Crossing over

References

1. Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S.
   (1997) The jigsaw classroom: Building cooperation in the classroom (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. C.
   (2008) Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. doi:  10.1177/0022487108324554
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554 [Google Scholar]
3. Bogden, R., & Biklin, S. K.
   (2011) Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Borko, H.
   (2004) Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15. doi:  10.3102/0013189X033008003
   https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033008003 [Google Scholar]
5. Cummins, J.
   (1981) The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. InCalifornia State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp.3–49). Los Angeles, CA: California State University, National Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Darling-Hammond, L.
   (1999) Educating teachers for the next century: Rethinking practice and policy. InG. A. Griffith (Ed.), The education of teachers: The ninety-eighth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp.221–256). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., Gardner, M., & Espinoza, D.
   (2017) Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Deussen, T., Autio, E., Roccograndi, A., Hanita, M.
   (2014) The impact of Project GLAD on students’ literacy and science learning: Year 1 results from a cluster-randomized trial of sheltered instruction. SREE Spring 2014 Conference Abstract. Retrieved from https://ia800403.us.archive.org/1/items/ERIC_ED562842/ERIC_ED562842.pdf/.
9. Fortune, T. W., Tedick, D. J., & Walker, C.
   (2008) Integrated language and content teaching: Insights from the immersion classroom. InT. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp.71–96). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847690371‑007
   https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690371-007 [Google Scholar]
10. Full Option Science System (FOSS)
    Full Option Science System (FOSS) (2015) Water and climate. Retrieved from https://www.fossweb.com/delegate/ssi-wdf-ucm-webContent?dDocName=D3023747/.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Gibbons, P.
    (2003) Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247–273. doi:  10.2307/3588504
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588504 [Google Scholar]
12. Krashen, S.
    (1988) Second language acquisition and second language learning. New York, NY: Alemany Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Lave, J., & Wenger, E.
    (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511815355
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355 [Google Scholar]
14. Lee, O., & Luykx, A.
    (2006) Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511617508
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617508 [Google Scholar]
15. Meyer-Jacks, L., & Thaddeus, E.
    (2006) Water: Third-grade curriculum. Albuquerque, NM: Project GLAD, Dual Language of New Mexico.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Migration Policy Institute
    Migration Policy Institute (2017) Children in U.S. immigrant families. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/children-immigrant-families/.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D. & Gonzalez, N.
    (1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. doi:  10.1080/00405849209543534
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534 [Google Scholar]
18. Morton, T.
    (2016) Conceptualizing and investigating teachers’ knowledge for integrating content and language in content-based instruction. Journal of Immersion and Content Based Language Education, 4(2), 144–167. doi:  10.1075/jicb.4.2.01mor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.4.2.01mor [Google Scholar]
19. National Center for Education Statistics
    National Center for Education Statistics (1997) America’s teachers: Profile of a profession. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
20. National Research Council
    National Research Council (2012) A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    [Google Scholar]
21. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
    National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2004) National Science Teachers Association position statement. Retrieved from www.nsta.org/docs/PositionStatement_ScientificInquiry.pdf/.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Oliveira, A. & Weinburg, M. H.
    (2017) Science teacher preparation in content-based second language acquisition. New York, NY: Springer. doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑319‑43516‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43516-9 [Google Scholar]
23. Orange County Department of Education (OCDE)
    Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) (2015) OCDE Project GLAD learning guide (2nd ed.). Costa Mesa, CA: Orange County Department of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Quinn, H., Lee, O., & Valdés, G.
    (2012) Language demands and opportunities in relation to next generation science standards for English Language Learners: What teachers need to know. (Understanding Language Initiative) Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Scarcella, R.
    (2003) Academic English: A conceptual framework. Irvine, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Shulman, L.
    (1987) Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1–22. doi:  10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
    https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 [Google Scholar]
27. Snow, M., Met, & Genesse, F.
    (1989) A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23(2), 201–217. doi:  10.2307/3587333
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587333 [Google Scholar]
28. Swain, M.
    (1996) Integrating language and content in immersion classrooms: Research perspectives. Canadian Modern Language Review, 4, 529–548. doi:  10.3138/cmlr.52.4.529
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.52.4.529 [Google Scholar]
29. Tong, F., Luo, W., Irby, B., Lara-Alecio, R., & Rivera, H.
    (2015) Investigating the impact of professional development on teachers’ instructional time and English learners’ language development: a multilevel cross-classified approach. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(3), 292–313. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2015.1051509
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1051509 [Google Scholar]
30. Walker, C., Ranney, S., & Fortune, T.
    (2005) Preparing preservice teachers for English language learners: A content-based approach. InD. Tedick (Ed.), Second language teacher education: International perspectives (pp.313–333). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Walqui, A., & van Lier, L.
    (2010) Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent English language learners: A pedagogy of promise. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Wilson, D. M.
    (2011) Dual language programs on the rise. Harvard Graduate School of Education, 27(2), 1–4.
    [Google Scholar]