Leticia 2.00 8 8 14 0, +6

18. Alicia 2.06 23 7 14 -16, +7

19. Franco 1.30 4 5 4 +1, -1

20. Guillermo 1.24 6 7 1 +1, -6

21. Fred 1.62 11 4 Senior -7

22. Alejandra 0.00 No score No score No score

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 47

APPENDIX IV

PROCEDURES FOR SUSTAINED SILENT READING Sustained Silent Reading is an opportunity for you to improve your reading skills by reading a book of your choice. I cannot stress enough that you need to find a book that is of interest to you. If you need help, the clerks at bookstores and the librarian at the public or school library will be able to assist you. You need to ask for help, and tell them what you’re interested in. If you do both of these, you should be able to find a book that appeals to you.

SO…What exactly am I supposed to do? 1) CHOOSE a fiction book (no magazines, short stories, assigned novels or texts) 2) WANT desperately to read the book! 3) BRING the book to class every Monday. 4) READ and ENJOY the book. 5) Write about he book following the format in the SSR journal log. 6) DO the above five steps at least once a week at home.

GRADING: YOU will choose the grade you receive for SSR. Using the following chart. You must complete 90% of the in- class “reading buddy” letters and any other assignments related to SSR. PowerPoint presentations are graded separately. You must, however, turn in reading logs to be able to create a PowerPoint presentation.

Grade of A+ Read over 550 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 30 pages (20 logs)

Grade of A Read at least 500 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 25 pages read (20 logs)

Grade of A- Read at least 450 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 25 pages read (18 logs)

Grade of B+ Read over 400 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 20 pages (20 logs)

Grade of B Read at least 350 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 20 pages read (18 logs)

Grade of B- Read at least 300 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 25 pages read (20 logs)

Grade of C+ Read over 250 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 12 pages (20 logs)

Grade of C Read at least 225 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 12 pages read (19 logs)

Grade of C- Read at least 200 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 10 pages read (20 logs)

Grade of D+ Read over 175 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 10 pages (18 logs)

Grade of D Read at least 150 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 10 pages read (15 logs)

Grade of D- Read at least 125 pages during the semester Turn in a reading log for every 10 pages read (13 logs)

NOTE: The teacher has the right to examine any book for print size and readability and to judge final grading accordingly.

F in ally , I LOV E to r ead and can’ t w ait to get s tarted. Ho w ev er , I w ill o ccasion ally tear my ey es f r om m y b oo k and check to b e s ur e yo u ’r e r eading . An d r em em b er , I can w alk an d read at th e same time (jus t ask m y m om ). Y ou r eff or ts in clas s , as ob serv ed by me, will be co un ted tow ard y ou r f in al participatio n gr ade.

48 NANCY SALM

APPENDIX V

September 5, 2000

Dear Parents and Students, Please take a few minutes to read the following letter and to discuss the policies and

procedures I have instituted for Sustained Silent Reading (SSR). A student who does not participate in SSR cannot pass English 10. SSR is a vital part of English development. To develop the skills necessary to function in an English-speaking school and work environment, students must be consistently exposed to the English language. Reading every day is the best way to accomplish the level of exposure needed to develop fluency in English. (The term “fluent” refers to writing and reading comprehension abilities, not just speaking.)

I cannot emphasize enough the importance of student participation in SSR. Please know that students will be required to read 30 minutes and complete a reading log once a week at home, and once a week in class. This would be the minimum time commitment for a grade of “C” for the SSR grade. Students who wish a higher grade on SSR (approximately 30% of the class grade) must read more often during the week and turn in more reading logs. Please se the chart below for the breakdown of requirements for grades.

I thank you in advance for your commitment and dedication to your child’s education. Please note that every student must have a book with them on Friday, September 8th. We will be going to the school library before that date to choose a book. A student may also purchase a book, borrow on e from the public library or bring one from home. Yard sales and used bookstores many times have interesting titles to choose from at inexpensive prices.

If your child does not bring a book to class on Friday the 8th, I will be contacting you by telephone. Again without participating in the Sustained Silent Reading program, your child cannot pass the ELD 5 class. Thank you.

Sincerely, Mrs. Nancy Salm ELD 5 teacher

---------------------Students: Detach here and return bottom portion to me--------------

I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE SSR POLICIES FOR ELD 5

Parent signature: ______________________________________

Student signature: _____________________________________

***This assignment=10 points if returned the following day.

To Read or Not to Read (Silently) 49

APPENDIX VI

SSR LIBRARY PROJECT

The purpose of this assignment is for you to find a book that you’ll enjoy reading during SSR on Mondays. (No SSR is not going away.) Everyone must complete and hand in an assignment sheet. The assignment is worth 30 points.

Note: The first time you show up on Monday without your SSR book, you’ll get a verbal warning. You will read something I’ve chosen and instead of writing a reading log you will write a one page essay about how important reading is. The second time you show up without a book, you will be assigned detention, and I’ll call home and ask your parent to assist you in choosing a book. Thank you and good luck on your quest for the perfect book!

1. What interests you? List hobbies, sports, movies, books, music, school subjects, etc.

2. QUIETLY brainstorm with others at your table ways to locate books you might like to read. Write your ideas in the space below.

3. You must browse through 3 different books by three different authors. You must note the following:

TITLE: AUTHOR: Number of Pages: SUBJECT: (Read the back cover and inside front cover to determine the book’s subject)

Open the book to any page and read the entire page. Write a brief summary of what the book seems to be about. Include a statement about whether or not you think you’d enjoy reading this book. Explain why.

50 NANCY SALM

APPENDIX VII

Library Book Review

YOUR NAME: Class period:

Title: Title: Title:

Author: Author: Author:

Pages: Pages: Pages:

Summary of what book is about:

Summary: Summary:

Evaluation: Evaluation: Evaluation:

Evaluation: Tell whether or not you think you would like this book and tell WHY. Assignment=30 points DUE AT THE END OF THE PERIOD

51

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class

by

FaraLee S. Wright

What a year! Normally I really like the ELD math classes and make sure I get one because the

students are great. They work hard. There is mutual respect and a warm feeling of safety in the

class. They are willing to accept instruction and to do the hands on as well as the book activities.

Having worked with English learners for 8 years, I know what Pre-Algebra students need in

order to be successful in Algebra I and what Algebra I students need in order to be successful in

Algebra II and in Geometry. Our program has always had an excellent level of success—but it

didn’t feel that way this year. This year's students were simply placed into the 10th grade Pre-

Geometry (SDAIE) class for the convenience of scheduling rather than for the student's level of

competence.

Two other high schools in my city are having difficulty with their programs. One, a new high

school without all four years up and running yet, did not have enough EL students to

accommodate a full-range schedule for them. They do have block scheduling that may help

them, but they must also be diligent in assigning students to the appropriate classes. The other

high school’s program is in flux, but they are trying to maintain a consistent set of teachers and a

coordinator so that a successful program can be achieved. Perhaps my investigation could

inform the scheduling departments at all three high schools about the effects on learning of

improper placement of EL students.

MY PAST EXPERIENCE

Every year prior to the last two, students with really low skills could be placed in the low skills

class without destroying their schedules because the math classes were all scheduled at the same

time so that students could be moved as needed. Within my classroom, there were still two to

three different levels of instruction, but the levels were related. Although not as successful for

the students as it could have been had there been only one level, it was possible to split the class

into groups for appropriate instruction. In these years I could always count on several students in

my Pre-Algebra class being ready and able to handle the Algebra I curriculum. Both courses

were accomplished together by my splitting the class into two groups and doing two different

lectures each day. Two different texts by the same author were used—excellent texts for my

52 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

English learners because skills were reinforced throughout. Students in my Pre-Algebra class

received the skills necessary for them to succeed in Algebra I and in higher levels.

Ben, an ELL student I'd had three years ago in Pre-Algebra, typified how this old system of

placement worked. Ben moved over to the Algebra I side of the class early in the year because it

was clear to me that he'd been misplaced in the Pre-Algebra class. He was not scheduled to take

Algebra I because no records came with him that specified what previous math experience he’d

had. In my class he improved his English and his Algebra skills. Ben went on to do well in both

Algebra II and Geometry as a sophomore. He came to my Statistics class last year as a junior

and made an “A” while at the same time taking Trigonometry and Pre-Calculus at the

community college. He is currently a senior taking Calculus and Chemistry at the community

college. He would not have gotten this far had he not been able to take Algebra I when he was

ready for it.

In these years, we did many activities, all of which worked well. One year in Math B-SDAIE we

learned constructions with the compass on paper and then with string and sidewalk chalk. It was

fun, and everyone was successful. The following year some of these same students were in my

Algebra Ready-SDAIE class. They worked with students in their own class and relearned how

to do the constructions. The whole class reached out with their skills and taught one of the

resource math classes how to do the constructions outside on an asphalt area with string and

sidewalk chalk. It was great. Students were teaching each other and becoming more competent

with the concepts themselves and with their English. Students who never had reason to interact

with each other developed respect for each other. Students in both classes felt successful and

were successful. As an added benefit, the mathematics in chalk stayed on the asphalt for several

weeks, and the students from both classes were seen showing them to their friends until they

were washed away by the rain. All of us felt that the activity was useful and that we had learned

from the experience. Students from prior years made comments in later years like "Remember

when we used the compass in class and then went outside and used the chalk? That was fun," or

"Remember when we used those little green and yellow squares and then we could do the

positive and negative numbers? I still write the positives and negatives that way when I forget

the rule." Because students were appropriately placed in the math class that matched their skill

level, we were successful together.

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 53

SET UP FOR FAILURE: WRONG PLACEMENT, WRONG TEXTBOOKS

During the last year these kinds of interactive activities have proved impossible because the skill

levels have been so wide apart and the text we were given was so inappropriate for ELL students.

Scheduling:

Because math classes were not aligned for the same class period, this year students were put into

my SDAIE class—Pre-Geometry, which purported to be the class for the 10th graders after Pre-

Algebra—because it was the only math class available in their particular time slot. Other

students who should have had a sheltered math class were put into a regular class because there

was no appropriate class for the time slot they had in their schedules.

In prior years the site ELD Coordinator was more autonomous and could assign all ELL students

to their English level class and coordinate that with the appropriate math level. When students

arrive from their native country, they seldom come with transcripts. If and when the transcripts

arrive, they simply say “Maths” or “Mathematics,” and the coordinator is left to wonder just

what was included in the course. After being interviewed, students were assigned to a math class

that appeared to be appropriate and could be changed if necessary. Success was the result. In

the last two years, the counseling office has been given the task of assigning students who are

already in the public school system to their classes by the recommendation of their eighth grade

teacher. The course descriptions’ lack of clarity about what prior knowledge is needed for the

student to be successful in the class has made it difficult to be sure the student is correctly

placed.

When the ninth grade Math A and tenth grade Math B classes were changed to Pre-Algebra and

Pre-Geometry, the names were changed, the texts were changed, but little thought was given to

what skills were really needed for the Pre-Geometry class. Because the class was set up to be

Pre-Geometry, I could not teach material below that level. Several of the students had already

taken Pre-Algebra and could not get credit again for taking it a second time. The logical

progression should have been Pre-Algebra then Algebra I, and then Pre-Geometry, Business

Math, or Technical Math depending on what the student’s interests were. If the students did very

well in Algebra I they could take Geometry for the college prep track and go on from there to

Algebra II as only one student was prepared to do.

Because our school district administration has changed the concept of pre-requisite to “suggested

prior courses,” students can sign up for some classes with just a parent’s signature. This can be

54 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

just the ticket to failure. Prerequisites are necessary if students are to succeed. If the

administration’s focus is on high stakes testing scores, then students need to be where they are

prepared to learn if they are to perform better on these tests.

Textbooks:

Because there was no other alternative, I used the mainstream text, Informal Geometry (Smith,

1992) –– a most peculiar text designed for students who had already taken algebra and chosen by

the local community college for a geometry class they offered. Because the other high school

had liked the text, our school agreed to use it as well. Perhaps with English speakers it was fair,

but it was a very poor selection for English learners.

There were several pages of algebra skills review throughout the text that would have been easy

for any student who had taken Algebra I, but because only two of the 15 students had ever taken

algebra and another three had ever taken Pre-Algebra, these pages took three to four days each to

get through. Several students had never before seen positive and negative numbers; four did not

have the concept of fractions; most could not measure or work with inches and feet, but could

handle metric because decimals go easily into the calculator, whereas fractions do not. As a rule

the topics had only a few problems to work because they were designed as a review. The topics

advanced quickly through positive and negative numbers skills into equation solving, inequality

equation solving, and solving proportional equations with square roots. When it came to

integers, I tried the method that was so successful when I had taught other pre-algebra classes

both in high school and in middle school, but it takes nearly three weeks to use the manipulatives

to teach for understanding how integers work. Because this was a geometry class, I could not

justify spending three weeks on a “review” lesson from another course. The same thing was true

for the review pages of equation manipulation. This is where I discovered that so very many of

the students had no concept of fractions, both what they really were and how they were to be

manipulated as in this problem, “ _ x – 2 = _ x – 1” (Smith et al., p. 121). Since Geometry

requires equation and formula manipulation, the equation work was essential. Fortunately we

didn’t need this type of equation very often. Sometimes they could work the formulas and

sometimes they could not. Overall, the concepts had to be taught from scratch and very quickly,

and students’ understanding was superficial at best.

Some of the wording of the explanations and the problems were nearly impossible for the

English learner. For example, this text used proofs and required the manipulation of “if-then

statements.” This paragraph in lesson 2-5 was meant to enlighten the student: “In mathematics,

many postulates and theorems are stated as conditional sentences. We say they are in if-then

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 55

form. Look for examples of if-then sentences in the postulates and theorems of Lessons 2-3 and

2-4.” (Smith et al, p. 54). It then gives an example of such a sentence. This explanation was

difficult at best and almost useless as a review paragraph later.

Indeed, following the text was impossible because it was so language intensive. I could assign

only the numerical problems, which worked fine for a while, but eventually that was too much

for some students because there was little that they could refer back to in the text that made

sense. For example, lesson 10 dealt with the special 30-60-90 triangle. These problems

extensively use the square root of three, which is a confusing idea in the first place to a student

who is ready for geometry. These students had not had the luxury of working with the concept

of square roots in an algebraic context let alone applying it and realizing that its value was really

only approximation of 1.7. There were seventeen problems in which the students merely

crunched the values for the lengths of the sides of a triangle with a calculator. Then to bring

application to this type of triangle problem nineteen says, “An extension ladder forming a 600

angle with the ground is placed against an outside wall. The top of the ladder touches a

windowsill that is 12 feet high. To what length is the ladder extended? How far from the wall is

the bottom of the ladder?” (Smith et al., p. 363). This is stilted prose for even an English

speaking student. For an English learner it is a big puzzle.

Here is another example: for a student who has grown up in the United States, the game of

baseball and its vocabulary are not a problem, but for students from another country a problem

involving baseball involves more than just arithmetic and vocabulary. For example, this

problem, “The distance between bases on a major league baseball diamond is 90 feet. About

how far is it from home plate to second base?” Smith et al., p.349). Before the students can do

the problem, they need to have the basic idea of the game of baseball explained to them. They

need to know that the bases are the vertices of a square. Without this vital piece of information,

the problem cannot be solved. Comments like these show that understanding the game a little bit

helps in being able to do the problem: “We eat off plates,” “What are bases,” “Why are they

numbered,” “What is home plate?” A quick and easy problem becomes a serious topic for

discussion with the numbers as a side consideration.

COULD HANDS-ON ACTIVITIES BE THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING?

Geometry vocabulary is very specific and one word—like “bisector” or “perpendicular” – can

evoke both what the concept is and how it is created. To really get the feel for these, students

must develop the concept with their hands as well as with their heads. Both of these concepts

56 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

involve using the compass. The text referred to perpendicular lines and angle bisectors but these

were hollow words, so I taught some of the concepts in the Pre-Geometry class in the same way

that I taught them in the mainstream geometry class. They worked alone and in pairs with

compasses and rulers to construct perpendicular lines, perpendicular bisectors, and angle

bisectors. Students translated for each other when necessary during the construction lessons and

used English extensively as well. This was a successful hands-on lesson, and the students had

fun. Two of the boys were very excited and did some very nice work. They were willing to try

these constructions on the board with 'teacher tools' to show they knew how to do what we were

learning. These were new concepts, and they simply considered them fun. Even though their

paper and pencil work was better than the boys' work, the girls in the class were not able to put

aside their shyness and try them on the board. Everyone enjoyed the construction activities and

learned new skills.

I found out that multiplying without a calculator was nearly a non-existent skill for several of

them. And don't even consider long division; about half of them could do that. We followed the

text problems for perimeter with decimals. That lesson was somewhat successful in terms of an

answer, but it was clear they did not understand what they had when they were finished because

linear and squared units were used haphazardly.

It was time for some hands on measuring of objects to really see what perimeter really was.

They measured their textbook and desk top in both inches and in centimeters. Thus I found out

they did not know how to read a ruler in either measurement dimension so we reviewed how to

do that in centimeters and in inches. Standard measurements in feet and inches are not used in

other countries, and this was another foreign language for them. Only three students improved

their measuring skills in standard measure. All students measured the dimensions of the

classroom, the windows, and the doors in both dimensions. They marked the information on

diagrams and determined perimeters. This two-day lesson took a week, but at least it was

geometry.

Knowing that area of a plane figure was next, I had the students do some problems in the text to

connect with the skill. To apply these skills, students were to measure the hallway in front of the

classroom and the main hallway in our building for both perimeter and area. The students

worked in groups of two to four students, measuring, reading, and recording the measurements.

Another lesson that should have taken no more than two days took four days instead. There were

four groups of students, and it was more than difficult to keep the students on task to complete

the measuring and put the measurements in the correct places on the hallway map. This hands-

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 57

on activity in the hallway was like herding cats. They were everywhere. One of the girls was a

natural leader, and many of the other students both boys and girls deferred to her. Whatever she

did, they echoed on their papers – including errors. The perimeters and areas, if they were done

at all, were haphazardly thrown together by most of the students. Diagrams were hard to read.

Perimeter and area were just numbers on the paper without their support calculations because

they were either copied or taken from the calculator. Neither the textbook work nor the

measuring activities were as successful as they should have been. The only skill that showed

improvement was knowing how to read a ruler in both dimensions.

As I look back now, the hallway measuring activity was probably too complicated to do in both

metric and standard measurements with their skill level. Perhaps staying with only the metric

would have been more successful. If I were doing perimeter and area again with English

learners, I would have the students find the perimeter and area for only the classroom floor, the

windows and the doors. In order to get a real “feel” for the concepts of perimeter and area with

the standard measure system, the students could determine the perimeter and area of the

classroom floor by calculation and then verify by counting the number of 1-foot tiles. After

measuring and counting the tiles, I doubt they would confuse perimeter and area again.

COULD NOTE-TAKING HELP STUDENTS TO HELP THEMSELVES?

When the material is new or different, students need to take notes. Since I do not have to read

their notes, it is not important that all their work is done in English although English must be

there so new vocabulary and concepts can be learned in the new language. I talked to the ELD

coordinator at school about how to help students build their vocabulary, and she helped me plan

how to have the students set up their papers. The left three-fourths of the page was for notes.

Unfamiliar words were to be underlined and then translated into the student's native language on

the right hand side. This note taking strategy was useful for a time but lasted only a couple

months when students said they knew all the vocabulary. Because there was little prior

knowledge about what we were trying to do in class, the new terminology seldom had a

comparable word they already knew; therefore, there was really no need to translate. As a result,

we abandoned the native language supported note taking system with no desire to resurrect it

later.

58 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

STUDENT VIGNETTES

Four of the EL students from this class stand out from the others: Bernice and Steven because

they were appropriately placed for their needs; Mark and Kathy because they represented three-

fourths of the class who had little or no English and inadequate math skills for the level in which

they were placed. They were held as culprits for their incomplete understanding of the pre-

geometry concepts.

Bernice:

At the beginning of the year Bernice was actually the only student in the class who was

mathematically prepared for the Pre-Geometry class. She’d had algebra and some geometry in

her native country the year before, but was willing to do whatever the lesson was and do it both

neatly and accurately. Her algebra skills were very good. The organization of her work on the

paper was excellent—clear, methodical, and easy to read. Because she'd had some geometry in

her native country, she was able to connect the current work with what she already knew and

with the English she was learning. She used her algebra skills as a tool and did not have to learn

how to solve algebraically. She went half of the year without speaking very much English. She

understood what was said, but she was in the pre-production stage and would say little. During

the last four months of school Bernice began volunteering answers and asking questions in class.

It was a wonderful breakthrough for her!

This year when she had to do the constructions in the regular Geometry class, Bernice did very

well. Although she was not in my Geometry class this year, she occasionally dropped by to ask

questions. When she had difficulty, she brought her tools and asked for help in figuring out how

to do the constructions. Her questions were clear and well stated, always "how" to do a problem,

never "what" was the answer, a decided improvement over the hesitant, halting questions of last

year. When I asked Bernice if there were things we had done last year that helped her this year,

she named the review algebra work and learning how to use the compass for the constructions.

She had liked the measuring activities and learning how to use inches. Had Bernice not been

adequately prepared by her previous math experience, she would not have done as well as she

did last year or nearly as well as she is doing this year. Her current geometry teacher

wholeheartedly agrees that Bernice is a very confident, competent student and an absolute joy to

have in class.

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 59

Steven:

Steven came into the Pre-Geometry class for scheduling reasons, but his skills were beyond what

we were doing. This was evident when he organized the measuring the room and hall activities

and was done in short order. His text work was orderly and perfect. He was tutoring another

student who was beginning to be able to pull the concept together. It was clear to me in a short

time that Steven was misplaced. I asked him to look through the text and to show me the

concepts that he had not had in another math class in his native country. Perhaps 1% of the Pre-

Geometry book was unfamiliar to him. I gave him the text for the Geometry CP course and

asked him to do the same. "Start at the beginning and go through the book and show me where

the material is unfamiliar." He did exactly that, and we set up an assignment schedule so that he

could finish the second semester of work in about half a semester. Because I had made similar

arrangements with students in prior years, I knew we could make this adjustment in the class title

associated with his course time slot. Had he been in another class he would have wasted his year

in the wrong class. To show he was ready for second semester Steven took the first semester

final exam which he passed with great success. He did every lesson assignment, checked his

answers with the key, asked questions when he needed instruction, took the second semester

final exam, and passed beautifully with another “A”. This year he is doing independent study

with an agreeable Algebra II teacher so he can keep taking math and graduate in June 2003. His

class schedule did not leave room for the math class because he had to have certain other classes

in order to graduate. By offering individualized instruction, I was able to ascertain Steven’s

competence level, and through independent study he was given appropriate instruction for his

needs.

Mark:

Mark is a happy, friendly student whose spoken and listening English skills are fair. For him,

reading English, however, was not an easy task, and academic language did not seem to connect

very well with what he already understood. His previously learned organizational skills in

assembling the algebra work on his paper were better than I'd expected based on his lack of

focused on-task behavior in class.

In my class he wrote the problem, the subsequent steps, and then the clearly defined the answer,

often times in a hand-written box. Now that he is in algebra I he has improved these

organizational skills, and his work is tidier and more methodical than last year's. His algebra

skills were right on the edge of getting better and would have if he had taken Algebra I before

Pre-Geometry rather than after it. His equation work would have been stronger and his grasp of

60 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

the concepts would have been better because algebra would have been a tool rather than a skill

he had to work so hard at remembering.

His progression through the development of mathematics was needlessly interrupted by being

inappropriately scheduled for Pre-Geometry after Pre-Algebra. We worked with some basic

equations, and he was able to handle the algebraic steps for them. He was the "tutor" for two

other students for some of the algorithms. Because he missed a lot of school for various reasons,

he became frustrated when what we were doing didn’t connect well with prior knowledge, and

his behavior got in the way of his learning. When asked this year about his grade, he said "not

so good. I miss a lot of school." Sometimes he is ill, sometimes he just doesn't make it to

school, and sometimes he's suspended for various reasons. This pattern has been part of his

school history.

Kathy:

Kathy was a delightful girl who had no English at all when she came into my class. She really

tried her very best all the time. She often enlisted the aid of another student to help translate

what she didn't understand. Although she could add and subtract easily, multiplying and

dividing were calculator activities. She copied example problems and tried very hard to use

them as a model for the lesson. Sometimes she was successful and sometimes not. She used

English as much as possible both last year and in Pre-Algebra this year. At the end of the year

when asked about how much she thought she had learned, she answered, "I learn [things] with

you because I not can multiply nothing. I like the class because no is boring." This was

wonderful to hear after such a year, but her skills were still limited. Kathy's work was

methodical and clear with minute changes for each step. It was clear she’d had very good

instruction in unfolding numerical problems in her native country. The most obvious class for

her to take would have been Pre-Algebra where she could have built on what she already knew,

then Algebra I, then the appropriate level of geometry. By being put into the inappropriate class,

she lost a valuable year of appropriate instruction, because what we did could not connect very

well to what she already knew.

Even though data analysis was not part of the geometry curriculum last year, we learned about

mean, median, mode, and stem and leaf plots because I knew they needed to be exposed to it and

I was looking for some activities that could end our year on a positive note. We did many stem

and leaf plots with ordering numbers and finding the median and mode of the list. Kathy tried

very hard to get it right, but it was clear that what we were doing was not connecting to what she

already knew. Integers and the geometric concepts met similar fates. It was clear she was in the

The Nightmare of Mischeduling English Learners in a High School Math Class 61

wrong course, but there was no other class available for her because she was locked in with

English and science courses that are offered only in one class period each day for English

learners.

This year beginning data analysis was a series of lessons in Pre-Algebra so she was able to

connect an important concept from last year in my class to her class this year. Kathy’s work this

year includes more English that she understands and the concepts are making sense. Her work is

methodical and shows a clear understanding in her own words. Her integer work now has the

positives and negatives in the right places this year, and it is clear that she is in the appropriate

class because she is making excellent strides. Her teacher is very pleased with the quality of her

work and with her progress.

What a difference in preparedness levels! Bernice’s experience showed how instruction should

work if students’ preparedness matches the level of the class. Steven’s experience showed how

it could work if individually tailored options were available. Mark’s and Kathy’s experiences

typified the failure from last year.

CONCLUSIONS

First, it is clear to me that the appropriate sequencing of courses for English learners should have

been different. The sequence should be Pre-Algebra SDAIE, Algebra Ready SDAIE (if the

student needs the extra time to develop enough skills so that the student can have a positive

algebra experience), Algebra I SDAIE, Pre-Geometry SDAIE, and then into mainstream

Geometry with a SDAIE-trained teacher.

Second, too much with regard to placement of students is “figured out on paper.” If their

transcript says Algebra, that doesn’t necessarily mean they have acquired the necessary skills to

go to the next level in the United States. A placement test seems like the best answer, if one

could be found. Steven’s “Maths” that made him ready for Algebra II and Kathy’s

“Mathematicas” that did not include fractions were obviously vastly different. When sites in our

district had more autonomy, students were appropriately served. As it stands now the person

making the decisions is not the person working with the students.

Third, many people who make the master schedule and even teach EL students have no idea

what language is required at each math level. Also, there is a myth that math is ‘universal.’

There is little regard for students who have no experience with math concepts. The biggest

62 FARALEE S. WRIGHT

barrier is when the appropriate math and English classes are scheduled at the same time, pitting

their language needs against their academic needs. Several times in prior years I had formally

suggested that administrators schedule math classes for English learners in the same period so

students could be moved into the appropriate math class if it were necessary without creating

conflicts with the rest of their schedule. My suggestions went unheeded every year. Just as

taking a mainstream class is inappropriate, a math class with no comprehensible input is a waste

of precious time.

Fourth, EL students placed in a math class solely because that math class is the only one that fits

their schedule encounter many difficulties. They can be ill-prepared for the course because they

do not have the skills and prior knowledge in order to make the necessary connections for the

concepts. They can make superficial connections that leave serious, gaping holes in their

knowledge of important mathematical concepts. They can also become so frustrated about their

not being able to do math that their “math self-confidence” is damaged and what used to be a

positive class for them, instead becomes a source of failure. However, it is clear that when

students are appropriately placed in a math class for which they are prepared, they can do well

and they can feel confident about their abilities to handle the material. They can then learn the

skills they will need for the next level of mathematics. The focus should be on student

placement based on preparedness for the course, rather than on where the available seats are.

TEXT: Smith, Stanley A., Charles W. Nelson, Roberta K. Koss, Mervin L. Keedy, Marvin. L.

Bittinger. Informal Geometry. Addison-Wesley Co., Inc. 1992.

63

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning?

by

Oneta Edmonds

THE FIRST YEAR

The Question

The students were very rowdy today. It took me several minutes just to settle them down. I had them work on a project. I went over the instructions on the overhead. Then I gave them the worksheet (the exact same worksheet as the one I went over). When I asked if anyone had any questions, not one raised their hands. I handed out the assignment secure in the knowledge that they understood the assignment, until I told them to do it on their own. I then proceeded to spend the better part of the class going over the exact same instructions, individually, with about seven students. That is seven times too many on the frustration meter. I felt that I had given clear explicit instructions but discovered that it was possible that the instructions were clear as mud. I felt exhausted by the end of the class period. (Journal Entry, 11/7/01)

A high school Social Science teacher, I teach a SDAIE class of 36 students (13 female and 23 male)

fourth period right after lunch. As I looked over my teacher research journal entries, I realized

many of them dealt with my frustration with my SDAIE class. I started off the school year with 40

students, and things were pretty chaotic until the classes were leveled to 36. Even then, I struggled

with the large class size, lessons, and classroom management, spending most of the class time

trying to the keep the students focused on the lesson at hand. I made a list of student behaviors that

were indicative of this situation:

It took students longer to get started when the bell rang. They had to get a pencil, get paper, a drink of water, sharpen their pencil, throw a piece of paper away, go to the bathroom, office, locker, or another class because they left their folder there, etc.

Students were easily off task and easily distracted by classroom interruptions from T.A.s bringing in notes, picking up scantrons, and hall monitors looking for students.

I had a difficult time getting all students to focus on any one topic.

At the end of each class period, I was exhausted. My question for my first year of research was

obvious after I read my journal entries: “How can I keep the students on task without burning

out?” Over the course of this year and into the next, I would discover strategies that worked and

would spend my second year researching one of those in particular.

64 ONETA EDMONDS

Comparing Classes

I also found myself continually comparing my college prep classes with my SDAIE class, as shown

in the following chart:

Class Activity College Prep. Class SDAIE class

Class Notes, Lecture & Discussion 10 to 15 minutes 15-20 minutes

Worksheet & Correction 20 minutes 30-40 minutes

Tests 30 minutes 50 minutes

Projects: Time Taken 1-3 days 3-4 days

% Students Presenting 95% 50%

Taking roll Beginning of class Middle to end of class

In my SDAIE class, the distractions seemed endless. I was unable to take roll at the beginning of

class or even at the middle because I had to keep a close eye on the students; sometimes I would

have to wait until the end or after class because it was just too busy. The students took a long time

to write down the notes on the overhead. It was nearly impossible to have class discussions

because several students wanted to blurt out their thoughts. When a student would offer an answer

to a question, other students would start conversing with their friends. Still others wanted to get up

and get water or sharpen their pencils. Since students had a hard time doing the worksheet

assignments individually, I had to go around and help them, and when my attention was diverted,

several other students started talking to one another or getting up and wandering around. Before I

could blink, half the class was off task, and the assignment was not completed, making correcting

each other’s papers difficult. If I told them to take the worksheet home, there was no guarantee that

they would return it. When I gave the students a project, it took three to four days, and much time

was spent explaining the assignment, as well as getting them to focus on working on the project

during class time. On presentation day, only about 50% of students were prepared. Students

would take the entire class period to complete a chapter test. Students asked questions about the

test and how to take it. I would spend a great deal of time wandering around answering their

inquires, but then I would run out of time to collect the tests and essays. Several students would

have to stay after class to finish the test. I felt as if nothing I did was working!

The Strategies I finally had an “ah ha” moment when I was at the December LMRI meeting. As Pam Castori was listening to me lament my burnout, she suggested how to focus in on what was working and not on

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 65

what was not working. By using classroom observations and journal entries, I began to look at

what was working and what strategies might meet the needs of the SDAIE students:

Strategy #1: Test materials on desk before students enter class I decided to hand out the test forms and work on their desks before they came into class. All they had to do was get a pencil ready. It went smoothly although I still had students asking me questions about various things. They finally started to take the test and the room was silent for about 40 minutes. Only several students called me over to ask a question. I noticed that I did not disrupt the other students. I then waited until the last 2 minutes and told students to leave their test forms on the desk and I collected them after they left. This also solved another problem about trying to get students to turn in papers at the end of the period on test day. (11/28/01)

Strategy #2: Students raising hands before getting out of seats I told them they had to have permission to get up out of their seats. I then assigned a book assignment. They were quiet and well behaved and with one exception they were doing their work quietly without talking out to one another. It was a good day. (1/16/02)

Strategy #3: Reading together We are working on the review sheet together. We are reading for the answer together in the textbook and then discussing the answer aloud, and then writing down the answer. It went smoothly, students were focused and not easily distracted. (12/6/01)

Strategy #4: Vocabulary lists The real reason I’m writing now is because I instituted a vocabulary assignment every day. I gave students an overhead list of 5-10 words at the beginning of class. They write down the words and then look up the definitions in their textbooks. They are given 10 minutes to do this assignment. They are to keep the words in their notebooks. They are then required to turn in the vocabulary words for points. And boy has it worked to calm them and focus them for the next class assignment. This vocabulary thing definitely works like nothing else I have tried this year. I do it at the beginning of class each day except for review day and test day. It has worked to calm them and focus them for the next class assignment. This strategy definitely works like nothing else I have tried this year. (2/15/02)

66 ONETA EDMONDS

Of these strategies the vocabulary list was the most successful. If the students were absent, they

would ask if they had missed any words. They also reminded me if I had checked off their

vocabulary words.

Conclusions for Year 1

As I focused on what was working with the students, I was able to use a variety of strategies that

helped to handle the logistics of the large class size, that prompted student involvement and that

provided a routine that students began to expect and enjoy. Toward the end of the school year, the

students had settled in wonderfully, and I was able to do activities with them that I never thought

possible, thus ending the school year without the burnout I experienced in October.

As I looked over the first year research notes, I noted several key observations that had to

specifically deal with student voice:

a. They would listen to one another before they would listen to me.

b. Class would be quiet when volunteers read an assignment aloud.

These observations would prompt my second year of research and inspire me to find other ways to

encourage student voice.

THE SECOND YEAR

A New Problem Emerges

This year I taught a World Civilization SDAIE class with 34 students (17 females—13 Hispanic, 3

Filipino, 1 Asian, 1 Middle Eastern; 17 males—11 Hispanic, 5 Asian, 1 Middle Eastern). When I

started out, I adopted all the successful strategies from the year before, and they became a routine

that met little resistance. None of the problems with discipline or classroom management from the

previous year seemed to surface. The students were just terrific. Things seemed to be going along

wonderfully.

That was, of course, until the tests scores came in. To be honest, the test scores were dismal. I was

not sure what to do. I had always allowed the students to use their vocabulary words and notes on

the test. I did not know what else I could do to help the students improve their tests results. After

seeing the results of Chapter 5, I knew I had to do something differently.

Lingo Bingo to the Rescue: Shifting Responsibility to the Students

I decided to implement Lingo Bingo, a SDAIE strategy that I had learned when I took the S.B.

1999 Training with Kathleen Kenfield. I had excitedly used Lingo Bingo in all of my classes,

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 67

SDAIE and College Prep, after I had learned of it. I spent a lot of time getting everything set up; as

it turned out, I was doing most of the work, and the students were doing very little. I would ask the

questions and give the answers. With the SDAIE classes, it was harder because they had to listen

to the answer and try to place it with the one on their bingo card. I also found I had to try to quiet

the students in between answers or when I started to call out the questions. Several students in each

class chose not to play. Needless to say, I found myself seriously burned out by the end of the

year, doubting whether or not I would ever use this technique again. However, with the distance of

several years, pondering long and hard about how to revamp this game to meet my current needs, I

decided to try Lingo Bingo again and use what I had learned about student voice. I essentially had

the students take over the majority of the game play. To monitor our success, I would research how

this language routine affected their test results.

The Game Itself

To get started, I typed out the questions and answers, copied them on to an overhead, cut each one

out, mixed them up, and put them in an envelope. I created a Lingo Bingo card with the answers. I

handed out the bingo cards and had the students put the answers in any of the boxes, making up the

card any way they wanted to. I would have 24 questions and go through all of them, generally

taking four to five games. The same card would be used for all the games. I started with game one,

and once the answer was given, they would put a number one in the appropriate box. When all the

numbers lined up, they would win and yell out Lingo Bingo. I would give them a sticker as a prize.

I asked for four or five volunteers to read the questions aloud. I would first show the question and

have a student volunteer read it aloud. I had the students raise hands if they knew the answer. I

would take several answers, and whether I received the correct one or not, I would show the answer

on the overhead, thus benefiting students visually and verbally.

Student Voice

When the students took over the game, they gained ownership. This gave me the opportunity to

observe which students were getting into the game and which ones were not. In previous years

there were always several students who did not want to play. Yet this time all students were

engaged and participated fully. Student voice can be a powerful force! For me, it was a liberating

experience that I recorded in my journal:

JOURNAL ENTRY, 2/3/03:

Game Observation: Today I was going to do lingo bingo. After class started and I had handed out bingo cards, I had a student come in late. She is usually one of my volunteers to read. Although she volunteered to read, I could tell her mind was elsewhere. All students with the exception of two new

68 ONETA EDMONDS

kids worked on quietly filling in boxes. I showed them how to fill in the answers. This typically takes about 5-10 min. Let the games begin! Student reactions to the game play: • Where did I put it? • Yelling out of answer • I did know it! • I’m hecka smart! • Sigmund no ....I just guessed! • One student was waving her arms trying to flag me down to give me the answer.

• One student yelled out Bingo Lingo! • I knew it! • What up Lingo Bingo Boy! • No you did not get lingo bingo! Teacher Reaction: I had a good time. Both the students and I were laughing. It was fun to watch the students enjoying themselves. It was especially good to see other students who are normally quiet and shy participate in the game by giving correct answers.

Test Results

I have included below graphs of test scores beginning with Chapter 5, Chapter 7, and Chapter 10. It

was really amazing to see how the test scores improved dramatically:

When I shared these results with the students, they were excited that their scores were getting better

and really looked forward to playing the game.

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 69

STUDENT SURVEYS

After the last chapter test, I gave the students a survey to fill out. Listed below are the survey

questions and student responses (including misspellings):

1. Do you like to play Lingo Bingo? Yes I do like it because it helps me learn faster. Yes because I think it helps a lot. Yes, because it’s fun. Yes! I like playing lingo bingo because it’s easy in the test. He** yeah. (Student made this statement class appropriate) Yes, helps me study for the test which I don’t know. Yes, it’s a very helpful game. Yeah because it’s Hecka cool. Yes, because in the game I can see how the question can be, and if I don’t remember something I see it in the game. No, because I do never won that game. Not really cauz in a way it gets boring and sometimes fun.

2. Why Do you like Lingo Bingo? Yes, I do because since I’ve played it I have been getting better grades on my test. Because I can memorize a lot of things that are on the test and playing is fun. Because it’s fun and it helps me for the test. From Lingo Bingo you can learn so fast and it is easy to understand. Because is fun and make you learn better. Because we go over some questions and we repeat them over and I could memorize them. Because it helps me to know the question which I dont knew about. Because its fun to play. Because it helps me pass my test Because when we do it I get a good grade. In I way I kike lingo Bingo cauz it helps you study and it gets fun.

3. Does it help you study for the test? Yes, it does helps me study because you don’t here the question once you her it more time and you memorize the answer. Yes because with this bingo lingo game I can remember the questions for the test better. Yes I got a good scores. Yes! It help a lot. Yes. Well not really but a little Yeah it helps me because I get all the names, dates and other thing memorized. Yes, because I can remember everything about the chapter. Yes because we can see the word’s that is going to be on the test. Yea it helps me.

4. Do you have any suggestions to help you get a better grade on the tests? I would have to say keep playing Lingo Bingo. I think that playing bingo lingo is enough to get a good grade on the test.

70 ONETA EDMONDS

I have no suggestions. No. Nope. To play Lingo Bingo befor the test every time. Give me a At, that would help. Play Lingo Bingo Play some othe game because we can get interesting the class To play Lingo Bingo

I have also included samples of items I use in the game play: Lingo Bingo Sample (Appendix I),

Questions Overhead Sample (Appendix II), and Test Questions Sample (Appendix III).

Stepping Stone not Stumbling Block

My research question evolved from “How Can I Keep the Students on Task Without Burning

Out?” to “How do Language Routines Effect Student Learning?” The routine of working with the

English language every day in my class was significant; the vocabulary lists and lingo bingo

strategies allowed the students to experience the language auditorially, verbally, and visually.

Honoring their voices and encouraging their involvement seemed to empower them. When the

students started seeing a difference in their test scores, they became more actively involved in their

learning. Instead of being a stumbling block, the English language had become a stepping stone for

these SDAIE students.

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 71

Appendix I: Sample Lingo Bingo Card and Answers

CH. 10 LINGO BINGO

Women Selling military secrets Anti-Semitism Dominion Ireland New Zealand Australia Potato crops Westward expansion Oklahoma U.S. Zionist movement Suffrage Natural Selection Charles Darwin Henry Ford Lois Pasteur Thomas Edison Alexander Graham Bell Marie Curie Guglielmo Marconi Wilbur Wright Ivan Pavlov Sigmund Freud

72 ONETA EDMONDS

Appendix II: Lingo Bingo Questions for Chapter 10

The Chartist movement pressed for suffrage for men but not for

Women

Alfred Dreyfus was a French army officer who was unjustly accused of

Selling military secrets

The pogroms that took place in Russia were fueled by

Anti-Semitism

Canada received the right to control its own domestic affairs when it became a

Dominion

In which country did most Protestants oppose the idea of home rule?

Ireland

The people known as the Maori are people that settled in this country

New Zealand

How Do Language Routines Affect Student Learning? 73

Appendix III: WORLD CIVILIZATION TEST

1. The Chartist movement pressed for all of the following EXCEPT

a. a secret ballot.

b. universal male suffrage.

c. universal woman suffrage.

d. pay for members of Parliament.

2. Alfred Dreyfus was a French army officer who was unjustly accused of

a. disobeying orders.

b. selling military secrets.

c. cruelty toward his men.

d. cowardice under enemy fire.

3. The pogroms that took place in Russia were fueled by

a. Zionism.

b. anti-Semitism.

c. anti-Communism.

d. demands for voting rights.

4. Canada received the right to control its own domestic affairs when it

a. became a dominion.

b. became pat of the British Empire.

c. was reunited as the Province of Canada.

d. persuaded frontier territories to join the Canadian union.

5. In which country did most Protestants oppose the idea of home rule?

a. Ireland

b. Canada

c. Australia

d. New Zealand

6. The people know as the Maori are

a. inhabitants of the Arctic.

b. nomadic inhabitants of Australia.

c. French speaking Roman Catholic Canadians.

d. a Polynesian people that settled in New Zealand.

74 ONETA EDMONDS

75

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner

Student Achievement

by

Heera Kulkarni

Background

I remember being seven years old and sitting next to my mother who was busy making rotis,

Indian tortillas. Every night as she cooked she would help me practice my times tables and to do

my homework. Traditionally, parents do not volunteer at schools in India, but since social

promotion is nonexistent, parents work with their children at home to make sure that their child

performs at or above grade level at all times. Because I grew up in an educational system that so

strongly encouraged parental involvement, years later, when I had children of my own, I became

an active participant in their education. Wanting to provide the academic rigor that I was

accustomed to while attending school in India, every week I assigned them homework designed

to fit their accelerated academic needs. In addition to volunteering in their classrooms, I served

on the school's PTA board and was sponsored to attend the Gifted and Talented Education

(GATE) conference being held in Sacramento in order to train specifically in GATE-related

issues. At one Open House night in my son’s fourth grade classroom, the teacher was recruiting

parents to sign up for jobs including chaperoning on field trips, tutoring students, correcting

student work and presenting lessons in music using the “World of Music” program. Since I have

a significant background in music, I volunteered to present lessons on the subject. From then on,

I began teaching music to fourth graders once a week and was hooked – I was on my way to

becoming a teacher.

As a teacher, I have made concerted efforts to involve parents in my own classroom. The

highlight of the school year has always been presentations by parents about festivals of lights

from their particular culture. In the last two years, I have also added an activity to mark the end

of a unit in the reading program, called the “Parent-Child project.” These experiences have

prompted me to look closely at the impact of parent involvement on student achievement,

especially for English language learners. To paraphrase an African proverb, it does indeed take a

village to raise a child. In modern times, a successful educational program—covering both

academic and extra-curricular development—must rest on three sound footings: the school, the

76 HEERA KULKARNI

family and the community. Let’s look at the existing research on the subject of parent

involvement.

What the Research Says

Research has shown that the family is most responsible for making students successful (Delgado-

Gaitan, 1990). The extent to which parents become involved in various aspects of their children’s

formal education impacts their children’s level of academic achievement. Thirty years of

research conducted by the Department of Education (1994) shows that greater family

involvement in children’s learning is a crucial step to achieving a high quality education. This

research also points out that parents have control over students’ absences from school, providing

reading materials in the home, and the amount of time spent watching television. According to

this research, family income or education is not as important to a student’s success as what the

family actually does with the student in the home. When international comparisons are made by

the Department of Education between America and Asian countries, a strong link is found

between high academic success of students and the high priority their families give to education.

This comparison proves that when parents are involved with their child’s education there are

numerous benefits (Department of Education, 1994).

However, not all families are able to participate in their child’s education; some barriers

(including linguistic and cultural) faced by families at urban schools prevent their active

participation. The communication between poor families and school can sometimes be negative.

Many parents think they are unqualified to be involved in their children’s schooling.

Nevertheless, most parents from different backgrounds and all cultural groups express a strong

desire to be involved in their children’s schooling. When parents get involved, and stay involved,

they can also stay informed and make a difference for themselves and their children (Epstein,

1995).

While going through the teacher preparation program at the M&M Center (Multicultural and

Multilingual Center) at CA State University, Sacramento, I came across a book by Sonia Nieto

entitled Affirming Diversity (1992) which inspired me greatly. Nieto expands the definition of

parent involvement to include the following actions: • Stressing the importance of going to school and college; • Providing a loving and supportive environment; • Providing support by monitoring homework; • Taking an interest in how they are doing at school;

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 77

• Supporting their children’s academic success through continued use of native language and reliance on family’s cultural values;

• Being proud of their children and demonstrate that in a variety of ways; • Having high expectations of their children.

As an educator and a parent, I have seen many examples of the above types of parent

involvement, where parents may not be showing up in the classroom to volunteer but are,

nonetheless, very much a part of their child’s schooling.

Significance of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between active parent participation and

ELL student achievement. This study will provide information and ideas to teachers,

administrators and families about how the students’ success depends on active participation from

the parents. This project will in turn promote and facilitate active involvement of parents and

other family members with curriculum-related activities at school and home. Parents, teachers,

grade level leaders, leadership committees, and school administrators all need to understand that

parent involvement is the single most important thing public schools need to help students learn.

During the first year I collected data from my classroom regarding student achievement, which

included the results from various assessments, the rate of homework returned, reading logs, etc. I

also collected data for parent involvement such as attendance at Open House and parent-teacher

conferences and completion rates of parent-child projects at home. I pulled the data together in

the form of four charts, two for the student assessments (July-December and January-May) and

the other for parent involvement. During the second year I changed my teaching position from a

classroom teacher to a resource teacher at another school site in the district. During this time

period I looked at the changes in legislation and teaching practices and examined various parent

involvement programs carried out successfully by other schools around the nation.

Getting Started and the Research Setting

When I was asked to get involved in this teacher research group, the project seemed very

feasible; as a teacher, I was already collecting data on all of my students and their families, many

of whom are English Language Learners (ELL). Giving and analyzing assessments are parts of

daily instruction. Since I believe that parents play a crucial role in making a student successful, I

wanted to test out the idea for ELL students and their families. I also had been collecting data on

parent participation for students in my classroom.

78 HEERA KULKARNI

ABC Elementary, a Title I school in Sacramento, has a very diverse student population. Various

nonwhite ethnic groups make up 80% of the student population, and the students speak 17

different languages. 55% of students receive free or reduced price lunches.

The class I taught in the school year 2001-2002 was comprised of thirteen English Language

Learners (ELL) and six English-only students. There were seven Hispanic students, and one each

of Vietnamese, Chinese, Hmong, Russian, Tongan and East Indian nationalities. To make the

data more manageable I decided to limit the study to ten ELL students. Due to a year round

calendar, the school year started in July and ended in May, with three months on and one month

off schedule. Since some students transferred to my class later in the school year, for these

students the data was not available for the first part of the year.

Data Sources

• Student achievement scores, which include pre- and post- tests for reading and math, results

goal tests, and Open Court end of unit assessments: For the purpose of this study standardized

tests were not used. Instead, natural classroom assessments were used. Lisi, Smith, and Smith

(2001) define the characteristics of good natural classroom assessments as follows:

1. Develops naturally from classroom instruction. 2. Respects students. 3. Assesses what students have had the opportunity to learn. 4. Helps students to show what they can do. 5. Facilitates the instructional process. 6. Provides dependable information about students.

• Parent surveys (“My child as a learner”): At the beginning of the school year I sent home a survey to be filled by the parents to help me understand each student’s interests and capabilities.

• Parent Attendance at Back to School Night, Open House, and conferences: This data gave information regarding how motivated the parent was about finding out what their child was accomplishing at school through these school sponsored events.

• Rate of parent accountability notes for newsletter and weekly work report returned to teacher: If the parent returned the accountability notes every week then they were knowledgeable about their child’s progress in school.

• Rate of homework returned and completed off-track homework packets: Parent involvement was evident if the child completed the homework packets and the assigned off-track packets regularly.

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 79

• Nightly reading done at home and maintaining a book log: If the child maintained a book log and got his/her parent to sign it every night, then parents were monitoring the nightly reading done by the child.

• Completion of parent-child projects: This project definitely had to get the parents involved. The parent and child usually had to look through old magazines to find pictures related to the unit of study, go to the local library to find books on the assigned subject to write a report or create dioramas together at home.

• Attendance at Parents Are Teachers Too (PATT) night: During this night all parents from one grade level were invited to attend workshops related to reading/book making/math, etc. in the multipurpose room. They were provided dinner and baby-sitting.

• Deficiency notes returned, conference attended for deficiency: If the parents returned the notes for the deficiency report and/or attended the conference for deficiency then they knew exactly where the child was having difficulty. Then they had at least six weeks before the actual report card time to work on the areas their child was struggling with.

• Keeping attendance/tardy records: I kept my own records of tardies and absences for each child and called parents to find out the reason for absence or tardies. Bringing the child to school on time and not having absences from school shows parent involvement.

Key Data Gathering Opportunities • Maintaining assessment data/classroom records: I created an assessment data sheet for each

trimester containing as many columns as the number of weeks in that semester. On one of these sheets I recorded attendance/ tardiness for all students for that week, on another behavior, another sheet for parent contact, one for math scores, one for reading scores, homework, etc

• Keeping notes regarding the progress of each child being studied: I analyzed the above mentioned assessment and other related data sheets on a regular basis to monitor progress for each student.

• Maintaining a portfolio with writing samples and other work done by the students: This portfolio had copies of writing samples, fluency records, math assessments, etc. This portfolio was showcased at parent conferences in addition to being used at Student Study Team meetings, IEP meetings, etc.

• Keenly observing: I observed my students throughout the school day, especially during small group work during workshop time. I could ask them questions also at this time.

• Conferencing with parents: This meeting with the parents was a great window on what the parent was doing at home with the child. These conferences also were opportunities to discuss what else the parent could do at home to enhance the achievement of their child.

80 HEERA KULKARNI

• Keeping records of written communication with parents such as accountability notes from the classroom newsletters: If the child was struggling in school I usually saved these notes in the child’s portfolio. I could refer to them while meeting with parents or administrators.

• Keeping records of oral communication with parents such as parent interviews/ phone logs: The phone log for parent contact was maintained throughout each semester. It was a directive from the administrator since parent involvement is part of the CA Standards for the Teaching Profession. This was used at conferences and at CAST meetings (Collaborative Academic Support Team). The main purpose of the log was to ensure positive parent contact for each child.

Communicating with Parents

Regular communication with parents plays an important role in establishing rapport with families

and ensures successful tackling of issues arising in a student’s life. This link between home and

the home was established through various means such as:

• monthly/bi-weekly newsletters detailing curriculum and units presented in class, upcoming events, tests, tips and suggestions on how a parent could assist the child learn specific concepts being taught at school. This newsletter had blank space for comments/questions from the parent and signature of the parent (this served as an accountability note).

• Observation survey for parents

• Back to School Night

• Open House: Having parent write comments at Open House

• Parent-teacher conference

• Deficiency report conference

• Phone calls to parents

• Phone calls to parents for absences and/or tardies

• Parent volunteers in the classroom

• PATT Night meetings

At the beginning of each school year, to collect information on each student on topics such as

study habits, and doing school related activities at home, I sent home to the parents a survey,

“My child as a learner”. This is sent home during the first week of school. When parents filled

out this survey, they usually described the reading, writing and homework activities that the child

engaged in at home after school, indicating if the child enjoyed reading for pleasure and whether

or not the child had trouble with specific areas of homework. Through this survey parents could

let the teacher know of the child’s interests and hobbies. They could also let the teacher know

whether the family had a library card; if it didn’t, the teacher provided an application so that the

family could visit the local library to check out books.

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 81

At the Open House night in March 2002, many parents visited the classroom. Able to view their

children’s work, these parents were able to see firsthand their children’s great improvement in

reading and spelling (and perhaps to see what a difference their involvement had helped to

make). When asked to reflect on their children’s progress, all parents were very proud and

excited to write an encouraging note. The next day when the children read these comments, they

in turn felt proud of their own accomplishments because the parents had positively

acknowledged their work.

Organizing the Data

With the data I collected throughout the school year I created two sets of charts, one for the

student assessment and one for parent involvement. The first set of charts is for July-December,

and the other set is for January-May. The results data contains pre- and post-test results for skills

such as compound words, end punctuation, capitalization, antonyms and synonyms, etc. The

parent involvement chart includes attendance at Back to School night, homework completion,

parent accountability notes returned or not, etc. I assigned numbers to the academic performance

of each student. Numbers (1) through (4) indicate academic performance: (4)-Advanced, (3)-

Proficient, (2)-Basic, (1) Novice. Similarly I assigned numbers from 1-4 to the levels of parent

involvement: (1)-Very low, (2)-Low, (3)-Medium, (4)-High.

82 H

E E

R A

K U

L K

A R

N I

R esults D

ata: E L

L students July 2001-D

ec. 2001 S econd G

rade K ulkarni

N am

e L

anguage E

L L

P rof.

L evel

C oncerns

P arent

Involv em

ent 1-4

C om

pound W

ords P

re-test

C om

pound W

ords P

ost-test

E nd

punctuation and capitalization

P re-test

E nd punctuation

and capitalization P

ost-test

A ntonym

s &

synonym s

P re-test

A ntonym

s &

synonym s

P ost-test

P refix & suffix

P re-test

P refix & suffix

P ost-test

F luency

P re-test

F luency

P ost-test

P assing:70

w pm

1 J D

S panish

L 3

A D

H D

B eing tested/

S p.E

d

2 N

o H W

30 50 (2)

0 50 (2)

30 30 (1)

0 30 (1)

12 48 (2)

2 G

B E

nrolled: 9/7/01

S panish

L 1

W as in

bilingual class

3 N

A N

A N

A N

A N

A N

A 0

70 (3)

25 51 (2)

3 S

V R

ussian L

1 N

o K N

o E ng.

@ hom

e

1 N

o H W

0 0(N

) 0

30 (1)

50 30 (1)

0 0(N

) 5

24 (1)

4 N

H S

panish L

3 A

D D

L ack of

m otivation

1 70

90 (3)

40 80 (3)

40 80 (3)

0 70 (2)

22 52 (2)

5 M

J C

antonese L

3 4

80 90 (3)

90 100 (4)

80 100 (4)

50 100 (4)

60 105 (4)

6 K

T V

ietnam ese

L 3

4 90

100 (4)

90 100 (4)

80 90 (3)

30 100 (4)

48 115 (4)

7 D

L H

indi L

3 4

90 90 (3)

60 80 (3)

90 100 (4)

10 100 (4)

62 129 (4)

8 T

N H

m ong

L 3

IE P

2 10

70 (2)

0 30 (1)

10 50 (2)

0 40 (2)

31 57 (2)

9 R

K T

ongan L

3 A

D D

3 60

90 (3)

0 90 (3)

20 80 (3)

0 100 (4)

33 88 (3)

10 P

C S

panish L

3 4

30 100 (4)

40 100 (4)

10 90 (4)

0 100 (4)

77 119 (4)

K E

Y : P

arent Involvem ent 1-4: 1-V

ery L ow

, 2-L ow

, 3-M edium

, 4-H igh

N um

bers (1) through (4) indicate perform ance: 4-A

dvanced , 3-P roficient, 2-B

asic, and 1-N ovice

P arent P

articipation: A P

ositive P ow

er F or E

nglish L anguage L

earner S tudent A

chievem ent

83

R esults D

ata: E L

L students January 2002-M

ay 2002 S econd G

rade K ulkarni

N am

e L

anguage E

L L

P rof.

L evel

C oncerns

P arent

Involv- em

ent 1-4

A bbreviati-ons

P re-test

A bbreviati-ons

P ost-test

A B

C order

P re-test

A B

C O

rder P

ost-test F

luency P

re-test F

luency P

ost-test

1 J D

S panish

L 3

Q ualified for

S p.E

d 2

N o H

W 40

70 (2)

0 20 (2)

12 42 (1)

2 G

B E

nrolled: 9/7/01 S

panish L

1 W

as in bilingual class

3 100

100 30

100 12

54

3 S

V R

ussian L

1 N

o K N

o E ng.

@ hom

e

1 N

o H W

80 80 (N

) 30

100 (1)

5 28 (1)

4 N

H S

panish L

3 A

D D

L ack of

m otivati-on

1 70

90 (3)

0 40 (3)

22 36 (3)

5 M

J C

antonese L

3 4

100 100 (3)

60 100 (4)

60 92 (4)

6 K

T V

ietnam ese

L 3

4 90

100 (4)

60 100 (4)

48 78 (3)

7 D

L H

indi L

3 4

100 100 (3)

0 100 (3)

62 98 (4)

8 T

N H

m ong

L 3

IE P

2 90

90 (2)

0 50 (1)

31 55 (2)

9 R

K T

ongan L

3 A

D D

3 70

80 (3)

0 30 (3)

33 68 (3)

10 P

C S

panish L

3 4

90 100 (4)

100 100 (4)

77 92 (4)

K E

Y : P

arent Involvem ent 1-4: 1-V

ery L ow

, 2-L ow

, 3-M edium

, 4-H igh

N um

bers (1) through (4) indicate perform ance: 4-A

dvanced , 3-P roficient, 2-B

asic, and 1-N ovice

84 H

E E

R A

K U

L K

A R

N I

P arent Involvem

ent D ata: E

L L

students July 2001-Jan. 2002 2nd G rade K

ulkarni

N am

e L

anguage E

L L

P rof.

L evel

G rade level perfor- m

ance

P arent

Involvem ent

1-4

B ack to S

chool N

ight P

.A .T

.T N

ight H

om e

w ork

O ff-track

packet of H

W

P arent

accountab-ility notes

D eficiency notes 8/01

D eficiency

conference 8/01

P arent teacher conference

9/01

D eficiency

conference 12/01

P arent

teacher conference

1/02

1 J D

S panish

L 3

(1) 2

Y es

Y es

N o H

W N

o review concepts@

h om

e

N o

Y es

Y es

Y es

Y es

P hone

C onf.

Y es +

S S

T 2

G B

E nrolled: 9/7/01

S panish

L 1

(2) 3

N A

N A

Y es

Y es

Y es

N A

N A

Y es

Y es

Y es

3 S

V R

ussian L

1 (N

) 1

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

Y es

4 N

H S

panish L

3 (2-3)

2 Y

es Y

es Incom

- plete

Incom -

plete N

o Y

es N

o N

o N

o Y

es

5 M

J C

antonese L

3 (4)

4 Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es N

A N

A Y

es N

A N

A

6 K

T V

ietnam ese

L 3

(4) 4

Y es

N o

Y es

Y es

Y es

N A

N A

Y es

N A

N A

7 D

L H

indi L

3 (4)

4 N

o Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es N

A N

A Y

es N

A N

A

8 T

N H

m ong

L 3

(2) 2

Y es

N o

Incom -

plete Incom

- plete

Y es

Y es

N o

Y es

N o

Y es

9 R

K T

ongan L

3 (3)

3 Y

es N

o Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es N

o Y

es N

o P

hone C

onf. 10

P C

S panish

L 3

(4) 4

Y es

N o

Y es

Y es

Y es

Y es

N A

Y es

N A

N A

K E

Y :

P arent Involvem

ent 1-4: 1-V ery L

ow , 2-L

ow , 3-M

edium , 4-H

igh N

um bers (1) through (4) indicate perform

ance: 4-A dvanced , 3-P

roficient, 2-B asic,

1-N ovice, N

-N on-reader

P arent P

articipation: A P

ositive P ow

er F or E

nglish L anguage L

earner S tudent A

chievem ent

85

P arent Involvem

ent D ata: E

L L

students Jan. 2002-M ay 2002 2nd G

rade K ulkarni

N am

e L

anguage E

L L

P rof.

L evel

G rade

level perform

ance

P arent Involv

em ent

1-4 O

pen H ouse

W eekly H

om e

W ork packet

P arent accountab-

ility notes D

eficiency conference M

arch/02

P arent teacher conference

5/02

1 J D

S panish

L 3

(1) 2

Y es

N o H

W N

o review concepts@

hom e

Y es

Y es

Y es

2 G

B E

nrolled: 9/7/01 S

panish L

1 (2)

3 Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es Y

es

3 S

V R

ussian L

1 (N

) 1

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

4 N

H S

panish L

3 (2-3)

2 Y

es Incom

-plete N

o N

o N

o

5 M

J C

antonese L

3 (4)

4 Y

es Y

es Y

es N

A Y

es

6 K

T V

ietnam ese

L 3

(4) 4

Y es

Y es

Y es

N A

Y es

7 D

L H

indi L

3 (4)

4 Y

es Y

es Y

es N

A Y

es

8 T

N H

m ong

L 3

(2) 2

N o

Incom -plete

Y es

Y es

Y es

9 R

K T

ongan L

3 (3)

3 Y

es Y

es Y

es P

hone C onf.

Y es

10 P

C S

panish L

3 (4)

4 Y

es Y

es Y

es N

A Y

es

K E

Y :

P arent Involvem

ent 1-4: 1-V ery L

ow , 2-L

ow , 3-M

edium , 4-H

igh N

um bers (1) through (4) indicate perform

ance: 4-A dvanced , 3-P

roficient, 2-B asic,

1-N ovice, N

-N on-reader

86 HEERA KULKARNI

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

What Does the Data Mean?

After analyzing the data I found out that the students whose parents played an active role in their

child’s education showed good academic growth over the weeks and months as the school year

progressed. The students whose parents did not support their child with the academic activities

such as homework or nightly reading did not succeed academically, as evidenced in their reading

logs and incomplete homework. Other issues affected these students’ academic achievement,

including learning difficulties, ADHD, and English proficiency level.

The following comparison of reading fluency scores and the reading levels of two students from

the study clearly indicates the critical role parent involvement is playing in the success or failure

of these students.

S V (Very low parent involvement) Reading fluency: Text Level:

July- 5 w.p.m. ............................July- B January- 18 w.p.m. ......................January- 8 May - 28 w.p.m. .........................May –10-12

Principal’s Math Club Test: Passed only one test out of nine

Math Chapter 1-12 Cumulative assessment: 52%

M J (Active parent involvement) Reading fluency: Text Level:

July- 60 w.p.m. ..........................July- 20 January- 95 w.p.m. ......................January- 24 May - 100 ...................................May - 30

Principal’s Math Club Test: Passed all nine tests with 100% score

Math Chapter 1-12 Cumulative assessment: 100%

The family of S V, the Russian-speaking student highlighted above who struggled throughout the

year, did not place emphasis on academic learning at home. The mother could not speak English.

Many older siblings attending high school could have helped SV but didn’t. This child also did

not attend kindergarten because the mother did not think that it was important. Therefore the

child was still learning the sounds of letters in second grade. On the other hand, the parent of M

J, the successful Cantonese-speaking child who is highlighted above, also could not speak much

English, but she had high expectations of her child and placed great emphasis on the importance

academics. She attended all school events such as Back to School night and parent conferences,

provided quiet time for reading and homework, and made sure that the child did all his

homework and nightly reading at home. She also helped the child learn his first language and

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 87

culture by enrolling him in the language and culture school held on the weekends. The difference

in their cultural beliefs and traditions also contributed to the difference in parent involvement and

academic achievement levels for these two children to a great extent.

Further analysis of this data shows that out of the ten students being studied two were on L1

level of English proficiency. Out of these students S V, who is mentioned above, who had

skipped Kindergarten and was still learning the sounds of the letters in second grade, was unable

to do basic math of adding and subtracting one digit and two digit numbers. G B, also a Level 1

student, has a different story and deserves highlighting here. She had transferred from a Spanish

bi-lingual class and had also missed about eight weeks of the first semester for my English only

class. But her academic progress was much faster than S V. Her parents came to meet with me as

soon as she enrolled in my class. They came back the in two weeks for another meeting before

our class was off-track for a month. At this meeting I was able to share results from the initial

testing I had done. I also gave the parents all the necessary materials to use at home during the

off-track month such as books, reading fluency sheets, math speed tests, math work book pages,

homework packets from the previous weeks, etc. The parents promised to work with her at

home. The child and her parents were highly motivated for her to excel in school. Her spelling

improved from 20% correct at entry to 88% correct at the end of the year. Her reading fluency

improved from 12 w.p.m. to 62 w.p.m. This student’s enthusiasm for learning new material was

boundless, further enhanced by the constant support from her family. She also showed great

progress in math. Her Chapter 3 score was 12% and Cumulative Test Ch. 1-12 at the end of the

year was 96%. I believe that the parents had high expectations from this child; they gave her all

the necessary support at home and also encouraged her to do well in school. These were some of

the key factors in making her story a successful one.

If we look at the data from other students it is clear that if the parents spent some time with the

child it made a huge difference. Even if both the parents worked outside the home, they

monitored the homework and signed the reading log on a nightly basis. Both parents of K T, D L

and G B worked outside the home but took interest in what the child was doing at home even if it

was just providing a quiet place to read and do the homework. These parents also had high

expectations of their children. All of these parents took their children to the public library on

weekends to check out books. Two of these families except for D L, were not fluent in English.

What exactly did the parents do with those four students who had a score of four or advanced for

grade level performance? The parents of M J, K T, D L, C M, and G B (who had a score of (2) or

basic but well on her way to success) all did similar kinds of things. As mentioned above, these

88 HEERA KULKARNI

were: having high expectations from their child, imparting their native culture and native

language (some children could read and write their native language), providing quiet time for

homework and reading, taking the child to the free public library, helping them complete the

parent-child projects, etc. S V, K T and C M had perfect attendance also.

If I ever have the opportunity to take this research to another level, I would like to see if there are

certain ethnic groups who are doing well academically due to parent involvement. From my own

personal experience I know this for certain: the East Indian ethnic group the parents have very

high expectations from the children. There are many great role models in the community (e.g.

38% of all physicians in the US are East Indians) that the students are expected to emulate. This

factor has made most of the East Indian students highly successful and have made the Indian

community the wealthiest minority in the USA.

BEGINNING A SECOND YEAR OF RESEARCH

In May of 2002 I applied to teach at a different school site as a resource teacher. This school year

I taught writing skills and creative writing to 1st through sixth graders at a different school site.

Since I am no longer in the classroom, I started looking at the programmatic aspects of my

original research question. I wanted to include the CA Standards for the Teaching Profession

(CSTP) in my study since this is undeniably going to provide much needed change in the

evaluation process for teachers. After attending an informational workshop about the new

“Leave No Child Behind Act,” I was convinced of the renewed hope this law would bring to

Title I schools where most of our ELL students are. I also scrutinized my paper from the view-

point of the reader. To make this research beneficial to readers in more ways than one, I decided

to also include the best practices in parent involvement undertaken successfully by other schools

throughout the nation.

Two Official Endorsements for Parent Involvement—A Great Hope

As an educator I feel that most teachers know that parent participation enhances children’s

learning. However, parent involvement until recently was not a part of the value system in most

American schools. One reason for the lack of parent involvement is that the strategies to create

these opportunities are not taught in most teacher training programs. Moreover, parent

partnership programs were not a part of any assessment system for teachers or principals, so they

are easy to ignore (Decker, 1997). Two recent developments that I consider a great hope for the

future underline the importance of parent involvement.

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 89

1. California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP):

CSTP is a description of professional practice for California teachers, adopted by CA

Commission for Teaching Credential in January 1997 and approved by State Superintendent of

Public Instruction in July 1997. Since the school year 2002, these standards are being used in

some districts across the state (including Elk Grove and Freemont) to evaluate all teachers.

Hopefully other districts will follow suit. In Elk Grove, the teachers must use all six standards in

their weekly lesson plans and their performance evaluation is based on them, too. Many schools

are also requiring teachers to maintain parent contact phone logs. The sixth standard, the

standard for developing as a professional educator, emphasizes the importance of family and

community involvement:

STANDARD FOR DEVELOPING AS A PROFESSIONAL EDUCATOR

Key Element: Working with communities to improve professional practice.

Key Element: Working with families to improve professional practice.

As teachers develop, they may ask, “How do I . . .” or “Why do I . . .”

• value and respect the student's community and appreciate its role in student learning? • increase my understanding of the cultures and dynamics of my students' communities? • promote collaboration between school and community ? • identify and use school, district, and local community social service resources to benefit

students and their families? • seek out and use resources from the local community and businesses to support student

learning? • provide my students with community-based experiences that support their learning? • interact with students in activities outside the classroom? As teachers develop, they

may ask, “How do I . . .” or “Why do I . . .” • value and respect students' families and appreciate their role in student learning? • develop an understanding of families' racial, cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic

backgrounds? • engage families as sources of knowledge about students' linguistic and social

backgrounds? • promote positive dialogue and interactions with all families, and respond to their

concerns about student progress? • ensure that communication with all students and their families is understood? • provide opportunities for all families to participate in the classroom and school

community? • present the educational program to all families?

Page 21 of CA Standards for the Teaching Profession, 1997

90 HEERA KULKARNI

The second official endorsement has come from the federal government in the form of Leave No

Child Behind Act of 2001, the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) of

1965.

2. Leave No Child Behind Act of 2001:

There have been major changes brought about in the new law, which encompasses the Title I

program specifically aimed at improving the academic achievement of disadvantaged students,

many of whom are English learners. Part A of Title I addresses parent involvement. The ESEA

(Elementary and Secondary Education Act) Title I, Part A, SEC. 1118, Parental Involvement,

defines: a) Local educational Policy, b) School parental involvement policy, c) Policy

involvement, d) Shared responsibility for high student academic achievement, e) Building

capacity for involvement, f) Accessibility, g) Information from parental information and resource

centers, and h) Review. Under this new act 10 percent of Title I funds are to be allocated for

parental involvement by each Title I school.

A Look at Programs that Work

To find out how other schools are trying to involve parents I decided to analyze various parent-

school partnership programs across the nation, and what I found supports the strong connection

between student achievement and parent, school, and community involvement. This information

will also open a window for the readers on best practices attempted by other schools. Following

are the findings from a select few programs.

Ysleta Independent School District, El Paso, Texas: In March 1999, I was selected by the

Edward Kemble Elementary School administration to visit exemplary school sites in the Ysleta

Independent School District in El Paso, Texas. This school district has been named the First

“Recognized” Urban School District in Texas in 1998, by the Texas Education Agency. In spite

of having students who are poor, from minority backgrounds and broken families, and who do

not speak English, this district has made tremendous gains by being persistent and unyielding

about expectations of parents, teachers, students and the community. The pass rate of this district

on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) is the highest amongst the big eight school

districts in Texas. In 1997-98, for grades 3-8 and 10, the reading percent passing was 88.8%,

math, 86.4% and writing, 89.2% (Research, Testing and Evaluation Department of Texas

Education Agency, 1999).

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 91

One of the secrets of their success is a close relationship all schools maintain with the parents

and the community. Most schools have a parent liaison on their staff who works with the parents.

All schools offer parent-training programs such as workshops and mini-conferences at the school

site. At Ascarate Elementary I met a group of parents who, proudly wearing the family-school

partnership T-shirts, were busy finishing projects for their respective classrooms. This group had

just returned from attending a conference organized for parents in Austin where they had learned

how to write grants to apply for funds for their school. These parents felt tremendously

empowered. Another strategy this school used to involve parents was the parent-child project,

created by parents and children together at home, and displayed proudly throughout the school.

Here I also learned that when the teachers are teaching units in the classroom, each unit has a

parent component that must be completed at home by the parent and child together. Upon my

return from Texas, I added the same practice to my teaching. I request to parents that every child

in my classroom complete a parent-child project at home with each of the Open-Court units.

These projects have included creating a collage of pictures related to the unit, writing a book

report, creating dioramas, etc.

Many schools in the Ysleta Independent School District have a partnership with the university,

which provides scholarships for students. At-risk students are matched up with mentors from the

community who meet with them on a weekly basis (Ysleta Independent School District

Handbook, 1999).

James Mckee Elementary: A California Distinguished School: I have personal experience

working as a parent volunteer at James Mckee. Recently, this school received top honors as a

California distinguished elementary school. The parent involvement program at Mckee is very

successful, and the school has many devoted parent volunteers. Each family at Mckee agrees to

volunteer one hour each week to the school by performing a variety of tasks. At the beginning of

the school year the parents sign a volunteer agreement and agree to contribute thirty-six hours

per academic year of volunteer time to the school and its programs. The parents can be involved

at home or at the schools performing a number of jobs, including maintaining phone trees, typing

school/classroom newsletters, serving as art docent, garden volunteer, drama club assistant, and

attending parent advisory committee meetings. Volunteer hours are tracked for individual

recognition and school wide awards in the spring.

There are approximately 700 students at the school. According to the volunteer coordinator, each

year approximately ten thousand volunteer hours are recorded. More than forty percent of

92 HEERA KULKARNI

families are actively participating in this program. The volunteers also raise about ten to twelve

thousand dollars each year through fundraisers and school carnival.

This parent volunteer program compliments Elk Grove Unified School District’s policy which

encourages the parents to “contribute time and effort” toward their child’s education. This school

district is making tremendous efforts to involve parents. This year the district has started a

training program for parents called Connections 2000, where parents are offered a full day

conference three times a year, with opportunities to attend workshops. (James Mckee

Elementary, Parent and Student Handbook/Calendar).

Technology Night: A Maryland elementary school involved parents and the community by

hosting a Technology Night that showcased student work. During this night the community

becomes educated about the benefits of computer technology in the classroom and informed

about current technological practices. The technology committee asked the students to

demonstrate the special programs that they used in their classroom, and the parents came to see

their young stars shine. The district-level technology instructional specialist gave opening

remarks before student presentations. The school was also able to get support from local

businesses in the form of 30 door prizes (Dupont 1998).

The Best Practice Project: In 1988 extensive parental involvement was mandated in Chicago as

part of the decentralization plan. Discouraged by the fact that too few schools have parents acting

as curriculum leaders, this project was started in Chicago by National-Louis University at twelve

schools to develop teacher and parent leadership. Through a series of workshops the parents

understood how they were taught themselves and then explored ideas about teaching and

learning. In another school in this district, family history became the basis for a new social

studies program that emphasized parent involvement (Daniels, 1997).

Baltimore Project: According to Sanders (1996), the National Network of Partnership-2000

Schools at John Hopkins University is trying to involve families and communities in a variety of

ways. There are 49 schools in Baltimore who are working with this program. It is a research-

based component of the School Improvement Plan for three years. There are no fees. This

program has helped three Baltimore schools tremendously. In this program there are three

ingredients for success: 1). An action team is created, a committee of parents, teachers,

administrators, and community members who cultivate and maintain strong connections between

schools, families, and communities. 2). Each member serves as chair or co-chair of one of six

committees representing six types of involvement: a) parenting, b) communicating, c)

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 93

volunteering, d) learning at home, e) decision making, and f) collaborating with the community.

3). They have assistance of full-time project facilitators. These three schools have tried some of

the following programs in this project:

1. Commitment to School and home: Farring Elementary School, Pre-K - 5 school, focused on

volunteering and learning at home. Subcommittees on parenting, volunteering, and home

learning were formed. This school organized workshops for parents such as Family Learning

Survival Kits, introduction to TIPS (Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork), an interactive

homework process. Volunteers work in school and off-site at home. This program

demonstrated increased confidence among parents and volunteers, who eventually enrolled in

a GED program.

2. Pops On Patrol: Mosher Elementary School’s action team was comprised of two co-chairs

employed by the school as parent liaisons, two teachers, and an assistant principal. Home

visits were done by parent liaisons. Grandparents volunteered as safety patrols. To involve

more fathers, this school started father-son breakfasts. They also invited community guest

speakers for man-to-man workshops. Summary sheets of all school events were made

available in Parent Room for parents who could not attend; summaries were also included in

monthly newsletters.

3. 100 Percent: Complaints from parents regarding lack of communication from school led to a

contest called “The One Hundred Percent Club.” A monthly packet of information goes

home. Community partners provide gifts for volunteers and fund-raisers. This school also

started a Parent Room (Sanders, 1996).

Involving Senior Citizens at Schools: According to Halford (1998), in today’s rapidly aging

society the schools need to recognize senior citizens as a rich resource. Seniors have a significant

voter impact yet few seniors have connections to their local schools. According to this author 40

percent of the adult population have no daily or even weekly contact with school-age children.

Based on these findings, Pattenville School District in St. Louis, Missouri launched a 55-Plus

Club in order to reach out to the older generation. Club membership grants free admission for

senior citizens to school events and senior citizen prom. The seniors in return help tutor children,

assist with after-school programs and sponsor clubs. This intergenerational relationship is great

way to achieve educational excellence. Such programs can be very helpful to the participants

both young and old in developing a positive attitude towards education.

94 HEERA KULKARNI

The above mentioned school programs have some things in common that makes them successful.

These programs all maintain a close relationship with the parents and the community. Most

schools have a parent liaison on their staff who works with the parents. Many of these schools

provided a parent room in the school where the parents could network. Many schools offer

parent-training programs and workshops on a regular basis to help parents become more

informed and effective participants. Some schools came up with new ideas to involve the fathers

of the students in the school and also the senior citizens from the community. All of these

schools have recognized parents and other members of the community as a rich resource.

BENEFITS OF PARENT INVOLVEMENT

According to Hayes and Ben-Avie, as stated in Family-School Links by Booth and Dunn (1996),

the teachers, parents, school, and community all benefit from increased parent involvement, and

many other authors (myself included) agree.

Student outcomes: The effects of parent involvement on student achievement are obvious. By

establishing family-school partnerships student achievement increases and is sustained across

grade levels. This holds true for low-income as well as for middle-income families. Students

show more positive attitudes toward school, better homework habits, higher attendance, lower

dropout rates, and improved behavior.

Teacher outcomes: Teachers understand parents better and parents have more confidence in

themselves and the schools, thus they tend to participate more in school activities (Kaplan,

1992). When parents are involved in the school, the staff better understands the socio-cultural

context of the communities served by the school, and so the teachers have an increased sense of

efficacy and have more effective and improved classroom climate (Booth and Dunn 1996).

Bagin, Gallagher, and Kindres (1997) also found definite advantages for teachers when parents

were involved. Because of an exchange of information with parent, teachers gain knowledge of

pupils that they otherwise would have been denied. Teachers acquire a direct understanding of

the difficulties experienced by parents, certain experiences of children, and influences that have

been responsible for their behavior. They learn how parents think and act, their attitudes towards

life and what they want for their children. As a result, the teachers are able to deal intelligently

with their students’ needs.

Parent outcomes: As parents become involved in the school, they in turn learn ways to help their

children. They may even become motivated to further their own education. The parents who

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 95

have had negative school experiences and the parents who are alienated from the mainstream

culture also perceive the school in a positive light. (Booth and Dunn 1996). Bagin, Gallagher

and Kindres also found advantages for parents. From contact with teachers, the parents acquire

information about their children’s school experiences which may be useful in living with their

children at home. Sometimes it is difficult for parents to understand how a school functions.

When parents are involved they are able to understand analyses of test results, school records,

behavior reports and class work, how much progress their children have made and how much

more they could improve with help at home. They also make plans with teachers for attaining

common objectives (Bagin, Gallagher and Kindres, p.123).

School outcomes: If school change processes can mobilize parent involvement, the stakes

parents have in their children’s school success can make them a powerful force for change

(Booth and Dunn 1996).

Community outcomes: When the family and school team up, the school becomes a potent force

in the community, promoting healthy holistic development among all children (Booth and Dunn

1996).

RECOMMENDATIONS

My research has left me convinced that there are concrete steps that can and should be taken to

increase parent involvement in schools.

• Adequately prepare teachers. Today’s teachers are ill prepared to successfully engage families in schools. Teacher education should prepare teachers to build family and community partnerships. To remove negative stereotypes, teachers need to be trained to be aware of the risks that parents face. Teachers could attend workshops, do professional reading, and take courses to understand risk conditions.

• Define clear roles for parents and identify mechanisms for their sustained involvement in the school. As parents work with national and state community organizations and with school agencies, they can develop an active base of citizen support and a menu of school- and community-based activities to improve students’ attendance, academic motivation, sense of responsibility, grades, and test scores. Through pertinent tasks and strategies, parents can help their children develop literacy skills and behaviors needed to perform in schools and in daily communications (Kulkarni, 2000).

• Give parents necessary training. Many poor families think they are unqualified to be involved in their children’s schooling even though most parents from all groups express a strong desire to be involved in their children’s schooling. They may require help in becoming qualified. As

96 HEERA KULKARNI

an active member of the school’s PTA Board, where my own children attended, the school sponsored me to attend a three-day conference on Gifted and Talented Education. This training helped me tremendously in working with my own children.

• Provide resources to local parent organizations. National organizations should work closely and cooperatively with local educational groups and leaders in providing training in developing school power and community resources. They need to have a committee whose main function is to identify parental groups that lack leadership or organizational skills and volunteer to help them improve the management of local parent organizations.

• Make most members of the community school board parents. These parents can recommend program changes, provide input for program’s administration, and plot future developments for the program and their children.

• Make a special effort to involve multi-cultural parents. Including parents from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds will help to 1) build rapport with parents through adequate communication; 2) assist parents or other interested members of the community to understand the curriculum; 3) solicit parental help in developing the instructional program; 4) gain parental support in implementing the program; 5) clarify conflicting values and goals; and 6) provide literacy training in the schools, so that parents can tutor their children in the native language (Carrasquillo and London, 1993).

• Evaluate the family-school partnership programs. These programs cannot be very successful and improve over time if they are not constantly assessed and evaluated, whether quarterly or yearly.

According to research, family is the most important reason why students become successful.

Success of a student does not depend on family income or education but what the family actually

does with the student in the home. If we want our children to become successful and productive

citizens, then their families need to become involved in their children’s school in trying to

improve home and school learning. All parents want their children to succeed. To encourage

their participation, we need to follow the example of communities who seriously appeal to those

families that might not come forward on their own to participate in the schools, seeking to

remove obstacles and to offer parents the necessary training they may need to expand their

parenting and literacy skills.

Parent Participation: A Positive Power For English Language Learner Student Achievement 97

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alvarez, B., Bloom, B.S., Kellaghan, T., & Sloane, K., (1993). The Home Environment and School Learning: Promoting Parental Involvement in the Education of Children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bagin, D., Gallagher, D. R., & Kindred, L. W. (1997). School and Community Relations. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Booth A., & Dunn, J. F. (1996). Family School Links-How Do They Affect Educational Outcomes. Princeton, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

CA Commission on Teacher Credentialing and CA Department of Education (1997). California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP)

Carrasquillo, A. L., & London, C. B. G. (1993). Parents and Schools: A Sourcebook. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.

Daniels, H. (1996). “The Best Practice Project: Building Parent Partnerships in Chicago.” Educational Leadership, 53 , n 7, 38-43.

Decker, L. (1997). “Is Parent Involvement Your Job?” Interview with the co-author of The Hard-to-Reach Parent: Old Challenges, New Insights in NEA Today, 16, n 3, 6.

Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1990). Crossing Cultural Borders, Pittsburg: Falmer Press.

Department of Education. (1994). Strong Families, Strong Schools: Building Community Partnerships for Learning. Washington, DC.: A research base for family involvement in learning.

Department of Education (2001). Leave No Child Behind Act of 2001.

Dupont, A., P. (1998). Technology Night. Educational Leadership, 55 n 9, 74-75.

Epstein, J. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 701-712.

Halford, J. M. (1998). For significant support turn to seniors. Educational Leadership, 55, n 9, 49-51.

James Mckee Parent and student Handbook/Calendar (1999-2000) James Mckee Elementary School, Elk Grove, CA

Kaplan L. (Editor) 1992 Education and the Family. Sponsored by Association of Teacher Educators. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

98 HEERA KULKARNI

Kulkarni, H. (2000). Family-School Partnership: A guide for administrators. California State University, Sacramento

Lisi, R.D., Smith, J.K., Smith, L.F. (2001). Natural Classroom Assessment: Designing Seamless Instruction and assessment. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Maclean, M. S., Mohr, M. M. (1999) Teacher Researcher at Work. Berkeley, California: National Writing Project

Nieto, S., (1992) Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman.

Sanders, M. G. (1996). “Building family partnerships that last: School family and community programs.” Educational Leadership, 54, n 3, 61 (6)

Ysleta Independent School District Handbook (1999): The Closer You Get, The Better We Look. Ysleta Independent School District, Public Outreach Division, El Paso, Texas.

99

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program: One School’s Search for a Challenging Academic Program to Meet the

Language and Literacy Needs of its Long Term English Learners

by

Nancy Salm

Front-line educators who have spent more than ten years in the classroom are used to seeing programs, theories and ideas come and go, only to return again in a slightly different form, a few years later. The current educational “phenomenon” is the standards-based movement. Some educators think it will eventually disappear; however, most educational leaders believe standards are here to stay (Aiming High, p. xiii). Along with the standards-based movement are the pressures bearing down on schools to increase test scores. Although all K-12 schools face these pressures, high schools have a unique mandate in that they must increase test scores and provide students with skills and knowledge to enable them to function in the increasingly high tech workplace. One particular subgroup hard hit by these challenges is English learners, and the number of English learners continues to increase, making it more and more difficult for schools to meet the demands of standards and higher test scores. The drop out rate for Hispanic students is increasing, especially with the advent of the California High School Exit Exam (Cardinale, p. 38). This paper chronicles the efforts of one Northern California high schools attempts to meet the needs of its long term English learners, detailing the first four years of the English Language Development (ELD) program and how it has grown and changed in response to student needs, teacher input, and educational practice and policy.

This paper will also give readers a glimpse of the day to day struggles of a classroom teacher trying to find and develop curriculum and materials that will meet the testing, academic, and life- long needs of the long term English learners in her classroom. These students and their situation frustrated, challenged, and captivated me, the above-named teacher. Having never worked with ELD students until 1999, I quickly found myself immersed in trying to develop curriculum to fit their needs. This paper will briefly explore the two distinct tracts of reading skills curriculum and writing skills curriculum that I developed and used in my ELD 5 classroom over the course of four years and the assessments I used in an attempt to document student achievement. It will chronicle my frustrations, successes and thoughts as I worked with this unique group of students, experimenting with different interventions, considering student response and studying changes in student performance. It has been a long and difficult journey, mixed with inspiration, joy and sadness as I watched individual students achieve, succeed, or drop out. As a population, long- term English learners have become my educational focus. They have taught me as much or more than I have taught them.

100 NANCY SALM

YEAR ONE: SETTING UP A WHOLE NEW ELD PROGRAM

This four-year journey began with a new course offering and a teacher new to the school. In late August of 1999 I joined the staff of a northern California high school as an English Language Development (ELD) teacher. With seven years of prior experience teaching English in an urban school district, a single subject credential in English and a CLAD credential, I was hired to teach a new course offering: ELD 5: Reading and Writing. I was given four sections of ELD 5 and one section of ELD 4, while another teacher in the foreign language department was given two sections of ELD 5. A third teacher, new to both teaching and ELD was given three classes, ELD 1, 2 and 3. There were 2.4 teachers in ELD, (each class period = .2, so a teacher teaching five classes is full time, or 1.0.), under the auspices of the foreign language department, where previously there had been only one full-time and one part-time ELD teacher, to equal 1.6 FTE’s (Full-time Equivalent.)

The new ELD 5 course was offered by the district as the result of a lawsuit brought by district parents that forced the district to reexamine its academic offerings to ELD students. The suit charged that the district was not meeting the academic needs of all ELD students. To meet the needs of long-term students, and transitioning immigrant students, ELD 5 was born. The course was designed to improve Limited English Proficient (LEP) students’ reading and writing skills. Previously at the high school, ELD students had not been well monitored by the system; many of the students enrolled in the fall of 1999 had not had ELD instruction since junior high or elementary school. With the hiring of a part-time bilingual resource teacher, and the new ELD 5 class, students’ cumulative records and home language surveys were being inspected and examined. Students who’d left the high school in June of 1999 with a schedule of their own design came to school in the fall to learn that they were being placed in ELD 5. The school’s “official” ELD population jumped by over 180 students, with the addition of the new long-term ELD 5 students.

The majority of ELD 5 students at our high school are “long-term” English Learners, whose first language is Spanish. Many of them have lived in the United States all their lives, yet didn’t speak English when they started kindergarten. Their academic skills are poor in both English and Spanish. About 89% of the ELD 5 students are native Spanish speakers, yet only a few have had academic instruction in Spanish. (It is important to note here that classes were in place for the lower level ELD students, 1-4, most of whom were immigrants with prior schooling in other countries and had been concurrently enrolled in either primary language and/or SDAIE core classes.)

As ELD 5 was a new course offering, no curriculum existed. I was instructed to assess student needs and develop curriculum that would meet those needs. Since I was hired about a week before school started, this meant having to find assessments and assignments in a hurry. Until I was able to discern where student’ skill levels were, it was going to be difficult to find or

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 101

develop what they needed. I searched for curriculum that focused on reading and writing, and as the semester progressed, I modified and rethought the course development. It was an ongoing process, and one that was arduous, time-consuming and not as beneficial to students as I’d hoped, based on test scores, class grades and students’ overall GPA’s (grade point averages).

Year One (1999-2000)—Reading: Setting Up a Sustained Silent Reading Program I began the first semester of the 1999 school year attempting to assess student’s skills in reading and writing. I quickly realized that student skill levels were low in both areas. Due to specific circumstances, students who had not passed the district reading proficiency test were going to have one more opportunity to pass it in November, therefore allowing more students to be redesignated as R-FEP (Redesignated Fluent English Proficient). For reading skill development, I decided to implement a program of Sustained Silent Reading (SSR.) In my early years of teaching, I’d developed a form for SSR (see Appendix 1). My goal in creating the form was to incorporate the research on what good readers unconsciously do as they read into an easy to use format. I wanted students to make predictions about what they were reading, to practice asking questions about the plot and character motivation, to make comments that related the story to their own lives, and finally, to briefly summarize the pages they’d read in each reading period. I made an overhead of the log they’d be using, and modeled the process by reading aloud, then writing my predictions, comments, questions and summary on the overhead, and discussing why I’d written the logs the way they were written. Monday became SSR day.

When students were retested with the IPT Reading Test in late November of 1999, eight of my approximately 85 ELD students passed the reading test, making them eligible for re-designation, about 10% of the students. I was glad that some had made it, but it was such a small group that I was disappointed that more students did not pass the test the second time. I asked “Leo” (all names changed to protect privacy), the day he received the good news why he thought he passed this time, only three months since he’d taken the test and not passed. He paused, as if he wasn’t quite sure he wanted to respond, and then said, “That’s the first book I’ve ever finished reading in my whole life.” He paused again, then added, “And I actually understood it.”

Thrilled, I asked, “Why do you think you were able to understand this book?”

He said, “Even though I didn’t like doing them, I think it was because of the reading logs. Writing about it [the book] helped me to understand.” Leo and the other seven students left the ELD program, but the students who stayed still needed assistance in reading.

For those students remaining in ELD 5, I continued the SSR program on a weekly basis. In an attempt to monitor student progress, I asked the bilingual resource teacher if we could give the IPT reading tests to the students at the end of the school year, as the district was no longer offering it, and she agreed to administer the test to my students in May. At that time a total of 43

102 NANCY SALM

students were registered in my two ELD classes. (By the second semester, enough students in my ELD 5 classes and another teacher’s ELD 5 classes had been redesignated that two of my ELD 5 classes were cancelled for the remainder of the year, and I taught two English classes in their place.)

In an effort to interpret scores, I decided to look only at students who took the reading test in September or November of 1999 and took the test again in May of 2000. This resulted in a total of 21 students who took both tests. I looked at the two scores next, and noted whether or not there was a gain, loss or no movement in the scores. Then I divided students into tables based on how many of the four sets of reading logs each student turned in. I also included each student’s grade point average at the time of final testing. It is important to note, however, that all ELD 5 students were enrolled in a SDAIE English class during the entire school year, and some students did read books but did not turn in any reading logs or turned in incomplete sets of logs. The four tables and data are shown below. All names have been changed.

TABLE 1: Four Reading Logs Completed/IPT Reading Scores Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Jessica 37 34 -3 2.28 Irene 41 43 +2 3.45 Cesar 37 40 +3 2.73

TABLE 2: Three Reading Logs Completed/IPT Reading Scores Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Oscar 31 32 +1 2.81 Paco 37 37 0 2.61 Diego 41 42 +1 1.47 Belinda 39 41 +2 2.79 Adriana 30 38 +8 2.00 Sara 35 39 +4 2.25 Rosanna 34 40 +6 1.45 Cristina 40 43 +3 2.18 Mari 38 40 +2 1.94

TABLE 3: One-Two Reading Logs Completed/IPT Reading Scores Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Lupita 37 35 -2 1.50 Jesus 44 44 0 2.39 Mario 40 42 +2 1.43 Ray 42 44 +2 2.03 Leticia 35 34 -1 2.61 Alicia 38 43 +5 2.58

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 103

TABLE 4: No Reading Logs Completed/IPT Reading Scores Name Fall 1999 score May 2000 score Change GPA Franco 36 33 -3 1.33 Guillermo 28 33 +5 1.50 Fred 34 38 +4 1.81 Alejandra 29 30 +1 0.00

Even if the results were not as uniformly positive as I had hoped, in looking at these students overall, I found that of all students who improved 3 points or more, 5 out of 8 had completed 3 or 4 logs of the 4 logs required. Only 6 out of 22 showed no improvement. Overall, 22 of 30 students showed improvement, or 80%, which is a significant percentage.

Year One (1999-2000)—Writing: Attempts to Teach Academic Writing During my first year teaching ELD 5, I also spent a great deal of time working with students to develop their writing skills. During the first three weeks of the school year, all ELD teachers were to assess students’ writing by administering an essay topic developed by the district ELD teacher on special assignment. These assessment essays were to be given three times per year––one in the fall, during the first month of school, one in the winter, just before the semester ended, and finally in the spring, a few weeks before school was out for the year. The assessment asked students to produce writing at each stage of the process: prewriting/brainstorming, a rough draft and a final draft. I administered the first writing assessment the third week of school. Students had three days of class to produce a pre-write, rough draft and final draft. Students turned in all three pieces. I was dismayed when I evaluated their essays; there was little to no prewriting of any kind, and there was no structure in many of them. The essays rambled, with run-on sentences and spelling errors everywhere and generally no obvious thesis sentences anywhere. I realized that many of these students lacked critical academic knowledge of how to structure and produce a quality essay. As there was no writing curriculum in place, I decided to teach a formulaic writing program that had been used with success in the previous school where I’d taught English.

Jane Schaffer, an educator and author, developed the program I used, “Teaching the Multi- Paragraph Essay: A Sequential Nine-Week Unit.” It is designed for use at the 9th grade level. The curriculum starts with identifying what a thesis sentence is, moves on to writing thesis sentences, and then teaches four different methods of pre-writing. Students follow very specific rules in pre-writing; they must have three topic sentences based on the subject of the essay, and each topic sentence must have three concrete details to support the topic sentences. Each concrete detail must contain a minimum of five words.

104 NANCY SALM

Schematic of Schaffer Writing System Each topic sentence mirrors sentence #1. Each concrete detail sentence mirrors concrete detail sentence #1. For definitions of terminology used by Schaffer, see Appendix 2.

After students have practiced the four types of pre-writing, they are introduced to the concept of expanding and developing their ideas, which Schaffer calls “commentary.” Schaffer uses extensive practice to teach what is very difficult for most students, adding in their own thoughts/comments. They must use two sentences of commentary for every concrete detail developed in the pre-writing. The Schaffer system uses many different types of examples to illustrate the concept of commentary, and also different types of “shaping the essay” forms that can be used by students of varying ability. Ultimately, if a student follows all the steps of the Schaffer system, he or she will be writing eleven-sentence paragraphs, using the skills learned to write well-developed essays.

In my first year of teaching ELD, I got only as far as introducing commentary and doing the practice exercises in the Schaffer system. Students completed one essay at the end of the semester, using the skills taught. They fought me all the way, saying it “was dumb,” yet they could not produce a quality, structured essay on their own. We struggled together to get through the first part of the program during the first semester. By that time, I was exhausted from fighting them and decided to not continue with the rest of the Schaffer Writing program. We would focus on using what we’d all ready learned. The rest of the year, we wrote more essays and I tried to reinforce what I’d taught up to that point: reading articles and stories, SSR, writing and some grammar instruction.

Ultimately, I believe the students balked at the Schaffer program for two reasons-first, they thought it was ‘beneath’ them, as in something they did in earlier grades, and second, the students were still angry about being in ELD 5. The long-term EL’s had not gotten over their

Copmment- ary #2

Essay Topic (Subject)

Topic Sentence #1

Topic Sentence #2

Topic Sentence #3

Concrete Detail #1

Concrete Detail #2

Concrete Detail #3

Comment- ary #1

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 105

anger at being placed in what they saw as a remedial program. The Schaffer program relies on reinforcement and repetition of skills learned previously in the program; the repetition combined with student rebellion worked against me in the classroom. By stopping instruction when we’d only finished half of the program, I denied students the chance to experience the best Schaffer had to offer, which comes at the end of the program when students have mastered all the previous skills. At that point, they are free to experiment, while using the basic program structure to write well-developed essays, yet I didn’t feel I could adequately continue the program, as so many of them refused to take it seriously and apply new skills to their writing.

Year One Ends I wrote a paper for my teacher research group at my high school about my first year experience with ELD and SSR and turned it in. Excerpts from it have been included above, and the paper itself is included in this anthology. With the school year over, I began to plan curriculum for the 2000-2001 school year. The ELD 1-3 teacher had resigned at the semester, and a new teacher was hired mid-year to teach ELD, to replace the teacher who resigned. At the semester, I lost three of my five ELD 5 classes, due to redesignation, and other student issues, while the other ELD teacher had kept her two ELD 5 classes. I finished the year much differently than I started, teaching English 10 and a senior English class, along with two ELD 5 classes and one ELD 4 class. The configuration of the ELD program had all ready undergone major changes in the first year, and the second year of the program would bring more.

READING AND WRITING EXPERIMENTS CONTINUED: YEAR TWO (2000-2001)

The numbers of ELD students at the school continued to grow, along with the overall enrollment of the school and the district, so two more ELD teachers were hired, one for lower level ELD (1 and 2) and one for ELD 4 and 5. The ELD portion of the foreign language department was growing; there were now two full-time ELD teachers and three part-time ELD teachers: a Spanish/ELD teacher, a French/ELD teacher, and me, English/ELD for a FTE equaling 3.2 teachers.

All the ELD teachers in the district at the high school and junior highs were invited to meet for a week during the summer to begin working on a district-wide ELD curriculum. The first summer after ELD 5 was instituted was a start for building a cohesive curriculum and program, but the fact that ELD 5 was a mixture of 10th, 11th and 12th graders meant that we could not use the previous year’s curriculum as we would have many students returning to ELD 5. At the summer session, I lobbied to include SSR as a part of the ELD 5 curriculum and the new high school ELD 5 teacher agreed. I could not agree with the junior high teacher present on a specific writing instruction program, nor did she want to include SSR in her program. I couldn’t convince the new high school teacher that the Schaffer Writing program should be used, as he had another writing program that he’d used previously and was familiar with. It seemed each person was “doing his or her own thing.” At this point in the ELD 5 program’s life cycle, things were

106 NANCY SALM

bumping along as we worked separately to develop a curriculum to meet the academic needs of this highly needy group of learners. Students previously in ELD 5 who had not met the redesignation criteria would remain in the program and grade levels were still mixed. It would be the second year in ELD 5 for a large number of students.

Year Two (2000-2001)—Reading: Continuing the SSR Experiment I started the 2000-2001 school year with SSR in both my ELD 5 classes. At the end of the first grading period, I found that many students did not turn in reading logs at all, or turned in logs that did not follow the guidelines of the assignment. Of the ten returning students in my classes, i.e., those who were included in last year’s research, six of the ten turned in most or all of the reading logs required to get a passing grade. Four of the ten turned in no logs and few of the new students turned them in. I was experiencing a great deal of frustration in getting students to write reading log responses, because most of them did appear to be reading: they disliked filling out the reading logs, yet last year’s students felt that logs had helped them to become better readers. I was at the point of dropping SSR, as too many students were failing the class because they refused to fill out the reading logs, when another change occurred in the program just before the end of the first semester.

At that time, the bilingual resource teacher announced that for one time only all seniors in ELD 5 who had grades of “C” or above during the semester would be eligible for a waiver out of the ELD program during the second semester. Four seniors who were included in my study last year became eligible to leave ELD 5 at the semester. This left me with an even smaller group of students from which to collect data for my continuing teacher research paper about SSR and ELD students. Plus it seemed, from reading the student’s logs, that their responses to their books had not improved, but were rather stagnant. I did not know how to address each individual student’s reading issues, so I decided to make a big change and have 20 minutes of SSR every day, in the hope that more time devoted to reading would produce more gain for the students. The students were not happy, but their desire to get out of the ELD program helped me convince them that the more reading they did the better their chances of exiting the program. Most of them were in ELD due to their SAT9 Total Reading Score. They needed a score of 26% or above on the SAT 9 Total Reading test to pass the reading portion of the redesignation criterion. Most of them were scoring between 5-10 %. As time wore on and the SAT 9 approached, it seemed harder to motivate students to read every day. I decided to poll them; after all, if it was their perception that SSR was not helpful, why continue?

Although not every student in both classes responded, overwhelmingly, those who did were positive about reading every day. They recognized that it was helping them. I, however, still wasn’t sure until one day the bilingual coordinator came to my room to schedule testing for my students, and I proudly showed her some samples of student writing I’d just received. I was excited about the content, as I was seeing some improvement and understanding of the Schaffer

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 107

system by the students, but she noticed and pointed out that the student’s spelling was much better than last year. After she said that, I realized she was right. I’d noticed it, also, but hadn’t made the connection that it might be from SSR. It was exciting to see that SSR was having a positive impact on student learning, in more than one area of English acquisition.

Now, two years and a great deal of research and study later, I have learned that SSR is helpful to students who have attained a certain level of reading proficiency; for those students, silent reading can and will boost reading ability and reading scores. For the struggling readers, reading at the primary grade levels, SSR will not help them overcome their reading difficulties, but only add to their frustration (SLSN Expert Training Series). Looking back, I see that the students who found SSR to be a positive experience were motivated students with higher goals and higher overall academic achievement. Their grade point averages were higher and they read and turned in reading logs, because they had the ability to do so, even if their skill levels were fundamentally lower than they should have been. Those students who rejected SSR were most likely in the group that reads well below grade level. For them, SSR was just another barrier they could not hurdle. In doing this two-year study, I learned a great deal about student learning and approaches to documenting and understanding student achievement, or the lack thereof. (For a more detailed account of what I learned, see my paper “To Read or Not to Read (Silently).”)

Year Two (200-2001)—Writing: Revisiting the Schaffer Writing System During year two of teaching ELD 5, with a small number of returning students in my two classes, I taught the Schaffer system again, from the beginning. I asked my returning students to assist me with helping others, but only a few felt comfortable doing that, so for them it was a review. The second year, we got completely through commentary and on to introductions and conclusions. I also was able to have students write on the suggested topic given in the Schaffer book, as a practice essay, and turn those in. Both years, I urged students to use the Schaffer system to write their ELD assessment essays and also to use it for their SDAIE (Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English) English classes. One problem I had was that students did not want to go through the “work” of pre-writing, preferring to just start writing. I had to constantly reinforce the rationale behind using pre-writing, and ended up giving extra-credit points to students who turned in pre-writing with their essays, which caused most of them to do the pre-writing. Overall, more students “bought in” to the writing curriculum this year than last.

Having taught the Schaffer curriculum the previous year, and having students in the class who were able to help their neighbors, even though they would not assist in a peer tutor fashion, helped me to move through the program more quickly and helped to validate Schaffer’s curriculum for the students who’d all ready been through it. I’ve found that for many long-term EL’s, school consists of many academic tasks that are too difficult for them to do, so they simply refuse to do much of anything, rather than appear not to know how to do something they should know how to do. The gaps in their education are numerous, and they have become masters at

108 NANCY SALM

hiding these gaps from teachers and other students. When last years’ students were able to actually do the Schaffer exercises rather easily, due to their earlier exposure, the other students were willing to tackle the curriculum as well.

Still, my main focus throughout the year had been reading, as I had continued to focus on SSR for my teacher research paper, actually expanding the paper to a 2-year study. Writing would become a focus in year three of the ELD 5 program, due to my continued involvement with teacher research and my quest for curriculum to assist students in writing.

YEAR THREE (2001-2002)—FOCUSSING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

I spent another week during the summer working with ELD 5 teachers throughout the district to try to refine the curriculum. A new ‘’twist” had been added to ELD 5; it would now be grade- level specific, with a set curriculum for each grade level. ELD 5 was now ELD 5 A, B or C, A meaning sophomore students, B for juniors and the C designation meant the ELD 5 students were seniors. Also, two more ELD teachers had been hired, as the school now had about 450 designated ELD students. ELD teachers were now a majority in the foreign language department, with a FTE equivalent teaching staff of 5.0.

As I rejoined my teacher research group for the third year, I received a flyer discussing the opportunity to work with a teacher research group at the University of California, Davis, at the Cress Center that focused specifically on ELD students. My ongoing interest in these students and their academic needs encouraged me to apply to the group. I was accepted into the group, also continuing with the teacher research group at my school. This worked well for me, as I had two different projects I was thinking of for the new year. I wanted to go back and finish my two- year paper on SSR by looking at students’ SAT 9 total reading scores and I wanted to look at students’ writing in more depth. I was ready and eager to tackle the new school year and a research paper exploring student writing, but first I wanted to revisit reading briefly.

Year Three (2001-2002)—Reading: What SAT 9 Test Results Show about Reading I looked at student’s 1999, 2000 and 2001 SAT 9 Total Reading scores and put them into the chart below. Again, I did not see the positive significant results I would have liked to see. Some students made strides, most only made modest gains. The information for the students who were included in the first year study of Sustained Silent Reading is included below:

TABLE #5 NAME GPA 1999 SAT 9 2000 SAT 9 2001 SAT 9 Change(s) 1. Jessica. 2.21 37 34 Senior -3 2. Irene 3.45 21 24 30 +3, +6 3. Cesar 2.65 7 11 Senior +4 4. Oscar 2.29 8 5 Senior -3

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 109

5. Paco 1.78 7 6 18 -1, +12 6. Diego 2.03 16 17 26 +1, +9 7. Belinda 2.6 2 No score Senior 8. Adriana 2.0 15 55 RFEP +40, 9. Sara 2.31 7 1 1 -6, 0 10. Rosanna 1.5 5 10 Senior +5 11. Cristina 2.19 19 29 RFEP +10, 12. Mari 1.94 5 Senior N/A 13. Lupita 1.69 6 6 10 0, +4 14. Jesus 2.28 3 7 14 +4, +7

15. Mario 2.03 4 Senior N/A 16. Ray 1.42 6 11 Senior +5 17. Leticia 2.00 8 8 14 0, +6 18.Alicia 2.06 23 7 14 -16, +7 19. Franco 1.30 4 5 4 +1, -1 20. Guillermo 1.24 6 7 1 +1, -6 21. Fred 1.62 11 4 Senior -7 22.Alejandra 0.00 No score No score No score

In my experience, the use of standardized tests to measure growth in reading ability is flawed. Each year, the test gets harder, so if a student does increase reading skill, it is doubtful that the increase will manifest itself in test scores. Also, students who read at an intensive reading intervention level (below 25% on the SAT 9 total reading test) will not show significant gains in reading scores even with an intensive intervention program, (SLSN Expert Training Series) which is not what I was able to do. I would have liked to have tested students with the IPT Reading test once more, but those tests were no longer available to me. Unfortunately, the use of a standardized test to determine whether or not a student will be redesignated gives a great deal of weight and power to the test. And once a student has given up, no test will have meaning for him or her.

Year Three (2001-2002)—Writing: Examining Student Work As the 2001-2002 school year opened, I realized that many of the students I’d had in either their sophomore and/or junior years, had returned to me for their senior year of ELD 5C. I was happy to learn that most of the students had already passed the district reading proficiency; one of four tests that must be passed in order to graduate; however, many more had not passed the writing proficiency. They were seniors now, so the SAT 9 Total Reading test scores were no longer issues for them; it was no longer possible for them to be redesignated as R-FEP. I decided to focus the class on writing, so as to assist students to pass the district writing proficiency test required for graduation.

110 NANCY SALM

I started the year with a review of the Schaffer Writing program, having the ‘old-timers’ assist new students, which worked better this time, as some of them had been with me both years. After we wrote an essay for the Fall ELD assessment, on “transitions in your life,” we read the novel, Bless Me, Ultima. I gave students an essay topic based on the novel and the transitions in the protagonist’s life and took them through the entire Schaffer writing process. For seniors, this was their last ELD assessment essay; they wrote a short research paper for their end of the year project.

After reviewing all the student folders available to me, I chose to do an in-depth examination of all the assessment essays produced by four different ELD students, whom I felt were representative of the ELD students in my classes, in their three years of high school ELD. Two of the students (Jesus and Sara) were with me for all three years of ELD 5, and the two other students (Leon and Lupita) were with me their sophomore and senior years of ELD 5.

Sara, Jesus and Lupita are all regular education students. Jesus was the only one of the four who was not a long-term LEP (Limited English Proficient) student; he came to the United States in 7th

grade, and graduated from high school one semester early. Leon was a special education student who worked very hard and was in mostly mainstream or SDAIE classes. All four graduated in 2002. I chose these students because they are representative of most students in the class, as far as their experiences and attitudes towards school and ELD. Also, all four of these students are true LEPs, which was not the case for all ELD students initially placed in ELD. There are seven different aspects of organizational structure taught by Schaffer that I looked for in the papers I analyzed. I have listed them below:

1. Thesis sentence 2. Introduction 3. Conclusion 4. Pre-write/shaper 5. Rough draft 6. Expanded paragraph (more than 5 sentences) 7. Paragraph uses both concrete detail and commentary

To facilitate analysis of the essays, I have used a chart that addresses each of the structural pieces listed above, except #7, (I only commented on commentary usage) and attempted to briefly summarize student’s work.

Sara Sara is one of the two students in this study who has been in ELD 5 with me for all three years of her high school career. Writing has always been difficult for Sara; as of 06/01, she had not yet passed the district IPT writing test for ELD redesignation. She did not pass the district-mandated writing proficiency test until a few weeks before graduation.

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 111

SARA Thesis Intro- duction

Conclu- sion

Pre- write

RD # of Body Para-

graphs

Comm- entary

attempted?

Expanded Paragraphs

(>5 sentences) Fall 1999

No Yes Yes Inc No 2 No No

Winter 2000

Yes Yes Yes Yes No 3 No one

Spring 2000

No Yes Yes No No 1 No No

Fall 2000

No Yes Yes No yes 2 No One

Winter 2001

Yes Yes Yes Yes yes 3 Some No

Spring 2001

Yes Yes Yes Inc Yes 3 no No

Fall 2001

Yes Yes Yes yes No 2 some No

Winter 2002

No Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 yes Yes (barely)

Sara is typical of a lower-level long-term English learner. The first essay she wrote as a sophomore, in the fall of 1999, was on the topic “an important event in your life.” It had an incomplete pre-write and no rough draft. The essay had two body paragraphs, 3 sentences in one and 6 in the second, but it was written as one paragraph. She did; however, write an introduction and a conclusion. No thesis sentence was present and the essay was not developed, talking first about having quincenaeras, then about the traditions associated with quincenaeras, and finally the decorations and escorts involved. Her conclusion states that her own quincenaera “was a lot of work to do but it was fun.”

Throughout the three years Sara was in my class, she struggled with writing. She did not like it, even though she would usually attempt to do school work, as she wanted to graduate and go to cosmetology school. From beginning to end, I see some improvement in the areas of paragraph development and sentence structure. For the last essay Sara wrote, she included a thesis sentence and used the shaper form (outline), but neglected to incorporate it into her essay. She did write an introduction, conclusion and an incomplete pre-write. Her biggest gain is in the body paragraphs, where she wrote good topic sentences with concrete details and some commentary. The two paragraphs are seven and five sentences long, respectively. She has also fixed some of her run-on sentences. I can see improvement in her overall writing, but not as much as I’d hoped for. I have included Sara’s first and final essays as Appendices 3 and 4.

112 NANCY SALM

Jesus Jesus was higher-level student who learned English at a fairly rapid pace, moving from ELD 1 in 7th grade to ELD 5 by 10th. He was the only one of the four students included in this analysis who was not a long-term English learner. He wanted desperately to get out of ELD, but some personal events during his 11th grade year caused a drop in both his motivation and his grades. He did; however, graduate from high school a semester early, even though he did not reach his goal of being redesignated.

Jesus Thesis Intro- duction

Conclu- sion

Pre- write

RD # Body Para-

graphs

Commentary attempted?

Expanded Paragraphs? (>5 sentences)

Fall 1999

No Yes Yes Inc no 3 No No

Winter 2000

Yes Yes Yes Yes yes 3 yes Yes

Spring 2000

yes Yes Yes No Yes 3 yes No

Fall 2000

yes Yes Yes yes yes 1 No No

Winter 2001

Yes Yes Yes Yes yes 3 yes One

Spring 2001

Yes Yes Yes yes Yes 3 some No

Fall 2001

no Yes Yes yes yes 3 some yes

Winter 2002

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

As a sophomore writing his first assessment essay, Jesus chose the topic of “a famous person you admire.” He wrote an incomplete brainstorm, a 2-sentence introduction and a 2-sentence conclusion. He wrote three body paragraphs of three sentences each. His organization was good, but there was no development of details (Appendix 5.)

Jesus picked up the Schaffer system rapidly, and increased sentence length in his introductions and conclusions. He also learned to write topic sentences and conclusion sentences for his body paragraphs, and the paragraphs were much longer in length. His first attempt at commentary was also commendable, and better than that of most students.

Jesus, of all four of these students, seems to have been the only one to continue to build on what he previously learned about essay writing. Even though he had some “setbacks,” (see chart), overall, he showed the most growth in essay structure. His voice also grew tremendously, and his ability to express feelings and emotion grew. His final essay is included here as Appendix 6.

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 113

Lupita Lupita was with me during her sophomore and her senior years of high school. She was an average student her sophomore year; however, by the time she returned to me as a senior, she’d grown and matured a great deal in her attitude about school and her personal degree of motivation.

Lupita Thesis Intro- duction

Conclu sion

Pre- write

RD # of Body Para

graphs

Commentary attempted?

Expanded Paragraphs? (>5 sentences)

Fall 1999

No Yes no Inc No 3 No no

Winter 2000

no Yes Yes Yes yes 3 Some no

Spring 2000

No Yes Yes yes yes 2 yes no

Fall 2000

No Yes Yes yes yes 2 some yes

Winter 2001

Yes Yes Yes Yes yes 3 Some 2

Spring 2001

Yes Yes Yes yes yes 3 no no

Fall 2001

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A

N/A N/A N/A

Winter 2002

Yes Yes Yes Yes yes 3 Yes yes

Lupita’s first essay had no thesis, a one-sentence introduction, no conclusion and an incomplete brainstorm for a pre-write. Like Sara, she chose quincenaeras as her topic. Her body paragraphs were three, two and one sentences long, respectively. This essay is included as Appendix 7.

Lupita wrote longer body paragraphs but still no thesis for her junior year ELD teacher, Mr. C. She seemed to have retained instruction from the previous year, by including a pre-write, introduction and conclusion. Her body paragraphs are a little more developed, eight and seven sentences, but she seems to have forgotten how to write concrete details and commentary.

For an essay about her “best friend,” Lupita wrote an excellent bubble cluster and a rough draft. She finally wrote a thesis sentence! She wrote three body paragraphs of seven, seven and three sentences in length. She definitely had vestiges of concrete details and commentary in this essay, so some of the teaching from her sophomore year did carry over.

114 NANCY SALM

Lupita wrote her final ELD essay for me on the topic of “people who influenced Tony’s (the novel’s protagonist) life and how they influenced him,” from the novel Bless Me, Ultima. The only copy available is the rough draft, where I made the students label their sentences following the Schaffer model. One of the bonuses of the Schaffer system, if students follow directions carefully, is that they will train themselves to put punctuation after each topic sentence, concrete detail and commentary they write, because of the inherent structure of the pre-writing techniques taught. I really stressed this the third year, as many students were still writing run-on sentences. By forcing students to label sentences, they had to move back and forth between the pre-writing and the shaper to compose the essay. For Lupita, it seemed to be very helpful. She had a thesis sentence, a pre-write, shaper and rough draft, a five-sentence introduction and a three-sentence conclusion. She followed the shaper exactly, and my instructions to choose the two best concrete details and use them in the essay. Her first body paragraph is nine sentences long and the second body paragraph is ten sentences. Her final ELD essay as a high school senior is included as Appendix 8.

Leon Leon was a highly motivated and hard-working special education student. At an IEP (Individual Education Plan) I attended for Leon, his RSP teacher commented that one of Leon’s goals was to improve his writing proficiency, and it appeared to her that he had. I told the group that I had seen growth in Leon’s writing also. One of the reasons he took writing seriously was that he wanted to be a police officer, and when he learned that writing was an important aspect of that career, he worked incessantly to improve his writing, until ‘senioritis’ hit.

Leon Thesis Intro- Duction

Conclu sion

Pre- write

RD # of Body Para-

graphs

Commentary attempted?

Expanded Paragraphs? (>5 sentences)

Fall 1999

No Yes Yes Inc No 2 No no

Winter 2000

yes Yes no yes No 3 No one

Spring 2000

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Fall 2000

no Yes no yes yes 1 No no

Winter 2001

Yes Yes Yes yes yes 3 Some 2

Spring 2001

Yes Yes Yes yes Yes 1 some yes

Fall 2001

yes Yes Yes yes Yes 3 No no

Winter 2002

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 115

Leon wrote his first essay his sophomore year about a famous person he admires. There is no thesis sentence, a minimal amount of pre-writing and he attempted an introduction and a conclusion. He wrote two body paragraphs of three sentences each, with no real structure. His essay on Pele is included as Appendix 9.

A thesis sentence is the first improvement noticeable in Leon’s winter assessment essay about his “proudest moment.” He wrote an excellent bubble cluster, on the responsibilities of being a team captain, but changed the topic to being proud of being voted team captain. He wrote two concrete detail sentences and one sentence of commentary for each in the first paragraph, for a total of six sentences. His second and third paragraphs are much weaker, only three and four sentences, and include just facts about being a team captain. Overall, though, there is improvement from his first assessment essay.

Leon’s last essay written in ELD 5, as a senior, was the fall 2001 essay. He did a good job of writing a thesis, completing the pre-writing with a good bubble cluster, a shaper form and a rough draft. He wrote a short two-sentence introduction and conclusion. I was disappointed in this effort because he left out all the commentary, but the rest of the structure is well done. I have included this essay as Appendix 10. (I must admit I was shocked when I was calculating grades and realized that Leon had not turned in a winter essay; he shrugged his shoulders when I asked him why. I attributed it to a bad case of “senior-itis".)

Conclusions from Student Profiles As I reflect back on all four students, I do see growth in their writing, but not as much as I would like to see. It seems to me that more should have been accomplished in three years of instruction. Why this is so still puzzles me, but I suspect it has to do with students overall levels of literacy being at the primary grade levels. Research suggests that literacy in a student’s first language is the key to academic achievement (Grant& Wong, 386) and Jesus, whose voice and ability to express himself grew the most of all four students had had prior instruction in his native language, Spanish.

In three years of working with long-term ELD 5 students, I have found that writing is the most difficult task for most of them. They speak English well, read somewhat fluently but have poor comprehension and struggle greatly with writing. In writing, it seems that transference (using Spanish syntax and grammatical structure) is the biggest barrier for these students to hurdle. I think that their writing skills have somehow fossilized. Intense teaching of English grammar might be helpful. Independent tutoring seems to be helpful, as that is how most of the students who could not pass the district writing proficiency test were able to finally pass it.

116 NANCY SALM

YEAR FOUR (2002-2003): A LOW POINT IN STUDENT MORALE AND HIGH POINT (A NEW PROGRAM)

Year four I again had only two ELD classes and both classes were senior students. This year would see profound changes in the ELD program at all levels, not just ELD 5. The biggest change that occurred was the establishment of ELD as a department in its own right, no longer part of the Foreign Language Department. Year four began with all ELD teachers from year three returning to the school, so the staff was beginning to build collegiality and a bond due to our common experiences. This bond and the dedication and vision of the ELD teachers are what would carry us through the upcoming year of major changes in curriculum and philosophy. What began as a district-sponsored training for teachers and administrators came to be the driving force of change in the ELD program.

Year Four (2002-2003): The Students Speak Out At the beginning of year four, ELD seniors were at the point of revolt. With three years of ELD 5 behind them, some students were feeling the frustration of being short on electives and being unable to meet the A-G requirements to attend a state university. Others chose to perform poorly in ELD, often stating to me, “I was born here. I don’t need this class.” Unfortunately, many students believe that their skill levels are higher than they really are. Some ELD 5 students, through a Chicano Studies class, began looking at Latino achievement at the school, in conjunction with their teacher and a professor from CSU, Sacramento. At the same time, the school joined into partnership with UC Davis to establish a “Latino Achievement Advisory Committee,” to address the same issues the students were addressing, that of poor overall achievement of Latino students at our school. The two groups came together one evening in early November, and two of my ELD 5 students read essays they’d written about the ELD program. I’d assigned the essays to them as the ELD fall writing assessment. I was excited to see students finally interested in writing, pouring their frustrations with school and the system out onto the pages of their essays. Their essays also expressed their feelings and anger at a system they thought kept them down, while the ELD teachers, administration and district ELD personnel were doing our best to provide a rigorous and challenging academic program. It became clear, after reading student essays, that we were far from assisting the long-term ELD 5 students to be successful, in their minds. I will let the students speak for themselves. (Some papers received extensive editing, some did not. Each excerpt will be copied here as written and turned in as a final draft. All names have been changed.)

Paper #1 Erika (Edited and presented to Latino Achievement Advisory-bold type in text is student’s emphasis) Why does the Hispanic community have the highest rate in high school dropouts? For many years Woodland has tried to help the Hispanic community rise to meet the challenge of the state standards by creating classes such as SDAIE and ELD. I’m a 17-year old Hispanic student of this high school and have experienced these

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 117

programs first-hand. As a student of the ELD program, I feel left out of so many opportunities that this school has to offer. For the past 3 years, I have been discriminated against, segregated and tracked just because of my race. ELD makes us feel less than our Anglo-Saxon peers. It is taking up space in our schedule for other opportunities…We feel trapped, restless and bored in classes we continue to repeat over and over again. …But in a way I thank the School Board for trying to help us out.

Paper #2 Maria (Presented to Latino Achievement Advisory Committee) The main reason that we as high school students were being put in the ELD program is because when we were registered for kindergarten our parents wrote “Spanish” in the space provided which asked, “What language is spoken at home?”

ELD is a very good and beneficial program to those who really do need it, but is it a good program for those who don’t? I think not. The majority of students are frustrated about the fact that they cannot get out of ELD, just because of a simple bad grade in mathematics or in another subject. Some students have college prep classes and the only class that is not benefiting them at all, is ELD. Students rather prefer a class that really helps them in their future…

Paper #3 Juan Have you ever wonder if you are in the right class? Why was this class designed? Was it to help us, or just simply to take us off track of the real classes we should be taking? …ELD at some point was helpful, but now is not something is helping me with my plans for the future. Students that are in ELD 5 sometimes are there for other reasons, other than just not understanding the language.

Paper #4 Sylvia Have you ever asked why are there a lot of requirements to get out of ELD classes? Once a student is in ELD, it is difficult to get out, only a very few students have been redesignated. Are ELD classes really helping students? Why have students who have been in the USA most of their lives having problems passing the redesignation criteria?

I know a student in ELD 5 who has a college reading level and because of her grades she can’t get out. She does not even put effort into ELD class because it makes her bored and this is affecting her. …ELD classes have helped me with my development of English, but the reason I would like to get out of ELD is because I don’t get college credit. Sometimes counselors make assumptions about where students should be. They think that if someone is taking ELD classes, they should take classes that are basic, low level classes, that don’t inspire us to go forward to take college classes. I am lucky because my counselor is a nice person and she has motivated me to go to college; however this is not true for other ELD students.

I think the tests are barriers that are not going to let us out, it seems every time we want to pass this barrier it gets larger and larger; every year the redesignation

118 NANCY SALM

criteria changes. In my case I have good grades, I have a good GPA and I also have college prep classes and just for the simple reason that I have not passed the [SAT 9 reading] test, I am still in ELD 5.

Paper #5 Teresa …That’s when I think ELD is a bad thing, when they think that Non-English speaking students are stupid, some people that are from different countries have higher grades or test scores but sometimes teachers ignore that and they still place them in ELD classes and they can’t get an elective.

Many people think that ELD is a program that helps students learns how to read and write better in English. They do help, but what about the student that has been here for eight years and has been schooled in English only? Just because a student has a Spanish last name or speaks Spanish doesn’t necessarily mean they should be placed in ELD classes.

Paper #6 Miguel My high school has an ELD program, created to help the students learning their second language. Some students…think this class is not helping them. They feel discriminated against being in ELD class because they are separated from other students who have English backgrounds. They are not receiving the same opportunities like the students in mainstream English classes. ELD 5 students have to take two English classes without having the opportunity to take an elective class. Some of them speak and write English very well but they are still in this program.

As I read the student’s papers, what stood out the most for me was the frustration students expressed at being in ELD 5. Many of them felt that the “extra” period in their schedule that was taken by ELD could have been put to better use by taking college prep classes. However, many of them did not have the academic ability to be successful in college preparatory classes, and those that did take college prep classes had difficulties academically. They were victims of a vicious cycle; they did not perform well academically, so they were placed in low level classes, causing them to get further behind in their academic abilities. For many of these long term EL’s, school was a place where failure was common, so the ELD program became the scapegoat. The system had failed them by never allowing them the opportunities they know they missed. Their frustration and anger are righteous and justified, and when we, the ‘system’ began to address their needs, it was really too late. Let us hope it is not too late for the next generation of long term English learners.

Morale had never been lower, for both the ELD 5 students and me, than just before Thanksgiving break, shortly after the meeting of the Latino Achievement Advisory Committee. Over 50% of students in ELD 5 classes were failing with grades of “F.” ELD 5 teachers were constantly dealing with discipline and attendance issues in the classroom. We knew we needed to do something, so we decided, with the district’s blessing, to offer Individual Educational Plans to

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 119

students who were seniors and on track to graduate. The individual plan allowed seniors who met certain criteria to waive out of ELD 5 at the semester. That was one answer, and it applied to about 45 students, but what about the rest of the ELD 5 students? The answer came from a direction none of us had contemplated.

Year Four (2002-2003): A New Direction in Writing Instruction The Secondary Literacy Support Network (SLSN) was developed by WestEd, a non-profit research, development and service agency, to assist schools with developing research-based literacy programs to assist struggling readers. My school’s involvement was brought about thanks to our new assistant superintendent’s knowledge of the work that had been done with a pilot school in Contra Costa County the previous year. They were in their second year of addressing literacy issues at their school. The rest of the school teams attending the trainings were novices, including my team. We knew there were problems with academic achievement at our school, for both EL’s and EO’s (English Only) students but the SLSN trainings identified and targeted the problem- many students can’t read at grade level.

The training was remarkably enlightening and informative. The specific needs of English Language Learners, non-standard English speakers (such as some African-American students) and low-achieving English-Only (EO) students were addressed throughout the training. SLSN sought to further assist schools by offering lectures and presentations from some of the experts in the field of reading including Kate Kinsella, Leslie McPeak and Sharroky Hollie. Also present at the trainings were publisher’s representatives, to explain how their particular wares might best meet the needs of the diverse school populations represented at the trainings.

As the newly formed Literacy Leadership Team (LLT) at the school began planning to implement an intensive intervention reading program at the semester of the 2002-03 school year (a student in need of intensive intervention is one defined as reading two or more grades below grade level, and scoring below 26% on the SAT 9 Total Reading test,) we looked at our scheduling and numbers and concluded that we could implement a pilot program with our ELD students, who had two periods of English in their schedules all ready. The ELD teachers agreed to attend district sponsored training and pilot the High Point program, developed by Hampton- Brown. It is important here to describe in more detail the High Point Reading program and how the district came to adopt the program, with the blessings of the ELD teachers.

High Point has six “placement points,” the place where the student enters the program. The first three placement points are for newcomers, and cover 1st, 2nd and 3rd grade standards. The A, B and C placement points cover 4th, 5th and 6th grade standards respectively. All former ELD 5 students, except those seniors who were able to waive ELD placement, placed into one of these three programs. ELD classes now became based on students’ placement on a test, not the

120 NANCY SALM

assumed ELD level, which had been determined by teacher recommendation until the previous year when the CELDT (California English Language Development Test) was administered.

On January 27, 2003, approximately 330 ELD students entered the new High Point classes, according to their High point placement test. We kept recent immigrant students in different classes, separating them from the long-term ELD students, as the two groups don’t mix well. Classes, however, are now mixed-grade as well as mixed “ELD” level. A student’s former ELD level is no longer taken into consideration as far as placement into High Point. This was a big change for both students and teachers.

Two of my English classes went to other teachers and I found myself teaching four periods of High Point. I had two very distinct groups; a group of former ELD 2’s and 3’s who all came to class with high levels of prior schooling in other countries. Having never taught this level of ELD, I was pleasantly surprised by most of these students’ hard work, dedication and intellectual capabilities. They were nothing like the ELD 5 students I’d been teaching the past 3 years, because they were anxious to learn English and didn’t mind being in ELD class. What a change!

I was also assigned two one-hour periods of High Point B, and these students were former ELD 5’s. I had a mix of sophomores, juniors and seniors. I was faced with all new students (even the students in my one remaining English class were all new at the semester) and a brand new curriculum. My world had completely and suddenly changed.

Year Four (2002-2003): Student Response to Highpoint—A Survey As I watched the differences in the two groups performance and attitudes towards High Point, I decided to survey students to determine if what they were thinking compared to what I was seeing in my own classrooms. I asked ELD teachers to survey their students about nine weeks into the second semester using the instrument I developed. I was also looking for information to help ELD teachers and our site Literacy Leadership Team (LLT) determine students’ initial reactions to the new program. I wanted to hear from students themselves what they thought about High Point. A copy of the survey is included as Appendix 11.

173 surveys were returned from five of the six ELD teachers. The breakdown of students responding based on former ELD level is as follows: ELD 1 = 3 students, ELD 2 = 23 students, ELD 3 = 28 students, ELD 4 = 26 students and ELD 5 = 93 students. While waiting for the surveys, I also obtained ELD 5 students’ grade records, and looked at each student’s semester grade in their ELD class during the first semester of 2002, averaging their letter grades. I compared their first semester ELD grade to their first 6 weeks grade in the High Point program.

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 121

TABLE #6 GRADE LEVEL First semester ELD grade 6-week High Point grade 10th Grade ELD 5 1.79 2.95 11th Grade ELD 5 1.72 3.05

12th Grade ELD 5 1.62 2.87

By looking at this quick evaluation, it is easy to see that students performed at much higher levels in their High Point classes, versus their ELD 5 classes. Was this a novelty, as the program was new, or were students performing better? I anxiously awaited the returning surveys, in the hopes of getting more detailed information.

One of the first questions I analyzed was Question 9, the question that asked students why they thought they were placed in High Point. I wanted to know if we’d (teachers) explained the new program thoroughly to students and also if students still held misconceptions about ELD that had carried over to High Point.

Responses were analyzed for the ELD 5 students as a group, then ELD 4, and ELD 1, 2 and 3 were grouped together, as students at the three lower ELD levels generally tend to have high prior schooling.

TABLE #7 REASONS FORMER ELD 5 FORMER ELD 4 FORMER ELD 1-3 1. Absent, not sure, did not take test seriously

17 2 4

2. No response or unclear response 24 13 7 3. Needed more English, help with English skills

24 12 23

4. Low grade point or low achievement 7 0 0 5. I speak another language 2 3 0 6. I tested into it; low test scores 22 11 4

96 41 38

I was happy to see that only five students total felt that High Point was discriminatory (question 5), as that was the attitude expressed by students when answering the question. Unhappily, almost half of the ELD 5 students and 1/3 of the ELD 4 students’ responses to questions 1& 2 continue to show the negative attitude these students have towards school and ELD. A number of

122 NANCY SALM

students realized that they were in the program because they tested into it (question 6) but I don’t think, based on their responses, that they understood the significance of testing into the program. One thing we did not do was explain to the students what grade levels the High Point placement points correspond to. We felt (based on feelings like those expressed in the essays above) that students would be negatively affected by that knowledge.

One of the most interesting items on the test were the student responses that I called #6-testing into High Point. As I’d analyzed ELD 5 students first, I found the connotations students put on testing into the program as very negative. Sample student responses follow: Student 5-3 grumbled, “I’m not really sure but I think I passed it and I’m still here.” Student 5-24 wrote, “Because I didn’t do good on the test.” Student 5-26 said, “ I probably did bad on the test.” ELD students formerly in level 1-3 saw their placement as much more positive, where test results were cited. Student 2-11 wrote, “Because I’m suppost to be here. I’m ready for this class.” Student 2- 22 was also very positive, “I think I was put in this class because they thought I was ready for this class.” “Because in the test I did well,” was student 3-27’s happy response. A fair number (14 of 24) of ELD 5 students used the excuse that they either missed the test or did not try on the test, to be placed into High Point. One student emphatically declared, “Someone in the school or the district made a mistake.”

Overall, ELD 5 students as a group still seem disgruntled with being in ELD, be it in the guise of High Point or just a class labeled “ELD,” whereas the former 1-3 students were much more positive about High Point. These findings come from question # 10-Do you like the High Point program, and question #12-Are you learning more, less or about the same as you did in your ELD class last semester?

TABLE #8 Question #10: Do you like the High Point program?

Yes No Somewhat

ELD 5 (92 responses) 20 37 35 ELD 4 (26 responses) 9 9 8 ELD 3 (28 responses) 8 4 16 ELD 2 (23 responses) 16 0 7 ELD 1 (3 responses) 2 0 1

The higher the former ELD level, the more students begin to state dislike for the program. Seventy-two out of 92 students stated they either did not like HP or only liked it somewhat. Reasons were quite varied. Student 5-1 was quite adamant in his dislike, which had little to do with the program and more to do with his or her personal feelings, “You guys are unfair to the people that speak two languages. I dislike the program cause I was born in California, and my first language is English.” Student 5-3 was more direct with his or her criticism, “Its dumb, its also stupid its really dumb.” Student 5-20 expressed frustration, “ I’ve been in these classes for

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 123

to long.” Student 5-42 laments, “ Because there nothing wrong with me I was here by a mistake.” Many students felt HP was “boring,” and a few said it was too easy. Student 5-83 said, “Because I think one English class is enough.” True program criticisms were complaints about too much vocabulary or too much repetition.

Question #12 was also enlightening, when student responses by former ELD levels were compared.

TABLE #9 Q# 12: Are you learning more or less in HP? (Compared to ELD)

More Less About the Same

No Response/ Don’t Know

ELD 5 (92 responses) 35 16 38 13 ELD 4 (26 responses) 15 3 8 0 ELD 3 (28 responses) 15 3 10 0 ELD 2 (23 responses) 17 0 5 1 ELD 1 (3 responses) 2 0 1 0

I believe that the results reflected here in table #4 show that students feel they are learning at least as much or more than they did in the former ELD programs. At least for former ELD 5’s, it is safe to say that their anger and frustration has not been appeased by the High Point program, even though grades went up substantially from their previous grades in ELD. Many of my former ELD 5 students told me that HP was too easy; I countered with the thought that perhaps it just where they’re supposed to be, so it seems easy, because for so many years everything in school has been above them, in terms of reading level. Few of them accept my hypothesis, but I believe it has some merit. Further exploration is needed.

THE FINAL DANCE? CONCLUDING THOUGHTS ABOUT MY FOUR YEARS OF RESEARCH

Next year I will again be teaching ELD students, but they will be High Point B students, high school students whose reading and language arts skills are at the 5th grade level. Will I have a “high prior schooling” group, as I did last year, or will I have returning ELD 5’s? It’s unknown at this time, what anyone will have, as the school’s new principal and the literacy team struggle to place all students who need intensive reading intervention. Our ELD students are the highest percentage of this group, but we also have 73 English only students who need intensive intervention. We hope to place them into High Point, to try to address student complaints that they are tracked and segregated from their Anglo peers. What will next year look like? Is High Point the panacea we all hoped it would be? Of course not. Does it offer a way to provide systematic explicit instruction to students who need such instruction? Yes, it does. Will it be

124 NANCY SALM

successful for former ELD 1’s, 2’s and 3’s? Yes. Will it be successful for former 4’s and 5’s that are long term English learners? I have my doubts.

I think schools need to look at their long-term English learners as a separate and distinct group from more recent immigrant students, a group with different educational needs and issues. More recent immigrants develop in their writing as they progress, through an ELD program. Long- term ELD students have fossilized writing patterns, as shown in their difficulties adapting to a structured essay writing program. Students with higher reading levels are helped by SSR; students with lower levels of reading continue to be frustrated. Long-term EL’s have been traumatized by the system, to the point where too many of them give up on school. I have found that I must cheer on my ELD 5 students, over and over, and assure them that they are intelligent and are capable of doing well in school. The issues of long-term students must be addressed long before they reach the high school. However, the full solution to helping long-term EL’s be successful academically has not yet been found.

I myself want to continue to search for answers. In conclusion, the past four years have been some of the most interesting years of my eleven-year teaching career. Next year I am also going to be the Literacy Coordinator for the school, working in conjunction with the bilingual resource teacher to be sure that all ELD students are correctly placed. I will be administering the Diagnostic Assessment of Reading (DAR) test to all high school students who are currently in Intensive reading classes, and most of them are ELD students. I hope that perhaps an even closer look at students’ strengths and weaknesses in their reading will help us to assure a quality education for all. I have identified the subject of my master’s thesis and my teacher research paper for next year––What type of intensive intervention program is most beneficial to long term English learners?

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 125

Bibliography

Aiming High: High Schools for the 21st Century. California Department of Education. Sacramento, California 2002.

Cardinale, K., Carnoy, M. & Stein, S. (1999). Bilingual education for limited English proficiency students: local interests and resource availability as determinants of pedagogical practice. Qualitative Studies in Education, 12, (1), 37-57.

Demie, F. (2001). Ethnic and gender differences in educational achievement and implications for school improvement strategies. Educational Research, [Online] 43(1), 8 pages. Retrieved May 2, 2003 from http://0-web6.epnet.com.eureka.lib.csus.edu/delivery.asp from Academic Search Elite, (Ebscohost).

Grant, R.A. & Wong, S.D. Barriers to literacy for language-minority learners: An argument for change in the literacy education profession. (2003). Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 46, (5), 386-394.

Secondary Literacy Support Network (SLSN) Expert Training Series. WestEd. (2002-2003.) 11days of training: October 16, 2002 through March 23, 2003.

Skrla, L., Scheurich, J.J. & Johnson, Jr., J.K. (2000). Equity-driven achievement-focused school districts: A report on systemic school success in four Texas school districts serving diverse student populations. The University of Texas at Austin: Charles A. Dana Center, 2000.

“Teaching the Multi-Paragraph Essay: A Sequential Nine-Week Unit.” Jane Schaffer Publications. San Diego. 1991.

126 NANCY SALM

Appendix 1

SUSTAINED SILENT READING JOURNAL LOG #________

Title of Book: ______________________________Author: ____________________

Date: ____________ Pages Read: __________YOUR NAME: ____________________ Prediction(s):

Questions and Comments:

Summary (include answers to your predictions):

=============================================================== SUSTAINED SILENT READING JOURNAL LOG #________

Date: _______________ Pages Read________YOUR NAME: _____________________ Prediction(s):

Questions and Comments:

Summary (include answers to your predictions):

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 127

Appendix 2

“Teaching the Multi-Paragraph Essay” Terminology Jane Schaffer

ESSAY A piece of writing that files your thoughts (commentary) about a subject. All essays you will write this quarter will have at least 4 paragraphs: an introduction, 2 body paragraphs, and a concluding paragraph.

INTRODUCTION (also called the introductory paragraph)

The first paragraph in an essay. It includes the thesis, most often at the end.

BODY PARAGRAPH A middle paragraph in an essay. It develops a point you want to make that supports your thesis.

CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH (also called the conclusion)

The last paragraph in your essay. It may sum up your ideas, reflect on what you said in your essay, say more commentary about your subject, or give a personal statement about the subject.

Your conclusion is all commentary and does not include concrete detail. It does not repeat key words form your paper and especially not from your thesis and introductory paragraph. It gives a finished feeling to your whole essay.

THESIS A sentence with a subject and opinion (also called commentary). This comes somewhere in your introductory paragraph and most often at the end.

PRE - WRITING

The process of getting your concrete details down on paper before you organize your essay into paragraphs. You can use any or all of the following: bubble cluster, spider diagrams, outlines, line clustering, or columns.

CONCRETE DETAILS (CD)

Specific details that form the backbone or core of your body paragraphs. Synonyms for concrete detail include facts, specifics, examples, descriptions, illustrations, support, proof, evidence, quotations, paraphrasing, or plot references.

COMMENTARY (CM) Your opinion or comment about something; not concrete detail. Synonyms include opinion, insight, analysis, interpretation, inference, personal response, feeling, evaluation, explication, and reflection.

TOPIC SENTENCE The first sentence in a body paragraph. This must have a subject and opinion (commentary) for the paragraph. It does the same thing for a body paragraph that the thesis does for the whole essay.

CONCLUDING SENTENCE The last sentence in a body paragraph. It is all commentary, does not repeat key words, and gives a finished feeling to the paragraph.

Appendix 2, continued

SHAPING THE ESSAY The step that is done after prewriting and before the first draft of and essay; it is an outline of your thesis, topic sentences, concrete details, and commentary ideas.

FIRST DRAFT The first version of your essay (also called the rough draft).

FINAL DRAFT The final version of your essay.

PEER RESPONSE Written responses and reactions to a partner's paper.

128 NANCY SALM

Appendix 3

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 129

Appendix 4

130 NANCY SALM

Appendix 5

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 131

Appendix 6

132 NANCY SALM

Appendix 7

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 133

Appendix 8

134 NANCY SALM

Appendix 9

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 135

Appendix 10

136 NANCY SALM

APPENDIX 11

Directions: This is an anonymous survey. The results will be used in a study about the High Point program. Please answer each question as it applies to you now.

1. Current grade level: 10 11 12

2. Former ELD level: 1 2 3 4 5

3. Current High Point class: Lakeside unit 5 A B C

4. Current GPA: ______________ (best guess, if not sure)

5. Grade in last English class: A B C D F

6. Name of class: _________________________

7. Grade in High Point class: A B C D F

8. Please list the title of each class you are currently taking and answer the questions for each class individually. Circle or write in an answer. Thank you.

Science class: _________________________________ Grade: _________ How much of the science textbook do you understand, when you read it silently to yourself?

I understand all of it between half and all about half less than half none

History class: _________________________________ Grade: _________ How much of the history textbook do you understand, when you read it silently to yourself?

I understand all of it between half and all about half less than half none

Math class: _________________________________ Grade: _________ How much of the math textbook do you understand, when you read it silently to yourself?

I understand all of it between half and all about half less than half none

Answer only if you have a second English class, other than High Point:

English class: _________________________________ Grade: _________ How much of the English textbook do you understand, when you read it silently to yourself?

I understand all of it between half and all about half less than half none

The Evolution of an ELD 5 Program 137

Please answer the questions in the space below:

High Point Level: ____________1st 6 weeks grade________ year 10 11 12

9. Why, to the best of your knowledge, were you placed in a High Point class?

10. Do you like the High Point Program? Yes some no Please give reasons for your answer:

11. Are you learning in the High Point program? Please explain.

12. Think for a minute about your ELD class last semester. How does High Point compare? Are you learning more or less in High Point?

More Less About the same Why do you think this?

13. What do you think is your current grade level of reading? For example, if you are a sophomore, you must be able to read books written at the 10th grade level. Think of the books in your science, math and history classes. Those books are generally grade-level books. If you don’t think you read at your grade level, what grade level do you think you read at?

___________________

14. If you were not in High Point, what class would you like to take in place of it?

15. How long have you lived in the United States? _____________________

16. Have you attended school in another country? Yes No

17. How many years of school did you attend in another country? _________

Thank you for your time. This survey will help us to determine the best classes for you and other ELD students.

138 NANCY SALM

139

© 2003 CRESS Center, UC Davis

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners

by

Carol Halbe

BACKGROUND OF INTEREST

The education of one in four students in California who are designated English Learners is a

critical topic. Much research has focused on the services received by EL’s at the elementary

schools, including the controversial debate over bilingual education. However, the concerns

about appropriate educational setting and time required to learn English only become

magnified when the high school EL, who must meet graduation requirements, including

passing the CAHSEE, is considered. In my practice as a secondary instructional coach and

administrator in a large suburban district, I have come to understand both the practical

realities experienced by students who enter high school with limited English proficiency and

the daily struggles they face. I have become convinced that once teachers, policy makers and

advocates for English Learner programs are made aware of what it “feels” like to be an EL in

a comprehensive high school, the comprehensive education of these students will improve. I

have seen that, in one district, the pressures on these students far outweigh the supports

provided.

Although my initial inquiry into the education of EL’s was grounded in the question of

whether EL’s were best served in integrated classes (where English only students learned

side by side with English Learners), especially for content subjects like science and history, I

discovered that students themselves had strong opinions about this topic and their schooling

experiences in general, and that prompted me to look closer at how they experienced high

school.

I began the study with the intention of answering my initial question of comparison between

integrated and segregated content classes in high school. I was interested in this question

because my district had recently returned all English Learners to their attendance area high

schools, after years of a policy that required them attend one of two high schools that served

all English Learners in the district. I intended to compare GPA data on EL’s before and after

140 CAROL HALBE

the change, but the district data had not been archived in a manner that I could retrieve. I

also realized that comparing different students’ grades across several years would not provide

valid comparison data because of the significant number of variables including

demographics, incoming education, teacher practice and home language literacy. I began

exploring the high school EL experience by interviewing students and teachers, and then I

conducted a focus group of EL students. I observed English Learners in content area classes

at several schools, and finally selected one EL student as the subject for an in-depth case

study. While I did examine academic issues, I also included the co-curricular concerns

brought up by the students themselves that certainly have an impact on the academic

performance of these students.

Context for the study:

The San Francisco Bay Area district studied in this project serves a student population of

approximately 31,000 students in grades kindergarten through 12. Of these, approximately

14% are designated English Learners.

• The size of the EL population has increased from 3, 456 in 1995 to 4,405 in 2002.

• The major languages of English Learners in the district are given below. A total of 38 languages were identified in 2001 – 2002.

+ Spanish (25 %) + Other non-English (19.5) + Mandarin (12.5%) + Punjabi (6.2%) + Vietnamese (4.7%) + Cantonese (4.7%) + Farsi (4.4%) + Korean (4.3%) + Filipino (3.6%) + Hindi (3.6%) + Burmese (3.5%) + Urdu (3.5%) + Gujarati (1.5%) + Arabic (1.3%) + Pashto (1.0%)

• The most recently reported redesignation rate is 16.9% (The county average is 8.3%; the state average is 9%).

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 141

THE RESEARCH QUESTION

When I began my research, I was struck with the number of student responses that dealt with

co-curricular issues. The initial question was: Are high-school English Learners (EL) best

served in content classes where they are integrated with English only (EO) speakers, or are

they best served in segregated classes? This question no longer seemed broad enough to

capture what students were experiencing. I then decided to take a broader look at some of

the affective factors influencing the EL high school experiences. My question became: Are

there advantages to integrating English Learners for content area classes that outweigh

the academic and social challenges integration into the mainstream presents?

THE DATA COLLECTION PROCESS

1. Teacher Surveys and Interviews:

• My first step was to conduct interviews with teachers who were currently teaching EL’s in integrated classes, and several who had taught segregated ESL classes in the past. I conducted 12 semi-formal interviews with teachers from three of the five high schools (Teacher Interview Protocol: Appendix 1). The following chart identifies the teachers who were interviewed initially about their experiences teaching English Learners.

(The number in parenthesis indicates number of male/female teachers, years teaching experience, # with/without EL authorization/ # teachers by subject.)

Gender Years Experience EL Authorization SubjectsTaught Men (2) 1 – 4 yrs. (5)

5 yrs. (1) Yes (8) English (3)

History (3)

Women (10) 12 yrs. (1) 13 – 19 yrs. (4) 30 yrs. (1)

No – but some SDAIE training (4)

Science (2) Geography (2) Reading (1) Computer Ops. (1)

• I distributed more than 100 surveys at two high schools, asking teachers if they were willing to be interviewed about their perceptions regarding SDAIE class compositions.

• Twelve teachers from the two schools initially agreed to a formal interview about their experiences teaching EL’s. (I anticipated many more responses than I received as, informally, some teachers had voiced “complaints” about the English Learners in their classes and at their schools. When given the opportunity to speak formally about their issues, fewer responded than I had expected.) Once the case study began, I interviewed an additional 3 teachers.

In most classes of 25 – 30 students, the number of English Learners usually ranged from one

to eight.

142 CAROL HALBE

• Teachers summarized the benefits they saw in integrating students for content classes. Most often they mentioned that the instructional level remains high with mixed students. They also indicated that integrating classes increases the socialization between EL’s and EO’s, reducing the EL’s feeling of isolation. Several indicated that integrated classes provide EL students with access to native speakers of the language and exposure to American culture.

• Teachers also spoke to the disadvantages. Most frequently, teachers reported that EL’s will not speak in class, and this makes it difficult to know whether they understand the material. Several pointed out how difficult it must be to work extremely hard and earn “C’s” or lower. Three teachers spoke specifically about how frustrating it is for teachers as well, who are often in a position to “re-teach” their EL’s during the short passing period or to answer questions that might have been asked during class time.

• I interviewed the Program Manager in charge of the ELD Program at the secondary schools in order to determine the district rationale for the change. I created a Program Theory flow chart to understand the various factors that might affect implementation success. Because I wanted to explore the affective responses to the program change implemented by the district, I asked teachers to discuss their understanding of the rationale behind the program change. Their understanding of the district decision was limited to the points outlined below.

• The EL’s were returned to their home school in order to--

+ Keep students in their neighborhood school

+ Avoid the watered down curriculum that sometimes occurs in “sheltered” classes

+ Integrate students with native speakers of English because separate classes can actually hinder language development

+ Increase socialization

2. Focus Group and Student Interviews:

In order to bring student perspective into the study, I organized a focus group of 13 students

from all five comprehensive high schools (some newly arrived and some who had been in the

U.S. as long as 6 years) to talk to a group of teachers about their experiences in integrated

content classes. The sheer power of student voice and students’ ability to articulate, even in a

language some had just begun to learn, the impact of their experiences as English Learners in

high school, prompted me to look more closely and listen more carefully to what students

were experiencing. Although I was driven initially to investigate academic learning

specifically, in listening to the focus group discuss the wide range of topics that were

important to their school success, I knew I had to broaden my focus for the case study to

include co-curricular experiences as well.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 143

1. I interviewed 16 English Learner students about their experiences in integrated content and SDAIE classes, including the focus group students (Student Interview Protocol: Appendix 2).

2. Twelve students voluntarily participated in a Focus Group of English Learners to talk about their learning experiences since coming to the U.S. (Focus Group Protocol: Appendix 3).

Their home countries include:

• China Hong Kong • Mexico India • Jordan Burma • Taiwan Afghanistan • Pakistan

3. The Case Study:

The students who participated in this focus group brought up a number of topics that then, in

constructivist manner, became my focus when I decided to conduct a case study. My

purpose in conducting a case study was not to generalize one student’s experiences to stand

for the experiences of many or most English Learners, but to bring to the awareness of those

who work with or determine placement and policy for English Learners some of the

complexities embedded in the high school experience.

I invited the students in an ELD II class on one high school campus to participate in a case

study. Several students expressed interest, but only one student followed through with

parental release forms. I selected this student as the subject of my study. She is 16 years old

and has been in the United States about 18 months. Her native country is India and her

language is Punjabi.

The student selected for the case study was a high school junior who had been assigned to

two 10th grade classes. She had been in the U.S. about one and a half years at the time the

study commenced, and had been at two different high schools due to a family move. Over

the course of several months, I interviewed her in my office, observed her in her classes and

looked at samples of her class work and homework. We discussed her preparation for

upcoming tests and her registration for summer school and classes next fall when she will be

a senior. Her bright smile and immediate willingness to participate belied the very shy, sad,

lonely girl whom I would come to know well over the ensuing weeks. I will call her Mari.

144 CAROL HALBE

ORGANIZATION OF THE DATA

I structured the paper around key questions that emerged from the students’ descriptions of

their experiences as they overlapped with my observations from the case study and

interviews with students and teachers. What stood out among these data was the range of

curricular and co-curricular frustrations that the high school English Learner faces daily, as

well as the EL’s willingness to persevere despite the obstacles and challenges they

encountered.

What is the experience of an English Learner in small cooperative groups within integrated content classes?

Findings: Working in groups was the SDAIE strategy mentioned most often by teachers in

integrated content classes. Research supports that well-structured, cooperative groups can

benefit all students working together. This aspect of successful grouping was not evident in

any of the classes I observed, although some teachers spoke of successfully pairing students

by primary language to help each other. Most often I observed students grouping

themselves, which placed the EL at a disadvantage because they were not socialized as well

as the EO’s. I also observed “off the top of the head” groups selected by the teacher, which

also failed to support the EL. Teachers were quick to discuss the limitations of group work

and the problems inherent in student group assignments. Many English Learners as well

spoke of the discomfort they experienced when placed in groups to complete tasks.

Teacher Interviews:

• Teachers self-reported strategies they used, which they believed were successful with English Learners. The strategy mentioned most often was cooperative grouping, which took different forms. Some teachers paired students with the same primary language. Others paired students with EO’s who were successful and could help them. Some used a random approach, or no teacher directed grouping at all (student self-selection). The other strategies mentioned included using visuals and graphics and providing extra help for students either before or after school or at lunch. (Teacher Responses: Appendix 4)

When these same teachers were asked how are your EL’s doing in classes compared to EO’s,

they responded as follows:

• Ten teachers indicated their EL’s are passing at the same rate or better;

• Two said many more are earning D’s and F’s; however, when asked to check their grade books, both retracted their initial impression. The immediate response of these teachers

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 145

underscores a prevailing tendency for some teachers to see special needs students from a deficit model.

Focus Group: Students were asked to describe their experiences working in groups.

S. is an articulate young woman from Jordan who wears a traditional scarf that covers her

hair. She had only been in the United States about six months, though her spoken English

was quite good. In the focus group she talked about her experiences.

Q: Can you tell me what it’s like to work in groups? Does that help at all?

A: If I was in the group and I didn’t understand the information or what they tell me to do, like in science. Sometimes they’re gonna make fun of me, sometimes they whispering to each other and sometimes I feel nervous, so it’s hard to be in groups sometimes. But I can just explain it and say, “I’ve only been here 6 months so what are you whispering at?”

She exudes a self-confidence that allows her to retain her sense of place, even with English

only students who need to be reminded of this. Such confidence is not evident in every

student, especially given the number of EL’s who say they would never speak in class. Her

self-assuredness may well be the exception rather than the rule.

Case Study Observation:

My observations of Mari in World History reinforced the difficulty students whose English is

limited experience in cooperative groups that lack structure and consistency.

Ms. C announces that she is going to put the students in groups today because students need

to “do some work on their own.” She begins to explain the worksheet that asks students to

analyze bias and assumptions in a text. She asks students for examples of unproven

assumptions and students offer such suggestions as, “ legends,” “religion,” and “big foot.”

For clarity, she reads a definition of bias and gives the Western “imperialization of Africa” as

an example. She then assigns students into triads by row. The noise of chairs being scooted

into pods drowns out the teacher’s voice as many students are beginning to move into their

groups of three. Ms. C says, “Work with your group and answer the questions on the paper.

Now, don’t let one person do all the work. That’s not fair.”

Mari is assigned to work with two girls, one of whom, the teacher whispers to me is the “best

student in the class.” The other girl is a student who struggles because of truancy issues. As

other groups arrange their desks so that the edges of the tabletops touch, Mari’s group has

146 CAROL HALBE

been squeezed into a sort of “s” shape that will not allow them to talk face to face. When the

students begin talking in groups I suggest to Mari, Lisa and Marisol that they move their

desks to form a circle and face each other. Lisa is immediately ready to move, but Mari only

scoots her desk a few inches back, and the “s” shape becomes elongated. Marisol rolls her

eyes that Mari hasn’t moved into a better position, and the girls settle in to read the material.

(Class work: Appendix 5)

For some minutes, not one word is spoken in Mari’s group. The other students behind them

discuss the text and collaborate on filling in the answers to questions. Marisol and Lisa have

answered the first two questions, and Mari’s paper is blank. At last Lisa asks “What

assumptions do you have?”

Mari and Marisol are simultaneously starting to reply; however, Mari, whose voice is much

softer, seems to shrink back in her desk slightly and she looks at Marisol to continue.

I do not think Marisol or Lisa were even aware that Mari had begun to speak. The dialogue

that followed between Marisol and Lisa about the answer to the first question was barely

absorbed by Mari, who stared at her paper, moving her pencil over the words in one

paragraph again and again. She did not make eye contact with either girl. I do not believe

she understood what they were talking about.

Mari waited until Marisol had finished talking, and she asked Lisa about the correctness of a

word she had written. Mari had written two or three words for question one; Marisol and

Lisa had each written several sentences.

It seemed Mari trusts Lisa. It also seemed she was more willing to ask a question of another

student than of the teacher. I saw her speak twice to Lisa; this was the first time I observed

her speak in a class. I do not know whether she actually was successful in getting her

question answered, as her accent and a somewhat noisy classroom made communication

difficult.

I commented earlier that Mari looks like the other students in the class. I’d like to clarify that

she looks just like the other students only until one realizes she is covering up a lack of

understanding by staring at a text, moving her pencil over the words as if she is reading; she

is pretending. Tonight she will go home and use her dictionary to look up as many words as

she needs to make sense of what other students may grasp in a first, quick glance.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 147

Follow-up Case Study Interview:

I interviewed Mari after the World History group lesson. Mari was quite matter of fact that

cooperative groups do not help her learn.

Q: When you were in groups you were working with Marisol and Lisa. Did you feel comfortable working with them, asking them questions?

A: They didn’t talk me a lot of times. I just asked them a question.

Q: When they talked to each other, did you understand? For instance, Lisa said, “What did you write down for the first answer?” Then Marisol was talking to her. Did you understand what she was saying?

A: Little bit.

Q: Are you comfortable asking questions of Marisol? Of Lisa?

A: They don’t comfortable with that.

Q: What makes you say that?

A: Because when I ask them they will say that, “She doesn’t know anything.”

Q: What does that make you do when you think they will say that you don’t know anything?

A: I think it is better if I do it alone or something.

Q: But I think you did ask Lisa questions twice when I was in there, so how did that go? Did she give you an answer? Did it feel okay?

A: I asked her the first one and she said what she wrote and then I asked again and she said look at the definition for that.

Q: So, she kind of brushed you off. She sort of said you do it yourself?

A: (Nods)

When Mari and I talked about the world history class, she admitted she had one question.

She asked me what is a “margin.” I was struck with this question and what it revealed to me

about her level of understanding. Ms. C had instructed her students to “take notes in the

margin” and then proceeded to discuss some fairly complicated concepts. I do not believe

Mari understood the concepts. On this day, she was “stuck” on the instructions. How much

better if Mari had another student in class she felt she could ask for such help.

Case Study Observation:

On another occasion, I observed Mari in the biology lab where the class self-selected groups

and participated in an activity to demonstrate natural selection. Students were attempting to

148 CAROL HALBE

explain Darwin’s theory and biodiversity through several cartoons. Most students were

laughing good-naturedly at one student’s possible interpretation. Mari was stone-faced; she

did not understand the joke.

As students begin working answering questions from textbooks, some chatter could be heard.

Mari looked around and seemed interested in others’ conversations, but she did not speak to

other students or the teacher.

This activity models “direct natural selection.” Students would be able to pick their own

groups once in the lab. As Ms. B. talks about the lesson, she encourages students to “make

bird noises” because “you are the predator.” The assignment is to use a single hole punch to

punch out 25 sets of moths from each of 4 different colored papers. Then, as birds do with

camouflaged moths, they will select from a colored background whichever insects catch their

eye. The remaining insects represent 2nd generation surviving moths.

Students moved into the lab and Mari sat at a table with two students. She returned to the

classroom to retrieve a notebook, then returned to find four people at the table. The other four

girls discussed who would work where, and one girl moved. Mari was not included in this

conversation.

As the hole punching commenced, the other girls chatted and laughed, “Hey where’d my

holes go?” Mari did not laugh. She concentrated on the task. Once all the holes are punched,

the girls mixed them on the background paper.

As each took a turn selecting moths, laughter and small talk could be heard in the lab. Mari

watched, taking her cues from the other girls, never cracking a smile. Elsewhere in the room

students were twirling, making birdcalls and enjoying themselves. Mari’s table was

relatively quiet although the other girls chatted now and then.

When Mari took her turn, last, her slight smile indicated that she seemed to enjoy herself.

However, the girls who had reviewed the colors for each other as each chad was selected, did

not do so for Mari. She was forced to copy from another girl after her turn was over. At last

the teacher came by to check and informed the group that they did not even need to record

the colors selected. The group had done this wrong.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 149

A few minutes remained and the three girls at her table talked. Mari returned to her seat,

watching the teacher. She talked to no one and her head was slightly down.

Conclusion: From the beginning, this exercise placed Mari on the outside. First, she did not

acknowledge that she had selected a table that already had four girls, and the two who moved

did so to accommodate her (rather than explain the situation). The subtle mistreatment of

helping call out the colors might even have gone unnoticed by Mari, but it was direct and

intentional on the part of the other girls. It created extra work for Mari and spoke to the fact

that though she worked with them, she was on the outside.

Follow-up Case Study Interview:

Afterwards, when I talked about how the group working together made this assignment

easier, Mari disagreed.

Q: When I was in your class, you were working in groups. How was that for you?

A: When I was working with the girls? I like to work alone. I can do it myself, and I can know it well, because they do it but sometimes I don’t understand what they are doing. So if I do it myself I can understand and I can ask Ms. B. about that. We did group work one time, and I didn’t go there for two days because I had to take the test [CAHSEE] and she said you can work alone on that [a lab].

Q: Did you go in alone and work after school?

A: No, because I just had to find the information on the computer, so I did it at home.

Q: Was there anything that helped you working with the other students?

A: Actually, they just talked theirselves [sic]. They talked with their friends.

Mari said she understood what they were talking about “somewhat.” I believe it may be more

painful for Mari to be put into a group where she is ignored that to work alone and not need

to “pretend” she is part of a learning group. Though my initial observations revealed that

Mari was largely ignored, during my final observation I saw her read from her paper to

contribute to the group twice. She had also made a friend in class, another EL student, whom

she spoke with on several occasions.

150 CAROL HALBE

Teacher Interview:

The following interview with Mari’s world history teacher identifies some of the problems

she encounters with grouping in a 10th grade heterogeneous class. She had mentioned the

range of skills and background knowledge students bring to such a class. Specifically, in

Mari’s class where there are five EL students, she also has Gifted and Talented (GATE) and

Resource (RSP) as well as mainstream students.

Q to Ms. C: With these different levels, do group assignments help you at all?

A: No! I gave a group assignment and the questions went from really easy to harder, and those lazy kids got in the group and gave the hardest questions to the ELD kids. I made a comment that that was not fair, and because you didn’t want to be bothered. Most of the students don’t want to do group work because there’s always someone in the group who doesn’t want to do his work and they get stuck doing it anyway. People don’t work together. It’s really hard to make a homogenous group. If they work one day, the next day someone doesn’t show up. And it’s really frustrating. Every time I do it, something doesn’t work, so I just don’t do it. Students themselves complain about it—can I just do this on my own?

Likewise, Ms. B., Mari’s science teacher, said she had tried groups and putting students with

students who can do more, and bring them in, but this often proved socially awkward.

However, grouping students with other EL’s who speak the same language, when possible

seemed to work.

Conclusion: Group work is, more often than not, an awkward experience for most EL’s and

may be equally awkward for the EO’s as well. Group experiences can actually set students

like Mari back in terms of academic progress because the criticism of peers can raise her

affective filter extremely high. How can Mari concentrate on her schoolwork when she is so

self-conscious about how she is being treated by other students, or worried about the subtle

ridicule that comes along with her attempts to express herself.

If cooperative grouping is viewed as an effective SDAIE strategy, teachers need to

strategically structure groups and the activities they engage in. Then, for the English Only

students, guidance, modeling and monitoring of how individuals interact need become part of

the activity and assessment. Unstructured grouping of EL’s reaps unnecessary frustration and

can negatively impact self-esteem and resulting academic performance. Much discrepancy

exists between teacher and student perceptions of the benefits of heterogeneous grouping for

class activities.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 151

WHAT SOCIAL ISSUES ARE CONCERNS FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS?

Findings: Proponents of integrated EL content classes argue that English proficiency

improves with the natural socialization between EL’s and native speakers. Students’

experiences indicate that natural socialization in not the case for most EL’s, despite an

interest on the part of the EL’s in socializing more with EO’s.

Focus Group:

Focus group students responded to one of the hardest things about adjusting to life in the U.S.

as “making friends with students who already know English.”

S. said, “If I want to make some friends I think I shouldn’t do that, maybe some negative

thinking that came to my mind. Making some friends is really hard.” Another student, F.,

also commented on the importance and difficulty in trying to make friends. The students

were fairly unanimous in expressing their desire to make friends of other high school

students, and equally consistent in pointing out the near impossibility of doing so for a

variety of reasons.

Student Interviews:

When asked individually about making friends, most students responded that they eat lunch

only with students from their ELD class. They said that it’s easier to meet people of the same

culture. One boy said that he eats by himself. He admitted, “I try to make friends with the

regular students but we really don’t best friends.” Another said, “I’d love to make friends but

how? They [EO’s] already have friends.” One student aptly pointed out that “even ELD

groups segregate.” Clearly making friends is far more difficult than putting students in

classes together and hoping for the best.

Campus Observations:

One reason often given for the integration of EL’s with EO’s was the increase in

socialization that occurs. Although some more outgoing students do seem to make friends

and acquaintances with EO’s, the EL’s I have observed on every campus tended to cluster

together. Students responded that the interaction between EL’s and EO’s is limited to the

classroom itself. If it is difficult for any newcomer to a high school to make friends, it is that

much more so for those with limited English language.

152 CAROL HALBE

It was easy to spot the English Learners at lunch on a high school campus. Most were

grouped in places like the library or the ELD teacher’s classroom while their EO peers went

off campus or claimed territory in the cafeteria or quad. Though many teachers acknowledge

the difficulties in integrating EL’s socially with the mainstream, I encountered only one

teacher among those I spoke with and observed who tried to help with the integration of EL’s

outside of her classroom. She required every EL to join one club on campus. She is no

longer teaching ELD and I did not inquire about the success rate of her efforts.

Case Study Interview:

I suggested a class buddy for Mari, someone who could help her with class notes, etc, and

Ms. C agreed to help arrange this. However, almost immediately, Mari expressed her fear

that no one would want to work with her or give her extra time. She seems overly cautious

not to impose her needs upon anyone else in the school, teachers or other students.

Q: This isn’t the first time you have felt frustrated.

A: I felt a lot of times but today is the first time I cried a lot.

Q: What frustrates you?

A: The worksheet I turned in Tuesday, Ms. C told me about one paper, not both.

Q: Do you every ask questions in class?

A: No, I never talk. I am shy and other students will make fun of me.

Q: Have they made fun of you before?

A: Yes, one day in biology in the lab. They asked me a question and I answered wrong, and they laughed. Or, if I talk and say something wrong, they smile at each other.

Q: Are you happy to come to school?

A: No, I’m not happy. Sometimes if I get easy homework or have friends here, I am happy.

Q: Who do you eat lunch with?

A: I don’t eat lunch. I got to computer or Ms. C.

Q: Do you get hungry?

A: Sometimes I eat at home or have fruits at brunch. I feel alone the whole day. But when I talk to friends, I don’t think about that.

Mari’s loneliness, directly related to a lack of social interaction, underscores the need for

teachers to lower the affective filter, especially as mainstream students respond to EL’s.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 153

On another occasion, I had this conversation with Mari.

Q: You have one more year here, and then where do you see yourself going? Do you think you will go to college?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: Do you have other friends, Indian friends at school?

A: (Shakes head no)

Q: Why not? Do you know other Indian girls?

A: Yes, I know them. I had a lot of friends at my other high school because there were many Punjabi students who were new in that country.

Q: And there aren’t as many here?

A: Yes, there are some but they already came here three four years ago and they know English very well already.

Q: Do you feel they don’t talk to you because your English isn’t good?

A: They speak English to each other.

Q: Were you happier at the other school?

A: I don’t know.

Q: When you were there did you have friends, people you ate lunch with?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you like it there better?

A: Yes. (There is a long pause.) Mrs. H. I don’t feel comfortable in that school.

Q: Which school?

A: Here. I don’t want to meet certain people who don’t want to talk with anyone. And who make fun of others. Like their nature is different than me. Because I am emotionally and they are so different than me [sic].

Q: There are lots of people out there who are emotional and sensitive and care about other people and sometimes we don’t see that. Sometimes it looks like everybody just cares about themselves. And that’s why if you can make one or two good friends, it is more important than 100 people who aren’t your real friends. You are very pleasant and people like you. Here you may need to put yourself out there to make a friend.

A: If I do that they will think that I am strange or something.

154 CAROL HALBE

I commented that I had seen her at lunch with a group of girls in one of the science

classrooms and thought to myself, that’s a nice group of friends. Mari said they only speak

English.

Q: Are other students friendly? How do you feel about the students?

A: Sometimes I see them and I think why I don’t join them. They are nice in the class but don’t outside of class.

Mari has told me on more than one occasion that she is lonely. She has mentioned that in

India she had many friends and always spoke in class. I had never, until the end of this

study, heard her speak aloud or ask a question except in her ELD class. With one month left

of the school year, I observed her participating quite naturally in a large group in World

History, and raising her hand to offer an answer in front of the entire class. This could be

because the teacher had employed group strategies more often toward the last part of the

school year.

Teacher Interview:

Ms. C reiterated her concerns about socialization and academics for the EL student:

Q: To what degree do you see socialization happening?

A: Very rare. I have a few, but I think because they have those other students in ELD class and they see them twice [a day]. If you put them in groups they’re very scared and intimidated by the rest of the students and they don’t like that at all.

Q: You see them as less isolated and better connected to the student body.

A: I think they feel a part of the school, but academically, I don’t think they fit in.

Conclusion: If self-esteem is a factor in academic success, EL’s are again at a disadvantage.

Because teachers and schools do not intervene in the social isolation that occurs between

these students and the EO’s at least at school, EL’s are less likely to be exposed to American

norms and customs. Making social errors further isolates the EL from the EO’s, and denies

them access to English spoken by native speakers, except in some cases from the teacher.

The teacher who required each of her ELD students to join a club on campus, just to meet

people and socialize had a good starting idea, but it was far from sufficient in terms of what

teachers could do to help EL’s interact more consistently with EO’s. The loss here is evident

not just for the EL’s but also for the EO’s who have not benefited from the opportunity to

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 155

understand diversity on a personal level. Though teachers tended to acknowledge the social

gap, few described taking the next step by incorporating specific remedies to bridge the

social gap.

What makes learning in mainstream classes frustrating for English Learners and their teachers?

Findings: Related to the social gap mentioned above is the reality that EL’s will rarely ask a

question or add to a discussion in class, for fear they will be corrected or ridiculed, and that

they will not be understood anyway. It is far safer to sit quietly and attempt to ask the

teacher questions when there are no other students in the room. Unfortunately, learning often

requires interaction. Students do not benefit from the ideas of others if they learn exclusively

from a text, an electronic dictionary or a teacher, for that matter. Expressing an idea aloud

forces one to clarify one’s thinking. This essential step is lost if the EL never joins the

conversation in a classroom.

Compounding this problem is the fact that teachers are more often than not at a loss about the

specific learning needs of students who can or will not share them because of language

limitations or their cultural backgrounds. This “inaudibility” hinders the progress of students

already at an academic disadvantage compared to native speakers. Coming to terms with the

needs of EL’s and acquiring the expertise to be able to assess students linguistic and subject

matter difficulties requires the support of districts, universities and state resources. Though

embedded in pre-intern programs, B/CLAD and SB 395 Training are currently left to

individual teachers to acquire.

Student Interviews:

Students were asked whether they ever raise their hand to ask a question, give a response or

ask for clarification in a mainstream class? Most responded with an adamant “No!” EL’s are

painfully conscious of their limited English proficiency and do not want to risk sounding

dumb. The difficulty is that teachers can’t get into their heads to know what they understand

and what they don’t. It forces a situation where students will only ask for clarification or

other help when English proficient students are not in the room. This often means students

need help in the 5-minute period between classes, when students are exiting and the next

class is entering the room, and the teacher is trying to get things ready for the next group. The

time between classes is inadequate to address the EL’s learning needs.

156 CAROL HALBE

Students talked about how American teachers and other English mainstream students treat

them. Most appreciate their teachers and respond positively to their approachable manner.

Several students in the focus group mentioned the formality and distance that characterizes

the student to teacher relationship in their home countries, and respect their American

teachers even more for their willingness to be accessible. Many, like Mari, must learn this

cultural difference about the role and status of teachers in America, which can be quite

different from their home country. Their experiences with other students are not as favorable.

Case Study Interview:

I happened to see Mari at lunch today and she asked if I can talk to her. She looks upset, I

notice, and I said, “When?” She tells me she wants to come to see me at the end of lunch, and

at 12:30 she is waiting for me outside my office.

Ms. C has also been waiting, and I ask her to come into my office first since she will need to

return to class shortly. She tells me she has upset Mari at lunch and she wants me to know

about it before Mari’s father calls. She then admits she has made Mari cry. Ms. C tries to

explain. “She [Mari] always wants to come in and bicker about grades,” and she had come in

this particular day, and Ms. C had “blown up” at her and made her cry. “Nothing I do is

good enough for her,” she says, and “She’s not going to get special privileges. Class rules

apply to her, too.”

Ms. C had apologized, but Mari was so upset, she wasn’t sure she had heard the apology.

Ms. C wants me to know the circumstances in case I receive a call from Mari’s parents.

She said, “Friday she asked about the homework. Tuesday she asked again.” It was clear to

me that Ms. C interpreted S’s questions as grade negotiating. Ms. C said, “When she’s

absent, she has to take the initiative about getting work.”

She added, “She bickers, and tries to argue. She knows the material well, but she doesn’t

speak well. Probably because she’s nervous. I’m frustrated, because I don’t know what she

wants. She has a 77% and I acknowledge that she’s working hard—harder than some other

students.”

I asked her to talk to Mari directly and invited Mari into the office where the three of us talk.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 157

Ms. C began with a repeated apology, and added, “You’re working very hard and you know

the work.” She was attempting to console Mari with praise of her efforts. She ended by

saying, “I don’t like to make people cry.” That Ms. C thinks Mari “knows the work” brings

to mind an occasion when Mari had explained to me how she passed a quiz or a test only

when the vocabulary required matching. If she did not recognize the exact same definitions

she had studied, she was lost.

I ultimately deduced that Mari missed some assignments when she was testing for CAHSEE.

When she returned to ask Ms. C what she had missed, she was informed of only one of two

worksheets that were due. When she turned in the late work, she was told one paper was

missing, and when she went into Ms. C’s room at lunch to find out if she would be able to

make it up, she was told she would not be permitted an extension.

Mari: I work hard and I don’t get it [the material] and then I be in your room.

Ms. C: When you ask for help, it’s usually during passing period, and I’m trying to get ready for my next class.

Mari: That’s why I come at lunch. I can’t make you stay after school just for me.

Ms. C: Yes you can. You’re my student and I’ll wait for you. Mari is fully crying now: It’s my fault.

Ms. C: The work you’ve been turning in is great. But sometimes I think you want special treatment over other students and that’s not fair.

Mari: Because I have different language I want help. Here Mari expressed concern over not being allowed to make up work missed during CAHSEE.

Ms. C: I didn’t know you didn’t have the homework.

Mari: I didn’t know where it was.

Ms. C: It’s always on the same place on the white board. The problem is that when you’re absent, there is a miscommunication about the work you missed.

Conclusion: This exchange, though stressful at the beginning, ended with reconciliation

between teacher and student, an acknowledgment of miscommunication on both sides, and an

understanding about the best time for Mari to ask for help. I was struck with Mari’s

perception that she had “no right” to take the teacher’s time after school to get extra help.

Likewise, Ms. C was dealing with the issue of “fairness to other students,” interpreting

Mari’s questions as an attempt to negotiate credit for late work that she would not afford to

any of the students in the class. Ms. C did not accept late work. I was aware of my role, not

158 CAROL HALBE

as researcher but as advocate for the student, explaining her frustration to the teacher and

helping Mari understand that it is okay for a student to ask for help from a teacher. I was

also aware that if I had not intervened in this situation, neither Mari nor Ms. C would have

understood what the problem was, and Mari’s focus on this negative emotional encounter

would continue to bother her for some time.

It should be noted that with Mari’s language limitations, it took quite a while for me to

understand the situation and what she was asking for. If the exchange between Mari and her

teacher had taken place between classes or even at lunch, the chance for misunderstanding is

quite good. Only after talking with Mari one-on-one on many occasions had I come to

understand her well enough to interpret the needs she was having trouble expressing. The

difficulty for a classroom teacher with more than 150 students to reach this level of rapport

with each of her students is understandable.

Teacher Interviews:

Ms. B. reported on another occasion, that Mari actually had a huge issue in her class. “I

forgot about that. I have a group of popular, athletic girls and boys and we were doing a lab

assignment that required colored pens and pencils, which were all in one bucket. Mari came

up to get a pen and one of the girls said, “Hey you can’t take that color; I need to use it”

jokingly, but Mari put the pen back. The girl said, “No, go ahead, you can use it,” but then all

the girls started laughing and Mari cried the rest of the class period. I tried to explain that

they weren’t making fun of her but she said, “They laughed at me.” It was heartbreaking. I

talked to the students about that. And they sort of learned, but Mari was mad at me for

talking to them at all. She thought I was making the situation worse.

I said Mari is very, very sensitive. Ms. B. said “I think it took a long time to realize that. I

didn’t get that impression. That’s part of the problem with the language when they can’t

express their emotions in the same language.”

One English teacher said that the progress of her 12th grade English Learners was “pitiful,”

and the experience of having them in an EL’s class was “frustrating for both teachers and

students.” She had been teaching Beowulf, “a tough read” and was getting kids who were

“completely lost.” She also admitted she could use some SDAIE tips, four or five strategies

to help students with limited vocabulary and low reading skills. When I asked her to check

her grades for these students, she found that in a class of 22 students, of the 11 who were

EL’s, 7 had passed with C’s or D’s. She said twice that “some kids gave up early on” and

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 159

that additional help would “be too late.” This teacher exemplifies many teachers who find

EL’s in their classes and are not fully prepared to meet their needs. Several teachers I

interviewed expressed the dilemma they face in choosing between continuing subject specific

training and/or EL Authorization. With time constraints on teachers as they are, teachers

often feel pursuing both areas of professional growth is not feasible.

Teacher Interview:

Ms. B. had shared her concern about Mari coming in after school and related this story:

When she first started coming in after school, I was thrilled. I welcomed her. Then she was coming in all the time—sometimes two and three hours a week. I was concerned about the amount of time and her over reliance on me. I decided that this semester, I’d try to wean her off. She may have perceived me as a little tough, but I know I need to set limits around how willing I am to help her. I felt like I was becoming a tutor for one when I had 145 students.

The benefits Ms. B. sees in integrating EL’s are few. “Maybe helping them assimilate into

American culture. Being exposed . . . but nothing academically.”

The disadvantages include how “difficult it is for them to succeed academically, and

compounded with trying to learn a language, trying to make friends and then to see an “F” on

the report card would be so disheartening.”

As with many teachers, Ms. B. is not unsympathetic about how difficult it is to learn high

level academic content and English simultaneously. Like Ms. C, she feels compelled to

uphold the same standards for all her students. Ms. C continues in the same vein.

Q: Academically it’s very different for them. For instance, when Mari talks about it, when you teach and you go over materials, she doesn’t really get it in class. She goes home and works and works with her dictionary . . .

A: I know a lot of my EL students do that. They go home and go over their dictionaries.

Conclusion: Teachers who see themselves as advocates for the social, linguistic and personal

needs of their students end up supporting them academically and bettering their chances of

receiving some equity in school. This level of advocacy however takes time. Several

teachers interviewed for this study, interestingly, expressed almost a sense of “guilt” about

giving one student or group much more time and support than they give the other students.

This “tension” brings out the need--given the diverse composition of California’s classrooms

160 CAROL HALBE

and school communities--for schools to rethink their mission within the larger society. Not

only must a teacher find extra time to meet the needs of the English Learners (no easy task),

but they must come to personal terms about what it means to provide an equitable education

for all students. Professional development that allows educators to interact with one another

and process new knowledge as they grow professionally offers the best hope for positive

change.

What is the price of academic success?

Findings: The English Learners who participated in this study were, for the most part, hard

working students who acknowledged the high price they paid in time and effort to pass high

school. They did not express resentment that they often worked much harder and longer than

native speakers of English, but they did offer suggestions that might minimize some of the

many hours they labor over dictionaries and incomprehensible textbooks. In spite of the

difficulties passing mainstream classes, as a whole they did not want to be isolated into

“sheltered” sections of science and history.

Teacher Interviews:

An English teacher said that EL’s who failed his 10th grade college prep class did not fail

because of language issues. He recognized the disadvantage of having students in EL’s

classes (compared to segregated SDAIE) because students will not speak up in front of their

peers and the fact that in his own tracking system, the EL’s get lost. With only 3 or 4 in each

class, he loses sight of them as English Learners. Of the 13 EL’s he had in his classes the

previous semester, 11 passed with 2 A’s, 5 B’s, 2 C’s and 2 D’s. He noted that the students

who earned B’s would have probably earned “easy A’s” in a segregated SDAIE class

because the class standard would not have been the same.

Case Study Interview:

Mari, though excited about earning a grade of A on a 6-point quiz, sacrificed sleep time to do

so. She had studied 3 or 4 hours at night, and then awakened at 4 a.m. to study another hour

and a half. The time demands on EL’s are grossly inequitable compared to their English

counterparts.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 161

Focus Group:

V. talked about the time demands of doing homework in a second language. She said,

“Sometimes I have to look up the works, like for World History. And I sometimes need to

stare at the book and use my computer for six hours.

S. who spoke very little in the focus group, specifically mentioned the issue of time required

to learn. She said the one thing teachers can give students to help them learn is “time.”

W., the student in the focus group who has been here the longest, says , “If the teacher have

us read one or two chapters I have to use the dictionary to know what it means.” He added,

“In regular classes, you learn but you don’t understand.”

Through individual interviews (EL Perceptions: Appendix 5, pgs. 1 - 2) students were asked

to talked about their experiences in a comprehensive high school program and whether they

preferred to take segregated EL or integrated classes. One student talked about the cultural

issues involved in high school graduation requirements. She arrived from Afghanistan this

year and because of Taliban restrictions in her native country, she had not attended school

though her mother had taught her at home, since 5th grade. She was 16. She was enrolled in

a school that offered only Algebra for 9th graders. She struggled and failed the first time she

took the course, but she repeated it second semester and was now earning a “B”. Asked if

she would prefer classes only with other students learning English she said, “Absolutely not!

I’m earning a B and I’m proud of that.” Though students “say things” like calling her “Bin

Laden” after September 11, she maintains a positive attitude.

Students identified classes they found the easiest to learn in, and those that were the most

difficult. English Learners said their ELD class was the easiest and most supportive class. In

addition, they felt able to learn in hands-on classes like PE (where teachers show them

things) and art. The classes that they selected as being the most difficult were history (most

students mentioning 10th grade World History) and science (most mentioning Biology). Both

of these college prep courses have difficult textbooks with advanced academic vocabulary.

The concepts may also be new to students if they have not studied these courses in earlier

years of schooling.

Case Study Interview:

I talked with Mari about how she had been doing in World History. She happily reported she

had brought her grade up.

162 CAROL HALBE

Q: I wanted to ask you, so you said you think you did well on the quiz?

A: (Nods)

Q: Okay, why?

A: Because I did 4 or 5 right questions, because I studied last night, and before that night.

Q: TEL me about how you studied, again.

A: I learned them.

Q: What did you learn?

A: Like about the strike; what the definitions are.

Q: When you study, do you use a dictionary?

A: Yeah.

Q: How much?

A: I sometimes more than, sometimes lot of times.

Q: How long did you study for this quiz? How much time?

A: Two, two or three hours.

Q: And you got 4 out of 5 right?

A: I didn’t get that back.

Q: But is that how you think you did?

A: Yes, out of 6. Four or five or something.

Mari’s battered Thorndike Elementary Dictionary, which is stamped “discard”, is a constant

companion. She spoke to me about how much easier it is when a teacher gives definitions

and the exact same ones appear on the test. When she must look up the words on her own,

and then the definitions she has don’t appear on the test, she struggles.

Focus Group:

F. also spoke to the presentation of material. “Here, they give the words and the things that

are coming up on the test ahead of time,” she reported. “There, no! I’m always surprised.

And they ask questions from every single page of the book you read. You can’t remember

now.”

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 163

S. said, “Teachers [in her home country] don’t tell the students, really, and they don’t really

care. Here teachers really care about the students. In my country we can’t use notes or

notebooks. We have to memorize the things to learn. If we don’t learn, we have to repeat.

Case Study Interview:

Q: Do you feel that to be a success here you will always have to go to teachers after class to get your questions answered? To get a good grade do you always have to get help from the teacher, one on one?

A: Mari lets a little emotion show through. She says, “It made me mad. First I have to go in that class and then I have to go in that class and the bell is ring and lunch is over so then I have to go after school and the teacher is not here or not there.”

Q: Do you have to do that almost every day?

A: Four, three days a week.

Q: How do you feel about school? Do you still think it is too hard for you and you have to work too hard?

A: It’s not school’s fault if I have to study hard. When I wake up in the morning to study my biology I think it’s so boring, like that.

Conclusion: Without the ability to question students about their knowledge, teachers are left

to surmise what the EL student has really understood about a lesson or assignment. One

teacher reported, “Because English Learners tend to turn in all their work, their learning

needs are not apparent on the surface.” They can get through the work, but they may be

approaching the assignment ineffectively and spending much time unnecessarily. Likewise,

one student knowingly indicated that when he goes to teachers for help, “They don’t openly

refuse [to help]. More they don’t know what to do.” Teachers have, as Ms. C says, “ a

million things on my mind,” not the least of which is updated content knowledge.

Understanding English Learners and acquiring the pedagogy to be effective in teaching them

may take a back seat to updating content specific information for many single subject

teachers.

What forms of discrimination do English Learners experience?

Findings: English Learners experience discrimination in the educational policies that limit

or prevent them from learning content in their primary languages. They feel discrimination in

the laughter of other students who detect an accent or a grammatical error. Their self-esteem

suffers when they are marginalized in groups, covertly or openly. Discrimination is daily

164 CAROL HALBE

fare for most students who are struggling to learn English, and it can be particularly painful

in the public high school.

Focus group:

Students responded to the question about how Muslim students were affected since

September 11th, 2001.

F.: My teachers were so nice, because it wasn’t our fault. Nobody could hurt us or say anything because the teachers weren’t saying anything. If the older ones do something, the younger ones will do behind them.

S.: When students ask if we are from Pakistan and I say yes, they say do you know Osama Bin Laden and I say yes and they say, “I will kill him.” And I say good, but do you know where he is?”

S.: Some students who drive, and I don’t know where they are from, they tried to hit me in the crosswalk. I don’t know where they were from.

W.:I see some signs, when they are across the street. There is a difference between immigrants now and there always was one, but now the difference is bigger. They don’t speak it but I feel it.

N.: I’m not from Afghanistan and I see how other students treat students from Afghanistan and they put bad words on the locker. It isn’t right. You should treat people how you want to be treated.

S.: I had trouble when I came here since it was 9-11 and my teacher was talking “those Muslims” telling students not be friends with them. I said, “Hello, I’m Muslim.” I told my mom and didn’t come to school for 3 days and then we went to the office and they said maybe he meant something else, and so the next day I went there [to the teacher] and he said “No, I didn’t mean that, to hurt your feelings,” and I was fine.

Student Interviews:

Five students said other students treated them “ok, fine.” The remaining students had not had

positive experiences, and used phrases such as “they abuse me” and are “mean” or “very

bad” and they “discriminate because we are English Learners and don’t know anything.”

Three students said others “make fun of their English.”

As F. pointed out, “If they went to our country, no one would understand them. Our names,

some people call me “FIRE-STA” and some call me “FRESCA.” That was hard the first day

because I didn’t know who they were talking to.”

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 165

Case Study Interview:

Q: Do you have any students in that class [World History] that you are comfortable with?

A: I don’t think so because everybody do their own. . .

Q: People are interested in doing their own work. Are there any students in there who are English Learners?

A: Just one boy. You know B.?

Q: I don’t know him.

A: He’s a funny. But you know I don’t like him.

Q: Oh really, how come?

A: He always say bad things about my country, you know . . .

Q: What does he say?

A: Are you going to do anything with him . . . do anything bad to him?

Q: No, no I’m not. Unless you want me to.

A: No, I don’t want.

Q: Who is the boy?

A: B.

Q: What does he say?

A: He just talk with his friends . . . Indian people are like that and that.

Q: Where is he from?

A: Afghanistan.

Q: What does he say, “Indian people are like that?” What does he mean?

A: They don’t take showers and something like that.

Q: He said that to you, or did he say that to his friends when you could hear it?

A: Yeah, we were working in a group and he told him that, and he was laughing too. And I told Ms. C and she said, I can’t do anything. She said you have to tell him and I did but he didn’t hear anything and I told Ms. C and she said “I can’t do anything.” She again expressed worry that I would talk to B. and some retaliation would occur.

Conclusions: Most students who have experienced name-calling and put downs did not

want teachers to intervene. One girl said if teachers say anything, the other students will

“just avoid us.” Their fear of isolation is much worse than tolerating the criticisms of their

peers.

166 CAROL HALBE

In a subsequent interview with Ms. C, I brought up Mari’s concerns with the verbally abusive

male student, B. When I told her what B. said to Mari, she responded, “Oh my god! I didn’t

know that!” As we continued to talk, Ms. C remembered, “I think she tried to tell me but I

couldn’t quite understand what she was saying.” Again, in my own initial interviews with

Mari I had many facts about her family and background wrong because though I thought I

understood her, I clearly hadn’t. Her spoken English improved a great deal over the course

of the study.

WHAT DO TEACHERS RECOMMEND?

Many teachers had suggestions on how to make integrated content classes work for students

who are still learning English. Their recommendations follow:

• Provide a system for tracking EL’s within integrated classes—for example ask for their grades disaggregated every 4 weeks to alert teachers of students falling through the cracks. Because EL’s tend to ask few questions, they give the impression that they don’t have any, which is not necessarily the case, and they may not be learning as they appear.

• If there is an ideal, according to several teachers, it’s 7 – 8 students in a class, seated together so an instructional aide can help them. Clustering students allows teachers to differentiate within one class or lesson.

• Keep the classes at a reasonable size.

• Provide support materials—visuals and dual language dictionaries.

• Schools need a 5-year plan; some of these students won’t meet graduation requirements in 4 years.

• Provide alternatives to getting help at break, at lunch and after school. Schools that provide tutoring for EL’s are moving in the right direction. This is a necessary starting point to rectify the time inequality faced by EL’s.

• Better screening of which students will be integrated (some teachers feel determination and motivation make the difference) into college preparatory classes with intense vocabulary demands. Evaluate program based on student’s prior schooling as well as language proficiency.

• Increase collaboration between the content specialists and the ELD specialist. Co- planning and team teaching should be considered.

• Investigate co-curricular support systems that actually help students socialize and that would increase tolerance and acceptance among all students at the sites.

• More resources should be provided, once EL’s are placed in integrated classes—perhaps a support class to focus on content vocabulary specifically.

• Structure co-curricular interactions (including group work) so that EL’s have access to a positive high school experience.

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 167

• Ensure that students are not segregated into less rigorous classes for core academic content, while guaranteeing that integration be accompanied by adequate support for students and teachers.

• Continue its policy of encouraging all teachers acquire the skills and knowledge required for EL Authorization, including holding serious conversations about the requirements for reaching every student in today’s schools and providing equity and opportunity to all.

• Support on-going teacher development in content specific SDAIE strategies that work with EL’s, especially group work.

• Individualize the learning plans for EL’s, much as we do for Special Education students, so that they are not forced into trying to meet unrealistic graduation requirements without the prerequisite skills and/or schooling.

• Consider adjusting the instructional time required by EL’s to provide more equitable expectations toward graduation.

CONCLUSIONS

The education of English Learners is not an isolated issue. Although some schools in

California have small numbers of EL’s, most are experiencing an increase at a rate that

outstrips the number of teachers who are qualified to teach them. In response to this

increase, EL Authorization has become easier for experienced teachers to acquire with SB

1969/395 than the coursework required by B/CLAD in university classrooms. However,

without district mandates that require teachers to earn their EL Authorization, the likelihood

is still good that these most at-risk students will be placed in classes with teachers who are

not trained to meet their needs. The B/CLAD and SB Training is actually only the first step

in the process of improving instruction to meet students’ needs. Through my interviews with

teachers and my observations in classrooms, most teachers (including those with EL

Authorization) indicated they were not completely prepared to serve students with limited

English in their academic content areas. This study highlights content area curricula like

history and science as areas of greatest concern. None of the high schools in the study had

systematic, ongoing professional support in place to provide content area teachers the

opportunity to learn from each other and to share practices about working with EL’s.

A second area of concern related to teachers is the traditional concept that many hold about

what it means to be a competent teacher. In many instances, teachers see subject matter

expertise as the single determinant of quality teaching. That teachers need to connect content

with students, with all students, requires a second equally critical set of skills and knowledge

about students, particularly since one-fourth of all students in California are now English

168 CAROL HALBE

Learners. Making the connection is sometimes put back on the student when teachers say

“Send them to my class when their English is better.” Students coming into high school

currently only have four years to take required courses. As difficult as learning in

mainstream classes is, this is what the EL students themselves want. Students don’t want to

come back when their English has improved––they want teachers to scaffold instruction to

make passing grade-level, required academic classes possible while they are learning

English. The blueprint for making this happen needs to come from the content area

classroom teachers themselves and be shared across curricular levels. Unfortunately, I

observed too little of this happening. As the recommendations above reveal, teachers who

work with EL’s have the capacity to create a learning environment that will meet their

diverse needs. We err in not tapping into this resource in creating classrooms and schools that

better serve English Learners.

The experiences of the high school English Learners themselves provide perhaps the greatest

insight into student needs. Their testimonies reveal that the affective experiences of EL’s in

public high schools significantly affect their academic learning. To ignore these experiences

further isolates an already high risk group and limits their access to educational equality.

Many of the issues they bring up: social isolation, overt discrimination, miscommunication,

peer interactions, and meeting academic requirements go largely unaddressed in any

systematic manner. Whereas the majority of the students felt completely supported in their

ELD classes, they found content courses like biology and world or U.S. History very

difficult. Despite teacher strategies that enabled them to access the curriculum to some

degree, passing these classes was a struggle at best. I see the need for schools to become

more proactive in meeting the co-curricular and curricular needs of immigrant student if

society is to benefit from an educated population. The very attributes that we observe in

EL’s—persistence, tenacity and diligence—in an educated population could infuse the

lagging American economy with new energy.

I was also struck with the inequity of forcing English Learners through a system that was

designed to meet the needs of native speakers. Much of the burden of educating EL’s falls

on the shoulders of the students themselves, laboring over dictionaries night after night to

keep up in the college preparatory academic classes that their mainstream peers take largely

for granted. Despite these efforts, it would be wrong to deny EL’s higher education

opportunities of mainstream students. I raise this issue to open a discussion of alternative

educational paths that would result in educational equity for EL’s, a discussion that should

involve high school students themselves. EL’s tend to be invisible and inaudible in order to

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 169

avoid being isolated in high school. Only when they “blend in” do they escape criticism.

Both EL’s and EO’s have much to contribute to a process aimed at inclusion, one that would

empower students and ultimately prepare them to actively participate in creating an equitable

society in the future.

I learned as much about myself as I did about English Learners from working on this project,

and especially from working closely with Mari. I happened to see her on the summer school

campus last Friday, and she had a warm greeting for me. I thanked her again for contributing

to this study, but she cut me off several times to express that she wanted to thank me. She

repeated how much she appreciated that I was there to talk with her when she needed

something and that I had helped her with school. What stood out from this encounter was the

visible happiness she exuded, and the great improvement in her spoken English. I saw her

later on campus with a group of girls her age, all talking and laughing at break. Perhaps the

most significant result of this project was the personal connection a linguistically and

culturally isolated student was able to make with another person on campus. Mari will be a

senior next year, and I look forward to attending her graduation.

170 CAROL HALBE

Appendix 1

Staff Experience with SDAIE Classes:

1. Please state your name, grades and subjects you currently teach, any special

certification you hold, and years of teaching experience.

2. How many years have you taught in Fremont?

3. How many English Learners do you teach within your EL’s content classes? What

are the sizes of these classes?

4. What strategies do you currently use to help your English Learners succeed?

5. How are EL’s doing in your classes (passing, not passing) compared to the other

students?

6. What are the benefits you see in integrating EL’s in your content classes?

7. What are the disadvantages?

8. If you have taught SDAIE content classes for EL’s only, what advantages did you see

with the EL’s classes?

9. What were the disadvantages?

10. To what degree has integrating students resulted in increased socialization between

EL’s and EO’s? How do you know?

11. What is your understanding about the reason for this program change in Fremont?

12. What would you like to communicate to the ELD Program Manager about the

effectiveness of integrating EL’s for academic content classes?

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 171

Appendix 2

Student Interview Questions:

1. Which are the classes where you learn best? Why?

2. In which classes do you have the most difficulty learning? Why?

3. Do you learn best in classes with English Learners or when the class is mixed with

English speakers as well? Why?

4. How do you feel about raising your hand and talking in classes where there are

English speakers?

5. How is the pace of the class that is mixed with English speakers and English

Learners?

6. With whom do you eat lunch? How do you choose the social group you hang out

with?

7. How do other students on campus treat you? What examples can you provide to

show how other students treat you?

8. How do teachers on campus treat you? What examples can you give?

9. How comfortable are you talking to teachers in content area classes about difficulties

you are having?

10. When you go to a teacher for help, what kind of response do you receive?

172 CAROL HALBE

Appendix 3 Focus Group Protocol

1. What were the hardest things to learn about adjusting to life here in the US?

2. How could the school or the teachers have made your adjustment easier?

3. What would you like the teachers in this district to know about what helps you learn

English?

4. What are the hardest things you are asked to do in your classes?

5. What advice would you give a student newly arrived in this country?

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 173

Appendix 4

TEACHER PERCEPTIONS

Strategies Mentioned (from most often to least) Number of Mentions

Cooperative Groups 7

Visuals 5

Individual Help (during or after class) 5

Repackaging/repeating information 3

Assignment Modification 2

BENEFITS TO EL’S CLASSES:

Strategies Mentioned Number of Mentions

Maintains high instructional level 6

Increases socialization between EL’s and EO’s 5

Provides access to language and culture 5

Reduces feeling of isolation among EL’s 3

Good for EO’s too 1

DISADVANTAGES TO EL’S CLASSES:

Strategies Mentioned Number of Mentions

Students won’t talk in class 7

Harder to succeed academically 3

Frustrating for teachers and students 3

Students don’t socialize anyway 2

English only students can discriminate 1

174 CAROL HALBE

Appendix 5, pp. 1 - 2 English Language Learner Perceptions

Q. #1 In which classes do you learn best?

Classes Number of Mentions

English Language Development (ELD) 7

PE 2

Art 1

Mathematics 1

Q. #2 Most difficult classes # of Mentions Reasons why

World History & U.S. History 7 Vocabulary too hard; can’t follow teacher

Science (Biology & Chemistry) 5 Vocabulary too hard; book is hard; get lost in class discussions

Mathematics (Algebra & Geometry) 5 By the time we ask for help, it’s too late

English/Language Arts 2

Health 1 Topics not discussed in my country

Q. # 3 Which classes do you prefer? EL only, Integrated with EO’s, or Both?

Segregated Classes Integrated Classes with EO’s Neutral/ No Difference

4 6 6

Students gave the following reasons for preferring segregated classes:

“Students put me down in history. If I tell the teacher, they avoid me.” “Teachers pay more attention to us.”

Students gave the following reasons for preferring integrated classes:

“EL only classes are too easy; like 9th grade, we just copy. We don’t care.” “If people in class speak Spanish, we’ll speak Spanish.” “In integrated classes, I pay attention more.” “If you’re lucky, and have nice classmates, the mixed class is interesting—otherwise it’s sad.”

One student who indicated “no difference” said, “Because, as you see, I talk well.”

Ask the Students: Student Perspectives on the Academic and Social Progress of English Learners 175

Q. #4 Do you raise your hand and ask a question in an integrated class?

Yes No/Never because they are afraid, or being ridiculed Depends

4 9 3

Q. #6 With whom do you eat lunch? How do you choose the social group you hang out with?

Other English Learners Alone/No one Mixed friends including EO’s

12 2 4*

*Two students indicated both EL’s and EO’s.

One student asked, “I’d love to make friends, but how? They already have friends.”

One eats by himself, saying, “I try to make friends with the regular students but we really

don’t best friends.”

Another says, “I have no American friends; they don’t like to be with us.”

Q. #7 & #8 How are you treated by other students and by teachers?

Positive Responses …

# of responses Treatment by Students # of responses Treatment by teachers

3 Friendly; students say “Hi” 7 Very helpful

3 Fair, but not equally 6 Nice

1 Accepted in H.S. (not in Jr. High)

1 Pair me with other students for help

Negative Responses

# of Responses Treatment by Students # of Responses Treatment by Teachers

2 Call me names (like Bin Laden)

2 Sometimes they lost their patience

1 Judge people who can’t speak well

1 Said things against Muslim students

1 They ignore me 1 Avoid asking questions

176 CAROL HALBE

Q #10 When do you get extra help from your teachers? How do they respond?

Number of Responses When students feel comfortable asking for extra help

4 Before school or after class

4 Lunchtime

1 During Class

2 Don’t ask the teacher for help

One student indicated the ELD teacher is a source of help with all subjects.

Another student said, “At first they [teachers] help. Then they lose patience.”

177

Cross-Study Analysis

After the studies were completed, the team worked for several months to look across the studies,

analyzing them for themes related to the teachers, teaching, students, and learning involved. During

this phase of the research, the studies themselves became the data. We identified common threads,

and each member of the team read all of the studies coding for these threads and identifying others.

We then synthesized and compiled the results:

Institutional Circumstances/Constraints: All of the teachers faced institutional circumstances and

constraints as they attempted to deliver the most appropriate and effective instruction to their EL

students. These constraints posed very particular challenges for instruction and pointed to the larger

school/district context for their work. Many were a function of school-based/district/state policies

that were set to target the needs and expectation for EL students but that presented particular

challenges or dilemmas. Examples included: inappropriate placement and scheduling of students;

scripted curricula which, depending on how it was implemented, either honored or ignored teacher

knowledge, experience, and decision-making abilities; a "one-size-fits-all" context for instructional

delivery and assessment; inappropriate text choice; continuous changes in programs; lack of

assistance; flawed use of standardized tests; and inadequate preparation of teachers to face the

unique challenges of the multilingual, multicultural classroom. Taken collectively, these constraints

characterize the contexts in which teachers attempted to modify, adjust, create, intervene, and

comply. They did so by generating their own teaching strategies to target the academic/social needs

and interests of their students.

Teaching Strategies/Interventions: In their attempts to raise student achievement, teachers designed,

tested, and employed many different tools. Approaches included: specific strategies for teaching

writing, oral language, language routines, and silent reading; increasing parent involvement;

identifying and using role models; making the curriculum relevant to students' lives; balancing

basic skills instruction with hands-on learning contexts; providing individualized instruction (by the

teacher, by an aide, by a peer) for students who needed extra enrichment or who lagged seriously

behind in basic skills; engaging the students in the process of setting standards and evaluating their

own work; making students' voices heard by modifying assignments and assessment approaches.

We consider these teaching strategies to be closely linked with and in many cases in response to the

institutional circumstances/constraints and recommend that this relationship be studied further.

Student Voice: Five of the studies identified "inaudibility" or lack of student voice as a phenomenon

they both observed and addressed. When given opportunities to raise their voices—both literally

178

and metaphorically—EL students had much contribute. Whether having voice in the construction

of a student-generated rubric, actually hearing fellow students read words in a Lingo Bingo game,

answering simple questions about mathematics preparation in their home country or about their

experiences in mainstream and ELD classes, students have much to say about what will make their

education meaningful and more effective. The team acknowledged this as a very prominent theme

and wondered how our educational system can more effectively listen to the students they serve and

use what they hear to improve their education.

Social Challenges and Relationships: The studies documented different examples, challenges, and

configurations of the relationships between students and students, students and teachers, and

teachers and parents. Looking closely at these relationships helped to determine how and whether

instructional strategies/interventions were making a difference in student achievement and offered

insight into other factors which both inhibited and enabled progress. Careful documentation of

these relationships were key attributes of the studies and offered a different kind of data source, one

that was powerful and insightful.

Recommendations for Change: The interface between these teacher research studies/findings and

implications for policy, primarily at the local level, was identified as a cross-study theme. In light of

its particular findings, each study generated suggestions or recommendations for change.

Examples included: adequate teacher training for multilingual and multicultural settings; thoughtful,

site-based scheduling taking into account the preparation and needs of individual students; support

for defining clear roles for parent involvement; social support for EL students; and careful,

intentional and systematic (less haphazard) selection of programs and texts that match the needs of

the site and don't conflict with what a teacher has found successful. The individual studies could

potentially influence policy in their immediate context, and we wondered how these studies and

others like them, taken collectively, could influence policy at a larger level. It is interesting to note

that four of the teachers in this collaborative team are working on their administrative credentials.

We will follow them and the others to see how this research experience finds its way into future

decisions they may ultimately be involved with at the site and district level.

179

Conclusions

During our last team meeting, Nancy Salm reflected and wrote the following about her experience

with the LMRI Teacher Research Group:

Working as a teacher researcher at my own school site brought me a sense of belonging and provided a forum to assist me in examining my own teaching practices. As a member of the LMRI Teacher Research EL Cohort, I have had the pleasure of expanding my interactions with colleagues and being able to examine the issues of English Learners through the eyes of elementary and high school educators and administrators from throughout Northern California. This collaboration gave me new ways of seeing the EL population I work with each day in my classroom. I was able to gaze through the eyes of a first grade teacher, and begin to understand that where my students are today is largely a byproduct of where hey were yesterday. Seeing through the eyes of a newcomer at a large Bay Area high school gave me insights into actions I observe in my classroom each day. How many of my EL students suffer like Mari suffers? It is both comforting and frightening to realize that I am not alone with these unique students; teachers at all grade levels through the city, country, state and nation, even throughout the world, cope with second language learners every day. It is nice to know that we are all working together for them, and for each other."

For every teacher involved, the process of reflection and systematic/intentional inquiry about one's

own teaching practice can be transformational. One teacher commented specifically on how the

research process offers an important challenge to teachers’ own biases as well as group context for

working those through: “It opens your mind and allows you to think past what you see all the

time.” The research team agreed that teacher research brings into focus the real experiences and

activities of students and teachers, broadens and challenges a classroom teachers' efforts and points

of view, and makes not knowing OK and therefore tangible and “investigatable.”

For the world beyond this cohort of teachers, what utility can these teacher research studies offer?

On its own, each LMRI teacher research study says something specific about the way a particular

teacher investigated, learned about, and attempted to improve achievement for EL students.

Documenting these interventions and their impact on student achievement is central to the studies.

The success of these interventions inevitably attracts attention. For example, as a result of her

improved test scores and her articulate explanation of how she achieved them, Shirley Fagout was

asked by her administration to work with other teachers on the use of student-generated rubrics.

As a collection, the studies were also very successful at articulating and raising teachers' AND

students' voices about what it means to teach EL students and what it means to be an EL

learner—voices that clearly relate challenges, hopes, frustrations, and successes. Marion (2002)

suggests that teacher research represents a "fugitive" literature and that the time has come to look

180

systematically at studies across networks of teacher researchers in pursuit of answering the

question, "what does the teacher research say" about particular educational issues. We suggest the

teacher and student voices and perspectives articulated through teacher research efforts like the ones

supported through the UC LMRI deserve a respected place in the discourse and decision-making

arenas for EL education and that looking systematically across studies from different networks may

reveal new insights and opportunities for improving education.

Our mission during this final year of our work together is to raise these voices through presenting

our work at conferences, publishing the work, and inviting other teacher researchers and educators

to join us in thinking about the relationship between what teacher researchers know about

achievement of English Learners and the implications of this knowledge for research, practice, and

policy.

181

References

(2000) Position Statement on High-Stakes Testing in Pre K-12 Education. Educational Researcher, 29:8, p. 24-25.

Barton, A. (1999). Phonemic Awareness Education with an ESL Class. Action Research Monograph. Project 353. Pennsylvania Action Research Network: ED440217.

Bausch, L. (2001) The Story of Their Lives: Understanding Our Students' Literacy Practices and Events,” Encounter: Education for Meaning and Social Justice 14(3).

Castori, P. (2002) Teacher Research Facilitators' Handbook. CRESS Publication, University of California, Davis.

Cochran-Smith, M. and Lytle, S. (1993). Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge. Teachers College Press, Columbia University, N.Y.

Dabisch, D. (2001) From Desks to a Quest: Understanding the Process of Teacher Research. Networks: Online Journal for Teacher Research, vol. 4(2).

Eisner, E. (2001). "What Does It Mean to Say a School is Doing Well?", Phi Delta Kappan 82:5, p.372.

Fuischer, D., Mercado, M., MorganV., Robb, L., Sheehan-Carr, J.,. Torres, M. The Curtain Rises: Teachers Unveil Their Processes of Transformation Doing Classroom Inquiry. Networks: Online Journal for Teacher Research, vol. 3 (1).

Isserlis, J. (1990) Using Action Research for ESL Literacy Evaluation and Assessment. TESL Talk; v.20(1), p. 305-16.

Marion MacLean and Marian Mohr, 1999. Teacher Researchers at Work. The National Writing Project, Berkeley California.

Marion, R. (2002) Raising our Voices. Keynote address at the annual Voices from the Classroom Conference, Folsom, CA.

Marion, R. & Zeichner, K. (2001). Practitioner Resroruce Guide for Action Research, National Staff Development Council, Ohio.

Peitzman, F. (Ed.) (1990) The Power of Context: Studies by Teacher-Researchers.

Rumberger, R.W. & Gandara, P. (2000) Presentation at the University of California All Campus Collaborative, Outreach, Research and Dissemination (UC ACCORD) Conference, " Education and Equity: Research, Policy, and Practice," San Jose, California.

Shenk, T. (1999) Teaching Grammar in an ESL Classroom. Action Research Monograph. Project 353. Pennsylvania Action Research Network: ED440234.

Strunk, S. & Fowler--Frey, J. (1996) ESL Online Action Research. Final Report. Pennsylvania Associaton for Adult Continuing Education: Lancaster, PA. ED406861

Sweeney, A. & Tobin, K. (Eds.) 2000. Language, Discourse and Learning in Science: Improving Professional Practice through Action Research. Tallahasee, FL: SERVE.

Sykes, G. (1996). Reform Of and As Professional Development, Phi Delta Kappan, 77:7.