COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Graduate and Professional Studies in Education California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of
SPECIALIST IN EDUCATION in School Psychology by Michelle Sandoval SPRING 2015
ii
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
A Project by Michelle Sandoval Approved by: __________________________________, Committee Chair Catherine Christo, Ph.D. __________________________________ Date
iii Student: Michelle Sandoval
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the library and credit is to be awarded for the project.
_________________________, Graduate Coordinator ____________________
Geni Cowan, Ph.D. Date
iv Abstract
of
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
by
Michelle Sandoval
This project reviews the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative and the pedagogical implications for English learners (ELs). Emphasis is placed on CCSS and assessment; teachers however are not provided with tools to develop, support and prepare ELs. This project aims to provide techniques that ELs can use toward standards
attainment. It emphasizes how ELs can benefit and engage in content learning with proper support. It is expected that after attending this workshop, teachers will gain the knowledge and skills to address the needs of ELs in their classrooms.
The prepared project is a 4-hour training workshop including a presenter‟s
manual, handouts, slides, and presenter notes. Credentialed school psychologist can train a target audience of teachers working in schools. Workshop participants will better understand the implementation of Common Core State Standards for English Language Learners.
__________________________________, Committee Chair Catherine Christo, Ph.D.
____________________________ Date
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the kind guidance and encouragement of my advisor, Catherine Christo. I would also like to thank God for allowing me this wonderful opportunity. In addition, I would like to thank my boyfriend, Ricardo Santos, for his everlasting support and love through it all, my mother for her support, love, and wisdom, and my family for being there through my educational career.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements ... v
Software Specifications ... viii
Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ... 1
Background of the Problem ... 1
Purpose of the Project ... 2
Definition of Terms... 3
Limitations ... 4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 5
Before Common Core ... 5
Common Core State Standards ... 5
English Learners ... 9 Roles of Stakeholders ... 14 Learning ... 20 Conclusion ... 21 3. METHODS ... 22 Research ... 22
Development of the Presentation ... 22
4. FINDINGS ... 24
vii
Recommendations ... 24 Conclusions ... 25 Appendix A. Presenter‟s Manual ... 26 Appendix B. Presentation Slides: Common Core State Standards and
English Language Learners... 32 Appendix C. Handouts ... 98 References ... 104
viii
SOFTWARE SPECIFICATIONS
The project appendix includes presentation note pages designed to be used with slides in a workshop presentation. Slides should be viewed using Microsoft® PowerPoint
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
The Common Core State Standard (CCSS) initiative enacted a multitude of changes in philosophy, curriculums, instructional methods, and assessments. However it did not implicitly state how educators should teach to meet these goals. Implementing CCSS has its pros and cons; educators need a clear framework to best serve their
students. Without these plans, students may suffer academically and social-emotionally. In order for teachers to adequately meet the needs of their students they need
comprehensive, well-organized, quality resources that do not just tell them what
standards to teach but provide them with guidance as to how to teach them. In addition it is important that teachers have a solid understanding of CCSS and how to design their instruction for ELs around CCSS. Teachers, standards, and assessments must
intrinsically interact to provide effective education for ELs. Training workshops are the key in providing teachers with the knowledge and resources needed to implement Common Core in the classroom.
Background of the Problem
In 2001, President George W. Bush proposed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) to monitor school progress. NCLB mandated that each state design unique standards, assessments, and measures of proficiency to improve students‟ academic achievement (Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2011, p.29). Over time, these rigorous academic expectations, aimed at improving student achievement
achievement in the United States. CCSS focuses on preparing students for college and the workforce by reinforcing the quality of education in an equitable manner. If successfully implemented, these new standards will immerse students from all
socioeconomic backgrounds in classes that will prepare them for college and careers. Implementing CCSS will have a wide range of effects; CCSS is a new system with standards that are more rigorous than previous. To understand shifts in instruction and to learn how to adjust methods, teachers will need consistent support and training. As implementation of CCSS takes place, the preparation of all teachers to educate ELs is crucial. Large numbers of immigrant children experience serious problems with
education and assimilation into American society. The well-being of immigrant children is especially important as they are the fastest growing segment of the U. S. population (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). A strong emphasis has always been placed on standards and assessments alone. However, teachers have often received no support when developing methods for ELs assessment. This has caused increasing achievement disparities between ELs and English proficient students. It has been assessed however that with proper support and CCSS training teachers can better assist ELs.
Purpose of the Project
This project aims to help teachers better understand CCSS and give them the information needed to support ELs. The primary purpose of this project is to identify current research that is relevant to the topic and condense the format of information to ensure accessibly to teachers. Information used in this project was grouped into four hour training workshops along with complimentary handouts for teachers. The
workshops are designed to serve the needs of multiple audiences: elementary, secondary, and English as second language teachers. A manual and presentation guide allow for workshops to be delivered by any trained school psychologist. It is hoped that through the development of this project readers or workshop attendees will obtain the knowledge necessary to provide ELs effective instruction and access to complex material.
Definition of Terms
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS): The basic language skills (in English)
needed to engage in social and informational conversations and to interact with others (Cummins, 1980).
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP): The academic language skills (in
English) necessary for students to complete academic work and to make educational progress (Cummins, 1980).
Common Core State Standards: A set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics
and English language arts/literacy (ELA). These standards outline what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade (Common Core State Standards
Initiative, 2014).
Curriculum Content Language (CCL): The language used in teaching and learning
content (Bailey & Heritage, 2008).
English Learner (EL): Students whose first language is a language other than English and
whose CALP skills are below the level of “fluent.” Students are still considered an English learner if their primary language is English and even if their level of BICS has reached “fluent.”
Extended Anticipatory Guide (EAG): The statements that involve key concepts and invites students to express opinion based on prior, but not prerequisite, knowledge (Koelsch, Chu, & Rodriguez Bañuelos, 2014).
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): Act that required individual states to design standards,
assessments, and proficiency levels for students‟ academic achievement (Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2011).
Novel Ideas Only (NIO): The building a whole-class set of semantic associations about
the concept that is then refined in the lesson (Koelsch et al., 2014).
School Navigational Language (SNL): The language students use “to communicate with
teachers and peers in the school setting in a very broad sense-the language of the classroom management (Bailey & Heritage, 2008).
Limitations
This project has been designed to give teachers a better understanding of CCSS and to give them the tools they need to provide effective instruction to ELs. The strategies and suggestions provided are not intended to replace the current curriculum teachers are using, but rather the information provided can be used as a supplement. It is important to note that it is unclear how differences in teaching style will affect the outcome of CCSS. Additionally, the implementation and effectiveness of this workshop is not included in this project and warrants additional research.
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW Before Common Core
The purpose of this literature review is to illuminate the underpinnings of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative and to consider the pedagogical
implications for English learners (ELs). Using a historical lens to analyze the CCSS will help educators to understand how the document came about and how to support ELs. Beginning in 2001, President George W. Bush proposed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) to monitor school progress. NCLB required individual states to design
standards, assessments, and proficiency levels for students‟ academic achievement (Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2011, p.29). This resulted in the development of wide gaps in expectations for rigor and student achievement. For instance, students relocating from one state to another experienced large gaps in educational expectations causing frustrations for administrators, teachers, parents and students (Neuman & Roskos, 2013). To remediate this issue, CCSS were created to increase student academic achievement in the United States. CCSS would focus on preparing students for college and the workforce, stressing quality education for all students, and increasing rigor in schools.
Common Core State Standards
CCSS initiative required numerous changes in philosophy, curriculum instruction, and assessment. To address the necessary changes, teachers, administrators, and other professionals collaborated, evaluated feedback from the public, and drafted English
Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics CCSS (Common Core State Standards Initiative [CCSSI], 2014). ELA and mathematics were chosen because they include skills
necessary for all other content areas. They do not, however, direct how educators should teach to meet these goals. The standards are intended to mirror standards of
top-performing countries. CCSS adoption was voluntary and states individually adopted ELA, mathematics or both sets of standards (CCSSI, 2014). Monetary incentives are available to states that choose to adopt CCSS (Lavenia, 2010).
If implemented well, the new standards will engage all students, rather than just a privileged few, in the rich and rigorous content that will prepare them for college and careers. Implementing CCSS is far from a given; teachers need high quality instructional materials that truly align to the standards. Clear lesson plans must be constructed based on the new standards as they look very different from what came before. For example, there are fewer concepts in math and language arts require reading and writing across all content areas (Crandall, 1987). In other words, almost all teachers will have to
reconstruct their teaching practices. To make this shift as smoothly as possible, states and districts need clear and detailed plans.
Adoption
In most states, the state school board members formally adopted the standards. In others, the decision was made or ratified by the state superintendent of education, State Legislature, or governor. It is unconstitutional for the federal government to mandate CCSS adoption; therefore, individual states voluntarily adopt either the ELA,
to states that choose to adopt CCSS (Lavenia, 2010). Race to the Top Fund (RTT), created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and totaling $4.35 billion, offers competitive grants to all 50 states based on a number of criteria (Lavenia, 2010). In addition, states that adopt CCSS are allowed to request a waiver from NCLB requirements. A primary requirement for receiving the waiver is that States‟ educational agencies must adopt college and career ready standards. State educational agencies that eliminate CCSS are unable to maintain the waiver. Overall, the debate on the Common Core Standards provides a unique opportunity for states to recognize that they still retain the power to make decisions that will affect the future leaders of their
communities. Today, 43 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted the Common Core and are implementing the standards according to their own timelines (CCSSI, 2014). Common Core Criticism
The new standards, however, are not without critics. Some opponents say the standards are dictating curriculum: that they are limiting and “too standardized” (Gardner & Powell, 2013, p.49). The standards limit the flexibility that teachers have to teach what they think is best. According to Garden and Powell (2013), opponents believe CCSS should be free mandates that tell teachers how to teach. Furthermore, opponents argue that no one has an idea of how they will affect the schools, teachers, and students. However, it is unclear how differences in style will affect the outcome of CCSS. There is no way to predict a positive or negative outcome without implementation. But, more than anything, it seems that those against the standards have not read the standards or
comprehend them. In addressing concerns about the standards, the Ohio Department of Education stated that regardless of opponent views, students have common needs that can be assessed with the CCSS‟s clear benchmarked standards Ohio‟s New Learning
Standards (n. d.). The common core standards will be the same regardless of what state, school district or classroom a student is in. Because the skills are carefully scaffold, teachers have a framework for understanding what students learned or should have learned before arriving to class. A common language allows students and teachers to understand what students are learning (Ohio‟s New Learning Standards, n. d.).
The Common Core standards offer a clear framework of what students should be able to do (the skills), not what they should know (the content). The rigor of the
standards teaches students to engage in productive critical thinking rather than focusing on what is on the test. In other words, it is not about the finished product so much as it is about the experience that led to the product (Gardner & Powell, 2013). The Common Core language ultimately helps students to become critical thinkers and problem solvers. Preparing Parents
As schools begin to implement Common Core parents will start hearing about the new standards. The way teachers communicate their views about standards will solidify parental view. For instance, Haycock and Policy Innovators in Education (2012)
indicated that if teachers are enthusiastic in standards-related professional development it will come across to parents and will be contagious. But when educators have a less positive view parents will be nervous about what the new standards will mean for their children. A good communication plan will allow parents and stakeholders to understand
the positive changes of the new standards. This is essentially important once tests are administered. CCSS assessments will almost certainly drop student‟s proficiency rates and create wider gaps between students. With states and teachers working together, parents will be more understanding and less critical of CCSS.
Teacher Preparation
The CCSS are both different in kind and more rigorous than previous standards. To understand shifts in instruction and to learn how to adjust their practices teachers will need consistent support and training. Teacher preparation programs must ensure teachers are capable of implementing Common Core in the classroom. Teachers will need
comprehensive, well-organized, quality resources that do not just tell them what standards to teach and when, but actually guide them on to how to teach them.
According to Raising the Bar: Implementing Common Core State Standards for Latino Success (2012), some teacher resources include the following: Literacy Design
Collaborative and the Math Design Collaborative which offer resources to help teachers align their assignments to CCSS; the Teaching Channel which has compiled a series of videos of Common Core-aligned lessons; and Learn Zillion, a free online platform that combines videos, assessments and progress reporting centered on Common Core standards. Equitable resources translate to equitable instruction.
English Learners
Large numbers of immigrant children are experiencing serious problems with education and assimilation into American society. The wellbeing of immigrant children is especially important to the nation because they are the fastest growing segment of the
U. S. population (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). In 2012, it was reported that 17.4 million children under age 18 lived at home with at least one immigrant parent (Nwosu,
Batalova, & Auclair, 2014). Nwosu et.al, indicates that immigrant children account for 25 percent of the 70.2 million children under age 18 in the United States. However, what these demographic trends portend for the future of immigrant children is highly uncertain for several reasons. Many factors can complicate an immigrant child‟s educational attainment. A child‟s immigration status, for instance, can foretell the hardships he or she will encounter. For example, children raised in homes where English is not spoken lag behind native youth in reading and math, especially if their parents have little to no education. Poor parental education levels along with low English language knowledge are associated with poor scholastic outcomes for immigrant minority youth (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). Failure to master English in the early grades undermines scholastic achievement, educational attainment, and economic mobility (Heckman, 2006). This is significant because basic literacy and numeracy often provide fundamental basics to entry-level jobs.
Wide and persistent achievement disparities between ELs and English proficient students indicate that schools must address the language, literacy, and academic needs of ELs more effectively. ELs are the most challenged because they often lack literacy in their first language and have attained low proficiency, if any, in English (Goldenberg, 2008). This situation challenges educators on how to best meet the needs of English learners. Upon arrival at school ELs are placed in classes with same age peers, complicating the learning environment for the teacher and students. Teachers without
preparation for teaching ELs become frustrated and pressured with the accountability of student‟s academic performance arising from the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (Bailey & Wolf, 2012). As implementation of CCSS takes place, the preparation of all teachers to educate ELs is crucial. All teachers need to have an understanding of how to work effectively with these students. Awareness and understanding of why students have difficulties allows teachers to meet academic needs and challenges of ELs.
Implications for ELs
New CCSS in English language arts and disciplinary literacy require K-12
students to “read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently” (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2014, p. 10). Text
complexity issues for ELs, who must work with texts in a language they are still developing, are even more complicated. This project aims to provide techniques by which ELs can access texts across subjects to meet CCSS.
Benefits of Being an EL
Learning to read is complicated for ELs because they must master the structure and functions of literacy in a largely unfamiliar language. Yet reading, and learning to read, in a second language share many features with the same tasks as in a first language. When students have had opportunities to develop primary language literacy skills, those are transferable to second-language reading (Bernhardt, 2011). Bernhardt indicates that literacy skills developed in one language facilitate reading in a second language. However, the transfer of literacy skills may depend partially on similarities between the two languages. Readers may also draw on background knowledge to construct text
meaning. Comprehension challenges imposed by limited English proficiency are alleviated when the text concerns content with which the second language reader is familiar. Background knowledge can help ELs, but it does not ensure comprehension of complex texts. Coleman and Goldenberg (2012) indicates that students who build on shared experiences and have active background knowledge demonstrate a better understanding of the texts they have read. Recognizing hierarchical text structure impacts reader‟s text coherence.
Language Demands
The federal government requires school districts to provide services to ELs, yet it does not offer states policies to follow in identifying, assessing, placing, or instructing them (Calderon, Slavin, & Sanchez, 2011). Emphasized in the CCSS are the language demands of each content area; students who meet the standards are described as those who develop the skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening that are the foundation for any creative and purposeful expression in language (CCSSI, 2014). As schools across the nation begin to implement the CCSS, the need for defining and understanding how to teach academic English is more pertinent than before. Most of the language students bring to school is social language, or Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS). According to Cummins (1980), students develop the ability to cope with the academic demands, Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP), through application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of language in school settings. Bailey and Heritage (2008) broaden the conceptualization of school language use by breaking academic English into School Navigational Language (SNL) and Curriculum Content Language
(CCL), where SNL is the language students use “to communicate with teachers and peers in the school setting in a very broad sense-the language of the classroom management and CCL is the language used in teaching and learning content” (p.15). The range of and variety of language acquisition provides a potential framework to help educators address the role of language in the schools.
Given that current instruction for ELs focuses on atomistic elements of language “academic” words, syntactic structures, rigid conceptions of genres (Walqui et al., 2010) teachers will need additional support to learn how to develop the pedagogical scaffolding needed to engage ELs in discipline specific practices of explaining, arguing, and
reasoning as required by the CCSS (Lee, Quinn, & Valdes, 2013). As students are introduced to disciplinary concepts they need two types of languages: a language for engaging with core ideas or concepts, and a language for interacting about ideas and concepts with each other. Extended Anticipatory Guide (EAG) and Novel Ideas Only (NIO) assist teachers in scaffolding understanding of language (Koelsch et al., 2014). EAG hinges on crafting statements that involve key concepts and invites students to express opinion based on prior, but not prerequisite, knowledge. NIO focuses on
building a whole-class set of semantic associations about the concept that is then refined in the lesson. Overall, EAG and NIO invite ELs of all levels of proficiency to listen, speak, read and write about a concept. These tasks invite students to contribute language for elaborating upon, connecting, and ultimately narrowing meaning toward more
English language learners face a variety of obstacles in schools stemming from fundamental misunderstandings of what they need in order to develop language and academic skills at the same time. English learners are usually in schools and classrooms with other ELs. They are learning English and practicing it with one another. Instruction is often focused on building decoding skills, comprehension, and English acquisition. Students may learn little on other subjects because of this method. According to Fillmore (2014), the content English learners acquire when reading is often watered-down with no detail or development to warrant student‟s attention. To learn a language, children require interaction with speakers of that language. When children interact with other ELs, they tend to learn nonstandard English (Wong-Fillmore, 1992). Thus, many English language learners do not gain the appropriate forms and structures of the English
language.
Roles of Stakeholders ESL (English as a Second Language) Teachers
ESL (English as a Second Language) teachers play a critical role in the success and implementation of CCSS. In the United States today, it is estimated there are 24,000 elementary schools and 21,000 secondary ESL teachers. This is a significant number of teachers working toward ELs education within the CCSS framework (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007). To provide effective education for ELs, teachers, standards, and assessments must constantly interact and influence each other. Teachers must design their instruction for ELs around CCSS and determine the academic language ELs need to acquire at each stage of English language proficiency so that students can access content.
Emphasis is placed on standards and assessment; however, teachers are often not provided with how to develop, support and prepare ELs for assessment. TESOL
International Association (2013) indicates that ESL teachers will need new instructional strategies adapted to the rigor demanded by the CCSS.
Librarian Role
School librarians will play a crucial role in the implementation of the English Language Arts CCSS. Librarians will support students and classroom teachers in the implementation process. CCSS require that in elementary grades 50 percent of what students read be informational text, and this requirement increases to 70 percent in high school (Uecker, Kelly, & Napierala, 2014). Librarians can take an active role by motivating students‟ interest in nonfiction material. Book talking allows librarians to engage students in a wider range of materials. Librarians‟ knowledge of students‟ individual reading levels can assist in exposing students to more rigorous text that is aligned to both interest and maturity level. School librarians will support students‟ skills in critical thinking. Students will use implied or direct statements to support their claims or assessments.
Supporting Academic Achievement
ELs need support and motivation to make progress in English academic achievement. Demanding materials can be utilized with appropriate instructional
support. ELs require instructional support to face the cognitive and linguistic challenges across curriculums. For language learning to take place, speakers and learners must work
jointly to communicate, respond, participate, and understand the language (Gonzalez, Pagan, Wendell, & Love, 2011).
Teacher Support
The Standards attempt to “stretch” students‟ reading capabilities and text engagement across disciplines requires instructional support. ELs may disengage in reading if they struggle too much to process text or if they cannot relate to the text. Engagement, motivation, and cognition are necessary for ELs to access texts in a
language they are developing. Initial literacy instruction in a student‟s primary language, opportunities for development of English oral proficiency, instruction in foundational literacy skills, and vocabulary development are essential components of ELs literacy development. Luke, Woods, and Dooley (2011) indicates that, beyond literal and inferred meanings, comprehension is predominantly a cultural phenomenon, involving critical analyses of the possible origins, motivations, and consequences of text‟s meaning (p.160). Strategies that may support ELs in accessing and comprehending complex text across varied school settings include the following:
Building on background knowledge. This strategy can activate students‟
knowledge relevant to texts they are about to read. Background knowledge is built in two ways: through direct experiences or indirect experiences (Marzano, 2004). Direct
experiences include pre-reading activities such as providing background knowledge, discussing story content, building shared experiences, and explaining lexical items. Indirect experiences build background knowledge in more subtle ways. Students acquire knowledge by interacting with other students, reading, and teacher modeling. Through
interactions students share their understanding of the world and get a glimpse into the understanding of others. However, Grabe (2009) cautions that guidance for students is needed, pointing out that novice readers often misapply their knowledge so teachers should help readers make explicit connections between that knowledge and the text. Attention to text structure. Attention to text structure has demonstrated positive impacts on text comprehension. Grabe (2009) indicates that awareness of text provides better comprehension and recalling of information. Students who recognize hierarchal text structure are effective at summarizing, predicating, and connecting ideas. Educators who focus on developing specific strategies allow students to comprehend texts. Text coherence impacts a reader‟s performance and, over time, language acquisition.
Use of native language. ELs native language can be used as instructional support for reading in English. Translation is a useful skill in itself. It helps students to maintain their own sense of first language identity, while also building new bilingual identity. In addition, it allows ELs to relate new knowledge to existing knowledge, promotes language awareness, and highlights the differences and similarities between new and existing language. Ethnographic profiles have documented the progress of middle-school ELs engaged in translating English text to Spanish as a way of unearthing and
highlighting the cognitive, linguistic, critical, and metalinguistic practices implicated in deep text understanding (Cole et al., 2012). Translation does not impede efficient language use. Students who begin their studies through translation become fluent and accurate users of the new language.
Stimulating reading engagement. Reading engagement produces stronger achievement growth than strictly cognitive models (Guthrie, Wigfield, & You, 2012). Collaborative and interactive learning prompts student interaction and creates a venue for students‟ shared native language as a resource. Saunders and Goldenberg‟s (1999) intervention study showed that limited-English proficient students benefited considerably from the combined effects of a literature log and instructional conversation in a reading program, indicating the importance of verbal interactions. Collaborative reading allows for students to assist one another in understanding the meaning of challenging words and getting the main idea. Students can learn each other‟s perspectives while enhancing language learning process. Group work triggers the usage of a shared native language which increases ELs engagement in reading.
Scaffolding. Scaffolding strategies help ELs to organize their thoughts in English, develop study skills, and follow classroom procedures. Research identifies the following scaffolding approaches as effective: Keep the language simple; Use actions and illustrations to reinforce oral statements; Ask for completion, not generation; Model correct usage and judiciously correct errors; and Use visual aids. According to Diaz-Rico and Weed (2002) and Ovando, Collier, and Combs (2003) English language learners show progress when teachers consistently use these supports as they deliver instruction. Scaffolding is centered on active participation and the development of constructed interactions.
Strong relationships. Low levels of parental involvement are sometimes viewed as parental disinterest in the educational process. However, non-English speaking
families often have cultural expectations regarding the appropriate relationship with their children‟s school. Schools should invite families to participate in meaningful school activities. Family and school partnerships trigger academic and behavioral benefits. When families and schools work together grades improve, test scores rise, and students‟ attitudes towards school work improve. Other benefits of establishing partnerships include improved behavior at school, higher attendance rates, lower drop-out rates, higher self-esteem, and higher probability of avoiding high-risk behavior in adolescence
(Callender & Handson, 2012). Family-school partnerships ensure higher levels of academic and social benefits.
Challenge based learning. English language learners need the essential challenge of gaining access to academic language and complex constructions found in school-based texts. Such texts are not available to ELs until they reach a level of competence that allows them to learn content via independent reading. Fillmore (2014) argues that the key problem in the education of ELs is that the language required for advanced literacy and learning in school is treated as a prerequisite for working with complex and demanding curricula rather than as a byproduct and outcome of working with such materials. The English language is complex due to its flexibility to adopt and create new vocabulary, thus making it difficult to teach to non-native English speakers. Fillmore (2014) indicates that the many structural features, constructions, forms and functions of English language cannot be usefully taught. Language teaching and learning is a complex interplay of practice rather than being taught in a certain way. English language readers must be able to unpack information and use structural cues to interpret
relationships between parts. To learn such language, learners must know the notions of English discipline.
Cooperative learning. Students must participate in classroom activities and discussions to thrive in content rich classrooms. However, ELs first need sufficient language comprehension to obtain information in such content. When ELs are isolated for direct instruction they miss opportunities to learn subject content and the natural language used in class (Hakuta, Santos, & Fang, 2013). EL students need to learn the language and content practices of the disciplines. Teaching ELs at a different academic pace only hinders their academic achievement. They need to learn and interact with native speakers to learn and implement the language demands of CCSS. For the vision of English learning to take hold collaboration must occur at every level. This is important for all students, but it is especially important for English Language Learners. The work will not be easy, but it will prepare all students for success in college and careers.
Learning
To be a proficient reader and writer, practice is required. Fillmore (2014)
indicates that academic language can be learned from texts only by interacting with those texts in non-superficial ways: it calls for the reader to read not only for meaning and understanding, but also with attention to how things are said. Discussion of such texts and writing about the materials in the text are important aspects of the learning process. The problem for English language learners is that they rarely have an opportunity to work with challenging material. The texts they are likely to get are “watered-down” or overly simplistic. ELs need to notice how meaning is packed into phrases, clauses, and
sentences. Overall, they need to understand what goes together and what is to be
interpreted. When students read they are looking for meaning, and when nothing makes sense they tend to not notice the language itself. It is here where ELs need help from their teachers. A discussion of complex sentences allows students to notice language itself. By deconstructing sentences students make sense of sentences that once seemed impossibly difficult for them (Wong & Fillmore, 2012).
Conclusion
CCSS were created to increase student academic achievement in the United States. CCSS focuses on preparing students for college and the workforce, stressing quality education for all students, and increasing rigor in schools. CCSS adoption is voluntary and states individually adopt ELA, mathematics or both sets of standards (CCSSI, 2014). The new standards, however, are not without critics. The way educational institutions communicate their views about standards will affect critic‟s views. Educational institutions must ensure that parents and teachers obtain sufficient support and training. Immigrant children are the fastest growing segment of the
U. S. population (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). To meet their academic needs, teachers must be prepared to provide techniques by which students can meet CCSS. This project aims to provide techniques by which ELs can work toward standards attainment. It stresses the idea that ELs can benefit and engage in content learning with proper support. By providing ELs strategies and access to complex material, meaningful learning occurs.
Chapter 3 METHODS
Research
A variety of methods were implemented in the development of this project and training workshop. The following databases were utilized for peer reviewed journal articles: Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), Academic Search Premier, and LexisNexis® Academic. Key words that were used for the search include “Common Core State Standards” (CCSS) and “English Language Learners” (ELLs). These
keywords were used in conjunction with other terms such as criticism, parents, teachers, implications, and benefits. The articles found were outlined, summarized, and are reflective of the positive and negative implications of CCSS. Research was focused on discovering methods by which EL‟s can work toward standards attainment.
Development of the Presentation
This training workshop is intended for educators at k-12 schools. It was created to serve two main objectives. Firstly, to inform educators about the challenges ELs will face with CCSS. Secondly, it aims to provide educators with methods by which EL‟s can work toward standards attainment. The presentation begins with a summary of the
literature review that provides the audience underpinnings of the CCSS initiative and lists the pedagogical implications it will have on English learners (ELs). The presentation focuses on helping educators to understand how the CCSS came about and how to support ELs. A case study is used to help attendees implement their newly acquired knowledge. The workshop emphasizes the extent to which EL‟s can benefit and become
engaged in content learning through proper support. By providing ELs with strategies and access to complex material, more insightful learning occurs.
This workshop includes a facilitator guidebook and participant handouts. It will include Power Point slides and other methods educators can use with EL students. The Power Point training workshop is 3-hour presentation. It can be extended into a 5 hour full day workshop. The workshop is a combination of direct instructions and interactive activities. Activities will further enhance educators‟ understanding of CCSS and also help implement standards while working with EL‟s.
Chapter 4 FINDINGS
Information obtained during the review of the literature was used to create a training workshop for teachers. The workshop is designed to last four hours. The manual, slides with presentation notes, and activities are included in the project
appendices and are designed for any trained school psychologist to be able to present at a teacher training. This research project and related workshop aim to help teachers‟ better understand CCSS and to give them the tools they need to provide effective instruction to ELs.
Workshop Objectives
The verbal presentation should include teacher-friendly language, take the audience into consideration, and provide visual aids to assist in the discussion of CCSS. It aims to help teachers better understand CCSS and to give them the information needed to support ELs. The primary purpose of the project is to inform educators about the challenges ELs will face with CCSS. Secondly it aims to provide educators with methods by which ELs can work toward standards attainment.
Recommendations
It is recommended that school personnel view the content of this project with the understanding that workshops are intended for use under current CCSS development and practice. This project serves as a guide for both understanding the basics of CCSS and the challenges ELs will face with CCSS. It is the goal of this project to develop
workshops that may serve as a starting guide for educators, most notably those who work with English as second language learners.
Conclusions
CCSS was created to increase student academic achievement in the United States. However, they do not clearly direct how educators should teach to meet these goals. If implemented well, the new standards will engage all students in the rich and rigorous content that will prepare them for college and careers. While producing this project, it is intended that this information provide educators with a foundational knowledge of CCSS and how to support educators on how to best meet the needs of English learners. With the growing cultural diversity in California school districts, research on CCSS and the pedagogical implications for ELs is essential.
APPENDIX A Presenter‟s Manual
Presenter‟s Manual
Created by Michelle SandovalIntroduction
The CCSS initiative requires numerous changes in philosophy, curriculum instruction, and assessment. The situation challenged educators to configure how to best meet the needs of English learners. The wellbeing of immigrant children is crucial to the nation because they are the fastest growing segment of the U. S. population (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). As the implementation of CCSS takes place, the preparation of all teachers to educate ELs will be essential. All teachers need to understand how to work effectively with these students. Awareness and understanding of why students have difficulties allows teachers to meet academic needs and challenges of ELs.
This manual and accompanying PowerPoint presentation is designed to educate teachers on CCSS and the pedagogical implications for ELs, and how to appropriately teach ELs. The information is based on a literature
Nature of the Presentation
The presentation is designed to serve teacher audiences. Other education personnel who are involved in the implementation of CCSS may also find some of the information useful.
The presentation is designed to last four hours. Two breaks are incorporated each break is 15 minutes. Audience participation is an integral aspect of this presentation. Presenters must use quality presentation techniques such as pausing for questions, demonstrating active listening, and validating audience input. To foster participation, presenters and participants wear name badges, which can be read from a distance. Before
beginning the workshop the presenter will need to make copies of the handout for each participant. The handout is available at the end of this manual.
In preparation for giving this workshop, presenter(s) should read over the slides and accompanying notes thoroughly. Presenter(s) may add their own names and contact information to the initial slide. In addition, it is recommended that presenters are familiar with the information cited and referenced at the end of the presentation. It is possible audience members will have questions which are not directly answered within the scope of the presentation. To assist outlying questions, the final slide serves as an informational source. It includes the author‟s contact information as an additional resource that may be helpful to the audience.
Guidance for Presenters
This workshop is presented as a series of Microsoft PowerPoint slides. The slides are prepared with all necessary information for presenting the workshop. On the notes section of each slide, general information about the slide and its purpose is presented. The presenters may use their own language when presenting but sample language has also been provided to meet their needs. Many slides include discussion points after certain bullets. The notes will direct the presenter to first read the slide or a portion of the slide, then say, read, ask, do, or pause. The workshop is designed to include audience participation. Questions and activities are embedded throughout the slide notes. To highlight these activities, the presenter should ask the audience through prefaced words such as “ask” in the notes section of the slides. Directions for activities are provided. To
provide feedback to the audience following the presenters‟ questions, the words “listen for” provide the content that answers the question.
This presentation can be performed with one or multiple presenters. If there are multiple presenters, a natural place to change is at each section break. This is denoted at each section by a slide with the section title on it and a prompt to introduce the new section. There are no firm rules regarding presenter changes or segments but it is recommended that presenters introduce themselves at the beginning of the presentation and before each segment (other than the first presenter).
A recommended timeline for the training workshop follows:
Slides Topic Duration
#1-5 Intro and Outline 15 minutes
#6-16 Before Common Core and Common Core 35 minutes
#17-24 Adoption and Criticism 35 minutes
Break 15 minutes
#25-30 Preparing parents and teachers 30 minutes
#31-33 ELs 15 minutes
#34-46 Implications and benefits for ELs 35 minutes
Break 15 minutes
#47-61 Roles of Stakeholders and 35 minutes
Roles of Stakeholders and Strategies
About the Author
Michelle Sandoval is a school psychologist intern. Michelle completed her Masters degrees at California State University, Sacramento. This workshop was completed to satisfy part of the requirements of the Specialist in Education (Ed.S.) degree.
APPENDIX B
Presentation Slides: Common Core State Standards and English Language Learners Workshop
Slide 1
Presenters should insert their own names into the slide above and introduce themselves and the presentation topic to the audience.
Slide 2
Sample Presentation Language: I/We will start by indicating what took place before CCSS. I/ We will also define CCSS and provide information on how CCSS were
adopted. I/We will also discuss the criticism behind CCSS and the significant impact on teachers and parents.
Slide 3
Sample Presentation Language: Next, we will discuss the impact of CCSS on ELs, including but not limited to the impact, benefits, and demands. Lastly, I/we will discuss the roles of stakeholders and strategies they can utilize with ELs.
Slide 4
Sample Presentation Language: The purpose of this training is to illuminate the
underpinnings of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative and to consider the pedagogical implications for English learners (ELs). Using a historical lens to analyze the CCSS will help educators understand how the document came about and how to support ELs.
Slide 5
Say: Beginning in 2001, President George W. Bush proposed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) to monitor school progress. NCLB allowed states to design their own standards, assessments, and proficiency levels.
Sample Presentation Language: This resulted in the development of wide gaps in expectations for rigor and student achievement. For instance, students relocating from one state to another experienced large gaps in educational expectations causing
frustrations for administrators, teachers, parents and students (Neuman & Roskos, 2013). To remediate this issue, Common Core State Standards were created to increase student academic achievement in the United States.
Slide 6
Sample Presentation Language: Ask audience to form in small groups and to discuss their knowledge of CCSS. (Pause. Allow groups to discuss for up to 6 minutes.) Next ask audience, does anyone want to share what they know about CCSS? Can anyone tell me what CCSS are? (Pause. Allow the audience to provide answers and discuss for up to 6 minutes.) Lastly, screen 3 min CCSS video:
Slide 7
Sample Presentation Language: Overall, the purpose of CCSS is to create common educational standards, prepare students for college, stress quality education for all students, and increase rigor in schools. However, they do not direct how educators should teach to meet these goals. In this presentation, we will learn how to support our educators to meet these goals. If implemented well, the new standards will engage all students, rather than just a privileged few, in the rich and rigorous content that will prepare them for college and careers.
Slide 8
Sample Presentation Language: High standards that are consistent across states provide teachers, parents, and students with a set of clear expectations to ensure that all students have the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in college, career, and life upon graduation from high school, regardless of where they live. These standards are aligned to the expectations of colleges, workforce training programs, and employers. The standards promote equity by ensuring all students are well prepared to collaborate and compete with their peers in the United States and abroad. Unlike previous state standards, which varied widely from state to state, the Common Core enables collaboration among states (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2014).
Slide 9
Sample Presentation Language: The nation's governors and education commissioners, teachers, parents, school administrators, and experts from across the country led the development of the Common Core State Standards and continue to lead the initiative. The actual implementation of the Common Core, including how the standards are taught, the curriculum developed, and the materials used to support teachers as they help students reach the standards, is led entirely at the state and local levels.
Slide 10
Sample Presentation Language: CCSS initiative required numerous changes in
philosophy, curriculum instruction, and assessment. To address the necessary changes, teachers, administrators, and other professionals collaborated, evaluated feedback from the public, and drafted English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics CCSS (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2014). ELA and mathematics were chosen because they include skills necessary for all other content areas.
Slide 11
Sample Presentation Language: The stark differences between state standards and the Common Core are partly due to differences in topics addressed, but also to the fact that the Common Core emphasizes somewhat different cognitive skills: devoting less time to memorization and performing procedures, and more to demonstrating understanding and analyzing written material. Other differences between old and new standards include the following:
Slide 12
Sample Presentation Language: Math Common Core State Standards require greater focus by teachers and deeper knowledge by students than many previous state standards. Students will need to accurately calculate equations, understand concepts not just
memorize answers, and accurately select the best mathematical concept or equation to solve real-world problems, while demonstrating why the method or equation they selected is accurate.
Slide 13
Sample Presentation Language: The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts are designed to ensure students fully understand what they read, and can effectively talk and write about it. While the old standards focused on simply expecting students to recite facts learned through reading textbook passages, the new standards expect students to read books and textbook passages that are more challenging. Students will show a deeper understanding than before, demonstrating greater critical thinking and analytic skills.
Slide 14
Sample Presentation Language: Common Core standards provide a distinct definition of what students should be able to do (skills) as compared to state standards. State standards were more ambiguous as they only required individual states to design standards,
assessments, and proficiency levels without focusing on critical thinking or problem solving skills. As a result, state standards did not provide the necessary tools students need to be successful not only in college but their careers. Common Core mandates that all students be provided with tools that they need to develop their critical thinking and problem solving skills.
Slide 15
Slide 16
Sample Presentation Language: Today forty-three states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted the Common Core State Standards (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2014).
Slide 17
Sample Presentation Language: It is unconstitutional for the federal government to mandate CCSS adoption; therefore, individual states voluntarily adopt either the ELA, Mathematics, or both sets of standards (CCSSI, 2014). Monetary incentives are available to states that choose to adopt CCSS (Lavenia, 2010).
Slide 18
Sample Presentation Language: Monetary incentives include: Race to the Top Fund (RTT) and NCLB waiver. RTT was created by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009, totaling $4.35 billion fund. It offers competitive grants to all 50 states based on a number of criteria. NCLB waiver allows states that adopt CCSS to waive NCLB requirements under a certain criteria. RTT and NCLB requirements will be discussed in the following slides.
Slide 19
Sample Presentation Language: RTT awards are given to states that are leading the way with ambitious yet achievable plans for implementing CSSS. RTT winners help trail-blaze effective reforms and provide examples for States and local school districts throughout the country.
Slide 20
Sample Presentation Language: States that adopt CCSS are allowed to request a waiver from NCLB requirements. A primary requirement for receiving the waiver is that states‟ educational agencies must adopt college and career ready standards. State educational agencies that eliminate CCSS are unable to maintain the waiver.
Slide 21
Do: Hand out blank pros and cons sheet.
Slide 22
Sample Presentation Language: The new standards, however, are not without critics. Some opponents say the standards are dictating curriculum: that they are limiting and “too standardized” (Gardner & Powell, 2013, p.49).
Slide 23
Read: all information on the slide.
Say: Overall, the Common Core language will ultimately help students to become critical thinkers and problem solvers.
Slide 24
Sample Presentation Language: Common Core critics believe the standards limit the flexibility that teachers have to teach what they think is best. However, it is unclear how differences in teaching style will affect the outcome of CCSS.
Slide 25
Sample Presentation Language: As schools begin to implement Common Core, parents will start hearing about the new standards. The way teachers communicate their views about standards will solidify parental view.
Slide 26
Do: develop two groups of two people and have them role play how to debrief a parent. Role players will create their own skit and the audience will criticize the role play.
Slide 27
Sample Presentation Language: Haycock & Policy Innovators in Education (2012) indicated that if teachers are enthusiastic in standards-related professional development it will come across to parents and will be contagious. But, when educators have a less positive view, parents will be nervous about what the new standards will mean for their children.
Slide 28
Sample Presentation Language: Overall, a good communication plan will allow parents and stakeholders to understand the positive changes of the new standards. This is essentially important once tests are administered. CCSS assessments will almost certainly drop student‟s proficiency rates and create wider gaps between students.
Slide 29
Sample Presentation Language: The CCSS are both different in kind and more rigorous than previous standards. To understand shifts in instruction and to learn how to adjust their practices, teachers will need consistent support and training. Teacher preparation programs must ensure teachers are capable of implementing Common Core in the classroom. Teachers will need comprehensive, well-organized, quality resources that do not just tell them what standards to teach and when, but actually guide them on to how to teach them.
Slide 30
Sample Presentation Language: According to Raising the Bar: Implementing Common Core State Standards for Latino Success (2012), some teacher resources include the following: Literacy Design Collaborative and the Math Design Collaborative which offer resources to help teachers align their assignments to CCSS; the Teaching Channel which has compiled a series of videos of Common Core-aligned lessons; and Learn Zillion a free online platform that combines videos, assessments and progress reporting centered on Common Core standards.
Slide 31
Sample Presentation Language: Does anyone here know the percent of immigrant children in the United States?
Slide 32
Sample Presentation Language: Large numbers of immigrant children are experiencing serious problems with education and assimilation into American society. The wellbeing of immigrant children is especially important to the nation because they are the fastest growing segment of the U. S. population (Tienda, 2011). In 2012, it was reported that 17.4 million children under age 18 lived at home with at least one immigrant parent (Nwosu, Batalova, & Auclair, 2014). Nwosu et.al, indicates that immigrant children account for 25 percent of the 70.2 million children under age 18 in the United States. However, what these demographic trends portend for the future of immigrant children is highly uncertain for several reasons. Many factors can complicate an immigrant child‟s educational attainment.
Slide 33
Sample Presentation Language: Many factors can complicate an immigrant child‟s educational attainment. A child‟s immigration status for instance, can foretell the
hardships he or she will encounter. For example, children raised in homes where English is not spoken lag behind native youth in reading and math, especially if their parents have little to no education. Poor parental education levels along with low English language knowledge are associated with poor scholastic outcomes for immigrant minority youth (Tienda & Haskins, 2011). Failure to master English in the early grades undermines scholastic achievement, educational attainment, and economic mobility (Heckman, 2006). This is significant because basic literacy and numeracy often provide fundamental basics to entry-level jobs.
Slide 34
Sample Presentation Language: ELs experience intense problems in content area learning because they have not yet acquired the language proficiency needed to succeed in
understanding subject matter content. Because the language of academic subjects (such as social studies, science, and math) requires a high degree of reading and writing ability that English language learners do not have, they experience immense difficulties reading their textbooks and understanding the vocabulary unique to particular subjects. The following slides will discuss practical strategies that content area teachers can use to support English language learners in their classrooms.
Slide 35
Sample Presentation Language: Failure to master English in the early grades undermines scholastic achievement, educational attainment, and economic mobility (Heckman, 2006). This is significant because basic literacy and numeracy often provide fundamental basics to entry-level jobs.
Slide 36
Sample Presentation Language: Wide and persistent achievement disparities between ELs and English proficient students indicate that schools must address the language, literacy, and academic needs of ELs more effectively. ELs are the most challenged because they often lack literacy in their first language and have attained low proficiency, if any, in English (Goldenberg, 2008). Upon arrival at school, ELs are placed in classes with same age peers, complicating the learning environment for the teacher and students. Teachers without preparation for teaching ELs become frustrated and pressured with the
accountability of student‟s academic performance arising from the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (Bailey & Wolf 2012). As implementation of CCSS takes place, the
preparation of all teachers to educate ELs is crucial. All teachers need to have an understanding of how to work effectively with these students. Teachers‟ awareness and understanding of why students have difficulties allows them to meet academic needs and challenges of ELs.
Slide 37
Sample Presentation Language: Ask: What are the benefits of being an English learner? (Pause. Allow audience to respond for approximately 10 minutes)
Slide 38
Sample Presentation Language: Reading and learning to read in a second language share many features with the same tasks as in a first language. When students have had opportunities to develop primary language literacy skills, those are transferable to second-language reading (Bernhardt, 2011). Readers may also draw on background knowledge to construct text meaning. Comprehension challenges imposed by limited English proficiency are alleviated when the text concerns content with which the second language reader is familiar. Background knowledge can help ELs, but it does not ensure comprehension of complex texts.
Slide 39
Sample Presentation Language: The federal government requires school districts to provide services to ELs, yet it does not offer states policies to follow in identifying, assessing, placing, or instructing them (Calderon, Slavin, Sanchez, 2011).
Slide 40
Sample Presentation Language: BICS or social language is not specialized and not very demanding cognitively. These language skills usually develop within six months to two years after arrival in the U.S. Problems arise when teachers and administrators think that a child is proficient in a language when they demonstrate good social English.
Slide 41
Read: All text on slide.
Sample Presentation Language: Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) skills usually develop within five to seven years. Research has shown that if a child has no prior schooling or has no support in native language development, it may take seven to ten years for ELLs to catch up to their peers.
Slide 42
Sample Presentation Language: The work of Alison Bailey and Margaret Heritage (2008) provides initial ways of cataloguing the language all students, including ELLs, need to succeed in school. Bailey and Heritage broaden the conceptualization of school language use by breaking academic English into School Navigational Language (SNL) and
Slide 43
Sample Presentation Language: SNL is the language used to communicate with teachers and others in the school (e.g., “Get your red pens out.” “Do we have to write a
summary?”) and CCL is the language used in teaching and learning content (e.g., “The plot revolved around two main characters.” “This time we are using an expanded algorithm.”). The range of and variety of language acquisition provides a potential framework to help educators address the role of language in the schools.
Slide 44
Sample Presentation Language: As students are introduced to disciplinary concepts, they need two types of languages: a language for engaging with core ideas or concepts, and a language for interacting about ideas and concepts with each other. Extended
Anticipatory Guide (EAG) and Novel Ideas Only (NIO) assist teachers in scaffolding understanding of language (Koelsch, Chu, & Rodriguez Bañuelos, 2014).
Slide 45
Sample Presentation Language: EAG hinges on crafting statements that involve key concepts and invites students to express opinion based on prior, but not prerequisite, knowledge. NIO focuses on building a whole-class set of semantic associations about the concept that is then refined in the lesson. Overall, EAG and NIO invite ELs of all levels of proficiency to listen, speak, read and write about a concept. These tasks invite
students to contribute language for elaborating upon, connecting, and ultimately narrowing meaning toward more disciplinary connections with the facilitation of teachers.
Slide 46
Sample Presentation Language: English language learners face a variety of obstacles in schools stemming from fundamental misunderstandings of what they need in order to develop language and academic skills at the same time. English learners are usually in schools and classrooms with other ELs. They are learning English and practicing it with one another. Instruction is often focused on building decoding skills, comprehension, and English acquisition. Students may learn little on other subjects because of this method. According to Fillmore (2014), the content English learners acquire when reading is often watered-down with no detail or development to warrant student‟s attention. To learn a language, children require interaction with speakers of that
language. When children interact with other ELs, they tend to learn nonstandard English (Wong-Fillmore, 1992). Thus, many English language learners do not gain the
