Search results

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the possible merits and difficulties of utilizing participatory augmented reality simulations (PARS) with English learners (ELs) in K‐12 science classrooms.

The authors analyzed literature of PARS, sheltered English instruction (SEI), and other literature relevant to science instruction for ELs. Though the authors relied primarily on empirical research related to PARS and ELs, other papers were included to increase thoroughness.

The authors identified elements of PARS that address requirements for effective instruction of ELs including the modality, engagement, collaboration, language use, and identity forming aspects. The findings indicate that future research into the use of PARS in science instruction may benefit ELs.

The literature synthesis was conducted to address a gap in the literature. Additional research specifically examining the impact of PARS on ELs is necessary.

Despite increased focus of PARS and instruction for ELs within educational literature, there has been little examination of the relationship between the two elements. Therefore, this paper highlights parallels in PARS research with documented best practices for sheltered English instruction (SEI). No other paper was found that explicitly evaluates PARS for science instruction with ELs.

This study aims to explore the stories of two young refugee women, Sue Mar and Amora, and how their adolescent identities, experiences, and beliefs, partially shaped by their English teacher, helped pave their paths to higher education.

This study is guided by the lens of critical literacy as “a way of being and doing” (Vasquez et al., 2019). The authors chose portraiture, a participant-centered methodology, as a response to the historical marginalization of refugees, to bring their voices to the forefront (Lawrence-Lightfoot and Davis, 1997). They draw from interviews conducted with Sue Mar and Amora, document analysis, and an interview with the English teacher.

In Sue Mar and Amora’s portraits, aspiration and determination are seen as primary factors in their college-going. In addition, Sue Mar and Amora were propelled by their English teacher’s support through the cultivation of a loving relationship, high expectations, and critical pedagogical practices. Their family and community fostered beliefs about the power and potential of education, and other refugees served as important role models.

Researchers should explore refugee students’ experiences accessing higher education.

English educators should connect literature to the lived experiences of their students to show that they value their students’ knowledge and past experiences.

Policymakers should consider the role that community colleges play in the lives of refugee students and should support programs including tuition reduction for refugee students.

As only 6% of refugees currently attend college (UNHCR, 2023), it is essential to understand factors that contributed to students’ college-going.

This chapter addresses the common assumption that research questions are fixed at the outset of a study and should remain stable thereafter. We consider field-based organizational research and ask whether and when research questions can legitimately change. We suggest that change can, does, and indeed should occur in response to changes in the context within which the research is being conducted. Using an illustrative example, we identify refinement and reframing as two distinct types of research question development. We conclude that greater transparency over research question evolution would be a healthy development for the field.

In the current political environment where nativist sentiments are driving policies that overtly discriminate against immigrants and refugees, most notably Muslims, it is crucial to prepare teachers who will value and serve all students regardless of their ethnicity, language, or race. It has never been more important than now to bring the stories, experiences, and languages of all the people who make up this country into our classrooms. This study employs self-study of teacher education practices to question how teacher educators might improve our practice to better meet the needs of the diverse students in our classrooms, most specifically English Language Learners (ELLs). Self-study allowed me to engage in cycles of design and analysis to examine how well I implemented critical research as praxis as a tool to prepare students in my Sheltered English Immersion class to critically engage in theories and practices of teaching ELLs.

In this chapter we discuss the essential components of special education for ELLs with learning disabilities. We focus on the importance of culturally responsive teachers implementing culturally and linguistically relevant instruction in all settings. Within this framework we emphasize the need for ELLs with LD to have a supportive classroom environment and essential English language instruction. The general education classroom can be a supportive environment for ELLs with LD by utilizing sheltered instruction techniques, specific accommodations and modifications, and reading comprehension instruction. We also consider how to support ELLs within the framework for common core curriculum standards, and finally we highlight some intensive interventions for ELLs with LD.

Using the systematic search and coding procedures of a meta-synthesis, this paper reviews the extant literature on English language learners (ELLs) in the social studies classroom. The 15 studies making up the corpus adhere to both topical and methodological criteria. The Language-Content-Task (LCT) Framework informed the coding and analysis of the results. Discussion of the findings provides three primary implications: (1) the need for linguistically and culturally responsive instruction for ELLs in social studies classes, (2) the need for increased training for inservice and preservice social studies teachers in preparation for teaching ELLs, and (3) the need for future research among ELLs in the social studies context.

This chapter explores how TESOL teacher educators used self-study to respond to educational policies for emergent bilingual learners (BLs) and their teachers. The purpose was to examine tensions, challenges, and opportunities in our efforts as teacher educators to prepare teachers to teach BLs in mainstream classes through a state-mandated sheltered English instruction (SEI) course. Data sources, including emails, course artifacts, meeting agendas, and journals, pre and post surveys and course assignments were analyzed using mixed methods. Practitioners and participants agreed one SEI course is insufficient. In a coherent approach to preparing mainstream teachers to teach language, learning would be reinforced from coursework to the classroom. Without self-studies that provide an informed response to external policies that shape teacher education, the danger is new policies result in no substantive change.

In a university/district collaboration, three college professors and authors of this chapter co-taught with four teachers over a period of seven years. This study explores the perceived changes in thought and practice of both groups as a result of providing three-week summer school programs for fifth and eighth grade emergent bilinguals. This research is grounded in qualitative methodologies of self-study and case study. We present our joint story as a self-study. Data were collected in the form of lesson plan notes, yearly journals, personal notes, audiotapes of meetings, and in-depth interviews/discussions of those involved in the bounded context. Resulting themes were situated meaning, hybrid language, and a 5R Instructional Model. A case study design is used to present the data from the four in-service teachers. Data were collected from field notes and interviews. Several themes emerged from the teacher data, all of which are components of situated meaning: professional development as side-by-side teaching and learning, recognition of and interest in curriculum integration, and change in classroom practice. Findings indicate that the summer program was a meaningful avenue for professional development (PD) for both groups. However, within group similarities were stronger than across group. The experience changed the way we teach and how we develop PD for teachers. The implications for professors and K-12 teachers are discussed and suggestions for further study and PD are given.

This chapter investigates the impact of a teacher preparation program that includes specific attention to the needs of bilingual learners on participants’ subsequent teaching practices. Specifically, this mixed methods retrospective study examines graduates’ reports of their current teaching practices as well as their perceptions of the Teaching English Language Learners (TELL) program’s impact on these practices. Multiple-choice survey data were analyzed quantitatively to identify trends among reported practices and perceptions. Open-ended survey and interview data were analyzed qualitatively to identify interrelated themes within teachers’ detailed, first-hand accounts of their pre-service and in-service experiences. The results showed that there was variety with respect to whether particular linguistically responsive practices were routine, used occasionally, or rarely. There was also a difference with respect to whether such practices were perceived to be the result of having participated in the program. Notably, the most frequently used practices attributed to the TELL program involved teaching language (TL) to facilitate content learning. Other aspects of the teacher preparation program supported effective practices for academic content learning, but only TELL coursework and experiences facilitated practices that emphasized academic language development. These results suggest that programs created to improve the preparation of teachers to work with bilingual learners in mainstream classroom contexts must make a special effort to develop teachers’ skills in regard to language teaching, especially practices that focus on language beyond the word-level. There are limitations to the study because of the small number of participants and the fact that they were self-selected as program participants.