Upload
priscilla
View
226
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Communities of Participation in TESOL
Equipping Classroom Teachersfor English Language Learners
JI YOUNG KIMFayetteville State University
COLLEEN WALKERCampbellsville University
PRISCILLA MANARINO-LEGGETTFayetteville State University
The purpose of this article is to describe the Quality EducatorsAcademy (QEA), a year-long training for K-8 classroom teachersthat was funded by a NC ESEA Title II–A Improving TeacherQuality (NC QUEST) Grant. Key features of the project as wellas the design and content of the training contributed to successin recruiting, retaining, and effectively training classroom teach-ers to work with ELLs. The authors, who implemented a QEAin North Carolina, share what they did in detail so that othersinterested in equipping classroom teachers with research-basedbest practices for meeting the needs of English language learn-ers may learn from their efforts. This article describes keyfeatures of the project: collaboration, recruitment and selectionof participants, professional development design, and trainingand content delivery.doi: 10.1002/tesj.40
Graduate students in our Master of Education programfrequently ask how it is possible to teach content to Englishlanguage learners (ELLs) with limited English language proficiency.Classroom teachers in our state of North Carolina are alsoconcerned that they are held accountable for ELLs’ performance onstate mandated tests. These concerns illustrate the impact that thegrowing number of ELLs in our schools is having and indicate thegeneral lack of teacher expertise to deal with this new situation.
722 TESOL Journal 3.4, December 2012� 2012 TESOL International Association
While training teachers at our institution, we discovered a dire needfor high-quality professional development for classroom teachersfocused on effective practices for meeting the needs of the growingpopulation of English language learners.
The number of ELLs has grown exponentially nationally and inNorth Carolina over the past decade. Nationally, the number ofindividuals who speak languages other than English increasedfrom 23.1 to 55.4 million between 1980 and 2007 (Skinner, Wight,Aratani, Cooper, & Thampi, 2010). Also, according to the NationalClearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA; www.ncela.gwu.edu), the number of ELLs grew nearly 400% from 1996to 2006. The state of North Carolina mirrors the national statistics.
The literature also indicates that classroom teachers areunderprepared to teach ELLs. Although No Child Left Behind(NCLB) called for highly qualified teachers in every core academicclassroom, there is a significant shortage of teachers qualified toteach ELLs (National Commission on Teaching America’s Future[NCTAF], 1996). Moreover, most states do not require allclassroom teachers with ELLs to have specialized training. Inaddition, the majority of teacher preparation colleges do notadequately provide education majors with strategies for teachinglinguistically and culturally diverse students (Gandara & Maxwell-Jolly, 2000). In the Schools and Staffing Survey (National Center orEducation Statistics, 2002), 41.2% of the 2,984,781 public schoolteachers had 8 or more hours of ELL training in the previous3 years. Thus, many ELLs receive much of their instruction fromteachers who have not had appropriate professional development toaddress second language development needs or to make contentinstruction comprehensible (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008).
The purpose of this article is to share what we learned fromimplementing the Quality Educators’ Academy (QEA), a year-longtraining project for K-8 classroom teachers in the CumberlandCounty School District in North Carolina, which was funded by anESEA Title II–A Improving Teacher Quality (NC QUEST) Grant.We begin with a brief outline of the project to provide context,then share the critical features of the project as well as strengthsand weaknesses so that those who embark on a similar effort maybenefit from our experience.
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 723
THE QUALITY EDUCATORS’ ACADEMY (QEA)The overall goal of QEAwas to increase the number of K–8 teacherswho are highly qualified in effectively developing ELLs’ literacy andacademic language needed for content-area learning. The projectwas carefully designed to try andmeet the needs of all involved. Weoffered benefits that we thought would be attractive to teachers anddeveloped a training schedule to accommodate teachers’ busyschedules. Finally, we implemented a train-the-trainer professionaldevelopment design to ensure that the information providedthrough this training would be shared with other teachers. In thissection we briefly discuss the following key features of the project:collaboration, recruitment and selection of participants, professionaldevelopment design, training content and delivery, and evaluation.Table 1 presents a summary of the QEA key features.
CollaborationThe QEA was designed collaboratively between the universityand school district. Through weekly meetings an interdisciplinaryteam consisting of faculty from the College of Arts and Sciences(CAS) and the School of Education (SOE), along with the ESLCoordinator and the grant officer from the local school district,worked together to write the grant proposal. Once the grant wasobtained each of the partners had distinct responsibilities. Theuniversity faculty served as project director, co-director, andconsultant. Faculty members focused on administrative tasks aswell as planning, delivering, and evaluating the training. The ESLcoordinator and her staff from the local school district focused onidentifying schools, recruiting participants, informing teachersof school district policies, and participating in the training.The university–school district collaboration as well as theinterdisciplinary collaboration among university faculty proved tobe critical to the success of the project. This aspect of the projectwill be discussed in more detail later.
RecruitmentWe sent letters to principals of schools with the highest numberof ELLs, informing them of the grant and inviting them to select
724 TESOL Journal
TABLE1.
Overview
ofKey
FeaturesofQualityEducators’Academ
y
Collab
oration
Participan
tsProfessionalDev
elopmen
tDesign
TrainingContentan
dDelivery
Evaluation
August
2007
–July
2008
Betweenuniversity
facu
ltyan
dschool
districtpersonnel
Interd
isciplinary
collab
orationam
ong
university
facu
lty
from
SOEan
dCAS
Recruitment
Letters
toprincipalsof
schools
with
highest
number
ofELLs
Principals
coord
inate
withESL
coord
inatorto
select
teachers
toparticipate
Description
28participan
ts–21
elem
entary
and7
middle
school
teachers
26females,2males
Train-the-trainer
Long-term
andongoing
Year-longsched
ule
included
:5-day
summer
institute;onewhole-day
sessionper
month
for
7monthsduringthe
schoolyear;3-day
culm
ination
the
following
summer
Substitute
teachersto
reliev
eteachersfor
full-day
trainings
duringtheschool
year
Employed
theSIO
PWeek-LongSummer
Training
Team-building,sh
aringof
experienceswithELLs,
collectionofpre-self-
assessmen
tdata,
explorationoffirst-an
dsecond-lan
guag
eacquisition,an
dan
introductionto
SIO
P.
Monthly
Sessions
Participan
tsdev
eloped
lessonplansarounda
grade-ap
propriate
conceptthey
wereteaching;
incorporatedtheSIO
Pcomponen
tsinto
their
lessonplan;im
plemen
ted
thenew
lylearned
ideasin
classroom;sh
ared
and
reflectedontheirlessons,
added
onnew
SIO
Pcomponen
ts.
Form
ative
assessmen
tsconducted
throughout
thetraining
Pre/post-
assessmen
tsParticipan
tsu
rvey
san
dreflections
Principal
survey
Portfoliorubric
Summative
assessmen
tconducted
by
external
evaluator
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 725
TABLE1.
(Continued)
Collab
oration
Participan
tsProfessional
Dev
elopmen
tDesign
TrainingContentan
dDelivery
Evaluation
Participan
tssh
ared
avideo
oftheirteachingat
the
endoftheacad
emy.
Three-D
aySummer
Culm
ination
Participan
tscreateda
professional
dev
elopmen
tplanwith
theirschoolprincipal;
worked
together
todev
elopatraining
packet
which
included
aPowerPoint
presentation.
Principalsan
dschool
districtpersonnel
participated
ina
recognitionceremonyfor
participan
tsonthelast
day
oftheQEA
where
participan
tssh
owcased
theirlearningexperiences,
whichincluded
artifacts
oftheirwork
withELLs.
726 TESOL Journal
a classroom teacher to participate in the year-long training.Principals in consultation with the school system’s ESLCoordinator selected teachers who had at least three yearsteaching experience and who exhibited leadership qualities. Theexpectations of participants and benefits for participating werepresented to prospective participants in the form of acommitment letter. The expectations included making a year-long commitment, attending all training sessions, beginning withthe summer, returning to their current school for the followingschool year, and training other teachers in their schools. Thebenefits included becoming highly qualified at working withELLs and knowing how to implement Sheltered InstructionObservation Protocol (SIOP) using a variety of strategies forworking with ELLs, receiving a daily stipend for attending thesummer training sessions, paying substitute teachers to covertheir classes while they attended once-per-month trainingsessions, earning six graduate credits that could be appliedtowards a Master’s in Reading or an ESL Add-on License, andreceiving materials to conduct staff development in their schools.With this approach, we successfully recruited and retained 28participants.
ParticipantsOut of 28 participants, 21 were elementary classroom teachersand 7 were middle school teachers. Two were male and 26were female. Cumberland County, North Carolina is designatedas a low-wealth area and has one of the largest Hispanicpopulations. According to the 2004 estimates, Hispanics makeup 6.2% of the county’s population. The school district serves alinguistically and culturally diverse student population due toits proximity to Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base. Presently,in the school district, 20 full-time ESL teachers serve ELLsenrolled in 78 schools in grades K–12. Of those 20 ESLteachers, 11 are fully certified in ESL. The shortage of ESLteachers serving ELLs in grades K–12 only magnified the needfor highly qualified teachers who can effectively andappropriately meet the needs of ELLs in their classrooms.
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 727
Professional Development DesignWe designed a tiered “train-the-trainer” professional developmentacademy that was long term, ongoing, and substantial. Thisdecision was influenced by the literature on professionaldevelopment. According to Gonzalez and Darling-Hammond(1997), in order to be effective professional development effortsmust be “ongoing, sustained, and targeted to the teachers’classroom needs” (p. 55). We decided on a year-long academy thatbegan with a 5-day summer institute followed by one whole-daysession per month for 7 months, and ended with a 3-dayculmination the following summer. In designing this academy wethought about the teachers’ needs. We did not want themattending training in the evenings after a full day of work. Besides,many of them attended graduate school in the evenings. We alsodid not want teachers to give up time on Saturdays. We wantedthem to be fresh and fully engaged in the training activities.
Training Content and DeliveryAccording to Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995),“professional development strategies found to improve teachingare: sustained, intensive development strategies with modeling,coaching, and problem-solving; collaborative endeavors foreducators to share knowledge; experiential opportunities thatengage teachers in actual teaching, assessment, and observation;and development grounded in research but also drawing fromteacher experience and inquiry, connected to the teachers’ classes,students, and subjects taught” (p. 598). Additionally, researchshows differences in teacher quality to be among the mostimportant factors accounting for differences in students’ academicgrowth from year to year. Some claim it is the most importantfactor (Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997). As we planned experiences,we consciously incorporated many of these best practices.
The academy was also designed to meet the program objectives.By the end of the academy we expected participants to: (1) supportELLs’ literacy development, (2) use effective teaching methods anddifferentiated instruction to support ELLs’ second language (L2)development and academic language skills, (3) use effectivealternative assessment methods, (4) collaborate and serve as a
728 TESOL Journal
resource for their peers, (5) demonstrate greater understanding ofcultural differences and conflicts and promote the creation ofdesirable cross-cultural interactions, and (6) demonstrate growth inthe literacy and content-area learning of ELLs.
We used the SIOP because it is a state-adopted model for ESLteachers. We wanted QEA participants to be able to “speak thesame language” when coordinating with the ESL teachers at theirschools. We implemented SIOP to be used in a wide variety ofclassrooms: those with all ELLs, those with a mix of native andnonnative English speakers, those with students who have strongacademic backgrounds, those with students who have had limitedformal schooling, and those with students of different levels ofEnglish proficiency.
At the monthly all-day sessions, participants developed lessonplans around a grade-appropriate concept they were teaching andincorporated the SIOP components into their lesson plan. Theyreturned to their classroom and implemented the newly learnedideas. The participants shared and reflected on their lessons, andlearned one or two more components of the SIOP. At theconclusion of the seven months, the participants shared a video ofthemselves teaching the full lesson. They were provided feedbackon the lessons from their colleagues, as well as the ESLcoordinator and her staff.
Evaluation of QEAThe main purpose of the evaluation was to assess the objectives ofthe QEA. We used formative assessments such as feedback onlessons and group discussions throughout the academy.Additionally, as part of the requirement of the grant, an externalevaluator conducted a summative evaluation using a variety ofdata sources including pre- and post-assessments, workshopevaluations, and a portfolio rubric.
DISCUSSION
Project StrengthsCollaboration made this academy successful. The university had along history of collaboration with the school district; therefore, it
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 729
was not difficult for us to connect with school district personnel.Since we involved the ESL Coordinator in the grant writingprocess, the QEA goals were consistent with the school district’sgood to great classroom initiative. Characteristics of good to greatclassrooms included positive emotional climate, clear measurablegoals, active engagement, meaningful learning, academic rigor,and continuous feedback. These characteristics emanated fromresearch by Sousa (2005); Collins (2001); Mazzano, Pickering, andPollock (2001); and Payne (2005).
This collaboration also supported North Carolina’s statewideinitiative Closing Gaps and Raising Achievement (ARCC, 2009). Theresearch briefly identified effective instructional strategies forELLs. As the outgrowth of this initiative, North Carolina adoptedthe SIOP to help teachers make content more accessible andcomprehensible for ELLs. This training was offered to ESLteachers in North Carolina but not to classroom teachers. Byincorporating the SIOP into the QEA training we made it possiblefor classroom teachers to have some common ground with ESLteachers with whom we wanted them to collaborate.
We brought multiple perspectives to the table as we wrote thegrant proposal and developed the program. We were able to drawon an array of expertise and learn from each other. In addition,participants gained sensitivity and understanding of differentcultures and effective strategies for working with ELLs by sharingtheir experiences with ELLs and getting feedback from projectstaff. They also gained valuable hands-on experiences workingwith diverse content teachers at different grade levels as well asdiverse project staff and consultants.
Another successful feature of the project was the professionaldevelopment design. In their reflections teachers liked the week-long summer training because it allowed them to get to know eachother, focus on their learning without distraction, and organizethemselves before they started back to school. They also likedgetting release time on Fridays to attend the academy during theschool year. This time away from their classroom allowed themthe space necessary to focus on their own learning. Without thegrant it would have been difficult to pay for substitute teachers to
730 TESOL Journal
allow participants to attend training on Fridays during the schoolyear.
Participants reported enjoying and benefiting from theopportunities to interact and share with colleagues. The sharing oftheir teaching videos is an activity they particularly seemed tobenefit from. From observation by project staff and participantfeedback it was apparent that the experience helped participantsgain greater knowledge and proficiency in evidence-based literacyand content-area instruction for improving the academic languageand content-area learning of ELLs.
Overall, the participants perceived the QEA as being verybeneficial and worthwhile. They felt the academy positivelyimpacted ELLs’ literacy and academic language skills. Theybenefited greatly from the opportunity to interact with each otherthroughout the school year, as well as from the increased literacyresources made available by their participation in the QEA.
Challenges and RecommendationsWhile there were many successful aspects of the project there werealso challenges. First, some principals selected teachers toparticipate who already had many commitments in their schools.As a result some participants had other responsibilities thatconflicted with training dates. A second challenge was that someparticipants did not honor their commitment to stay in theirschools a year after the training in order to train other teachers.Both of these situations left some schools without trainers and costthe project money. In response to these challenges we recommendthat principals select teachers who are not already stretched thin,and that coordinators train two teachers per school. A thirdchallenge was that some of the teachers who completed the projectwere not given the support needed to provide training in theirschools because some principals did not honor that agreement.A fourth challenge was that some teachers had difficultyimplementing the SIOP in their classroom due to limitedresources, time limitations, and inflexibility of the curriculum. Inresponse to these challenges we recommend involving principalsmore throughout the training year. Perhaps if principals weremore involved they would have been more invested in the project
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 731
goals and attentive to the needs of their teachers. A final challengewas one faced by project administrators working with the differentfiscal schedules and guidelines of the university and schooldistrict. Due to these differences it was sometimes difficult tocoordinate contracts, reimburse invoices, and pay substituteteachers, resulting in delays and extra time spent on follow-up.We recommend being aware of these differences in guidelines andschedules and working out a plan for addressing them early.Finally, we recommend always keeping the lines ofcommunication open among all project partners.
CONCLUSIONThe goal of the QEA was to increase the number of K–8classroom teachers who are highly qualified in effectivelydeveloping the literacy and academic language needed by ELLsfor content-area learning. The design and content of QEAallowed us to achieve that goal. In this article we shared thekey features of QEA to enable others who wish to provideclassroom teachers with research-based best practices formeeting the needs of ELLs to benefit from our experience. Webelieve that more projects like the QEA are needed to increasethe number of teachers who are trained to effectively supportthe language and literacy learning of ELLs. We encourageothers who implement such projects to share their experience sowe can continue to learn from each other and improve uponour efforts to support teachers.
THE AUTHORSJi Young Kim is an assistant professor of English in the College ofArts and Sciences at Fayetteville State University. She received herPhD in TESOL at the University of Mississippi. Her scholarlyinterests include facilitating teachers to improve literacyinstruction for ELLs, supporting underprepared college students,and using technology to enhance literacy learning.
Colleen Walker is an assistant professor in the School of Educationat Campbellsville University. She earned her PhD in language,literacy and culture from The Ohio State University. Dr. Walker’s
732 TESOL Journal
scholarly interests include supporting at-risk learners, supportingteachers to improve literacy instruction, and using technology toenhance literacy learning.
Priscilla Manarino-Leggett is a professor in the School ofEducation at Fayetteville State University and serves as thereading education coordinator and director of the Reading Clinic.She received her PhD in education and her MA in readingeducation from the University of South Florida. She has receivedseveral funded grants related to teacher education, early readingprograms, and science and literacy.
REFERENCESAppalachia Regional Comprehensive Center (ARCC). (2009).
Closing gaps and raising achievement: A focus on ELLs.Retrieved from www.arcc.edvantia.org/forum
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies
that support professional development in an era of reform.Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597–604. Retrieved from http://intl.kappanmagazine.org/content/92/6/81.full
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2008). Making contentcomprehensible for English language learners: The SIOP model.Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gandara, P., & Maxwell-Jolly, J. (2000). Preparing teachers fordiversity: A dilemma of quality and quantity. Teaching andCalifornia’s future. Retrieved from http://www.cftl.org/documents/Jolly_paper.pdf
Gonzalez, J. M., & Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). New concepts fornew challenges: Professional development for teachers of immigrantyouth. McHenry, IL: Delta Systems and CAL.
Mazzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroominstruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasingstudent achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision 7 Curriculum Development.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). Schools andstaffing survey, 1999–2000: Overview of the data for public, private,
Equipping Classroom Teachers for English Language Learners 733
public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondaryschools. (NCES 2002-313). Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofEducation, National Center for Educational Statistics.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future(NCTAF). (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’sfuture. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College.Retrieved from nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/whatmattersmost.pdf
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 107th Congress of the UnitedStates of America. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/107-110.pdf
Payne, R. K. (2005). A framework for understanding poverty.Highland, TX: aha! Process, Inc.
Sousa, D. (2005). How the brain learns. Thousand Oaks, CA: CrownPress.
Skinner, C., Wight, V., Aratani, Y., Cooper, J., & Thampi, K. (2010).English language proficiency, family economic security andchild development. Retrieved from http://www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_948.pdf
Wright, P., Horn, S., & Sanders, W. (1997). Teacher and classroomcontext effects on student achievement: Implications for teacherevaluation. Journal of Personal Evaluation in Education, 11, 57–67.doi:10.1023/A:1007999204543
734 TESOL Journal