1887
Volume 4, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2212-8433
  • E-ISSN: 2212-8441
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This article reports on a dissertation study that explored the efficacy of language-focused differentiated instruction targeted to facilitate student oral proficiency development. The study took place in a linguistically diverse Grade 3 immersion classroom. Students’ ( = 24) oral proficiency was assessed and focal student language was evaluated at different stages of the study with attention to complexity measures. The teacher and researcher collaboratively designed instructional language supports to promote more complex language production during math and reading classes. Overall, students expanded their language complexity although Spanish home language (SHL) students appeared to benefit less than English home language students. A functional approach to language development was key to the study as students took more risks to meet their communicative needs, thereby expanding their linguistic repertoires. The teacher provided increasingly more complex alternatives for students to integrate into their classroom interactions, particularly for SHL students.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.4.2.05you
2016-09-02
2018-10-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anberg-Espinosa, M
    (2008) Experiences and perspectives of African American students and their parents in a two-way Spanish immersion program. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation.) University of San Francisco, CA.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Angelova, M. , Gunawardena, D. , & Volk, D
    (2006) Peer teaching and learning: Co-constructing language in a dual language first grade. Language and Education, 20(3), 173–190. doi: 10.1080/09500780608668722
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780608668722 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bannan-Ritland, B
    (2003) The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21–24. doi: 10.3102/0013189X032001021
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001021 [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker, A
    (1994) Repetition and otherness: An essay. In B. Johnstone (Ed.), Repetition in discourse, Vol. 2, (pp.162–175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bender, L.A
    (2000) Language planning and language policy in an urban, public school: The interpretation and implementation of a dual language program. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, A.L
    (1992) Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2 [Google Scholar]
  7. Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL)
    (2009) CAL oral proficiency exam and student oral proficiency assessment rating scale. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Charmaz, K
    (2006) Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cummins, J
    (1991) Interdependence of first- and second-language proficiency in bilingual children. In E. Bialystok (Ed.), Language processing in bilingual children (pp.70–89). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620652.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620652.006 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dutro, S. , & Moran, C
    (2002) Rethinking English language instruction: An architectural approach. In G. Garcia (Ed.), English learners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy (pp.227–258). Washington, DC: International Reading Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fuchs, D. , & Fuchs, L.S
    (2006) Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4
    https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4 [Google Scholar]
  12. Gibbons, P
    (2009) English learners, academic literacy, and thinking: Learning in the challenge zone. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gumperz, J
    (1982) Discourse strategies: Studies in interactional sociolinguistics1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hernández, A
    (2011) Successes and challenges of instructional strategies in two-way bilingual immersion. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). California State University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Herrenkohl, L.R. , & Guerra, M.R
    (1998) Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and instruction, 16(4), 431–473. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1604_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1604_3 [Google Scholar]
  16. Hickey, T.M
    (2007) Children’s language networks in minority language immersion: What goes in may not come out. Language and Education, 21(1), 46–65. doi: 10.2167/le617.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/le617.0 [Google Scholar]
  17. Howard, E. , Christian, D. , & Genesee, F
    (2004) The development of bilingualism and biliteracy from grade 3 to 5: A summary of findings from the CAL/CREDE study of two-way immersion education. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kovalainen, M. , & Kumpulainen, K
    (2005) The discursive practice of participation in an elementary classroom community. Instructional Science, 33(3), 213–250. doi: 10.1007/s11251‑005‑2810‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-2810-1 [Google Scholar]
  19. Lee, O. , Quinn, H. , & Valdés, G
    (2013) Science and language for English language learners in relation to next generation science standards and with implications for common core state standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233. doi: 10.3102/0013189X13480524
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13480524 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lindholm-Leary, K
    (2001) Dual language education. Dual language education. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Loban, W
    (1963) The language of elementary school children. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Martin-Beltrán, M
    (2009) Cultivating space for the language boomerang: The interplay of two languages as academic resources. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(2), 25–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Miller, J.F. , Andriacchi, K. , & Nockerts, A
    (2011) Assessing language production using SALT software. Middleton, WI: SALT Software, LLC.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Miller, J. , Heilmann, J. , Nockerts, A. , Iglesias, A. , Fabiano, L. , & Francis, D
    (2006) Oral language and reading in bilingual children. Journal of Learning Disabilities Research to Practice, 21(1), 30–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑5826.2006.00205.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00205.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Mohan, B. , & Slater, T
    (2005) A functional perspective on the critical “theory/practice” relation in teaching language and science. Linguistics and Education, 16(2), 151–172. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2006.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.01.008 [Google Scholar]
  26. Montrul, S
    (2012) The grammatical competence of Spanish heritage speakers. In Beaudrie, S & Fairclough, M (Eds.), Spanish as a heritage language in the United States: The state of the field (pp.101–120). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Montrul, S. , & Potowski, K
    (2007) Command of gender agreement in school-age Spanish-English bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(3), 301–328. doi: 10.1177/13670069070110030301
    https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110030301 [Google Scholar]
  28. Norris, J.M. , & Ortega, L
    (2009) Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in Instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp044
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044 [Google Scholar]
  29. Palincsar, A. , Collins, K.M. , Marano, N.L. , & Magnusson, S.J
    (2000) Investigating the engagement and learning of students with learning disabilities in guided inquiry. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31(July), 240–251. doi: 10.1044/0161‑1461.3103.240
    https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.3103.240 [Google Scholar]
  30. Palmer, D.K
    (2009) Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should be listening to Jonathan right now...”. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 177–202. doi: 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2009.tb00164.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00164.x [Google Scholar]
  31. Pica, T
    (1994) Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes?Language Learning, 44(3), 493–527. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1994.tb01115.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01115.x [Google Scholar]
  32. Potowski, K
    (2007a) Characteristics of the Spanish grammar and sociolinguistic proficiency of dual immersion graduates. Spanish in Context, 4(2), 187–216. doi: 10.1075/sic.4.2.04pot
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.4.2.04pot [Google Scholar]
  33. (2007b) Language and identity in a dual immersion school. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Potowski, K. , Jegerski, J. , & Morgan-Short, K
    (2009) The effects of instruction on linguistic development in Spanish heritage language speakers. Language Learning, 59(3), 537–579. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00517.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00517.x [Google Scholar]
  35. Rojas, R. , & Iglesias, A
    (2009) Making a case for language sampling. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Leader, March3, 1–4.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Rymes, B
    (2009) Classroom discourse analysis: A tool for critical reflection. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Saenz, L. , Fuchs, L.S. , & Fuchs, D
    (2005) Peer-assisted learning strategies for English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 231–247. doi: 10.1177/001440290507100302
    https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100302 [Google Scholar]
  38. Saldaña, J
    (2012) The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Schleppegrell, M.J
    (2013) The role of metalanguage in supporting academic language development. Language Learning, 63(March), 153–170. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00742.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00742.x [Google Scholar]
  40. Tedick, D.J. , & Young, A
    (2014) Fifth grade two-way immersion students’ responses to form-focused instruction. Applied Linguistics. doi: 10.1093/applin/amu066
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu066 [Google Scholar]
  41. Thomas, W. , & Collier, V
    (2004) How to close the academic achievement gap for linguistically and culturally diverse learners. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Thomas, W. , Collier, V. , & Collier, K
    (2010) English learners in North Carolina: Final Report, 2010. NC: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Thompson, L.E. , Boyson, B.A. , & Rhodes, N.C
    (2006) Student oral proficiency assessment (SOPA) administrator’s manual. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics and Ames, IA: Iowa State University National K–12 Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Valdés, G
    (1997) Dual-language immersion programs: A cautionary note concerning the education of language-minority students. Harvard Business Review, 67(3), 391–230. doi: 10.17763/haer.67.3.n5q175qp86120948
    https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.3.n5q175qp86120948 [Google Scholar]
  45. Wiese, A
    (2004) Bilingualism and biliteracy for all? Unpacking two-way immersion at second grade. Language and Education, 18(1), 69–93. doi: 10.1080/09500780408666868
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780408666868 [Google Scholar]
  46. Young, A. , & Tedick, D
    (2016) Collaborative dialogue in a two-way Spanish/English immersion classroom. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp.135–160). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/lllt.45.06you
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.06you [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.4.2.05you
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error