.

Linguistic Differences with Bilingual Parents Who are Immigrants: Words for Dialoguing About Young Children

Gregory A. Cheatham1 • Sylvia Nyegenye1

Published online: 14 July 2016

� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Abstract While partnerships including meaningful, two-

way, parent–teacher dialogue about young children during

early childhood program and school meetings are critical,

linguistic differences between bilingual parents who are

immigrants and early educators can impede communica-

tion and lead to inequitable services. In this article, we

focus on one aspect of linguistic differences for educators

and bilingual parents: English-language adjectives used by

teachers to describe young children. We highlight aspects

of adjectives, their uses, and cultural contexts to illustrate

potential misunderstandings that may lead to not only

miscommunication but also challenges to partnerships and

equitable early childhood service provision. Subsequently,

we present recommendations to foster meaningful dialogue

and greater understanding between educators and bilingual

parents who are immigrants when dialoguing about young

children.

Keywords Cultural diversity � Linguistic diversity � Parent � Bilingual

Early childhood programs are increasingly serving young

children who are from culturally and linguistically diverse

backgrounds many of whose parents have immigrant

backgrounds (NCELA 2011). Both the Division for Early

Childhood (DEC) of the Council for Exceptional Children

(2014), and the National Association for Education of

Young Children (NAEYC) (Copple and Bredekamp 2009)

emphasize family-early educator partnerships as a critical

component of appropriate and effective services for chil-

dren and families. Partnerships can include several aspects,

such as caring, trust, respect, and equality; additionally,

partnerships include effective communication during par-

ent–teacher conferences, IFSP (Individualized Family

Service Plan) meetings, and IEP (Individualized Education

Plan) meetings (Turnbull et al. 2015).

However, researchers have pointed to communication

and partnership challenges in early childhood programs,

particularly with families from linguistically diverse back-

grounds in part because educators may be unaware of

partnership challenges and may not possess effective part-

nership skills (Harry 2008; Kalyanpur and Harry 2012;

Lynch and Hanson 2011; Salas 2004). Educators’ everyday

uses of the English language during meetings may result in

communication and partnership difficulties, particularly

with parents who are bilingual from immigrant backgrounds

and who use English during school meetings (Cheatham

and Jimenez-Silva 2012; Cheatham and Ro 2011a, b;

Howard and Lipinoga 2010). Some of these bilingual par-

ents may have limited English proficiency while others may

have experiences in school meetings and education systems

outside the US. Without effective English-language com-

munication, opportunities for equitable and effective early

childhood services to young children and families can be

missed.

In this article, we focus on one aspect of linguistic dif-

ferences for early educators and bilingual parents who are

immigrants: English-language adjectives used by teachers

during school meetings about young children. We highlight

aspects of adjectives, their uses, and cultural contexts to

illustrate misunderstandings that may lead to challenges to

partnerships and equitable early childhood service provi-

sion. Subsequently, we present recommendations to foster

greater understanding between educators and parents when

& Gregory A. Cheatham [email protected]

1 Department of Special Education, University of Kansas,

Lawrence, KS, USA

123

Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692

DOI 10.1007/s10643-016-0803-0

dialoguing about young children, including the need for

educators to avoid stereotyping bilingual parents and

instead learn about their experiences, perspectives, and

English-language proficiency.

Adjectives for Dialoguing About Young Children

In this section, we focus on examples of linguistic differ-

ences: English-language adjectives used by teachers when

dialoguing with bilingual parents who are immigrants

about their young children. Adjectives (i.e., words that

describe and provide more information about a noun) can

be set within a context of parent–educator partnerships,

which can be defined as follows:

A relationship in which families (not just parents) and

professionals agree to build on each other’s expertise

and resources, as appropriate, for the purpose of making

and implementing decisions that will directly benefit

students and indirectly benefit other family members

and professionals (Turnbull et al. 2015, p. 161).

Collaborative decisions regarding young children

therefore include expertise and priorities of both parents

and early educators. To this end, true dialogue refers to a

space in which multiple perspectives are heard and valued

(Shields 2007). Two-way dialogue necessitates both

teachers and parents sharing and collaboratively charac-

terizing young children’s strengths and needs (i.e., con-

structing through discourse) through the use of English-

language adjectives. When teachers and bilingual parents

misunderstand each other’s uses of adjectives, miscom-

munication and partnerships challenges can occur. Char-

acterizations of children can be inaccurate resulting in

mismatch between educational support and children’s

actual needs. Mischaracterization of young children may be

particularly frequent during meetings with teachers and

bilingual parents from immigrant backgrounds.

Therefore, English-language adjectives constitute

essential elements of teacher and parent child portrayals,

which lead to identification of children’s strengths and

needed educational supports. Critical details about young

children’s personalities, appearance, skills, and develop-

mental areas are expressed through adjectives (e.g., ‘‘Billy

is curious about airplanes,’’ ‘‘Mary is nervous during circle

time’’, ‘‘Socially with peers, Bumshin can be rude to other

children’’). A focus on teachers’ uses of English-language

adjectives spoken during school-based meetings can

address language differences and ensuing challenges to

parent–teacher communication and partnerships by sup-

porting parent–teacher dialogue. Parents understanding

teachers is just a first step. In the spirit of true partnerships,

bilingual parents who are immigrants should be afforded

opportunities to both agree and disagree with educators’

perspectives and recommendations as they collaboratively

plan for young children.

This discussion will highlight potential parent–teacher

miscommunication based on discourse meanings (Gee

2014a, b) of adjectives during early childhood meetings,

such as parent–teacher conferences, IFSP, and IEP meet-

ings. Following Gee, teachers and parents actively con-

struct discourse meanings during school-based meetings

and interactions. While adjectives may have agreed-upon

definitions, intended and perceived meanings are actively

negotiated between speakers based on many factors,

including grammar and discourse context. Meaning-mak-

ing may be challenging when teachers talk with bilingual

parents who are immigrants and have limited English skills

and/or few experiences in US school meeting contexts but

teachers do not have skills to promote meaningful, two-

way dialogue. We frame this discussion of adjectives

around two key aspects of Gee’s (2014a, b) discourse word

meanings (i.e., system meaning and situated meaning) to

illustrate potential challenges and opportunities for com-

municating and partnering with bilingual parents of young

children. Importantly, rather than assuming that parents

simply listen and acquiesce to teachers’ ideas, this dis-

cussion points to ways to open and maintain parent–teacher

dialogue and partnerships.

System Meanings

First, like all words, English-language adjectives can be

described in terms of their system meaning, which are broad

ranges of possible meanings associated with a word (Gee

2014a, b). In an early childhood context, teachers typically

have in mind system meanings of adjectives used to describe

children. For example, the adjective ‘‘shy,’’ may have the

following system meanings: quiet, reluctant, frightened,

withdrawn, cautious, and timid, which while similar, are also

quite distinct. Similarly, the adjective ‘‘independent’’ can

mean self-sufficient and not requiring assistance of others.

However, some bilingual parents who are from immi-

grant backgrounds and who have lower English proficiency

may only know a few system meanings for adjectives used

to describe children. For instance, some bilingual parents

may not know any or know only a few system meanings of

‘‘shy’’ in English. Misunderstandings about adjectives’

system meanings can lead to challenges in understanding a

teacher’s perspectives on children and their skills, thereby

impeding meaningful dialogue and partnerships.

Situated Meanings

Second, English-language adjectives can be described in

terms of situated meaning, which is the actual meaning of a

686 Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692

123

word as used in specific context (Gee 2014a, b). Speakers

draw upon their knowledge of a word’s potential system

meanings during dialogue within a particular situation and

with specific speakers. For example, when a teacher says,

‘‘Lorenzo is shy at the water table’’ during a parent–teacher

conference or IEP meeting, the teacher’s intended meaning

of ‘‘shy’’ is ambiguous based only on the spoken words.

This sentence reflects a teacher’s knowledge, experience

and cultural perspective. The teacher makes assumptions

about parents’ knowledge and experiences for dialogue to

proceed. Much of the meaning of adjectives, such as ‘‘shy’’

is taken for granted and not shared with bilingual parents

who are immigrants, therefore creating misunderstanding.

Parents should be afforded opportunities to meaningfully

dialogue with educators as well as contribute to charac-

terizations of their children’s skills and contest teachers’

viewpoints.

Adjectives and Assumed Knowledge and Experience

Situated meanings are intricately entwined with individu-

als’ knowledge and experience (Gee 2014a, b) including

the institutional culture of early childhood education.

Embedded in the sentence, ‘‘Lorenzo is shy at the water

table’’ are many aspects of the US early childhood edu-

cation, such as the meaning of ‘‘water table,’’ how a water

table looks, its developmental value for children, ways in

which children interact at the water table, and much more

as well as the teachers’ role to evaluate young children’s

developmental skills. Thus, when a teacher says, ‘‘Lorenzo

is shy at the water table,’’ the teacher can mean the fol-

lowing and more: ‘‘Rather than interacting with same-age

peers, Lorenzo plays alone with cups and funnels during

water play. He is timid with peers during this activity in an

early childhood classroom when compared to his social

skills during other classroom routines.’’

This situated meaning of ‘‘shy’’ can only be understood

with reference to the context in which it is spoken. Conse-

quently, if a teacher incorrectly assumes that bilingual par-

ents from immigrant backgrounds have particular

experiences or knowledge (e.g., have observed children at a

water table in a US early childhood program), miscommu-

nication can occur—and parents may not be not afforded

opportunities to provide alternative perspectives. Without

further dialogue, teachers may assume mutual understand-

ings about the characterization of children. Thus, meaning

making and partnerships can be problematic.

Adjectives’ Scalability

Furthermore, challenges to parent–teacher communication

and partnerships can occur when discussing young chil-

dren’s skills, because many English-language adjectives

are scalable; that is, a speaker’s intended situated meaning

can be placed on an imaginary scale indicating its meaning

in relation to its antonym (Fromkin et al. 2014). A list of

English-language scalable adjectives and antonyms is

provided in Table 1. As illustrated below, the meaning of

the adjectives ‘‘shy’’ and ‘‘independent’’ form a scale with

their antonyms, ‘‘outgoing’’ ‘‘dependent/interdependent.’’

Shy �������������! ������������� Outgoing

Independent �������������! ������������� Dependent/Interdependent

Meanings of scalable adjectives are relative, with

placement on the scale dependent on the situation

Table 1 Scalable English-language adjective antonym pairs for dialoguing about young children

Agreeable

�������������������������! �������������������������

Disagreeable

Good Bad

Beautiful Ugly

Clean Dirty

Clever Unintelligent

Kind Cruel

Deep Shallow

Capable Incapable

Fast Slow

Happy Sad

Gentle Aggressive

Loud Quiet

Shy Outgoing

Noisy Quiet

Terrible Wonderful

Fat Thin

Generous Stingy

Mature Immature

Neat Messy

Obedient Disobedient

Patient Impatient

Young Old

Healthy Sick/ill

Strong Weak

Polite Rude

Optimistic Pessimistic

Honest Dishonest

Graceful Clumsy

Brave Cowardly

Assertive Timid

Talkative Silent

Independent Dependent

These adjectives are provided as example endpoints on a word-

meaning scale; early childhood teachers may not use many of these

adjectives to dialogue with parents about children

Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692 687

123

(including the speaker’s and listener’s perspectives) in

which they are spoken (Matthews 2014). Scalable adjec-

tives’ meanings are typically narrowed (i.e., become more

specific) depending on context in which they are spoken

(Kennedy 1999, 2007), which can pose further communi-

cation difficulties as teachers and parents have different

points of reference on the scale when dialoguing about a

child. As such, an early childhood teacher’s intended, sit-

uated meaning is not inherently obvious based on words

alone, because the location on which the teacher places the

intended meaning of an adjective on a scale is not easily

discernible without experience and knowledge of US early

childhood settings. For example, a teacher who describes

Lorenzo as shy may mean that the he falls on the far left on

the shy-outgoing scale. In contrast, a bilingual parent from

an immigrant background may infer that the teacher is

describing Lorenzo as at middle-right of the scale.

Furthermore, despite teachers’ best intentions, vague-

ness of adjectives can actually increase through the use of

adverbs, such as ‘‘really,’’ ‘‘somewhat,’’ ‘‘unexpectedly,’’

and ‘‘very,’’ (e.g., ‘‘Sammy is very independent during

clean up time’’), because these modifiers do not specify the

speaker’s intended placement of an adjective on a scale

(Hübler 1983). Consequently, while the teacher believes

that Lorenzo is shy with reference to outgoing, the bilin-

gual parent may actually view Lorenzo as less shy and

more outgoing. In fact, some parents may not even agree

with teachers about the scale endpoints of English-lan-

guage adjectives. These adjective meaning differences can

lead to parent–teacher communication and partnership

challenges, such as inability of parents to meaningfully

dialogue with early educators.

Adjectives and Assumed Comparison Groups

Moreover, adjectives’ scalability also assumes situated

comparison (Gärdenfors 2014), but bilingual parents who

are immigrants and teachers may not agree on the kinds of

comparisons they make. For instance, when stating,

‘‘Lorenzo is shy at the water table,’’ a teacher is also

comparing Lorenzo to other children in the classroom as

well as to children encountered in years of teaching, and

potentially children with whom the teacher grew up in his/

her US family, community, and schools. A teacher’s use of

‘‘shy’’ typically references other US children who, when

faced with similar circumstances (e.g., playing at the water

table) are less shy and therefore more readily initiate and

sustain play with peers. Teachers’ comparisons also are

informed by their teacher preparation programs, which

include study of developmental guidelines and early

childhood curricula.

Parents born and raised in the US with more cultural

knowledge of and experience in the US educational system

will likely better understand contexts in which words are

uttered and therefore are likely to infer teachers’ intended

adjective meanings thereby setting the stage for more

parent–teacher dialogue. Listeners draw on their own

knowledge, make assumptions, and infer in order to make

sense of the words they are hearing (Gee 2014b). Bilingual

parents who are immigrants can face challenges making

sense of teachers’ words in part because they may have a

different comparison group of children, and because they

may not have experience as a teacher in the US nor have

participated in a teacher preparation program. As such,

some bilingual parents’ estimations of young children’s

skills can be significantly different (though not necessarily

incorrect) from those of teachers. Without recognition of

the situationally-contingent meanings of adjectives, par-

ent–teacher communication and partnerships may be

impeded, which can result in inequitable services to young

children. With attention to their words, teachers can foster

meaningful dialogue in which parents’ expertise and pri-

orities about their children are heard.

Adjectives and Assumed Culture-Based Values

In addition, situated meanings of adjectives are associated

with culture (Gee 2014a). Teachers’ and bilingual parents’

culture-based perspectives of children can be different even

though they use the same adjective to describe children.

More specifically, bilingual parents and teachers may not

agree on the ascribed values associated with the child skill

that they are describing via adjectives. Teachers may

assume that children’s skills prioritized at school are uni-

versally valued (Kalyanpur and Harry 2012). However,

given the socially-mediated contexts in which children

learn and develop at home, in communities, and in schools,

adults’ expectations regarding children’s skills and

behaviors are inherently culture-based and can differ from

teachers’ expectations in schools (Chen et al. 2009; Rogoff

2003). Consequently, misunderstanding and disagreement

can occur regarding the extent to which a child skill is

considered positive, neutral, or negative. The value of

many child skills described using adjectives, such as chil-

dren’s friendship intimacy, self-expression, social partici-

pation, compliance with requests, and aggression must be

interpreted through a cultural lens (Chen and Rubin 2011;

Chen et al. 2009; French et al. 2006; Parmar et al. 2008).

Parents from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds

may actively promote their children’s development of

specific skills which contradict skills valued in early

childhood programs (Cheatham and Santos 2005).

For example, when the teacher says, ‘‘Lorenzo is shy,’’

he/she is likely suggesting that Lorenzo should be more

outgoing, which reflects a widely-held value and child

behavior expectation within US early childhood programs.

688 Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692

123

However, some bilingual parents’ culture-based beliefs

suggest that their children’s shyness is not problematic but

actually valued. Indeed, parents from some culturally

diverse backgrounds place higher value on shyness com-

pared to individuals from more mainstream US back-

grounds (see Chen and Rubin 2011). Parents from diverse

cultural backgrounds may not agree that children playing

alone at the water table is problematic. Thus, unknown to

both teacher and parent, when a teacher says, ‘‘Lorenzo is

shy,’’ the parent’s interpreted meaning may not match the

teacher’s intended, situated meaning. Similarly, children’s

independence skills, which are highly valued in certain

early childhood program contexts may contradict a child’s

family emphasis on cooperation and interdependence at

home and in community (Kalyanpur and Harry 1999, 2012;

Lynch and Hanson 2011).

In summary, teachers’ and parents’ understandings of

adjectives’ system and situated meanings are critical to

meaningful, two-way dialogue with parents about children

during school meetings. System and situated meanings of

adjectives used by teachers and bilingual parents who are

immigrants to describe children can lead to miscommunication

and misunderstandings, which are likely to result in difficult

parent–professional partnerships and inequitable services for

young children.

Implications for Parent–Early Educator

Communication, Dialogue, and Partnerships

When early educators implement strategies to address

misunderstandings about their uses of adjectives when

describing young children, partnerships and equitable ser-

vice provision can be promoted. Drawing from Gee’s

(2014a, b) discourse theory, teachers can more effectively

dialogue with bilingual parents from immigrant back-

grounds by specifically addressing intended, situated

meanings during parent–teacher conferences, IFSP meet-

ings, and IEP meetings. Early educators can facilitate

bilingual parents’ understanding of situated meanings by

providing parents with experiences with relevant social

language (e.g., words and grammar). These suggestions for

early educators can help build bilingual parents’ knowl-

edge about US early childhood, culture, and experiences in

IFSP and IEP meetings and parent–teacher conferences and

are intended to promote mutual understandings and two-

way dialogue. Further, as Gee (2014b) contends, when

individuals have a stake in the outcome of an experience,

their grasp and understandings of the issues increase. Thus,

it is not surprising that in the context of school meetings,

bilingual parents from immigrant backgrounds can more

effectively learn from experiences when they see that their

actions impact not only dialogue but collaborative decision

making regarding their own children. Strategies to foster

parent–teacher dialogue through experiences are discussed

below and can be implemented before, during, and after

school meetings.

Before Meetings

Prior to school meetings, early educators can implement

strategies to support two-way dialogue and partnerships

with bilingual parents who are immigrants. First, early

childhood programs can create receptive and comfort-

able environments for educator–family partnerships

(Turnbull et al. 2015), that include a space for effective,

ongoing two-way discussion (Delgado-Gaitan 2001) as

well as contribute to implicit and contextual understand-

ings of children across school, home, and community.

Teachers take the role of learner to genuinely engage

families as a means to form positive relationships with both

teachers and schools (Gonzalez et al. 2005). Teachers can

begin discussions with parents from the periphery, for

example by asking open-ended questions about family

activities and routines and children’s activity preferences.

As rapport is established, parents and teachers can share

their families’ stories, language backgrounds, lived expe-

riences, cultural perspectives, and previous experiences

with schools and educators. Families can be encouraged to

discuss their perspectives on raising their children in a US

environment, which has diverse cultural influences. Dia-

logue can include talk of culture-based and individual

academic and behavioral expectations for children. For

families who do not want to share, early educators should

respect their decisions.

Early educators also can invite bilingual parents into

their children’s classrooms. Parents can observe classroom

interactions and activities to gain an understanding of the

classroom experiences and teachers’ situational expecta-

tions of children. Parents can observe and discuss with

teachers classroom organization, materials, and interac-

tions between children and with educators as well as how

children manage their early childhood program days.

Consequently, bilingual parents from immigrant back-

grounds can build their experience and knowledge base of

US early child settings including classroom vocabulary

(e.g., ‘‘water table,’’ ‘‘centers’’). During these visits,

teachers may respond to parent questions and engage in

discussion purposefully incorporating adjectives to

describe children. For example, if a bilingual parent asks,

‘‘How are children expected to behave during center

time?’’ The teacher can respond, ‘‘One expectation is that

children should be patient while waiting their turn for the

computer center’’ followed by describing what patient

means in that context. Thus, early educators can illustrate

Gee’s (2014b) situational meanings of adjectives and other

language within early childhood classrooms and parents

Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692 689

123

can be encouraged to discuss their expectations for

children.

During classroom visits, bilingual parents who are

immigrants can build shared experiences and adjective

meanings with early childhood teachers and have oppor-

tunities to question and make suggestions regarding their

children. Teachers also can discuss with bilingual parents

aspects of US culture relevant to young children’s educa-

tion (e.g., a curricular focus on building child independence

and fostering child social interaction in specific classroom

contexts) while soliciting the parent’s perspectives and

expectations (Kalyanpur and Harry 2012). Thus, teachers

and parents develop positive relationships, mutual under-

standings of expectations, and cultural perspectives

regarding children’s competencies and characteristics

through ongoing, meaningful dialogue using adjectives.

Additionally, teachers can collaborate with early child-

hood program administrators to develop a mentoring sys-

tem for bilingual parents from immigrant backgrounds who

may have lower English proficiency or have fewer expe-

riences with US early education programs. According to

Gee (2004), experience is constructed through interactive,

intersubjective dialogue with others who have greater

contextual knowledge. In this way, parents of children who

already completed an early childhood program can act as

cultural/language informants. With an informant, bilingual

parents from immigrant backgrounds can discuss typical

agendas, procedures, topics, and adjectives used during

school meetings. By hearing about and discussing other

parents’ experiences, bilingual parents can build their

expectations about US early childhood systems and antic-

ipate experiences for school meetings. These discussions

equip them to understand and meaningfully participate in

dialogue about their children.

Likewise, early educators can seek out language/culture

information and informants for themselves to better sup-

port parent–teacher dialogue and partnerships. Information

about families from diverse cultural and linguistic back-

grounds can be found in books (e.g., Lynch and Hanson

2011), although teachers will need to get to know indi-

vidual families to determine the extent to which cultural

information is applicable. Bilingual informants should be

specific to the language, language variety/dialect, and

culture of the families with whom the teacher is partnering.

Additionally, bilingual informants should have high profi-

ciency in both languages and have considerable experience

with US schools. They can support teachers’ learning about

language and culture to promote dialogue during school

meetings. For example, teachers can learn about meanings

of adjectives and early childhood parent–teacher meetings

in the families’ country of origin. Bilingual informants can

also create resources to support bilingual parents as they

dialogue with teachers about children, such as a word bank,

which highlights similarities and differences in English-

language adjective system meanings, classroom situational

meanings, and ascribed cultural values across homes,

communities, and schools.

Similarly, to help parents build knowledge about school

meetings, early educators can invite bilingual parents who

are immigrants to observe or watch a video-recorded IFSP

meetings, IEP meetings, or parent–teacher conferences

about another child (with his/her parents,’ teacher’s, and

early childhood program permission). Subsequently, the

teacher can discuss with bilingual parents expectations for

meetings, topics addressed, and answer parent questions. A

mentor parent could also conduct a simulated IEP meeting

or parent–teacher conference with the bilingual parent to

build knowledge of the language used and promote bilin-

gual parents’ meaningful participation. Indeed, simulations

are important tools for building experience and under-

standings (Gee 2004).

During Meetings

Aligning with Gee’s (2014a, b) work in discourse and

language meaning, early educators can provide greater

context to talk during IFSP and IEP meetings and parent–

teacher conferences while also becoming familiar with the

lived experiences of bilingual families from immigrant

backgrounds. For example, at the start of meetings,

teachers can discuss the expected purpose of the meeting

and bilingual parents’ expectations. Teachers can share and

revise the meeting purpose and agenda in response to needs

of bilingual parents being careful to avoid controlling

parent–educator interactions, thereby supporting parents–

teacher dialogue.

During meetings, teachers also may seek in-depth

information from parents, for instance through asking

detailed questions about their children’s skills and com-

petencies (Turnbull et al. 2015). Teachers could seek

meaningful dialogue via open-ended questions and provide

sufficient wait time for bilingual parents’ responses

(Cheatham and Ostrosky 2009). For example, early edu-

cators can say, ‘‘John likes to draw cars and airplanes

during center time. What does he like to talk about at

home?’’ or ‘‘I shared my perspective of John in our early

childhood program. What is your perspective, and what

suggestions do you have for me?’’ Early educators there-

fore act on the information families provide, to rework

their instructional approaches or make necessary curricular

modifications.

To avoid making mistaken assumptions about bilingual

parents’ knowledge and experiences, teachers can also be

explicit in their communication with bilingual parents who

are immigrants while maintaining sensitivity. To this end,

690 Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692

123

teachers can use explicit descriptions of child actions and

provide detailed examples using English-language adjec-

tives. For instance, when a teacher describes a child as

‘‘active,’’ the teacher can explain the intended situational

meaning saying, ‘‘Mary seems unable to sit down in class

during snack time.’’ Likewise, for a bilingual parent who

has fewer experiences in US early childhood settings, the

teacher can say, ‘‘Though Marko is usually polite with

peers, he can sometimes be rude. For example, yesterday

when sitting during circle time, he was poking the girl

sitting next to him even though we prompted him many

times to stop. We will continue reading the social story,

‘Keeping Hands and Feet to Myself’ during circle time this

week. To what extent is Marko usually polite with his

siblings and cousins at home?’’ In this way, the teacher

uses adjectives (i.e., ‘‘polite,’’ ‘‘rude’’) while embedding

explicit descriptions in her/his discussion such that a

bilingual parent can better understand, respond, and

meaningfully discuss and plan the child’s learning

environment.

Additionally, visuals/graphics can also support bilingual

parents’ understandings and provide a space for dialogue

with early educators. Teachers can create or provide actual

visual examples of children’s work (e.g., class drawings,

videos of children interacting with peer and learning

materials) and ask bilingual parents to interpret the por-

trayed meaning. From the information provided by parents,

teachers could discuss parents’ culture-based perceptions

of their children’s skills and build on parents’ knowledge

and perspectives to share their ideas and engage in col-

laborative decision making regarding children’s school and

home learning.

Moreover, early educators can develop an informal

visual scale for English-language adjectives used to

describe children. Antonyms can also be included to mark

the extreme ends of the scales.

Shy �������������! ������������� Outgoing

Independent �������������! ������������� Dependent/Interdependent

As both teachers and bilingual parents talk, they can

refer to the scale to illustrate degrees of meaning in

relation to expectations and actual child behavior.

Teachers and bilingual parents provide comparisons to

expected child skills and behaviors on the visual adjective

scale to identify children’s past, current, and expected

functioning. When parents and teachers do not agree

about characterizations of children, more discussion

should ensue with reference to contexts and expectations

of children’s skills. Importantly, early educators can

acknowledge the validity of parents’ perspectives and

expectations and when specific skills are prioritized,

individualize modifications to curricula.

After Meetings

To further expand the contextual frames for bilingual

parents who are immigrants and to continue to familiarize

them with the meanings of English-language adjectives and

other aspects of language, educators may create opportu-

nities for dialogue and meaningful interaction between

teachers and bilingual families. After IFSP meetings, IEP

meetings, and parent–teacher conferences, teachers can

conduct follow up telephone calls, face-to-face meetings,

and home visits. Teachers also can encourage bilingual

parents to regularly dialogue about their children, for

instance, during child drop-off or pick-up. Frequent, posi-

tive discussions with bilingual parents can promote com-

mon understandings, which can lead to more effective

communication.

Finally, teachers can seek out ongoing professional

development addressing communicating, collaborating,

and partnering with families from diverse cultural and

linguistic backgrounds who are immigrants (Harry 2008;

Copple and Bredekamp 2009). Because teachers’ actions

are critical to fostering meaningful family–educator dia-

logue, pre-service and in-service professional development

can focus on facilitating teacher learning about aspects of

parents’ culture and language, ways in which language

socially constructs the world as well as enacts and repro-

duces power differences between early educators and par-

ents, and how teachers can more effectively include

bilingual parents in dialogue about their children (Chea-

tham and Ro 2011a, b; Beneke and Cheatham 2016). Early

educators can then practice strategies, such as those dis-

cussed in this article, to support bilingual parents’ and their

own discourse understandings to facilitate meaningful

dialogue during school meetings. Additionally, profes-

sional development can include supporting early educators

working through the process of cultural reciprocity

(Kalyanpur and Harry 2012) with families over time, which

can help teachers understand origins of their cultural values

and norms, discern the extent to which the family being

served shares their values those assumptions, acknowledge

and give explicit respect to any cultural differences iden-

tified and fully explain their culture-based assumptions,

and—in collaboration with families—determine the most

effective way of interpreting and addressing the child’s

needs.

In conclusion, language differences between early edu-

cators and bilingual parents who are immigrants can

impede parent–professional communication and partner-

ships. English-language adjectives are one important aspect

of language used during IFSP/IEP meetings and parent–

teacher conferences. Adjectives’ system and situation

meanings are critical to parents’ and teachers’ under-

Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692 691

123

standings about and planning for young children. Gee

(2014a) emphasized the importance of experience to build

knowledge and language understanding. In the context of

early childhood parent–teacher interactions, early educa-

tors can promote knowledge and experience for themselves

and for bilingual parents from immigrant backgrounds,

thereby promoting meaningful dialogue, partnerships, and

equitable service provision for young children.

References

Beneke, M. R., & Cheatham, G. A. (2016). Inclusive, democratic

family–professional partnerships: (Re)conceptualizing culture

and language in teacher preparation. Topics in Early Childhood

Special Education, 35(4), 234–244.

Cheatham, G. A., & Jimenez-Silva, M. (2012). Partnering with Latino

families during kindergarten transition: Lessons learned from a

parent–teacher conference. Childhood Education, 88, 177–184.

Cheatham, G. A., & Ostrosky, M. M. (2009). Listening for details of

talk: Early childhood parent–teacher conference communication

facilitators. Young Exceptional Children, 13(1), 36–49.

Cheatham, G. A., & Ro, Y. E. (2011a). Communication between early

educators and parents who speak English as a second language:

A semantic and pragmatic perspective. Early Childhood Educa-

tion Journal, 39, 249–256.

Cheatham, G. A., & Ro, Y. E. (2011b). A linguistic perspective on

communication with parents who speak English as a second

language: Phonology, morphology, and syntax. Early Child

Development and Care, 181, 1247–1260.

Cheatham, G. A., & Santos, R. M. (2005). A–B–C’s of bridging home

and school expectations for children and families of diverse

backgrounds. Young Exceptional Children, 8(3), 3–11.

Chen, X., Chung, J., & Hsiao, C. (2009). Peer interactions and

relationships from a cross-cultural perspective. In K. H. Rubin,

W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer

interactions, relationships and groups (pp. 432–454). New York:

Guilford.

Chen, X., & Rubin, K. H. (2011). Culture and children’s socioemo-

tional functioning: Contextual-developmental perspective. In X.

Chen & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), Socioemotional development in

cultural context (pp. 29–52). New York: Guilford.

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally

appropriate practice in early childhood programs: Serving

children from birth to age 8. Washington, DC: National

Association for the Education of Young Children.

Delgado-Gaitan, C. (2001). The power of community: Mobilizing for

family and schooling. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Division for Early Childhood (2014). DEC recommended practices in

early intervention/early childhood special education 2014.

Retrieved from http://www.dec-sped.org/recommendedpractices.

French, D. C., Lee, O., & Pidada, S. U. (2006). Friendships of

Indonesian, South Korean, and US Youth: Exclusivity, intimacy,

enhancement of worth, and conflict. In X. Chen, D. C. French, &

B. H. Schneider (Eds.), Peer relationships in cultural context

(pp. 379–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2014). An introduction to

language. Boston: Wadsworth.

Gärdenfors, P. (2014). The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on

conceptual spaces. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of

Technology.

Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of

traditional schooling. London: Routledge.

Gee, J. P. (2014a). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and

method. New York: Routledge.

Gee, J. P. (2014b, October). Language as system and situation:

Writing the world. In: Maryland Conference on Academic and

Professional Writing. College Park, MD.

Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge:

Theorizing practices in households, communities, and class-

rooms. Mahwah: Taylor & Francis.

Harry, B. (2008). Collaboration with culturally and linguistically

diverse families: Ideal versus reality. Exceptional Children, 74,

372–388.

Howard, K. M., & Lipinoga, S. (2010). Closing down openings:

Pretextuality and misunderstanding in parent–teacher confer-

ences with Mexican immigrant families. Language and Com-

munication, 30, 33–47.

Hübler, A. (1983). Understatements and hedges in English. Philadel-

phia: John Benjamins.

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (1999). Culture in special education.

Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (2012). Cultural reciprocity in special

education: Building family–professional relationships. Balti-

more: Paul H. Brookes.

Kennedy, C. (1999). Projecting the adjective: The syntax and

semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland.

Kennedy, C. (2007). Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of

relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and

Philosophy, 30, 1–45.

Lynch, E. W., & Hanson, M. J. (Eds.). (2011). Developing cross-

cultural competence: A guide for working with children and

their families. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Matthews, P. H. (2014). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University.

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (2011).

Key demographics and practice recommendations for young

English learners. Available at http://www.ncela.us/files/uploads/

9/EarlyChildhoodShortReport.pdf.

Parmar, P., Harkness, S., & Super, C. M. (2008). Teacher or

playmate? Asian immigrant and European–American parents’

participation in their young children’s daily activities. Social

Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36,

163–176.

Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Salas, L. (2004). Individualized education plan (IEP) meetings and

Mexican–American parents: Let’s talk about it. Journal of

Latinos in Education, 3(3), 181–192.

Shields, C. M. (2007). Bakhtin primer. New York: Peter Lang

Publishing.

Turnbull, A. P., Turnbull, H. R., Erwin, E. J., Soodak, L. C., &

Shogren, K. A. (2015). Families, professionals, and exception-

ality: Positive outcomes through partnerships and trust. Boston:

Pearson.

692 Early Childhood Educ J (2017) 45:685–692

123

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.