Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners : Insights from Linguistics, 3e 9781462553242, 9781462553259

Citation preview

BUILDING LITERACY WITH MULTILINGUAL LEARNERS

Also from Kristin Lems Fluency Instruction: Research-Based Best Practices, Second Edition edited by Timothy Rasinski, Camille Blachowicz, and Kristin Lems

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners Insights from Linguistics THIRD EDITION

Kristin Lems Tenena M. Soro Gareth Charles

THE GUILFORD PRESS New York  London

Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles Published by The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc. 370 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1200, New York, NY 10001 www.guilford.com All rights reserved Except as indicated, no part of this book may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America This book is printed on acid-free paper. Last digit is print number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 LIMITED DUPLICATION LICENSE These materials are intended for use only by qualified professionals. The publisher grants to individual purchasers of this book nonassignable permission to reproduce all materials for which photocopying permission is specifically granted in a footnote. This license is limited to you, the individual purchaser, for personal use or use with students. This license does not grant the right to reproduce these materials for resale, redistribution, electronic display, or any other purposes (including but not limited to books, pamphlets, articles, video or audio recordings, blogs, file-sharing sites, internet or intranet sites, and handouts or slides for lectures, workshops, or webinars, whether or not a fee is charged). Permission to reproduce these materials for these and any other purposes must be obtained in writing from the Permissions Department of Guilford Publications. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lems, Kristin, author. | Soro, Tenena M., author. | Charles, Gareth,  author. Title: Building literacy with multilingual learners : insights from   linguistics / Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, Gareth Charles. Description: Third edition. | New York : The Guilford Press, 2024. |   Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2023034762 | ISBN 9781462553242 (paperback) |   ISBN 9781462553259 (hardcover) Subjects: LCSH: Language and languages—Study and teaching. | Reading. | Second language acquisition. | BISAC: EDUCATION / Bilingual Education |   EDUCATION / Professional Development Classification: LCC P53.75 .L46 2024 | DDC 418.0071—dc23/eng/20230815 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023034762 Guilford Press is a registered trademark of Guilford Publications, Inc.

About the Authors

Kristin Lems, EdD, is Professor in the ESL/Bilingual Education Program at National Louis University. A two-time Fulbright Scholar, to Algeria and Mongolia, Dr. Lems directed two 5-year grants from the Office of English Language Acquisition of the U.S. Department of Education. She is a column editor for the Illinois Reading Council Journal and has coauthored or coedited several books. Dr. Lems is a recipient of the Excellence in Teaching Award from National Louis University and the Elliot Judd Outstanding Teacher Award from Illinois Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages– Bilingual Education. Tenena M. Soro, PhD, has taught courses in linguistics, cross-cultural education, foundations, and reading at National Louis University, where he received the Outstanding Adjunct Faculty Award. Dr. Soro has also taught courses in ethics and philosophy, linguistics, and social science at Columbia College Chicago, Northeastern Illinois University, and Northwestern University. Originally from Ivory Coast, he analyzed the syntax patterns of his native language, Senufo/Cebaari, for the first time in his dissertation. He has presented on linguistics and ESL topics at state and national conferences. Gareth Charles, MEd, has taught academic English for international students at KMUTT University in Bangkok, Thailand, and has also taught high school English courses as part of the Thai government’s outreach program for disadvantaged youth. In addition, Mr. Charles develops and teaches online lessons for Chinese education companies across Asia and provides ESL corporate training at companies that focus on international business English. Originally from Oregon, Mr. Charles has lived in Thailand since 2007. v

Preface

W

hy release a third edition of a text that was contemporary when the second edition came out in 2017? Everybody knows why: worldwide technology breakthroughs and a 2-year pandemic that isolated us from our communities. These are no small changes, and their effects are not reversible. So many transformations from two such little things: a chip and a virus! We authors share an astonishing range of experiences in teaching and learning languages and in traveling, teaching, and living in different countries. We have lived on four continents, and two of us have emigrated to new countries as adults. All three of us married people whose first languages and countries differed from ours. We have taught in face-to-face, blended, and online environments. We have taught preschool students through adults; at not-for-profits and for-profits; and at U.S.-based and international universities and institutes. We have studied and speak several additional languages, including those with different orthographies from ours. We have published online and in print and presented at conferences in the United States, Morocco, Algeria, Chile, Argentina, Mongolia, China, Ukraine, Cambodia, and Trinidad. We are proud to distill our expertise and passion for English language acquisition in this third edition! We believe in multilingualism and multiculturalism as cornerstones of our identities in this interdependent world. In this third edition, we welcome a new author, Gareth Charles, and salute Leah Miller, our now-retired second author for the previous two editions, whom we thank for her leadership over a decade of expertise. There are exciting and confounding new ideas in the fields of linguistics and literacy. What does it mean to learn a new language through an app? Or a game? Or using AI? How can English language learners (ELLs) handle vii

viii Preface

the geysers of new English vocabulary that are gushing from social media? And how can learners successfully navigate the new literary genres, some of them still evolving, as readers, writers, and creators of multimodal content? And . . . what exactly is the new role for a teacher? Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, addresses these areas of interest by increasing the knowledge base of educators involved with teaching ELLs. Our book is intended for the following audiences: (1) instructional leaders in English as a second language (ESL) and bilingual education; (2) reading teachers and specialists who need to know more about the processes of developing reading in a new language; (3) new, current, or future ESL teachers who need to develop expertise about literacy; and (4) classroom teachers at all grade levels (PreK–college) who need to know more about both ESL and reading in English for their ELL students. This book has been used around the world for master’s programs in teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) and can be used in reading and language classes, ESL or applied linguistics classes, elementary or secondary language arts methods classes, or study groups for practicing teachers, coordinators, or principals. We have been told by many students that our previous editions are stimulating and highly readable. Although we introduce key abstract concepts, we cleave to very accessible terms with lots of examples. We keep this same balance in the third edition. Chapter 1 provides an overview of first- and second-language acquisition; how language acquisition has been taught and how it is evolving; and what we know about what works. In this chapter, we introduce some linguistics and literacy vocabulary because we want to establish a common set of understandings and terminology for our readers. Chapter 2 is devoted to the gnarly subject of first-language influence on learning a new language and to a look at translanguaging as an added perspective on this learning process. These two chapters establish our conceptual framework. The nine chapters that follow include a new one, “Visual Literacy” (Chapter 5), and a completely reworked chapter called “The Multimodal Multilingual Classroom” (Chapter 11), which greatly updates and articulates the new landscape for ELLs. The intervening chapters cover

• the critical development of oracy • learning successful decoding of the English alphabet • using morphemes to increase vocabulary • understanding word formation processes, cognates, and collocations • developing reading fluency • developing a set of flexible reading comprehension strategies • learning to write for self-expression, skill building, and using writing to learn.

Preface ix

At the beginning of each chapter, we present a graphic with key vocabulary; all the italicized terms in the chapter can also be found in the Glossary at the end of the book. Each chapter includes teacher voices, as well as our own (often humorous!) insights and anecdotes. After exploring the key content information in each chapter, we move to “How Does This Look in the Classroom?” and share activities to practice the focal skills of the chapter. Each chapter ends with intriguing questions that can be used in a classroom, for professional development, or individually. Language is not an easily reducible subject—in fact, it just grows and grows—and why would we want it to be? However, we are confident that learning about the linguistic features of English will create many “aha moments” for you and will provide both immediate and long-term benefits for your classroom teaching or instructional leadership. Learning these features is also likely to raise your curiosity about language in general. You will undoubtedly notice features about your own English language and literacy that you have never noticed before! And in discussions with classmates, coworkers, and your students, you will find ways to incorporate your new understandings into your educational settings. The three of us built this book across many time zones—a 12-hour difference, to be exact—and with sometimes as many as seven screens and five computers operating at once! We learned to say “good morning” even though we were ending our day and to understand that when another author was rubbing his or her eyes, it might be because he or she had already worked a long day while we were just beginning ours. And—oh, yes!—a baby was born to Gareth and his wife, turning him into a proud papa while he was also teaching full time and becoming a proud first-time author. And Kristin became a first-time grandmother!

Acknowledgments

W

e would like to thank the teachers and students who were kind enough to allow us to share their insights in this third edition: Christina Bires, Joan Bowers, Jenna Gatsis, Bryan Johnson, Wendella Knuti, Alok Lall, Trisha Leu, Claudia Lopez, Jasna Sehovic, N. Small, Mary Sorensen, and Amanda Yee. Thanks also to the teachers, students, and others whose work appeared originally in our first and/or second editions: Sam Willingmyre, R ­ osario Gomez, Beatriz Lappay, Malitzina Salazar, Mary Helmstetter, Misty J. ­R ichmond, Sylwia Bania, Patricia Grivas, Adriana Iuhas, Barb Prohaska, Joanne Lovaglia, Patricia Luna, Xiomara Guerrero, Leticia Cortes, Vicki Musial, Janis Mara Michael, Theresa Kubasak, Samar Abousalem, Margarita Jaime, Rob Schoonveld, Arlene Duval, Virginia Runge, Reena Patel, Maria Marquez, and Kathleen McColaugh. Further thanks go to the following colleagues, consultants, and artists: Xiaoning Chen, Parima Kutchasuwanmanee, Elmer Saflor, John Walters, Dan Piraro, and Martha Rosenberg, We also thank the teachers, students, and scholars whose contributions to the two previous editions enabled us to even contemplate writing these books. The worldwide community of innovative language users and educators continues to light our way. Thanks to Leah Miller, who got this whole project started in 2010 when she said, “There’s no good book about second-language acquisition, reading, and linguistics. Let’s write one!” Jenna Gatsis, whom we were lucky to have as a graduate assistant in the final month of preparing this book, gave us “just-in-time” brilliant assistance. Thank you, Jenna! Finally, we greatly appreciate the fine team at The Guilford Press. x

Contents

Guide to Pronunciation in This Book

xvii

CHAPTER ONE

Big Ideas and Research That Guide the Profession The Right to a Home Language  2 The Right to Literacy  3 The Language‑Based Theory of Learning  4 About Our Choices of Words and Abbreviations  5 Universals and Specifics of Language and Literacy  6 Two Developing Systems and the Syndrome of Success  7 English as a New Language: Four Expanded Domains and the Fifth Domain 8 Language‑Centered Factors Influencing Second‑Language Acquisition 10 Nonlinguistic Influences on SLA  12 Instructional Models for Language Teaching and Learning 14 Vygotsky’s Influence on Second‑Language Learning  18 Challenging the Deficit View  19 Research into Effective Teaching Strategies for ELLs  21 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  23 Questions for Further Study  27 APPENDIX 1.1.  Lesson Planning to Include the Five Domains and Three Functions of Language Learning  29

xi

1

xii Contents

CHAPTER TWO

First‑Language Influence in Second‑Language Acquisition

30

Language as an Innate Human Endowment  31 The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis  31 The Interdependence Hypothesis  32 Sociocultural Theory and SFL  32 L2 Reading Models  34 Language Distance or Linguistic Proximity  39 The Problem with “Transfer”  40 Cross‑Linguistic Influence 41 Examples of PCI  42 Non‑Effects 45 Metalinguistic Awareness Facilitates the Study of New Languages 45 Bottom‑Up and Top‑Down Skills  47 Hypotheses about SLA Literacy  49 Performance Definitions for ELLs  55 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  56 Questions for Further Study  56 APPENDIX 2.1.  Performance Definitions for the Levels of English Language Proficiency 58

CHAPTER THREE

ELL Oracy: Listening Comprehension and Oral Language Development

59

Listening Comprehension in English as a New Language  60 The Active Nature of Listening Comprehension  66 Oral Proficiency in English as a New Language  72 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  77 Questions for Further Study  86

CHAPTER FOUR

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words in English as a New Language How Word Recognition Occurs in English  89 Probabilistic Reasoning for Reading  90 Major Kinds of Writing Systems  92 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  113 Questions for Further Study  116

88

Contents xiii

CHAPTER FIVE

Visual Literacy and Language Growth

119

Understanding Visual Literacy Concepts  120 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  137 Questions for Further Study  141

CHAPTER SIX

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary

142

Morphemes: The Building Blocks of Words  143 Morphemes: Hard to Spell, Pronounce, and Recognize  143 Morphemes through Different Lenses  146 Two Major Categories of English Morphemes  147 Morpheme Study in the Classroom  158 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  161 Questions for Further Study  165 APPENDIX 6.1.  The 50 Most Common American English Words 167 APPENDIX 6.2.  Common Morphemes from Content-Area Vocabulary 169 APPENDIX 6.3.  The Compound Noun Game  170

CHAPTER SEVEN

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations

172

Vocabulary: The Bottom Line for Reading in Any Language  172 English: A Richly Generative Language  173 Nyms, Glorious Nyms: Four Bonus Word Formation Types  181 Using Cognates 185 Beware of Three Common Misunderstandings  187 Collocations: Phrasal Verbs, Idioms, and Listemes  188 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  193 Questions for Further Study  199 Answer Key for Figure 7.2  201 APPENDIX 7.1.  Selected False Cognates between English and Spanish 202 APPENDIX 7.2.  More English and Spanish Words from Latin Roots 203

CHAPTER EIGHT

“The Same, but Different”: Reading Fluency in English as a New Language A Working Definition of Fluency  204 Automaticity Theory 206

204

xiv Contents Oral Reading Fluency as a Proxy for Reading Comprehension 206 Prosody as an Additional Measure  207 ELLs and Fluency Research  208 Fluency Instruction 212 Successful Fluency Instruction for ELLs  216 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  219 Questions for Further Study  222 APPENDIX 8.1.  Sample Text for Oral Reading  224 APPENDIX 8.2.  Three Ways to Mark Text for Oral Reading  226 APPENDIX 8.3.  Score Chart for Repeated Readings of a Single Passage 228

CHAPTER NINE

Achieving Comprehension in L2 English Reading

229

Comprehending Connected Text in a New Language Is Hard! 230 The Threshold Theory and Reading Strategies  232 Word‑Learning Strategies 233 Phrase‑ and Sentence‑Level Reading Strategies  241 Paragraph‑ and Discourse‑Level Reading Strategies  244 Metacognitive Strategies 248 Digital Reading Programs and Websites  251 Extensive Reading Develops All of the Comprehension Strategies 253 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  254 Questions for Further Study  258 APPENDIX 9.1.  Four Useful Graphic Organizers for ELLs  260

CHAPTER TEN

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum Interactions between Reading and Writing  263 Written Language: Not Just Frozen Speech!  265 Writing as a Thinking Process  267 Writing Workshop and ELLs  268 Guidance from the English Language Proficiency Standards  272 Translanguaging in Dual‑Language and Bilingual Classrooms 273 A Way to Classify School Writing Tasks  273 Mistakes and Errors in ELL Writing  276 Who’s Afraid of Spelling?  277 Handwriting: Still Important, but Not Paramount  278 Practical Writing Needs for ELLs  279

262

Contents xv Many Genres to Try, Including New Ones  279 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  282 Questions for Further Study  291 APPENDIX 10.1.  Writing Rubric of the WIDA Consortium Grades 1–12 292

CHAPTER ELEVEN

Multilingual Learners in the Multimodal Classroom

293

New Aspects to Comprehensible Input  294 AI, Natural Language Processing, and Corpus Linguistics  294 ChatGPT and Other AI Chatbots  297 What We Know about Screen‑Based Reading  300 Strategies for Reading Online  301 Web‑Based Resources 303 The Autonomous Learner  304 Video Gaming  305 The Right to Internet Connectivity  308 “Just Because” Technology? No!  309 Teaching with Empathy, Presence, and Efficacy  311 How Does This Look in the Classroom?  312 Questions for Further Study  316 APPENDIX 11.1, PART I.  Technology Terms Reflecting English Word Formation 318 APPENDIX 11.1, PART II.  Answer Key  319

Glossary 321 References 343 Index 367

Purchasers of this book can download and print the reproducible appendices at www.guilford.com/lems-forms for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details).

Guide to Pronunciation in This Book

W

e have chosen to avoid most International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) symbols in favor of common, simplified forms that can be created on a standard keyboard, with the exception of four sounds: the schwa sound, /ə/, the North American “flap” sound, /ṙ/, and the two pronunciations of th, voiced /ð/ and voiceless /θ/.

Consonants Voiceless

Example

Voiced

Example

/p/ /t/ /k/ /θ/ /f/ /sh/ /s/ /ch/

pin tin kid think fan shell sad chin

/b/ /d/ /g/ /ð/ /v/ /zh/ /z/ /j/

bad dog go that van measure zip job

Voiceless only /h/

Voiced only hat

/w/ /ng/ /m/ /y/ /ṙ/

xvii

win sing mad young city, edit, better, ladder

xviii

Guide to Pronunciation

Voiced only (continued) /l/ /n/ /r/

lid not red

Vowels Example

Commonly called

had bed bid hot, father book cut unstressed vowels (before, zebra)

short a short e short i short o alternate short u short u schwa sound

Short vowels /a/ /e/ /i/ /o/ /oo/ /u/ /ə/

Long vowels (all diphthongs in English) /ey/ /iy/ /ay/ /ow/ /uw/ /aw/

say see, tea try, lie go you, food saw, caught

Additional diphthongs /ou/ /oy/

house, crowd toy

R-controlled vowels /ar/ /er/ /ir/ /eyr/ /ayr/ /owr/ /uwr/

hard hurt, fir fear care fire for sure

long a long e long i long o long u open o

CHAPTER ONE

Big Ideas and Research That Guide the Profession

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY multilingualism • multiliteracy • second‑language acquisition linguistic capital • language‑based theory of learning universal grammar • phonology • morphology • syntax • semantics orthography • syndrome of success • communicative competence input hypothesis • comprehensible input • output hypothesis comprehensible output • affective filter • motivation resilience • lingua franca • communicative language teaching grammar translation method • audiolingual method content‑based instruction • zone of proximal development • deficit view

L

anguage is at the heart of how humans communicate with each other. It is no small thing! Through language, we “learn to mean” things (Halliday, 1993) and how to share those meanings with others. The story of how those meanings are created and shared through language is truly the story of the human family. Language is our distinctly human endowment—­our superpower! Even more remarkable than having one language is having two or more of them—maybe a super-superpower—­a nd that is the focus of our book. Multi­ lingualism means being able to share meanings with others in more than one language, and multiliteracy is being able to read and write in more than one language. These remarkable achievements benefit both the individual and society. They create options for self-­expression, friendships, learning,

1

2

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

tolerance, economic viability, and shared problem solving. We unequivocally support multilingualism and multiliteracy as core goals for all societies and for a better, kinder world—one in which we can talk directly to each other, listen to each other, read and write to each other, and care for each other. Many schools and educational settings around the world are dedicated to the development of multilingualism and multiliteracy. In fact, people in most countries are surrounded by a variety of first languages and dialects. Globally speaking, monolingualism is actually the exception. The United Nations recognizes the value of multilingualism as an expression of human culture, stating “linguistic diversity is an important part of cultural diversity” (U.N. General Assembly Resolution 61/266, 2007). That being said, however, no one should pretend that achieving multiliteracy is easy or fast—or even universally valued. In the United States, the educational infrastructure is deeply built upon the use of English, and English is also the language of instruction in many countries around the world. The focus of our book is specifically about building literacy with English language learners (ELLs) in PreK–12 settings. At the same time, we recognize that English, as a result of colonization, may have privileges it has not rightly earned, and that our book in some way contributes to that privilege. We intend to speak to that throughout the book. That being said, however, we believe that humanely and effectively teaching English, whether as a lingua franca, a foreign language, or a second or third language, remains a worthy goal, and we hope to engage joyfully with you in our shared journey toward that goal. Our book is framed by foundational ideas about literacy, linguistics, and second-­language acquisition (SLA), and we introduce them in this first chapter so you will have them in mind as you read the chapters that follow. Entire books have been written about any one of these ideas, and we regret that we must condense such grand concepts into short summaries. We hope you will continue to explore them beyond our book, but for now, we can give you at least a “starter kit.” We begin with two beliefs about language which we see as human rights: the right to a home language and the right to literacy.

The Right to a Home Language The world is full of unique and magnificent languages, more than 7,100 of them in current use (“How many languages?”, 2023). Children acquire these languages by belonging to a language community. However, in many regions in the world, once a child enters school, he or she must learn to use a different language. In the world’s most populous country, China, for example, standard Mandarin is the language of school throughout China, but as many as 30%



Big Ideas and Research 3

of Chinese speak a different dialect or home language (“Beijing says,” 2013). In India, the world’s second most populous country, Hindi is used in school, but most Indian children speak a local language and a regional language—­ even before they begin to study English. Africans in many countries speak a local language, a regional language, and a national language in addition to studying a European language such as English or French. We mention these examples as reminders that many children do not speak the same language at home that they speak at school. When we recognize that monolingualism is unusual, we can then reframe multilingualism as normal and desirable. Not only is multilingualism normal, but the right to speak and write in one’s home language has been elevated and celebrated in these times. Renowned Kenyan author Ngugi-wa Thiong’o wrote and published in English, his third language, before deciding to write and publish in his home language, Gikuyu, instead. In Wales, a Welsh-­speaking country within the United Kingdom, Welsh finally won bilingual status equal to English in 1993 in the curriculum, the government, and even the private sector. Consider this story from Vicar John Walters: With Welsh as my first language, I felt linguistically excluded and sometimes scorned in my English medium school—­yet I was in my own country! Most of the other pupils didn’t speak Welsh and therefore I had to adapt to them. I remember how strange it felt that I, a speaker of the native language of the country in which I lived, should feel as if I were part of an “ethnic minority”! The passage of the 1993 Welsh Language Act meant that I no longer felt I was a second-­class citizen. I now have the legal right to communicate in both English and Welsh in everyday conversation and official communication! (Walters, 2022)

Whether or not we have experienced it ourselves, we can try to imagine how it must feel to be asked to leave our home language at the schoolroom door. How much better it feels to find a seat for that language in the classroom, where it can serve as a resource rather than an obstacle! Our language is inseparable from our identity and our culture; Thiong’o refers to a native language as “the collective memory bank of a people’s experience in history” (Thiong’o, 1986). It is a core part of our identities and needs always to be claimed, honored, and celebrated (De Luca, 2018).

The Right to Literacy Reading and literacy empower both individuals and entire societies. Once literacy was an entitlement confined to elites, such as religious clergy, kings, and ministers, but now there is a shared understanding that all societies should make literacy available to all. The right to universal literacy is not a

4

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

new idea, but it is not a very old one either, and unfortunately it is not always upheld. The right to literacy is enshrined in the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO’s) mission: Literacy is a fundamental human right and the foundation for lifelong learning. It is fully essential to social and human development in its ability to transform lives. For individuals, families, and societies alike, it is an instrument of empowerment to improve one’s health, one’s income, and one’s relationship with the world. (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 2013, para. 1)

Another way to frame literacy is by an analogy to capital. Capital can be defined as assets or resources available that give people power or prestige in their society. Because we are social beings who use language for all manner of exchanges, we can refer to linguistic capital as the “amount of capital one can claim in the social world on the basis of one’s linguistic ability and use” (Kanno & Kangas, 2014, p. 853). Literacy enhances our linguistic capital and, in turn, confers a larger cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984), or access to cultural privileges, upon its participants. It is not an exaggeration to see literacy as a kind of wealth. Literacy greatly increases our ability to negotiate our needs with others and gives us the ability to create, store, and share information and ideas. Literacy is not a luxury but a necessity and a human right.

The Language‑Based Theory of Learning The language-­based theory of learning (Halliday, 1993) is a good organizing principle for this book. Halliday, a renowned sociolinguist, considered all learning to be a linguistic process taking place in three interconnected areas: learning language, learning about language, and learning through language. Figure 1.1 shows the three sectors of his language-­based theory of learning. Halliday (1993) explains his theory as follows: With this formulation I was trying to establish two unifying principles: that we should recognize not only a developmental continuity right through from birth to adult life, with language in home, neighborhood, primary school, secondary school, and place of work, but also a structural continuity running through all components and processes of learning. (p. 113)

Halliday recognized that language is not just a set of skills but a tool for all other learning. Halliday’s formulation nicely captures the concept of language both as a means to an end and an end in itself. It helps guide our thinking



Big Ideas and Research 5

Learning about Language

Halliday’s languagebased theory of learning

Learning through Language

Learning Language

FIGURE 1.1. Three language functions of the language-­based theory of learning (­Halliday, 1993).

about how learning English as a new language can account for all of those functions. We can learn language, whether it is our first language or an additional language, through our social relationships, through play, games, and songs, and by performing speech acts, such as requesting, commanding, and informing, within our language community. However, we normally learn about language and learn through language in a more structured setting, such as school. When teachers include activities to practice each of the three areas, students will experience a rich palette; conversely, if any of these areas is neglected over time, learners miss out on important areas of language growth.

About Our Choices of Words and Abbreviations Before we go further, we’d like to explain our choice of a few terms. We use English language learners, or ELLs, to refer to the students learning English as a new, second, third, or additional language, or as a lingua franca. Although the designation ELs, for English learners, is now used widely, we prefer to keep the second L, which represents “language,” because as Halliday points out, learning language is both a means to knowledge and a goal in itself. We want to preserve a sense of the primacy of language throughout the book. Finally, even though the title of the book cites multilingual learners, we are working on the assumption that one of those languages is, or will be, English. We also use some terms common in linguistics. L1 represents the concept of “first language,” “native language,” “heritage language,” or “home language,” and the term L2 is used to mean “second language,” “new language,” “subsequent language,” or “additional language.” L3, by extension, refers to a third language. When we want to “fine-tune” the nuances of these, we make the distinction clear at that time.

6

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Universals and Specifics of Language and Literacy Language is a system that contains many small elements that combine in an infinite number of ways to form meanings. Linguists identify human language as having four universals: phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics. These four universals can be combined into the overall term universal grammar, which linguist Noam Chomsky describes as its deep structure, and meanings can be expressed in many forms of surface structures (­Chomsky, 1964, 1965). The rules that govern the surface structures derive from the deep structure but are unseen. For example, the phrase “Sit down” is a surface structure, and we do not see the subject of the sentence ( you), but the deep structure tells us that there is an unspoken subject. Each language has its own grammar, and although features of one language can be found in other languages, the full inventory of characteristics is unique to each language. We call those characteristics language-­specific, and they form a distinct set for each language within the larger linguistic universals. The first universal is the inventory of sounds and sound combinations that belong to a language, its phonology. Phonology is the study of the sound patterns of a language and the rules that govern how the sounds can be used and combined. These patterns and rules give each language its own distinct auditory profile. Another universal is morphology, the study of the units of meaning that make up the words of a language, as well as the ways those units of meaning can be combined. A third universal is syntax, the set of rules governing the ways in which words can be ordered into phrases and sentences or through word endings that indicate the part of speech in languages using cases, such as German. Finally, the semantics of a language, the fourth universal, is defined as the meanings that emerge from combinations of the previous three: the sounds, word meanings, and word patterns. Even though the phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics of every language differ, all languages have sounds, words, patterns, and meanings. On the other hand, not every language has a writing system, or orthography. The first evidence of writing dates back only about 10,000 years (Schmandt-­Besserat, 2015); writing systems were invented, just as early civilizations invented the wheel, glass, and other cultural artifacts. Although orthographies take many shapes and forms, there is nothing inevitable about them, and they are not universal. Orthography is a relatively recent development in human history. The difference between the four universal aspects of language systems and writing systems is important because native speakers of a language acquire the four universals naturally, whereas literacy usually needs to be taught. Linguist Stephen Pinker (2007) says succinctly, “Language is an instinct, but reading is not” (p. 14). If reading and writing were universal and inevitable, all languages would have a writing system, but we know



Big Ideas and Research 7

that many societies, including some in existence for centuries, did not. The Mississippian peoples living in the Cahokia region of Illinois around 1050 c.e., for example, created complex dwellings, a system of trade, games, many tools, and fine works of art, but they never developed a writing system (Seppa, 1997). In fact, some current languages do not have a writing system. Because reading and writing are not inevitable, even in a first language, it’s no wonder that considerable energy and effort are needed to accomplish them in a new language.

Two Developing Systems and the Syndrome of Success As ELLs undertake the grand adventure of becoming literate in a new language, two large-scale, long-term processes are going on at the same time. One is acquiring or learning the new language, and the other is achieving literacy in it. The two processes overlap and interact in complex ways over a period of years. We like to think of their successful dual achievement as a kind of “syndrome.” A syndrome is customarily thought of as a group of factors that characterize a disease or disorder. However, we’d like to reframe it to describe a positive pattern, which we will call a syndrome of success, a synergy in which seemingly disconnected factors, working in combination, make success likely. Because a syndrome of success for literacy in a new language includes complex factors and because there is a great deal of individual variation, researchers do not know all of the necessary ingredients, nor their proportions. However, we do know that a certain number of characteristics need to be “in the mix” and that some cannot be missing. Let’s look first at some key features of the syndrome of success for L1 literacy. It is not a short list! It includes: proficient listening comprehension, phonological and phonemic awareness, oral language production, the concept of word, sound–­symbol matching (phonics), word recognition, the ability to construct meaning from print, fluent decoding, reading fluency, some knowledge of morphology, vocabulary knowledge, an understanding of punctuation, the ability to spell, awareness of the diverse purposes of print, writing for a variety of purposes, and more. All of these same L1 literacy features need to be developed in order to acquire literacy in a new language. Some aspects of these features can be learned in our L1 and positively applied to the L2. Other features are unique to a particular language, or language-­specific. We fully discuss this concept in Chapter 2. Even with that exhaustive list, many more features make up literacy success. In particular, the ability to integrate prior knowledge into our new knowledge is a key skill for learning and benefiting from literacy (­Filderman, Austin, & Boucher, 2021). Background knowledge is acquired not just in school

8

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

but through lived experiences. The kinds of experiences children have in their homes, including interactions with family members and their communities—­ taking part in cultural practices, sleeping and eating, concepts of wellness, time, work, friendship, and travel, and even knowledge of plants and animals—­a re foundational. These days, a great deal of background knowledge is also acquired through media, which penetrate our lives in many forms. After accounting for all of these ways, both direct and digital, we want to make sure to highlight the fact that a great deal of background knowledge is obtained by reading itself. This makes literacy recursive—the more we read, the better we get at it, and the more enjoyable it gets, the more we want to read so that, as our reading gets more efficient, our background knowledge achieved through reading increases as well. We might call it a “virtuous cycle.” Teachers of students who are becoming literate in a new language need special understandings of the strategies and skills ELLs need to learn, and these special skills can be considered part of the ESL teacher’s “toolkit.” We have sketched some of them in Table 1.1.

English as a New Language: Four Expanded Domains and the Fifth Domain The language learning field identifies four large domains involved in learning a new language: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. As multimodal TABLE 1.1. ESL Teacher Toolkit

• Knowing the conventions of school and schooling • Finding ways to work with families • Honoring and including home languages • Honoring and including home cultures • Paying greater attention to students’ oral language development • Understanding L1 influence in phonology • Structuring opportunities to practice speaking in many genres • Understanding development of English decoding with knowledge of L1 decoding practices

• Helping students develop an extensive vocabulary • Providing more scaffolding and greater practice time for writing • Demonstrating explicit modeling, especially for writing • Understanding L1 influence in spelling development • Modeling and practicing appropriate and effective language in

many different settings



Big Ideas and Research 9

literacies enter the education field, the four domains have expanded, so that reading might also include comprehending environmental print such as signs, a photograph, a video, or an interactive graph, sometimes called “viewing” (McAndrews, 2020); writing now encompasses drawing or sketching, using speech to text, or creating a visual timeline, sometimes called “visually representing” (McAndrews, 2020). Language can now be practiced through the fine arts, visual media, online platforms, performance, and many other forms or modes. A multimodal text consists of two or more modes that combine to create meaning. Examples of multimodal texts are slide shows, lyric videos, digital stories, cartoons, video games, or spoken poetry. Now that these modes are available for teachers and students to show what they know in a variety of ways, the idea of separate language domains seems out of date. Listening, speaking, reading, and writing used to be considered the more or less expected order of SLA, and language learning curricula were based on this model. In fact, at least in terms of focus, this book maintains a similar order. However, although the order in which modes are introduced and practiced may differ, any well-­structured program for English language acquisition will include all four domains. These, in turn, can be contextualized within the three areas of Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning—­ learning language, learning about language, and learning through language. In the classroom setting, educators of ELLs will probably alternate between focusing on one domain or skill and giving students multimodal activities across several domains. Each of the four language domains has many small subskills, such as differentiating the meaning of a word that sounds like another word or being able to guess the next word or supply the missing word in a sentence. For example, proficient English speakers know that the missing word in “a box    crayons” is of. A more advanced learner can know that in the sentence “Either my sister     my brother will call me tonight,” the missing word is or. Mastering so many small skills is less tedious and more fun now that there are so many ways to learn. The pedagogical approach that favors mixing smaller skills into a framework of larger, meaning-­based activities is called balanced literacy. We adopt that approach in chapters to come.

The Fifth Domain: Communicative Competence In addition to the four domains, we present a fifth domain: communicative competence. It can be considered both a product of the other four and a contributor to them (Hymes, 1981). Communicative competence can be described as “the ability to know when, where, and how to use language in a variety of contexts or situations” (Rothenberg & Fisher, 2007, p. 38). People

10

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

exercise communicative competence every day in innumerable ways, through word choices, vocal intonations, body language, and gestures. We also demonstrate it through the complex, socially constructed rules that guide our conversations and interactions. Because communicative competence in a new language takes a long time to develop, it should be included in the curriculum. When language is used in authentic situations, it also increases communicative competence in a natural, recursive way. For example, when students hear their teacher say “Way to go!”, they notice the teacher’s facial expression and remember the context. They mentally ask themselves such questions as “What do we say or do that makes the teacher say that? Is it a phrase only the teacher can use? Can I use it with my friends? Could I also use it sarcastically?” We have provided a chart at the end of this chapter, Appendix 1.1, as a way to think about ways to include the five domains and Halliday’s three functions in your lesson planning. The chart can be used in the classroom or in your longer curriculum planning, as a kind of quick check.

Language‑Centered Factors Influencing Second‑Language Acquisition What kinds of forces and factors contribute to gaining proficiency in a new language? Research converges on several key factors, which we briefly discuss here.

The Input Hypothesis and Comprehensible Input Learners need sufficient exposure to a language, at a manageable level, to acquire it. The influential researcher Stephen Krashen (1985) named this concept the input hypothesis, one of the six hypotheses in his SLA theory. It posits that people acquire a new language similarly to the way they acquire their native language, as long as they are exposed to enormous amounts of language, which Krashen calls “input,” that is delivered at a level at or near to the current proficiency level of the learner. Krashen uses the term comprehensible input to describe language delivered at a level at which the learner can understand most of it. We all create comprehensible input intuitively when we modify our speech for a specific listener. For example, we speak “baby talk” with an infant (or a companion animal), using gestures and exaggerated intonation to get across our meanings (this is also called motherese or caretaker speech). Also, input is modified for us! When we travel to places whose languages we don’t speak, guides or “locals” may add gestures or throw in a few words of English to help us. And those of us who are not proficient in new digital tools



Big Ideas and Research 11

and apps may also require comprehensible input to make use of new digital apps and processes. As teachers, we also modify our language to support ELL students as they move through several levels of proficiency. Other ways people make input comprehensible include simplifying words, repeating words or phrases, speaking more slowly or clearly, breaking speech into smaller units, using enhanced stress or intonation, adding facial features or gestures, or adding visual images. As learners gain proficiency, the level of comprehensible input becomes more advanced as well. When learners access large amounts of input from several domains of language at their level of comprehensible input, all other things being equal, they will acquire or learn it. However, even when the language is comprehensible and there’s enough of it, language acquisition requires one more thing: an authentic communicative purpose—­it needs to be meaningful and relevant. The input hypothesis and the concept of comprehensible input have been enormously influential in the ESL field. Both concepts have affected the development of all successful ESL, English as a foreign language (EFL), bilingual, dual-­language, and multilingual programs. We now look at the output hypothesis.

The Output Hypothesis Language learners need opportunities to not only be exposed to spoken and written language but also to interact with it. Swain’s (2005) output hypothesis attempts to address this. Swain noticed that Canadian L1 English speakers in bilingual education programs, despite being immersed all day in French language instruction over many years, did not speak and write French at the same level as their L1 French-­speaking counterparts. The school “input” was the same in quantity and quality; the missing piece was the “output.” L1 English speakers were not being motivated or pushed to use French meaningfully, resulting in a lack of communicative competence. Swain reasoned that learners needed abundant opportunities to create language in situations that mattered to them, and she coined the term comprehensible output. Comprehensible output in the classroom takes place through contact with a more competent other, such as a teacher or conversation partner, in interactive situations (Swain, 2000, 2005, p. 478). This important addition to comprehensible input is embedded in classroom techniques such as small-group work, instructional conversation, and project-­based learning. Comprehensible input describes the conditions for learning that are most likely to influence listening and reading, whereas comprehensible output helps account for the development of speaking and writing. Input and output constantly interact, however, and communicative competence is the overriding goal, no matter which processes are in play at the time.

12

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Systemic Functional Linguistics One more influential approach is that of systemic functional linguistics (SFL, or “the functional approach”). It is an outgrowth of Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning and ties into the concept of communicative competence. Functional linguists believe that “language users make choices based on their linguistic repertoires and these choices are related to the situations they participate in” (Achugar, Schleppegrell, & Oteiza, 2007, p.  12). Functional linguists unpack the ways language users engage with many different communities for many different functions. For example, the language we use in the presence of our immediate family is very different from the language we might use at the gym, in a repair shop, with a help desk, or gaming with a friend. Proficient language users, in their L1, L2, or beyond, learn to interact nimbly with a wide range of language communities.

Nonlinguistic Influences on SLA Many nonlinguistic factors influence success in learning a new language, and we highlight three we consider to be very important.

The Affective Filter Affect, or emotional state, is closely associated with language learning outcomes. Krashen has called the emotional aspects that influence language learning the affective filter (Krashen, 1982). Krashen made lowering the affective filter one of the key hypotheses in his SLA theory. Stated briefly, he says “the lower the level of anxiety, the better the language acquisition” (Krashen, 1987, p. 39). The teacher plays an important role in lowering the affective filter of his or her students by creating a welcoming, comfortable, and friendly environment in the classroom. Creating conditions that lower the affective filter will allow the students to acquire their additional language in a way similar to how they acquired their first language (Peregoy & Boyle, 2005; Freeman & Freeman, 2004). Learners’ attitudes about the role of the new language in their intersecting identities, prior educational experiences, sense of themselves as learners, and many other factors influence the affective filter.

Motivation The purposes that motivate a person to learn a new language are also at the forefront of language success and can be grouped into four different categories: integrative motivation, instrumental motivation (Gardner & Lambert, 1972), assimilative motivation, and intrinsic motivation. Integrative motivation



Big Ideas and Research 13

is the motivation a person feels when he or she wants to join a community. Voluntary immigrants are historically those most interested in integrating into their new environment, and this has an effect on the way they will pursue language learning. Instrumental motivation refers to when a person needs to learn a language for a specific purpose, such as entering an occupation or profession, passing a test, or functioning alongside others. This applies especially to people in English-­medium settings, such as pilots and air traffic controllers, help desks and information technology staff, YouTubers, Web designers, and international students. When individuals wish to merge their identity with a target group (Richard-­A mato, 2010), they are exhibiting assimilative motivation. Learners with assimilative motivation want to construct a new personal identity along with the new language and, for a variety of reasons, are less interested in maintaining their L1 heritage, language, and culture. This group of learners fits in with the “melting pot” idea in which everyone “melts” into a single national, religious, or language identity, whereas learners with integrative motivation fit into the “salad bowl” concept, willing to mix with but not “melt” into another culture. A fourth kind of motivation, identified less often but surely relevant to the language learning discipline, is intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975). People with this motivation have great curiosity to learn about something and, by doing so, to learn new things. They might strive to learn a new language, or anything else, for that matter, simply because they consider it enjoyable. Many of us in the language learning and teaching profession have strong intrinsic motivation to study languages and find it captivating. Many scientists, including linguists, are also noteworthy for this disposition, interest, and talent. In addition, motivation from the educational setting must always be counted. The way teachers design and present content has a measurable effect on the motivation and success of ELLs (Guilloteaux & Dornei, 2008) and all students.

Resilience Resilience, sometimes dubbed grit, describes a person’s ability to persevere amidst obstacles. In research about the differences between resilient and nonresilient students, looking specifically at fourth- and fifth-grade Spanish-­ speaking ELLs, Padrón, Waxman, Powers, and Brown (2002) found that resilient learners stayed on task more of the time in class, had higher satisfaction with their classes and a better self-image, got in trouble less, and had better relationships with their teachers. Significantly, resilient learners also used more metacognitive strategies while reading, and they did not consider reading to be their hardest subject. The researchers also found that more interactive teacher strategies helped build resilience.

14

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Padrón et al. (2002) suggest the following ways that teachers can build resilience in the classroom:

• Offering students opportunities to develop close relationships in the classroom;

• Increasing students’ sense of mastery in their lives; • Building social competencies in addition to academic skills; • Reducing stress; • Finding and generating school and community resources to serve the learners’ needs.

Instructional Models for Language Teaching and Learning Across time and distance, there have been many approaches and methods to teaching new languages, and instructional models have developed according to the strengths of each approach (we use the terms approach and method interchangeably in this section). We divide these into two basic groups: (1)  methods used in English as a foreign language (EFL) and English as a lingua franca (ELF) settings, in which English is not the dominant language; and (2) methods used in settings in which English is the dominant language (ESL, sheltered instruction, bilingual education, or dual language), with varying amounts of home-­language support. These summaries are necessarily brief, and there are many fine and detailed descriptions in books and articles about learning and teaching languages (e.g., Center for Applied Linguistics; ColorinColorado.org). Our goal here is to help you recognize the model in which you have learned, have taught, or will teach and to ensure that it has the necessary ingredients for student success.

EFL and ELF English continues to be taught in many countries around the world, and English as a new language is studied more than any other language in the world. In fact, in our global village, English has become the lingua franca used as a common language between those from many different languages. A lingua franca allows people to cross tribal, regional, religious, and national boundaries—­even though it often comes with a colonial legacy. We will see that the methods used to teach EFL in the past were mainly two models, grammar translation and the audiolingual method, whereas a newer method, communicative language teaching (CLT), is used now for both EFL and ELF. All three of these methods are still in use for teaching English as a lingua franca. Historically, the dominant methods for EFL were the grammar translation method and the audiolingual method, along with the more recent CLT.



Big Ideas and Research 15

The grammar translation method has been used for centuries. It required L1 literacy, focusing on the reading and writing domains, with no instruction in listening or speaking. A grammar translation lesson consists of reading and translating portions of text from one’s first language into the new language and vice versa. Once learners understand the specific grammar rules embedded in the reading passages, they are expected to generalize from it to begin reading and writing in the target language. Usually, the teacher introduces a portion of text in the new language and explains specific grammar rules embedded in the passage. Students might be given a list of vocabulary words and phrases to facilitate their reading. In Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning, this can be classified as “learning about language.” The grammar translation approach is used today for religious studies or for advanced degree seekers in certain academic disciplines. Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and Sanskrit might be taught with this method. Grammar translation may become obsolete as AI translation software becomes better and better, but as a linguistic exercise for highly motivated students, it can be satisfying. In the audiolingual method (ALM), listening and speaking take precedence over reading and writing. This is reflected in its title—“audio” representing listening, and “lingual” representing speaking, the two oral domains of language learning. It is just about the opposite of the grammar translation approach. The initial impetus for ALM in the United States was the push to develop fluent speakers of the world’s languages for national defense purposes. Audiolingualism is still used in the United States to prepare volunteers for the Peace Corps and for diplomatic and other international assignments. ALM activities form a part of many independent language academies and language-­learning programs such as Duolingo and Babbel. Traditionally, an ALM lesson consisted of listening to and repeating dialogues with the teacher and other students and practicing sentences through oral drills based on the dialogues. ALM practice used to occur in a language lab but now takes place through individualized practice, often from language learning apps while on the go. Grammar rules are learned through dialogues, which are memorized, and there is a strong emphasis on correct pronunciation by imitating the speaker. Reading is not a focus of audiolingualism and is not generally introduced until the third year of study. ALM can be considered “learning language” in Halliday’s theory. Although the dialogues contain some short phrases or “chunks,” it doesn’t encourage learners to create their own unique utterances. ALM lacks the natural interactions found in a language community. CLT puts the fifth domain, communicative competence, at center stage and is widely used in EFL contexts. Researchers (e.g., Canale & Swain, 1980; Savignon, 1983) recognized that traditional language teaching methods did not promote the social functions of language or meaning making within a speech community.

16

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

CLT is student-­centered, with the primary goal of authentic and natural language use achieved by role plays and discussions. Although reading and writing occur along with oral practice, they are seen as a means to a larger end. Teachers might include written sources such as menus, signage, texting, or games, along with songs and skits. Grammar is introduced in the service of enhancing communication; the goal is always successful communication. CLT is widely used in EFL settings and is also practiced in the American world language classroom. CLT, like ALM, focuses on Halliday’s function of “learning language,” but, unlike ALM, it is considered within a social context.

ESL and English in English‑Dominant Countries In countries in which English is the dominant language, whether it is the official language or widely spoken and taught in schools, content-­based instruction (CBI) has become a principal method for teaching English as a new language. Following Halliday’s paradigm, CBI involves “learning through language” in all the content areas. Although content-­based instruction might also be found in settings in which English is not the dominant language, it is more likely to be fully developed in settings such as the United States, where public schools are conducted overwhelmingly in English. In ESL settings, CBI can be found in several variations: in all-­English “enhanced” programs, called sheltered instruction; in bilingual programs that provide varying amounts of native language instruction; or in dual-­language programs, in which some content language may be taught in the home language, in English, or both. In a sense, CBI unifies all of the other approaches because it can work inside or outside an English-­dominant setting and it can use English only, a home language, or some combination of languages. CBI (Chamot & O’Malley, 1986) is important because it allows young people to keep up with grade-level content as they are learning English—­ there’s no time to wait. In addition to subject matter, students in ESL or bilingual programs need to be able to use language to perform procedural tasks related to school, such as listening to directions and taking standardized tests. CBI is now the primary instructional approach for teaching ELL students, whether in a dual-­language, bilingual, or sheltered context. The central idea of CBI is to provide many avenues of support for teaching content and language. Sheltered instruction sets clearly defined language and content goals. This is done by means of an enriched curriculum, supplementary materials, flexible grouping options, authentic materials (not materials written to practice grammar), technology enrichment, and classroom-­ based assessments. For too long, it was assumed that ELLs would naturally acquire the academic language that native speakers in schools are expected to possess, but all too often, this was not the case. Now, all teachers, whether



Big Ideas and Research 17

they are ESL, bilingual, dual-­language, or content teachers, are becoming knowledgeable about sheltering strategies and techniques. By the way, these same techniques also help with monolingual speakers of English! Sheltering can occur at every age and grade level, in age-­appropriate ways, and a sheltered classroom is often used as a transitional year between bilingual education and immersion into classrooms with native English-­speaking students. The “language side” includes learning the forms of English (grammar), learning its functions, and becoming fluent in a wide range of spoken and written tasks. Learners need exposure not only to social English and academic English, but also to the language of general academic operations, such as the procedural language of school. Of course, social English is part of CLT, too, but CBI and sheltered instruction make content and language their explicit goals. The “content side” includes learning the specific vocabulary of each unit of the curriculum in each of the content areas (e.g., learning the names of laboratory equipment in science, such as “beaker” and “pipette”), as well as the content knowledge itself. The content vocabulary may be found not only in textbooks and lectures but also in classroom interactions, such as a teacher modeling a think-­a loud involved in solving a math problem, as well as in print and online materials such as video clips and podcasts. The content-­ based approach can be considered “learning through language” in Halliday’s theory (see Figure 1.1). When using the content-­based method, it’s important to continue to include the other two aspects, learning language and learning about language, in order to provide a balanced approach. In the past, teachers believed that introducing individual content vocabulary about an academic topic would meet the needs of language learners, whether they were native speakers or ELLs. However, the missing ingredient for ELLs was accounting for the language used in procedures needed in order to perform the academic tasks. For example, third-grade ELLs learning about dinosaurs need two kinds of vocabulary. They need to learn the words to understand dinosaur species, their habitats, and the geological time periods in which dinosaurs lived, but they also need academic language to demonstrate their understanding of the content, such as “Give reasons for and explain why the dinosaurs became extinct” or “Include supporting details about dinosaur habitats” or “In a single paragraph, summarize what you have learned about brachiosaurus.” These complex academic operations require explicit teaching and practice. The content-­based approach recognizes that the academic language demands are just as important as the study of the content itself. In fact, learning these academic language strategies can transfer to the study of new content in other disciplines. For example, if a learner knows how to use a graphic organizer to represent the ways that modern birds possess the characteristics of theropod dinosaurs, that learner can use the same kind of

18

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

graphic organizer to list the ways that Charlotte the spider and Wilbur the pig show friendship in the classic text Charlotte’s Web (White, 1952). CBI is standards-­based, and the standards mirror the grade-level expectations for native English-­speaking children in each subject area. The best-known sheltered model is the sheltered instruction observation protocol (SIOP) (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2018), which is research-­tested and offers eight major principles with subtopics; its accompanying strategies aim to build students’ language skills while learning grade-level content. SIOP involves intensive teacher training and has been successfully implemented in many school districts. It’s also important for CBI programs to provide adequate time for ELLs to engage in daily oral language activities that develop social skills and allow time for classroom friendships and a sense of community to unfold. Many techniques and strategies of sheltered instruction are included in the section “Research into Effective Teaching Strategies for ELLs” later in the chapter.

Vygotsky’s Influence on Second‑Language Learning Both Krashen’s and Swain’s hypotheses include the assumption that students’ L2 proficiency increases when they engage in activities that will move them to a higher proficiency level. Therefore, they benefit from authentic opportunities to connect with a language user at a level just above their own current one. Their theories mesh nicely with those of Lev Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist whose works were largely unknown during his own lifetime but are now influential with language researchers, child psychologists, and educators. Vygotsky contributed two important ideas to the field of SLA. One of these ideas is his characterization of learning as being socially constructed (Vygotsky, 1978). Our social interactions and the language we use to perform them provide us with the mental tools that allow us to learn. School settings are places where “socially organized events” occur, so they are important venues for our language growth, which, in turn, is the basis of our cognitive growth. These interactions take place during schooling, family time, work, and play. The other idea is Vygotsky’s concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD; Vygotsky, 1978), which he describes as “the discrepancy between a child’s actual mental age and the level he reaches in solving problems with assistance” (Vygotsky, 1986, p. 187). Vygotsky described an effective learning setting as one in which the learner has multiple opportunities to grow within that zone. The teacher’s role might be viewed as something like “collaborative coaching in the zone.” Research on effective second-­language instruction



Big Ideas and Research 19

supports Vygotsky’s idea that ELLs thrive when they engage in instructional conversation, or engaging students in teacher-­guided discussion (Tharp et al., 2003; Waxman & Téllez, 2002). It is now well accepted that students make great progress with assistance from a near peer or “expert other.” The concept of ZPD acknowledges the dynamic process of learning and the importance of flexible grouping and differentiating instruction among learners within a classroom. In the same classroom, students may not be in the same ZPD, especially where language and literacy are concerned. After all, no two people are alike, and no two language learners are ever at exactly the same stage. Therefore, pairing students in a dynamic arrangement can touch many at the place where they currently are. I visualize learning a new language “in the zone” by imagining an atoll becoming a new island in the South Pacific. The island forms as more and more material is pushed up from below and becomes rich island soil. Following the metaphor, as we learn more language, more material is added to the rich soil, and that in turn increases the base. After a while, there is enough to stand on, and things begin to grow. In time, you might have enough space to live upon.—­K ristin

Challenging the Deficit View As we discuss best practices for building proficiency in English as a new language, we want to be sure to address the hidden assumptions beneath the idea that English, or one form of English, is better than a student’s home language or dialect. This assumption reflects the deficit view, which has been identified and critiqued by many scholars studying learners from diverse backgrounds (e.g., Eller, 1989; Flores & Rosa, 2015; Labov, 1972; Lakoff, 1973) and has, unfortunately, only recently begun to be rooted out of the ESL/EFL profession. The deficit view is the idea that children enter school with various “deficits,” such as their families’ socioeconomic levels, interactional practices, parental education levels, or, all too often, nonstandard home dialects. As a result, the role of the school—­a nd the teacher—­has been to frame student language “as in need of correction” (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 166). The role of the school is to correct the “deficits.” Sociolinguists have demonstrated that family and community languages have strengths of their own and that educators need to recognize language resources children already have in order to further develop them (Heath, 2012). Children’s home languages and dialects should be seen as resources and assets that demonstrate their cultural identity, prior knowledge, and communicative competence. Having covered the major instructional models for learning English as a new language, we would be remiss not to mention the method—­or better said, “non-­method”—of immersion. This consists of dropping ELL children into

20

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

an all-­English classroom with no support or accommodations. It was used for new immigrants to the United States when immigration was at its peak (1880–1920). Using the thin rationale that immersion could be compared to an infant being surrounded by her or his native language, it has been proven to be highly negative to the identities of its young victims. Children who are immersed often receive neither comprehensible input nor a low affective filter, both prerequisites for second-­language acquisition. Immersing a child without consideration of his or her socioemotional needs is tantamount to erasing the child’s identity. Although this “method” fails, the immersion method is, sadly, still found in some private and rural schools, or when a family declines services for their child. One of us had such an experience: I was first immersed into French at age 8 while living in my small town in West Africa. There were over 100 kids in the classroom, and we were not allowed to use our mother tongues to communicate among ourselves. If you were caught speaking your language, you got punished and you had to wear the jaw of an animal hung around your neck, like a “scarlet letter,” and everyone would make fun of you. On the first day of school, we went home for lunch at noon, and I told my parents I didn’t want to go back because I was traumatized. My parents didn’t want to hear it, so they whipped me and forcefully returned me to school. They told the teacher I didn’t want to study. The teacher in turn gave me another whipping, and they all told me that my place was in school, and I must learn in French. That’s one of the reasons I studied linguistics, so that my mother tongue could be taught too.—Tenena Although it is true that immersion can work for some learners, especially very young children in a natural setting, it has serious problems. First, one’s first language is a resource that can inform and improve upon second-­ language study. Why not use it? “It’s like asking a person to dance with one hand tied behind his or her back,” said one of our students. Second, not allowing children to use their home language can have negative consequences for their identity and sense of well-being, as illustrated poignantly in Tenena’s account. When children believe that the very words they use at home are of lesser value than the language they must speak in school, it creates a powerful negative message. It also makes children think there is no place for them in school. A second-­grade bilingual Spanish teacher in a district that offers bilingual education cites another example: I work with a little girl who is completely ashamed of speaking Spanish. When I do Spanish interventions, she laughs and giggles. She purposely mispronounces words even if I know she knows the correct way. It saddens me to see that she is so ashamed to speak such a beautiful language.—Leticia Cortes



Big Ideas and Research 21

Research into Effective Teaching Strategies for ELLs In the past, research about best practices for teaching ELLs was spotty. Most of the research had been—and still is—­conducted on adults in academic settings, but far less was known about how children who speak a language other than English at home could achieve biliteracy and academic success. However, research about best teaching practices for ELLs has grown in recent years. A number of metastudies (which look for trends and commonalities across individual research studies) inform best practices about student achievement. One comprehensive study is Hattie’s Visible Learning (2009), which looks at hundreds of studies about teacher practices and student learning. Hattie finds strong positive impacts on student learning when teachers use metacognitive strategies, direct instruction, peer tutoring, formative feedback, and, the most powerful effect, when teachers believe in their own self-­ efficacy (see also Tschannen-­Moran & Hoy, 2001). When you lie in bed at night thinking about what could have been improved upon in a lesson, this doesn’t make you a poor educator, but a good one. Once we understand and accept the direct effect we have on learners’ lives, our journey of teacher efficacy begins, adapting our pedagogy, implementing new technologies, maybe next year teaching a different grade level or subject, always trying to reach every student. When we realize that, like our students, we too are lifelong learners, the rewards begin.— Gareth In metastudies pertaining directly to ELLs (e.g., August & Shanahan, 2006; Gersten & Baker, 2000; Gersten et al., 2007; Téllez & Waxman, 2006; Tharp et al., 2003; Waxman & Téllez, 2002; Williams et al., 2007), several characteristics emerge:

• Collaborative learning communities. ELLs thrive in cooperative learning and small-group settings. Such settings lower the affective filter, give more opportunities to practice language, and provide motivation to use language for authentic communicative purposes. • Multiple representations of content. ELLs benefit when they have several points of entry into content, including the use of visual images, audio files, videos, movies, and art forms such as music. Multimodal learning confirms that if one method of presenting material doesn’t make sense, another one may. • Building on prior knowledge. When learners activate their prior knowledge before engaging in any kind of academic activity, it’s easier for them to connect with many topic areas and respond positively. Students often have more extensive prior knowledge than teachers realize; it’s just a matter of giving students opportunities for it to unfold.

22

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

• Daily instructional conversation. Extended daily instructional conversation both with peers and with the teacher fosters ELL academic growth. This dialogue should be daily and protracted. Téllez and Waxman (2006) found that “keeping the conversation going” (p. 261) as learners advance through school results in increased achievement among ELLs. • Culturally responsive instruction. Like any students, ELLs need to see themselves and their home languages, cultures, and identities reflected in the curriculum. Although this is widely understood, many classrooms and schools have still not taken up the challenge to fully embrace and affirm ELL children’s lived experiences. • Technology-­integrated instruction. Technology is central to the landscape for teaching ELLs. Programs, websites, and apps allow students to work at their own pace and on their own lessons and allow differentiation in mixedlevel and mixed-­language classrooms. We devote Chapter 11 to this topic. • Challenging curriculum. When teachers are busily preparing lessons for ELLs at different English-­proficiency levels, it’s easy for them to become inadvertent “enablers.” ELL students, like any students, can meet and exceed standards. Historically, ELL students were often wrongly placed in special education or remedial classes simply because they spoke a different language (Kanno & Kangas, 2014), and they were underrepresented in gifted programs. Like all students, ELL students will reflect a wide range of talents, abilities, and interests, and they deserve opportunities to reach the highest standards. In fact, multilingualism and multiliteracy can be considered a kind of giftedness because of the clear cognitive benefits that come from regularly using more than one language (Dorner, Orellana, & Li-­Grining, 2007). • Strong and explicit vocabulary development. Vocabulary development in both oral and written forms is at the core of all academic learning for ELLs. Students need to master the language of all of their content areas and to experience using new words and concepts in many ways and on many occasions. A study of fourth-­grade ELLs in Canada who were classified as either strong or weak English readers (Xiao & Hu, 2019) looked for pedagogical factors that were common to the strong readers and missing with the weak readers. After inputting descriptions from detailed teacher questionnaires, the researchers used artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze the data and come up with an “optimal feature set of pedagogic factors” (p. 7). They found the following factors in order of importance:  1. Providing reading materials that match the students’ interests.  2. Teaching students strategies for decoding sounds and words.



Big Ideas and Research 23

 3. Describing the style or structure of the text they have read.  4. Determining the author’s perspective or intention.  5. Making generalizations and drawing inferences based on what they have read.  6. Teaching or modeling skimming or scanning strategies.  7. Having a class size of less than 20.  8. Linking new content to students’ prior knowledge.  9. Encouraging student discussions of text. 10. Using longer fiction books with chapters. Except for #7, teachers have quite a bit of control over these conditions. (By the way, the findings specified that some of these had to be done every day, whereas decoding—#2—could not be done more than three times a week or its value declined.) It is important for teachers to see themselves as capable, powerful, valuable, and effective. Teacher efficacy, a teacher’s confidence in her or his ability to guide students to success, is directly tied to student success (Hattie, 2009). As Jackson and Davis (2000, cited in Padrón et al., 2002, p. 14) put it, “ ‘teachers cannot come to expect more of their students until they come to expect more of their own capacity to teach them.’ ” We hope to help you build your teacher efficacy as we introduce you to important linguistics and literacy knowledge in the chapters to come.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? The following four items are general reminders of ideas presented early in the chapter. After those, we provide brief classroom ideas addressing the best practices reviewed in the chapter. We share many more techniques in the chapters to come.

Planning in the Five Domains ELLs need daily experience using all five domains, both separately and in combination. Ask yourself, “Is each student in the class taking part in listening, speaking, reading, writing, and communicative activities every day?”

Providing Comprehensible Input The key word here is comprehensible. A person can be in the presence of a radio or TV in which another language is spoken all day and call it language “input,” but that doesn’t mean it’s comprehensible! What makes

24

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

input comprehensible? Here are some of the ways: by breaking language up into smaller chunks, using visuals, providing repetition, simplifying language, adding captions, increasing expressive language, activating background knowledge, and checking comprehension regularly.

Pushing Output Pushing output describes a student-­centered approach with less teacher talk and more pair work and small-group talk among students. Teachers can make sure desks and chairs are in pods rather than rows, experiment with flexible grouping so learners have many opportunities to interact, create cross-class and cross-grade visits and projects, invite guests into the classroom, and encourage student creative expression.

Lowering the Affective Filter It’s possible to create a learning environment that is at once comforting, nurturing, and challenging. One teacher reports, “The atmosphere in my high school ESL class improved a lot when I dropped the closed-­ book tests and quizzes.” In the area of assessments, we can give students choices about ways of responding, allow sufficient wait time for students to formulate answers, allow first-­language use, and provide opportunities for students to work in pairs or small groups instead of presenting to the entire class. Here’s a reminder from a preschool teacher who is a former ELL student: I remember when I was an ELL student, I was never comfortable to start a conversation, but when my teacher paired me with someone to work with, that helped me open up and start talking more.—­Jasna Sehovic Laughter, games, songs, skits, and brain teasers are also winners. Culturally aware celebrations and parties also help to build community and contribute to an ambience that encourages resilience. Invite families, caregivers, and friendly school staff to be part of the classroom community.

Ideas about Implementing Activities on Research‑Based Best Practices

• Collaborative learning communities. Students can design projects together through project-­based learning, literature circles, group science experiments, performances, interviews, debates, and more. In classes of



Big Ideas and Research 25

mixed ELLs and native speakers, it works well when teachers structure activities so that the ELL students have a specific role to competently perform—­in some cases, this is better decided by the teacher than the students in the group. As an example, one child can draw a picture of a butterfly garden as another child in the group writes a description of it.

• Multiple representations of content. Audio and video sources can easily be brought in. Realia, which consists of real-life artifacts, can enhance any lesson. Ask students what they can bring in from home to illustrate a lesson. Realia might include bringing in a pair of knitting needles on the day you read a picture book featuring knitting, showing labels on clothing to collectively decode washing instructions, or looking at the fiber content of a snack during a health unit. Formative assessments can also ask students to represent content in various ways, through labeling, drawing, filling in graphic organizers, or creating their own visual products, including collages, photo essays, or posters. • Building on prior knowledge. Coaxing out prior knowledge before beginning a new unit or book is part of any good lesson. However, don’t forget that prior knowledge also means reviewing the previous day’s lesson or the lesson from the previous week. The review helps students embed the new language and concepts into their memory. • Daily instructional conversation. Daily instructional conversation can include not only reading and writing topics but also procedural topics about classroom activities, such as planning where each student goes during rotating stations, setting up and maintaining a composting area, deciding on and rotating student tasks, or thinking through how to reduce waste or store or highlight student work. Don’t do this for the students—­do it with them! • Culturally responsive instruction. Inviting families and culturally diverse guests into the classroom helps set a welcoming tone. Artifacts from other countries and cultures give children a chance to look at and touch arts and crafts from around the world and encourages them to try to recreate similar items in art class. A good, attractive classroom library of multicultural and multilingual children’s books deepens the exposure. • Technology-­enriched instruction. Digital technology has made colorful and engaging resources available free or through school subscriptions. Short, decodable books can be read alone, in pairs, or chorally, and children can color and otherwise personalize their own copies. Google Images can pull up images of almost anything found in books, making

26

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

it easier for students to visualize them. Videos on every imaginable topic can be found at major sites and through simple searches. More technology ideas can be found in Chapter 11 and throughout the book.

• Creative curriculum. Sometimes we may be so focused on “meeting or exceeding standards” that we overlook the talents and capabilities within our own classrooms. While students are still expanding their English, you can set up projects that require a lot of thinking, conversation, and problem solving. Making a class movie together, creating a mural, writing a skit, building a toothpick fortress, creating and executing a service project, or cowriting an alphabet book to go home to families are but a few of the ways you can help students explore their creative and cognitive potential. Instead of dwelling on the language that is still in development, it’s great to look at the creative skills that they already have! • Strong and explicit vocabulary development. There are many ways to “turbocharge” vocabulary learning. Children have the capability to learn thousands of words and phrases, so you can use wordplay and word work in your teaching setting, providing simple explanations of words and repetitions of new words in many different contexts. Students can practice new words in oral and written form, and they can illustrate them, too. Bilingual and multilingual students can learn new meanings of words they know in their L1, L2, or L3 and multiply the possibilities. Create a vocabulary learning system in the classroom so it’s systematic—­ and then venture beyond the system. One of our favorite sites is freerice. com, run by the United Nations’ World Food Program, which donates rice to needy people as each player completes many kinds of vocabulary quizzes. Could you have students play Freerice when they complete a project a few minutes early? Think of the millions of grains your class can donate! There are other online resources, many created by teachers. It is hard to find a profession whose members are more generous with their knowledge than teachers. In addition to sharing teaching tips and techniques, teachers often share and sell original games, quizzes, lessons, units, and other inventions at places like Pinterest, Quizlet, ESL Café, and Teachers Pay Teachers. If you are already in the language teaching field, you probably know other resources. If not, look around (but be cautious about downloading!), and you will not be disappointed.



Big Ideas and Research 27

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Describe ways in which having bilingual or multilingual skills has benefited you or someone you know.  3. What new background knowledge have you learned recently? How did you learn it? How can you use it, if you can?  4. Ngugi-wa Thiong’o declared in 2020, “Monolingualism is the carbon mon‑ oxide of cultures; multilingualism is the oxygen of cultures.” What do you think of this quote?  5. What are some ways that input has been made comprehensible in a teach‑ ing or learning setting with which you are familiar?  6. The chapter mentions that the order of listening, speaking, reading, and writing is usually considered the general order of SLA. In what ways does this reflect, or not reflect, your own experiences as a learner or teacher of languages? Do you think that order makes sense for all language learning purposes? Why or why not?  7. What methods of foreign language study have you been exposed to? How did they work for you? How did the presence or absence of motivation affect your language learning?  8. What tasks in your life have been guided by integrative motivation? Instru‑ mental motivation? Intrinsic motivation?  9. Do you think resilience and intrinsic motivation are determined entirely by environment and upbringing, or are they something some people are born with or without? Discuss. 10. Try to think of a time you have modified your speech or writing to create comprehensible input for someone. What techniques did you use to ensure it was comprehensible? 11. Have you experienced the deficit view, as a learner, a parent, or an educa‑ tor? If so, what did you do about it, if anything? How would you advise oth‑ ers to respond when they see the deficit view at work? 12. If you have access to a classroom setting with ELLs, look at the daily activi‑ ties to see how much time, if any, is devoted to the five domains of listening, speaking, reading, writing, and communicative competence. Do you think the proportion should change for different grade levels? Proficiency lev‑ els? Instructional settings? 13. Building on question 12, try to classify the daily activities according to Halli‑ day’s language-­based theory of learning. How much time is spent teaching language, teaching about language, or teaching through language? How do you think the time allocated for each area might change for different grade

28

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners levels? Instructional settings? From your own experience, which of the functions do you think is most often overlooked in instructional settings?

14. How do you know whether you are introducing children to challenging con‑ tent? What criteria would you use to know this, or whom would you talk to? 15. Of the overview of best practices at the end of the chapter, which do you think are most similar to best practices for native speakers? Least similar? 16. What are some ways one might keep track of the development of commu‑ nicative competence in ELLs? Try to create a rubric or checklist for commu‑ nicative competence development and explain how you decided to include certain skills or competencies. 17. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Look at Appendix 1.1 and create an instructional unit of two or more weeks in length that uses all of the five domains and three functions of language learning. Share your instructional unit with others.

APPENDIX 1.1

Lesson Planning to Include the Five Domains and Three Functions of Language Learning Learning language: Listening Activities

Learning about language: Learning through language:

Learning language: Speaking Activities

Learning about language: Learning through language:

Learning language: Reading Activities

Learning about language: Learning through language:

Learning language: Writing Activities

Learning about language: Learning through language:

Learning language: Communicative Learning about language: Activities Learning through language:

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

29

CHAPTER TWO

First‑Language Influence in Second‑Language Acquisition

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY language acquisition • language learning • contrastive analysis interdependence hypothesis • common underlying proficiency sociocultural theory • translanguaging • code switching linguistic proximity • cognates • transfer • cross‑linguistic influence metalinguistic awareness • bottom‑up skills • top‑down skills threshold theory • basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP)

A

lthough many mysteries remain about how new languages are learned, we now understand quite a bit. It doesn’t take a book like ours to convince you that learning a new language is not a matter of starting from scratch. The influential Russian educator Lev Vygotsky wrote that our first language serves as “an already established system of meanings” (1986, p. 197). Some of those meanings can be extended directly and indirectly to a new language, but others are embedded within the structure of a specific language. Let’s begin our discussion of first-­language (L1) influence on second-language acquisition (SLA) with a few keywords used in studying SLA and brief definitions of their concepts. These keywords are consistent in the field and can benefit our overall understanding of SLA research (Chen, 2018, p. 19). 30



First‑Language Influence 31

Language as an Innate Human Endowment As described in Chapter One, the influential linguist Noam Chomsky proposed that language acquisition is innate, universal, and automatic, a uniquely human endowment (Chomsky, 1964, 1965, 1972). Infants are born with the inborn capacity to acquire the language of their language community. But what about an additional language? Can that also be acquired by being part of a speech community, and if so, by what age? Linguists who focused on teaching second languages found both similarities and big differences in how we go about acquiring a first language and learning a new one. It was Stephen Krashen who, in 1982, differentiated the effortless part of adding a new language, language acquisition, from the more effortful process he called language learning. From that point on, linguists began to sort out what could be considered second-­language acquisition, something effortless and automatic, from second-­language learning, which was more purposeful, conscious, and usually academic. This, in turn, led Cummins to the key concepts of basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP; Cummins, 1979, 1981), which we describe later in this chapter. The natural approach evolved as a widely applied way to try to bring as many of the qualities of first-­language acquisition into second-­language learning as possible (Krashen & Terrell, 1998; Toprak, 2019). At the heart of the approach is the idea that language acquisition only occurs when people hear, read, and understand messages and that, like babies acquiring their first language, growth occurs through communicative activities. Although many aspects of second-­language acquisition are compelling, our focus in this chapter and in this book is on literacy, which is more likely to be learned than acquired naturally, since language is an instinct, but reading and writing are not.

The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis The contrastive analysis (CA) hypothesis emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, when linguists extensively analyzed features shared and not shared among languages in the specialty called structural linguistics. They predicted that learners would make certain kinds of errors according to the characteristics of their first language. CA emerged when behaviorist methods were in vogue, and CA implied that language patterns were a matter of habit formation and could be predicted. As they gathered more research, the linguists found that CA did not explain many phenomena that teachers observed in their students and only accounted for some areas of growth in language proficiency.

32

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

In addition, important research, especially that of Dulay and Burt (1974), revealed that English morphemes, such as -ing or third-­person plural -s/-es, were acquired by learners in a certain predictable order regardless of their first language. CA became less influential as the audiolingual method and behaviorist view declined. However, the “weak form” of the CA hypothesis is widely accepted. The idea that different systems of the L1 have explanatory power for the ways learners acquire a new language is a powerful idea and can help with teaching and learning a new language.

The Interdependence Hypothesis The interdependence hypothesis (Cummins, 1979, 1981) is an influential idea. In examining research about bilingual children in Canada, Cummins (1981) found that L1 literacy closely correlated with L2 literacy, all other things being equal, and he proposed that there is a common underlying proficiency (CUP) between two languages that can help students achieve high levels of biliteracy in PreK–12 settings. The implication of this research, which has been robustly confirmed, is that native language literacy assists L2 literacy. This hypothesis has provided strong support for bilingual education, dual-­ language education, and the value of children’s L1 literacy.

Sociocultural Theory and SFL The field of teaching English as a second language originally focused on teaching English to international college students, adult travelers, and ­ scholars, and it was housed in linguistics departments. Now it is more often housed in education colleges, with a focus on teaching PreK–12 children whose families speak a home language other than English. As educators address the rights to equity and the needs of multicultural children and their families, sociocultural theories have found new relevance for the language teaching field. Despite his untimely death in the 1930s, Lev Vygotsky contributed the enduring notion that social interactions using language form the mind of the child and that interacting with slightly more proficient peers and teachers builds language proficiency (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986). Sociocultural theory (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) and its linguistic application, systemic functional linguistics (SFL), also focus on the social nature of language and the complex ways that people use languages, dialects, and language registers (levels of formality) to live in the world. Here are some of the questions asked by sociocultural and SFL linguists:



First‑Language Influence 33

• What does it mean to say one form of language is “correct” or “incorrect”?

• What kinds of language hold power and authority, and which ones are stigmatized (Bourdieu, 1991)?

• Who has access to the powerful forms and registers of language, and who controls the access?

• What hidden messages are coded into different kinds of speech, writing, and academic standards and the way they are taught in schools?

• How do hidden hierarchies of language perpetuate inequities, both within a language and across languages and dialects?

Translanguaging An influential concept has emerged from these kinds of questions: translanguaging. It can be defined as “the deployment of a speaker’s full linguistic repertoire” (Oteguy, Garcia, & Reid, 2015, p. 281). To understand translanguaging, we might refer back to CUP (Cummins, 1981), the core concept mentioned earlier. Cummins rejected the idea that languages were “housed” in separate parts of the brain, like two sets of dictionaries that sit side by side on the shelf and can’t see each other. He reasoned that different languages had different surface features and codes but that each derived from our brain’s common language-­making capacity. CUP allows us to acquire, store, and use different languages in many ways, with differing levels of formality, intonational patterns, word choices, and more according to our communicative purposes. Translanguaging can be seen as a logical extension of the CUP hypothesis but with a focus on challenging the inequitable power and control privileging some languages over others used by multilingual learners. The term translanguaging was coined in 1994 (Williams, 1994), but the term code switching has been used more often to describe freely drawing upon two languages. Although the practice of code switching is used almost universally in and among multilingual communities, the monolingual bias in previous language teaching implied that code switching served only to “compensate” for missing language by those lacking “balanced bilingualism.” The translanguaging perspective points out that this is a deficit view, in which a bilingual person is always aspiring, but never quite able, to be as good as a monolingual native speaker of a more dominant, higher status language. Multilingual learners know that, in reality, code switching is a creative celebration of the infinitely versatile ways in which speakers exercise their multilingual repertoires. Translanguaging might be seen as an “ensemble” of language resources that are performed both internally, through thoughts, dreams and cultural knowledge, and externally, through their manifestation in speech and writing. Translanguaging recognizes that a bilingual person

34

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

not only uses two or more languages but is able to draw upon and use his or her combined funds of knowledge (Beeman & Urow, 2013; Gonzalez, Moll, & Amanti, 2005; Vogel & Garcia, 2017). In short, in the view of translanguaging the whole [of language knowledge] is greater than the sum of the parts. Of course, people should grow and enlarge their ability to use various language registers and repertoires—­that’s what education is all about! Using widely accepted forms of written and spoken languages is one of the ways we share information and ideas. Instead of stigmatizing multilingualism as a “merely tolerated transition to majority language monolingualism” (MacSwan, 2017, p.  167), we should consider bilingualism and multilingualism as a gift, quite the opposite of a “deficit.” This conceptual reframing affords bilingual language learners “the opportunity to learn and grow while enjoying intellectual and emotional benefits of all of one’s linguistic resources” (Oteguy et al., 2015, p. 305). And let’s not forget that a majority of the world is multilingual! A translanguaging perspective also values dialects, such as African American English (AAE), which is often stigmatized despite its major role in English language innovation and worldwide appeal. New meanings of common words like crib for home, homie for someone growing up near one’s home, bro for brother, and even bad to mean very good are but a small example of the profound influence of African American culture on global English. The new Oxford Dictionary of African American English (2023; https://public.oed.com/ oxford-dictionary-of-african-american-english) will change the landscape for African American English with a comprehensive dictionary of not only meanings, pronunciations, spellings, usage, and etymology of each entry but also real-life examples of AAE in both written and recorded form. Far from being characterized as “broken” or “improper,” AAE will increasingly come to be seen as a source of important language and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1991). Our classrooms should reflect the sense of pride children feel in being part of a globally influential language community. In appropriate settings, teachers can employ translanguaging strategies that set the tone for multilingual learners. This might include invitations to speak freely in one’s L1 with other classmates, including writing assignments that can be completed in one’s L1 and later rendered into English, journaling in one’s L1, and more (Khote, 2018). Dual-­language instructional models have also begun to loosen their positions about using only one language at a time, as the cross-­fertilization is so obviously beneficial.

L2 Reading Models Myriad factors contribute to literacy, and creating a model that accounts for literacy in a new language can be confoundingly difficult. A good L2 literacy



First‑Language Influence 35

model must not only encompass many kinds of languages, on both the L1 and L2 sides of the equation, but must also account for learners of all ages, literacy levels, and living conditions as it factors in individual differences. We have found two models that we consider powerful and useful. Bernhardt’s (2011) revised compensatory model of second-­language reading (Figure 2.1) accounts for several of these complexities. Bernhardt examined research about L2 reading by children, adolescents, and adults from a number of first- and second-­language combinations in order to construct a model that could explain and predict reading proficiency in a new language. In her model, L1 literacy (alphabetics, vocabulary, text structure, beliefs about word and sentence configuration, etc.) accounts for about 20% of second-­language reading proficiency, whereas L2 language knowledge (grammatical forms, vocabulary knowledge, cognates, L1/L2 linguistic distance, etc.) accounts for another 30%. Beyond those two identifiable areas, 50% is “unexplained variance” and consists of comprehension strategies, engagement, content and domain knowledge, interest, motivation, and so forth. “Executive function”

Unexplained variance

Comprehension strategies, Engagement, Content and domain knowledge, Interest, Motivation, etc.

L2 language knowledge

Comprehension

50%

nta o-sy rph Mo

ctic K

nowledge

30%

20% 0

Emerging L1/L2 readers

Grammatical forms, Vocabulary knowledge, Cognates, L1/L2 linguistic distance, etc.

Readers acquiring L2 literacy

L1 literacy

Alphabetics, Vocabulary, Text structure, Beliefs about word and sentence configuration, etc.

Achieving L2 proficiency

Developing Proficiency FIGURE 2.1. A compensatory model of second-­ language reading (revised). From ­Bernhardt (2011). Copyright © 2011 Taylor & Francis. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, a division of Informa plc.

36

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

related to self-­regulation of language use is beginning to emerge as another factor, as brain-based research allows us to examine formerly inaccessible cognitive processes (Duke & Cartwright, 2021). In Chapter 1, we pointed out that many of these variables contribute to the “syndrome of success.” Bernhardt stresses that development within the two known contributors does not have to occur in a fixed order; first-­language literacy development may take place before, during, or after second-­language grammar development, and comprehension strategies or motivational factors can kick in at any time. Also, the model is bidirectional in nature, so that “as literate individuals process their second language in reading, they rely on multiple information sources not a priori determining what is an ‘important’ source but, rather, bringing whichever sources to bear at an appropriate moment” (2011, p. 37). That is why Bernhardt calls her model “compensatory”—­learners draw from their strong areas of literacy to compensate for their weaker areas, and these areas develop and shift over time. Research in dual-­language programs is providing new glimpses into how this interplay develops. Bernhardt represents this reciprocal process by showing a two-way arrow between L1 literacy and L2 proficiency and a longer two-way arrow crossing all of the variables. Grabe (2012) confirms the decisive role of second-­language proficiency: “L2 reading development is not simply the result of L1 transfer. In fact, most issues in L2 reading development can be associated more with the development of L2 language proficiency, L2 language exposure, L2 print exposure, and L2 processing-­skills development” (p. 151). The second model is Birch’s (2015) hypothetical model of the reading process (Figure 2.2). Although it is not designed to specifically describe reading in a new language, you will see how seamlessly Birch’s model addresses second-­ language reading growth. The two large columns of the model represent Processing Strategies, on the left, and Knowledge Base, on the right. Each of these in turn is composed of two sectors. The two parts of the Knowledge Base column are World Knowledge and Language Knowledge. World knowledge, which is often called background knowledge, is general knowledge we acquire by living in the world, and it is not language-­specific. However, language knowledge (sentences, phrases, words, letters, and sounds) is language-­ specific, acquired through both learning and acquisition, and includes literacy. The Processing Strategies column encompasses Cognitive Processing Strategies and Language Processing Strategies. As you can see, the cognitive processing strategies (inferencing, predicting, problem solving, and constructing meaning) are universal in nature. However, the language processing strategies (chunking words into phrases, accessing word meaning, word identification, and letter recognition) are language-­specific. We understand that it is not enough to learn cognitive processing strategies; language processing strategies need to be mastered in order for a person to read or write, and they need to be learned for each language in which someone needs to read or write.



First‑Language Influence 37

Processing Strategies Cognitive Processing Strategies Inferencing Predicting Problem solving Constructing meaning

TEXT Language Processing Strategies Chunking into phrases Accessing word meaning Word identification Letter recognition

Knowledge Base World Knowledge People Places Events Activities

Language Knowledge Sentences Phrases Words Letters Sounds

FIGURE 2.2. A hypothetical model of the reading process with some sample processing strategies and types of knowledge. From Birch (2007), published by Routledge. Copyright © 2007 ­L awrence  Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Reproduced by arrangement with Taylor & Francis Group.

Now let’s look at the Birch model horizontally instead of vertically. If we look across the top of the model, we see Cognitive Processing Strategies and World Knowledge. These are not language-­specific, and they can be activated in many settings, including many that do not involve reading and writing at all. We use cognitive strategies and world knowledge in combination. For example, we might predict whether it’s going to rain by looking at the clouds in the sky and factoring in our background knowledge of the weather at that time of year, or we might gauge our relative’s reaction to our big new idea by noticing her or his facial features and body language as we converse. We need nuanced and complex cognitive strategies to function in the world, and classrooms are one of the primary places in which children exercise and learn those skills. We also use cognitive strategies to set up a classroom procedure for a hands-on science experiment, for instance. Cognitive processing strategies and world knowledge are necessary mental activities for learning. However, they are not sufficient by themselves for reading and writing in any language. Now let’s look at the bottom half of the Birch model. Learners must be able to use the language processing strategies and language knowledge

38

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

for reading to happen. These skills are specific to each particular language, and without them, reading cannot occur. Just like the Bernhardt model, the Birch model is bidirectional, and the areas are porous. Activity in each area informs the others, and all four areas need to be developed. However, what is too often overlooked is that the language processing strategies and language knowledge are indispensable for “cracking the code” of reading. What’s more, these language strategies have to be learned separately for each language. Colleague Leah Miller puts it succinctly: I call the language processing strategies the “dirty little lie about reading.” They look so insignificant, but they are so decisive. Without those language processing strategies, like chunking text into phrases or accessing word meaning, it doesn’t do any good to have the higher order strategies or world knowledge because reading won’t work.—­Leah Miller By treating these four areas of the reading process individually, Birch’s model helps us understand that unless language-­specific skills are learned in a new language, the other universal aspects of language cannot be accessed for reading. In brief, without acquiring the “nitty-­gritty” skills of language knowledge and language processing, the higher order skills just can’t be used. Paolo Freire’s phrase “Read the word so that you can read the world” might be used as a slogan to represent the way language knowledge allows us to unlock our world knowledge (Freire, 1970). In addition to exploring and activating children’s existing world (background) knowledge, teachers can find many ways to create new world knowledge inside and outside the classroom, including field trips, project-­based learning, guest visitors (including family members), and making systematic use of the home language (Beeman & Urow, 2013). Teachers should also note that students’ background knowledge may have cultural dimensions, as can be seen from this example: When I was teaching second grade, I was told to test reading fluency/comprehension with one specific book called the Carrot Seed . . . in my predominantly Latino and African American classroom the page that stumped them each time was a page with what looked like a tree. The page read, “a carrot came up.” but the picture clearly looked like a small tree. It was a picture of the top of the carrot. Well, my kiddos had never seen a whole carrot that way. It completely confused them. So, using pictures for clues, they would read the page “a tree came up.” That lowered their reading score.—­Claudia Lopez Some aspects of L1 literacy contribute to literacy development in a new language, whereas other aspects do not, and figuring out what to include and how to present and practice them is a complex job (Beeman & Urow, 2013; Birch,



First‑Language Influence 39

2015; Koda, 2005; Van Gelderen et al., 2007). For example, learning which English words start with capital letters is language-­specific and does not match the conventions in Spanish or German. However, learning how to make an inference about a character in a novel based on the character’s speech or descriptions of his or her clothing and accessories can occur across many languages. Another influential model of the reading process, first published in 2001, is by Hollis Scarborough; it was originally titled an “illustration of the many strands that are woven together in skilled reading” (Scarborough, 2001, p. 98). Now commonly referred to as “Scarborough’s Reading Rope,” it is widely referenced. Although, as in Birch’s model, the reading rope does not specifically address multilingual learners, it demonstrates the need for both language processing strategies and cognitive processing strategies to work in combination for reading comprehension to occur. Also, the graphic accounts for the need to weave together the different skill areas until they become automatic, which we might refer to as developing fluency (see Chapter 8).

Language Distance or Linguistic Proximity Language distance (Odlin, 2003, p. 443), also called linguistic proximity, can be thought of as an inventory of characteristics two languages share. Language distance is assessed by comparing the phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and communicative competence that are built into different languages. In addition, language distance is influenced by its history, which affects the number of cognates, or words that share roots. Languages that derive from a common origin have greater linguistic proximity. You could almost think of it as sharing DNA in a family tree, as people do when they compare their recent common ancestry. As a general rule, the closer the linguistic proximity, the easier it is for people to learn each other’s languages. Of course, many considerations affect the undertaking, including age, motivation, L1 literacy, culture, and instructional setting. Still, those languages with historically close provenance make some aspects of language learning easier for those learners. French, Spanish, and Italian, for example, are sister languages that share syntactic patterns, sounds, an alphabet, and many cognates. My son volunteered on an organic farm in Switzerland with two guys from Spain and Italy. The Italian guy spoke English and Italian, the Spanish fellow spoke Spanish, Italian, and French, and my son spoke French and English. Each pair had one language in common, and no language was shared by all three. By listening in on the speech of the other two speakers and figuring out unknown words by their similar sounds, along with lively body language, they managed to get along well and do the farming!—­K ristin

40

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

At the same time, languages that are similar can cause confusion when a person is not expecting to find a difference! For example, English and Dutch have some traits in common, including most of their alphabet, but the letter j is pronounced differently. When they are first learning to read and write in English, Dutch children might pronounce a word such as joke with a /y/, like /yowk/, because that is how the letter is pronounced in Dutch. Teachers can help learners notice those differences and provide targeted mini-­lessons. Even with minor discrepancies, however, the common linguistic features of sister languages make them easier to learn. Orthographic distance is a subset of language distance. It describes the degree of similarity between the orthographies, or writing systems, of two languages. Sometimes, two languages use different writing systems, such as Chinese and English, and a learner must learn the new writing system from scratch. In other cases, a common writing system is used for sister languages, such as the Roman alphabet, which is found in the Romance languages of Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Rumanian, and French, and the variations in their alphabets are relatively minor. It takes less time for native speakers of one of those languages to learn to read words in another. However, the Roman alphabet is also used for languages from other language families, such as Swahili, Czech, Vietnamese, Welsh, and Icelandic, which use the Roman alphabet in dramatically different ways. Although they share a basic orthography, they are still orthographically distant because the same letters appear in different combinations and represent different sounds and meanings. Readers from one of those languages would not have much if any benefit in trying to read words in another of them, except perhaps a few items on a menu, even though they share the Roman alphabet. The relationship between the writing systems of two languages can influence how quickly and easily people learn to read and write in a new writing system (more on this in Chapter 4). Spanish and English share 26 letters from the Roman alphabet, and Spanish has one additional letter (ñ) as well as several digraphs (two-­letter combinations that make one sound) that are treated as individual alphabet letters in Spanish (ch, ll, and rr). Because of so many shared letters, it is fairly easy for Spanish ELLs to recognize the letters of the English alphabet. Thai ELLs, on the other hand, use an alphabet that does not share any letters with the English alphabet, so we can expect Thai ELLs to need more time to learn and use the English alphabet.

The Problem with “Transfer” Transfer can be defined as “influence resulting from similarities and differences between the target language and any other language that has been



First‑Language Influence 41

previously acquired” (Myles, 2002, p. 7; Odlin, 1989). We prefer not to use the word transfer for four reasons. First, it is too often assumed that any language skill attained in the first language will be automatically available in the second language as well, but that is not always the case. For example, a study of high school–­age Spanish-­ speaking ELLs who were also proficient in English found that the strategies they used to read in Spanish were not the same as the strategies they used to read in English (Pritchard & O’Hara, 2008). The authors conclude, “We cannot assume that proficient readers (much less struggling readers) will automatically transfer the ability to use those strategies from Spanish to English” (p. 637). The process is neither automatic nor inevitable. The second problem with the word transfer is that it implies a facilitating process, but first-­language reading knowledge doesn’t necessarily make learning to read in English easier, at least not until ELLs master English decoding, or identifying written words. Birch (2015) summarizes it thus: “It is true that transfer may facilitate reading in the L2, but it is equally true that it might interfere” (p. 13). In fact, the written system in the L1 might be a seriously complicating factor for learning to decode in English, at least in the short run. L1 knowledge may be very dependent on features specific to the first language. In Polish, for example, the letter w will be pronounced as /v/, and this Polish-­specific feature does not transfer to English pronunciation. The name Sylwia, for example, is pronounced the same way in Polish and English, as /silviyə/, but the spelling is different. The third problem with the word transfer is that it implies that L1 knowledge is conveyed immediately. Sometimes an area of potential cross-­linguistic influence might lie waiting in the wings, perhaps for years, until it surfaces or can be rendered usable. This issue is discussed in more detail in the upcoming section on the threshold theory. Finally, Ellis (1997) regrets the use of the word transfer for another reason, explaining, “When we transfer money, we move it out of one account and into another, so one account gains and the other loses. However, when language transfer takes place there is usually no loss of L1 knowledge” (p. 54). We want to make sure multilingualism is additive, not subtractive.

Cross‑Linguistic Influence Cross-­linguistic influence can be defined as the action, conscious or unconscious, of applying features of a first language to the learning of a new language, in this case, English (Koda, 2005; Odlin, 2003). In this book we use this term in lieu of the term transfer. We prefer a more global concept that includes not only “corresponding or analogous skills, but also meta-­linguistic or meta-­ cognitive skills that emerge from competence in the first language” (Genesee,

42

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Geva, Dressler, & Kamil, 2006, p. 161). We refer to the facilitating effects of the first language on second-­language literacy as positive cross-­linguistic influence (PCI) and to obstacles to second-­language literacy based on first-­language features as L1 interference. I once had a Chinese student who was always so embarrassed whenever L1 interference occurred. I tried for months to explain to her that it’s OK and normal for her English to be affected by her Chinese! She was continuously critical of herself, until I finally told her that “It’s not that your English is bad—it’s that your Chinese is so good!”—­Gareth Although there are many examples of PCI in action, ironically, it’s often easier to spot L1 interference than PCI. That’s because the interfering feature stands out—it doesn’t look or sound like the target item in the new language. L1 interference is noticeable, whereas PCI is likely to resemble the output of a native speaker. We can think of PCI and L1 interference like traffic rules while driving. We don’t keep track of all the traffic rules we obey perfectly, but when we break a rule, we are very aware of it, especially if it results in a mishap, ticket, or accident. It’s important for teachers to support their learners’ use of new forms even when they are still in development and to notice and celebrate PCI, not only errors caused by L1 interference.

Examples of PCI Literacy experiences in the first language can benefit the acquisition of a new language. Extensive research covers many of the components of reading, including phonological awareness, syntactic awareness, vocabulary know­ ledge, sentence and discourse processing, text structures, and comprehension (e.g., August & Shanahan, 2006; Bernhardt, 2011; Birch, 2015; Grabe, 2012; Grabe & Stoller, 2002; Koda, 2005; Scarborough, 2001). Those of us who have taught or learned another language can probably think of many examples in which our knowledge of one language helped facilitate learning the other. Most of us can think of English words that we can also recognize in spoken or written form in another language. We can easily pronounce the French word sel, for example, because its sounds and letters match with English. If we learn a language that is written from left to right, we can apply our knowledge of the directionality of English without ever giving it a conscious thought. Hausa learners of English are able to easily master the adjective + noun word order of English, as Hausa also places an adjective before a noun. In addition, the influence of English as a worldwide lingua franca has introduced English words into many languages, and these borrowed words, as well as cognates, also aid PCI. Teachers who already know



First‑Language Influence 43

or take the time to find out about the home languages of their learners can increase their learners’ PCI while demonstrating respect for their home languages. In general, the more literacy skills and strategies readers have in their first languages, the more they will have available for use in reading in a new language, so long as they are developed in concert with second-­language proficiency (Beeman & Urow, 2013; Bernhardt, 2011; Grabe, 2012; Koda, 2005). However, many critical steps must be taken in order to become a good reader, and these require explicit, language-­specific instruction in a wide range of skills and strategies.

Examples of L1 Interference L1 interference occurs when structural features of the first language impede acquiring or using a similar feature in the target language. L1 interference is the opposite of PCI. Not all learner errors constitute interference; they may be due to developmental stages of understanding or to individual interpretations of an item that have nothing to do with the first language. L1 interference can occur in many areas, including phonology, sound–­symbol correspondence, vocabulary, and syntax. The following are examples of each of these areas: Phonology When a learner’s L1 doesn’t have some of the sounds of English, it will take extra effort to learn those sounds. The two th sounds of English, for example, are not found in many other languages, including Polish. One of the th sounds, the “soft” or voiced th, might be pronounced with a /d/, such as saying “dis” for the word this, which is formed close in the mouth to that sound. Similarly, the student may pronounce the English word thing as “ting,” as the sound /t/ is formed very close in the mouth to the sound /th/, the “hard” or voiceless th in the word thing. You may notice this in some of your students whose first languages do not include the th sounds. Sound–Symbol Correspondence Conflicting sound–­symbol patterns in two languages can be a source of L1 interference even if the languages share an alphabet, as in the example of the Dutch and English pronunciations of the letter j mentioned previously. L1 interference can also be shown in spelling. ELLs who read and write in their first language may have spelling errors based on spelling patterns in their L1 writing system (Dressler & Kamil, 2006, p.  203). For example, when an L1 Spanish ELL spells the word beat as bit, he or she is indicating that he or

44

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

she knows that the “long-e” vowel sound is spelled with the letter i in Spanish. This very common spelling error of L1 Spanish ELLs differs from the developmental spelling stages of native English speakers (Bear, Templeton, Helman, & Baren, 2003). Vocabulary Shared vocabulary can facilitate learning, but it can also be an area of potential interference. Some words sound or look the same in two languages but have different meanings. These are called false cognates, and they are discussed in Chapter 7. In other cases, two or more words combine differently in different languages, and a word-by-word translation results in a strange utterance. For example, “Tengo veinte años” which means “I’m twenty years old” in Spanish, can be mistranslated as “I have twenty years” in a word-byword translation. That is one of the reasons it has taken digital translation software so long to work well—it isn’t possible to simply put a string of individual words into one side and have accurate translations come out the other! There are also cases in which the words are comprehensible, but the cultural meanings differ in the new language, as can be seen in this story from Tenena’s early days in the United States. I remember asking for the toilet in the museum, and when the man pointed me to a sign for the restroom, I thought the guy didn’t understand what I meant because I wasn’t tired. I imagined there was a couch there where you would go and relax after you had walked around. Even though I knew the words, I didn’t know the cultural connotation of “restroom.”—­Tenena Syntax Word order differs among languages, and trying to construct the same sentence in a new language can create errors. For example, the sentence “The woman who I called her is at work” reflects Arabic word order using English words. Because Arabic doesn’t delete the direct object inside a relative clause the way English does, there is an extra word, her, and it sounds odd to an English speaker. Another example of a word-by-word translation from Spanish is the sentence “No speak English,” which means “I don’t speak English.” Spanish allows the subject pronoun of a sentence to be deleted because we understand the subject by the form of the verb or by context, so the word “I” isn’t needed in Spanish—­a nother example of surface versus deep structure. In addition, Spanish doesn’t use an auxiliary verb to make a negative as we do in English, but puts the word no in front of the verb form, so it makes sense to use the word no in a word-by-word translation into English. The sentence seems correct when translating “No hablo ingles” into English word by word.



First‑Language Influence 45

Non‑Effects Finally, there are features that require attention in one language that are simply irrelevant to another language, which we call non-­effects. For example, Slovak requires learning the placement of diacritical marks, or diacritics, around letters in words to guide pronunciation, such as the three marks in the word dĺž eň, which means “accent mark.” Because English has no diacritical marks, knowing Slovak diacritical marks neither helps nor harms the Slovak ELL learner with English. It is simply part of the learner’s L1 literacy knowledge and as such has positive value. Those of us in the language teaching profession have come to recognize PCI and L1 interference in our students’ language learning and incorporate that knowledge into our lessons. They manifest the weak form of contrastive analysis and should be greeted as a positive feature of L1 literacy. By the way, many multilingual learners are adding English as a third or fourth language, so they will have PCI, L1 interference, and non-­effects from several sources.

Metalinguistic Awareness Facilitates the Study of New Languages Metalinguistic awareness is the ability to bring into consciousness, reflect upon, and/or manipulate the forms and functions of language apart from its meaning (Chaney, 1992; Koda, 2005; Pratt & Grieve, 1984). Here are a dozen examples of metalinguistic awareness skills.  1. Distinguishing real words from non-words.  2. Hearing the phonological error of a mispronounced word and correcting it.  3. Recognizing a foreign accent.  4. Hearing an error in a syntax pattern (word order) and correcting it.  5. Segmenting a spoken phrase into its individual words.  6. Counting the syllables in a word.  7. Playing with words to make jokes.  8. Creating new words or labels for unknown objects or people.  9. Making a mental translation. 10. Recognizing cognates or false cognates. 11. Detecting structural ambiguities in sentences. 12. Alternating (code-­switching) between different registers or dialects of a language. Some aspects of metalinguistic awareness are a natural by-­product of acquiring one’s native language, but others, especially those connected with

46

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

the written word, emerge through schooling. Metalinguistic awareness goes hand in hand with literacy achievement. In several studies, when children were given training or practice in developing metalinguistic awareness, their reading comprehension increased (Carlisle, Beeman, & Shah, 1996; Pratt & Grieve, 1984; Zipke, 2008). The metalinguistic awareness that learners develop in their first language can be a helpful tool in learning a new language. In fact, the very process of learning a new language fosters metalinguistic awareness, as new sounds, spellings, syntactic patterns, and words unfold, each with its own peculiarities. Young children develop metalinguistic awareness before they go to school, through chants, call-and-­response games, jump-rope rhymes, tongue twisters, silly songs, riddles, clapping games, and rhyming chants. These may be played at home, in child care or day care, or with older siblings, neighbors, parents, or caregivers. When children enter school, their metalinguistic awareness moves in the direction of literacy activities, as they learn to hear and sort out sounds and letters; listen to poems, stories, songs, and read-­ alouds; and engage in wordplay and word games. They also learn to understand and tell jokes, such as “knock-knock” jokes (Zipke, 2008): Knock knock! Who’s there? Boo! Boo who? Why are you crying? Popular children’s books, such as the Amelia Bedelia series (Parish, 1963– 2013), the Junie B. Jones series (Park, 1992–2013), Dr. Seuss books, and poems by Shel Silverstein (1974, 1981) and Chris Harris (2018), have many examples of wordplay and quizzical musings about why English is the way it is. For example, Shel Silverstein’s poem “Toucan” begins, “Who can catch a toucan? You can!” (Silverstein, 1974). These kinds of books are very confusing to ELLs at a certain level of proficiency but can later become great sources for amusement and metalinguistic awareness. Many classic children’s books foster metalinguistic awareness, such as Who Says a Dog Goes Bow Wow? (De Zutter, 1993), or books of homophone puns (jokes based on words that have the same sound but different spellings and meanings), such as A Little Pigeon Toad (Gwynne, 1998). ELLs will come to love the funny misinterpretations of idioms and figurative language as their proficiency increases. Wordplay can also be found in the poetry of many young poets, such as the Youth Poet Laureates who are selected every year, including Amanda Gorman, the first Youth Poet Laureate who was chosen in 2017. These gifted young poets often have spoken word recordings full of wise and witty wordplay that can be enjoyed by students and teachers around the United States.



First‑Language Influence 47

Of course, wordplay and metalinguistic awareness can be cultivated in any language both inside and outside the classroom. All it takes is a “playful but purposeful” word-rich environment. As you might guess, metalinguistic awareness helps with SLA, and it also works in favor of learning a third language (Clyne, Hunt, & Isaakidis, 2004). Wilga M. Rivers, a famous pioneer in the field of teaching ESL, learned five languages over time. She decided to keep a daily diary of her study of Spanish, her sixth language, and her diary is full of fascinating evidence of her highly developed metalinguistic awareness (Rivers, 1981, pp. 500–515). Vygotsky (1986) pointed out that studying a foreign language also deepens our understanding of our first language. “A foreign language facilitates mastering the higher forms of the native language,” he says. “The child learns to see his language as one particular system among many, to view its phenomena under more general categories, and this leads to awareness of linguistic operations” (p. 196). Clearly, metalinguistic awareness helps with language learning in general because it helps us “learn about language”—the second function in Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning.

Bottom‑Up and Top‑Down Skills Reading is an interactive process (Birch, 2015; Rumelhart, 1977/1994) that takes place between the text, the reader’s processing strategies, and the reader’s background knowledge. To read, we need to master the word-level, bottom-­up skills that allow us to decode connected text. They are represented in the Birch reading model as Language Processing Strategies and Language Knowledge (see Figure 2.2). We also need to learn a large set of strategic reading skills, which are the top-down skills. Readers use these skills in concert with their background knowledge to construct meaning from text. These are represented in Birch’s model as world knowledge and cognitive processing strategies. To summarize, the bottom-­up skills refer to the word identification skills that are required for decoding, and the top-down skills refer to the analytical and cognitive processes that we engage in for reading comprehension. You can’t have one without the other, but as reading comprehension increases, the bottom-­up skills become automatic and unconscious. Eighth-­ grade math teacher N. Small makes an insightful analogy between the bottom-­up and top-down skills in reading and in math: I make a connection of bottom-­up skills and top-down skills to math. The bottomu­ p skills allow students to decode text, like students “decode” basic math facts or understanding the process of basic skills. If you don’t know your basic math facts, it is difficult to solve higher level problems. In teaching math, I have students

48

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

who can do the 8th-grade portion of math but struggle with 4th-/5th-grade skills. Once they master basic facts, 8th-grade math becomes a natural process for them because they can multiply numbers unconsciously.—­N. Small Even proficient monolingual readers encounter many kinds of texts, and from time to time they will need to consciously activate bottom-­up skills in addition to cognitive strategies and background knowledge. The reading field often calls the combination of these strategies “fix-up strategies.” They require making many rapid judgments and keeping words and phrases in working memory as readers form reasonable interpretations about possible meanings. Surprisingly, it is the bottom-­up skills that may cause the greatest hurdles for ELLs, even if they are literate in another language. That occurs because of the effects of L1 interference, as well as the peculiar characteristics of the written system of English, which is discussed in future chapters. Teachers of monolingual English-­speaking children may find this concept counterintuitive. Yet the need for ELLs to master the “nitty gritty” skill of proficient decoding before reading comprehension occurs is one of the big understandings that comes from studying linguistics and its relationship to literacy. Teachers expect L1 English-­speaking children to have the bottom­up skills firmly in place by the end of second grade at the latest, and they provide interventions to make that happen. When ELLs come to school after second grade, it’s common for teachers to assume that their bottom-­up English skills are in place, but this is not necessarily the case. Indeed, ELLs may have these skills in their native language, or they may not. However, even if they do, the bottom-­up skills are language-­specific, and ELL students need to master them at whatever age they come to study English. Furthermore, the details of English word decoding are exceptionally difficult to learn. In summary, even ELLs who are literate in their L1 need to learn to crack two different codes, the written code of their L1 and the written code of English. In addition to the bottom-­up skills that students acquire, the top-down comprehension skills that learners hone over many years of schooling require multistep strategies. These include, but are not limited to, predicting, summarizing, inferencing, ranking, prioritizing, comparing, and so on. Readers who are able to use these reading strategies will enjoy more of the benefits of PCI because these strategies are less language-­specific. For example, if Talia knows how to put historical events into a timeline in Hebrew, her first language, it will be much easier for her to put events into a timeline in English. However, the top-down strategies cannot be fully activated until the lower level, language-­specific processes are in place. In other words, ELLs will not be able to make use of higher level reading strategies that cross languages until they are competent in the lower level skills that are specific to English. The student’s first language also makes a difference in the ease and speed



First‑Language Influence 49

with which the skills will be learned. The bottom-­up skills of English are more difficult for students whose L1 has more linguistic distance from English even if the learners are literate in their first language. This, in a nutshell, is the critical way in which the process of reading in English as a new language differs from learning to read in English as a native speaker. As we look at ways that native language literacy can serve as a strong bridge to the new language, we acquire a more nuanced, less black-and-white view of bottom-­up and top-down skills between languages. Some of the ­bottom-­up features of the new language will match the bottom-­up features of one’s native language, whereas others will not, and reading is easier when structural features of the two languages are similar to one another.

Hypotheses about SLA Literacy In addition to the concept of cross-­linguistic influence, two other concepts are important in understanding literacy in a new language: the threshold theory and the concepts of BICS and CALP.

The Threshold Theory The threshold theory (Alderson, 1984, 2000) asserts that it is second-­language proficiency, not first-­language literacy, that determines whether or not a second-­language learner will become a proficient reader. Alderson’s theory suggests that ELLs need language-­specific skills in the second language, including decoding, grammar, and vocabulary, to be successful readers and that, until a threshold proficiency level has been reached in the new language, the benefits of L1 literacy cannot be fully put to use. According to Grabe (2001), “Few researchers would deny that transfer of literacy skills from the L1 to the L2 occurs, but many researchers believe that positive transfer occurs consistently only after students have had much practice in the L2, have automatized basic L2 language skills, and have been trained to use these potential transfer effects” (p. 32). A summary of reading research from the National Literacy Panel on Language-­Minority Children and Youth confirms this observation. “In general, for students with higher second-­language proficiency, second-­language reading is a function of both second-­language proficiency and first-­language reading ability, whereas students with lower levels of second-­language proficiency are less able to apply their first-­language reading skills to reading in a second language” (August & Shanahan, 2006, p. 65). In a comprehensive study, Fitzgerald (1995) also found that the ways ELL readers use reading comprehension strategies in academic tasks look more and more like the strategies of good L1 English readers as they become more proficient.

50

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Alderson succinctly summarizes: “Second-­language knowledge is more important than first-­language reading abilities” (2000, p.  39). To illustrate with a simple example, even a very skilled reader of English, no matter how erudite, cannot read in Chinese until he or she learns the Chinese writing system, its syntax, its grammar, its vocabulary, and more. The threshold theory helps us understand the development of reading strategies by emergent bilingual children. As these children advance in their literacy development, their dominant language in different domains will shift at different times. Moll, Estrada, Díaz, and Lopez (1997) found that bilingual Spanish–­English students demonstrated use of comprehension strategies during Spanish reading but used decoding strategies during their English reading. Seen through the lens of the threshold theory, it appears that the students had not reached the needed threshold level in English to be able to use the comprehension strategies they had achieved in Spanish. They were still working on mastering the bottom-­up skills involved in English decoding. Spelling development is another area in which the cross-­linguistic influence evolves over time. Zutell and Allen (1988) found that lower proficiency L1 Spanish ELLs made spelling errors more related to their native language. However, their higher proficiency peers made spelling errors that resembled those of their L1 English peers. Writing proficiency takes much longer to develop in any language, and first-­language writing skill is one of several factors contributing to good writing in a new language. However, strong L2 grammar, strong L1 and L2 vocabulary, and good writing instruction in both languages also boost proficiency (Garcia, 2000; Grabe, 2001, 2012; Yigsaw, 2013). Famed authors such as Joseph Conrad and Vladimir Nabokov created literary masterpieces in English, although English was not their first language, and Lisel Mueller won the Pulitzer Prize for poetry, although her first language was German (Genzlinger, 2020). These writers have added fresh insights to English, such as lines from Lisel Mueller’s (1996) poem “Things”: We gave the clock a face the chair a back the table four stout legs which will never suffer fatigue. These remarkable writers demonstrate that language knowledge, advanced vocabulary, and a creative mind can produce great writing in a new language. A less well-known precursor to the threshold theory is Clarke’s (1980) short- ­circuit hypothesis. Clarke claimed that even successful L1 readers cannot read for comprehension in a new language until they have adequate proficiency in it, and that, until then, their reading process will “short-­circuit.”



First‑Language Influence 51

The difficulty, of course, is figuring out the threshold for learners of different ages and proficiency levels, from different languages, in different language domains, in different content areas, and for different purposes! It can seem like a Rubik’s Cube! Helping each learner reach and surpass her or his threshold to reading comprehension must be the mission of any good ESL, EFL, bilingual, or dual-­language program, and teachers discover best ways to move their students up to those thresholds. Fortunately, the widely implemented WIDA standards for English language development help with that (WIDA Consortium, 2020).

BICS and CALP Among many contributions to the language research and teaching field, Cummins is best known for naming the language phenomena of “BICS” and “CALP,” which created a major new paradigm in the language teaching field. He describes BICS as basic interpersonal communicative skills, also called “conversational language,” and CALP as cognitive academic language proficiency, also called “academic language proficiency” (Cummins, 1979, 1981, 1991). BICS and CALP are key constructs in the field of teaching English as a new language. In his field research, Cummins noticed that young L2 learners often did well in their language classes but had trouble with academic tasks, including reading comprehension, once they entered grade-level classrooms. Similar findings were reported as early as 1976 by Skutnabb-­K angas and ­Toukomaa (1976) with bilingual Finnish children in Sweden and by Pritchard and O’Hara (2008) in research with Spanish-­speaking ELLs in the United States. Cummins hypothesized that there are two distinct forms of language, whose characteristics we have summarized in Figure 2.3. BICS consists of simple English that can be acquired in everyday natural settings, without formal instruction. It may include formulaic expressions, and its verb forms are simple. The context makes the message easy to understand, and the conversation takes place in the “here and now.” This conversational language is also referred to as “playground language,” “social language,” or “survival English.” CALP includes the much larger and more complex academic vocabulary of school. This language, also called academic language, instructional language, or discipline-­specific language, is needed for reading and writing, not only in the language arts, but also in science, mathematics, and the social sciences (Fang, 2008; Zwiers, 2006, 2007, 2008). CALP language becomes more specialized as students are exposed to higher levels of knowledge in different fields; without extensive CALP language proficiency, ELL students will not be college- and career-­ready (Zwiers, 2008) and may not even manage to graduate high school. It uses more tenses and modes, assumes an unseen audience, and conveys its messages with words alone. CALP language does not provide

52

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

BICS (context-rich, social, survival) language has some or all of these characteristics

CALP (academic, expository) language has some or all of these characteristics

Utterances are in fragments or memorized chunks.

Utterances and sentences are long and often contain embedded clauses; word order is varied.

Vocabulary consists of high-frequency words with general meanings.

Vocabulary consists of abstract, subjectrelated content words, often with specialized meanings.

Verb forms are in present tense or progressive aspect.

Verb forms include modal auxiliaries, perfect tenses, and passive voice.

Negative is indicated by the word no.

Correct syntax is developed or developing.

Conversation topics are related to the here and now and are context embedded.

Topics focus on subject content and may be context reduced.

Understanding relies on background knowledge.

Understanding depends on language in addition to background knowledge.

Language tends to be conversational, personal, and egalitarian.

Language tends to be distanced, impersonal, and authoritative.

FIGURE 2.3. Some charactersistics of BICS and CALP.

a great deal of contextual information to aid reading comprehension. However, it is a prerequisite to academic, expository writing because academic writing requires the ability to address an unseen audience. The reason that the concepts of BICS and CALP are so critical in teaching ELLs is that ELLs have often been misjudged to have high language proficiency just because they have developed BICS skills; however, it takes years to attain CALP language at a level comparable to that of native speakers, and it is a long-term process (Thomas & Collier, 2002). CALP is needed in any language, not only in English! A good ESL, EFL, bilingual, or dual-­language program includes ample time to learn both BICS and CALP. One teacher recalls her own situation as a language learner. [As teachers, we expect] students to know how to read because they know how to speak a language, but this is not true. I personally experienced this. I was fluent in Spanish but did not know how to read it or write it. When I went back to Mexico



First‑Language Influence 53

for 3 years, many teachers just couldn’t figure me out. At times they assumed it was laziness because I spoke perfect Spanish but couldn’t read or write it. I failed sixth grade and barely passed the second time.—­Rosario Gomez Consider the vast range of mental and verbal activities that take place in classrooms over the course of each and every school year. In some classrooms, the CALP language will be the language of a lab report; in others, it is the language of oral argumentation; in another, it is the language of math operations or health studies. Even producing a definition of a new word is a kind of CALP language skill because the definition is extracted out of its communicative context. Interestingly, the ability to define words is correlated with ELL reading comprehension achievement (Carlisle et al., 1996). CALP is the language of the content standards, textbooks, standardized tests, literary genres, and even debates and lectures. It is what the curriculum is all about. The concepts of BICS and CALP have been very influential in improving the way ELLs are assessed, placed, and exited from programs, as well as the quality of the programs themselves. Before these ideas became well known, ELLs were often wrongly considered “fluent” on the basis of their BICS alone and placed in grade-level classrooms, only to fail through no fault of their own. Now there is widespread understanding that reading and writing skills take much longer to develop in a new language and that proficiency cannot be judged just on the basis of listening and speaking skills. We now understand the value of building academic language in programs that support a learner’s first language as well. Learners benefit from having opportunities to practice challenging academic content in their first languages. Standardized language proficiency tests for ELLs, such as the ACCESS-­ ELL2.0 test (ACCESS for ELLs, 2023), measure ELL language proficiency in the four domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing on a yearly basis. ELLs are able to exit programs only when they reach a satisfactory level of social and academic English proficiency. Even so, the composite exit scores have been raised more than once in several states, as states found that children needed more time in language and academic support programs and a longer follow-­up period. This development affirms the value of the threshold theory in creating appropriate language policies for ELL students. As we evaluate our own experiences in learning new languages, we can analyze our knowledge of BICS and CALP and clearly see how that knowledge influences what we are able to do in those languages. We have observed some common misunderstandings about the notions of BICS and CALP as we have come to understand them, and we describe them briefly in Table 2.1. Here is an example of how one kindergarten teacher builds CALP in her classroom.

54

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

CALP skills can be incorporated into the listening and speaking aspects of any lesson. I will often rephrase student responses from BICS to CALP orally in conversation and sometimes have students repeat them. Another example is that during attendance I play a role, and students have to respond appropriately to that person. So, today I was the Queen of England, which meant my students could not say “Wuz Up!” to me when I called their names, as they had been doing the day before when I was their big brother. Instead they had to say, “So nice to meet you, Your Majesty.” I also use CALP language during instruction to normalize and TABLE 2.1. Fallacies and Realities about BICS and CALP Fallacy

Reality

BICS is oral and CALP is written.

BICS is usually oral, but could be written, too: it consists of high-frequency words and phrases that are highly contextualized through visual and contextual clues. For example, an illustrated menu could be considered a BICS text even though the items are written down because the words can be easily accessed on the spot. CALP can also be oral, such as a college lecture that requires a listener to carefully follow a topic.

BICS will take care of itself; all attention must be paid to CALP.

If children have learned English as a foreign language in a non-English-speaking country and then immigrate to the United States, they may have acquired some academic English because of the method in which they studied English, but lack conversational English or communicative competence. Older children with strong formal education in their native language will also have more CALP skills to transfer from their L1, but may need help acquiring BICS, especially if they are very selfconscious. It should never be assumed communicative language will take care of itself. If ELLs don’t have conversational abilities in English, they will be isolated from their peers, and school will be an unpleasant experience for them.

Teachers should wait until BICS is in place before beginning CALP.

Exactly the opposite is true. It is never too early to introduce CALP language and skills, even when students are not totally proficient in BICS, and even if they are not fluent decoders. CALP skills can involve oral analysis and listening vocabulary as well as written words.

BICS and CALP transfer automatically between languages.

This book is devoted to laying out some of the complexities of the landscape for developing English reading proficiency. Although some skills can be used automatically or easily in a new language, others are language-specific and require care and conscious attention.



First‑Language Influence 55

familiarize my students with it. For example, in my kindergarten math lessons, we use either the words digit or quantity instead of the generic number, and we say equation rather than number sentence.—­Joanne Lovaglia Although the concepts of BICS and CALP are descriptive and not definitive, they are unquestionably a powerful “shorthand” to help millions of educators understand that social functions take less time to grasp than the complex academic functions of education. Before leaving this topic, we note that the BICS skills are extremely important, too, and should never be taken for granted! Having daily conversational exchanges is indispensable, for very young learners as well as newcomers of any age. Practicing conversational skills, listening to narrative spoken forms, and taking part in problem-­solving strategies form the very foundation of the child’s learning experience and eventual identity (Epstein, 2007; Vygotsky, 1986).

Performance Definitions for ELLs How do we describe what an ELL in grades PreK–12 is able to do at different proficiency levels? This used to be a daunting task, because there were no standards against which to judge performance. As a result, it was impossible to compare the criteria used in one ESL program with another. An “advanced” learner in an ESL or bilingual program, once exited, might still be performing far below grade level in a classroom of native speakers or in a different program of instruction. This situation has changed for the better. The Center for Applied Linguistics, in conjunction with the World Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium, a multistate working group, created PreK–12 language proficiency standards that describe performance definitions for ELLs. These have gone through several meticulous updates and revisions (WIDA Consortium, 2020, 2022a). The summary performance definitions of the six English proficiency levels can be found in Appendix 2.1 at the end of the chapter. The detailed standards focus on the language needed to perform both social and academic tasks in each of the content areas, in each language domain, and in each grade range. The creation of these standards is a major accomplishment for ensuring quality in the English language teaching field. The field of ESL teaching changed dramatically when the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2002 required schools to demonstrate that ELLs were making adequate yearly progress toward English language proficiency. Combined with greater knowledge of how languages are learned, sociocultural theories of language, and a set of academic standards in each discipline, the teaching of ELLs has come of age. Now academic language, often in both the L1 and English, is part of the curriculum, raising multilingual achievement,

56

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

and all three functions of Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning are in use: learning language, learning through language, and learning about language.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? As mentioned in Joanne Lovaglia’s story on pages 54 and 55 of using the “Queen’s English” in kindergarten, using academic language in daily dialogue will help students get accustomed to hearing CALP and using such language in reading and writing. When teachers feel comfortable talking in an academic English register, it gives ELLs repeated exposure to the words they need to know. A teacher might say to young ELLs, “You sang that so well—can we replicate that performance in the assembly later on today?” Replicate is one of the verbs in the formative assessments of the WIDA standards. Reading stories and nonfiction books both aloud and silently is also a natural way to expand academic vocabulary. Books have vastly more vocabulary than even the most eloquent spoken language (Krashen, 2004). To encourage written CALP use, it helps to display CALP vocabulary words in the room and to provide encouragement and support when students try to use them.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. How would you appraise your own metalinguistic awareness? What are some examples of it? Do you think that there is an optimal age at which to develop this awareness? If possible, discuss it with a partner.  3. As a learner or teacher, have you had any experience with code switching or translanguaging? What have you noticed?  4. Try to find three examples of PCI, three examples of L1 interference, and three examples of non-­effect from your own language teaching or foreign language study. Which examples were easiest for you to find?  5. Look at the examples of metalinguistic awareness in the chapter (p.  45). Which of them do you think can be introduced at lower levels of English pro‑ ficiency, and why? Which ones might require a higher level of proficiency or a higher grade level? What ways can you think of to build metalinguistic awareness in your teaching setting?  6. Sometimes ELLs who come to the United States or Canada in mid- or late



First‑Language Influence 57 adolescence have strong CALP skills in their L1, but lack any English BICS. Think of some ways to build BICS skills for these older students.  7. Lesson plans often account for CALP skills in the domains of reading and writing. What ways can you think of to support building CALP skills in listen‑ ing and speaking?  8. Thinking about the language(s) you have studied or acquired, evaluate your own BICS and CALP skills in them. Using the instructional models intro‑ duced in Chapter 1 (pp. 14–18) what kinds of teaching methods do you think encourage the development of BICS? of CALP?  9. When we understand that a first language can be stronger, or weaker, than the new language at different times in each separate domain, how can ESL instructors incorporate some of the understandings of the threshold the‑ ory when creating assessments for ELLs? 10. What successful experiences have you observed or taken part in that treat children’s home languages as a resource? 11. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Look closely at the compensatory model (Figure 2.1, p. 35) and create a classroom scenario for a specific unit of study in which L1 literacy, L2 proficiency, and unknown factors interact with each other in a dynamic way.

APPENDIX 2.1

Performance Definitions for the Levels of English Language Proficiency At the given level of English language proficiency, ELLs will process, understand, produce, or use: • specialized or technical language reflective of the content areas at grade level 6—Reaching

• a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in extended oral or written discourse as required by the specified grade level • oral or written communication in English comparable to proficient English peers • specialized or technical language of the content areas

5—Bridging

• a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in extended oral or written discourse, including stories, essays, or reports • oral or written language approaching comparability to that of proficient English peers when presented with grade-level material • specific and some technical language of the content areas • a variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in oral discourse or multiple related sentences or paragraphs

4—Expanding

• oral or written language with minimal phonological, syntactic, or semantic errors that do not impede the overall meaning of the communication when presented with oral or written connected discourse with sensory, graphic, or interactive support • general and some specific language of the content areas • expanded sentences in oral interaction or written paragraphs

3—Developing

• oral or written language with phonological, syntactic, or semantic errors that may impede the communication, but retain much of its meaning, when presented with oral or written, narrative, or expository descriptions with sensory, graphic, or interactive support • general language related to the content areas • phrases or short sentences

2—Beginning

• oral or written language with phonological, syntactic, or semantic errors that often impede the meaning of the communication when presented with one- to multiple-step commands, directions, questions, or a series of statements with sensory, graphic, or interactive support • pictorial or graphic representation of the language of the content areas

1—Entering

• words, phrases, or chunks of language when presented with one-step commands, directions, WH-, choice or yes/no questions, or statements with sensory, graphic, or interactive support

Note. From WIDA Consortium (2022b). Reprinted by permission.

58

CHAPTER THREE

ELL Oracy Listening Comprehension and Oral Language Development

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY oracy • listening comprehension • oral text • phonological awareness onset • rime • phoneme segmentation • concept of word • stress patterns contrastive stress • intonation patterns • paralinguistic features probabilistic reasoning • auding • gist • simple view of reading instructional conversation • silent period • dictation/dictado • cloze total physical response • interactive read‑aloud

I

n this chapter we talk about comprehending and using spoken English, which is composed of listening comprehension and oral language production. Together these two skills lay the groundwork for the emergence of reading and writing. Sticht and James (1984) refer to the listening and speaking levels reached by native speakers before they learn to read as their “reading potential” and refer to the combined skills as oracy. They chose the term oracy to serve as a parallel to the term literacy, which had been considered at that time to consist of only reading and writing. To some extent, current views of literacy encompass oracy, which is sometimes referred to as “oral language proficiency,” but we prefer the term oracy because we believe listening skills are too easily overlooked. Students with strong oracy in English are more likely to develop strong literacy levels in English as well. Oracy develops in ELLs in different ways than it does for children acquiring their native language. To explore those ways, we begin with a 59

60

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

discussion of the nature of listening comprehension, how it develops in ELLs, and its role in reading. Next we look at how speaking skills develop in ELLs and how they interact with reading development. Then we look at how teachers can support developing strong ELL oracy in the classroom as a path to literacy and competence in English as a new language. Finally, we share some good teaching ideas for building both listening comprehension and oral proficiency.

Listening Comprehension in English as a New Language The first of the two oracy skills is listening comprehension. Listening is one of the primary modes through which we learn about our world; if listening is weak, overall comprehension suffers. Listening comprehension is the ability to understand spoken language, sometimes called oral text, and, in this case, the spoken language of English. That might seem self-­evident, but it isn’t. The listening comprehension that we acquire more or less unconsciously in our native language, just by being around and interacting with people who speak it, encompasses many different complex skills we don’t even realize we have mastered. Children learn very early on which speech sounds to ignore and which to attend to as they interact with caregivers. All children with normal abilities acquire the set of sounds that make up their native language and will learn to use them—so long as they are exposed to speakers of the language and have opportunities to interact with them. The ability to distinguish the sounds and rhythms of one’s native language occurs in literate and nonliterate societies and is part of the “hard-­wiring” of the human brain. This differentiation process, one of the first critical periods of language acquisition, occurs between 6 and 10 months of age (Conboy & Kuhl, 2011; Pinker, 2007). However, many listening skills are language-­specific and need to be cultivated or taught as part of a bridge to literacy. Following are some of them.

Phonological Awareness Phonological awareness is the ability to recognize the sounds of a language. It is considered one of the most important skills for reading. Young children develop phonological awareness through interacting with caregivers, hearing nursery rhymes, and engaging in wordplay, rhyming games, and songs. When children begin their schooling, at most schools in North America, they will further refine their phonological awareness. By the beginning of kindergarten, the focus of phonological awareness will shift from children recognizing and understanding words they hear to manipulating the sounds in words they are going to learn to read. Children learn to recognize the order

ELL Oracy 61

of sounds within a word gradually, moving from bigger parts of a word to its individual sounds. English-­speaking children gain phonological awareness in developmental steps that lead toward literacy (Caravolas & Bruck, 1993). First, they are able to identify the sounds of a word, beginning with its consonants. Then they manipulate the syllables of a word, often through rhymes. For example, they can recognize that snow rhymes with go in the nursery rhyme “Mary Had a Little Lamb,” and they can learn to supply the missing rhyme. In the next step, after hearing rhyming words, they are able to break down an English syllable into its “onset + rime” pattern. Onsets and rimes are a way of looking at English syllable structure by separating, and then recombining, the onset, or beginning sound(s) of a syllable, and the rime, the rest of the sounds of the syllable. For example, the rime -at can be combined with the onsets of b-, c-, s- to form the words bat, cat, or sat and then the blends br- or fl- to form brat or flat. Analyzing words in this way, children can learn to identify and produce the onsets and rimes in syllables that form words or part of English words. Finally, children learn to manipulate the phonemes, or individual sounds, of a word. For example, they can look at pictures of a cat and a cap, which differ by one phoneme, and point to the picture that matches with the consonant sound they hear. They can also look at pictures for a ship and a sheep and point to the picture that matches with the vowel sound they hear. When children get to the point that they are able to break down the individual phonemes of a word (called segmenting) and put them back together (called blending), they have achieved phoneme segmentation. Phoneme segmentation is considered a crucial step toward learning to read in English. Phonological awareness is one of the strongest predictors of reading comprehension in L1 English-­speaking children and ELL children (Geva, 2006). It is also important in learning to read in other first languages. However, the forms of written languages affect the ways that phonological awareness comes into play in learning to read (more on this in Chapter 4). To summarize, phonological awareness helps ELL learners in three distinct ways: 1. They imitate the sounds and thereby learn to pronounce and use the word. 2. They recognize the word when they hear it because the sequence of sounds is stored in their long-term memory and becomes part of their listening vocabulary. 3. Once they begin to read and write, their phonological awareness, and in particular their ability to do phoneme segmentation, will greatly assist ELLs with decoding, writing, and spelling unknown words in English.

62

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Concept of Word As we acquire a language, we learn to perceive the boundaries between words even though they flow together in spoken form. The ability to distinguish word boundaries within the flowing stream of speech is called concept of word (Morris, 1993). When we hear people animatedly speaking a language we do not know, we hear it as a torrent of connected sounds without form or meaning. However, once we learn a language, we come to know where one word ends and the next begins and how the words taken together have meaning. One of the benefits of literacy in a first language is that the concept of word can be taken for granted in the new language—­a lthough language-­specific word boundaries will have to be learned. Of course, with the preponderance of contractions in English, learners must also figure out that the sounds they hear may represent two words that are contracted into a shortened form, such as I’m representing I + am. Concept of word can also extend to recognizing short phrases, sometimes called language chunks, such as “stand up.”

Stress Patterns Stress patterns are audible differences in how long and how loudly a speaker pronounces a word or group of words. Stress patterns follow a complex set of rules that are part of the deep structure of each language and are known unconsciously to native speakers of the language. Syllable stress rules tell us how to assign stress to individual words, and sentence stress rules tell us how to assign stress to phrases and sentences. Although native speakers pick up these rules as part of their native speaker endowment, ELLs, as you might guess, may need to learn some of these rules explicitly. Word stress rules may also differ in different dialects of English. Syllable Stress As we become proficient in a new language, we learn to recognize the stress patterns of syllables within a word. English is called a stress-­timed language, and every multisyllable English word has a stress pattern. Matching these stress patterns with words is one of the subskills that allows us to understand a spoken word. In addition, some words in English can have more than one stress pattern according to the part of speech they occupy. (When a word is an adjective or part of a compound noun, stress is usually on the first syllable, but when that same word is a verb, its stress usually goes to the second syllable.) For example: Lettuce is in the PROduce section of the store. (Produce is an adjective.) Bees proDUCE honey by pollinating flowers. (Produce is a verb.) or

ELL Oracy 63

I feel conTENT when I’m with my family. (Content is an adjective.) The CONtent of the contract is hard to understand! (Content is a noun.) Phrase and Sentence Stress In English, the content words in a phrase or sentence (the nouns, verbs, adjectives, or adverbs) receive the strong stress, whereas the function words (the prepositions, pronouns, conjunctions, or articles) do not. For example, in this sentence, the stress is on the final content word game. I went to the GAME. Because the last content word of a phrase or sentence is normally stressed, we can teach this as a listening strategy that can help learners even if they miss some of the previous words. When listeners catch strong-­stressed content words in the final position of a sentence, they may be able to capture key points even if the message is degraded somehow. When my class learned the listening comprehension strategy that the last content word of a spoken sentence can serve as a “hook” to the larger meaning of the sentence, one of my ESL students, remembering an idiom we had covered, said excitedly, “In other words, we save the best till last, right?”—­K ristin Contrastive Stress As they learn to recognize the stress patterns of English, proficient listeners will also develop an “ear” for changes to meaning when speakers use irregular stress patterns, called contrastive stress. For example, look at the differences in meaning when the sentence stress changes in this sentence. He hid the KEYS. (answers “What did he do?”—normal stress) HE hid the keys. (answers “Who hid the keys?”—contrastive stress) He HID the keys. (answers “What exactly did he do with the keys?”— contrastive stress) Playing with contrastive stress patterns of a sentence in a classroom is a fun activity to encourage predictions for listening comprehension, whether with ELLs or L1 English speakers.

Intonation Patterns Intonation patterns are vocal changes of pitch that occur in the normal course of speaking. They differ according to many factors, including the speaker’s region, dialect, gender, age, speech community, individual personality, and

64

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

even vocal apparatus. Intonation patterns vary among the dialects of English and are not necessarily shared by native speakers from different regions of the same country. English speakers may have difficulty understanding each other if they are from different regions or use different dialects, due partly to their differing intonation patterns. Part of the skill of listening comprehension is being able to tell that two sentences with the same words can have completely different meanings based solely upon their intonation. For example: The lights went out. (a declarative statement) versus The lights went out? (trying to confirm whether the power went out) In the second sentence, one’s voice rises at the end to signal that it is a “yes/no” question. This is specific to English, but not to all languages, and may need to be taught. Understanding the meanings of intonation patterns is a subtle and complex process, and learners need to learn to pick them up over time. Discerning meanings in intonation is not only a listening skill but also part of communicative competence. Even very good teachers may not be able to predict when examples occur, so they may need to teach intonation patterns on the fly as they come up in class. In particular, many teachers of ELLs note that it is hard to help students identify sarcasm and irony in oral speech. For example, if we say the following sentence with normal intonation, it will give a completely different meaning from when we say it with exaggerated intonation, implying a disappointing outcome. The student followed all the rules. (the outcome was positive) or The student followed all the rules. . . . (but still got in trouble)

Paralinguistic Features Another related ability is knowing the meanings of gestures, body language, and facial expressions that accompany or even substitute for speech. Gestures and body language are not universal; like sounds, spelling patterns, phrases, and syntax, they are specific to language and culture. Paralinguistic features or cues are nonverbal signals made by the human body. Although they are not part of listening comprehension per se, they do contribute significantly to meaning. They are also culturally specific, including such things as table manners and protocols used in greeting people. Robots that were programmed to use iconic hand gestures were able to be understood as well as human speakers, once hand gestures were added

ELL Oracy 65

(Bremner & Leonards, 2016). It’s no wonder that so many fans felt warmly toward Star Wars robot C-3PO, with his polite British intonation and elegant hand gestures. Paralinguistic features work in concert with the oral text to help us understand the meaning of the words. Teaching in Thailand, I often see that body language has cultural dimensions. I used “air quotes” often one semester to signal sarcastic speech, assuming my ELL students understood what I meant. At the end of the semester, a student raised a hand and politely asked why I was “making peace symbols,” and another suggested that it might be “bunny ears!”—­Gareth The WIDA standards help teachers identify the listening comprehension skills needed by learners at various ages and proficiency levels, as discussed in Chapter 2 (Gottlieb, Katz, & Ernst-­Slavit, 2009; WIDA Consortium, 2020, 2022b).

Probabilistic Reasoning Probabilistic reasoning is the cognitive strategy of recognizing patterns and applying that knowledge to predicting “what comes next.” It is developed both consciously and unconsciously and is improved through practice. Probabilistic reasoning (Birch, 2015; Pearl, 2014) helps us learn to recognize patterns and make predictions, part of our human capacity and part of human learning. Perhaps the word algorithm will replace this term, but we like the idea that probabilistic reasoning is still housed within the human brain. Probabilistic reasoning is a core concept that infuses the rest of this book. Probabilistic reasoning comes into play in oracy, as seen in the following three examples. First, we can use probabilistic reasoning in listening comprehension to predict the next word people are going to say. For example, when we hear someone say the words what kind, we know, without consciously realizing it, that the next word will be of because we know that what kind of is a fixed and predictable English phrase. Second, we use probabilistic reasoning to understand the meaning of words using intonation patterns, even if the syntax of the words doesn’t indicate the meaning, such as knowing that “That’s all” can mean “Is that all?” if it’s spoken with rising intonation. Third, we may be able to infer what kind of interaction is taking place through gestures and body language, such as watching a teacher and students when outside the classroom (“looking at his two thumbs up, his smile, and his head nodding, it looks like the teacher is appreciating a student’s performance . . . ”). Body language, hand gestures, and facial expressions come through even if we can’t hear a word. Children learn to read the body language of their teachers even before they can understand the words, and these skills are part of a second-­language learner’s toolkit. As effective teachers of ELLs, we need to unpack and explain assumptions that native speakers make using their

66

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

probabilistic reasoning and include these in our curriculum, while keeping an eye out for biases or hasty generalizations.

The Active Nature of Listening Comprehension Once we understand the components of listening comprehension, we realize why listening is an active process. Like reading, however, it is sometimes wrongly labeled as a “receptive” skill, as if listening were a passive process. If listening didn’t require active engagement, we could understand speech when we weren’t paying any attention to it, as if “by osmosis,” like a plant absorbs and processes sunlight. Remarkably, native speakers of a language are so proficient that they can actually keep track of the topics of some spoken language even when they are not concentrating on it, such as hearing news on an audio device from a different room. Only the most proficient L2 learners have that luxury. Comprehending oral text in a new language requires constant attention—­a nd the process is exhausting (Igoa, 1995)! Active listening is an intense mental workout; it’s no wonder many children listening to a new language all day feel fatigued. It’s even possible that the inattention or behavior problems some ELLs may exhibit are related to listening fatigue. Francisco Jimenez (1997), in the book The Circuit, describes his first attempts to understand spoken English in his first-grade classroom: Miss Scalapino started speaking to the class and I did not understand a word she was saying. The more she spoke, the more anxious I became. By the end of the day, I was very tired of hearing Miss Scalapino talk because the sounds made no sense to me. I thought that perhaps by paying close attention I would begin to understand, but I did not. I only got a headache, and that night, when I went to bed, I heard her voice in my head. For days I got headaches from trying to listen, until I learned a way out. When my head began to hurt, I let my mind wander . . . but when I daydreamed, I continued to look at the teacher and pretend I was paying attention because Papa told me it was disrespectful not to pay attention, especially to grownups. (pp. 17–18)

Auding: A Way to Describe Active Listening Auding is a word coined by Brown (1950) and subsequently adopted by Carver (1981) to describe not just hearing but also active listening. During auding, a person actively constructs meaning from an oral text similarly to the way a reader actively constructs meaning from a written text. Auding does not require literacy, but the two skills develop hand in hand. Auding is an interaction between active listeners and spoken language as listeners rapidly process oral texts through their mental systems. These systems include the listening

ELL Oracy 67

skills presented earlier in this chapter in addition to the listener’s background knowledge, the clarity of the message, and cultural and emotional filters. Moreover, the listening is happening in “real time.” As we perform these complex maneuvers, we hold the message in shortterm memory and later move it in condensed form into long-term memory so that it can be retrieved for future use. In auding, we do not remember the exact form in which a message was conveyed to us, unless there was something very striking about the words or about their delivery. Instead, we remember the main idea, or gist. When we are trying to get the gist of an oral message, we may miss the critical details, due to missing or misunderstanding part of the message. Critical details are even more likely to be missed in a new language, as demonstrated in this anecdote from an ESL teacher traveling in Taipei after studying Chinese. As a newly arrived student in Taipei, I had studied Chinese for only 2 years and had very limited experience listening to normal-­speed speech. In addition, the local accent was different from the accent of the teacher I had primarily studied under. During my first week, I got lost trying to find my college and asked directions of someone on the street. He understood my carefully rehearsed question, which clearly made me sound more capable than I actually was. He gave me rapid directions, which I in turn thought I understood. Unfortunately, the speed of his speech caused me to fail to remember a few essential steps. I got the gist, but for following directions around a city, that just isn’t enough. I ended up far from home, even more lost, and having to sacrifice my very limited funds to take a cab back. I finally found the college the next day, when I made sure to have written directions.—­Janis Mara Michael Although listening for content words is a good strategy, ELLs are likely to hear content words but miss some of the shorter function words (Field, 2008). Those little unstressed words that seem to be merely “details,” such as prepositions, articles, pronouns, and conjunctions, can actually be the pivots for comprehension. Because they are unstressed, they are spoken more quickly and more softly than content words. As we have seen in Janis Michael’s anecdote, a wrong preposition can literally set a person “off in the wrong direction.” Even when an ELL, or learner of any new language, can handle these features with some proficiency, it’s still much harder to make out spoken words in a new language than in one’s L1, especially if the signal is degraded by background noise. Scharenborg and van Os (2019) reviewed research about differences in listening comprehension in a first or an additional language. They found that background noise creates worse interference for listening in an L2 than an L1. They speculate that the greater difficulty of listening in the new language may be due to the listener’s need to account for sounds

68

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

(phonemes) that are not familiar to them. No wonder one of the popular features of the audiolingual method was using headphones in a language lab! When we consider all the complex skills of listening comprehension, think about all the compromised environments in which we are asked to listen and understand, and further realize that these tasks occur in real time and often require an immediate response from the listener, we gain a new appreciation of how remarkable it is that we can process oral language as fast and as well as we do. It’s all the more remarkable when we can do it in a new language.

Similarities between Comprehension in Listening and Reading There are striking similarities between the comprehension processes involved in listening and in reading, as summarized in Table 3.1. Listening involves learning how to make “reasonable interpretations” of an oral text (Brown & Yule, 1983, p. 57) using probabilistic reasoning, and reading involves the same process for a written text. There are other similarities as well. Listening comprehension is borne by the oral text alone and includes all of the content TABLE 3.1. Similarities between the Listening and Reading Processes  1. Both require active construction of meaning, with interaction between the text (oral or written) and the person.  2. For both reading and listening, text is remembered as the “gist,” not as the exact words.  3. Both listening and reading require phonological awareness.  4. Both the reading and listening processes benefit from larger vocabularies.  5. Reading and listening comprehension require having the concept of word (as a unit of meaning that can be manipulated).  6. English has many similar-looking and similar-sounding words, and these can be confusing.  7. Longer words are harder to store, retain, and retrieve from memory.  8. When context is stripped away, comprehension becomes much more difficult.  9. Automaticity facilitates the ability to construct meaning for both listening and reading, and this can be developed. 10. Learners need to become familiar with different genres and what can be expected from the structure of the genres. 11. Listening or reading tasks vary according to different purposes, different texts, and different contexts. 12. Both intensive and extensive practice are needed to improve listening and reading levels. 13. Both listening and reading require knowledge of English syntax patterns in order to make good guesses about what is coming next.

ELL Oracy 69

of a language—­its vocabulary, syntax, meanings—­whereas literacy situates all of that language within a written system. Oracy connects listening, a natural language process, and reading, an unnatural process. The stronger the oracy, the stronger the connections. All of us learn to listen in our native language, and the habit of listening comprehension becomes automatic and unconscious by the time we begin school. Once we begin to learn content in school, however, even native speakers need to develop their auding skills in order to learn new content, and the listening comprehension we take for granted is no longer completely automatic. There are two areas in which all learners must become active listeners in an academic setting: 1.  Increasing listening vocabulary. When we hear new words or words we are not sure about, we need to use probabilistic reasoning to figure out what they mean. Here are three examples from the authors. I heard an official say, “That’s a bunch of malarkey,” and I didn’t know the word. I thought it might be Malachi from the Bible, but it didn’t make sense. I had to ask somebody about it.—­Tenena Even though I know the meaning, I always second guess myself when I hear the word “condone.” When someone says “I don’t condone” I always confuse it with “condemn . . . ”; it seems negative even though it’s positive. . . .—­Gareth When I heard my colleague say, “We have to perform triage,” in a meeting at school, I had no idea what triage meant, but as she continued, I figured out that it must mean to “sort” students. I got it completely from context.—­K ristin These examples show three different strategies we used to disambiguate new words: asking a friend, subvocalizing a word to remember it, and figuring out the word’s meaning from context. 2.  Following sustained academic content. Students need to learn how to actively listen to sustained academic discourse in the classroom. The academic demands of listening to content increase as students move up in school, and they apply to native speakers and ELL students alike. In this distracting digital era, it’s more important than ever to build listening stamina.

ELLs and Listening Vocabulary By the time they start school, native speakers have a large storehouse of listening vocabulary: an estimated 5,000–7,000 words (Grabe & Stoller, 2002). ELLs, however, do not have this listening vocabulary, or storehouse of known English words. Although they have undergone the same universal processes of acquiring their native language that L1 English speakers have, the set of

70

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

words, sounds, and patterns is not the same. Therefore, the features that would allow a smooth bridge from oracy to literacy, such as those in Table 3.1, do not apply to transitioning to reading in a new language because ELLs don’t have the English listening vocabulary yet. Until their English listening vocabulary is well established, the skills that ELLs can import from listening into reading cannot come into play. They simply don’t have the listening vocabulary threshold (Alderson, 1984, 2000) that allows them to recognize words when they begin to read in English. For this very reason, newcomer programs begin with a period of building listening comprehension before introducing any literacy.

The Simple View of Reading The simple view of reading (SVR; Gough & Tunmer, 1986) considers reading comprehension to be the product of listening comprehension and decoding. In the SVR framework, reading comprehension consists of everything that remains when decoding is not a factor, leaving listening comprehension, or what is also called language comprehension. This includes all of the listening skills mentioned earlier in the chapter, one’s listening vocabulary, and probabilistic reasoning. Research supports the idea that listening comprehension is a decisive factor in reading comprehension (e.g., Biemiller, 1999; Dymock, 1993; Garcia & Cain, 2014; Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Stanovich, 1996). In a metastudy examining the relationship between decoding and reading comprehension, Garcia and Cain (2014) found that listening comprehension had a significant positive effect on reading comprehension. They note, “Readers with poor listening comprehension skills are likely to have poor reading comprehension” (p. 76). Royer and Carlo (1991) found that Spanish ELLs’ English listening comprehension, assessed in fifth grade, was one of the strongest predictors of their English reading comprehension in sixth grade. Carlisle and colleagues (1996) documented that English listening comprehension and quality of vocabulary definitions could account for 50% of the variance in reading comprehension scores of teenage Mexican ELLs. Lems (2017) looked at SVR in relation to multilingual learners and found it useful for separating out decoding skills in order to concentrate on listening comprehension skills and their robust relationship to ELL reading comprehension. Duke and Cartwright (2021) suggest that SVR needs to be updated to account for reading difficulties that can arise from causes other than poor decoding or poor listening comprehension. They mention the importance of “self-­regulation” (intentional use of metacognitive skills and strategies) and propose an expanded model called the “active view of reading.” With regard to ELLs, nevertheless, the simple view of reading provides a good reminder of the role of listening comprehension in second language proficiency.

ELL Oracy 71

The Grammar of Oral Language The grammar used in spoken English differs from that of written grammar. Native speakers of a language do not typically use complete sentences when speaking. Spoken language usually uses less specific vocabulary, looser syntax, pronouns instead of nouns, and a lot of ellipses (omitted words that can be understood from background knowledge or context) because the setting and the interaction provide so many clues to meaning. The bumper sticker on a car in Figure 3.1 employs ellipsis. Can you figure out what the missing word is? How do you know? Spoken language also has a large variety of discourse markers, such as conversational fillers and vocal sounds, to help listeners keep track of where a speaker is in the course of an utterance at a particular moment (Brown & Yule, 1983). These vocal fillers, such as “uh huh,” “hmmmm,” or the all-­ purpose word “like,” serve as an informal kind of “oral punctuation.” B ­ razil calls these fillers a “step-by-step assembly of a spoken utterance” (Brazil, 1995, p. 17). Slang and idioms particular to a time and place abound in spoken language. In addition, pronunciation is less precise. Because oral language happens in real time, it can afford to be somewhat fragmentary, as there are other cueing systems available. However, context-­reduced language (Cummins, 1996), such as spoken language exchanged during phone calls or when the other speaker is not visible, lacks the cueing systems that we use to compensate when our auditory comprehension breaks down. Context-­reduced listening tasks can be especially stressful for ELLs, even when their proficiency in other areas is high. Unfortunately, context-­reduced listening tasks are exactly the kinds of tests many adolescent ELL students are asked to take, in which

FIGURE 3.1. Bumper sticker on a car.

72

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

they are given a written or spoken prompt, often timed, and have to record a response, which is evaluated later without any real-life interaction. It is possible that AI-­generated assessments may depersonalize listening assessments even further. Oral language contains many forms. It may be informal BICS language, such as conversation between two friends on a live chat, or more formal, CALP language, such as lectures, in-depth news reports, speeches, or technical trainings. The level of difficulty and the purpose for listening change from task to task, and these changes require flexibility and strategic listening—­both skills that need to be practiced in the classroom. When the spoken language is too hard, beyond the learner’s zone of proximal development (ZPD; Vygotsky, 1986), the input is no longer comprehensible, resulting in mental shutdown and a lack of academic progress. When context cues are reduced, the listening task gets harder because the words alone must carry the meaning. Here is one account by a second-­ grade ESL teacher that captures the nature of the challenge, not only for students and their families but also for their instructors. I speak Spanish, but would by no means call myself bilingual. However, I often have to speak Spanish in my school with both students and parents. If I am called upon to make a phone call in Spanish, I tend to panic because I cannot see the person talking to me and therefore do not have any body language to interpret, or anything visual, for that matter. I also translate for conferences, and by the time the night is over, I am mentally exhausted. And when analyzing why, I think that listening to the parents and making sure I am understanding what exactly they are saying is pretty stressful. And then to translate that to the teachers, then translate back to the parents is really tiring. People can “zone out” while someone is speaking their native language and still get the gist of what they are saying, but to do that in a person’s second language is just not possible.—­Vicki Musial All of these factors—­the fleeting nature of spoken words, the fragmentary nature of oral grammar, the casual pronunciation of words, background noise, idiomatic vocabulary, the different purposes and difficulty levels for listening tasks, and cultural factors—­combine to make ELL listening comprehension challenging. Because listening remains effortful for ELLs for a long time, it is important to practice it often, in manageable amounts and at the appropriate level.

Oral Proficiency in English as a New Language The second component of oracy is oral proficiency, sometimes called the speaking skill. Although being able to speak a language well does confer many

ELL Oracy 73

benefits, oral proficiency in itself doesn’t predict reading proficiency (August, Calderon, & Carlo, 2002; Geva, 2006). For ELLs, reading proficiency is more affected by core decoding skills, which include phonological awareness, letter identification, word recognition, knowledge of English grammar (Bernhardt & Kamil, 1995), vocabulary, and background knowledge. In addition, as we have shown, listening comprehension is not inconsequential. That being said, however, Geva’s (2006) review of research concludes, “having well-­developed oral language proficiency in English is associated with well-­developed reading comprehension skills in English” (p. 135). One way in which oral proficiency boosts reading comprehension is through instructional conversation and interactive dialogue (Saunders & Goldenberg, 1999; Tharp et al., 2003; Waxman & Téllez, 2002). Instructional conversation can be defined as “planned, goal-­d irected conversations on an academic topic between a teacher and a small group of students” (Tharp et al., 2003, para. 6). ELLs need daily opportunities to engage in instructional conversation in English. For example, learners may use instructional conversation to explain the steps of a mathematical process, to express their opinion about a current topic in an informal debate, or to organize a project with their peers that is shared with the rest of the class. Instructional conversation can take place in pairs, in a small group, or in a teacher-­d irected large group, but small groups provide the richest opportunities for students to practice and flex their speaking skills. There are three major benefits to instructional conversation. First, when ELLs engage in probing conversations with near peers and expert others, including teachers, they improve their academic skills by using strategies such as conveying information, discussing, analyzing, inferring, debating, summarizing, evaluating, and synthesizing (Zwiers, 2007). Second, they also build communicative competence by practicing social-­emotional skills, such as taking turns and commenting and expanding on their classmates’ ideas. Finally, instructional conversation provides practice with paralinguistic skills such as vocal intonations and body language. These three aspects can be seen in the Oracy Skills Framework (Mercer, 2014; see Table 3.2), developed and used at the University of Cambridge. As children advance in their grade levels, more and more CALP language is used in the instructional conversation of the classroom. To provide this in a natural way, all teachers, even at the PreK level, can plan ways to engage in instructional conversation in class. It is all too tempting for teachers of ELLs to simplify speech, becoming inadvertent “enablers” of lowered expectations and depriving them of the CALP “workout” they deserve (Zwiers, 2007, p. 107). When teachers finish a sentence for the student, affirm too quickly, or oversimplify, students pay the price. Students benefit most when teachers ask focused questions, provide sufficient wait time (Rowe, 1986), and pay

74

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

TABLE 3.2. Oracy Skills Framework Physical Voice

• Fluency and pace of speech • Tonal variation • Clarity of pronunciation • Voice projection

Body language

• Gesture and posture • Facial expression • Eye contact

Vocabulary

• Appropriate vocabulary choice • Register • Grammar • Structure and organization of talk • Rhetorical techniques (e.g., metaphor, humor, irony,

Linguistic Language variety Structure Rhetorical techniques

mimicry)

Cognitive Content Clarifying and summarizing Self-regulation Reasoning Audience awareness

• Choice of content to convey meaning and intention • Building on the views of others • Seeking information and clarification through questions • Summarizing • Maintaining focus on task • Time management • Giving reasons to support views • Critically examining ideas and views expressed • Taking account of the level of understanding of the audience Social and Emotional

Working with others Listening and responding Confidence in speaking

• Guiding or managing the interaction • Turn taking • Listening actively and responding appropriately • Self-assurance • Liveliness and flair

Note. Adapted from Mercer (2014). Copyright © The Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge. Adapted by permission.



ELL Oracy 75

attention to the thinking process of the students without supplying answers or steering them toward a “correct” answer.

Oral Language Development in ELLs Children learning their first language produce speech in roughly the same order no matter what their native language is: They start with nouns, followed by verbs, then adjectives (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2004). ELLs go through somewhat analogous stages of oral language development, moving from single-­ word production all the way to complex sentences and gradually incorporating their growing unconscious proficiency with English deep structures (Dulay & Burt, 1977; Krashen, 1977). The WIDA standards include descriptions of the stages of oral language with suggested activities for ELLs in different grade bands (Gottlieb et al., 2009; WIDA Consortium, 2020, 2022a). Some ELLs may reach a native-­speaker level in their English BICS in the space of about 3 years (Thomas & Collier, 2002), but this is certainly not a “one size fits all” metric. Development is influenced by factors such as the age at which the learner begins to learn English, L1 oracy and literacy, prior schooling, the presence of English-­speaking siblings, motivation, learning style, and disposition, among many factors. Of course, progress is also greatly affected by teachers and the instructional setting!

The Silent Period: Common but Often Misunderstood One of the phenomena in the stages of oral language development that every teacher of ELLs must be aware of is the preproduction period, called the silent period. Not all ELLs experience this stage, but many do, and it occurs not only with young children but students of any age, especially newcomers, who may have a silent period. During the silent period, which may last as long as a year, the learner is absorbed in listening to spoken English and may not produce any oral language. The silent period is similar to the prespeech period of infants in their native language, but for ELLs, it can occur at any age. Although it may appear on the surface as if no learning is occurring, the silent period is very dynamic. During this period, ELLs are actively gaining knowledge of the sounds and patterns of English, and teachers can have full confidence that intensive learning is taking place. At the same time, while respecting that learners may not be ready to speak, teachers need to continue to actively include and engage such students. Students can be asked to point or gesture, perform motor activities, manipulate objects, act, pantomime, draw, or create something to show what they have understood. Clear speaking and expressive oral reading by

76

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

the teacher are important sources of linguistic modeling for students during this period. Here are two examples from teachers with students in the silent period: I have witnessed an extreme example of the silent period in a seventh-­grade student whose first language was Chinese. She was in an ESL class, and although her father, a bilingual Chinese–­English speaker, went over the English lessons with her every night, she wouldn’t say a word in class. For 9 months she was mute, and the district was getting ready to test her for a learning disability, but then summer came. Although she spoke only Chinese during the summer, she came back the following fall and, after a week in school, was speaking full sentences and carrying on conversations in English, like a native speaker.—­Leah Miller I worked with a student that didn’t speak for a very long time, but she was able to read and comprehend tasks given to her. She was able to write and do written work. We continued to practice words both verbally and nonverbally. She was able to understand my tone and how it implied different outcomes. Then one day she spoke out and she did it with pride. She began talking and sticking up for herself and was able to use tone to help get her point across.—­Christina Bires Teachers need to be extra careful not to mistake a silent period for defiance or “tuning out,” especially when students are adolescents. Teachers might think older newcomers and refugees are resentful or resistant, but this is simply how the silent period might look at the adolescent level. Students at this age need just as much support and patience as children at younger ages receive. It’s important not to leave older children “out of the loop” but to plan ways to include them in activities. In one study, teachers claimed they were allowing an extended silent period for new ELLs, but to observers, “the students seemed neglected” (Mohr & Mohr, 2007, p. 443).

Assessing Oracy Assessing a student’s listening skills is key to his or her academic and social success. Notwithstanding its importance, the listening comprehension level of ELLs is often hard to assess. Because listening comprehension cannot be easily seen, teachers may have a false sense of how much an ELL understands. On the one hand, if students’ oral language has not reached a threshold that allows them to produce connected sentences, they may comprehend but not be able to demonstrate their comprehension verbally. On the other hand, students may signal that they understand even when they don’t because they simply don’t want to call attention to their confusion. Whenever possible, listening assessments should include an opportunity for ELLs to hear the text and the prompt more than once.

ELL Oracy 77

Assessing a student’s speaking skills may seem easier, but it’s important to keep the affective filter low and use frequent formative assessments. Students need adequate processing time when they are being assessed for oral activities. Timed tests may not provide a fair measure of what ELLs may be able to do. Speaking assessment should focus on communicative competence and recognize the developmental nature of oracy.

Oracy Development for School Success Research shows that children who come to school with strong oracy are at an advantage and those with limited oracy are more likely to have difficulty learning to read (Scarborough, 2001; Tracey & Morrow, 2002). Early delays in oracy development can be reflected in low levels of reading comprehension, which in turn can lead to lack of academic success (Biemiller, 1970). Thanks to the natural proclivity of children to acquire language, children who are learning English as a new language can easily develop oral vocabulary. In fact, at least one study has indicated that kindergarten-­age ELLs learned more English vocabulary in a classroom than their English-­only counterparts (Silverman, 2007). Children who speak a home language other than English also benefit from developing strong oracy in their first language because they will bring more vocabulary, background knowledge, listening skills, speaking skills, and self-­confidence to their English-­learning endeavor. For all of these considerations, spending time on helping ELLs develop their oracy to a high level is a key ingredient to their syndrome of success.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Here are intensive and extensive practice activities for listening and speaking and a special section on integrated listening/speaking activities by an expert teacher of young ELL children. We end with a few holistic comments.

Listening Activities Intensive Activities Intensive listening gives students a chance to focus on discrete features of the sounds of English in a controlled setting in which they can hear the oral text more than once and analyze its features and sound combinations. The insights gained from intensive listening can be applied to other listening experiences. Intensive activities can also be embedded within extensive activities.

78

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Four intensive listening activities—dictation, cloze, transcribing, and using closed captions and subtitles—­can help build listening comprehension. Dictation. This is a great technique to practice all the key components of listening comprehension. There are several ways to use dictation. 1.  Choose a set of short sentences and read them aloud, pausing at the phrase and clause breaks as students write them down. As students get better at this, you can increase the length of the sentences as students become proficient at holding more words in their working memory. 2.  Choose a short text to read aloud, saying both the words and the punctuation, and ask students to write down all the words and the punctuation they hear. Repeating the passage several times will increase student success. This is a great way to model written conventions while also practicing listening comprehension. 3.  Use a prerecorded text, preparing stopping places in advance and pausing the audio track. Students can also work on this individually. An advantage of this method is that students can begin to comprehend other English speakers besides their teacher. 4. For math practice, create a dictation for numbers, equations, and expressions. Students can write the dictated math on paper or on the whiteboard. Then they can read back what they wrote, which is a good oral proficiency practice. For all of these variations, students should be encouraged to self-­monitor and self-­correct their work in order to build metalinguistic awareness. The dictado is a widely used technique in Spanish dual-­language or bilingual classrooms that holistically builds word study, including listening comprehension, in Spanish. The passage, which is appropriate to the skill level of the learners, is presented by the teacher on the first day of the week by reading it aloud several times. Students write an initial dictation, and the teacher presents minilessons specific to the passage. During the week, students practice, alone and with others, paying attention to word forms, spelling, and meaning. Students listen to and write the passage one more time at the end of the week (Beeman & Urow, 2013; Escamilla et al., 2014; Urow & Beeman, 2014). Cloze Exercises. Many in the language teaching field use cloze dictations, sometimes called gap fills or fill-in-the-blank activities, to practice listening (Taylor, 1953). In a cloze dictation, some of the words are

ELL Oracy 79

provided, and others are left out. To practice listening comprehension, a teacher can provide a written text in which some of the words are left out and read sentences that include the missing word. Students write the missing word(s) they hear in the blanks. There are many variations of cloze activities, including omitting every seventh word; omitting a certain part of speech, such as adverbs or prepositions; filling in missing words while listening to a song; or focusing on features of pronunciation that might be tricky for ELLs to perceive, such as the sounds of contracted words. For example, in American English, when one word ends with t, such as didn’t, followed by a pronoun that begins with y, such as you, we unconsciously change the sound between the two words into a /ch/ sound, so that didn’t you sounds like /didenchuw/ (in linguistics that process is called assimilation). The same phenomenon occurs when an English word ends with d and is followed by the pronoun you, changing the sound in between the words into a /j/ sound, so that would you sounds like /woojuw/. Once a teacher explains and gives examples, students can practice these assimilations with a cloze exercise. For example, you might give a student this written sentence:            like to sit down? and say, “Would you like to sit down?” The student understands that when he or she hears the sounds /woojuw/, he or she should write the words would and you. Transcribing Lyrics. Transcribing a text while listening to it is really a variation of dictation. The best and most enjoyable texts to transcribe are surely song lyrics. Students already seek out lyrics to their favorite songs online, so this activity may be familiar to them. Choose a song that is age appropriate and slow enough to be transcribed with just a few listens. A simple folk, country, or pop song with a repeating chorus works best. You can split the class into small groups and ask each group to transcribe one verse of the song as they listen. After hearing it twice, each group collaborates to create their verse, and then one member can write it on the board. When all the verses are written on the board, play the song one more time as students check to see whether they need to make any corrections. Finally, supply written copies of the complete lyrics and have students check their work. A tip: If one group has significantly lower listening proficiency, they can be assigned to write the chorus of the song, because the chorus repeats several times. Building listening comprehension through songs is entertaining and motivating and can create great discussions about the themes in songs while also introducing students to singers and songs that may be new to them. Don’t forget—­your students may also have great songs that

80

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

are new to you, too! And, in a dual-­language or bilingual classroom, learners of the other language might choose and transcribe a song in that language, too, and all can check it out together. I have had success using the classic song “Que Sera, Sera,” sung by Doris Day, which I found on YouTube. Everyone loves to sing along and sway in their seats as they sing. The words are easy enough to capture, but there are a couple of tricky little sound combinations that can be useful to teach too.—­ Kristin Using Closed Captions and Subtitles. Using subtitles and captions is a natural way to help students connect the ways words look with the ways they sound. TV shows, movies, and videos now include AI-­generated closed-­captioning options so students can read the English words as they hear them. Videos can also be stopped and replayed to point out specific features. However, be sure the captions or subtitles are the same as the words being spoken, since reading words that are not being spoken makes listening harder, not easier! This multimodal route is an incredible resource for improving listening comprehension. Students are already seeing captioning in their gaming, movies, and other online activities. Closed captioning and subtitles are now a permanent resource for language learning. Extensive Activities Three extensive listening activities—total physical response (TPR), guest speakers, and interactive read-aloud—help students practice getting the gist of an utterance as they develop strategic listening skills in engaging, low-­stress contexts. Total Physical Response. TPR is a widely used ESL teaching technique in which teachers or students act out a word, sentence, or scenario (Asher, 1988) to enhance listening comprehension. It works well for the earliest learners in the silent period who can indicate comprehension through movement. A classic example is that of preschool students performing the song “Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes,” showing they know the part of the body they are singing about by touching it as they sing. Sam Willingmyre uses TPR in her second-­grade math class for the game Geometry Simon Says, a variation of the children’s game Simon Says. Students learn different arm movements that visually represent geometric concepts, such as “line” (both arms extended), “ray” (one arm ends in a fist), and “line segment” (both arms end in fists), among others. After teaching the arm movements, Sam calls out different geometry

ELL Oracy 81

terms at the front of the class. When she precedes them with the phrase “geometry says,” the students must perform the actions, but when the phrase is omitted, students must stand still or they have to sit down. It’s uproariously fun, and it helps students remember abstract geometry concepts using “muscle memory.” Guest Speakers: Live or Virtual. A second way to increase extensive listening is to invite a guest speaker to class, whether in person or virtually. This guest might be an artist, or a chef, or a city worker—­the sky is the limit. Students might prepare questions in advance, or take notes and write a summary later. Teachers can also invite family members to share their talents, occupations, or stories about their own childhoods. This taps into ELL students’ funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). Guest speakers give children a chance to hear different voices and to add to their background knowledge. By the way, writing thank-you notes for the speakers is a very important communicative activity that will both charm the guest and practice the text structure of writing thank-you letters, a nearly lost art, as well as practicing gratitude. Zoom visitors can come into the classroom even from very far away. Many publishers make their children’s book authors available on Zoom, and authors love to talk with children about how the children responded to a book they read. Now a virtual visit is both commonplace and accepted, and it’s a lot less wear and tear on the guest. Interactive Read-Aloud. The third method is a core literacy technique especially effective for learners in the early primary grades. For interactive read-aloud (IR), teachers read a book or a story to children without displaying the written text. IR is usually used with picture books. First, the teacher shows students the title, author, and cover art of the book, and they use probabilistic reasoning to guess what the book might be about. Then the teacher might mention its literary genre, such as biography or mystery. Next, the teacher does a picture walk, turning the pages of the book, as students “read the pictures” and comment on the story. At this point, the teacher expressively reads the story, stopping at key points selected in advance to generate curiosity about the plot or the characters or to make personal connections. After reading it once through, the teacher might ask students to draw or write a response to something in the book. It might be based on a prompt, such as “Draw your favorite part of the book,” followed by sharing their drawing with others in the class. An IR can occur over the better part of a week because the repetition gives ELLs increasing confidence in understanding the storyline, knowing and using the vocabulary, and absorbing the syntax. Samar Abousalem does a 3-day IR with her first-grade ELLs; she addresses the challenge of the 3rd day.

82

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners One challenge that is easy to encounter when using IRs with ELLs is difficulty maintaining students’ interest for very long on the 3rd day. They sometimes feel they’ve answered all the questions they want to answer. For this reason, I caution against spending too much time asking questions. Ask fewer questions, yet strive for questions that require higher-­level thinking. However, therein lies another challenge: finding higher-­level questions that will elicit answers that the students are able to produce. The best solution for this is a well thought out lesson plan so that the two previous days leading up to the 3rd day set the foundation for making deeper connections and inferences. (Lems & Abousalem, 2014, p. 14)

In addition to fostering oracy, IRs build crucial background knowledge of people, places, and events. A 2022 white paper about early learners functioning within two languages (referred to as dual-­language learners or DLLs) summarizes: “For DLLs developing early literacy in English, providing opportunities for oral language practice and building their background knowledge in English are crucial to effecting successful early literacy instruction” (Herrera, Martinez, Olsen, & Soltero, 2022, p. 4). As ELLs hear more stories, they develop a sense of story grammar, the probable sequence of events that a listener or reader can expect over the normal course of a story, and this develops probabilistic reasoning, which they will use later in all of their literacy activities. It is also possible to use informational text for IRs, such as short articles from Time for Kids or articles from NatGeo children’s books. These cultivate world knowledge and environmental awareness. Children benefit from read-­a louds even through eighth grade (Biemiller, 1999; Chall, 1996), and ELLs can benefit from IRs at any grade level. Teachers can also read chapter books aloud all the way up through the grades. Many teachers report that Harry Potter read-­a louds (Rowling, 1997–2016) have been some of the best times they ever spent with their classes. Looking for read-­a louds? Hawaii-­based Read Aloud America publishes an annual list of popular read-­a louds for every age level (Read Aloud America; www.readaloudamerica.org/index.htm), and millions have enjoyed the Jim Trelease Read-Aloud Handbook, now in its 8th edition (Giorgis, 2019). A school librarian will have some great suggestions. Speaking Activities Pronunciation Practice. For adult ELLs or those learning English as a foreign language or lingua franca, there are downloadable apps, like ELSA Speak or the Chinese app Liulishuo, that offer free or paid versions of feedback on pronunciation, using AI. Learners read English sentences aloud and record them into the app, which finds any of their deviations from standard American English. Learners can see their scores, look

ELL Oracy 83

at areas they consistently mispronounce, and practice further. These AI-­powered apps break down pronunciation like the most meticulous linguist—­a nd it includes word and phrase stress and even intonation! For ELLs living within the United States, there is no need for such programs because there are plenty of people to practice English speaking and pronunciation with, but for students learning English as a lingua franca or adult ELLs new to an English-­speaking country who are nervous about their pronunciation, these can be useful resources. Unless it is specific pronunciation practice, all speaking activities are extensive activities and build both speaking and communicative competence. Having them work with a partner or in a small group is the best way to coax ELLs to speak, at least at the beginning or intermediate levels of proficiency. The following three activities can be done in pairs, in a small group, or in the whole class, depending on comfort level: Information Gap. One of the most effective techniques for stimulating student speaking is through information gap activities. One of the students of a pair has some of the information needed, and the other has different information, so they need to formulate sentences and ask specific follow-­up questions to solve a mystery or puzzle. The teamwork is rewarding, and students relish the opportunity to get to know their peers while they solve a puzzle together. Here are three information gaps to promote communicative competence. 1.  Drawing dictation. First, students prepare with pencils and blank paper and are given different pictures to describe to their partners. It is important to remind the students to hide their pictures from view, perhaps behind a book, or covered by a piece of paper. Student A will start describing his or her picture for Student B to draw. While Student B is drawing, Student A can revise statements to improve the accuracy of the drawing if mistakes are seen. Additionally, Student B can ask follow-­up questions to ensure that he or she is correctly mirroring the images his or her partner is describing. For example, the describer might say, “OK, on the left side there is a man. He has glasses and is wearing a T-shirt.” Student B might ask, while drawing, “What kind of glasses? Is he smiling?” Try to choose pictures that are simple yet have enough details to create a variety of sentences, such as a cartoon with actions and objects. Make it clear that the goal of the activity is to practice speaking, not to create a perfect picture. Hilarious results are guaranteed! Search online for the term “drawing dictation” for some great printable images. 2.  Half crosswords. Students, in pairs, are given two sets of the same crossword puzzle, with different words missing. The students find ways to describe the words on their puzzle without saying the word until their

84

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

partner figures out the word and writes it in their puzzle. Usually students take turns after each word, although some may like to finish their entire list before switching roles. Students cannot say the word, give letters as hints, or use a rhyme—they can, however, give examples, opposite meanings, or even make a cloze sentence. For example, if a student has the compound noun “taxi driver” on the list—he or she could say “This is a person who . . . (can’t say drive) . . . uses a car to . . . take people places and . . . you pay them for it. If you are standing on the street, you might hold your hand in the air to hail a. . . . ” The hints continue until Student B guesses the word correctly and writes it down. Then Student B gives hints for his or her next word. You can find examples of “half crosswords” online, where there are two sets of a crossword puzzle, each with half of the words, but it’s also fun to create your own, possibly related to something you’ve been learning about in class. 3.  Twenty Questions. Twenty Questions can be played in pairs, small groups, or as a whole class. The teacher gives a student a word known only to the teacher and student, and the student answers yes/no questions that are asked by the class. A guess counts as a question. If they exceed 20 questions, the game is lost. Games may start by asking, “Is this a person?” “No.” “Is it a place?” “Yes.” Questions become more strategic as they narrow down the field. When played with the whole class, it also requires students to listen to each other and remember previous answers. It’s a great activity when there are 10 minutes left in class, and you, the teacher, can be the one to be quizzed about the secret word. This is one activity that makes it important to listen to one’s classmates to solve the game. Also, because English question formation is incredibly tricky, this is a great way to turn question formation practice into a game. In the Manner of the Word. This is a speaking activity that also involves a bit of theater and paralinguistic cues. It consists of students reading portions of a folktale using prosody and intonation to help identify a secret adverb known only to the student, as classmates try to guess the adverb. First, the teacher might introduce a few obvious adverbs and then write them on index cards. Students take turns pulling out an adverb that nobody else can see. The student then reads a chosen folktale “in the manner of the word” as students try to guess the adverb from their classmate’s tone of voice and body language. For example, when the slip of paper said “loudly,” a student shouted out the first part of Anansi and the Magic Stick (Kimmel, 2002) until his classmates guessed the adverb. It is important to choose adverbs that are easy to act out and not too abstract. Slowly, for example, works better than accusatorily. There are numerous other speaking activities: describing a picture, reviewing a favorite movie or concert, telling about favorites, describing

ELL Oracy 85

morning routines, recounting the antics of a beloved pet. . . . There are numerous ESL/EFL speaking ideas online, and a nimble teacher can also come up with her or his own ideas on the spot. Students experiencing the silent period may join in as active listeners if they are not yet prepared to speak.

For the Youngest Learners Barb Prohaska, a preschool teacher with many ELLs, confirms that children can get very fatigued from listening to tasks that are too long. She has these suggestions for keeping children alert and fresh.

• Working in groups works best when children have a task, such as finding out information and reporting back.

• Giving children an idea of what they are supposed to be listening for is helpful so that they aren’t just listening to listen.

• Playing I Spy with My Little Eye, and building clues to help them home in on what the object is. They may not know all the clues, but some of the clues can help them determine the object. • Making up a short story as students listen and draw the different scenes. I have done this individually and with small groups so they can help each other. This way they are taking part in active listening and making sense of the story. • We do an oral dictation activity in which I begin writing on chart paper a three- or four-word sentence, such as “The rabbit ran.” Then the kids continue adding words as I write, such as “The rabbit ran fast.” “The rabbit ran fast across the green grass.” I prompt the kids to use describing words and stretch out the sentence. We practice this same prompt for a couple of days, and believe it or not, they remember the content of the sentence. • We do a lot of pantomime, too, especially when we do our unit on “feelings.” I know that gestures and body language are not universal, and I see that when I talk to my Chinese ELL students. They are very quiet and frequently look down when I am trying to talk to them. Teachers can support language growth through the kinds of questions they use in class. Although teachers need to check comprehension of important facts, good questions should move from fact-based to those requiring critical thinking. Like other academic skills, the ability to engage with meaningful questions does not happen overnight but has to be practiced until it becomes a habit. Like all students, ELLs need to be held to high academic expectations (Swain, 2005; Zwiers, 2007).

86

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Looking at Halliday’s language-­based theory of learning, how would you apply the three main functions (learning language, learning about lan‑ guage, learning through language) to oracy?  3. Can you think of something someone said to you that you remember exactly, with a great deal of detail? What do you think was so striking about the words? Why do you think we remember some words we hear exactly, but most only for their gist?  4. Have you had any experience, either as a teacher or a language learner, in which someone seemed to understand an “oral text” (something spoken) until it was shown that they did not? What, if anything, were you able to do about it? Describe it.  5. Think of a recent example in which you engaged in instructional conversa‑ tion. With whom did you share it? What were some of its characteristics?  6. With a partner or alone, think of some “meaning-­bearing” gestures and body language you commonly use if you are in a classroom, or which you have seen as a student if you are not. Which ones do you think are indis‑ pensable? Which ones seem culture-­specific? Talk about ways those ges‑ tures could be taught to ELLs.  7. Do you know people who read well but cannot read aloud expressively? Do you think reading aloud expressively is an important skill for teachers, or is it optional? Do certain kinds of teachers need to read expressively more than others?  8. If you are familiar with another ethnic or linguistic culture, can you describe the differences in paralinguistic cues, such as body language, hand ges‑ tures, or facial features of that culture? How might you address those dif‑ ferences in a classroom that includes learners from that culture?  9. Do you think probabilistic reasoning takes place in species other than humans? When forming your position, give examples. 10. We often hear the lyrics of a song but interpret them completely differ‑ ently, changing the meaning of the song to our own skewed interpretation. Do you have any memories of this in your own life? Do you think songs have a “right” or “wrong” meaning? 11. Can you think of any words that you tend to mispronounce? Using some of the linguistics terms we have discussed in this chapter and the previous one, try to analyze what it is that makes these words tricky. 12. When you look at a TV show or movie without sound, what do you catch and what do you wonder about? How does it compare with hearing a TV from another room when you cannot see the picture? Have you ever looked at a TV show or movie in a language you didn’t know, with no subtitles? What can you figure out from the vocal inflections and body language?

ELL Oracy 87 13. Looking at the similarities between the listening and reading processes in Table 3.1 (on p. 68), talk about which similarities between listening and reading you had realized before reading this chapter, and which ones were new to you. Can you think of any others? 14. Look at the Oracy Skills Framework in Table 3.2 (on p. 74). In which areas do you feel you are already strong? In which areas do you feel you could use some improvement? Which areas of the framework do you think are impor‑ tant to learn about in teacher preparation programs, and which are not? 15. Create an example of contrastive stress, using a sentence which can have (at least) three multiple interpretations, and prepare a short lesson about it. 16. What can you bring from your own lived experience, as a listener or speaker of one or more languages, that will encourage, reassure, and embolden your ELLs? How have you been supported to develop your own syndrome of success? How can you pass this on? 17. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Think about ways that a person’s paralinguistic cues, or body language, might reveal as much or more about them than their words. How do we respond when body language and words give mixed messages? Try to design a lesson or set of guidelines to help ELLs develop communicative competence about paralinguistic features and reflect on it.

CHAPTER FOUR

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words in English as a New Language

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY orthography • phonemes • graphemes • word recognition decoding • decodable words • sight words • encoding • phonics reasoning by analogy • alphabetic writing system • syllabic writing system logographic writing system • orthographic transparency shallow orthographies • deep orthographies • opacity orthographic depth hypothesis • word calling

I

n this chapter we discuss how learning to read is influenced by the orthography of the target language, in this case, English. Each written language in the world has an orthography, or writing system, and English uses the Roman alphabet. The way words are represented in the English writing system affects the way everyone, including ELLs, learns to read in English. The experiences ELLs have with the English alphabet can be influenced by the writing system of their first language and its orthographic distance from the English writing system. There are many positive aspects to first-­language literacy, and knowing a writing system is a definite advantage that provides PCI for the learner. However, learning the English writing system can be challenging and is too often overlooked in teaching ELLs. Let’s begin by discussing how native speakers of English learn to recognize words and decode text. 88

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 89

How Word Recognition Occurs in English To read English words, we learn to match their phonemes, or sounds, with their graphemes, or written symbols. When we read in English, we learn to perform several steps very rapidly. First, we identify the first letter(s) of the word and try to find a matching phoneme. Then, working left to right, we quickly “sample” the rest of the graphemes and phonemes of the word. Holding the sounds in our working memory, we recombine them to form a mental representation that we attempt to match with a word from our listening vocabulary or our sight vocabulary. Once that lightning-­fast process occurs, we can access its meaning. Of course, there are other strategies involved if we are reading out loud, if it is not a decodable word, or if we don’t already know the word by sight. Goodman (1970) refers to this complex process as a “psycholinguistic guessing game.” Accessing and recognizing individual words is called word recognition, and accessing and recognizing words in connected text is what we call decoding. There are three broad categories of words in English: those with matching phonemes and graphemes, called fully decodable words, which have simple patterns; words that are decodable using onset and rime when students learn the patterns of onsets and rimes through phonics; and those that have to be memorized as whole words, called sight words. Here are some examples of each: Fully decodable:

get, pan, sun, big

Partially decodable: white, snail, beat, sleep, blank Sight words:

of, certain, build, bought, love

Decoding, phonics, and sight-word recognition are the primary word-­ attack skills for English word recognition. There are good reasons that English word recognition is taught through phonological awareness, decoding, phonics, and whole-word memorization, which will become clear as we proceed through this chapter. The process is different when we want to represent a word in written form, which is called recoding (sometimes referred to as encoding). We retrieve the known word from our listening vocabulary and try to write the letters that represent the sounds of the word, proceeding in order from left to right. Recoding words in English proceeds in three possible ways: by putting letters in order, for fully decodable words; by using reasoning by analogy to write the onset and rime patterns we know; or by writing them from memory, in the case of sight words. Although some of the shortest and most common English words are sight words, overall, the great majority of English words are decodable and

90

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

recodable, either fully or partially. Learning to decode and recode is necessary in order to read and write in English. When learners learn to decode English words, they start with the letter symbols and match them with the sounds, and when they write English words, they start with the sounds and match them with the letter symbols. No matter which side we start from, both processes involve matching the English sound and letter combinations. The skill involved in matching sounds and letter symbols is called phonics. Phonics knowledge requires an understanding of how the English sound and writing systems “map” onto each other. In order to help learners develop phonics skills, teachers need to understand how the phonemes and graphemes of English work together in the English writing system. At the same time, teachers of ELLs also need to appreciate how the orthographies of ELLs’ first languages affect their understanding of English sounds and letters and the skills they will need to acquire to read and write in English. Exploring these similarities and differences is the principal purpose of this chapter. For a native speaker of English, the process of learning to read and write words usually begins before or in kindergarten and continues until it is firmly in place, normally before third grade. This is a lengthy and often laborious process and must be accomplished before the focus can change from “learning to read” to “reading to learn.” Learners of English as a new language need to go through this process just like native speakers do, but the process might occur at any age or grade level, depending on when they begin to learn English. The phonics skills, or “bottom-­up” skills referred to in Chapter 2, are critical to cracking the code for reading and writing English and must be accounted for in any comprehensive instructional program. As Calderon (2006) nicely summarizes, “Whatever the grade level, teachers with ELLs will eventually have students who need instruction in these basic skills, before they can comprehend a text” (p. 131).

Probabilistic Reasoning for Reading We introduced the concept of probabilistic reasoning in Chapter 3 to talk about the advantage native speakers have in figuring out the messages of spoken English. Because they know more words, they will recognize more of them when they are spoken. When probabilistic reasoning is applied to decoding, however, native speakers of English have less of a natural advantage. That’s because English sounds do not predict English spelling patterns with a high degree of consistency, so, in some ways, decoding is more of a level playing field. However, the big advantage for native English speakers is that they have a larger listening vocabulary, so it will help their probabilistic

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 91

reasoning as they try to decode a word they are seeing for the first time. That being said, however, we want to reiterate that learning to read and spell in English is not an easy task for native speakers of English or ELLs. It is a tough job! Even though the relationship between phonemes and graphemes is not consistent in the English writing system, L1 English readers can come to predict that when a consonant or vowel occurs next to certain other letters, it is likely to be pronounced in a specific way. For example, when we see the word pride, even if we don’t know its meaning, we unconsciously compare it to other English words we know, such as side, and say to ourselves, “This word is probably pronounced like side, a word I already know.” This is called reasoning by analogy (Goswami, 2013). Reasoning by analogy is the development of the ability to predict the meaning of unknown items by recognizing their underlying similarity to known items and making a mental leap. As young readers have more experiences with print, they become better and better at predicting what the next letters of a word are likely to be and how they are likely to sound. When we become really proficient readers, we can even compensate for missing letters or missing words if the message is compromised somehow. The game show Wheel of Fortune tests the probabilistic reasoning skills of contestants who try to be the first to guess a hidden phrase with the fewest letters revealed. McGuinness describes the process as occurring when brains “automatically keep score of the probabilities of recurring patterns” (McGuinness, 2004, p. 47). Probabilistic reasoning is embedded in digital devices. Search engines “guess” how we want to complete a word or phrase as we type in the first couple of letters. If a person starts a Google search with the letters st, for example, the search brings up the highest frequency letter string beginning with st—and it is often Starbucks! Spellcheck algorithms finish or correct the spelling of a word we are trying to spell, based on the most common misspellings of the word. Extending probabilistic reasoning to a larger scale, we now see predictive text appear when we begin texting or writing emails, and it even provides answers to questions when we type only a few key words. Although AI seems to be a boon for English language learners looking for assistance, these algorithms have the creepy downside of collecting information about us and pitching ads to us that predict what we might want to buy, too. In addition, it’s possible that our cognitive ability to recode/spell words is diminished by the automatic answers we no longer have to puzzle through. Once we realize that we are talking about the brain’s ability to make guesses based on its assessment of probabilities, we also realize that what we call rules are really just “highly probable events” and exceptions are just “less probable events.” Seen that way, we can approach English decoding and recoding from a different perspective. English words don’t “break spelling

92

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

rules” but instead are less probable or less common ways to represent the sounds of the word. Let’s look at how different writing systems are organized in order to better understand how sound and letter combinations work in English.

Major Kinds of Writing Systems Over time, human beings have developed many kinds of orthographies. All of them are attempts to capture and preserve the information contained in speech. The way an orthographic system represents spoken language influences how people learn to read in that language. Orthographies can be classified into three large systems: alphabetic, syllabic, and logographic (Birch, 2015; Perfetti & Dunlap, 2008). The major difference between these three systems is in the size of the units the word is made up of. An alphabetic system uses a letter or letters to represent the sounds of a word, a syllabic system uses a syllable as the smallest unit to represent a word’s sounds, and a logographic system uses a whole word as the unit for representing a word, with less detail about its sounds. “The defining feature of a writing system is its mapping principle—­graph to phoneme (alphabetic), graph to syllable (syllabic), and graph to word or morpheme (logosyllabic)” (Perfetti & Dunlap, 2008, p. 15). Within each of these large systems, there are many individual orthographies belonging to different languages. Moreover, each of these kinds of writing systems is well represented in the languages of immigrant groups to the United States and Canada. When we learn to read in a new language, we need to learn its orthographic system. If we are literate in our first language, we also retain the knowledge of its orthographic system.

Alphabetic Writing Systems An alphabetic orthography represents each sound with a symbol or symbols. The set of all of the symbols that can make up words is called an alphabet. Many languages use alphabetic orthographies. These include English, Russian, Spanish, Arabic, and many more. Within alphabetic orthographies, however, there are many different alphabets. English uses the Roman alphabet, and so do many other languages; however, the relationship between the letters and the sounds they represent differs from language to language. For example, the letters ch represent the /ch/ sound in English, as in the word church, but the /sh/ sound in French, as in the word chateau, or the /k/ sound in words of Greek origin, such as choir or chaos. The Cyrillic alphabet is another alphabet used for several languages, including Russian, Ukrainian, Mongolian, and Bulgarian. A few of the letters

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 93

are shared with the Roman alphabet, but most do not map onto the same sounds, which means readers of those alphabets will experience more L1 interference in trying to read English words. Arabic is another widely adopted alphabet. It is called a consonantal alphabet, which means that all of the consonants, but only some of the vowel sounds, are represented with a letter. The Arabic alphabet is used not only for Arabic, but for Urdu, Persian, Dari, Malay, and other languages spoken by many ELLs. In addition, it is written and read from right to left and is paired with a different numbering system from English. In addition, each Arabic letter can take three forms according to whether it is at the beginning, middle, or end of a word, and Arabic does not use capital letters. When L1 Arabic speakers are learning English, they need extra practice in learning how to say and write the vowel sounds of English. In addition, they need practice in writing English numbers, using capital and small letters, and reading and writing from left to right—as well as turning pages in that direction! Arabic readers of English “rely heavily on the consonants when attempting to recognize English words” (Birch, 2015, p. 41), and one of our students comments: [Pronouncing words by relying on their consonants] can really cause problems for Arabic speakers trying to learn and pronounce similar sounding words in English. A perfect example of this is Hassan, my Arabic-­speaking husband, frequently mixing up the name of my father, Gene, with my best friend’s mother, Jan, and two of our good friends, Jenn and Jane. The fact that he has so much trouble hearing the differences between these tense and lax vowels has been the cause of confusion multiple times.—­Leah Cooper Generally, however, ELLs whose first language is represented by an alphabetic script will have an advantage in learning to decode English words because they already understand that the letters of the alphabet represent sounds. In addition, ELLs whose languages use the Roman alphabet have the added advantage of recognizing some of the letters and numbers of English from the start (although they may have different sounds).

Syllabic Writing Systems The syllabic writing system uses a consonant–­vowel combination as the smallest unit to represent sounds. Each symbol cannot be broken down further (Comrie, Matthews, & Polinsky, 1996). Languages that use syllabic orthographies include Japanese Hiragana and Katakana, Hawaiian, Khmer, Hmong, Bengali, Gujarati, and Cherokee, which are spoken and read by many ELL students. Words in syllabic writing systems consist of a sequence of syllables, and the complete set of syllables in the language is called a syllabary. The

94

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

disadvantage of a syllabic writing system is that words are often very long, as the syllable is the smallest possible unit, so these long words can become unwieldy. Figure 4.1 shows a primer used to teach the syllables of Gujarati. Each of the symbols represents a whole syllable, and the whole word written under each illustration is an example of a word that includes the syllable.

Logographic Writing Systems No writing system is completely devoid of a phonological element. However, those that use a logographic writing system have less phonological information than alphabets and syllabaries. Chinese (Mandarin) has the best-known logographic writing system. A Chinese word is composed of a radical that contains semantic information and a phonetic component, which is not always apparent. Chinese has about 2,500 logograms that are considered the basic number of characters needed for everyday use (Yule, 2010). Because the smallest unit is a word, reading Chinese involves less phonological processing but more semantic processing (analyzing of meaning). Nonetheless, it has been shown that phonological awareness, an important building block of reading, affects reading ability in Chinese as well (Pang & Kamil, 2003; Perfetti & Dunlap, 2008). It takes a long time to acquire a complete set of logograms (McGuinness, 2004). However, logographic orthographies provide two major advantages. First, they provide a direct pathway to meaning, allowing people to read and write “what they mean,” rather than just “what they say” (Ellis et al., 2004, p. 438). Second, because logograms carry less phonological information, they

FIGURE 4.1. Learning the syllables of Gujarati.

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 95

can be understood by a wide range of regional language and dialect speakers who cannot speak with each other but can understand each other’s writing. Of the three orthographic systems, alphabetic systems have the added advantage of being the most generative, because a limited number of letters and sounds can be combined to generate an infinite number of words. The elegance and economy of alphabetic systems has convinced many societies to adopt them, as we shall see presently.

English—Not Completely Alphabetic! Although English uses an alphabetic writing system, it also contains logograms. These symbols, which include numbers, do not contain phonological information but form an integral part of the writing system. These logograms can be found on the standard keyboard. Examples of English logograms include 1, 2, 3, $, @, ?, and so forth. As students begin working in the content areas, they will be exposed to more and more logograms, especially in the fields of mathematics, chemistry, music, and computer science. These symbols need to be memorized and understood as whole units, just like other logograms. The differences children experience in learning literacy through these writing systems are profound, but proficient readers and writers emerge through the medium of all of them. For a detailed inventory of the world’s writing systems, we recommend Omniglot, an online encyclopedia of writing systems and languages of the world (www.omniglot.com). Some of the diverse orthographies used by members of immigrant and ethnic communities in Chicago are featured in the photo essay Chicago Orthographies (Figure 4.2).

Orthographic Transparency and Depth An important concept that describes how closely writing systems represent the sounds of words is orthographic transparency or depth. Transparent (also called shallow) orthographies have a close match between the sounds of the language and its symbols. These orthographies are also referred to as “phonetic,” “consistent,” “decodable,” or “reliable”; they include such languages as Italian, Spanish, Czech, Turkish, Korean, and Dutch. We use the terms transparent and shallow interchangeably in this chapter. Opaque (or deep) orthographies, on the other hand, have symbols that do not match consistently with their phonemes. These languages include Chinese, French, Lao, Japanese Kanji, and, most importantly, English. We use the terms opaque and deep interchangeably in this chapter. Languages that have kept the same written form for a long time are naturally more opaque because written language changes more slowly than spoken language. Over

Amharic sign on an Ethiopian restaurant. Georgian store with Georgian and Russian orthographies.

Chinese soybean seller in a new Chinatown neighborhood.

Korean signs adorn many Chicago and suburban neighborhoods.

Neon sign in “Greektown.”

Russian sign for a hearing aid company.

FIGURE 4.2. Orthographies found on signage in the Chicago area. 96

English/Hebrew sign.

Arabic adorns all the panels of the door at this center.

Hindi sign on a restaurant.

Armenian alphabet on church sign.

Multilingual peace signs in Russian and Ukrainian. Towing sign in four languages.

FIGURE 4.2. (continued)

97

98

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

time, the gap between the two widens. Also, when a region or country is occupied or colonized, the central government may insist on the use of a common writing system for convenience or to assert its hegemony, and it may result in a poor fit with the spoken language. For these and other reasons, languages with deep orthographies generally take learners longer to read and write. Because English has an opaque orthography, many English words cannot be identified by “sounding out” the letters across a word. There are 40-plus phonemes in English (Ellis et al., 2004; Venezky, 1970), but only 26 letters to represent them; therefore, English alphabet letters combine in many ways to represent English sounds. The letter sequence ough, for example, has (at least) five distinct pronunciations: /uf/ as in tough, /uw/ as in through, /au/ as in bough, /ow/ as in dough, and /awf/ as in cough. These pronunciations can’t be learned by decoding and must be learned by heart. There is such an extreme discrepancy between English sounds and letters that it has been called “the least consistent of any alphabetic orthography” (Caravolas et al., 2012, p. 679) and an “outlier orthography” (p. 678).

Historical Features Contributing to the Opacity of English English has an opaque writing system because of at least three historical factors. The first of these was the Christianization of England; once the Bible was translated into English, literacy rates skyrocketed, at least among those allowed to access literacy (Eskelson, 2021, p. 109), and written forms began to standardize. The second factor is the various foreign invasions, most notably the Norman Conquest of 1066, in which spoken and written English became infused with thousands of new French words. The Norman Conquest introduced a second word into English for many words that already existed, but the French words had a higher status. Examples of parallel words with AngloSaxon and French origins include pig and pork, cattle and beef, help and aid, and smell and odor (“List of English words,” 2023). The third factor is the effect of the wide diffusion of written materials that resulted from the invention of the printing press. Printed materials codified the spellings of some words and distributed them widely. All of these historical factors have contributed to the opacity of the English spelling system. The opacity of English explains why it is so hard to spell in English, not only for ELLs but also for native speakers. For example, before they have become adept readers, beginning writers have to figure out if the word coat is written with the letter c or the letter k, as they notice that the letter c has two pronunciations (as in cake or city). Some words even have silent letters, as in comb or sign, and these must be memorized as sight words. The Chinese writing system is also opaque. Although Chinese characters contain some phonological information (Li, 2002), the characters cannot be

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 99

separated into a linear sequence of sounds. Like English, Chinese orthography has changed more slowly than its spoken forms, so its symbols are pronounced in many different ways. Because of its opacity, readers of Chinese learn to look for the semantic element of a word more than its pronunciation clues. Recognizing this difficulty, Chinese-­speaking countries have adopted a learning alphabet, discussed later in the chapter.

The Effect of Orthography on Learning to Read and Write Katz and Frost (1992) first proposed the orthographic depth hypothesis to address how different writing systems influence the ways children learn to read. They hypothesized that it would be easier for children whose orthographies were transparent to learn to decode and spell than it is for children whose orthographies were opaque and that children whose languages had transparent orthographies would use more phonologically based strategies to identify words. The hypothesis has been borne out by many studies. For example, Greek children acquire decoding skills earlier than their English counterparts due to the transparent orthography of Greek (Tafa & Manolitsis, 2008). In a study by Ellis et al. (2004), children from transparent orthographies learned to read more quickly, read longer words more slowly, and were more likely to substitute non-words or nonsense words when they made reading mistakes. Children from more opaque orthographies, on the other hand, took a longer time to learn to read, did not read longer words more slowly, and were more likely to substitute other real words when they made reading errors. In addition, they were more likely to skip words. Readers from transparent orthographies read across the sounds of a word, so it takes them longer to read a longer word. Interestingly, readers from transparent orthographies are more likely to substitute nonsense words when reading aloud, and this suggests that some may not be reading for meaning, at least initially. This is the downside of the transparency advantage. Ease in decoding can result in word calling, or decoding without comprehension, because it is possible to focus on the sounds of a word without accessing its meaning (Paulesu et al., 2000). Decoding is not really reading if it doesn’t include comprehension. This statement is from an L1 reader of Korean, which is one of the most transparent orthographies. When I read out loud in Korean in my school days, I often found myself decoding words without thinking about any meanings of the sentences, and now I understand what the reason might be. Also, I noticed that when I started learning to decode words in English, I couldn’t comprehend much while reading aloud either because I mostly focused on decoding the words correctly.—­Seung-Hee Ha

100

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Word calling may also occur when students learn to memorize or recite religious texts in languages in which they are not fluent, as many readers—­ including one of our authors—­has experienced. Tenena recalls, “As an altar boy, I used to recite and sing Latin prayers that I didn’t know the meaning of.” Also, some ancient Hindu mantras recited as part of Brahmins’ sacred rituals may no longer have identifiable meanings (van der Hoek, 2010). Readers learning to read in opaque orthographies go through different strategies as they learn to decode. The fact that readers of opaque orthographies in the Ellis et al. (2004) study made real-word substitutions when they read aloud suggests that they were using a different set of strategies as they learned to decode. Research published in Nature Neuroscience revealed that Italians reading in a transparent orthography used the part of the brain accessing phonological information more than English speakers did and that English speakers used the part of the brain for naming objects and processing the meaning of words more (Paulesu et al., 2000). Although phonological decoding is surely a key strategy, readers also engage in phonemic segmentation, whole-word recognition, probabilistic reasoning, and generalizing from onset and rime syllable patterns. (As discussed in Chapter 3, a rime is the pattern of common letters and sounds in an English syllable, and an onset is the set of letters that precede the rime. For example, the rime -act /akt/ can stand alone as the word act, can be preceded by the onset f as in fact or t as in tact, or can be the second syllable in longer words such as contact or attract. Rimes do not usually share a morpheme, just a letter pattern.) Researchers summarize, “A cross-­linguistic comparison among different orthographies showed that children learning shallow orthographies become accurate and fluent in reading words sooner than children who must learn to read French, Danish, and particularly English” (Buchweitz, Mason, Tomitch, & Just, 2009). Reading problems are also more common for readers of opaque languages. A longitudinal study of children learning Welsh (a transparent orthography) and English in a dual-­language setting found that after 3 years of instruction, no learners were still struggling to read in Welsh, but a number of learners were still struggling to read in English. The researchers concluded that “in the long term the detrimental effects of an opaque orthography are most damaging to the poorest readers” (Hanley, Masterson, Spencer, & Evans, 2004). The time it takes to learn to read in an opaque orthography such as English takes a toll on the overall curriculum. Cloud (2016) summarizes it well: “There are places in the world where kids study architecture because there’s space in the curriculum for that because they’ve already learned to read. We’re very bogged down in the United States with the teaching of reading, and it cramps the curriculum, and in some cases, it dominates the curriculum in very negative ways because it’s taking away other subjects that the

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 101

students might have enjoyed learning about.” In short, when fluent reading occurs earlier, the knowledge gained through reading occurs earlier, too. In addition to orthographic depth, there are also four other issues related to writing systems. The first is the visual complexity of the writing system; the second, the visual display of the written system; the third, the closeness of the written language to the spoken form of the language; and the fourth, access to L1 literacy. Visual Complexity A writing system might be transparent but still very complex to learn. Even if the symbols are phonetically regular, there may be a lot of features to decipher. For example, Czech is a transparent orthography, and children must learn the complex consonant onsets found at the beginning of syllables (­Caravolas & Bruck, 1993), but once they do, Czech is predictable. Modern Standard Arabic, for another example, has a wide range of symbols, designating a wide range of vocal features such as glottal stops (sounds produced in the glottis when the airflow is completely stopped and then released) and consonant lengthening. After these are mastered, a student can read any word, but because of its extreme visual complexity, learning to decode and encode in Arabic takes a long time (Abdelhadi, Ibrahim, & Eviatar, 2011). Another instance is Thai, a tonal language, which requires learning to decode the markers that represent its five tones, as well as a complex system of letter order. Even though these complex writing systems are transparent, they take a long time to learn to read and write. Thai vowels can be written to the right, above, below . . . and even before consonants! Initially shocked by the complexity, I have come to appreciate it. Not only is the orthography consistent but the vowel placement rules are as well. For example, the Thai vowel /ey/ always comes before the consonant, while the vowel for /u/ always goes below. Your eye movement might change, but you get used to it!—­Gareth Visual Display The visual display of a writing system can also increase its complexity. A writing system takes several forms, including handwritten forms, the formation of upper- and lowercase letters, and, now, many different fonts and typographic flourishes. To read, learners must recognize a range of visual presentations of the letters they are learning, not only one—and that includes the teachers’ handwriting on papers and whiteboards. Because students ultimately need to read handwriting from many sources, teachers must ensure that their writing is clear and legible, especially when their students are

102

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

in the early stages of literacy. In addition, students should be exposed to a range of written fonts, including serif and sans serif varieties (a serif is a small stroke attached to the end of a larger stroke within a letter or symbol in a particular font). The Distance between Written and Spoken Language Another important issue is how closely a written language corresponds to the learners’ spoken language. If students speak a language variety that diverges greatly from its standard written form, it may take longer to recognize the words because the words’ appearances may not match with the learner’s listening vocabulary. All languages have divergences between their speech communities and their written language, including Chinese speakers whose first language is far from the spoken form of Mandarin, or Arabic speakers whose dialect diverges greatly from Modern Standard Arabic. Linguists call this diglossia, a situation in which two very different varieties of a language exist within a speech community. One variety is usually found in more formal and academic settings, whereas the other is found in more conversational and informal settings. These variations can affect the ease of transition into reading and writing. For example, students may belong to a language community that pronounces English words ending with -ing as -en, such as saying “goin” to represent going. This will probably show up in their early encoding/spelling. When students are learning to read in a language, whether their native language or an additional one, they gain more confidence when the written word looks like a word they have heard or said. Lack of Access to L1 Literacy Some students have not had prior access to literacy in their L1. They may have had limited access to formal education, or their access may have been interrupted. This might include refugee children, the children of seasonal workers, or children who have not attended preschool. For these children, English orthography will be their first exposure to any orthographic system, so all of the assumptions we can make about connecting sound to symbols must be unpacked and clearly presented. A child without prior literacy exposure needs to learn that the sounds she or he hears can be broken down sound by sound and represented with letters, that these letters form words, that these individual words have meanings, and that words can be strung together to represent thoughts. Although we take these understandings for granted, they are not intuitively obvious, are not universal, and must be learned, as writing, at worst, can be considered, as Pinker ruefully describes it, “an optional accessory that must be painstakingly bolted on” (Wolf, 2008, p. 19).

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 103

Writing System Creation and Reforms When writing systems are created or reformed, the result can be an explosion of literacy. Following are a few examples. In 1819, after 10 years of labor, Seqouyah, a Cherokee man with an English father, created a writing system for Cherokee, a southern Iroquoian language, as a tool to protect Cherokee land from theft by settlers. The phonetically regular, syllable-­based orthography Sequoyah created was easy enough to learn that “within a few years after its invention, a high level of literacy had been achieved within the Cherokee community” (Comrie et al., 1996, p. 207), surpassing the literacy rates of their settler neighbors, according to historical records (Wilford, 2009). This achievement was followed shortly after by a bilingual Cherokee–­English newspaper. Social studies teachers might well highlight this man’s remarkable achievement as part of the study of American history and culture. In addition to resources about Native languages, the National Indian Education Association has many resources for teaching about culture, history, and language (National Indian Education Association, 2023). In the 20th century, a number of local languages were codified into written form and adopted for use in instruction. The language policy of Nigeria states that Yoruba, Igbo, and Hausa, the major languages spoken in Nigeria, for example, be incorporated in the school curriculum, along with English and Arabic. Kiswahili (Swahili), an amalgam of several languages, was adopted as the national language of Tanzania, where it is now a language of primary school instruction (Mohammad, 2015). Closer to home, the Navajo language has been taught in the Puente de Hózhó Trilingual Magnet School in Flagstaff, Arizona, which has two-way immersion programs in Spanish–­ English and Navajo–­English (Puente de Hózhó Trilingual Magnet School, www.fusd1.org/pdh), and Hawaiian immersion programs are taking root in Hawaii. These efforts support and value the mother tongue in both spoken and written form and support home language as a resource. Writing system reforms make a difference in literacy levels. One important reformer was Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881–1938), the founder of modern Turkey. Turkish had been written in the Arabic alphabet during the Ottoman Empire, resulting in an opaque orthography. Atatürk adopted the Roman alphabet as part of a modern nation-­state he formed, and this created a much more accessible and transparent representation of Turkish. Emel Gokçen describes the change in her own family that occurred when Atatürk introduced alphabet reform to Turkey. [When Atatürk changed the alphabet,] my father immediately had a teacher come to teach my mother the new Turkish, the new alphabet. My mother could write in the old ways. She had been schooled enough to write her own letters. But she told me that the old Turkish writing, the Arabic

104

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners alphabet, was so difficult that it took years to learn, whereas the new one was not only easy to read and write but very easy to pronounce. It is much easier to read than French or English because it is like Italian. You don’t have to know the language. It was phonetically clear, very easy to learn. So all the grandmothers started reading books and learning. . . . Reading spread like wildfire all over Anatolia, and it reduced the tremendous ignorance of the population—­the workers out in the fields and so forth; they could take part in a better government. (Cherry, 2008, p. 25)

Other nations, such as Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, have adopted the Roman alphabet for writing system reform, too, but the most far-­reaching is certainly the introduction of pinyin for learning Chinese. Pinyin is a phonetically based alphabetic system that uses the Roman alphabet along with extra diacritic markers to represent the sounds of Chinese, including the Chinese tonal system. Pinyin is used more or less as a “learner alphabet” to be coupled with memorizing Chinese logographs. It has made a great difference in access to literacy and has been incorporated in schools as a system of support. However, handwriting has also been an important tool for Chinese students learning the logograms, and computer-­based pinyin shortcuts, which are typed like alphabet letters instead of written longhand using Chinese calligraphy, have shown negative effects on the reading of Chinese children who use it (Tan, Xu, Chang, & Siok, 2013). In addition, research on learners of Chinese as a foreign language suggests that “learning to write a character rather than its pinyin has a stronger overall positive effect on visual recognition” (Zhang & Reilly, 2016, p. 21). There may be something about the motor skills involved in creating a character that makes it more likely to be remembered. Overall, it is much easier to learn to read in a transparent writing system. Some call transparent orthographies “learner-­friendly orthographies.” In addition to their superiority for silent reading, they are also easier to read aloud because there are no unpleasant surprises. The benefits of learning to decode early on, however, do not necessarily translate into long-term superiority in reading comprehension (Ellis et al., 2004), because reading is so much more than decoding. To me, learning to read in an opaque writing system is like learning to drive a car with standard transmission: It takes longer to learn, and there are more subskills involved, but once you’ve got it, it’s just as smooth a ride. A driver learning to drive with automatic transmission is like a reader from a transparent orthography—­he or she learns faster, but they may not have quite as good an understanding of how the car goes forward since it works fine just by pressing the pedal!­—Kristin Another advantage of transparent orthographies is that learners don’t need to spend so much time on spelling as compared with learners from opaque orthographies.

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 105

A Mexican elementary school teacher in one of my classes said, “In Mexico there’s no subject called ‘spelling’ like you have in America. That’s because Spanish spelling, at least for most words, pretty much takes care of itself. When students start to write words in Spanish, they are easier to read than the invented spelling of kids in English.”—­Leah Miller Many children have trouble learning to spell in languages with opaque orthographies, such as English, even if they can read well. When school systems place correct (often called “proper”) spelling at a premium, a lot of students come to believe that they can’t write simply because they can’t spell well, and this type of thinking can have a negative impact on the syndrome of success. For an opaque orthography such as French, on the other hand, spelling is elevated to the level of an important subject. Classes in orthographe, or spelling, are part of a French child’s language study. Spelling is part of language arts in schools in English-­language-­dominant countries, such as the United States and Australia. Spelling is best taught as a reasoning activity, using probabilistic reasoning, not just as a “hit-or-miss” memorization activity. If a child writes the word goal as “gole,” for example, we see that the child hears the long-o sound and knows that some words with a long-o can be spelled with a final silent e, such as the words pole or role. Although it’s a miscue, the spelling demonstrates phonological awareness of the vowel sound, as well as knowledge of the English long vowels in words with silent e at the end. This is a good example of probabilistic reasoning in action. Of course, some words are not at all decodable, and their spelling needs to be learned by memorization, as probabilistic reasoning won’t help. Students who read a lot are more likely to spell nondecodable words correctly because they have seen more words in print. The Strange Case of Proper Nouns and Names The area where decoding and spelling hit the wall is with proper nouns, especially place names and first and last names. Often, they are cemented into a fixed spelling pattern even if their pronunciation has changed over time. The place name or family name may have special value exactly as it is written, and no one wants to make the spelling more decodable. Readers may need to learn to memorize place names as whole words, rather than sound by sound or letter by letter. I try to keep careful track of the spelling of my student’s first names because I know how important it is to see your name spelled correctly. There are Alisons and Allisons, Meghans and Megans, Allens and Alans, Shawns and Seans—I admit that I wince when I receive an email addressing me as “Kristen.”—­K ristin

106

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

By figuring out information about your ELLs’ home language and literacy level, you can predict some of the language-­specific practice they will need in English as a new language. If the students you teach are from a language with which you are not familiar, you can easily find out how opaque their language is by asking the adults of the family two questions: “Is it hard to learn to read in your language?” and “Is it hard to learn to spell in your language?” Although it may vary among speakers, if they attended school in that language, they will probably have a ready answer. Representing Non‑English Names in English Another complication in spelling names is that many ELLs’ names were written in a different writing system, and they might be spelled several different ways in English. For example, the Arabic name, ‫ کریمه‬might just as easily be spelled Karima or Kareema in English, or the very common Thai name ชมพ ู can just as easily be spelled Chompu or Shompoo. Add to that the different spellings of place names, such as the Chinese city Guangzhou for what was once spelled Canton, and there are complications for both learners and teachers. Spelling English Sounds Because English sounds can be represented in a number of different ways, spelling takes a long time to learn, and many good readers and writers never learn to spell very well! The trickiest part of English spelling is usually found in its vowels. For example, the sound /ay/, often called the “long-i” sound, can be spelled in at least five different ways: lie, buy, try, sigh, and height. Also, the vowels of most unstressed syllables in English (except for final /ow/ such as jello or video) are pronounced with the schwa sound /ə/, so it is impossible to hear the “correct” vowel, even with good phonological awareness. The unstressed syllable in the word lemon, for example, has a schwa sound /ə/ for the letter o, and it is just as logical to write lemin or leman if you haven’t seen the word before. Thousands of English words have reduced vowels in unstressed syllables—­we can’t tell by listening to them which letter the reduced vowel sound represents. How do we learn to spell better? By reading! In the case of the word lemon, if a student has read the word, there is a greater chance that he or she knows how it is spelled—­or at least that it “looks right.” If they haven’t seen it in print, they may just take a guess or apply reasoning by analogy. They might also know the word limón in Spanish, but could misspell the first vowel (or add an accent mark). Vowel sounds are the most malleable sounds of a language because they consist of air passing through the mouth as the tongue and lips are held in certain positions, and they are not tethered to other organs of speech. Just

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 107

think of the subtle differences between the vowels in good and food, for example. In fact, vowels are most likely to be pronounced differently among dialects of a language. Because it is hard to hear subtle difference in the sounds of English vowels to begin with, it is no wonder that it’s hard to spell them. Here’s a first-­person account of that problem: When I first arrived in the United States, in the days before GPS, a friend was supposed to meet me at the airport. I waited in vain; he never showed up. After about 3 hours of waiting, I decided to take a cab. I told the driver that I was going to “Queen” Street. We drove around and around for another 3 hours looking for “Queen” Street. Finally, the cab driver asked me if I had the address on a piece of paper. I pulled it out from my folder and showed it to him. He went, “What are you talking about, man?” It was Quinn Street; we had passed it again and again, but I was too busy telling him to look for “Queen Street.”—­Tenena

Spelling Changes Due to New Technologies Instant messaging has had a profound effect on the way words are spelled, not only in English but in many other languages. Although learning to read and spell the full forms of words is still imperative in the classroom setting, texting shortens words through simplified spelling, alphabetic spelling, or numeric spelling. In alphabetic spelling, sometimes called letter name spelling, an alphabet letter is written to represent a syllable or word by pronouncing its letter name. Common examples are U for you, Y for why, or R for are. Numeric spelling applies the same principle to numbers, such as 8 to represent ate or 4 to represent for. Simplified spelling reduces part of a word to a more phonetic spelling, such as donuts for doughnuts or xtra for extra. Figure 4.3 shows some examples of alphabetic, numeric, and simplified spelling. When I was a kid, we had autograph books, and everyone wanted to write a message with alphabetic and numeric spelling. In my book, my best friend wrote “U R A Q T. G I N V U.” As you can see, I still remember it to this day.—­K ristin Two books by New Yorker cartoonist William Steig play with alphabetic spelling in a delightful way. They are called CDB! (1987) and CDC? (2003). Steig’s cartoon books consist of whole sentences created entirely of alphabet letters, as you can see from the two book titles.

Implications for Teaching ELLs have home languages with all kinds of different orthographies and varying degrees of transparency. Therefore, teachers need to differentiate their instruction regarding English orthography, keeping in mind characteristics

108

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

We don’t miss the E in HLP because the consonants guide us. Simplified spelling with visual support.

A mix of standard and alphabetic spelling.

Simplified and numeric spelling.

Numeric spelling and simplified spelling with vowel removal.

FIGURE 4.3. Alphabetic, numeric, and simplified spellings.

learning to Read, write, and spell words

109

Simplified spelling on an awning.

Alphabetic spelling of you in a wordplay.

When dough changes to do, we lose the morpheme that tells us it’s made of dough.

Simplified spelling—how many pets does this owner have?

Further simplified spelling for Dunkin’ Donuts.

FIGURE 4.3. (continued)

110

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

of each student’s L1 orthography, especially if they have been in school using that orthography. If students have learned to read and write in a transparent orthography, such as Spanish, they may be good at phonological decoding, but they may not notice when they read a real word as a nonsense word because they don’t have to access its meaning to decode it (more about this in Chapter 8, on fluency). They need to practice strategies to read for meaning. Children learning to read in an opaque orthography such as English need training in phonological awareness and phonics (De Jong & van der Leij, 2002) because there are so many spelling patterns for each phoneme. ELLs need to learn the same strategies that L1 English readers use to decode and recode printed words. These include breaking a word down into its individual sounds, recognizing onsets and rimes, memorizing sight words, and making logical guesses from context, among other strategies.

Using Morphemes in Opaque Writing Systems Languages with deep orthography make up for their phonetic inconsistencies by conveying semantic information through their morphemes. Morphemes are the smallest units of meaning of a word, and we explain how students can unlock the meanings of words using morphemes in Chapter 6. For example, although highlight is not an easily decodable word because of its two silent gh letters, learners find a clue to its meaning when they identify the two morphemes high and light in the word. ELLs from languages with transparent orthographies that do not share the Roman alphabet with English, such as Bulgarian, will need to learn not only how to read for meaning but also the details of the English alphabet and phonics system. Arabic requires changing the directionality of reading and writing, as well as mastering a new numbering system; ELLs who read Chinese will need extensive guidance and practice with phonological awareness and the English phonics system. For these students, phonological awareness will really bear fruit because they will be able to learn to decode unknown words. ELLs from other languages may need less phonological awareness, but all learners will need some. We have summarized possible pedagogical directions for readers and writers from different L1 orthographies in Table 4.1. Of course, L1 literacy level and prior educational experiences will influence the instructional focus as well. Table 4.1 can be used more or less as a checklist when you encounter learners from these orthographic backgrounds. Numeracy: Also Not Universal We expect to find different writing systems in our ELLs, but we may not be as prepared for their different numbering systems. Have you ever tried

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 111 TABLE 4.1. Early Reading Instruction for ELLs Literate in Different Kinds of Orthographies L1 orthographic system

Example languages

Spend more time on:

Spend less time on:

Transparent Roman alphabet with some similarities to English

Spanish Polish Turkish Welsh

English phonics (focusing on differences from L1), reading for meaning, learning sight words

Phonological awareness, phonics for sounds/letters shared with L1

Opaque Roman alphabet with limited similarities to English

French Portuguese

Phonological awareness, English phonics, learning sight words

Reading for meaning

Transparent alphabet or syllabary other than Roman alphabet

Ukrainian Arabic Korean Gujarati

Reading for meaning (for transparent), English phonics, learning sight words

Phonological awareness

Opaque alphabet or syllabary other than Roman alphabet

Mongolian

Phonological awareness, English phonics, learning sight words

Reading for meaning

Opaque orthographies that do not use an alphabet

Chinese Japanese Kanji

Learning the concept of an alphabet (representing sounds through symbols), phonological awareness, English phonics, learning sight words

Reading for meaning

Nonliterate

Any

All of these through a balanced literacy program

None

to decipher Roman numerals on a monument or a sports trophy? If so, you know the frustration of looking at a numbering system you can’t access automatically. Ironically, English uses the Roman alphabet and Arabic numerals, but the numerals used with Arabic come from earlier roots, Sanskrit and Hindi. Here are the numerals from 0 to 10 in Arabic along with their numeric equivalents in English. .

۰ ۱ ۲ ۳ ۴ ۵ ۶ ۷ ۸ ۹ ۱۰ 0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

As you can see, some of the numerals look just similar enough to other English symbols that they can be confusing. For example, the Arabic zero

112

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

resembles a period (although it is placed higher above the line than the period). Math teachers in particular should “factor in” plenty of practice time for students who learned to use a different numbering system. Like new languages, new numbering systems take time to learn. In addition to numbers, punctuation symbols and math symbols differ among languages. These include the “hollow” periods used by Chinese and Korean writers, the use of dashes for quotation marks, and commas rather than decimal points for many European languages. In addition, inverted exclamation marks and question marks frame Spanish sentences at both ends of the sentence, which means that a writer must plan his or her question or expostulation in advance. Some of these are non-­effects and do not cause interference, but they are features that teachers should know and appreciate. The more we recognize and practice them in class, the more effectively we can meet each student’s needs. Emojis: A Semiotic System In 2015, emoji was chosen as the Oxford English Dictionary’s Word of the Year (“Word of the Year,” 2023), and, since that grand debut, emojis have become firmly embedded in human communication. Emojis, like logographs, do not contain any fixed phonological information, and as their inventory increases, observes blogger Mack Flavelle (2017), “we move closer to a true logographic language, where each symbol represents not an idea, but a word phrase.” Emojis can be used as a shorthand for conveying emotions, actions, and information, such as identifying an emoji to match your pain level on a chart in a doctor’s office or clicking on an emoji to indicate satisfaction with a product or service. Emojis might be compared to picture dictionaries. Best of all, an emoji can be used in thousands of languages, not only a few. In that sense, then, emojis are a universal language. Irrespective of how useful they may be, however, producing emojis does not give language learners practice in decoding, handwriting, pronunciation, or spelling and does not help the learner become a better reader or writer. Figure 4.4 shows how emojis are becoming part of young people’s worlds in this poster for a craft project at a Wisconsin library.

Orthography Is Not Destiny . . . but It’s Important When we discover how different orthographies influence the way students learn to read, write, and spell in their L1, it explains a lot about the way they learn English. However, we add a word of caution: L1 orthography is only one factor in the vast array of factors that determines how ELLs learn English as a new language. Wang and Koda (2007) summarize it well:

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 113

FIGURE 4.4. Poster for an emoji pillow craft project.

L2 readers with different L1 orthographic backgrounds engage in both universal and language-­specific processes. On the one hand, properties of the L2 writing system affect L2 processing similarly across learners irrespective of L1 backgrounds. On the other hand, L1 reading experiences also come into play in L2 reading. . . . The properties of both L1 and L2 interact with one another, jointly contributing to L2 reading processes. (p. 201)

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Here are some intensive and extensive practice activities for developing the ability to read, write, and spell in the English writing system, and a few final comments.

Intensive Practices Identify Logograms and Symbols Students can become familiar with logograms, including symbols, as they interact with them in the content areas. In language arts, logograms consist of punctuation marks, such as periods, quotation marks, or hyphens. Another logogram, which isn’t spoken, is “&,” which is pronounced ampersand, but functions to mean and (there are a lot of them in

114

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

this book!). In math, there are important logograms for operations such as multiplication (×) and division (÷). A logogram wall of math symbols is a great way to help students automatize their recognition of math symbols and their ability to use them. Phonological Awareness and Phonics Phonological awareness and phonics skills can be developed through many enjoyable activities. Word sorts that use words from the day’s lessons are one way to do this. Students simply write the new words on index cards and sort them by sounds or letter patterns. This might be done in pairs or small groups. Another way to sort words is through word walls on the wall of the classroom. Word walls can be organized not only by first letters but also by phonemes or syllables. For example, students can classify words on the word wall according to their number of syllables or ending sound. Moreover, students can write the entries for the word wall on card stock paper and place them on the wall themselves, giving a kinesthetic dimension to this word work activity. Invented Spelling and Spelling Practice Read (1975) discovered that native English-­ speaking children went through predictable stages of spelling development. In the prephonetic level, children learn to hold writing instruments and move them across the page in “squiggles.” At the phonetic level, children grasp the idea that letters represent sounds and that words can be separated into sounds and letters. At this stage, they begin to represent the sounds they hear with the letters they know. In the third stage, called transitional spelling, they begin to activate their knowledge of decodable words, sight words, and onsets and rimes to words they know; finally, the fourth stage is conventional spelling, in which learners represent the correct letters of an English word in the correct order. School instruction and prior literacy experiences can greatly influence student progress. English spelling development and error patterns may look different when children have learned to read and write in a different language. The English spelling of Spanish ELLs, for example, may reflect Spanish phonological influence, such as using the letter i for words with the “long-e” /iy/ sound (e.g., writing sit to represent the word seat). Children reading in a logographic orthography, such as Chinese, on the other hand, may remember the letters making up a word but not their order of appearance, because Chinese characters do not require identifying sounds in sequence (e.g., early learners may write the word table as “tbale”). These

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 115

are predictable stages of English language development connected to the learner’s L1. Understanding the stages of invented spelling allows language arts teachers to focus on where an individual student might need help. Many trained early childhood educators are able to read the invented spelling of the children they work with—often better than their parents and caregivers can! Because accurate English spelling takes a long time, having regular spelling lessons or quizzes makes sense. Many programs lay out the sequence of phonics lessons, and your school is likely to have a program in place already. However, if you are doing this on your own, it makes sense to begin with high-­frequency decodable words and then move toward less decodable words, including high-­frequency sight words. After that, students can be taught patterns of onsets and rimes, such as pronunciation and spelling of words with the silent -e sound, such as time, same, or home, then moving to two-­syllable words. At the same time, due to the opacity of English, some words aren’t decodable and don’t fit onset and rime patterns—­called “oddball words” by the authors of the Words Their Way series (Bear, Helman, Templeton, Invernizzi, & Johnston, 2007). Here are a few creative ideas to practice phonological awareness and spelling through fun activities: 1. Draw a picture that contains things with the letters sh and then label them. 2. List five words that end with the sound /t/ and read them out loud. (Remember, they might not end with the letter t!) 3. Make a list of items in the classroom that have a long vowel sound. 4. Make a list of animals and sort them by the number of syllables each animal name contains. 5. Write one sentence that includes a word ending with a silent e.

Extensive Practices Celebrating Different Writing Systems Celebrating writing systems in schools and classrooms helps students and their families gain an appreciation of the remarkable ways humans have devised to put words down in print. An innovative third-grade teacher, Theresa Kubasak, does this by organizing an annual Hangul Day Festival at her school. Hangul Day, which takes place on October 9, is a Korean holiday celebrating the invention of the Korean alphabet in 1444. Hangul is considered the most elegantly transparent alphabet in

116

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

the world, both easy to read and easy to spell. At the all-­school festival, parents from languages with different orthographies are invited to the school to share their way of writing with children and other families. Children and families circulate among the classrooms and learn how to write their own names in Arabic, Chinese, Devanagari, Cyrillic, and other scripts. Each language station uses different writing materials, such as black ink on rice paper for Japanese, silver pens on black construction paper for Arabic, and fine-tip pens for Cyrillic. Theresa adds, “Also we splashed the room with environmental print from the various alphabets, which is easy to obtain in Chicago through menus, posters, newspaper ads, and wedding announcements. It is an amazing day in a classroom.” Celebrating Hangul Day helps all learners become more metalinguistic as they internalize the understanding that writing systems are widely varied, invented, and arbitrary, and that all of them are ways to represent speech. Exploring past and present writing systems, such as hieroglyphics, codes, invented languages, and secret languages such as nushü, a Chinese writing system developed in one part of China for “women only,” or the Tengwar script, invented by J. R. R. Tolkien, adds even more luster to learning English orthography.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Now that you have learned about transparent and opaque orthographies, what new thoughts do you have about your own reading, writing, or spell‑ ing, whether in your home language or in an additional one?  3. Besides the probabilistic reasoning used in email programs, spellcheckers, and cellphones, what are some other examples of probabilistic reasoning for written language that you use every day?  4. Look at the sign in Figure 4.5. Based on the analysis of writing systems in this chapter, what would you guess is the L1 writing system of the person who wrote this sign? (We don’t know the answer!) Why?  5. When you are at a whiteboard or blackboard, how do you make your hand‑ writing accessible to students? How do you ensure that they can read the comments you write on their papers? What feedback have you received about your handwriting?  6. In what ways have you seen or used emojis to help with comprehension or expressing emotions? Are they clear, or are there ambiguities? Assess their effectiveness.

Learning to Read, Write, and Spell Words 117

FIGURE 4.5. Sign on a fuel pump.

 7. A 20-year-old immigrant from El Salvador never had the benefit of formal education. Now he wants to learn to read and write at a community college night school that offers a Spanish or English GED. His first language is Span‑ ish, but he speaks some English. Would you advise him to learn to read and write first in Spanish, or in English? Why?  8. An administrative assistant who is a Chinese ELL is typing names into a database and comes across a handwritten last name she cannot read. She types exactly what she sees: Sctubert. Could this be a name? Why not? What do you think the name is? What is your guess based on? Explain this anecdote in terms of probabilistic reasoning. How could you help this per‑ son develop the kind of reasoning you applied to reading the name?  9. What experiences have you had trying to read another writing system? If you have done this, what kind of writing system was it? What strategies did you use to try to decipher it? Which strategies helped, if any? 10. Reflect on ways a teacher with a classroom of mixed-­l anguage ELLs can dif‑ ferentiate instruction so that children whose home languages use different orthographies from the Roman alphabet can get extra practice with English orthography. 11. A quipu is a set of knotted strings that was used during the Inca Empire to keep track of inventories and convey news about the Empire (see a quipu in Figure 4.6). The knotting system was learned by select members of the court. The quipu was taken to the king by a runner, sometimes as far as 1,200 kilometers away, and decoded there. In what way can a quipu be con‑ sidered an orthography? In what ways is it not? Could it convey something that a writing system could not convey? 12. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Make a short list of place names, last names, and

118

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 4.6. A local type of quipu from Rapaz village, Peru. Reprinted with permission from Frank Salomon.

other proper nouns with which you are familiar. Then try to classify them into three groups: decodable, partially decodable, and sight words. Remem‑ ber, the sight words may be very common but still not decodable, such as the name “Knight.” What can you generalize from this, if anything, for the teaching of reading and spelling proper nouns? 13. CHALLENGE QUESTION: What are some more examples of logograms in Eng‑ lish? How are they similar to and different from company logos? What kinds of lessons can be created to teach them? Write a possible lesson plan using logograms or logos that are common in English and, if possible, try it out in a classroom. Reflect on what you learned. 14. What can you bring from your own lived experience as a speller, writer, or decoder that will help your ELLs feel that they can decode and spell the opaque orthography of English? How can you express the complex param‑ eters of English without saying “Oh, well, that’s just English . . . ” while sup‑ porting the class’s collective syndrome of success?

CHAPTER FIVE

Visual Literacy and Language Growth

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY multimodality • visual literacy • semiotic domain • schema • realia • callouts visual language theory (VLT) • establishers • initials • peaks • releases GIF (graphic interface format) • meme • picure walk

W

e have explored the ways in which oracy and orthography affect the growth of ELLs, so it’s time to look at the role of visual input on language learning. Until very recently, a written text was the principal means of sharing knowledge in school, and showing comprehension using written language was the primary way students demonstrated their knowledge. In literacy development, children were exposed to beautiful picture books in the early grades but gradually expected to read full-­length novels with no pictures at all, and graphic-­centered novels were off limits. In the area of writing, children were expected to show what they knew mainly through expository writing. Kress and Van Leeuwen (2006) observed that “children’s own production of images was channeled in the direction of specialization—­away from ‘expression’ and toward technicality. In other words, images did not disappear, but they became specialized in their function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2006, p. 16). Children who excelled in fast and accurate decoding and well-­organized and grammatically correct writing would clearly be the beneficiaries of such a system—­disadvantaging children who were not adept or fast in these skills. Goodbye to all that! Now, it is easy to experience a wide variety of ways to convey meaning using more than one mode of expression, and visual literacy is a big one. Multimodality, the use of two or more modes of expression, is quickly reshaping the learning landscape. ELLs are among the biggest potential 119

120

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

beneficiaries of this new landscape. The 2020 WIDA Standards, which guide the curriculum for ELLs in most states, explain: “Multimodality, the use of multiple means of communication, is an essential way for all students to access and engage in the content areas. In addition to the use of spoken and written language, students also communicate through gestures, facial expressions, images, equations, maps, symbols, diagrams, charts, videos, graphs, computer-­mediated content, and other means” (WIDA Consortium, 2020, p. 17). Multiple modes of academic content benefit ELLs because, in addition to the growing number of dual-­language instructional programs that teach content in students’ home languages, multiple modes give access to content that can bypass some advanced language demands in favor of alternate modes of presentation. However, just like written text, these modes must be presented and unpacked to be beneficial rather than overwhelming or distracting—­a nd that’s where we come in. This chapter focuses on helping students develop the visual modes, which involve watching, looking, viewing (McAndrews, 2020), and interpreting visual data. Although visual literacy skills overlap with written language skills, they have a life of their own, with their own skills to be learned and their own cognitive demands. Some of these skills and demands are variations of reading comprehension strategies, but others have developed through the disciplines of film study or art. Visual literacy is in practice everywhere—­not only for survival needs in the classroom and the world beyond, but for recreation as well. “Name That Thing,” a visual vocabulary quiz offered by the Britannica Dictionary, tests people’s ability to identify and name objects (Britannica Dictionary, 2023). A kind of gamified picture dictionary, it can challenge anyone. Try it and see how you fare! We divide this chapter into five major areas of visual literacy: (1) sensory data found in body language and in nature; (2) single still images, such as maps, works of art, graphs, tables, or photographs; (3) still images with multiple frames, such as comic books, manga, and graphic novels; (4) symbolic digital images that supplement or replace written text; and (5) moving images such as videos and movies. Video games are saved for Chapter 11. Each category has many constituent subcategories, but we focus on the ones that can be most useful in the classroom. More forms will undoubtedly spring up while this book is in circulation, and we can only hope the teaching ideas here can apply to them as well.

Understanding Visual Literacy Concepts First, let’s become acquainted with a few terms to help us process visual images.



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 121

Semiotic Domains and Schema A useful concept in analyzing visual and multimodal artifacts comes from James Paul Gee, an influential linguist. He defines a semiotic domain as a “set of practices that recruits one or more modalities . . . to communicate distinctive types of meanings” (Gee, 2003, p. 18). These domains comprise an individual’s specific background knowledge. The concept is similar to schema theory, an enduring and influential concept in child development and cognitive psychology. A schema is “what is learned about some aspect of the world, combining knowledge with the processes for applying it” (Arbib, 1992, p. 4). By having multiple interactions in and about a topic, individuals build a schema of specific knowledge. The schemata (plural of schema) are partly academic—­ and we want to make sure our students develop these!—but also include the notions and functions of daily life, how we do things. The semiotic domain, like a schema, includes not only the content but also many social practices and behaviors and a whole range of modalities, including “oral or written language, images, equations, symbols, sounds, gestures, graphs, artifacts,” and so forth (Gee, 2003, p. 18). For an extended example, let’s look at the components that go into the semiotic domain of the London men’s football club Arsenal. Author Gareth Charles, a big fan, has unpacked some of the multimodal experiences he has accrued to become a serious fan and “resident expert”: 1. He knows domain-­ specific vocabulary, including offsides, sweeper keeper, and the modern press, which allow him to understand both the rules of the sport and his team’s specific playing style. 2. He knows the color coding of the team’s symbols: its red logo, with an image of a cannon on it, which helps him understand why Arsenal players are nicknamed gunners. 3. He knows key events over several seasons of the team and remembers emblematic moments. For example, the players wore rainbow-­colored shoelaces in November 2021, demonstrating that the team supported the league’s anti-­homophobia campaign, and it was the first club to do so. 4. He knows the choral chants made up by fans about the team and individual players, such as Jack Wilshere (“ . . . walking in a Wilshere Wonderland!”). 5. He knows about Thierry Henry, Arsenal’s most famous player, and has repeatedly enjoyed the iconic video in which he scores a goal dubbed a “wonder goal.” These images, artifacts, sounds, historical timelines, videos of the team, and songs of the fans combine to make up Gareth’s semiotic domain, or schema,

122

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

of the Arsenal club. Some of these factors are language-­based, whereas others are cultural, with both physical and representational aspects. From this example, it’s easier to think about what kinds of semiotic domains and schemata our students have—and how we can provide the scaffolding to help them develop these in the areas in which they need them— both academic and procedural.

Visual Literacy in the Standards The Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which have been adopted in a majority of U.S. states, account for visual literacy in several standards: Standard 7 of English language arts standards cites “content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words” as an anchor standard, and Standard 1.2 in grades 1–5 includes manipulating “a text read aloud or information presented orally or through other media” (Common Core State Standards, 2022). The teaching of film is also included in several grade 6–12 standards (Wisconsin Film Festival Film Guide, 2020). The 2020 WIDA Standards also encourage teachers to make use of “oral, written, and visual forms” (WIDA, 2020, pp. 27, 63). Even the widely used ACCESS test, which checks the listening, speaking, reading, and writing of ELL students annually, uses pictures in its listening comprehension portion, asking children to point to the picture that represents a word they hear (ACCESS for ELLs, 2023). These are only some of the ways that visual learning pervades standards and classroom practices. The Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association, has also developed and regularly updates its Visual Literacy Competency Standards, designed for use in higher education; it covers many dimensions of the rapidly changing landscape of visual literacy (Brown, Bussert, Hattwig, & Medaille, 2016). The visually literate student is expected to know how to select and retrieve visual materials, analyze and evaluate their meanings and their sources, and use and produce images for a range of projects and scholarly uses. Additionally, they are expected to understand ethical issues related to different modes and media (American Library Association, 2023). To achieve these outcomes, all students should have solid knowledge in place well before they enter higher education settings.

What Is Visual Literacy? Visual literacy is the ability to construct and create meaning through visual images, akin to the way we construct and create meaning from reading and writing words. A white paper commissioned by Adobe Systems in 2003 describes it this way: “A visually literate person should be able to read and write visual language. This includes the ability to successfully decode and



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 123

interpret visual messages and to encode and compose visually meaningful messages and communications” (Bamford, 2003, p. 1). In other words, visual literacy is not just a matter of digesting meaningful images but also of creating them. Creating images and art no longer requires expensive and lengthy training, and AI art generation software allows many more people to dabble in, or even excel in, creating art. We see children create visually meaningful messages as soon as they learn to hold a writing utensil, when they scribble something on a piece of paper, hold it up, and proudly say “Daddy!” or when they talk about the naughty mouse taking a cookie in a book, or notice that cars stop when the light on a large metal pole changes from green to yellow to red. Even when they are very young, children learn that visual images can “tell the story.” For years, ESL and EFL teachers have known that text-heavy grammar textbooks could not do the job of teaching students English and that students needed to look at and talk about things from the real world. ESL teachers have always relied heavily on bringing in all kinds of materials from the community—“realia,” touchable artifacts, props, and pictures—­to make language learning spring to life. Now, the technology to support this long-­ standing need has come of age, and the new options are gratifying.

Sensory Data from Body Language and Nature Body Language The most primal communication comes from the human body, which infants learn to read in their first months of life. Appraising the facial expressions of parents and caregivers is foundational to a child’s survival and sense of well-being. Facial expressions are nuanced, and children must become early experts in decoding them. A raised eyebrow, eyes widened in surprise, a furrowed brow—these are part of the visual vocabulary children must master as infants all by themselves. In fact, we might think of facial features and gestures as “verb forms expressed through the face.” As children enter school settings, reading the body language of those around them is a critical element of school success. Young children entering school for the first time observe the gestures and behavior of adults they have never met before and find that these adults have a great deal of power over them. For ELLs, both the body language and the spoken language of these adults may also be culturally unfamiliar, and the effect can be downright frightening! Teachers can make the learning curve easier by helping newcomer students understand how activities in the classroom work and demonstrating them slowly and clearly. For example, teachers can teach a “thumbs up” for students to support another student’s idea, or a raised hand to indicate the

124

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

child has finished his or her task and is ready to go to another classroom center. Other, more elaborate meanings can be discerned from total physical response (TPR), a tried-and-true ESL method for young children (Stauffer, 1970). When children watch, imitate, sing, and dance along with the Hokey Pokey, for example, they are learning the names of body parts, as well as right and left directionality, as they develop muscle memory. Clear visual signage in the room helps, too—an art in which so many early childhood teachers seem to excel. And although no one should ever feel obliged to smile, the friendly smile of a teacher does help set a welcoming tone. What children are encouraged, expected, and allowed to do in school takes time to learn. For ELLs, teachers are the critical agents who provide the essential support so important as their language and familiarity with school are developing. Nature Beyond the family unit, every child lives in a natural environment. Tenena reminds us: Because many people in Africa have no access to the literacy opportunities readily available in developed areas, they rely primarily on visual literacy that is based on reading the signs of nature as well as gestures. For example, when the dogs howled in the middle of the night, we knew that it was the full moon. A stare from a parent or any person older than you meant that you were doing something wrong and therefore you had to behave. The northern wind was the precursor of the harmattan, the cold blowing down from the Sahara Desert, a time when bonfires would light up the evenings for heat.—­Tenena Even though it may seem we are several steps removed from it, the natural environment is our true home. Reading the stars allowed the sailors of the South Pacific to find and inhabit new islands. Reading tracks allowed humans to hunt, raise, and domesticate animals for food, shelter, clothing, and companionship. Children can learn to read the signs of nature—­ the shifting light of day and night, the clouds in the sky, the seasonal life cycles of flora and fauna, and temperature and humidity in the air. We want children to look, learn, and wonder! Children can be invited to notice and report back on the patterns of migrating birds, the growth of plants in the schoolyard or garden, the changing colors of leaves, the intricacy of a spiderweb, or the water levels of a pond; inside the classroom, students can keep a log of the growth of a monarch butterfly in a butterfly enclosure, note the changes in materials in a class composting bin, or watch the tadpoles in a terrarium become frogs. Later they will learn to represent these processes with charts and diagrams. At the beginning, however, any budding scientist must



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 125

learn to read the visuals. Interestingly, the concept of close observation is embodied in the classic preschool picture book by Bill Martin and Eric Carle, Brown Bear Brown Bear, What Do You See?, which charmingly teaches animal names and colors, practices question word order, and has a strong repeating rhythm and beautiful pictures. It can be chanted or sung as a call and response (­Martin & Carle, 1967).

Single Images: Works of Art, Photographs, Graphs, Tables, Charts, and Maps Visual literacy is part of school settings through art in the halls and in the classroom, and also by looking at works of art, photographs, graphs, tables, charts, and maps. We put these into the same group despite their vast variety because they have something in common: They hold still, and they can be observed without digital technology (although now they can also be seen with technology). Art History and Art In art class, students learn to look at great works of art and examine the details of balance, color, and form that make them memorable and admirable. Often, the backstory of the artist or painting is also taught, and students converse about it. Because great art from the world’s many cultures is inspiring and aesthetically pleasing, it is well worth the effort to expose children to it and to talk together about what they see. Simple questions such as “What do you notice about this collage?” or “How did this artist use color in her painting?” can be answered in written or oral form, at a student’s current proficiency level. Students can also take part in an artist study for a set of paintings, drawings, masks, or sculptures, similar to author studies in which students look at several books of a few renowned authors. Children can look at the work of beloved children’s book illustrator Eric Carle, for example (https://eric-carle.com). A remarkable video shows Eric Carle, himself an immigrant, working in classrooms with young children and in his studio, crafting his picture book collage style and talking about what art means to him (“Eric Carle, picture writer,” 2011). It’s an entrancing virtual field trip for ELLs of all ages. Another strong choice might be an artist study of painter Frida Kahlo. A woman whose paintings are unique and compelling, whose life story is tragic, and who played a role in the Mexican Independence movement, she has become a special source of pride for many students of Mexican heritage. There are tremendous resources available about Frida Kahlo’s life and work. In art class, students can study her painting techniques and then try to paint

126

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

in the same style. The classroom or school could even declare a Frida Kahlo Day and decorate the room with her art, along with colorful costumes. Online galleries can be visited at no cost at the world’s finest art museums; the renowned Louvre Museum in Paris, for example, makes available its entire collection of 490,000 pieces from the Louvre and the Eugene-­Delacroix Museum on its website (https://collections.louvre.fr/en). It includes notes available in French and English (O’Higgins, 2021). Students can browse one of the collections, choose a work of art they would like to talk about, write about, or sketch, and share their impressions with the class. They could also be invited to write a poem about it. By the way, there are also many online art galleries from dealers ready to sell their clients’ work. Another multimodal art experience is the “immersive” art experience offered at warehouses and lofts in many cities. In Chicago, we have had Immersive van Gogh, Immersive Monet, and even Immersive King Tut exhibitions. The immersive exhibits have giant-sized wraparound depictions of the artist’s work on walls, far larger than the originals, along with musical soundtracks. Attendees report having a very emotional experience. For schools that can manage it, this is a great experience for children. Too bad these artists never saw their works transformed into something larger than life, but it’s lucky for us that this multimodal experience is now possible. Another way to create and respond to stimuli in a multimodal format is to write and illustrate haikus: In a summer English immersion class with international high school and college students, we took a field trip by bus to the Chicago Botanic Garden. Before the trip, I taught haiku form and asked each student to write an English haiku about something they saw there and to create a drawing with the haiku on art paper. Both the poetry they produced and the design of the art were stunning and unforgettable.—­K ristin Photos and Images In photography class, students learn about light, subject, and composition, basic elements of photography, as well as the “rule of thirds” by which they learn to analyze or create visually appealing compositions using vertical and horizontal lines (“How to use, and break, the rule of thirds,” 2022). Students of photography are trained to look at facial expressions in the photographs, bits of background that create the context, the action captured in the photo, and the design and balance of the photo. They can also think about questions like, “How did the photographer choose what to include in that image?” or “What might have happened right before or after this photo was taken?” or “What might be going on outside the picture at the same time?” These can



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 127

be oral or written prompts, and ELLs can have lively discussions about them in small groups. Because many students did not have art classes or other classes that asked provocative questions, they may need practice in asking critical questions about the images they see. Unpacking and analyzing visual images is an important part of training in critical visual literacy (Chen, Han, Ko, & Thamotharan, 2023). Three short examples illustrate how critical visual literacy matters. First, after closely looking at facial images in Twitter, Swiss graduate student Bogdan Kulynych proved that Twitter’s algorithm favored “younger, slimmer faces with lighter skin” in image previews of its photos, and he won a prize for his work (Hern, 2021, para 1). Second, researchers at the Pew Center analyzed President Obama’s skin complexion in political ads during the 2008 presidential campaign and found that “darker images of Obama were more common in the most negative attack ads, especially in those linking Obama to crime,” adding “We also found that the darkest images were more likely to air more frequently as the election approached” (Messing & Plaut, 2016). Critical literacy about colorism is needed because “there is strong evidence linking skin complexion to negative stereotypes and adverse real-world outcomes” (Messing, Jabon, & Plaut, 2016, p.  44). Finally, pervasive visual representations of the Barbie doll’s hourglass figure were criticized for years for their harm to the self-­esteem of women and girls, and it wasn’t until 2016, after years of pressure, that the Barbie doll had a “redesign” to look more like real girls and women (Dockterman, 2016). Using critical visual literacy skills in analyzing photographs can make a real difference in society (Chen et al., 2023). Students can also create and analyze callouts, which are directional arrows or text boxes superimposed on an image to call attention to a certain part of it. Students can point out a certain part of a digital image by creating a callout, which is easy to do through any image software. In this way, ELLs can demonstrate their understanding of an image with a visual tool rather than by writing sentences. For example, you might ask students to put a callout on the part of a photo that expresses hope, or irony, or foreshadowing, or if those are too advanced, the part of the image that shows us the location of the photo. Maps, Posters, and Signs Maps are very important in our daily lives, and students need to learn to read them. Getting around town, whether by bike, skateboard, or on public transportation requires knowledge of maps. Although some maps are online, others are not, and even the online ones need to be deciphered. Some are color-coded, and some are not. Some are created to scale, and some are not.

128

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

For example, a map of our solar system greatly underestimates the distance between some of the planets, but for purposes of convenience, they are usually lined up within a single frame. Students look at maps when they study American history and world history, and they are often asked to analyze their content by the time the students leave middle school. There are several map conventions that all students must be able to identify before they can make sense of a map. These include the key, sometimes called the legend, and the scale. The key or legend gives the list of symbols and icons that are used on the map. The scale of a map tells the relationship, or ratio, of items on the map to each other in distance. These key vocabulary words cross boundaries and must be figured out for every map a student examines. Before answering any questions about the content of a map, students need to know its title and purpose, understand its key and legend (such as the way colors are used, or the kinds of icons or images used for each feature), and identify the unit of measurement, which is probably abbreviated. ELLs should practice explaining these orally to a partner, and after this, checking understanding as a whole group. Only after that can the information on the map be explored. The map’s symbols need to be explicitly taught and reintroduced for each new map. Students also need critical visual literacy to read a map because maps, like photos, carry assumptions about what is important enough to include and what is omitted, as well as how they are labeled. Looking up a location on a local online map, for example, might show large chain restaurants, but not the local bubble tea shop. Students might ask why. It’s probably because the owner did not pay to advertise on the map. It’s easy to find maps in your town and use them in the classroom. Look at the map in Figure 5.1, posted at a train station for the Chicago Transit Authority, and think about what it does, and does not, tell us. How is color used? What is the rectangle in the lower left corner? Posters and signs, like maps, also require visual literacy. In Figure 5.2, for example, we see visual information in the two signs that give us a clue to their content. What visual clues do you see that help unlock their information? As another example, the poster in Figure 5.3 is on the wall of a coffee shop where customers bus their own plates and cups to a trash area. The poster uses personification to address the patron with what seems to be a personal request. Could your students state the meaning of the sign? Could they paraphrase the poster using a sentence frame such as “The coffee shop wants us to . . . ” or the more formal passive voice, “Customers are expected to . . . ”? Charts, Graphs, and Tables The 2020 WIDA Science Standards expect ELLs to describe tables and graphs as early as grade 1 (WIDA Consortium, 2020, p.  71). The math standards



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 129

FIGURE 5.1. Chicago Transit Authority map.

FIGURE 5.2. Signs at a Chicago locksmith and for a suicide prevention hotline.

130

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 5.3. Sign in a coffee shop.

include describing charts and diagrams by grades 2–3 (p. 93), and the language arts standards expect students to create graphs and labeled diagrams by grades 4–5 (p. 115). The need to read, interpret, and create charts, graphs, tables, and labeled diagrams is included in all the standards through grade 12. Clearly, these cross-grade skills are just as consequential to ELLs’ academic success as reading and writing. Bar graph questions pervade standardized tests. A good way to model use of a bar graph (sometimes called a bar chart) is by creating a survey of class favorites and preferences, which is also great fun. The first time, the teacher might ask a survey question, such as “What is your favorite fruit?” and collect answers, create a bar graph from it, title it, and display it on the smartboard or blackboard. After the teacher models the procedure, students can be given their own sheet with a blank graph and repeat the same procedure in a small group, with different questions that they create. In a group of four, one student can develop the question and ask it, another can record the raw results, a third can fill in the bars on the graph, and a fourth can report on it to the rest of the class. Then all can fill in their bar graphs, coloring in the bars. First- and second-­grade ESL teacher Joan Bowers says about bar graphs: I had given the Reading A–Z test designed for English learners to my first- and second-­grade students. It was clear that they needed direct instruction about reading all sides of a bar graph. I found two bar graphs to practice with them, and now they are demonstrating significantly more success answering questions related to the bar graphs.—­Joan Bowers



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 131

It’s never too early to start reading bar graphs—­a nd then to learn to compare them, a skill which is sure to be tested in high-­stakes high school exams.

Still Images with Multiple Frames We have given comic strips, comic books, and graphic novels their own category because they are a rich and ever-­expanding literary genre. Krashen (1993, 2004) suggested decades ago that “comics can serve as a conduit to more demanding reading” (Ujiie & Krashen, 1996, p. 27) and suggested they be included in school libraries because they were expensive for kids to buy. Now, there are free websites containing thousands of high-­quality comics (e.g., Webtoon.com), and price is no longer an issue. Celebrated author and high school teacher Gene Luen Yang created best-­selling graphic novels, including American Born Chinese (Yang, 2008) and Dragon Hoops (Yang, 2020), comics, and a movie, and he makes a strong case for the use of comics in the classroom (Yang, 2018). Krashen and Ujiie (2005) found that reluctant readers were more motivated when they read comics than other kinds of text structures. Comics are gaining greater acceptance in the classroom and have value with ELLs in particular because they are multimodal, combining words and images in a clear storyline that can be accessed at the learner’s own pace. Reading a Comic Strip Although these graphic genres may appear easier to read than printed text, they often come with a complex semiotic domain, which includes lots of background knowledge and cultural knowledge, as well as common figures of speech and written sound effects used in comics. Williams (1995) breaks down all of the language features in a Calvin and Hobbes comic book, analyzing the discourse found in the speech bubbles. He notes the use of capital letters to indicate contrastive stress (“I’m NOT eating that!”), reduced forms and contractions (“I’m gonna . . . !”), common phrases (“Nice to see you!”), common two-word verbs (“get out,” “make up”), and onomatopoeia using creative typography (“BOOM”). The type of font used in a comic allows more visual freedom for increased text size and bold and italicized lettering. Krashen and Ujiie (2005) remind us that reluctant readers were more motivated when they read comics than other kinds of text structures. Comics contain rich illustrations from talented artists, in both their layout and in the representations of actions, gestures, and emotion. The layout can be surprisingly complex. Cohn, (2018) in his visual language theory (VLT), categorizes the narrative structure of comics into four constituents: establishers, which set up a scene or interaction; initials, which start tension in the narrative; peaks, which denote a climax in the action; and releases, which depict the aftermath of the occurrence. These are similar to the commonly taught

132

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

elements of story grammar, with exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution, but in visual form. Young ELLs can learn the four constituents, then look at a comic strip and try to apply them to it. After several applications, they might even create their own comic strip, with frames and labels for establisher (exposition), initial (rising action), peak (climax), and release (falling action/resolution) frames and labels. To practice this, look at the five frames of Figure 5.4, the “Carefree Carol” comic strip, by Thai artist Parima Kutchasuwanmanee, which we have put out of order. We think that two of the frames set up the establisher, along with one frame each for the initial, peak, and release. Can you put the five frames in order? What reasoning did you use for your choices? Now, try to list some of its language features as mentioned above (Williams, 1995). We have an online version of the “Carefree Carol” comic without speech that you may use with your students (see Kutchasuwanmanee, 2023).

Digital Images to Supplement or Replace Written Text Some symbols are used mainly in digital contexts and were developed for that purpose.

FIGURE 5.4. “Carefree Carol Takes a Walk.” Copyright © Parima K ­ utchasuwanmanee. Used by permission.



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 133

Emojis are pictographic writing systems that have become a language of their own. Because they do not have a fixed pronunciation, they can be considered logograms, with universal application. They originated in 1999 as a set of icons for Japanese cellphones, and by 2016 were already referred to as “the fastest-­growing form of communication” (Parkin, 2016, p.  40). An Egyptian-­born teacher quipped, “We’ve come full circle with emojis—­now it looks like we’re back to hieroglyphics.” Apparently, someone even “translated” the book Moby Dick into emoji (Turello, 2017)! GIFs (graphic interface format, but the full term is never used) were invented by a software engineer in 1987 as a way to miniaturize an image within an email or internet post, and they can be considered a precursor of the meme. The GIF was originally a still photo of something that was imbued with meaning at a moment in time, often featuring a popular figure making an iconic pose such as winking, holding up a glass, or looking derisive. These could be attached as a reply to a comment on a blog or website, serving as a kind of emotional punctuation. Although GIFs have been replaced largely by moving images or memes, they were an important step in the transition from words to images, and they required the viewer to construct meaning from context. Memes are visual images with possible audio or video elements that represent situations, feelings, and opinions and are propagated through social media. Their meanings can be applied to myriad situations, and it is easy to improvise on them through wordplays or making similar images. Rich in cultural references to pop culture, movies, or games, often with celebrity images, they tell stories, give commentary, or have truths or “morals” embedded in them. Memes often have humorous, ironic, or political meanings, and their captions might be in any language. They might be called a “visual sentence frame.” Understanding memes requires inference, a key strategy for reading comprehension. Although the images are fixed, just as the words are fixed in reading comprehension, their uses go off in various directions as people play with them. Because memes are rarely taught explicitly, individuals come to understand them by viewing multiple uses of the meme in social media and inferring its meaning. Students learn abstract concepts from the messages encapsulated in memes, and they can also create their own. As ELLs are exposed to thousands of memes through social media, memes are a valid form of comprehensible input and a major contributor to visual literacy. Figure 5.5 is the template (without words) for a wildly popular two-panel meme, “Running Away Balloon,” created by well-known graphic artist SuperElmer. “Running Away Balloon” shows the frustration of the hopeful character who is about to capture the balloon, but then can’t quite reach it. The big pink blob might represent any sort of hurdle or barrier. Figures 5.6 and 5.7 are two original memes we created using the “Running Away Balloon” template from an ELL student’s point of view.

134

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 5.5. “Running Away Balloon” meme template. Copyright © Elmer Saflor. Used by permission.

FIGURE 5.6. “Running Away Balloon” meme #1. Copyright © Elmer Saflor. Used by permission.



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 135

FIGURE 5.7. “Running Away Balloon” meme #2. Copyright © Elmer Saflor. Used by permission.

You can invite students to go to a meme site and create and share their own memes with the class. The class memes might be posted online, and then the class can pick a favorite. A high school teacher we taught invited his students to collectively create a class mascot using memes and then to name it. Gareth finds meme activity highly motivating for his students: If I ask students to use a new word in a sentence, they will produce it in a dutiful way. If, on the other hand, I ask them to use the new word in a meme, they will spend ten times more effort and be much more creative. The result will show more depth of knowledge for the word, too.—­Gareth Why are memes so great for ELLs? It’s because memes can express a deep or complex feeling or situation with a minimal use of words. This is a useful multimodal tool because the visual part of the meme is already there for the students; once they understand it, all they have to do is provide their own words. If they get a laugh, or a groan, or a nod from those they share it with, it means they have communicated! A good and safe source for memes is https://imgflip.com/memegenerator; it houses many templates to create memes. Students can choose their own images, and, by the way, so can teachers.

136

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Moving Images Films and Television Even several decades ago, teachers saw the value of showing movies in the classroom. Whether it was a recording of a live performance of a Shakespeare play or a health class filmstrip about changes coming at puberty, there was a role for movies and filmstrips in the classroom. Now, movies and shows are much better accepted as works of art and considered worth studying, reviewing, talking, and writing about. In fact, film study classes analyze films just like written literature and study filmmakers just like authors. What would have happened if the characters had not gotten together? If one had not died? If there had not been a war? What other endings could you imagine? What would you want for a sequel, or prequel? How was the musical theme used to build suspense? These are only some of the provocative questions you might use to start conversations before or after watching a film in class. Once again, although vocabulary must be taught and practiced, a good film is a way to level the playing field, as all students can use their eyes to construct meaning. In fact, you can even show silent films, which have no words at all, such as Charlie Chaplin classics or the renowned 1960 poetic work Dream of the Wild Horses (https://archive.org/details/dreamofthewildhorses). Students can discuss the films, write short film reviews, and share them with each other, or serve as “dueling critics,” debating how many stars a film deserves and why. They might even write a poem or song. Because students’ attention spans are harder to maintain these days and losing focus is a constant hazard, it’s best to give students something to do as they watch a film, and cellphones should be face down and in sleep mode. Also, the film watching event should be prepped as an exciting experience, not just another classroom assignment—­perhaps dressing up for “A Day at the Movies,” or even bringing popcorn! Teachers might consider shorter videos. For science and nature, there are stunning NatGeo and Planet Earth videos, and First Nations Network provides the respectful study of American Indians telling their own stories in their own voices. There are also many series and channels on YouTube, Net­ flix, and Vimeo that include videos about nature, science, animals, and many other wondrous topics, and of course there are cartoons and Disney movies that can be judiciously applied on a Friday afternoon. Excellent videos can be found with a simple search on Google, Vimeo, or YouTube, and they usually have plenty of reviews. When preparing questions about a video, you can now find a searchable transcript within YouTube. Also, you can find closed captions on most videos now, whether automatically generated or provided by the filmmaker. As you know, some of these are better than others, and you should check ahead of



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 137

time to make sure the written words match the spoken words and take care to screen for language that could upset parents.

Creating Visuals with Web‑Based Software Tools With so many ways to learn and express themselves, ELLs have the best chance in known history to become comfortable using and understanding English. There is an impressive list of tools that students can use to create their own visuals; here are a few in use at the time we are going to press: Canva, Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator, Google Slides, Procreate, and Clip Studio Paint. This range caters to both beginners and more adept artists, and all can be used on phones, laptops, or tablets. AI-­generated art, which can be remarkably generated by software like Midjourney, allows us to now input meticulous language-­based instructions or prompts, which the software processes to create unique and visually captivating imagery. ELLs (and their teachers) no longer need expertise in traditional artistic techniques or tools to create striking images. Ironically, however, what is needed is carefully crafted language to order up the artistic images we are looking for. As one gets to know the software, it takes several iterations to create exactly the sought-­a fter effects. These images might be used in creative projects or for content area reports or studies. To tantalize you with possibilities, see Figure 5.8, which is an image that Gareth created with Midjourney, using the following words: “Double exposure of a student and a language textbook, learning, watercolor art.” It was one of four images rendered in seconds.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Here are some additional ways to use visual images, both still and moving, to foster language and content growth while affirming children’s multilingual identities. We will start with activities for younger children and go to the more advanced grade levels—­a lthough, as always, grade level does not necessarily match with proficiency level for ELLs.

Picture Walks Interactive read-­a louds from wordless picture books and picture books with text are both multimodal and interactive. Before reading any book, teachers can perform a picture walk. Picture walks allow children to practice story structures as they talk about what they see on each page. This is a great way to preview and preteach vocabulary and to build anticipation

138

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 5.8. Example of AI-­generated art based on a prompt. Used by permission from Gareth Charles.

for the story. The pictures in the story can be projected on a screen if the book is too small for everyone in the class to see clearly. That means that a picture walk can also occur during remote learning, not only when students are sitting on a rug in front of the teacher. See Chapter 3 for a description of a 3-day interactive read-aloud.

Autobiographical Visual Storytelling Students can collect photos or images to introduce themselves and arrange them in a collage, scrapbook, or digital format. Then they can narrate a story about the images they have chosen. To help guide students’ stories, you can offer prompts or a template, such as “favorite foods,” “favorite games,” “about my pet,” and so forth. Students’ visual stories can be shared with the whole class or privately with the teacher in Flip. It’s a great freeform way for students to introduce themselves on their own terms.



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 139

Title That Image Students can be asked to look at a photo or image either in the classroom or online and give it a title. Then they can discuss why they gave the image that title. In a variation of the game Three Truths and a Lie, you can also show them a painting or photograph with four possible titles and ask which one is the real title. When the real title is revealed, they can talk about what they think would be a better title (any title is better than “Untitled,” and that is a common title!).

Scrambled Comic Strip Like our “Carefree Carol” example, you can cut up a comic strip with words and ask students to put it in order. They will need to use a combination of visual cues, verbal cues, and background knowledge to find the correct order. Then they can be asked to summarize the story verbally or in writing.

More Ways to Use Pictures If you have beautiful pictures from old wall calendars, you can trim the dates off and bring them in to your classroom. Students can generate sentences, either orally or in writing, about the featured picture. Pictures that show seasons can be matched with the current season and new vocabulary introduced about climate and weather. Images of the drastic consequences of climate change can spur students to action. Pictures of different cultures and ethnicities can be paired with social studies content. Pictures of animals can be matched with vocabulary about animals and habitats, and the class can decide to protect an endangered species by contacting a group such as World Wildlife Fund or the National Wildlife Federation. The government group called NOAA Fisheries also has teaching resources on environmental literacy (yet another form of literacy!) to help individuals learn about boundaries between viewing habitats and disturbing them (NOAA Fisheries, 2023). Talking about pictures opens the world and develops oral skills.

Google Doodles Google is more than the world’s biggest search engine. It also features a colorful and artistic “doodle” above the search bar for many important holidays, with a culturally diverse perspective. Clicking on the current doodle often shows a short animated video, and it is easy to get to

140

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

its backstory. Doodles cover a range of educational topics—­from great indigenous leaders to Nigerian Independence Day to Grandparents Day in Greece—­a nd there are prizewinning student doodles on different social-­emotional themes. Could you share a Google Doodle once a week in your classroom?

Digital Citizenship All students should have instructional time to learn to be digital citizens, as part of a schoolwide, cross-grade curriculum. Some of the best readyto-teach lessons, on several key topics, can be found free of charge at the Common Sense Education Digital Citizenship site (www.­commonsense. org/education/digital-citizenship). There are lessons about cyberbullying, digital footprint, online privacy, and related topics in four different grade bands. The lessons are also available in Spanish (Common Sense Education, 2023).

Optical Illusions Another entertaining source that can spark conversation, for adolescents in particular, is optical illusions. Optical illusions can be a refreshing change of pace after doing academic work. Intriguing optical illusions can be found through Google searches. The famed artist/ illusionist M. C. Escher created intriguing hand-drawn optical illusions that can be discussed and unpacked. Visual mysteries, whether natural or human-made, are an intriguing part of visual literacy. They are also a good entree to talking about digitally altered images and introducing ways to check up on recognizing fakes, by using sites such as snopes.com.

Creating an End‑of‑Unit Photo Album At the end of a project, alone or in a small group, students can create a photo album with captions to show what they have learned and reflect on it. This is a variation on the idea of a portfolio to show growth. Students choose their photos, which can consist of print photos, drawings, a mosaic, Google Images, or a collage, along with captions or short passages that tell the story. Photos can be affixed onto paper and pages bound with string, or the project can be done entirely through an online template. This can be started even as early as second grade.



Visual Literacy and Language Growth 141

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Have you ever used visual images as a reading comprehension or a listening comprehension strategy? Tell how it worked.  3. What are some examples of bias in visual images that you have noticed? What could be done to challenge and correct the bias?  4. Look at Halliday’s language-­based learning model from Chapter 1 and see what happens when you turn it on its head, to become learning visuals, learning about visuals, and learning through visuals. How does that inter‑ sect with, complement, or conflict with learning language, learning about language, and learning through language?  5. What are some ways you already incorporate visuals in your classroom? What are some additional ways you might incorporate visuals in your lan‑ guage learning classroom (logos, infographics, presentations, graphics, etc.)?  6. Do you have any special insights about visual literacy that come from your own experience as a learner or a teacher? Were you ever misled by a sign? Do you have a favorite meme?  7. Do you believe “everyone is a visual learner,” as opposed to people having different learning styles? Why or why not? Explain.  8. Of the five areas of visual images that are highlighted in this chapter, which one are you the least familiar with, and why?  9. If you plan to read a book and see a movie based on that book with your stu‑ dents, which do you think should come first, and why? What are some ways you could compare them? 10. Make a meme using “Running Away Balloon” and share it with your class‑ mates or friends. What might people infer about your current ironies or frustrations? 11. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Choose a subject in which you might consider your‑ self an expert, whether as a fan, a presenter, a writer, or some other way. Using the example of Gareth’s bond with his football team, try to unpack and describe all of the multimodal and overlapping ways in which you developed expertise about that topic. What were the sounds, sights, mem‑ orable events, symbols, foods, star personalities, or other things that came together to make you feel like an expert?

CHAPTER SIX

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY phonemic • graphemic • morpheme • etymology • assimilation • root • affix prefix • suffix • free morpheme • bound morpheme • lexical morpheme functional morpheme • derivational morpheme • inflectional morpheme syllable • morphophonemic • bound root

T

hink for a moment about all the ways we can “know” a word. We can recognize it when we hear someone say it. We can pick it out from a word list. We can understand its meaning when it appears in a written sentence. We can recognize it as part of a phrase or idiom or as part of a figure of speech. We can know how to pronounce it. We can use it in different social settings, we can make puns with it, we can spell it, and we can use it in our writing! Learning these many levels of word knowledge can be daunting in a first language—­but in a new language, it becomes downright frightening! Nevertheless, it is the ability to learn thousands of new words in a new language that, more than anything else, determines a learner’s success, in both academic and social settings. In Chapter 3, we talked about the phonemic aspect of words—how words sound and how ELLs can build a listening and speaking vocabulary that readies them for literacy in English. In Chapter 4, we discussed the graphemic aspects of words: how words are represented in different writing systems and how the decodability of words affects learning to read, write, and spell in 142

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 143

English. In Chapter 5, we expanded to visual images that support meanings. And in this chapter, we focus on morphemes, the smallest linguistic units of meaning. We look at the ways morphemes combine within and across words and how studying them can help ELLs supercharge their English vocabulary. Understanding English morphemes greatly adds to ELLs’ toolkit and is a building block of their syndrome of success. ELLs who can split words into smaller parts or make connections between words with the same morphemes have increased vocabulary growth at every level (Kieffer & Lesaux, 2008, 2009).

Morphemes: The Building Blocks of Words As we know, languages have four universals (phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics), and some have a writing system. Morphology is the study of morphemes, which can be defined as “a minimal unit of meaning or grammatical function” (Yule, 2010, p. 67), and they come in four forms, which we describe presently. All words are made up of morphemes, the units of meaning that make up the words of a language and the ways those units of meaning can be combined. Analyzing the morphemes of any language can be a tricky business, but English morphemes are unusually complicated due to the history of English. Freeman and Freeman (2014, p. 160) mention three factors that affect how morphemes look in words: the ways words sound (phonetic), the way they connect to similar meanings in other words (semantic), and the ways words reflect their etymology, or history. With all these factors at play, and the proven benefits of understanding how morphemes work, morphology deserves substantial attention, but ironically it receives very little in the typical American classroom. Probably that is because teachers do not know much about morphemes and are expected to learn about them on the fly, and, by extension, the same is expected of learners, including ELLs.

Morphemes: Hard to Spell, Pronounce, and Recognize English words have three kinds of information packed into each word: letter patterns that may predict a word’s pronunciation, morphemes that indicate its meanings, and spelling patterns that reflect the history of the word. These three aspects interact dynamically and provide lots of kinds of information about a word if they are used with skill. However, it takes skill! Here are some examples to illustrate how these factors interact.

144

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

First, let’s look at the morpheme medic. Medic is derived from the Latin word medicus, which means “physician,” and its Proto–Indo–­European (PIE) root, med-, means “to take appropriate measures” (Online Etymology Dictionary; www.etymonline.com/index.php). If we know that, and we might know the word medic already, we probably suspect that words with the letters medic in them have something to do with medicine. We can see the morpheme in the words paramedic and medicate, and they are easy to pronounce, but that same morpheme is pronounced differently when it appears in other words: medical /medʹ i kəl/ medicine /medʹ ə sin) medicinal /mə diʹ sənəl/ The word stress and pronunciation of the letter c change in these three words. In the first two, the first syllable gets the strong stress, but in the word medicinal, the stress moves to the second syllable. Also, in the first word, the letter c is pronounced as /k/, whereas in the second and third words, it is pronounced as /s/. It’s the same morpheme, and it retains the same spelling and basic meaning, but it has very different pronunciations. ELLs—or native speakers, for that matter—­hearing the words might very well not “hear” the morpheme medic or know how to pronounce the longer words. The same applies to the morpheme electric, derived from the Latin and Greek words for “amber” (www.etymonline.com/index.php). As in the previous example, the pronunciation of the second letter c changes according the place in the word that the morpheme occurs, and it has three different pronunciations, /s/, /k/, and /sh/: electricity /iy lek triʹ si tiy/ electrical /iy lekʹ tri kəl/ electrician /iy lek triʹ shən/ The word stress also changes. You can see that it is difficult to recognize the morpheme in these words and to easily pronounce them even though they have the same root morpheme. A morpheme’s spelling might also change, which makes it hard to identify even in written form. For example, the PIE root en-, meaning in or into, is the prefix in many words, but it can be spelled in four distinct ways! All four of these variations of en- carry the meaning of “into,” spelled four different ways: inim-

inflame, incur, inner imbibe, impress, imprison

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 145

enem-

engrave, enter, ennoble embolden, embryo, embattled

The fact that this little morpheme can be spelled four different ways gives you some idea of why it can be so challenging to recognize English morphemes. Part of it can be explained by assimilation, a linguistic phenomenon in which speakers modify a sound in a word to prepare for the phoneme that comes after it. People unconsciously try to expend the least effort to say a word, and this occurs in every language. As you can see, when the sound after the prefix begins with /b/, /p/, or /m/, the spelling and pronunciation of the prefix changes to /m/. That’s because the sounds, called bilabials, are made by closing the lips, so we close our lips to get ready for the bilabial. The spelling of the vowel can also change because both the e and the i are “short vowels” formed in almost the same place in the mouth, so it’s easy to represent them with two different vowel letters. The i spelling is more common in American English, whereas the e spelling is more common in British English—­a nd they are both correct. To give one more example of a morpheme that is used in three languages but with an interesting twist on the same prefix, en-, look at Figure 6.1. These three warnings have the same meaning and use the same morpheme; but among French, Spanish, and English, in can also mean “not” in English but means “into” in French and Spanish. Think of how confusing that warning might be if you saw it in one language and knew only one of the others!

FIGURE 6.1. Words with the same meaning in three languages, but the prefix has the opposite meaning.

146

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

In sum, here are two key ideas about morphemes that teachers can incorporate in their instruction: 1. Morphemes may be pronounced or spelled differently but still bear the same meaning. 2. Spelling patterns in English give us information about morphemes, phonemes, and the history of words. We have learned that English sounds and letters do not map neatly onto each other. In our opaque English orthography, some words don’t sound like they look or look like they sound. Now we see that the same idea applies to morphemes: Morphemes do not necessarily map neatly onto their pronunciations or spellings. Nevertheless, the morpheme stubbornly retains its meaning even with variations in pronunciation, spelling, or usage over time. A student once asked me why the adjective unequal changes to inequality as a noun. I told her that inequality has French–­Latin roots and the whole word was borrowed into English, while unequal simply added the prefix un- from Old English. What I didn’t mention was that I was frantically Googling her question on my phone when she asked me!—­Gareth One last example of how a word’s history might change the way the morpheme looks can be found in one of our most significant words, love. It was spelled luve at the time Robert Burns, a Scottish poet, wrote the immortal poem beginning “My luve is like a red red rose . . . ” in 1794. Ironically, the shortened spelling of love to luv in the 1960s has a connection to the word’s history—­a nd the spelling looks more like the “short u” sound we use to pronounce the word.

Morphemes through Different Lenses We can look at morphemes through two lenses: a “microscope,” to see how they make up parts of words, and a “telescope,” to see how they function in larger units of language. Let’s start with the microscope and examine how morphemes make up individual words.

The Microscope: Roots and Affixes When we examine words “up close” as if through a microscope, we see that words are composed of two kinds of morphemes: roots and affixes. Roots are morphemes that contain the primary meaning of a word and “cannot be cut up into any smaller parts” (Pinker, 2007, p. 128). A root may form a complete

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 147

word, such as plant or dance, or it may be combined with other morphemes in order to form a word. The second category is affixes. Affixes attach to roots. Although you may not know the word affix, you probably know the word prefix, which is an affix at the beginning of a word, or suffix, which is at or near the end of a word. Affixes are morphemes, but unlike roots they are not words, and they cannot stand on their own. Another feature is that they may be “coupled” like train cars: Many words contain several affixes. As we move forward in our understanding of morphemes, we should remember the complex origins of English morphemes. English etymology includes many Old English or Germanic roots and many more recent words with Latin and Greek roots, in addition to words from other languages. Some older words of Old English origin, such as listen or father, have two syllables but only a single root morpheme that cannot be broken into smaller units. Another example of a very old word is goodbye, which consists of a single root that has been contracted over time from what was once four separate words, God be with ye. One more example might be the word fulfill, which has a single root meaning “to complete” and can no longer be separated into two morphemes. Many high-­frequency words from Old English have single roots even though they consist of two syllables. Some are among the most high-­ frequency words of English. In addition to roots that have two syllables, there is also a small group of very old roots that no longer have any identifiable meaning on their own but can still be part of a larger word. They are called bound roots and are discussed in the next section.

The Telescope: Lexical and Functional Morphemes In examining words “from afar,” through a telescope, we find that morphemes also provide information about the grammatical roles of the words in a sentence. Now we look through the “telescope” to see the roles they play within and among words in a sentence. This perspective uses a different classification system from the one used for the “microscope” analysis.

Two Major Categories of English Morphemes Linguists place English morphemes into two major categories: free morphemes and bound morphemes. Free morphemes are words. Free morphemes have two categories: lexical morphemes and functional morphemes. The second category is bound morphemes, which form parts of words and cannot stand on their own. Bound morphemes also have two categories: derivational and inflectional morphemes. The inverted morphemes pyramid (Figure 6.2) allows us to see the categories at a glance.

148

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 6.2. Inverted morphemes pyramid. Copyright © 2009 Kristin Lems. Used with permission.

As you can see, the top two portions of the pyramid are the free morphemes, which represent words. All lexical morphemes are words. The second category is functional morphemes and also consists of words, but far fewer of them, perhaps 100 words. The lower part of the inverted morphemes pyramid consists of word parts called bound morphemes. This consists of two categories, derivational morphemes and inflectional morphemes. Bound morphemes are not words but combine with other morphemes to make words. In the following section, we examine free morphemes, bound morphemes, and the additional category of “leftover” morphemes, called bound roots.

Free Morphemes Free morphemes are words. They may consist of one or more roots and affixes. We can subdivide free morphemes into two categories: lexical and functional. Lexical Morphemes: The “Vital Organs” Lexical morphemes make up the vast majority of the words of a language. Also referred to as the more commonly understood term content words, lexical morphemes include nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and some prepositions. We can think of them as the important content words of a sentence.

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 149

Lexical morphemes range from high-­frequency words such as talk, tomato, around, or quickly to academic language such as ecolog y, angle, or migration to abstract words such as love, concept, or form. These content words can be considered the “vital organs” of the body of language. Linguists call lexical morphemes an open class category because new words can always be added to it. That is exactly what is happening every day as people stretch and mold language to fit their changing needs. No wonder there are so many English words! Not coincidentally, lexicon is the word used to mean “all the words in a language.” Lexical morphemes encompass both BICS and CALP vocabulary, and they become more difficult to learn as the content becomes more advanced and abstract. Lexical morphemes help ELLs develop that all-­important academic vocabulary of the content areas, and they are rightfully at the center of most ELL vocabulary study. Functional Morphemes: The “Connective Tissue” Functional morphemes, on the other hand, include prepositions, articles, pronouns, conjunctions, modals, and auxiliary verbs. They are often referred to as function words. Examples of functional morphemes include of, the, and, she; modal auxiliary verbs such as can; and auxiliary verbs such as are and is. Functional morphemes define the relationships among the content words around them. For example, they can stand in for a content word in the case of pronouns, or they can provide the meaning of a sentence by using a different modal verb, such as in the two sentences “she might study” or “she should study.” Linguists call functional morphemes a closed class category because no new functional words can be added. Functional morphemes can be considered the “connective tissue” in the body of language. What’s more, additional morphemes cannot be added to function words. They are what they are! For example, we can’t put -ed at the end of the word below. Another characteristic of functional morphemes is that they are subject to the rules of English syntax, or word order. As sentences become longer and more complex, they can be difficult to understand or to produce. For instance, ELLs need to be considerably advanced to understand, or correctly produce, a sentence like this: “I wouldn’t have eaten if I had known you were going to feed me.” A comprehensive explanation of function words can be found in Freeman and Freeman (2004, pp. 177–179). The number of functional morphemes is small, but they abound in English and are found in nearly every sentence. Of the top 10 most common American English words, eight are function words, and the other two (be and have) double as both auxiliary verbs (function words) and main verbs (content words; “Word frequency data,” 2023). In fact, we can scarcely find a sentence of more than two or three words without a function word! Without function words, English doesn’t make sense because the relationships among the

150

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

words can’t be expressed. For a list of the 50 most common English words, see Appendix 6.1 at the end of the chapter. The Trouble with Function Words The focus of vocabulary learning in schools is usually on learning lexical morphemes (content words), but functional morphemes are equally important for ELLs. It should not be taken for granted that ELLs know these all-­ important functional morphemes. In fact, despite their frequency, they are harder to learn than content words, for the following three reasons: 1.  Function words are opaque. Because function words have been in the language for a long time, their spelling is more likely to be opaque, that is, not decodable. This feature makes them harder to read, spell, and pronounce. Think about how hard it is to read or spell the function words of, could, and though. In addition to not looking the way they sound, some function words are homophones (to, two, too; there and their). Moreover, some of the most common function words look and sound bafflingly alike to beginning readers and writers. Examples of exasperating opaque function words are those with the “silent h” or the letter combination th, found in such function words as when, the, then, and them (Hiebert, Brown, Taitague, Fisher, & Adler, 2004). Beginning ELLs also have trouble spelling common function words with a silent l, such as would, could, and should, and those with silent letters that are spelled with a g or gh, such as through or although. Because these older, high-­ frequency words do not have decodable spelling or pronunciation, they are called sight words, and teachers ask students to memorize them as whole words, by sight or “by heart,” rather than decoding them. 2.  Function words are not cognates with Latinate languages. The second reason, related to the first one, is that English function words tend to be of Old English or Germanic origin and are not cognates of words in Latin-based languages such as Spanish. (Cognates are words that share a common root and meaning across languages.) That means that these words will not look or sound like words familiar to ELLs from Latinate languages such as Spanish. When my kids and I were visiting my family in Holland, we couldn’t recognize any Dutch content words, but a number of function words, such as en for the English word and, dis for the word this, and voor to mean the word for were easy for us to pick out. Due to the very old roots Dutch and English share, we experienced the strange sensation of not knowing the topic of a conversation but being able to tell more or less where a sentence was going.—­K ristin 3.  Function words can cause L1 interference. The third and most important difficulty with English function words for ELLs, however, is that the way

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 151

they combine with verbs in particular is English-­specific. Native speakers of English use thousands of combinations of verbs-plus-­prepositions (which are called phrasal verbs or two-word verbs) in their everyday speaking and writing. Those particular word combinations are not the same in other languages. For example, in French the preposition de is used in the verb se souvenir de, which means to remember. An intermediate-­level French ELL might say “I remember from her” instead of “I remember her” because the word de in French might seem to translate to the word from in English. Unfortunately, these small but important differences in the distribution of prepositions must be learned one by one in a new language, and there is limited PCI to facilitate the process. L1 interference from distribution patterns of function words in another language causes considerable problems in learning to read, write, listen, and speak in English. To further complicate matters, some native languages use no function words at all. These languages, such as Polish or Arabic, are called “case-­ ending” languages. The relationships between the content words are established through suffixes at the ends of words rather than by function words such as those used in English. For students whose L1 is a case-­ending language, the very “function of function words” is foreign and needs to be practiced over time. If you have these ELLs in your classroom, we suggest that you make sure to design lessons and practices for phrasal verbs and other phrases that use prepositions. Function words deserve attention in the ESL classroom. Figuring out how function words work within phrases and sentences can be a revelation to ELLs who can understand the content words around them but get tripped up by the “little words” in between. The Dangers of Analyzing Words by Syllables The syllables of English are the set of allowable consonant–­vowel patterns. They are based on a word’s sound. Sometimes syllables consist of a single morpheme, but most often they don’t. Although analyzing words by syllables is useful when young learners are developing phonological awareness, analyzing words by written syllables is more problematic in English because it is so opaque. For example, the word played is pronounced as only one syllable, but it contains two distinct morphemes, play and -ed. If we analyze it only by syllables, we will lose the information provided by the two morphemes, the root play and the inflectional morpheme ed, which indicates the past tense. Focusing on the syllable overlooks the morphophonemic nature of English and misses information that assists in both reading and spelling words. Once ELLs are beginning to read connected text, focusing on morphemes is more useful than focusing on syllables. In fact, using a syllable-­based

152

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

decoding strategy may conceivably contribute to “word calling,” a concern we discuss in Chapter 8 on fluency. When the phonemes and graphemes of a word get all the focus and the morphemes are bypassed, it is possible that words may be pronounced correctly, but their meanings may be overlooked. Some teachers ask students to do “word finder” activities—­ f inding words by scrambling the letters of other words or in letter strings, such as finding the morpheme bear in the word bread. This activity can be confusing. It is more valuable to ask learners to look for real morphemes within a word because morphemes are more than letter strings; they carry meanings. When morpheme analysis is used as a tool for word attack, ELLs are more likely to pay attention to the meanings of words as they read. In the Harry Potter books and movies, for example, the main antagonist has the last name Malfoy. When ELLs learn the Latin root mal, meaning bad or evil, they will recognize it not only in that name but also as a root in many words they will encounter in the future, such as malodorous, malefactor, malaria, maladjusted, and malfeasance. And the word hypnopedia, created by Aldous Huxley as a key concept in the eerie 1932 book Brave New World (Huxley, 1932), can be understood by breaking it into two morphemes, hypno and pedia, both of which students can use to identify and learn many other words. What would you guess might be its meaning? In oral reading, focusing on morphemes may create pronunciation miscues in the short run, but it will pay off in the added attention students pay to comprehension. For example, if an ELL student pronounces the word musician as /myuw zikʹ iən/, with a “hard k” as in the morpheme music, it indicates that the reader recognizes the morpheme music in the word. Although the student mispronounced the word, this is something we want to encourage. When ELLs make pronunciation miscues that signal that they recognized a morpheme, teachers should be glad that the student recognizes the morpheme and is therefore accessing part of the word’s meaning. There are other hazards to syllable-­based analysis. If we separate the word antibody into four syllables, for example, we think that there are four morphemes. Body is a free morpheme that carries a meaning all by itself, from the Old English and means “material frame” (www.etymonline.com/index.php). In contrast, the other two syllables, an and ti, do not retain any meaning when they are split up; however, seen as a single morpheme, we understand that anti- is a prefix that means “against” or “opposite.” Viewed as four syllables, we can’t grasp the meaning of the word, but viewed as two morphemes instead, we can derive a meaning of “against unwanted substances” and can apply it to a unit on health. Here is a similar example from a grade 1–2 bilingual teacher. In my class last week, one of my ELLs broke up the word altogether into “all to get her.” He said with excitement, “All the words are on the word wall!” And they



Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 153

were. But they have no relationship to the meaning of the word. I realized I needed to help them understand that some words can’t be broken into smaller words— they are inseparable.—Margarita (Margie) Jaime The most striking example of the danger of dividing words into syllables instead of morphemes is the odd fact about the word therapist. It makes sense broken into its morphemes—therap from the Greek word “to treat medically” and -ist, a bound morpheme meaning “one who practices.” However, if the letters of the word therapist are divided into the syllable “the” and two other morphemes, the word can also look like the rapist!

Bound Morphemes Bound morphemes are the other major category. As noted earlier, there are two kinds of bound morphemes, derivational and inflectional. Unlike free morphemes, a bound morpheme by itself cannot be a word. Bound morphemes attach to free morphemes in order to make a word. On the inverted morphemes pyramid in Figure 6.2, they occupy the two smallest parts of the pyramid shape. Derivational Morphemes Derivational morphemes can be either prefixes or suffixes in English. Derivational morphemes are dynamic and rich. They are one of the devices that grant English its remarkable ability to generate so many new words, as we discuss in the following chapter on word formation. Derivational morphemes not only allow many new words to be formed, but they also change the grammatical category, or part of speech, of a word, such as adding -ful to thought, thus changing it from a noun to the adjective thoughtful. Derivational morphemes operate in three powerful ways within words. 1. They can create words when added to a root (e.g., pay + ment, progress + ive) or a bound root (e.g., ex + pel, with -pel being a bound root). 2. They can change the meaning of an existing word. Examples include adding the derivational morpheme non- to the word dairy, creating nondairy, which means that a food does not contain dairy products, or adding dis- to appear, meaning to not be seen. 3. They can change a word’s grammatical category and therefore its meaning. For example, the noun or verb respect can be changed to its opposite meaning, disrespect, and can change to an adjective by adding the suffix -ful, to make disrespectful. Knowing common adjective suffixes alone, such as -ious, -able, and -less, we can unlock the meanings of thousands of words.

154

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Inflectional Morphemes The last subcategory is inflectional morphemes, the bottom of the inverted pyramid. There are seven inflectional morphemes, and they serve as grammar markers to show the tense, the number (singular/plural), possession, or comparison. (Linguists disagree about how to count inflectional morphemes, and the number may vary between 7 and 11.) Table 6.1 depicts the seven inflectional morphemes and their functions.

TABLE 6.1. The Seven Inflectional Morphemes of English

Inflectional morpheme

Grammatical function

Part of speech inflectional morpheme is added to

-s or -es

Noun plurals

Noun

apples, buses

Third person singular in present tense

Verb

gets, goes

Possessive for singular or uncountable nouns

Noun

the book’s, oil’s

Possessive for plural nouns

Noun

the students’

Regular form of past tense

Verb

talked, tried

Regular form of past participle

Verb

(have) talked, (has) tried

Some plurals

Noun

oxen, children

Some past participles

Verb

written, given

Derivation from noun

Verb

strengthen, threaten

Derivation from noun

Adjective

golden, silken

Comparative form of adjectives and adverbs

Adjective

friendlier

Adverb

faster

Superlative form of adjectives and adverbs

Adjective

friendliest

Adverb

fastest

Derivation from verb

Noun (gerund)

swimming

Present continuous (present progressive)

Verb

going, trying

’s or s’

-ed

-en (left over from Old English)

-er

-est

-ing

Example

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 155

As you can see, inflectional morphemes are distinguished by a few distinct characteristics. 1. 2. 3. 4.

Inflectional morphemes cannot create new words. All inflectional morphemes are suffixes. They are at the end of a word, after all other morphemes. Inflectional morphemes are very short—the longest two are only three letters long (-est and -ing). They are easy to overlook in both reading and writing, but they serve a key role in the meaning of sentences.

Although insignificant in terms of letters, inflectional morphemes are both very common and very important in conveying grammatical information. Also, despite their short length, inflectional morphemes may have several pronunciations, as we discuss in the upcoming section about pronunciation of words ending with the spellings -ed/-d, and -s/-es. A Special Category: Bound Roots Sometimes we don’t find understandable morphemes when we break a word apart. This is because, over time, the meanings of some morphemes become lost to the speakers of the language. These “orphan” morphemes, which seem to have no meaning of their own, are called bound roots. A bound root has no identifiable meaning until it is combined with another root or affix to create a single morpheme. For example, the words lukewarm, overwhelm, and cranberry look like they have two morphemes in them because they have more than one syllable, and one of the parts of the word has meaning. The free morpheme warm can be found in the word lukewarm, over can be found in overwhelm, and the word berry within cranberry. However, the other half of these words, luke, whelm, and cran, do not have any meaning on their own— they are bound roots. Bound roots can also be found after a prefix. Some examples of these are the words defunct, receive, and inane. When we remove the prefixes de-, re-, and in-, the remaining parts of the word, -funct, -ceive, and -ane, have no recognizable meaning. Other examples of prefixes followed by bound roots are the words reduce, conceive, and repeat. If these words pop up in your morpheme analysis with students, they won’t work because they have bound roots. The point is that morpheme analysis is very rewarding, but there will always be a few words that just can’t be analyzed that way, mostly old words, and you should be prepared to run into them when you teach. Earlier in this chapter, we pointed out that some two-­syllable words, such as father, contain only one morpheme and cannot be broken down further. The same is true for words with bound roots. They may appear to have

156

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

two morphemes, but one syllable has no meaning on its own and is dependent on the complete morpheme for meaning. When we encourage students to take apart new vocabulary words to find their morphemes, we must be aware that some bound roots will crop up. Here are the takeaway ideas to convey to students.

• Some multisyllable words are composed of only one morpheme and can’t be broken down any further.

• Although all morphemes carry meaning, there are some words with bound roots which can’t be figured out, due to the history of English words. • The vast majority of English words can be separated into morphemes, and it is a great strategy for word learning.

Pronunciations of Two Common Inflectional Morphemes Now that you’ve learned about the four different categories of morphemes, you’ll be able to make sense of the fact that there are three different pronunciations for each of the inflectional morphemes -s/-es and -ed/-d. Because they are found in many English words, it is critical that you, as a teacher of ELLs, understand why there are different pronunciations and find effective ways to teach them. The Inflectional Morpheme ‑s/‑es The -s/-es morpheme is a suffix that gives information about the grammatical category of the words they are part of. We add the letters -s/-es to the ends of many words for three different reasons. 1. To indicate a plural (e.g., book → books, dish → dishes). 2. To indicate the third-­person singular form of a present tense verb (e.g., play → plays, go → goes). 3. With an added apostrophe, to indicate noun possession (e.g., Leah’s cat, students’ phones). This common English morpheme can have three different pronunciations that apply to all of its possible uses, as can be seen in Table 6.2. If you are confused, say them to yourself, paying attention to the last sound (phoneme), and you will notice that there are three different pronunciations. If the last sound is an unvoiced consonant (your larynx doesn’t vibrate), the pronunciation of the -s/-es will also be unvoiced. If the last sound is a voiced consonant (your larynx vibrates) or any vowel, the -s/-es will also be voiced. If the last sound is a fricative (its sound creates friction in two parts of the mouth), we



Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 157 TABLE 6.2. Pronunciation of ‑s/‑es Endings Voiceless /s/ ending

consonant /p/ /t/ /k/ /f/ /TH/

tap get take laugh booth

/ps/ /ts/ /ks/ /fs/ /THs/

taps gets takes laughs booths

Voiced /z/ ending

consonant /b/ /d/ /g/ /m/ /n/ /ng/ /l/ /r/ /v/ /th/

grab bid tug hum gain sing pull stair love soothe

/bz/ /dz/ /gz/ /mz/ /nz/ /ngz/ /lz/ /rz/ /vz/ /thz/

Vowels /ey/ /iy/ /ay/ /oi/ /ow/ /uw/

grabs bids tugs hums gains sings pulls stairs loves soothes

/z/ ending

day see try boy go clue

/eyz/ /iyz/ /ayz/ /oiz/ /owz/ /uwz/

stays sees tries boys goes clues

All fricatives last sound /s/ /z/ /sh/ /ch/ /zh/ /j/

place size wash touch garage judge

long ending /səz/ /zəz/ /shəz/ /chəz/ /zhəz/ /jəz/

places sizes washes touches garages judges

158

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

add an extra syllable with an /əz/ sound at the end of the syllable. Note: This is a completely different skill from learning spelling patterns! The -s/-es endings are very common in English because third-­person singular verbs, plural forms of nouns, and noun possessive forms all use them. The Inflectional Morpheme ‑ed/‑d The second example is the morpheme suffix spelled as -ed/-d, which is added to the end of words for three processes. 1. To indicate the past tense form of regular verbs (e.g., watch → watched, live → lived, donate → donated). 2. To indicate the past participle of regular verbs (e.g., watch → has watched, live → has lived, donate → has donated). 3. For adjective endings derived from regular verbs (e.g., shocked, pleased, interested). Table 6.3 shows the three pronunciations of the -ed/-d endings. Say the words in the table and pay attention to the last sound (phoneme). If the last sound is an unvoiced consonant (the larynx doesn’t vibrate), the pronunciation of the -ed/-d will also be unvoiced. If the last sound is a voiced consonant (the larynx vibrates) or any vowel, the -ed/-d will also be voiced. If the last sound is either /t/ or /d/ (called alveolar stops or “flaps” in many words), we add an extra syllable with the sounds /əd/. These -ed/-d endings are very common in English because regular past tense, regular past participles, and adjectives derived from regular past tense verbs all use them. You may have realized that these very common endings are not always pronounced the same way but may not have understood the reason for this phenomenon—assimilation once again. The reason is that the sounds that immediately precede the morphemes affect the pronunciation of the morphemes. ELLs might be more likely to pay attention to those “pesky” word endings in their writing and speaking when they learn to recognize the meaning of the morphemes and realize that morphemes aren’t always going to be pronounced the same way in every word.

Morpheme Study in the Classroom Because English is derived from two big streams, Old English–­Germanic and Latin–Greek, some English words are more decodable than others. The same holds true for morpheme study; words from the Latin–Greek backgrounds, which dominate the vocabulary of the advanced content areas, are most usefully understood from a morphological perspective. Looking at words from

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 159 TABLE 6.3. Pronunciation of ‑d/‑ed Endings Voiceless /t/ ending

consonant /p/ /k/ /f/ /s/ /sh/ /ch/ /TH/

stop kick laugh kiss wash watch tooth

/pt/ /kt/ /ft/ /st/ /sht/ /cht/ /THt/

stopped kicked laughed kissed washed watched toothed

Voiced consonant /d/ ending /d/ ending

consonant /b/ /g/ /m/ /n/ /ng/ /l/ /r/ /v/ /th/ /z/ /j/ /zh/

grab tug hum gain bang pull stir love bathe surprise judge assuage

/bd/ /gd/ /md/ /nd/ /ngd/ /ld/ /rd/ /vd/ /thd/ /zd/ /jd/ /zhd/

Vowels /ey/ /iy/ /ay/ /oi/ /ow/ /uw/

stay agree try annoy flow sue

grabbed tugged hummed gained banged pulled stirred loved bathed surprised judged assuaged /d/ ending

/eyd/ /iyd/ /ayd/ /oid/ /owd/ /uwd/

stayed agreed tried annoyed flowed sued

Flap last sound /t/ /d/ /t/ /d/

wait load start pad

long ending /ṙəd/ /ṙəd/ /ṙəd/ /ṙəd/

waited loaded started padded

160

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Greek and Latin roots will yield better results than trying to take apart the older Germanic or Old English words whose morphemes may have become “cemented” into a single root or a bound root.

To Aid in Spelling From time to time, writers call for “simplifying” English spelling to make it more phonetic. Freeman and Freeman (2004) see reform proposals as humorous and not to be taken seriously. In their opinion: What many reformers don’t realize is that the current system is a good compromise. Writing systems are designed to serve two different groups of people: writers and readers. Changes that would make writing easier would make reading more difficult, and changes that make reading easier would make writing harder. Most reforms are aimed at simplifying the task of spelling words by making spellings more closely correspond to sounds. That is, the reforms favor writers. But most people read a great deal more than they write, so these changes would not be beneficial. (p. 106)

If spelling were simplified, we would lose morphemic information that helps us read in English. Homophones (words with the same pronunciation but different spellings and meanings) such as two, to, and too would become indistinguishable. English spellings do not just represent the sounds of a word; they also point to its meanings, grammar, and in some circumstances its origins. Because the English writing system contains information about a word’s morphemes, phonemes, and etymology, information may be contained in the visual display of a word that cannot be heard in its pronunciation. For example, in the word cupboard, the p isn’t pronounced, and the morpheme board is reduced to a syllable that sounds like the word bird, but if we examine the word, we can get a clue about its historical meaning: It must be a board or shelf where cups are kept. Also, we see that the word bomb is related to the verb bombard, as the second word pronounces the second letter b. Sometimes students will find a string of letters that looks like a morpheme but simply isn’t one. Teachers can encourage students to develop an “eye” for finding morphemes even though some attempts will lead to a dead end. For example, a student found the word meter in the word cemetery but analyzed the meaning of the word and quickly realized that meter was not a morpheme in that word—just a letter string!

Using L1 Morpheme Study as a Resource Studying morphemes in their native languages helps students to become more metalinguistic and to increase their L1 vocabulary. Comparing the

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 161

morphemes of words in an L1 and L2 using translanguaging can also highlight differences in the way a word’s meaning is constructed between two languages. A good example is the Spanish word for birthday, cumpleaños, which is derived from two Spanish morphemes meaning complete and year. Thus a birthday is the “completion of a year.” In English, on the other hand, the word birthday comes from the Germanic roots birth and day, a commemoration of the first day of a child’s life. In a bilingual or dual-­language Spanish–­ English classroom, pointing out the morphemes for the Spanish word can help students recognize that when they “turn 10,” 10 years of life have been completed on their birthdays, a useful mathematical concept. In Korean culture, moreover, until recently, a person’s age was calculated by taking the current calendar year, subtracting their year of birth, and adding one. Learning other languages exposes learners not only to new words but also to the new concepts within those words. Morpheme study can be a messy business due to the complicated paths words can take before and after they enter the English language. For that reason, we suggest bringing in morphemes gradually as literacy is introduced and not before then. When introduced, studying morphemes brings great benefits to students and teachers alike.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Most morpheme activities are intensive because we are specifically looking for and identifying morphemes. However, games, which are more creative, can be considered more extensive!

Intensive Activities Studying Etymology Studying etymology is a great history project, and it’s also a lot of fun. While learning about content, students can also explore the etymology of words that relate to that content and talk about how those words are created. For example, we can look at the morphemes in the word bankrupt and find a rich definition of it. Students can easily research the origins of words they are learning and share them with the class. As another example, if we look at the two morphemes of breakfast, break and fast, we find added meaning in the idea that we are not only eating the first meal of the day but “breaking our fast” from the night before. Etymology Online (www.etymonline.com/index.php) is a great go-to source for capturing some of the histories of words. Older unabridged dictionaries are also still a great source of word histories and etymology.

162

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Morpheme Word Walls Can you put up a word wall in your classroom? Charts, word walls, word banks, and binders can be organized not just by sounds or words but also by morphemes. Figure 6.3 shows a morpheme word wall in a seventh-­grade science classroom in Elgin, Illinois. Rob Schoonveld, an eighth-­grade science teacher who has a class of mixed ELLs and native speakers, puts up large cards with common science morphemes around his classroom and refers to them regularly. He finds that the visual reminder of the morphemes helps students feel more confident with new science vocabulary. The morphemes, which are a combination of roots and affixes, can also be found in science words in a number of other languages, and using translanguaging or dual-­language analysis will assist students from those language backgrounds. Some common science morphemes and other key content morphemes are listed in Appendix 6.2 at the end of this chapter.

FIGURE 6.3. A morpheme word wall in a seventh-­grade science classroom. The teacher writes the meaning of each morpheme next to it and color-codes the morphemes by science unit.

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 163

Extensive Activities: Some Fun Morphemes Games Word List Contest It’s possible to learn a lot of new words by listing them by prefixes, suffixes, and roots. First, teachers put students in small groups, and the group chooses a secretary. Next, the teacher writes or calls out a prefix, such as pro-, or a suffix, such as -ment. The groups have 5 minutes to generate as many words as they can that use the prefix or the suffix—­no cheating with a smartphone or Chromebook! After the time is up, the groups take turns sharing them with the class. Any word common to more than one group is crossed out, and the group with the largest number of unique words wins the round. Alternatively, they can also play for the largest total list of words. You can also play this game using roots, but as you know, the spelling and pronunciation of roots can change in different environments due to the morphophonemic nature of English. We would suggest differentiating this activity for more advanced ELLs and making sure the morpheme is displayed in written form. Teachers can use the content-­ focused morpheme charts in Appendix 6.2 or others connected to their course’s content area. For example, the root digitus, the Latin word for finger, is found in many words connected to numbers, such as digitize, digital, three-digit numbers, or the term for the magician’s craft: prestidigitation. Talking about how people “count on their fingers” is a good way to help students see the relationship between these words. It’s possible to add to a word list based on roots as students encounter new words in reading and speaking. This activity builds metacognitive awareness in L1 English learners, too. The Compound Noun Game Reena Patel, an ESL teacher in a second-­grade Chicago public school, created a game for ELLs based on the theme of recognizing and creating compound nouns. The game has two parts. She created cardboard tiles with pictures of lexical morphemes that can be used to create compound nouns. She gives one tile to each student in the class. The students walk around the room and find the partner whose tile allows them to create a real compound noun. For example, one student had an image of a book, and another had an image of a bag. Together they formed the compound noun bookbag. Then she collects the tiles, shuffles them, and lets each pair choose four tiles from the box. With the four tiles, all consisting of high-­frequency nouns, she asks students to form at least two possible new words, create a definition for them, and share them with the class.

164

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

For example, students in her class created the new compound noun dream shelf, a “place to put objects that will bring you happy dreams.” Animal Compound Game Reena also compiled a list of compound nouns that are used in many animal names, such as mole rat, butterfly, anteater, and muskrat. She made separate cards for each of the nouns in these words and asked students to combine them to create names for new imaginary animals, which they then illustrated and shared with the class. It creates a wonderful menagerie of morphemes, and lots of laughs! For a set of game cards and full instructions for both games, see Appendix 6.3. Call My Bluff! This is an adaptation of the “two truths and a lie” game. Students in groups or pairs work to both discover and create words using morphemes. This game can be adapted to several age and proficiency levels. The teacher gives each group a prefix and asks them to think of, or find online, two words beginning with that morpheme. Students then prepare a definition and example sentence for these two words. Next, students take their prefix and work in their group to create a “fake” word, along with a subsequent false definition and example sentence. Taking turns in the class, the pairs or groups read their three terms to their classmates and ask if they can identify the invented word. For example, a student group was given the prefix auto, and they prepared the words autonomous, autocrat, and the false word autocept. They created a definition for the false word, “to accept payment electronically,” with the example sentence “The cryptocurrency is autocepted in your online wallet.” The majority of the class believed the term, thinking that autocrat was the fake word! Compound Noun Chain Game In this classroom activity, a teacher splits the class into small groups and gives the whole class a free morpheme. The class should be given 3–5 minutes to come up with as many other compound nouns as they can by adding another noun in either direction. Then each group reads its words. If another group shares the word, cross it out. The group with the most words not thought of by other groups wins. For example, pot can form part of compound nouns such as flowerpot, teapot, crackpot, potholder, or potbelly. Some other nouns that combine with many other words include moon, home, stop, and ground. A variation of the game is to

Using Morphemes to Learn Vocabulary 165

generate not only compound nouns but also phrasal verbs, listemes, and idioms from the word. We provide more examples of word combinations in Chapter 7. Words from Content Morphemes Appendix 6.2 has a list of key morphemes used in four different content areas. Take the most appropriate list and note how many word lists students can generate from the morphemes in each content area. You can also add your own morphemes specific to the topic in use at the time.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Make a simple chart summarizing the important characteristics of function words described in this chapter. Could you make this into a poster?  3. If you teach young children, think about ways you can set up children’s lit‑ eracy for working with morphemes at a later time. What morphemes do you think would be the best starting place?  4. Without using an electronic device, choose a prefix or suffix and see how many words you can write with it in 1 minute. Remember, the spelling of the affix may change in different surroundings, and it’s possible you’ll find a letter string that isn’t a prefix or suffix.  5. Using Table 6.2, add -s/-es to the following 15 words and classify their pro‑ nunciation (for /s/, /z/, or the extra syllable /əz/): watch, mess, get, kick, sing, hold, help, wash, trust, hum, play, go, sign, stop, hang.  6. Using Table 6.3, add -ed/-d to the following 15 words and classify their pro‑ nunciation (/t/, /d/, or the extra syllable /ə d/): waste, live, save, raid, cook, start, dance, play, interest, try, watch, toss, turn, sort, kick.  7. As an educator, have you used morphemes to help students understand your content-­area topic? In what ways has it been beneficial to the stu‑ dents? What difficulties have you encountered (or could you encounter) when using morphemes in your classroom setting?  8. Appendix 6.1 shows the 50 most common English words classified as con‑ tent words and function words. The first 10 have been provided as a guide. Classify them, then talk about what you have discovered. Why are two of the top 10 words classified as both content and function words?  9. Choose three roots in one of the content-­area morphemes in Appendix 6.2 and see how many words you can think of with that root. Was it difficult? Why or why not? 10. Using translanguaging, choose a language you are familiar with and make a

166

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners list of 6–10 affixes (prefixes or suffixes) in it. Then compare them to similar affixes with the same functions or meanings in English. How could these similarities be displayed in a chart or table used in the classroom?

11. With others, have a contest to see who can find the word that contains the most affixes. Can you find one with four affixes? five? (For this game, we will not count the notorious antidisestablishmentarianism!) 12. Look at the spellings spilled and spilt, or burned and burnt. Which spellings give more morphological information? Which ones give more phonemic information? Why? 13. How can you adopt a playful stance toward this linguistically complex topic to make morphemes seem fun, not troublesome? How can you make mor‑ phemes “morphun”? 14. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Create a game based on some of the morphemes found in one or more sections of this chapter, and try it out with your class‑ mates or coworkers. What did you learn by creating and piloting it?

APPENDIX 6.1

The 50 Most Common American English Words The 50 most common words in American English

Content or function?

 1. the

F

 2. be

C/F

 3. and

F

 4. of

F

 5. a

F

 6. in

F

 7. to

F

 8. have

C/F

 9. to

F

10.  it

F

Germanic, Old English, or Latin?

11.  I 12.  that 13.  for 14.  you 15.  he 16.  with 17. on 18.  do 19.  say 20.  this 21.  they 22.  at 23.  but (continued)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

167

The 50 Most Common American English Words (page 2 of 2) The 50 most common words in American English

Content or function?

24.  we 25.  his 26.  from 27. that 28.  not 29.  n’t 30.  by 31.  she 32.  or 33.  as 34.  what 35.  go 36.  their 37. can 38.  who 39.  get 40.  if 41.  would 42.  her 43.  all 44.  my 45.  make 46.  about 47. know 48.  will 49.  as 50.  up Note. Data from Word Frequency Data (2016).

168

Germanic, Old English, or Latin?

APPENDIX 6.2

Common Morphemes from Content-Area Vocabulary Some Key Science Morphemes sol

aero

hydro

paleo

astro

physio

bio

ecto

endo

ortho

chemo

cyto

meta

geo

therm

eco

electr(o)

micro

macro

quant

qual

trans

techn

syn

Some Key Mathematics Morphemes grad

graph

deci

centi

milli

circ

meter

plex

numer

equa

tri

quad

angl

hemi

sphere

add

sub

tract

fract

penta

hecto

octo

vert

hor

Some Key Social Studies Morphemes multi

proto

poli

agri

metro

ethno

anthro

hist

demo

gyn

homo

andro

poly

mono

bi

mega

hetero

gen

morph

popu

arch

aqua

theo

psych

cult

edu

logy

soph

etic

emic

Some Key Language Arts Morphemes biblio

script

auto

comp

improv

infere

solos

meta

orat

studere

spect

littera

rhetoric

genus

narrare

krisis

dict

caput

Note. Some morphemes change spelling when adopted into English. From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

169

APPENDIX 6.3

The Compound Noun Game 1. Print the game cards and cut them into pieces. If possible, use card stock or laminate the cards. If the class is larger, create more compound noun pairs. If students are at a very beginning level, pictures can be added to the words. 2. Each student picks out one card with half of the compound word written on it. They will walk around and find a person whose card completes the compound word (e.g., if your word is water, you can make a compound noun with the person who has the word fall—waterfall). 3. Once the students find their partners, they discuss why it is a compound word and what it means. Explain to the students that sometimes compound words are made up of two random words (e.g., butterfly). 4. Now, collect all the words and mix them up. Have two sets of partners pick out four new game cards. Put them together in any order to make a new compound word! Be creative and have fun! Students can use the word in a sentence and draw a picture of the new word. They can also create an advertisement for their new word if it is an object.

ANIMAL COMPOUND NOUN GAME Try doing this same activity with the set of animal compound words below. When the cards are shuffled, students can create their own animals! catfish ladybug sheepdog

dragonfly anteater seahorse

bulldog bluebird bullfrog

jellyfish lionfish

starfish grasshopper

When they create the animal, have them draw it and describe what it does.

ANOTHER COMPOUND WORD GAME (COMPOUND WORD LADDER) 1. Give the students a compound word. Take the word and think of another word that has part of the first word. Keep going to make a compound word ladder! Example: snowman snowball basketball football footprint fingerprint fingernail 2. When you can’t think of any more words, try a new compound word! (continued)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

170

The Compound Noun Game (page 2 of 2) CARDS FOR THE COMPOUND NOUN GAME (ENTERING OR BEGINNING LEVEL)

back

pack

day

dream

sail

boat

water

bed

book

case

flash

light

lunch

box

171

CHAPTER SEVEN

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY homophones • homographs • polysemous words • coinage • borrowing compounding • blending • clipping • acronyms • abbreviations • backformation conversion • scale change • paired‑word sound play • multiple processes capitonyms • eponyms • contronyms • hyponyms • cognates • false cognates collocations • phrasal verbs • idioms • listemes

T

he previous chapter examined the ways in which words can be learned through the powerful tool of morphemes. In this chapter, we focus on the wonderful world of English word formation processes, cognates, and collocations and the ways in which we can successfully teach them in the ELL classroom. If you are familiar with another language, you will easily find examples of these same word formation processes in that language. Learning about the surprising ways in which new words are created and evolve is amusing and highly motivating to students and teachers alike. Get ready for some fun!

Vocabulary: The Bottom Line for Reading in Any Language It stands to reason that the more word meanings we know, the easier it is to understand what we read. Educators have looked at the correlation between reading comprehension and vocabulary for many years and found it to be a strong one. More than a half century ago, Thorndike (1973) researched the relationship between L1 vocabulary and reading comprehension across different languages. He collected data from students in 15 countries who 172

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 173

were learning to read in different first languages and found that the students’ vocabulary and reading comprehension levels correlated at a significant level across a wide range of grades. This strong relationship has been corroborated in other studies (e.g., August & Shanahan, 2006; Fitzgerald, 1995). The National Reading Panel, after a comprehensive 2000 review of reading research, came to the same conclusion: “growth in reading power relies on continuous growth in word knowledge” (National Reading Panel, 2000, p. 4). We can say that ELLs and other multilingual learners are tasked to acquire twice as much vocabulary twice as fast as native speakers. That is no small feat—but remarkably, it is achievable!

English: A Richly Generative Language English has the largest vocabulary of any language in the world, with 600,000 words, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, although the number includes words no longer in use and words that are variations of listed entries (https://languages.oup.com/research/oxford-english-dictionary). The size of the English word list, or lexicon, is due to at least three factors: the eclectic origins of English, the “accommodating” stance of English toward new vocabulary, and the digital revolution, which speeds up the rate at which new words are generated and shared. English easily absorbs and allows for the creation of new words in myriad ways that captivate linguists—­but can bedevil ELLs. In Chapter 6, we looked at the ways that English words can be formed and modified using morphemes. In addition to derivational morphemes (prefixes and suffixes) and inflectional morphemes (suffixes at the ends of words), English words can change according to their tense and verb form. For example, the word stand takes the forms stands, standing, and stood and can be combined with other morphemes to form words like withstand, stand-alone, and nightstand, or the idiom take a stand. They can also keep the same form but undergo changes in meaning. Some features of English are relatively straightforward, such as word order, grammatical categories, and lack of gendered nouns and adjectives. It’s getting a handle on sprawling English vocabulary that can prove challenging. At the same time, introducing word formation into the classroom is highly motivating because there are so many new words coming into English through social media. Your students may very likely be the experts!

Etymology One of the reasons that English is so rich and widely used around the world is the size of the English lexicon. Etymology is the study of the history of

174

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

words and how they evolve, and it is fascinating to study the origins of words in English, whether through examining the combinations of morphemes in older words, words that have evolved, or newly minted words. Before looking at the ways new words are formed in English, let’s look at how existing words can be ambiguous or confusing.

Three Kinds of Ambiguous Vocabulary in English The opacity of English and its diverse sources create many ambiguities and multiple meanings of words. Words containing differing spellings, pronunciations, or meanings are often lumped together into the catchall category of homonyms, but we prefer to separate them into three distinct categories: homophones, homographs, and polysemous words. They are summarized in Table 7.1. 1.  Homophones are two or more words with the same sound but different spellings and meanings. Because English spelling is so opaque (i.e., the sounds in English words can be spelled many different ways, and English letters can have many different sounds), these words abound. Homophones account for a great number of spelling errors. Even when students know the meaning and sound of a word, they aren’t sure which spelling pattern matches with the meaning they are trying to convey. Until recently, speech-­ to-text and spellchecking software often did not catch homophones because both of the choices are real words, but this is changing. In addition to homophones with two spellings, such as threw/through, do/dew, and pair/pear, some high-­frequency English words have not just two, but three different spellings and meanings. They include there/they’re/their, right/write/rite, sent/scent/cent, and to/two/too. It’s no wonder homophones cause so many spelling errors! 2.  Homographs (sometimes called heteronyms) are two words with the same spelling but different pronunciations and meanings. Because the multiple meanings of homographs are spelled the same way, they are not likely to be misspelled, but instead may be mispronounced, misread, and misunderstood. Examples of common homographs with the same letters but different pronunciations and meanings include bass (“fish” or “a musical instrument”), TABLE 7.1. Ambiguous Vocabulary in English Type

Same sound?

Same spelling?

Same meaning?

Homophones

Yes

No

No

Homographs

No

Yes

No

Polysemous words

Yes

Yes

No

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 175

bow (“weapon for shooting arrows” or “bend from the waist to show respect”), dove (“the past tense of dive” or “a white bird representing peace”), and wind (“twist a rope” or “a movement of air”). There are also many homographs like the word permit, which has different meanings and different syllable stress depending on whether it is a noun or verb. I got the permit from the city. (noun) Do the owners permit tenants to own dogs? (verb) Some homographs cannot be disambiguated without a context, such as the word read in the sentence “They read the newspaper.” Is read in simple present tense or simple past tense? We can’t know unless we hear it spoken aloud or see it written in a larger context. 3.  Polysemous words are pronounced and spelled the same way but have different meanings that do not appear to relate to each other. Exploring the etymology of the word may give us some historical clues about its different meanings, but it also may not. Examples of common polysemous words in English are bat (the animal or the baseball equipment), bank (the edge of the water or a financial establishment that handles money), fly (the insect, a baseball that is caught, or the motion of airplanes and birds), and bill (part of a duck, or money owed for goods or services). Many very common English words are polysemous, and figuring out their additional meanings is not easy! For example, ELLs in a class we observed were reading a story that included the sentence “They hunted game with bows and arrows.” The students were confident that they knew the meaning of the word game. Looking at it in the paragraph, however, they quickly realized that the sentence didn’t make sense when they interpreted game to mean “something you play.” These different meanings can be captured on semantic maps, which can have a word or concept in a circle in the middle and spokes going out from it. In a semantic map that shows different meanings of the word game, you might have one circle with the words “something you play” in the middle and the words chess, badminton, Minecraft, and Roblox extending out from it and a second circle with the words “animals hunted for food” with the words bison, wild boar, or deer coming out from it. English content words, which are CALP words, are often polysemous. They take on a variety of specific meanings in different subject areas, and students need to learn these precise definitions as they advance through the grades. For example, there are three distinct definitions of the word volume as it is used in library science, mathematics, and physics. Library science: A volume of an encyclopedia is one of the books that make up the set.

176

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Math: Finding the volume of a cylinder requires multiplying its base times its height. Physics: The volume of an acoustic signal is based on its amplitude (loudness). Students need to learn both the general meanings and the discipline-­specific meanings of words. Ogle, Blachowicz, Fisher, and Lang (2015) caution, “The small words are often the ones that can cause difficulties. For example, compare, design, look, work, average, equivalent, vary, and reasonable are all words with common meanings that may have explicit meanings in math” (p. 105). Many times, the content-­a rea text or teacher introduces a content word without any clarification as to its exact meaning, and multilingual students may carry a different understanding of the word in their minds, especially if they have made a mental translation of a word from their L1 that covers one definition but not another. For example, the English word play translates to two different words in Spanish: jugar when it refers to sports, as in jugar al futbol, but tocar when it refers to a musical instrument, such as tocar el piano. With guidance, ELL students, or L1 English speakers studying a foreign language, learn that this is not unusual or problematic but common and natural. A kindergarten teacher recounts when the director at her school announced a contest in the school library to win a free book: When the students who wanted to enter the drawing got in line, I noticed that my EL student had her cup of crayons with her. I told her she didn’t need to bring anything to the library and she asked, “But how will I do my drawing?” I was able to explain what a drawing was to her by demonstrating it with our class number sticks. Once I demonstrated that it was like our number jar, she understood, and still wanted to go to the library to enter her guess for the drawing!—­A manda Yee

Puns: Polysemous and Homophonic! English polysemous words and homophones create puns, which are jokes based on wordplay. Many puns derive their humor from the clash between the first and second meanings of polysemous words. Puns based on homophones, on the other hand, need to be spoken aloud. There are also puns based on close pronunciations of other words (Lems, 2011, 2013a). Small businesses often use puns in their names to attract customers. For amusing examples of puns on company signage, take a look at the photos in Figure 7.1.

A Dozen Word Formation Processes in English Although words might seem to enter English randomly, they have linguistically distinct categories. As you introduce these categories to students, they

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 177

FIGURE 7.1. English word formation using puns.

178

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

will start to find examples of English word formation every day and will begin to incorporate new words into their listening, speaking, reading, and writing. You may also find that students start to invent new words! These word formation processes, the entirety of which is sometimes called neologisms (or “new words”), can be found across languages because they conform to linguistic universals. 1.  Coinage. These words are made up from scratch to describe processes, products, or services. They may have no identifiable morphemes and no known etymologies, although they may derive from a sound. They may begin as commercial names that are then extended to more general use. As they become more widely used, the capital letter may fall away. Examples include Kodak, Kleenex, nylon, Skype, Etsy, and aspirin. 2.  Borrowing (loan words). These are words taken from other languages and incorporated into English. Sometimes the original meaning is modified, and the pronunciation may change. When a word was borrowed long ago, it may no longer look like a borrowed word; examples include cuisine (French), pajamas (Hindi), banana (Wolof), chipmunk (Algonquin), alfalfa (Arabic), and gung-ho (Chinese). English words are borrowed into other languages, too, using translanguaging, as in the Spanish words postear → to post (as on Instagram) or in code switching such as “Estoy chillin” → “I’m chilling” or relaxing, or French words such as le weekend, le whisky, or le parking. 3.  Compounding. A very common way to form new English words consists of combining two or more free morphemes to create a new word with a new meaning, called a compound. The new word may be combined into a single word (babysitter), may be hyphenated (merry-go-round), or may consist of separate words that we understand to have a single meaning, such as hot dog. Compounds are usually taught as two nouns, but they also consist of combinations of other kinds of words, such as noun-plus-­adjective (praiseworthy), verb-plus-­preposition (sellout, makeover), or other combinations. When two words are used together often enough that they become a new compound, the word stress often moves to the first part of the word, such as when white + house becomes the White House (say them to yourself to see how they sound). Examples of compounds include wastewater, frontload, sea-level, popup, upscale, and giveaway. It’s easy and fun for students to recognize them when they know the two nouns already, and exploring the richly generative nature of compounding in English belongs in every ESL class. 4.  Blending (portmanteau words). This creative English wordplay consists of combining morphemes or fragments of morphemes from two different words to create a new hybrid word, often with a humorous or trendy meaning. Blends abound in social media and quickly enter pop culture and common parlance. Over time, some become accepted as normal and others disappear.

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 179

Classic examples are brunch (breakfast + lunch); smog (smoke + fog), staycation (stay + vacation), webinar (web + seminar), chillaxing (chill + relaxing), company names such as Edutopia (education + utopia) or Brexit (British + exit)—the 2020 British departure from the European Union. 5.  Clipping. A word or phrase is shortened to create a new word, usually because the speaker or writer assumes their audience is already very familiar with the word. Although the clipped word usually consists of the beginning part of the longer word (bro for brother), some words keep the second part and clip the beginning (phone for smartphone or telephone), and some keep the middle ( flu for influenza). More examples include pro for professional, lab for laboratory, carbs for carbohydrates, burger for hamburger, and quake for earthquake. There are also clips that cross morphemes, such as blog, clipped from web + log. 6.  Acronyms. The first letter of each word in a group of words is combined into a single word, which is then pronounced as a whole. The resulting word may start as all capital letters but over time may change to small letters. The meaning of the words that make up acronyms may be forgotten as the acronym gains acceptance, such as radar (“radio detection and ranging”), scuba (“self-­contained underwater breathing apparatus”), pin (“personal identification number”) or zip (“zone improvement plan”). Few people remember that the fast-food chain Arby’s is actually an acronym for “America’s Roast Beef—Yes Sir!” And although it’s not usually pronounced, the CAPTCHA acronym, used when we sign in to sites to deter hackers, actually stands for (the rather clunky but clever) “Completed Automatic Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart”! 7.  Abbreviations. The first letter of each word in a group of words is combined into a single word, and its letters are pronounced individually. Examples include AKA (“also known as”), RIP (“rest in peace”), URL (“uniform resource locator”), and MRI (“magnetic resonance imaging”). Some words are an alloy of acronyms and abbreviations, such as AWOL, pronounced as “A-wall,” which means a soldier or someone else “absent without leave,” or ASAP, now often pronounced “A-sap,” which means “as soon as possible.” Sometimes, we even use English letters to represent words from other languages, such as BTS for the South Korean pop sensation Bangtan Sonyeondan, which means “bulletproof Boy Scouts,” or RSVP, which represents the French words “répondez s’il vous plaît,” meaning “let us know if you can come.” Texting has brought hundreds of new abbreviations into use, such as BRB (“be right back”), NVM (“never mind”) and the universally recognized LOL (“laugh out loud,” not “lots of laughs”). Acronyms and abbreviations can be especially tricky for ELLs if they are spoken aloud without explanation. A Panamanian ESL teacher, herself an ELL, describes her frustration.

180

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

I see a lot of abbreviations, and I am constantly asking people about them. I used to find these abbreviations as new words when going to the doctor, and it was very intimidating and uncomfortable. When I would hear them, I would not even know they were abbreviations, so my brain would be busy trying to figure them out. It was awful when it was medically related. It added unnecessary stress.—Maria Isabel Marquez 8.  Backformation. This is a process in which a new word is created by removing part of an existing word to create a new morpheme and then a new word; most commonly by taking part of a noun to create a verb. For example, the word edit is a backformation from editor, donate derives from donation, magnify from magnification, and peddle from peddler. Linguists have different ideas about what counts as backformation, and some of the previous word formation forms are also considered by some to be backformations. 9.  Conversion (category shift). In conversion, the grammatical category of a word is changed without changing any letters. Some examples are butter (noun → verb: pass the butter or butter the bread); empty (adjective → verb: an empty bottle or empty the bottle); Google (noun → verb): “If you’re not sure, Google it!”; and chair (noun → verb: sit on a chair or to chair the meeting). 10.  Scale change. For a scale change, an existing free morpheme adds a free morpheme, bound root, prefix, or suffix to indicate a change in dimension or scale. In English, the /iy/ sound is a suffix commonly used to indicate a diminutive. It can be spelled several ways, and it is especially common for children’s nicknames (Annie, Bobby, Jamie) and other vernacular items (selfie, veggie, kitty). There are diminutive morphemes in other languages too, such as -ito/-a in Spanish (e.g., burrito, abuelita) or -et/-ette in French (e.g., livret, coquette). Also, the suffix -thon from marathon is used to signal “long duration” in new words like walkathon or readathon. Scale changes can also appear at the beginning of words, such as in macroeconomics, microwave, and megabucks or at the end of words such as hoodie, dinette, booklet, and danceathon. 11.  Paired-­word sound play. Paired words use two kinds of sound play. In the first kind, the second word sounds like the first word except for a change of vowel, such as hip hop, seesaw, wishy-washy, or singsong. Interestingly, the second vowel is usually produced lower in the mouth. The second kind consists of paired rhyming words, which abound in English. Examples include romcom (romantic comedy), jet set, slo-mo (slow motion), or nitty-­gritty. Paired words might also have an onomatopoeic association, sounding like the thing they are describing (drip drop, bow wow). Humans apparently like to say similar-­ sounding words in sequence; in fact, the ability to hear and make rhymes and hear differences of vowel sounds is a milestone in phonological awareness development. English abounds in rhyming phrases, such as wine and dine, fair and square, a fun run, or a make it or break it moment.

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 181

12.  Multiple processes. Many words are combinations of the previous processes. For example, deli is borrowed from the German word delicatessen and then clipped; snowballed is a compound noun which is converted into a verb (the effects snowballed); and cyberbullying is a compound of the root cyber and the morpheme bully, converted to a verb and then to a gerund (noun) by adding the suffix -ing. Figure 7.2 features 12 photos that illustrate English word formation processes. Can you match them with the appropriate word formation type? (Answers are on p. 201 at the end of the chapter.) The English language is constantly in motion, as illustrated in these three interesting examples. I didn’t know what “to TP a house” meant. My students had to explain it to me. I learned that TP is an abbreviation of toilet paper, which is then converted into a transitive verb. The house is the unfortunate object of the verb, when it is “decorated” with dozens of rolls of toilet paper in the middle of the night.—­Tenena My daughter and her friends often used the word ish. Ish was originally a derivational suffix used to modify an adjective, such as childish, to mean “like what a child would do,” or 12-ish, to mean “at approximately twelve o’clock,” or newish for “somewhat new.” Now the suffix seems to function as a root of its own. When asked if she had a good time at a party, she shrugged and answered simply “Ish.” I figured out that it meant “I had a moderately good time.”—­K ristin I heard students constantly refer to others in the classroom as “the GOAT.” For some reason I assumed this metaphor was negative and was apprehensive to inquire about it. It wasn’t until a student got a perfect score on a test and shouted “I am the greatest of all time!” that I deciphered the acronym! Initially used to show elation for athletes, being the GOAT has now proliferated through social media as a phrase used for praise and even has its own animal emoji.—­Gareth

Nyms, Glorious Nyms: Four Bonus Word Formation Types In the 1970s, a linguist studied a chimpanzee to detect its ability to learn language and gave the chimp the name “Nim Chimpsky,” a takeoff on the name of renowned linguist Noam Chomsky, who called language a distinctively human endowment. Although the claim was not disproven by studying Nim Chimpsky (Terrace, 2019), the name “Nim” segues nicely into the following four additional word formation types that end with the morpheme nym, which means “name” in Greek:

182

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 7.2. English word formation processes. Can you classify them?

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 183

FIGURE 7.2. (continued)

184

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 7.2. (continued)

1.  Capitonyms are two words that have different meanings and sometimes different pronunciations based entirely on whether the word begins with a capital letter. Examples include Polish (the nationality) versus polish (to shine shoes or furniture), August (the month) versus august (distinguished and celebrated), or China (the country) versus china (a kind of dinnerware). They are not common problems but can be fun to bring up in wordplay discussions. 2.  Eponyms are words derived from a person’s name, created when someone exemplified a certain action or characteristic or brought about a law or custom. These are culture-­dependent, but they also cross cultures. For

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 185

example, Machiavellian, a word meaning “unscrupulous, with authoritarian tendencies,” comes from Italian author Machiavelli’s instructions on leadership in his book The Prince. When we say something is Kafkaesque, we refer to the surrealistic, creepy tone of German author Franz Kafka’s dystopian novels. A quisling is a traitor, with the word taken from Norwegian fascist Vikdun Quisling, who betrayed Norway during World War II. And in American politics we have gerrymandering, named for Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry, who in 1812 redistricted a Massachusetts district to favor his party; critics said its odd shape resembled a salamander, creating Gerry + mander (Trickey, 2017), which is also a blend. 3.  Contronyms are those odd words that can mean their opposite, depending on context. For example, cleave can mean “to bind together” or “to split apart,” and sanction can mean “to disallow” or “to allow.” Did these evolve just to drive us crazy? 4.  Hyponyms are new words that fit within a larger category. The words for a set of items, such as cooking utensils, clothing, or gadgets, constantly update as new items are added and older terms fall away. Women’s clothing “tops,” for example, include not only blouses and sweaters but the hyponyms tunics, shells, turtlenecks, tanks, and smocks. A natural and engaging way to try this activity in the classroom is to put the category in the center of a semantic map and see how many spokes a group of students can generate from it. If done digitally, students can also drag images to illustrate the words.

Using Cognates Depending on the languages that multilingual learners already know, cognates may be a rich source for vocabulary building in English. Therefore, we give this strategy special attention. A cognate is a word with a common or similar meaning in two or more languages that comes from a shared root. English derives about 60% of its words from Latin or Greek (Freeman & Freeman, 2004), and the percentage of Latin and Greek words in other Indo-­European languages is also high. Latin and Greek cognates are found in science, philosophy, mathematics, and the social sciences in many Indo-­European languages. ELLs can benefit dramatically from studying cognates if their first language is an Indo-­ European language, but the words they know will vary according to which branch of Indo-­European languages their language derives from. The most plentiful cognates shared with English come from the Romance languages, which include Spanish, French, Italian, Romanian, and Portuguese. There have been extensive contacts among these language groups since the Norman Conquest of England in 1066. There is an entirely different set of cognate

186

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

words shared with English from the Germanic branch of Indo-­European languages, such as Dutch, German, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, and others. These shared cognates are often historically older English words, and their spelling of the cognate may differ from the English word. (If you are interested in this branch of linguistics, often called historical linguistics, search “language family trees” or consult good print or online dictionaries.) English cognates from Latin and Greek tend to be academic language. Jim Cummins (2007) puts it succinctly: “English is a Romance language when it comes to academic language, just like Spanish and Romanian.” The fact that CALP words in English look like common words in Spanish gives Spanish-­speaking ELLs an enormous potential boost in developing their academic language, but only when these words are used with explicit bridging techniques in bilingual or dual-­language classrooms (Beeman & Urow, 2013). Table 7.2 shows a few Latin roots shared by English and Spanish words. ELL students whose first language includes Latin roots may be more familiar with a longer word in English than they are with a shorter version TABLE 7.2. Generating Words in English and Spanish from a Common Latin Root Root meaning

English words

Spanish words

prim (Latin, first)

primal primarily prime primordial primitive primary principal

primero primavera primitive primeramente primo principal

serv (Latin, servant)

subservient serving self-serving servitude serviceable service

servible servidor servilleta servicio

scribere (Latin, to write)

inscribe describe description scribble nondescript scripture script

escritorio escrito escribano escribir

Note. Using a common Latin root, it is possible to generate words in English, Spanish, and other Latin-based languages. As an example, here are three Latin roots and related Spanish and English words derived from them.

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 187

of that word from German or Old English. For example, Spanish-­speaking students might be familiar with the term elevation but not the word height because elevation is a Latin cognate, but height is not. Fascinatingly, the longer words that are “harder” for native speakers of English may be “easier” for ELLs who know a cognate of it in their L1. Table 7.3 shows examples of English words that have a similar meaning to a Spanish word. As you can see, Spanish words share cognates with English words that have Latinate roots, but not with English words from Old English/German roots. We use Spanish words as examples, but these similarities occur in other languages with Latin roots, too. Also, words with Greek roots such as photosynthesis, museum, velocity, and hydroelectric, for example, can be found across many Indo-­European languages, including some in different orthographies. Even when the complete cognate is not found in a learner’s first language, there may be clues in the morphemes, such as hydro as being related to water.

Beware of Three Common Misunderstandings On the other hand, beware of false cognates, cross-­linguistic homographs, and cross-­ linguistic homophones (oh my!). False cognates have the same appearance and/ or sound as a word in another language but do not share its meaning. They share a root, but the meaning of the morphemes has diverged over time. An example is molestar, which means “to bother” in Spanish, unlike the much more serious meaning of “molest” in English, “to sexually violate.” Another example is passer un examen, a French verb which means “to take an exam,” but not necessarily to get a passing grade, unlike the English to pass an exam, which means to get a passing grade. We have provided a list of some of the most notorious false cognates of English and Spanish in Appendix 7.1 at the end of the chapter. Take a look! We recommend that any teacher working with Spanish-­speaking ELLs or students endeavoring to learn Spanish print and post this chart in their office or classroom.

TABLE 7.3. English Words of Germanic Origin Compared to Latin‑Based English and Spanish Words English word of Germanic or Old English origin

English word of Latinbased origin

Spanish word of Latinbased origin

get fix keep breathe meet

obtain repair retain respire encounter

obtenir reparar retener respirar encontrar

188

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Of course, false cognates cut both ways—our learners might use them in English, just as we might accidentally use them when we learn a new language. English learners of Spanish might say “Actualmente no fui al concierto” when they are trying to say “In truth, I didn’t go to the concert,” but in Spanish, it means “Right now, I didn’t go to the concert,” which doesn’t make sense. Actually is a false cognate in many Romance languages because it means “at this time” in those languages, not the English meaning “to be honest” or “to tell you the truth.” Teachers will want to focus on false cognates that have a radically different meaning, as seen in the following anecdote from colleague Leah Miller. Imagine my surprise when I received a card on the last day of class, signed by all of my immigrant adults, which read “In Deepest Sympathy.” I didn’t dare tell them that it was a card we use to comfort someone at the death of a loved one. They meant it as a high compliment!—­Leah Miller A second kind of misunderstanding comes with cross-­linguistic homographs, words in two languages that share spellings but not meanings or pronunciations. For example, pie means “foot” in Spanish but “sweet dessert” in English, and chat means “cat” in French but “a short conversation” in English. The only thing the two words have in common is the same string of letters—­they don’t share a morpheme. Teachers of world languages are aware of many words that look like English words but have no similarity in sound or meaning. The third misunderstanding is due to cross-­linguistic homophones, words which share common sounds but not spellings or meanings. An example of a cross-­linguistic homophone is the Persian ‫ پارتی‬pronounced as party. In Persian it means “clout,” which is not at all like the English definition of a party (although people with clout may attend a lot of them!). Even though the two words sound similar, they do not share the same spelling or meaning. Another example comes from Thai. The number five in Thai is pronounced /ha/ (ห า ้ ), and when Thai students write “5555555” it represents “LOL” or “hahahaha.” This is confusing for foreign teachers in Thailand until they understand this amusing and pervasive cross-­linguistic homophone. Of these three misunderstandings, false cognates are by far the most consequential and should get the most attention.

Collocations: Phrasal Verbs, Idioms, and Listemes English vocabulary words whose meanings cannot be understood through single words alone are referred to as collocations. Collocations can be defined as a group of words commonly used together. Pinker (1999) notes that

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 189

collocations “are remembered as wholes and often used together” (p.  24). Part of learning to break text into “chunks” while reading is also learning to keep collocations together as a single chunk. Although we can find collocations in all written materials, they tend to be overlooked in vocabulary study because they are usually acquired unconsciously by native speakers who do not realize they need explicit instruction. It’s important to teach collocations in classrooms with ELLs, as they are pervasive and are part of communicative competence. Collocations are found in both social settings and in the academic language of school. We consider phrasal verbs, idioms, and listemes to be collocations.

Phrasal Verbs Phrasal verbs are verbs that are composed of a verb and one or more prepositions, or a verb followed by an adverb. These are very common in everyday English. The common action verbs get up, come in, pick up, and put down, for example, are all phrasal verbs. If you were asked to make a list of high-­ frequency verbs in English, you would quickly find that part of the reason that they are so common is that they combine with prepositions to form many phrasal verbs with different meanings. When you look at the phrasal verb look over, meaning “review” or “check,” for example, you can see that if either word is missing, we lose the verb’s meaning. We need both words together to form its meaning as a phrasal verb. Most short English verbs come from Old English/Germanic origins. As a result, it may be easier for some ELL students to understand a longer English verb with a Latin root than a phrasal verb. For examples of some common Latin-based English verbs alongside English phrasal verbs, please see Table 7.4. Because phrasal verbs are so common in spoken English, many ELLs will acquire them through their social language. However, some will not, and some of the meanings of phrasal verbs will not be obvious. What’s worse, many phrasal verbs have multiple meanings. For example, when Isho, a fourth-­grade L1 Assyrian ELL, read a story in a basal reader that said, “The laborers were forced to pick up the pace,” he asked his teacher which meaning of pick up was in the sentence. Did it mean lift, as in “pick up a sack,” gather, as in “pick up the pieces of broken glass,” or even learn informally, as in “She picked up a few words of Japanese while traveling in Japan”? In fact, in the example sentence, pick up doesn’t match any of those meanings, but has a fourth meaning, to “increase the speed of an activity.” In the ever-­changing linguistic landscape, a new meaning of a phrasal verb might be found in a popular song lyric or on TikTok. That’s what makes them so interesting and fun. At the same time, they also bear careful previewing because they can easily “pick up” sexual connotations!

190

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners TABLE 7.4. Selected Phrasal Verbs and Their Latin-Based Equivalents Phrasal verb

Latin-based synonym

ask about find out fix up get over help out keep on make up run into set up show up think up try out

inquire discover repair, rehabilitate recover, surmount assist continue reconcile, invent encounter plan, organize arrive, appear invent, create experiment, audition

It is common for ELL learners to omit a preposition, choose the wrong preposition, or add a preposition with English phrasal verbs. This may be due to a word-by-word translation from their first language. Look at the following anecdote from a teacher who emigrated to the United States from Mexico at age 10. I remember exactly what a guest speaker said to me, in the fifth grade. I had recently arrived in the United States and was in the first stage of language development: entering. The guest speaker was going around the class asking everyone what they liked to do. I remember thinking to myself, “Me gusta bailar,” and when my turn came, I said very proudly, “I like dance.” The guest speaker corrected me and said, “I like to dance.” I could not comprehend why she added a “to” if I had translated it correctly: Me gusta = “I like” and bailar = “dance.” There were no additional words—where did the “to” come from?—­X iomara Guerrero The word up combines with hundreds of verbs to form a vast number of subtle meanings, and one blogger calls it the “most confusing two-­letter word in English” (Eversull, 2010). It is clear that prepositions by themselves have neither directionality nor relationships except as in combination with verbs.

Idioms Idioms are metaphorical expressions whose meanings cannot be discerned from the individual words alone (Pinker, 1999). Often colorful and humorous, idioms give us insights into the cultural underpinnings of societies. For

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 191

example, the English idiom straight from the horse’s mouth stems from horse racing, in which the horse could be considered the highest possible authority about its own potential to win. Figure 7.3 is an illustration by a sixth-grade student of another idiom about horses. Can you guess what it is? Colorful idioms enhance the communicative power of a writer or speaker tremendously. Also, they can teach us fascinating history that might otherwise be lost. Linguist Ben Zimmer (2011) puts it well, using metaphor: Idioms are like barnacles on the ship of language. Oftentimes they long outlive their original intent, confounding generation after generation seeking clarity in the linguistic shreds that they’ve inherited.

There are thousands of idioms in English, just as in any language, and learning them is part of the fun of learning a new language and dialects within it. Teaching idioms successfully requires accounting for these distinct factors: 1. Does the learner need background knowledge to understand the idiom? 2. Does the learner need to unlock figurative language to understand the idiom? 3. Does the idiom include words, syntax, or pronunciation that is not commonly found in the learner’s environment? 4. Finally, choose to teach the idioms that your students are likely to hear or would benefit most from using.

FIGURE 7.3. Idiom drawing: What is the idiom?

192

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Each idiom should be checked for these factors, although sometimes it is so commonplace that it can be figured out by inference alone or from a visual support. Zwiers (2007) identified a number of idioms that teachers often use, such as “the gory details, that answer doesn’t hold water, a thin argument, a keen insight, crux of the matter, on the right track, and dissect the article,” and noticed, “Many of these academic idioms serve to describe cognitive processes and school tasks” (p. 108). Teachers may use them offhandedly, without explaining their meanings to students, or say only part of the idiom, without realizing it. When an ELL student hears half of an idiom, he or she must first identify the complete idiom and recognize its meaning and then apply it to the situation rapidly enough to respond along with others in the class. This is no small feat! Look at the following anecdotes: When I was teaching U.S. history, I used a combination of idioms: “when you boil it down, it was a hot mess between the British and the Patriots, where everything went sideways.” A student’s hand shot up and asked me to clarify who was doing the cooking and what they spilled. It was a funny moment to share but not if that student had not stopped to ask that question. I have learned that these phrases are acquired over time from exposure to English.—­Bryan Johnson And: One of my students mentioned that her fourth-­grade ELL students had learned the word capiche from a previous teacher. They figured out that it meant “Do you understand?” but the teacher had never told them it was an Italian word, not English. The new teacher had to explain that it was Italian and was being used by that particular teacher and not widely used.—­K ristin Tenena agrees: I have used the word capiche when teaching my graduate classes. I picked it up because of my contact with Italian friends who always said it. Everyone seems to understand it, or at least no one has ever asked me what it meant!—­Tenena

Listemes Listemes are words that commonly appear together. In addition to phrasal verbs and idioms, listemes include English expressions with words in a fixed order that are memorized as a whole. Some linguists refer to them by the general term collocations, and they might also be called chunks, but a more precise term is listemes (Pinker, 2000). Listemes are forged when millions of members of a language community use a combination of words so often that it becomes understood as a whole unit and is used that way. These exist in

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 193

every language. Some examples in English are “up and down” (but not “down and up”); “they lived happily ever after”; phrases from the digital era, such as “copy and paste”; or a written representation such as “IMHO” for “in my humble opinion” or “FYI” to mean “for your information.” Some listemes may be created during a particular historical era and are later updated, such as “unequivocal disaster” and its more contemporary update, “epic fail.” Other listemes, like the paired-­ word sound plays mumbo-jumbo, higgledy-­ piggledy, and wishy-washy, are bound together by the enjoyable reaction we feel hearing and saying them (Pinker, 2000). Some linguists consider individual words with irregular forms to be listemes (e.g., goose/geese or take/took/taken), but we consider listemes to consist of more than one word. Collocations can be confusing because very simple words may be combined in ways that are not at all simple, as can be seen in the cartoon in Figure 7.4. Learning to recognize and use collocations in English is an integral part of using the five domains of English: listening, speaking, reading, writing, and communicative competence. Collocations take students beyond the classroom into the realm of authentic language use, effective self-­expression, and constructing a unique language identity.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Wordplay: The Fun Stuff of Language! Between morphemes, cognates, idioms, and diverse word formation processes, there are many ways to get students excited about words—and they will. Here are a few. Taking Cameras into the Community Students can take their phones into the community to capture pictures of word formation in the neighborhood, and the images can be shared as photo stories by individuals or the whole class. Small businesses often have clever signs, and in multilingual neighborhoods, there are signs in other languages, where some of the same word formation processes can be seen (although it’s harder to identify them in unfamiliar orthographies). Three examples of humorous Spanish word formation can be seen in Figure 7.5. Idiom Calendars To practice idioms, high school ELL reading teacher Barb Willson created idiom calendars. It is a class calendar displayed on a wall of the room featuring a different student-­illustrated idiom every week. When

194

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 7.4. An English idiom. Reprinted with permission from Martha Rosenberg.

the idiom appears on the calendar, students practice the idioms through illustrations, dialogues, and skits. When ELLs share idioms from their L1, it is also a great way to enjoy linguistic comparisons while teaching metalinguistic concepts. Digital calendars can also be created with student-­made digital images. Word Walls Showing Word Formation You can make a section of a word wall, either physical or virtual, to represent each of the forms of word formation covered in this chapter. Some of the word formation types may be easier to recognize than others, but blends, compound words, clipping, acronyms, and abbreviations are easy to identify even to learners in the early grades, thanks to social media. Keep an eye out for inappropriate acronyms, of course (you may need to learn them first!). Collocations in Song Lyrics Country, pop, and rap songs overflow with colorful phrasal verbs, idioms, and listemes that reflect common speech. Listening to, analyzing, and singing along with song lyrics are natural, enjoyable ways to practice using these expressions. There are many benefits to using songs for vocabulary development, and many surefire ways to use songs

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 195

FIGURE 7.5. Spanish word formation processes.

196

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

successfully in your classroom. Resources for finding and using songs in class are plentiful. Songs also help ELLs express their feelings and build their identities while keeping their affective filters low. Music is a special interest of one of us (e.g., Lems, 2001b, 2002, 2013b, 2016, 2018, 2021a, 2021b). Pulling Out Phrasal Verbs One way to highlight phrasal verbs is to pull them out from different kinds of texts, including song lyrics, fiction, poetry, and Readers’ Theatre scripts. Phrasal verbs can be overlooked as the “easy words” in a text, but they carry important meanings; thus they deserve explicit teaching. For example, when an ELL high school student at the developing level did a presentation about his favorite song, the mysterious “Hotel California” by the Eagles, he did not recognize the irony in the line “living it up at the Hotel California,” because he didn’t know the idiom to live it up. That idiom, used ironically in a song about feeling mentally trapped, heightens the song’s power. New Product and Company Names Advertising copywriters create new words all the time as they try to come up with new products and services to entice the buying public. For example, “Bubblicious,” a blend, is the brand name of a gum. When we see its name in the gum and candy area, we know that it is bubble gum, and we figure out the association with the word delicious. Who can resist delicious bubble gum? Your students can create new product names to attract everyone to their product or service. First, have students find several products at a store or elsewhere and break their product names into morphemes, analyzing how the morphemes combine to create an effect. Discuss how successfully the created names sell the product. Then students can create their own new product names for a common product, such as toothpaste, soap, a pair of gym shoes, a robot, a drone, or a car. Next, ask them to write an ad for that new product. If appropriate, have students vote on the best product name created in the class. For this activity, make sure that cellphones and internet are deactivated— it’s much too tempting to browse for cool names!

Idiom Matching Game Write these or other idioms on heavy stock paper, then cut the pieces of paper with longer idioms into two halves and scramble them (see Figure 7.6). Have students work in small groups to put the idioms together, and

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 197

FIGURE 7.6. Teachers trying out the idiom matching game.

ask them to define the idioms in their own words and use them in an original skit. Can you match the first half of the idioms on the left with their second half on the right? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Too many cooks Behind every cloud Like mother Out of the frying pan One bad apple

and into the fire. like daughter. spoil the broth. doesn’t spoil the whole bunch. is a silver lining.

Note: Idiom matching games require idioms that have divisible phrases or clauses—­a nd some do not! For example, the idiom living it up cannot be divided, but out of the frying pan and into the fire, as you can see, can be divided into out of the frying pan and into the fire at its natural phrase break.

The Wonderful World of Dictionaries The internet has changed the way people find and learn words, and online dictionaries are a wonderful counterpart to print dictionaries. As early as 2016, more people had accessed the Merriam-­Webster Dictionary through smartphones than laptops, according to its editors (Sokolowski, 2017).

198

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Traditional print dictionaries give students practice in many important academic skills, such as using alphabetical order, understanding abbreviations and typographic symbols, exploring multiple meanings of words, and noticing words related to the one they were looking up. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language and the Oxford English Dictionary include word etymology in their print editions. No classroom should be without a high-­quality print dictionary—­or several—­ that includes etymology. Practicing how to use the dictionary should be part of your explicit instruction in the first week of the school year! Understanding the dictionary’s system of abbreviations and codes is just as important as using the dictionary to practice alphabetizing. All students should be given opportunities to go to the dictionary and share what they find there. Putting the dictionary in a featured, unobstructed location, displayed on a lectern accessible to the students, makes the statement that the dictionary is an integral part of the classroom. The Oxford Learner’s Dictionary has several kinds of learner dictionaries www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us, and Merriam-­Webster, a dictionary founded in 1828 (www.merriam-webster.com) provides not only a dictionary and thesaurus but also fun quizzes for all grade and skill levels, a word of the day, and a constantly updating list of the top 10 words searched at their site. The Oxford English Dictionary, “the definitive record of the English language,” has a more academic, scholarly approach, and each entry includes many citations to English literature and history. Encyclopedia Britannica has an online dictionary with many word-­learning quizzes, words of the day, and a visual literacy quiz. Dictionary.com, which is not derived from a print dictionary, has many captivating short sections about the wonderful world of words. These links and resources may very well be different by the time this book has been in print for a year or so, but you can be sure those sites will be there and, if anything, have even more resources as time goes by.

Online Resources for Word Study YouTube videos, blogs, and websites trace the origins of English words. Videos from publishers, language schools, and individual entrepreneurs are sprinkled throughout the internet, and now it is a question of finding the best materials rather than feeling lucky to find any! Some of the etymology videos we enjoy on YouTube come from Gina Cooke, Kori Stamper, Peter Sokolowski, John McWhorter, David Crystal, and Tom Scott. There are also abundant websites for learning idioms, some better designed than others. One of the best is a free, downloadable PDF of American idioms called In the Loop, written for the Office of English

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 199

Language at the U.S. Department of State. It can be found at a reliable American English website (https://americanenglish.state.gov/resources/loop). As you surely know from your own peregrinations around the internet, some of the most successful educational sites have an exasperating tendency to suddenly go behind a paywall, leaving behind many broken hearts. Therefore, we must always have material backup plans in the event our favorite site suddenly goes missing, leaving only a few crumbs for the general public.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Think of a word that has multiple meanings and create a semantic map with each definition on a different branch of the map and a blank in the center. See if your classmates or students can figure out the missing word in the middle.  3. What are some new English words you have encountered recently, whether spoken or in print? If you teach, what do you hear your students saying lately? After jotting down the words, ask the students to give a short defini‑ tion and a sample sentence. Were they able to define it? Are you?  4. In your work or in your life, have you found acronyms or abbreviations to be troublesome? If so, which ones in particular have given you a hard time? What ideas do you have to make acronyms and abbreviations more acces‑ sible to students as readers or listeners?  5. Which of the forms of word formation are most common in your teaching setting (either in the classroom or with your colleagues)? Which ones can you teach explicitly?  6. Do you think the word you will come to be spelled “u” someday? Why or why not?  7. Table 7.2 gives examples of words in English and Spanish that are generated from a common root. Try to do the same with the Latin roots in Appendix 7.2. If you don’t know Spanish, but know another language with common Latin roots, try to think of words from that language instead. If English is your only language or the only language you know that uses Latin roots, see how many words you can generate in the English column alone. Discuss ways the words reflect the meaning of the root.  8. With a partner or alone, generate your own list of word formation processes and compare with others in the class. If there are multiple processes, describe the processes that go into the mix.  9. Think of five idioms you use and evaluate them according to the criteria on p. 191. Do they require background knowledge? Do they include figurative

200

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners language? Do they use regional or unusual word patterns to be understood, or any combination of the three? How can you scaffold teaching each idiom so that it is easily learned?

10. Classify the following puns based on either homophones or polysemous words.



Q: What is the best fruit for studying history? Q: What two animals go everywhere you go?

A: Dates.

Q: What is the strongest day?

A: Sunday, because all the rest are “week” days.

Q: What letter is never in the alphabet?

A: The one that you mail.

Q: What should be looked into?

A: A mirror.

Q: Why did the Palmers name their cattle ranch “Horizon”?

A: Because that’s where the sons raise meat (sun’s rays meet).

A: Your calves.

Find some other jokes that are based on polysemous meanings or homo‑ phones. Better yet, do this with your students!

11. Idioms have rich cultural resonance. See how many idioms you can think of about one of the following topics: baseball, cooking, travel, weather, or birds. Then look at what kind of prior knowledge one needs to understand the idiom. How could you make these idioms come alive for your students? 12. Match the phrasal verbs on the left with their equivalent word on the right. Notice that several of the phrasal verbs have multiple definitions—­they are polysemous. Which column has the Latinate roots, and which has the Ger‑ manic ones? run into

a. initiate, begin

talk about

b. tolerate

think over

c. sacrifice, quit

make up

d. contemplate

put up with

e. encounter

give up

f. depart, escape

get out

g. reconcile, invent

start up

h. discuss

Now, create your own matching activity with other phrasal verbs and their Latin-based equivalents, and try it out with your students or colleagues. 13. Choose one of the following high-­f requency English verbs and see how many phrasal verbs you can create using it: get, take, come, go, make, write, pick, or think. Do the phrasal verbs have the same or similar underlying meanings? What does this suggest about teaching vocabulary with common verbs?

Word Formation Processes, Cognates, and Collocations 201 14. The photographs in Figure 7.1 (p. 177) contain puns and require both linguis‑ tic knowledge and cultural background knowledge to understand the joke. Explain each one and cite the background knowledge needed to understand it. 15. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Make a list of 8–10 common listemes and create les‑ sons to teach them to your students. 16. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Pick one of the following polysemous words and explore its multiple meanings, including its occurrence in idioms and in phrasal verbs: bass, tip, wind, mass, right, lead, game, bill. Could students create semantic maps with each of these words at the center?

Kleenex—Coinage

Answer Key for Figure 7.2

ARBY’S—Acronym EZ laundry—Abbreviation Mathlete—Blending Bubbleland—Compound The Cleaner—Conversion Tux—Clipping Grande Noodles and Sushi Bar—Borrowing Grubhub—Paired-­word sound play Mega flavor, mini guilt—Scale change Masspike—Mixed processes Make veggies less vegetabley—Backformation

APPENDIX 7.1

Selected False Cognates between English and Spanish Spanish translation for English word English word

Spanish word that looks/sounds similar to True meaning English word in Spanish

avergonzado

embarrassed

embarazada

being pregnant

estreñido

constipated

constipado

having a head cold or congestion

engaño

deception

decepción

disappointment

emocionado

excited

excitado

being sexually aroused

abarrotes

groceries

groseriás

spoken vulgarities

eficaz

effective

efectivo

cash

requisitos

qualifications calificaciones

grades

éxito

success

suceso

event, happening

realmente

actually

actualmente

at this time

apoyar

support

soportar

put up with, tolerate

ayudar

assist

asistir

attend

alfombra

carpet

carpeta

folder

darse cuenta de

realize

realizar

achieve

tela

fabric

fábrica

factory

salida

exit

éxito

success

asistir

attend

atender

take care of

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

202

APPENDIX 7.2

More English and Spanish Words from Latin Roots Root meaning

Related English words

Related Spanish words

solo (Latin, alone)

cent (Latin, one hundred)

circulus (Latin, ring)

vacare (v) (Latin, to empty) vacuus (n)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

203

CHAPTER EIGHT

“The Same, but Different” Reading Fluency in English as a New Language

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY fluency • automaticity theory • oral reading fluency (ORF) words correct per minute • miscues • prosody • rate • accuracy chunking (parsing) • phonological decoding • phonological loop repeated reading • genre

R

eading fluency has been considered a core literacy skill since the National Reading Panel (NRP) named it one of five essential components in 2000, and it continues to be part of balanced literacy programs across the United States and beyond. Once a neglected area of reading research and practice, reading fluency development is now well represented in the curriculum. This chapter briefly reviews research on reading fluency, its assessment and instruction for both native English speakers and ELLs, its specific benefits for ELLs, and some successful and engaging fluency instructional practices. At the end of the chapter, we give you a chance to measure your own oral reading fluency.

A Working Definition of Fluency According to the NRP (2000), “The fluent reader is one who can perform multiple tasks—such as word recognition and comprehension—­at the same time” (p.  38). Samuels (2007) defines it even more simply: “In order to 204

Reading Fluency

205

comprehend a text, one must identify the words on the page and one must construct their meaning” (p. 564). Achieving reading fluency is the stage of the reading development process in which readers advance from identifying individual words to being able to construct meaning from connected text. Because of this connection, fluency is often considered a “bridge” between decoding and comprehension, and fluency-building activities are seen as the way to cross that bridge. Figure 8.1 provides an overview of the fluency bridge and techniques to help students cross it. In the field of English as a second language (ESL) and foreign language learning, fluency has a completely different meaning from the definition used in the literacy field, and the difference has created some confusion. In language learning, when we say a person is fluent, we mean that he or she has native-like proficiency in speaking a new language. We want to distinguish this definition of fluency from the definition of reading fluency, also called simply fluency, as the ability to simultaneously decode and construct meaning from print. Fluency has the Latin root fluentem, meaning lax, relaxed, or flowing; other English words with this root include fluid, flow, flowing, and fluidity. Although the ESL field’s definition describes oral proficiency in a new language and the reading field’s definition is about reading, both share the common idea that the activity is effortless, smooth, and trouble free. A fluent speaker of a foreign language has no trouble communicating orally on any subject, and a fluent reader can easily handle written material with ease and confidence. In this chapter and throughout the book, we use fluency to refer to a reader’s ability to simultaneously decode and comprehend a written text and oral reading fluency to refer to reading written text aloud.

FIGURE 8.1. Fluency: The “bridge” from decoding to comprehension.

206

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Automaticity Theory Why is fluency important to reading? A theoretical explanation can be found in LaBerge and Samuels’s automaticity theory of reading (1974). Their theory is based on the idea that people have a finite supply of cognitive resources available while reading. Skillful readers engage in rapid, unconscious, and automatic decoding of texts. When readers achieve automaticity, they can devote their cognitive attention to constructing meaning while reading. In effect, readers who cannot process text fluently don’t have enough mental energy to construct meaning while reading. Fluency might also be described as processing efficiency (Koda, 2005). When decoding is inefficient and cumbersome, with many stops and starts, it’s hard to devote mental resources to the active process of reading comprehension or to remember what one has just read, because so much energy must be taken up in identifying individual words. We can apply this concept not only to reading but also to any activity that takes a lot of concentration until we get good at it. For example, a beginning piano student cannot play written pieces of music until he or she learns basic fingering techniques and sight reading. If we apply automaticity theory to ELLs and reading, it’s easy to see why it would take ELLs longer to become fluent readers. ELL readers need to recognize the English words and access their meanings as they appear in a text, even though their English vocabulary and understanding of English sentence structures is still developing. The idea of processing efficiency meshes well with Birch’s (2015) hypothetical model of the reading process discussed in Chapter 2. It stresses the importance of efficiency in the use of word-level “bottom-­up” language knowledge as an indispensable component of reading comprehension. Until word identification is automatic, constructing meaning will be hit or miss.

Oral Reading Fluency as a Proxy for Reading Comprehension In planning language arts instruction, teachers need to be able to evaluate the reading levels of their students. Historically, reading comprehension has been assessed mainly by (1) answering questions about a reading through a written multiple-­choice test, (2) writing responses or reflections based on a prompt, or (3) retelling, especially for younger children. To make judgments about a student’s reading level based on these kinds of assessments requires much time and care. In 1985, Deno discovered another quicker way to identify the reading comprehension level of students: by asking them to read a passage out loud for 1 minute. Their oral reading fluency (ORF) score, in words correct per minute, was highly correlated with their reading comprehension level from a standardized reading test. ORF measures were sensitive enough



Reading Fluency 207

to show even small improvements in reading—­a s reading comprehension went up, so did oral reading fluency scores (Deno, 1985). These informal ORF assessments were short—3 minutes and then eventually 1 minute long— and they used a method of counting words read minus the miscues, or errors, resulting in a score of words correct per minute. This new way was a lot more manageable, less expensive, and less anxiety-­producing than the previous reading assessment “batteries.” Correlations between curriculum-­based oral reading and silent reading comprehension were confirmed in many studies that followed (e.g., Fuchs, Fuchs, & Maxwell, 1988; Shinn, Knutson, Good, Tilly, & Collins, 1992), and, based on this robust research and its practicality, oral reading fluency assessments gradually began to be adopted in the classroom.

Prosody as an Additional Measure As oral reading fluency began to be measured in many classrooms, teachers and researchers started noticing other things. They noticed that expressive reading also seemed to provide information about students’ silent reading comprehension, sometimes correlating even better than with words correct per minute (Dowhower, 1991). Prosody, or “expressiveness” in oral reading, includes such features as pausing, vocal intonations, the loudness and softness of words, and vowel lengthening. Understanding and using prosody reflects an understanding of the syntax of sentences and an awareness of their punctuation, and it is one of the “gifts” that children receive when adults read to them. Expressive reading gives listeners vital information about the characters in the story, especially in direct speech between characters. For example, an expressive reader makes sure that the wolf in a fairytale has a low, growly voice and the children have higher, more excited voices when reading folktales such as “Little Red Riding Hood.” The prosody helps children comprehend stories long before they are able to decode written text. Studies of prosody supported the finding that children who read with more “adult-like” intonation in second grade were stronger readers (Miller & ­Schwanenflugel, 2006). Once prosody entered the conversation, ORF assessments added expressive reading as one of the measures of oral reading, but evaluating prosody has proven bafflingly difficult to objectify, and words correct per minute continues to be the preferred measure. One-­minute fluency snapshots are often done three times in a school year, providing teachers with a handy formative assessment to help them to find materials for children at their current reading levels, note specific areas of confusion that might be addressed through direct instruction or additional intervention, and keep track of student progress.

208

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

ELLs and Fluency Research How does this method of assessing reading apply to ELLs? Although there is great confirmation of the value of reading fluency, there is less research to validate using ORF as a measure of reading comprehension for ELL students. Large-scale fluency research often does not disaggregate results for ELLs (Lems, 2012b, p. 244). There is some research focused on ELLs, however. Baker and Good (1995) found that an ORF measure predicted reading comprehension for second-­ grade Spanish ELLs, as well as for their L1 English peers. Ramirez (2001) found higher correlations between fifth-grade Spanish ELLs’ oral reading fluency and their silent reading comprehension than in correlations of their reading comprehension with other reading scores. Mild correlations were found for 1-minute oral reading fluency scores and state reading tests for third-grade Spanish-­speaking ELLs (Vanderwood, Linklater, & Healy, 2008), and third- through eighth-­grade Spanish-­speaking ELLs (McTague, Lems, Butler, & Carmona, 2012). Although Quirk and Beem (2012) found that correlations for ELLs in grades 2, 3, and 5 generally matched those of native English speakers, a substantial number of the ELL students had significant comprehension gaps. And for adult ELLs literate in their home languages, oral reading did not show a strong correlation with their reading comprehension, but, interestingly, their listening comprehension did (Lems, 2005, 2012a). Although we have anecdotal evidence, we still don’t have confirmatory studies that establish ORF as a valid and reliable measure of ELL reading comprehension (Crosson & Lesaux, 2010; Lems, 2022).

Problems with Fluency Assessments As regular ORF snapshots have become standard in thousands of schools, teachers report two concerning side effects. One is that, regardless of whatever instructions are given, students believe faster oral reading is better reading and gallop ahead with no attention to prosody. The second is that students are now given cold readings they have never seen before, are timed on them, and are then asked to answer comprehension questions about the passage right after reading it aloud. For all students, this is problematic, but for ELLs, it is especially unfair (Lems, 2022). In 2009, Applegate, Applegate, and Modla found, in a study of students in grades 2–10, that fully one-third of children considered strong readers by fluency assessment measures were weak in comprehension of text. They wondered whether “the freed-up resources that result from automaticity and fluency do not necessarily or automatically flow toward comprehension” (p. 519) and reported that teachers noticed “an overemphasis in their schools on the development of oral reading indicators such as rate and accuracy without an accompanying emphasis on comprehension” (p. 512). This confirms that students are



Reading Fluency 209

getting an unspoken message that the rapid “performance” of the passage, not its meaning, is the bottom line. It also raises the affective filter, both for native speakers, especially reluctant readers, and for ELLs. The idea that reading fluency equals fast reading is problematic, but having students read random passages they have never seen before while being timed and then asking them to immediately answer comprehension questions about them is even worse. Look at the effect that stressful oral reading had on a young Polish ELL, who is now a teacher. My science teacher had us read entire chapters aloud in class. She would move up and down the rows and have each student read one paragraph at a time. Because I was an ELL and I was very self-­conscious about reading aloud in front of my peers, I would count out which paragraph I would have to read so that I could rehearse it ahead of time. As a result, I would not be paying attention to the previous paragraphs and, when my turn came, I would focus on my pronunciation, rate, and prosody, instead of the meaning of the text. My own oral reading experience in science class made me dread science. I did not understand anything that was read by others or by me aloud in class, not only because I was busy rehearsing my assigned paragraph, but also because the language was just words that oftentimes were unfamiliar to me. As a result, I not only hated science class, but also science. This, in turn, limited my own professional opportunities as I never wanted to enter the medical field because I just never considered myself good in science and I never found myself enjoying learning about it.—­Sylwia Bania When students read out loud in class, their ability to construct meaning at the same time is reduced. They are too busy performing the text to be able to focus on comprehending it. To make an analogy, it would be like taking Chaima, a brand-new driver, out on the road for a driving test and at the same time judging her posture at the wheel! The original research and the confirmatory research on fluency did not combine oral reading with an assessment of reading comprehension using the same text; in fact, the correlations between ORF and silent reading comprehension were all established using different texts, at different times.

Problems Specific to ELLs Using oral reading as an assessment of ELL reading comprehension is problematic for three key reasons (Birch, 2015; Helman, 2005; Lems, 2022; ­R iedel, 2007): the foreign-­accent factor, differences in processing time, and word calling. The Foreign‑Accent Factor The first is the “foreign-­accent factor”: ELLs may mispronounce a word because some of the sounds do not exist in their first language, and they

210

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

have not learned to say them in English; or because the letters they are trying to pronounce map to different sounds in their L1. Of course, many words in English are not able to be sounded out because English is an opaque orthography even when the sounds and mapping are the same in their home language. Because of these factors, raters listening to the oral reading may mark mispronunciations as miscues (mistakes) in the reading performance, even though the ELL reader knows the meaning of a word. For example, Mele, a native speaker of Tongan, may read the English word nibble as “nipple” because the sounds /b/ and /p/ are allophones in Tongan, which means they do not create a separate meaning when they are pronounced in those two ways. A rater might count her mispronunciation as a miscue even if she knows the meaning of the word. Although fluency testers may say they have accounted for a foreign accent, they cannot possibly predict all of the ways words in a passage can be mispronounced, and this creates an unreliable assessment. The foreign-­accent issue becomes even greater when ELLs start their study of English in adolescence, when their foreign accents are more likely to be set in place. Differences in Processing Time The second difference is that ELLs may take a longer time to retrieve and pronounce words because of their limited English vocabulary, limited pronunciation skills in English, and interference from their L1 orthography. These factors may place them in a lower reading group than they are capable of, based on rate alone, and may result in reading materials that are less challenging than they should be. In particular, proper nouns, such as place names and family names, are especially opaque in English. As a result, ELLs may spend a long time trying to sound them out, as can be seen in the following story. When I analyzed the oral reading of adult ELLs for my doctoral dissertation, I found that they made a large number of miscues on proper nouns in the reading passage. For example, most of the Chinese ELLs in the study were stopped cold by the name Indianapolis in the passage. They struggled mightily to pronounce it, mostly coming to an unsuccessful conclusion after several tries. That one word added several seconds to their reading rate, and the miscue was deducted anyway.—­K ristin In addition, eye tracking research has shown that reading numbers out loud is particularly burdensome for ELLs because “articulating a numeral is not only a linguistic process but also requires basic arithmetic skills, especially in the case of multiple digits” (Dolgunsöz, 2021, p. 141). Often a reader needs to make a partial mental calculation before saying the number, and the



Reading Fluency 211

ORF rate of beginning and intermediate-­level learners may be slowed down by these extra steps. ELLs and Word Calling The third issue of concern is word calling, or decoding a text without comprehending it. If ELLs are able to decode and pronounce English words accurately,  they may still not have the English words in their listening vocabulary and thus may not comprehend the text. Word calling, famously dubbed “barking at print” by researcher Jeanne Chall (1983), can occur with L1 English speakers, but it is not commonplace (Meisinger, Bradley, Schwanenflugel, Kuhn, & Morris, 2009). Students who are slow and inaccurate oral readers are also weak in answering grade-level comprehension questions (Markell & Deno, 1997). Also, researchers found that teachers who consider their students to be word callers may be using subjective criteria (Hamilton & Shinn, 2003). However, word calling may be a real phenomenon for some ELLs. ­Helman (2005) notes that Spanish ELLs she studied in Arizona struggled with comprehension questions in an oral reading assessment, warning, “A classroom teacher may make the assumption from hearing students reading out loud that comprehension is occurring. This assumption is less likely to be true for ELLs, who may have adequate accuracy and fluency on lowerlevel passages, but may not understand the vocabulary and content” (p. 221). A longitudinal investigation of 261 Spanish ELLs from first through sixth grades revealed that although their word decoding was on pace for the norm, their reading comprehension scores began to fall behind starting in the third grade (­Nakamoto, Lindsey, & Manis, 2007). Samuels (2007) echoes this concern: “As Riedel reports in his research, about 15% of the students who take the Oral Reading Fluency test [of the DIBELS] get misidentified as good readers, when, in fact, they have poor comprehension. These misidentified students are often English-­language learners who have vocabulary problems that interfere with comprehension” (p. 564). Kim (2012) found that Spanish-­speaking ELL first graders had similar oral reading scores for word reading rate and accuracy in English, but lower reading comprehension scores, leading to the conclusion that fluency and comprehension may interact differently for children whose first language is other than English. Here is an extreme—­a nd amusing—­example of a student who mastered an oral recitation of an English speech so well that he won a prize for it: During high school, I once took part in an extempore speech competition . . . when I went on stage and pulled out from a box containing various speeches, one of Abraham Lincoln’s greatest speeches: the Gettysburg Address (1863). “Four score

212

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent. . . . ” Except for maybe a few isolated words here and there, the words of the entire speech ran through my lips and my mind as an express train passes through an empty station; not even a slightest registration of either its context or as to what I was reading. The only one thing I remember doing is paying attention to the punctuation in that speech. As luck would have it, I went on to win the first prize in that competition, having recited a speech I had no idea who had written, what it meant, or what its purpose was. I was to learn much later from my dad that it was Abraham Lincoln’s speech.—­A lok Lall For all the above factors, oral reading for ELLs is a less valid measure of reading comprehension than it is for L1 English speakers, at least when learners are at the beginning or developing levels of English proficiency. A score below the mean for a school or district may not yield very useful information when an ELL student is learning an additional language. In addition, an intervention may not be appropriate. Quirk and Beem (2012) warn, “Practitioners should be cautious when making identification and instructional decisions for ELL students based solely on oral reading fluency data” (p. 539). ORF can be thought of as an additional source of data only, taken in a oneon-one setting, a “snapshot” of a moment in time. In summary, any important decisions about the reading progress of ELLs should not rely heavily on oral reading scores and should take into account student language growth, teacher observations, and multiple formative assessments, such as retellings and discussions. Still, monitoring the oral reading progress of an individual student is useful because increases in oral reading scores reflect increases in reading levels, for both native English learners and ELLs (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001; Lems, 2005).

Fluency Instruction Fluency instruction, unlike fluency assessment, is very important and useful for ELLs. We shift our focus now to the other side of the coin: What fluency activities are best to boost silent reading comprehension? Happily, the array of possibilities is impressive and has much research support.

Components of Fluency Instruction Fluency instruction is characterized by one or more of the following: 1. Some kind of reading repetition or practice. 2. Modeling by an expert or more proficient other. 3. Some kind of progress monitoring (Rasinski, 2003).



Reading Fluency 213

Although these components can be used for other activities than oral reading, most good oral reading practice involves all of them somewhere along the line.

Benefits of Fluency Instruction with ELLs There are six distinct benefits to using fluency instruction with ELLs, and they go above and beyond benefits that accrue to native speakers. Expressive Reading Expressive reading can assist in comprehension. Johnson and Moore (1997) found a moderate but significant relationship between the reading comprehension scores of ELLs and how native-­like their pausing was when reading English aloud. Fluency practice gives ELLs a chance to see how prosody looks in print and hear how it sounds at the same time. In spoken English, the most important words in a text are longer, louder, and higher pitched, which underscores their importance. Reading along silently or quietly with a text that is being read aloud helps students create these associations. Oral reading practice probably has positive effects on ELLs’ pronunciation and speaking fluency, too. A Spanish teacher at Addison Trail High School in Addison, Illinois, says the following about oral reading. Whenever I have to read aloud in front of an “audience” I never comprehend what I am reading. The weird thing is, though, when I don’t understand something that I have read silently, I read it aloud. As I am reading it aloud, I accentuate the words of importance and then I understand. This seems odd to me since I would classify myself as a visual learner. Even when I write, I usually speak aloud as I write. It really helps me to hear and see what I am trying to understand.—­K athleen McColaugh Chunking and Prosody Fluency instruction gives ELL readers practice in developing two important reading competencies: chunking and prosody. Chunking (which is sometimes called parsing) is the ability to separate written text into meaningful phrase units. It requires knowledge of syntax, and it develops unconsciously for native speakers. When they start to learn to read, native speakers apply their auditory memory of how words are grouped into phrases and apply that to the words they see across a line of text. For example, when Kiennesha, a native speaker of English, pauses at periods or changes her intonation pattern for a yes/no question, she is showing

214

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

that she can chunk the phrases or clauses of a sentence correctly as she “reads the punctuation.” However, prosody goes well beyond chunking the words in a sentence, and like many other features, it is language-­specific. Look at Gareth Charles’s observation about Thai prosody: I really struggle with prosody in my second language, Thai. The way Thais stress different words and use intonation differs dramatically, person to person. My mother-­in-law emphasizes her question tags, while my father-­in-law delivers very softly, unstressed. My students are more rhythmic with their word stress while my wife is more flexible with hers.—­Gareth Prosody practice includes interpretive features such as “getting into character” for reading certain texts by speaking more loudly, using variations in voice tone, or pausing for emphasis. These oral reading skills might come considerably later than chunking skills for ELLs, or they may not come at all. They are developing oracy in English, have different prosodic patterns in their home languages, and often have had limited exposure to spoken English, and for these reasons, we may expect their knowledge of chunking to precede—­or even exceed—­their ability to do expressive reading. Although it may be unrealistic to expect some ELLs to read expressively, it is useful to practice prosody along with chunking, because both techniques can boost reading comprehension. Phonological Decoding and the Phonological Loop Phonological decoding, or pronouncing written words, is a vital skill for beginning readers. The ability to decode and pronounce words is one of the most powerful predictors of reading success, even as early as first grade (Share & Stanovich, 1995; Torgeson & Burgess, 1998; Wagner, Torgeson, & Rashotte, 1994). This ability has been found in many languages, including those with other kinds of orthographies. Koda (2005) ranks it as “number one”: “Phonological decoding is perhaps the most indispensable competence for reading acquisition in all languages” (p. 34). The reason is that, even for mature readers, having a good phonological representation of a word helps retrieve it from working memory. It is a core literacy skill (Koda, 2005, p. 185). When we see or hear a written word that we know, we retrieve it from our long-term memory for active use. How does the word get into our memory to begin with? It is stored through a process called the phonological loop (­Baddeley, Gathercole, & Papagno, 1998, p. 1158; Birch, 2015). When we encounter a new word for the first time, the phonological loop converts the visual or auditory stimulus of the word into a sound-based “phonological image.” The brain, in turn, creates a short-term “slot” to hold the word, which can be filled with



Reading Fluency 215

semantic associations at that time or later, once we have learned it. The phonological loop is like a messenger, taking the information and moving it into auditory memory. The loop moves data from the eyes or ears into short-term and then long-term storage. Rehearsal solidifies the word in long-term memory, through visual and auditory repetition. What ELLs do not have available in their long-term memory is that reservoir of remembered words, the listening vocabulary, that native speakers accumulate through the natural, automatic process of acquiring a first language. As a result, it’s really important that ELLs have enough exposure to a word to secure it in memory through the phonological loop, and fluency practice provides that exposure. In fact, a repeated reading study of ELLs cited repetition as one of the factors contributing to their reading comprehension progress (Taguchi, Takayasu-­Maass, & Gorsuch, 2004). Reading Stamina In addition to vocabulary growth, fluency practice helps build stamina in the key skill of reading connected text. Hiebert and Fisher (2006) note that there are reports of sharp discrepancies in the ability of first-grade Spanish ELLs to read individual words from a list compared with reading connected text (p. 291). Reading comprehension requires moving swiftly and accurately through connected texts in many genres (types of texts), and fluency helps students build the endurance to keep moving and bring text processing up to speed. Confidence and Motivation Children who have the opportunity to listen to or practice passages multiple times develop more self-­confidence and independence as readers (Koskinen et al., 1995), provided they are in settings in which their affective filters are low. As we describe shortly, there are many opportunities for performance reading, whether prerecorded or performed live. Reading Rate The rate at which people read in a second language is slower than that of their first language, and if it is below a certain rate, it is impossible for readers to keep up with an academic curriculum (Birch, 2015; Rasinski, 2000). ELLs benefit from opportunities to learn techniques to increase their reading rate so that they can become successful readers of academic texts. Rate-­ building activities include timed repeated readings (oral or silent), charting progress on a graph, or repeating reading until a certain target rate is reached (­A nderson, 1999).

216

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Successful Fluency Instruction for ELLs Research has shown impressive results for fluency instruction with ELLs. Among many innovative techniques, Readers’ Theatre, poetry performance, audio-­a ssisted reading, echo reading, lyric singing, paired reading, timed repeated reading, simulated TV broadcasts, podcasts, and choral reading have been used to positive effect (e.g., Rasinski, 2003; Rasinski, Blachowicz, & Lems, 2012). Some fluency programs have raised the reading levels of striving readers by several grade levels in only a few months! Students enjoy these activities, too, and they increase students’ motivation to read. The following are a few good techniques you might draw upon.

Repeated Reading In a key work, “The Method of Repeated Readings,” Samuels (1979) found that when students silently read the same passage up to four times, their comprehension of not only that passage but subsequent passages improved dramatically. Hiebert and Fisher (2006) found that first-grade ELLs benefited from daily fluency interventions that included repeated reading and modeling by the teacher, whether they were reading highly decodable books or those with more high-­frequency, high-­imagery vocabulary. Eye-­tracking technology tracks the time a reader’s eyes stop, or “fixate,” on words, how many words they fixate upon, and how many times the eyes return to a word; it shows that, when L1 readers engaged in repeated reading, they “spent less time fixating on words, made fewer fixations per word, and revisited the previously fixated parts of the text progressively fewer times as they became more familiar with them” (Taguchi, Gorsuch, Lems, & Rozzwell, 2016, p. 109). Whole-class repeated reading has also demonstrated improvement in student word recognition (McTeer, Rasinski, & Bintz, 2022).

Audio‑Assisted Reading Audio-­a ssisted reading consists of looking at the words of a text while also listening to an oral version of the text, whether prerecorded or live. When Pluck (2006) implemented an audio-­a ssisted reading fluency intervention for L1 Maori ELLs and native English speakers in New Zealand, she found almost double the level of progress in word recognition, accuracy, comprehension, and spelling for the ELLs compared with the native English speakers. Koskinen et al. (1995) used audio-­a ssisted reading as part of a home–­school literacy program with first-grade ELLs, and both the teacher and parents noticed a marked increase by the children in daily conversations about books, as well as increased motivation to read. In addition, children became able to read more difficult books. At the university level, Woodall (2010) found that



Reading Fluency 217

low-­proficiency ELLs made more gains in reading comprehension when they were able to listen to an audio version of the text while reading than did their “reading only” counterparts. Many reading programs now use audio-­a ssisted support so that ELLs and others can practice reading aloud. Listening to audiobooks through digital devices is an excellent technique for modeling language and providing access to the sounds, appearance, and meanings of English. In Pluck’s intervention, ELLs gained an average of 2 years in their reading comprehension level from a 1-hour-a-day, 15-week audio-­a ssisted reading program (Pluck, 2006). The students read short, high-­interest stories as they listened to an audio track and repeated their practice until they could perform the reading on their own. The research was done as part of the Rainbow Reading program, now widely used in New Zealand and other English-­speaking countries (www.rainbowreading.org.nz). Listening while reading is not only a bridge to reading growth but a listening comprehension practice in its own right. When students listen as they read or read as they listen, they get a double dose of comprehensible input.

Performance Reading: Readers’ Theatre, Poetry, Public Speaking, Singing The category of “performance reading” (Rasinski, 2003) is very effective in developing ELL fluency, and the most widely used is Readers’ Theatre (Kozub, 2000). It’s fun, it allows for small-group interactions, and it builds good comprehension habits, such as analyzing the motives of characters in a play, that can be used later in reading fiction. It’s easy to find good resources for Readers’ Theatre, both free and paid, and resourceful teachers or even students can also write their own. Poems and public speaking can also allow students to practice expressive features that are so important to the development of L2 oral fluency. Initially, the language instructor can model the text with exaggerated stress and intonation to highlight its prosodic contours; then students can practice their parts, inside or outside of class. Performing for one’s classmates adds a positive social dimension to the practice, and teachers can set up the performances for success, inviting families and caregivers for a social event or perhaps performing the pieces for younger children in the school. Students should have plenty of time to prepare and plenty of chances to do dry runs, perhaps in pairs, so that no one is needlessly stressed or taken by surprise. Performances can be motivating, and especially for a young person learning to perform in a new language, it can be an important achievement to be remembered for years to come. Another option is for students to submit a private recording on Flip or to watch a private, class-­created video recording of themselves practicing the oral reading and to self-­evaluate and set goals

218

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

for their performance. A link in the references section shows a video of an elementary-­grade ELL doing exactly that, in an instructional conversation with his teacher (“Jung Wu reading self-­a ssessment,” 2010). There are myriad other techniques to help ELLs develop reading fluency. Li and Nes (2001) studied Chinese ELLs who received weekly English-­ language paired-­reading activities led by a skilled adult. The children made impressive gains in accuracy and fluency, even during the maintenance period, when the sessions became less frequent. McCauley and McCauley (1992) successfully used teacher-­led choral reading to promote language learning by ELLs to great success. Lems (2001a) used poetry performances in an adult ESL classroom and reported that students found the poems and the performances meaningful and memorable. Singing along with a song or performing a song in a choral group, in a smaller group, or in a karaoke format is a tried-and-true way to learn pronunciation and vocabulary in a new language while having a wonderful time. Did you realize that singing songs can also aid in reading fluency (Lems, 2013b)? When an ELL is reading lyrics and singing along with them, whether with a lyric video, printed lyrics, or a karaoke track, she or he is also practicing reading!

Read and Look Up: Building the Comprehension Habit Professor Yvonne Gonzalez, a specialist in bilingual special education at Texas Woman’s University, recommends checking comprehension as ELLs read aloud by asking them to read a sentence, then stopping them halfway through and asking them to look up and finish the sentence. “If they are really constructing meaning while they read,” she says, “they will be able to finish the sentence with a logical sentence ending” (Gonzalez, personal communication, January, 2008). Another way of checking comprehension is to ask students to retell the gist of each paragraph, taking turns with a partner. Many teachers have never had the opportunity to do their own repeated oral reading of a passage. To provide an opportunity for you to have this experience, we have included a short passage taken from the classic 1845 American work, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself (Appendix 8.1). After providing the passage, we show three ways that text can be marked for oral reading practice: in its original form, divided into phrases, and with slash marks (Appendix 8.2). Although the syntax and some of the phrases in this passage are almost 200 years old by now, we think it will be a good exercise for you to think about how readers decide where to segment text, figure out how to pronounce unknown vocabulary from context, and make sense of what they read. We have also provided a chart to show you how you might score a 1-minute repeated oral reading of a single passage (Appendix 8.3).



Reading Fluency 219

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Increasing Reading Rate Fluency practices can help students increase their reading rate and serve as motivators. When using repeated reading to increase reading rate, passages should be at the students’ already attained reading level so that the focus can be on processing text more rapidly rather than on guessing the meanings of unknown words. However, rate building should never be the main point of fluency practice, or even of repeated reading practice (Zutell, Donelson, Bevans, & Todt, 2006, p. 270). When students practice only in order to increase their reading rate, they are not building the habit of reading for comprehension. Although an increase in reading rate may transfer to other reading passages, the reading done in timed settings is not likely to yield high levels of comprehension. Of course, this is exactly what so much high-­stakes testing asks students to do; it forces them to rush through random passages and answer comprehension questions with little time for rereading or reflection. If we know this practice is not good in the classroom, why is it used for so many standardized tests?

Segmenting Text Segmenting text into lines that break at natural phrase endings, or by marking with slashes, is a great technique for ELLs. In one study, segmented text produced better comprehension in young readers than conventional text (O’Shea & Sindelar, 1983). This technique was validated in research comparing it with other techniques that used only repeated reading (Hoffman, 1987). Of course, poetry naturally segments phrases into different lines, and lines from a skit or Readers’ Theatre show the breaks that occur with different speakers in a conversation. These are good places to look for authentic text that is naturally segmented. Rasinski (1990) proposed an alternate method, not by having students read aloud, but by having them place a check mark for the phrasal breaks themselves, using a pencil. To be sure there was high reliability, Rasinski first had skilled readers mark the texts. A correct score for the students consisted of a check made by at least 50% of the skilled readers. Examples of these three ways to segment text are shown in Appendix 8.2 at the end of the chapter.

Choral Reading, Partner Reading, Echo Reading, Popcorn Reading There are many different ways to arrange oral reading in class, and educators unhappy about the stressfulness of round-robin reading

220

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

and remembering their own bad experiences have found ways to have students take turns that are less stressful but still motivating. Do you remember the stress of waiting for your turn in round-robin reading? This bilingual art teacher certainly does. My earliest memory in a school setting, reading aloud, is from second grade. I was a slower reader than my peers at the time and was insecure in my academic abilities. I can remember the aluminum can of popsicle sticks from my teacher’s desk and the stress I felt each time she vigorously shook the container. I feared my name being selected because I knew that she would make known each of my mistakes as I made them. —  ­Beatriz Lappay Before students practice in small groups, teachers can model expressive reading for the whole class. Here is what a third-grade teacher does to ensure that students do not experience anxiety about oral reading. I find that a whole-group lesson is a great time for me to model fluent reading and listening comprehension, and I use guided reading and partner reading as opportunities for the students to practice their own fluency. —  ­M ary Helmstetter Choral reading, with the instructor in the lead, works very well for beginning ELLs and very young readers who do not know the sounds of words and do not want to be singled out. Echo reading, in which students chime in right after the instructor, allows for a little more individual performance but still allows the student to safely shadow the main speaker. In popcorn reading, students take turns reading a short passage, then stop when they feel like it and select the next person. Here is how one math specialist handles it. We have a popcorn reading activity where students who start reading aloud can call on a classmate to read aloud. As a class we’ve decided a reader needs to read a complete sentence as a minimum, but they are welcome to read as much past that complete sentence as they would like. Some of my students that struggle with oral reading fluency have expressed they enjoy popcorn reading because they aren’t forced to read a lot, but they can read something to the class. Each student also has a pass at least once during the session. I tend to have students read aloud only for a second reading of text and after we have discussed many of the content vocabulary words that students may encounter when reading. I’m much more concerned that students feel safe to participate as that is not what I experienced for others in my classes as a child.—Misty J. Richmond



Reading Fluency 221

Cross‑Grade Reading, Buddy Reading Older students can benefit from the opportunity to read to younger students. Here is how a sixth-grade teacher of ELLs set up a cross-grade fluency project. In my own classroom in order to start practicing fluency, I started having them read Green Eggs and Ham. It was challenging, but students enjoyed it. I also talked to the kindergarten teacher, and we had my sixth graders go read to her kindergarteners. My sixth graders would practice their book so that when they read it to the kindergarteners they would sound “like a teacher.”—­M alitzina Salazar Even when students are the same age, having them take turns reading passages to each other can be useful. Buddy reading, also called partner reading or paired reading, is one of the five core activities in the popular “Daily Five” curriculum—­in the category called “Read to Someone” (Boushey & Mozer, 2014). Kids settle in nooks around the classroom and take turns reading paragraphs, each holding his or her copy of the text. They can also time each other with a stopwatch for fluency-­rate practice, or they can paraphrase their partner’s reading, to focus on listening comprehension. Buddy reading engages ELLs to actively use language as listeners, speakers, readers, and communicators and keeps the affective filter low.

Rhythm Walks In this kinesthetic fluency activity, after reading a poem or short story together as a class, the students and the teacher divide the reading into phrases or clauses, write them on construction or flipchart paper, and lay them out in sequence on the floor around the room (Peebles, 2007). Students walk around the room and read out each phrase as they come to its page. They can repeat their path several times, practicing the reading each time.

Classroom Fluency Norms and Diverse Assessments Establishing your own classroom fluency norms makes sense because native speaker fluency rates do not match with ELL rates. If you work in a setting with many ELLs, we suggest collecting students’ reading fluency scores over time and building your unpublished database as more students are assessed. If school fluency measures are already taken, disaggregate the scores for ELLs and be prepared to see lower scores from

222

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

students whose native languages are orthographically distant from English. If using fluency assessments with a comprehension component (not recommended!), allow ELLs a chance to read a text silently more than once before reading it aloud, and make sure that students clearly understand that there will be a comprehension component before they begin the activity.

Digital Resources for Fluency Practice Children can read a book and listen to it at the same time at the Starfall website (www.starfall.com), which has many folk- and fairytales. We especially like this site because the text is clean and readable, the stories are well written, and the readers are children with delightfully clear and expressive voices. Another resource is the expanding set of picture book stories read aloud by professional actors at Storyline Online (www.storylineonline.net), a website from the Screen Actors Guild with a growing collection of memorable performances. It is also easy to find stories read aloud by authors at their author or publisher websites, and teachers can easily find short interviews and book trailers by children’s authors and illustrators. Remember, your students need to see the words in order to read along, or it’s just a listening practice.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. With a partner, practice reading the Frederick Douglass passage provided in Appendix 8.1 aloud for 1 minute. Using the Score Chart for Repeated Read‑ ings of a Single Passage in Appendix 8.3, repeat a timed reading (using the passage provided, or another one you prefer) four times, and plot your scores. Note and mark the changes in the number of words read. In addition to the change in the number of words read, what other differences did you notice when you read this historical passage four times? When you do a repeated reading with your students (this one is not recommended due to its lengthy embedded sentences and syntax), have students create their own graph and color in the bars of the graph themselves.  3. If you are able to listen to the oral reading of ELLs, jot down notes about their reading performances. Did anything surprise you?  4. Using awareness of visual literacy discussed in Chapter 5, how does the “fluency bridge” in Figure 8.1 help you understand the transition from decoding to comprehension in a way that words alone cannot? Explain.  5. Did you read aloud in school as a child? How did you feel about it? Share with



Reading Fluency 223 a partner. How might that experience influence how you plan oral reading activities?  6. Have you ever read a text aloud without understanding a word of it? Talk about it.  7. Do you know people who read well, but cannot read aloud expressively? Do you think reading aloud expressively is an important skill for teachers, or is it optional? Do certain kinds of teachers need to read expressively more than others?  8. Looking at the statement from Kathleen McColaugh on page  213, do you feel that hearing your own voice as you read helps you, or hinders you? Why? Relate your discussion of this answer to the main ideas of this chap‑ ter.  9. Have you had any experience using a fluency instructional technique? If so, how did it go? What did you learn from it? 10. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Find a folktale from a culture you are less familiar with and create a short Readers’ Theatre piece at the reading level of the students you teach or will be teaching. After piloting it with colleagues, give it to your students to rehearse. If time allows, have them perform it. What did you learn from this experience? 11. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Find a new text at your students’ independent read‑ ing level and prepare it for use as an ORF assessment, based on a topic you are teaching or plan to teach. There should be two copies of the text: a “clean” copy, in large font size, for the students, and an instructor copy with numbered lines, enough space between lines to note miscues, and a place to write the scores for repeated oral reading. Try the reading with several students and report on what you learned from timing them and marking their miscues. 12. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Look at the three ways the sample text is presented in Appendix 8.2. Find three different people and ask each one to read the text in one of the three ways: unmarked, marked, or separated by lines, covering up the two that are not being used. Compare the performances. Which way of presenting the text do you think would be most appropriate at the entering or beginning levels? At the developing, expanding, or bridging levels? At the reaching level? Did you notice differences in rate, accuracy, phrasing, or expression with the different presentations of text? Talk about it.

APPENDIX 8.1

Sample Text for Oral Reading Frederick Douglass Decides to Learn to Read. From Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself (1845).  14  26  38  50  65

“Now,” [my master said to his wife] “if you teach him (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave. He would at once become unmanageable, and of no value to his master. As to himself, it could do him no good, but a great deal of harm. It would make him discontented and unhappy.”

 68 These words sank deep into my heart, stirred up sentiments within  79 that lay slumbering, and called into existence an entirely new train  90 of thought.  92 102 110 121 132 145

It was a new and special revelation, explaining dark and mysterious things, with which my youthful understanding had struggled, but struggled in vain. I now understood what had been to me a most perplexing difficulty—to wit, the white man’s power to enslave the black man. It was a grand achievement, and I prized it highly.

147 157 173 185 197 208

From that moment, I understood the pathway from slavery to freedom. It was just what I wanted, and I got it at a time when I least expected it. While I was saddened by the thought of losing the aid of my kind mistress, I was gladdened by the invaluable instruction which, by the merest accident, I had gained from my master.

209 220 233 245 256

Though conscious of the difficulty of learning without a teacher, I set out with high hope, and a fixed purpose, at whatever cost of trouble, to learn how to read. The very decided manner with which he spoke, and strove to impress his wife with the evil consequences of giving me instruction, served to convince me that (continued)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

224

Sample Text for Oral Reading (page 2 of 2) 266 he was deeply sensible of the truths he was uttering. It gave me the 280 best assurance that I might rely with the utmost confidence on the 292 results which, he said, would flow from teaching me to read. 303 315 329 341 352 364

What he most dreaded, that I most desired. What he most loved, that I most hated. That which to him was a great evil, to be carefully shunned, was to me a great good, to be diligently sought; and the argument which he so warmly urged, against my learning to read, only served to inspire me with a desire and determination to learn.

366 In learning to read, I owe almost as much to the bitter opposition 379 of my master, as to the kindly aid of my mistress. I acknowledge 392 the benefit of both. TOTAL: 395 words

225

APPENDIX 8.2

Three Ways to Mark Text for Oral Reading Frederick Douglass Decides to Learn to Read. From Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself (1845).

A. ORIGINAL TEXT (FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS ONLY)

 14  26  38  50  65

“Now,” [my master said to his wife] “if you teach him (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave. He would at once become unmanageable, and of no value to his master. As to himself, it could do him no good, but a great deal of harm. It would make him discontented and unhappy.”

 68 These words sank deep into my heart, stirred up sentiments within  79 that lay slumbering, and called into existence an entirely new train  90 of thought. Procedure: Place text in table with one row for each line of text; use word count feature to calculate each line, with the word matching with the word number at the beginning of each line.

B. TEXT DIVIDED INTO PHRASES, RETAINING PUNCTUATION (FIRST THREE SENTENCES OF PASSAGE ONLY) General guideline: Start a new line after a comma, between the subject and predicate of a sentence, after a period, or before a long clause. “Now,” [my master said to his wife] “if you teach him (speaking of myself) how to read, there would be no keeping him. It would forever unfit him to be a slave. He would at once become unmanageable, and of no value to his master. (continued)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

226

Three Ways to Mark Text for Oral Reading (page 2 of 2) C. DIVIDING TEXT BY SLASHES (FIRST THREE SENTENCES ONLY) One slash (/) = comma or “half stop” (pause for a comma, or between the subject and predicate of a sentence, or beginning of a phrase). Two slashes (//) = period or “full stop” (longer pause, at the end of a sentence or after a semicolon, or after a long phrase). “Now,”/ [my master said to his wife]/ “if you teach him/ (speaking of myself)/ how to read,/there would be no keeping him.// It would forever unfit him/ to be a slave.// He would at once become unmanageable,/ and of no value to his master.//

227

APPENDIX 8.3

Score Chart for Repeated Readings of a Single Passage 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Reading

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

Fastest score Slowest score Difference From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

228

CHAPTER NINE

Achieving Comprehension in L2 English Reading

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY reading comprehension • independent reading level • reading strategies preteaching • frontloading • lemma • lexeme • inferencing signal words • transition words • connectors • text structure graphic organizers • T‑chart • Venn diagram • double bubble map content frame (semantic feature analysis grid) • metacognition • think‑alouds question–­answer relationship (QAR) • wait time • extensive reading

I

n previous chapters, we reviewed some of the components that are needed to create a syndrome of success for an ELL reader—­proficient oracy, background knowledge, effortless decoding, an understanding of morphemes, familiarity with word formation processes, cognates and collocations, and the attainment of reading fluency. This chapter focuses on how these work together to bring about reading comprehension, the ability to construct meaning from a written text. Reading comprehension is not a static competency; it varies according to the purposes for reading and the specific texts that are involved. When the requisite skills are in place, reading becomes an evolving interaction between the text and the reader. This is accomplished through the use of both cognitive and metacognitive strategies, some of which we present in this chapter. 229

230

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Comprehending Connected Text in a New Language Is Hard! Even for ELLs who are able decoders in English, the level of effort required to read for meaning can be a monumental task. Look at how author Richard Rodriguez (1982) describes his reading in English as a new language: Most books, of course, I barely understood. While reading Plato’s Republic, I needed to keep looking at the book jacket to remind myself what the text was about. (p. 64)

One might ask how Rodriguez could be reading a book at such an advanced level in English but still not be reading with comprehension. How could he read and yet not read? And what makes reading in a new language so especially overwhelming? Part of the answer can be found in the fact that ELLs have less extensive listening vocabulary on which to draw when reading words they have never seen before. When we read words that we have neither seen nor heard, we don’t have the advantages of the phonological loop that helps us recognize and retrieve words from long-term memory. In addition, the extreme opacity of English means it is frustrating to “sound out” unknown words on the page, and it takes a long time to decode fluently in English. Add to that incomplete knowledge of the syntax and grammar patterns of English so that readers may need to make a great deal of effort to unpack a long sentence correctly. Even taking all of these factors into account, it is also due to the limits of working memory. When we struggle with sentences in a new language, reading takes a great deal of cognitive energy, and it’s easy to lose focus. As a result, retaining the gist of the previous sentences or previous paragraphs in working memory is harder as we move forward slowly through a text. Even when decoding is no longer very effortful, it is still much harder to construct meaning from text in a new language, a kind of real-time cognitive delay. When our decoding is more advanced than our reading comprehension, the result may be the strange phenomenon of word calling—­decoding but not comprehending, as lamented by Richard Rodriguez above. Native speakers of English experience this phenomenon, too, and reading teachers have evolved many strategies, such as highlighting text or reading and retelling to a partner, to help learners stay on task as they develop the comprehension habit. All together, developing reading comprehension can be a real challenge. An obvious, but often overlooked, rule of thumb in teaching reading strategies is to first practice new strategies using texts that are at a student’s independent reading level—the level at which students can read and comprehend without assistance. When students practice new strategies at their



Achieving Comprehension 231

independent reading level, they will feel confident in using them when the texts become denser and longer. For example, Sara, an 11-year-old ELL from Peru reading at a proficiency level comparable to a monolingual English speaker at the fourth-­grade level, practiced summarizing by reading a paragraph about waterfalls and completing a sentence frame that summarized what she had read. She tried that same strategy when she had a longer reading, still using the sentence frame, and on the third reading, she summarized without the frame. For ELLs and native English speakers alike, if texts are too difficult, they will become frustrated by reading, and a vicious cycle will develop. Have you seen—or known—­a nyone who was overwhelmed by being asked to read materials that were boring, too difficult, or both and began to fall further and further behind in both reading and academic progress? When we add to that the distraction and lure of digital devices, most of us can think of many people who fit that description. Stanovich (1986) calls it “the Matthew effect,” comparing the phenomenon to the Bible story of the Parable of the Talents, which can be paraphrased as “the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.” This can be a devastating lifelong burden, making people feel they are “not smart.” We want to see the opposite—­that reading well leads to more reading, more learning, more self-­confidence, and a syndrome of success. Making the transition from understanding general vocabulary, both oral and written, to the content-­specific language of the classroom is often challenging for ELLs. Ironically, ELLs often test out of bilingual and sheltered English programs just at the exact moment that content reading and writing are becoming much more complex, and they are not set up to succeed with rigorous academic activities in English. Handling complex reading tasks requires the ability to apply a number of strategies, as well as to make a judgment about which strategies to apply and how to orchestrate them (Duke & Cartwright, 2021). This chapter introduces some of the important strategies that build reading comprehension for ELLs. We will begin at the level of vocabulary building, move to phrase and sentence level comprehension, then move to text structures and visual and online supports, and finally to metacognitive strategies. Reading strategies can be defined as intentional actions that readers take to establish and enhance their comprehension (Jimenez, Garcia, & Pearson, 1996; Pritchard & O’Hara, 2008). Reading comprehension requires the use of strategies before, during, and after reading. Better readers in any language use more strategies and use them more effectively. A study of resilient and nonresilient ELLs found that resilient ELLs employed more successful strategies while reading (Padrón et al., 2002). Schoonen, Hulstijn, and Bossers (1998) found that knowledge of vocabulary and use of reading strategies for Dutch ELLs were decisive factors in their successful reading comprehension

232

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

in English. In fact, strategy use is so important that it can predict overall reading success (Duke & Cartwright, 2021).

The Threshold Theory and Reading Strategies Strategies readers use in their L1 may not be able to be applied to reading in English as a new language, at least not right away. Pritchard and O’Hara (2008) noticed that the strategies L1 Spanish ELLs used in reading texts in their first language were not the same as those they used in reading English, even though they were proficient readers in both languages. They were able to use analytical and critical strategies in Spanish, their native language, but used more sentence-­by-­sentence analysis in English, probably because English has such an opaque orthography. Of course, this is yet another argument in favor of dual-­language and late-exit bilingual education programs, as these students could engage in cognitively advanced behavior in their L1, although they could not use them yet in their new language. Fitzgerald (1995) did a meta-­review of research on L2 academic reading and found that the more proficient ELL readers became in English, the more their processing strategies resembled those used by proficient L1 English readers, both in the number and appropriateness of strategies used. Other studies support this view (see Fender, 2001; Jimenez et al., 1996). Evaluating the use of strategies in a comprehensive research review, August and Shanahan (2006) noted, “Strategies of various types are unlikely to help students who do not have the requisite language proficiency to comprehend the text” (p. 355). Some learners may be able to use both cognitive and metacognitive strategies in their L1 and yet not be able to use them in English because they don’t have the language to perform them. The threshold theory (Alderson, 1984, 2000) can be strongly applied to reading strategies, as well as Bernhardt’s compensatory model of second-­language reading (see Chapter 2, Figure 2.1), which shows L1 literacy accounting for 20% of L2 reading comprehension, with 30% coming from proficiency in the new language. For ELL readers, that L2 proficiency must include bottom-­up decoding skills before the top-down cognitive and strategic processing skills can be successfully applied to reading comprehension. Costas, a high school ELL who plans to enter culinary school, is trying to use an English-­language cookbook to make banana bread in his high school baking class. Even with Costas’s good background knowledge (he loves to cook!), he will still have to be able to read the names of the ingredients, the abbreviations for the measuring units, and the meaning of verbs such as whisk, fold, and spoon. His background knowledge and metacognitive strategies—­preheating the oven, wearing a mitt, or sniffing the room to detect when something is nearly done—will serve him well once he is able



Achieving Comprehension 233

to understand the English words that will allow him to execute the recipe. Of course, we can watch cooking shows from around the world now, and sometimes seeing them makes learning some of the vocabulary unnecessary. (In addition, Costas’s grandma has passed down her knowledge and famous memorized recipes through oral tradition!) Students need to understand how strategies work through modeling and support, and they need many chances to practice them. We should not expect students to figure out all the various reading strategies in any language by themselves. Using the baking example again, it would be like dropping someone into a kitchen for the first time and expecting them to produce a layer cake! Teachers need to introduce a select number of tools one by one, systematically, whether in the first language or the new one, and demonstrate them through careful guidance. Then students can truly “cook”! Because all of these intensive and extensive activities are used directly in the classroom, we incorporate them into the body of the chapter in lieu of describing them in a separate section at the end of the chapter.

Word‑Learning Strategies Native speakers and ELLs need to learn such a colossal amount of vocabulary during their academic lives that it is impossible to teach them all of the words that they need to know during class. We like the three principles of vocabulary study proposed by Lesaux, Kieffer, Faller, and Kelley (2010, p.  198) based on research: (1) Words should be studied deeply so that the chosen words are encountered multiple times and used in all domains, as opposed to word lists that are quickly studied and replaced; (2) academic words should be of high value across disciplines, as opposed to low-­frequency words that will not be applicable to many classes; and (3) explicit instruction should alternate with practicing strategies to help learners increase their proficiency on their own. Vocabulary learning is a cumulative process in which the initial and subsequent meanings of words are built upon over time. For ELLs, it is especially important to receive ample exposure to new words in order to activate the phonological loop. The best way to ensure that ELLs will be active vocabulary learners over the long run is to help them practice strategies and skills that can then be used independently, throughout and beyond their years of schooling, This approach prioritizes learner autonomy rather than high-­maintenance strategies that can only be done under the tutelage of an instructor. The following word-­learning strategies can be used in English as a foreign language (EFL), sheltered, bilingual, or dual-­language instructional settings, using English or the home language with English.

234

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Preteaching Vocabulary Preteaching vocabulary (Bamford & Day, 1997) is a proven method of enhancing knowledge before reading a new text, as well as introducing the cultural aspects of a text. In the literacy field, preteaching vocabulary before reading a text is sometimes called frontloading. Preteaching or frontloading introduces target vocabulary through oral activities so that, by the time the new words are found in the reading, they are already familiar (Hoyt, 2002). Freeman and Freeman (2004) consider learning new vocabulary as part of a continuum that “involves learning about something, talking about it, wondering about it, and then reading and writing about it” (p. 198). Preteaching vocabulary that is key to understanding the main ideas of the reading should take priority. I think carefully about what vocabulary I will select from a text we’re going to read and how to make the activities appealing. Words that are critical to understanding the background of the text or words that have key roles in understanding the plot are essential. I try to avoid cloze activities or writing the words in a new sentence since they are not engaging. Instead, I may have students pantomime or draw new vocabulary as a class, or play a matching game—­anything to get them excited before transitioning to the reading!—­Gareth

Lemmas, Lexemes, and Word Families Why teach one word when you can teach a set of words at the same time? A lemma is a single form of a word, also called a dictionary entry. However, a lemma belongs to a larger group of words that have the same morpheme and related meanings, but in different forms. In language arts classrooms, they may be called word families, but in linguistics, they are called lexemes. Lexemes are the variations of a lemma that are created by adding different derivational and inflectional morphemes to a root or stem (Kempen & Huijbers, 1983). For example, the lemma sell is connected to the lexemes selling, seller, sold, and sells. It is more productive to teach the lexeme, not just the lemma. ELLs may not be aware of all the forms of the word, especially because many irregular past tense forms of verbs in English look so different. To a native speaker of English, it’s obvious that sell and sold come from the same root, but it may not be obvious at all to an ELL student. A good way to account for the forms of a lexeme is through a spider map organizer. The lemma is written in the center, and its lexemes are written in the branches surrounding it, resembling the spokes of a wheel. We show an example of a lemma in a spider map lexeme in Figure 9.1. Another way to use a spider map to increase vocabulary is to place the multiple meanings of a polysemous word around the branches of the map



Achieving Comprehension 235

FIGURE 9.1. Lemma and lexemes for the lemma go.

with the word in the middle. When the word in the middle is left blank, students can identify it at the same time they notice its multiple meanings. Can you guess the missing word in Figure 9.2?

Word Cards/Word Rings A simple set of index cards can generate hours of effective vocabulary practice. It is easy for young ELLs to create picture cards. Older children might add a simple definition to their card, or even use the word in a sentence. The

FIGURE 9.2. Elementary grade teacher Mary Sorensen designed this spider map, with multiple definitions of the word in the arms of the map and the center left blank.

236

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

cards can be kept in a box or bound by a rubber band and kept in the student’s desk. Word cards can be sorted according to different criteria. Vocabulary expert I. S. P. Nation (2001) says, “for the simple word form–word meaning aspect of vocabulary learning, direct learning from word cards is an efficient and highly effective practice” (p. 299). In fact, there is some evidence that L2 vocabulary is retained best by using a simple L1 or L2 synonym (Fraser, 1999). The hands-on sorting provides an aid to recognizing and remembering the word. It’s also possible to generate and download card sets from Quizlet (quizlet.com) and other vocabulary practice sites, using card stock paper in the classroom printer. Variations of word cards might include writing sentences using the word, writing synonyms, drawing the word, or asking students to define the word using their own words. (One caution: beware of including “antonyms,” or opposites, in the template because many words don’t have them.) The word cards can be grouped using color coding by part of speech, thematic unit or topic, or even by structural characteristics of the word. When students are learning to read, they can use word cards to reinforce sight words or to sort words by sounds, spelling, or syllables. Sorting cards in alphabetical order is good practice for using a dictionary or finding books in the library. Students can also sort into piles by whether or not they confidently know a word. As students move the cards from the pile of words that they are learning to the pile of words they know, they feel very empowered. Language-­learning apps have evolved, and online vocabulary learning has, too. There are many ways to practice new words, and some involve hearing the word spoken aloud as well as seeing it in writing and seeing its translation. On their own, students can create and practice word lists in Quizlet and other quiz sites.

Word Walls and Labeling Teachers who have their own classrooms can create word walls. There are many varieties of word walls. They are most often arranged alphabetically, but they can just as easily be arranged by concept, topic, or root; bilingually; or by characteristics of words. These might include words with initial consonant blends starting with gl- or scr-, for example, or by endings, such as words ending with -tion or -ious. Pictures can be included next to the words. Sight words, or the high-­frequency words that are hard to decode, are often placed on word walls as an aid to memory for emergent readers. Teachers can put labels for common classroom objects around the room, which is a natural way for entering- and beginning-­level learners to access the print environment. Bilingual word walls may be color-coded by language. A science word wall, based on morphemes, can be seen in Chapter 6 (Figure 6.3, p. 162). Figure 9.3 shows three more examples of word walls. The first is color-coded by



Achieving Comprehension 237

FIGURE 9.3. Three kinds of word walls. Top of this page: This color-coded word wall uses red for math words, light blue for science words, and black for language arts. Bottom of this page: This third-grade word wall includes a picture with each word. Following page: This Spanish word wall is also color-coded.

238



Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 9.3. (continued)

content area; the second shows words accompanied by pictures; and the third shows a color-coded word wall in Spanish.

Deploying First‑Language Resources Because ELL students start school already speaking and understanding another language, their L1 vocabulary can be a tremendous resource for learning English vocabulary. In this respect, ELL children actually have a potential advantage over monolingual English-­speaking children because they have an additional reservoir to draw upon. Here are some considerations about ways to deploy this resource in vocabulary learning: 1. When the target words have sensory applications, often called “concrete” words, young children can use, or create, picture cards showing a picture and the word in both languages. For example, on one side, a



Achieving Comprehension 239

Spanish-­speaking student can write martillo and draw a hammer, and on the other, write the word hammer. 2.  It’s not always a one-to-one fit when it comes to words that represent processes, concepts, or ideas across languages. For example, the meaning of parade might be completely different for a child whose family has participated in Mardi Gras in Brazil or for a child who has seen military parades in China. It’s important to confirm that children have the same cultural understanding of the English vocabulary word as it relates to a similar word in their first language. This is another reminder of the importance of rigorous, explicit, culturally responsive teaching. 3.  As students start to learn content in their first language in dual or bilingual programs, teachers can be more confident that they are getting the needed academic vocabulary and background knowledge to facilitate positive cross-­linguistic influence (PCI), using bridging techniques such as those found in Teaching for Biliteracy (Beeman & Urow, 2013). For example, a bilingual word wall might have words in one language written in green and words in the other written in blue, or there might be two word walls next to each other. 4.  Many languages share cognates with English, which can be a very helpful tool for students from such languages. As discussed in previous chapters, cognates derive from a common root, look or sound similar, and have similar meanings in two or more languages. When cognates are explicitly taught, students get into the habit of looking for and recognizing them. Some cognates share a root but have language-­specific derivational morphemes. For example, the adjective suffix -ous in English often translates to the Spanish suffix -oso/-osa. When bilingual students learn this, they can easily create associations between these words. precious famous mysterious curious

precioso famoso misterioso curioso

Learning about cognates helps raise children’s metalinguistic awareness—they form analogies based on the word forms. It is also powerful for monolingual English students, by the way, as recognizing a cognate can unlock meanings to many new words (e.g., “spek,” a PIE [Proto–Indo–­European] root for see, unlocks insights about spectrum, inspect, prospect, speculation, circumspect, and spectacle; see Chapter 6 for more about morphemes). However, not all home languages share cognates with English, so even for students within the same classroom, this powerful technique must be judiciously applied.

240

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

An example of using translanguaging methods for new vocabulary can be found in the keyword method, an effective method of word learning (Ellis & Beaton, 1993), although its main value is in recognition, not production, of the new word. In the keyword method, the teacher encourages students to form a mental image connected to the meaning of a new word, often through its sound (Baumann & Kame’enui, 1991). This combined auditory and visual memory aid is often effective for hard-to-learn words. When I was learning the word pool for swimming pool, I made a mental image of a hen, which is poule in French, the language that I studied in school in Ivory Coast, flapping around in a swimming pool. Picturing that hen in the water allowed me to remember the word pool.—­Tenena

Providing Enough Repetitions Hiebert et al. (2004) found that words are repeated much less frequently in beginning reading series than they once were. This is a problem for ELLs at the entering or beginning levels who are using beginning reading books because they often do not encounter the words frequently enough to easily retrieve and comprehend them. The authors propose that new words be introduced with “an emphasis on a handful of familiar yet compelling categories across a set of texts [as opposed to] different categories of items in every text” (Hiebert et al., 2004). In other words, new words can be grouped into high-­ interest categories or topics, just as they can be bundled into lexemes when their root is similar. For example, if you’re learning the name of a musical instrument, why not learn the names for several of them and play samples of how they sound? Having high-­interest categories, along with an opportunity to interact with the words, will help ELLs construct background knowledge. As another example, introducing the vocabulary involved in setting up a classroom tortoise habitat will allow for many spirited conversations right away—and you might include a naming ceremony!

Making Daily Use of Dictionaries Dictionaries are an indispensable resource for ELLs but must be introduced and employed regularly for full effect. As mentioned in previous chapters, although there are excellent online dictionaries available now, it’s still important to have good print dictionaries at the right height and within easy reach around the classroom. Many activities can scaffold dictionary use, including alphabetizing, looking for synonyms, or finding word etymologies. In some classrooms, students can be invited to find a word in a large, open dictionary in the room and call out its meaning to the whole class. If students have their own dictionaries, don’t let them molder in their desks—­provide activities that



Achieving Comprehension 241

will get students into the habit of pulling out, opening, and consulting their bound dictionaries. This applies to bilingual dictionaries as well!

Phrase‑ and Sentence‑Level Reading Strategies Punctuation What’s the use of those little specks all over the text? Do they convey any meaning? Punctuation is an incomplete attempt to codify the ways words are spoken aloud. We can call them the “traffic signals” of language—­they tell us “to slow down, notice this, take a detour, and stop” (Truss, 2003, p. 7). Punctuation separates sentences into thought groups, which are phrases, clauses, and sentences. English punctuation, like all the other aspects of English we have covered in the book, is language-­specific. However, it also shares commonalities with punctuation in many other languages. For example, the concept of the period, or full stop at the end of a sentence, is shared between English and Chinese. The concept will transfer effortlessly when learning to read English as a new language. However, its appearance differs slightly, because for Chinese readers and writers, the dot floats above the line, rather than sitting on it, and it’s “hollow.” Therefore, a symbol with the same meaning for reading may look different in written form. Other features of punctuation, often called “spelling and mechanics,” may cause interference when they are not the same in the two languages. For example, in French, the first letters of months, days of the week, and nationalities are not capitalized, unlike in English, and French-­literate ELLs will need to learn that. German, on the other hand, capitalizes many nouns which are not capitalized in their English equivalents. Punctuation can make a tremendous difference in the meaning of sentences. Take these sentence pairs, for example: A woman without her man is nothing. (= Women need men to have value.) A woman: without her, man is nothing. (= Men need women to have value.) Of course, when we read these two sentences aloud, we read the punctuation, and along with our intonation, there is no problem distinguishing their meanings. However, in written form, the punctuation is all important! That’s why ELLs need to hear text read aloud as they look at it. In this way, they will develop a sense of how punctuation contributes to the meaning of words. Learning to “read punctuation” through expressive reading is an oral reading skill that ELLs can develop with fluency practice. Truss has written several entertaining books for elementary students about the importance of correct punctuation, including Eats, Shoots and Leaves: Why Commas Really Do Make a Difference! (2006) and others.

242

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Inferencing When we speak of someone who is not very perceptive, we often say that they “take things too literally,” like the famous character Amelia Bedelia by Peggy Parish (1963). We value a person’s ability to “read between the lines” and see the hidden dimensions of things. Knowing how to make inferences in reading is indispensable. Inferencing requires actively interacting with the words in a sentence and among sentences in order to fill in missing pieces. In the hypothetical model of the reading process in Chapter 2 (Figure 2.2, p. 37), inferencing is represented as the highest of the cognitive processing strategies. Some inferencing strategies are text-based, whereas others rely on world knowledge or general language knowledge. Here are a few important textbased inferencing skills:

• Making pronoun references (knowing what a pronoun in a sentence refers to).

• Forming hypotheses about what is coming next in the text (probabilistic reasoning).

• Guessing the meanings of unknown words or phrases. • Forming impressions about a character’s motives and behaviors across multiple locations in a text.

• Knowing not only the denotations, but also the subtle connotations of word choices as they are used in texts.

• Understanding cause–­effect relationships of events in a text. • Drawing upon background knowledge to fill in gaps within a text. • Using a detail provided in the text to help unlock the plot. ELLs can learn inferential thinking even before they are reading, through interactive read-­a louds and instructional conversations. A question as simple as “Hmmmm . . . what do you think the author might be trying to say here?” can help an ELL begin the process of learning to infer. Listening to mystery stories is one way to make inferencing exciting. With high-­intermediate high school ELLs, I read daily mysteries aloud from the book series “Two-­Minute Mysteries” (Sobol, 1967). I put them in small groups and read the mystery three times slowly, without interruption. Next, they discuss the story in their group and try to solve the mystery by discussing clues in the story. When they think they solved it, they present their reasoning to the rest of the class. Their listening and inferencing abilities get better and better as they get accustomed to the format. It supports collaboration, listening, and reading between the lines, and interest is always high. Since that collection uses a lot of dated language, I also adapt them and write my own!—­K ristin



Achieving Comprehension 243

Signal Words, Transitions, and Connectors Has anyone ever responded “Yes, but . . . ” to your great idea? That phrase is a kind of “shorthand” telling you that the person really doesn’t agree and is planning to object. Both words are powerful, and their meanings clash. The connector but tells us that the “yes” part of the sentence is about to take a turn toward the negative. Just like traffic signals, signal words, transition words, and connectors tell the reader what’s coming up and where to go. English has many signal words, transitions, and connectors, which range from the general to content-­specific. Different teachers and textbooks name and group these words in different ways, and it benefits your students when you use clear and consistent terms for them and check that the same terms are used in other grade levels at the school. For example, signal words for multiplication problems, such as multiply by, cubed, times as much, and factor of, can be found in many word problems. ELLs need to understand what mathematical operations the words represent in order to do the story problems—­it’s not enough to understand the math. Connectors can keep readers moving forward in a text even if they are missing some vocabulary words. For example, when students are reading history, the words prior to that, after that, at the same time, and shortly after help them situate events in a timeline. If we know the function of a connector, we can stay on track even when we’re not quite sure what’s around the bend. Signal words, transitions, and connectors use a variety of syntax patterns and punctuation, and these features can prove challenging to ELLs. In addition, they affect the form of the words that follow them. For example, if an introductory phrase begins with the word after or other prepositions of time and is followed by a verb, the verb is in the gerund (-ing) form, such as “After looking around, I found a good place to study.” You can learn about these from good grammar books and websites if you are unsure about a feature of English grammar. Many teachers have created wonderful grammar charts on Pinterest and Teachers Pay Teachers. Our own favorite English grammar books, which we consulted extensively as we learned and taught English, include those by Azar and Hagen (2022), Raimes (2004), and Quirk, ­Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik (1989). There are also excellent grammars from dictionary publishers. Learning to use connectors in writing can take a long time; however, their semantic purposes can be understood by reading. For example, the words but, although, nevertheless, regardless, and despite the fact that all signal a contrast, even though they are punctuated differently and the words that follow them are in different forms. We can display these relationships in the classroom with charts, word walls, or card stock sheets placed inside student folders.

244

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

A “retell rope” is one charming way to represent signal words, connectors, and transitions. The retell rope is a real piece of rope with knots which can be used as a memory aid as children retell a story they have read or heard. The knots on the rope can be appropriately labeled according to the text, such as: character, setting, problem, in the beginning, next, then, finally, and the problem was solved by. The knots can also be left unlabeled and simply used as something to hold on to while speaking. Kinesthetic aids provide comfort and reassurance to ELLs as they collect their thoughts and form English words, lowering the affective filter.

Paragraph‑ and Discourse‑Level Reading Strategies In this section we look at two methods for analyzing text at larger levels: (1) text structures and (2) visual supports, which include graphic organizers.

Text Structures Text structures define the ways different kinds of written information can be organized. Text structures define such aspects as the length of a text, how sections are divided and titled, the role and placement of images, whether and where content is summarized or explained, and related features. Common text structures include comparison–­contrast, cause–­effect, sequencing, problem–­solution, describing, and process structures. Getting to know common text structures is important background knowledge for all learners because they reveal the organization of the content. The text structure of the “whodunit” “Two-­Minute Mysteries” series, for example, looks very different from the text structure of an email, a movie review, a visual explanation of efforts at reforestation, or a timeline. Each has its own conventions, and they are culturally specific. Knowing the text structure of the material they are about to read helps ELLs set purpose before they begin. Research shows that readers benefit from knowing text structures to analyze and summarize information (Bogaerds-­Hazenberg, Evers-­Vermeul, & van den Bergh, 2021; Pyle et al., 2017). When we explicitly teach these forms and give students a chance to practice them with specific texts, students create mental templates that make it easier to recognize and navigate other texts with those structures. Even when ELLs have strong L1 literacy, they may not have been exposed to the text structures commonly used in English content areas, or the text structures may have been framed differently in their previous educational settings. Students can apply their awareness of text structures in three specific ways that involve both reading and writing.



Achieving Comprehension 245

1. They can quickly figure out the purpose of a text by looking at its text structure. 2. They can use the text structure to keep track of the content by its markers. 3. They can practice writing in different text structures. Recognizing text structure “has a profound effect on comprehension and memory” (Peregoy & Boyle, 2005, p. 321) and provides ELLs with a helpful scaffold as they develop vocabulary knowledge and sentence-­level reading skills. By the way, many pieces of authentic writing employ more than one text structure, so students may need to identify several as they continue reading.

Visual Supports There are many kinds of visual supports available to guide reading, including downloadable graphic organizers, vocabulary aids, and sites that can summarize texts using an algorithm (Jozwik, 2021–2022). As students’ visual literacy improves, their facility with visual supports will improve, and so will their ability to comprehend texts. Graphic Organizers Graphic organizers are, in a sense, the visualization of the way we store the knowledge we keep in our brains. They are useful organizing tools for all students, including ELLs, because they can help represent a great deal of information, including text structures, in a concise way. When teachers carefully choose a graphic organizer to guide a reading assignment, the reading task becomes more manageable. Graphic organizers can follow and organize information about a reading or even prepare a framework for writing compositions. There are terrific teacher-­made graphic organizers on Pinterest and Teachers Pay Teachers, as well as book sources (e.g., Buehl, 2014; Essley, Rief, & Rocci, 2008; Zwiers, 2006; Zwiers & Crawford, 2011), and we encourage you to explore them. We have chosen four graphic organizers we find effective with ELLs as they start reading information text: T-­charts, Venn diagrams, double bubble maps, and content frames. A small depiction of each of the four organizers can be found in Appendix 9.1 at the end of the chapter. Here are some ideas about how they can be used effectively: T-­Charts.  T-­charts help students list characteristics of two items in separate columns as they read. It’s easy to generate a simple T-chart with young students in a whole-class lesson.

246

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

First-grade teacher Trisha Leu says about T-­charts: I use the T-chart all the time in my classroom, because it’s a simple way to show students how to compare. We use it when sorting words (i.e., words that end in -an versus -at), or sorting categories (i.e., animals that have tails versus animals that don’t have tails).—­Trisha Leu Venn Diagrams.  The overlapping circles of Venn diagrams are widely used to help students learn how to compare and contrast two or three items. The features distinct to one item occupy a circle of the Venn, and the shared characteristics are in the overlapping part in the middle. They may be color-coded. For a kinesthetic version of the Venn, some first-grade classrooms put hula hoops on the floor, and children can place like and unlike objects in different parts of the hula hoops and talk about them. Double Bubble Maps.  Teachers have noted that the “overlapping” part of the Venn doesn’t give students enough room to write in the common features. That’s where the double bubble map comes in; it allows students to add more bubbles showing both commonalities and differences. The distinct features of the two items are in bubbles linked to them outside their shapes, whereas the shared features are boxes or bubbles connected by lines from both items. In a classroom, students can physically add their own filled-­in bubbles with one connecting line for a difference or two connecting lines for a commonality. Venn diagrams or bubble maps are great ways for students to develop the ability to read, write, and talk about contrasts. Content Frames. The content frames (semantic feature analysis grid) matrix allows students to list and compare things according to a number of different characteristics. For example, different animal names can be placed in the rows in the left column of the matrix, and the qualities animals possess, such as hair, warm-­bloodedness, kinds of appendages, and so forth can be listed across the columns in the top row of the chart. Students, in pairs or small groups, can evaluate several animals according to their characteristics by putting a check mark, writing yes or no, or adding detailed information in each box. Some of the boxes can be filled in as examples. When students report back on their completed charts, either in small groups or to the whole class, they engage in rich instructional conversation. A content frame is also a good scaffold for writing up a simple report, which sets up expository writing. It’s important to note that sometimes one or more of the characteristics do not apply to some of the items, so teachers need to show students how to write “n/a” or “not applicable.” For example, “kinds of claws” would have “n/a” written for snake.



Achieving Comprehension 247

The content frames matrix can be also be used as a knowledge rating tool for vocabulary learning. Across the top are degrees of familiarity with a word: 0 = don’t know the word; 1 = have seen it or heard it; 2 = think I know it; and 3 = know it well. The vocabulary words are listed in the left column. Students assess their vocabulary knowledge of keywords before reading. They return to the same words after reading and reassess their new level of understanding (Cobb & Blachowicz, 2007). Other Kinds of Visual Supports Visualization is a strategy that consists of forming a visual image in the mind in order to remember or evoke a word, event, or idea. It is often used in mindfulness training and can be useful to help children lower their affective filter when conditions are stressful. However, it can also be used to help students see images in their heads as they read, and this makes a reading come to life. Good writing makes it easier for readers to visualize events and makes a book memorable. Visualizations transcend language, but language is needed to conjure them. Asking students to create a visual representation of something they have read is an authentic way to check comprehension, a bridge to writing, and a natural way to share knowledge in class. This might consist of coloring in lined shapes or letting students draw freehand. You might also ask students to draw their visualization of a character or setting in a book and talk about it. Some students will show a gift for drawing, which can really win them appreciation in class, and for those who can’t—it can be a good laugh! Graphic novels and comics put visualization right at the center, creating a pictorial story that also has words. These super-­popular genres are a natural fit for ELLs—or any multilingual learners, because of the visual support. Some influential recent graphic novels with social themes include Gene Yang’s American Born Chinese (2006) and Dragon Hoops (2020), They Called Us Enemy (Takei, Eisinger, & Scott, 2019), about the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, the trilogy March (Lewis, Aydin, & Powell, 2013–2016) about the life and times of American civil rights hero Rep. John Lewis, and Marjane Satrapi’s (2007) Complete Persepolis. There are many titles, including plenty for adult readers, and even anthologies of prize-­winning collections. Check out www.goodreads.com for a cornucopia of choices. Audio imaging can also enhance comprehension. Classic television shows and famous movies have musical motifs that have become associated with certain moods or situations. The creepy opening theme of The Twilight Zone, for example, denotes “something mysterious is going on.” The ticking clock and melody from the television game show Jeopardy! tells us a timed competition is taking place. Because today’s young people are drenched in media, soundtracks can be a real source of information and an additional cueing

248

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

system. Kids can enthusiastically take the lead in choosing or obtaining these sounds for their multimodal projects. It’s even possible to add sound effects while stories are being read aloud, to set the mood. When a teacher did a read-aloud of the story of Balto, the heroic Alaskan husky that saved a town in Alaska during a blizzard [Kimmel, 1999], she put on sound effects of a violent snowstorm. Some of the children began shivering just hearing it!—­K ristin

Metacognitive Strategies Metacognition is conscious awareness of our own thinking and learning process. It is part of our human heritage and is found in people with and without formal schooling. However, it becomes much more highly developed as we obtain more education, and it has a demonstrable influence on reading and academic success. Metacognition is usually divided into three categories: planning, monitoring, and evaluating one’s own comprehension (before, during, and after performing a task). In the beginning, using metacognitive strategies may be a very conscious process, but as the skills become more ingrained, they become more automatic. When we read, metacognitive strategies help us prepare for a reading task, monitor the task as we go along, and then evaluate it when we have completed it (Grabe & Stoller, 2002). Some metacognitive reading strategies pertain directly to the text and are cultivated as students do close reading. These during-­reading strategies might include rereading, using graphic organizers, highlighting pronoun references and transition words that connect thoughts within and between sentences, annotating or other note taking, or looking up unknown vocabulary. Other metacognitive strategies make conscious use of prior knowledge outside the text. They might include tapping into one’s background knowledge, using probabilistic reasoning, recognizing a text structure, or figuring out something by analogy. For example, we might recognize the text structure of a mathematics story problem about the volume of a cylinder because we have seen it before, and recognizing that text structure helps us tackle a similar story problem in a timed test. Writers also use metacognitive strategies when they make careful word choices, read it aloud to see if their language “flows,” or try to put themselves in the shoes of their readers. Some metacognitive strategies rely on language-­specific characteristics, and others are more universal. Learners can perform metacognitive tasks in a new language when they know the names and descriptions of the processes



Achieving Comprehension 249

they are asked to perform. For example, even if Hussein, a fifth-grade ELL, realizes that he needs to take notes about a text as he reads it so that he can report on it later, he still has to know exactly what he is expected to do when the teacher says to “highlight” or “annotate” the text. When good readers realize that their comprehension has broken down, they use several strategies to get it back on track. The most obvious and universally used is rereading the section leading up to the breakdown, but there are other strategies, such as these:

• Retelling • Paraphrasing • Looking for alternative explanations • Looking for a connection to our own experiences • Checking the illustrations • Looking forward or backward in a text • Stopping and asking ourselves questions We can also activate our background knowledge to see whether there might be a hint in the text to something we already know. For example, when a young adult novel is set in America’s Jim Crow era, students should understand what it means when the young protagonist is confronted with two drinking fountains side by side, as a marker of America’s long period of racial segregation and discrimination. A teacher should make sure to take the time to help the class unpack and activate prior knowledge before they begin to read, supplement that knowledge, and, if needed, correct misunderstandings, too. A think-aloud is a metacognitive technique teachers use to orally express how they construct meaning as they read a text aloud. Also called verbal reports (Anderson, 1999), think-­a louds are a great way for teachers to help students become more metacognitive. Verbal reports are a key technique of early childhood educators, as they ask themselves questions or ruminate about what to do, using a conversational and informal tone with the class. Teachers can also add sounds or gestures that imply thinking, such as saying “hmmmmm” or tapping on their head. When students become acquainted with the technique, they can begin to chime in with their own answers to the teacher’s pondering. Think-­a louds are also a great technique during interactive read-­ alouds. Think-­a louds are useful in three important ways: 1. They build metacognitive awareness. 2. They give the teacher a window into the comprehension building processes of the learner. 3. They give ELLs opportunities to practice instructional conversation.

250

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Questioning Strategies Question–­answer relationship (QAR) is a useful question-­making and -answering strategy developed by reading researchers trying to find ways to help students perform better on standardized tests (Rafael & Au, 2005). The researchers discovered that the kinds of questions on reading tests could usually be classified into four types, in two categories: In the Text Right There Think and Search

In My Mind Author and Me On My Own

Answers to the first kind of question, “Right There,” can be found directly in the text without needing to infer. The second, “Think and Search,” requires combining information found in several parts of a text or inferring from missing information in order to get an answer. If the answer is distributed across several paragraphs or pages, or if it is necessary to read between the lines, ELLs are likely to experience difficulty because they are still straining to decode with comprehension or to process unknown vocabulary. The other two questions rely on connecting ideas in the text with background experience. The third kind of question, “Author and Me,” requires activating one’s lived experience and background knowledge and applying it to information in the text. The fourth, “On My Own,” activates general background knowledge. Rafael and Au (2005) found that students felt more empowered to answer questions when they could classify them, and even more so when they practiced writing questions themselves. Students can make colorful QAR charts to put up in the classroom as a reminder of the four kinds of questions and the processes needed to answer comprehension questions. Another system is the DOK, or depth-of-­knowledge, classification system. Webb (2002) analyzed texts from different content areas for their linguistic features and classified them into four levels of text complexity: (1) recall and reproduction, (2) skills and concepts, (3) strategic thinking and reasoning, and (4) extended thinking. Webb developed a set of possible questions for each level of text complexity. Many content standards make use of the DOK classification system, as well as incorporating question frames for texts at each of the four levels. For example, a “level-2” question frame might begin, “How or why would you use  .  .  .  ?” or “How would you organize        to show . . . ?” (Hess, 2013). Interestingly, the WIDA standards have also created question prompts for the academic activities at different levels of text difficulty, sorted by content area, grade level, and English proficiency level (WIDA Consortium, 2020).



Achieving Comprehension 251

Wait Time Educational researcher Mary Budd Rowe studied wait time, the length of time between when a teacher asks a question and speaks again, over a 20-year period, in classrooms from kindergarten through college, and she came to some remarkable conclusions (Rowe, 1986). She separated wait time into two categories: Wait Time 1 (pausing after asking a question) and Wait Time 2 (pausing after a student response). She measured and analyzed thousands of interactions using tape recordings. She discovered that most teachers tend to rush in to fill the silence after their question, waiting an average of less than 1 second for students to respond and less than 1 second to resume speaking after students do respond. Analyzing the quantity and quality of student responses, she found that a 3-second pause in Wait Time 1 had a strong positive effect on increasing student participation, and a 3-second pause in Wait Time 2 had a dramatic positive effect on the quality and depth of student responses. Wait time is even more critical with ELLs because they need first to consolidate their understanding of an English question and then to make a response in English, possibly constructing it first in their home language and then translating it. That can take a minute! Imagine answering questions to a teacher about something you have just read in a new language —would you want to be rushed?

Digital Reading Programs and Websites Digital reading programs and platforms are galloping ahead in their offerings, and no school district is without one. Providers include a wide range of online publishers and companies, and, as of this book’s publication, include such well-known providers as CommonLit, Readworks, Epic, newsela, Starfall, Actively Learn, Read–Write–Think (powered by the National Council of Teachers of English), Accelerated Reader, and trade book publishers such as Scholastic, Capstone and its imprint Pebblego, and Tumblebooks, among others. Their offerings include large collections of books, classified by content areas, topics, genres, grade bands, and reading levels. Many providers include graphic novels, manga, or anime formats, and some include classic works or renowned book series. Some, like newsela, provide informational texts and articles extracted from other sources, with adjustable reading difficulty levels. Others, particularly publishers, have their own titles and authors who are exclusive to their online platform. Some have a specific ELL category, but others do not. The offerings also have varying forms of interactivity. Some have words that light up when they are spoken, and others do not have audio tracks. Some are attentive to culturally responsive themes, and some

252

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

offer titles in Spanish. Most sites take care to show how their titles align with state and national standards, and titles are often written by experienced educators. It’s easy to get overwhelmed by the shiny marketing, and there is relatively limited longitudinal research about what does and doesn’t work for ELLs in this new landscape, which was pushed faster and farther due to the pandemic. We do not evaluate specific providers (although we hear about them from teachers), but we help you apply best principles and practices about ELL learning and acquisition. All too often, teachers cannot choose what is purchased and are left with the hard work of making sure ELLs are getting what they need; but sometimes you have input, and we’d like to help inform it. Following are a few of the positive and negative aspects of digital reading, with ELL equity in the center. 1.  Ever ready. Digital books and articles are always at the ready, and the books cannot be damaged or lost. In addition, they can be accessed from any location where the student’s device is connected to the internet. Moreover, the reading incurs no inconvenience to the students and their families—­no need to make a trip to the library or bookstore, no library fines, and no closing time. 2.  Large libraries, small devices. The large libraries of titles allow students to learn about new topics and try out new genres with minimal fuss. If a title does not excite them, there’s no need to keep going, and it’s easy to browse for others. With digital reading, it’s easier to become an eclectic reader and to find titles that are interesting. 3.  Wealth gap strikes again. Not all students have school-­provided devices or out-of-­school connectivity. Also, underserved districts often can’t afford to purchase an extensive range of digital offerings, so the selections might be meager, not culturally relevant, not challenging, or nonexistent. Moreover, some districts may not allocate funds or time for busy faculty to make best use of their collections in planning for and assessing student needs. 4.  Distractibility. Think about your own ability to read on a screen these days. It’s very easy to be distracted and drift away from the reading to attend to something else. All of us can see this in our classrooms, and we know that it’s harder than before to help students dive deeply into comprehension with screen reading. After all, every screen is equipped with other options and views, and many allow students to leave the reading completely. Here is one teacher’s account: In my fifth-grade dual-­language classroom, we did silent reading every day, and in the beginning I allowed students to choose digital texts and wear headphones,



Achieving Comprehension 253

since some were learning English or Spanish as a new language. When I circulated the room, students would quickly shield their screens from me. I soon realized that very few students were actually reading or listening to books. They had found ways to get to YouTube or TikTok, and the headphones were being used to watch YouTubes or sports. What looked like a quiet room of readers was just a big charade. I switched the requirement to paper books only, and everything changed. I could see their faces as they read and turned the pages. Circulating during the paper book reading, I only found one student who had hidden a phone in the book.—­Wendella Knuti There’s one more problem with some digital reading programs. Some reading software, such as the widely used Accelerated Reader, a “computer-­ based reading management system” (What Works Clearinghouse, 2009), makes a game out of the reading by assigning points, counting words, and administering multiple-­choice quizzes at the end of each selection. Although the volume of total words read increases, it has a clinical feel. Reading for points undermines intrinsic motivation for reading (Willekes, 2014) and turns recreational reading into little more than a timed workout. Moreover, with so many remote resources, it’s easy for even the most committed teacher to skip explicit instruction of reading strategies. When students are reading different types of texts, at different proficiency levels, in different genres, it’s tempting to reduce strategy instruction as it may not apply to what they’re reading at that time. Therefore, valuable explicit teaching lessons may fall away. Don’t let that happen! Also, for ELLs in particular, assigned online reading may lack the all-­ important social function of learning how to talk about books and ideas with others. Spirited conversations about books still need to take place in the classroom through lively activities using instructional conversation, whether it’s guided reading, literature circles, book clubs, or some kind of project-­ based learning.

Extensive Reading Develops All of the Comprehension Strategies There is no doubt that extensive reading is the best universal method to help all learners consolidate their reading comprehension. Extensive reading, which can be defined as reading a large amount of text for general comprehension (Anderson, 1999; Krashen, 2004), helps with vocabulary acquisition, content knowledge, familiarity with text structures, knowledge of genres, reading rate, and motivation to read more! Strategies that are taught and practiced in the classroom should be followed up by extensive reading. Of course,

254

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

out-of-class reading is not likely to occur unless students get the habit of regular silent reading time in the classroom. Krashen has a great deal to say about the nature of that extensive reading. It should be recreational, fun, and chosen by the student so that it is compelling (Krashen, 2004, 2018). A good reading program for ELLs affords opportunities to engage in many kinds of reading on a regular basis, in a variety of modes and genres. In both print and online modes, there are stunningly many titles and genres available for young readers these days, and teachers and schools that are committed to producing strong readers will find many ways to create and support their students’ reading passion.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Daily Silent Reading Whether in a brick-and-­mortar classroom, a virtual classroom, or an afterschool or summer program, daily silent reading is the best way to build a lifelong love of reading. Hiebert and Fisher (2006) put it so well: “If students are not reading voraciously in their classrooms, it is hard to expect that they would read voraciously at home, especially when language and cultural patterns differ in the two contexts. If English language learners are to read voraciously at home, they also need to read voraciously at school” (p. 291). Silent reading time might be called DEAR (drop everything and read), SSR (sustained silent reading, sometimes called “sit down, stay, and read”), FVR ( free voluntary reading), or just quiet time. During daily silent reading, learners read books of their choosing (Krashen, 2004, 2022). Krashen stresses that the free voluntary reading should be easy, chosen by the student, and not only interesting but “compelling” (Krashen, 2022). It might be a comic book, and it doesn’t have to be “uplifting,” but it must be interesting to them (Krashen & Ujiie, 2005). Because online reading programs might not be set to allow students to find readings that are “off topic” or “easy,” this may be a time that you want to include paper books. During silent reading, teachers should also engage in silent reading of their own. No quizzes should be associated with this enjoyable activity. The classroom for silent reading may find children hunched under headphones as they listen to a text, or turning pages at their desks, or lounging in a corner casually swiping pages as they advance in their Chromebooks. After silent reading time, ELLs might share what they have read that day with a reading buddy or write in a journal. Interactive dialogue about reading can get kids interested in books that their buddies like.



Achieving Comprehension 255

Reading Buddies Many schools bring together older and younger children to read on a regular basis. There are several formats for these visits. In the most common two, the older children bring picture books to read to the younger children in pairs, or the younger children practice reading as their older counterparts listen to them. ELLs benefit from reading buddy programs, whether they are the older or younger children. Older children feel a sense of mastery about the book they prepare to read to the younger children, and they bask in the admiration younger children naturally feel toward them. Younger ELLs enjoy the attention and mentorship of an older student at their school. We have a couple of tips for cross-age groupings with ELLs: 1. Whenever a read-aloud is involved, give the older students plenty of advance notice and an early copy of the book so that they can practice as much as needed. 2. Ensure that the text is of high interest and within both the reader’s independent or instructional reading level and the younger child’s listening comprehension level. Talking about the pictures as they occur in the book is also welcome and motivating.

Vocabulary Games There are some great board games that help in practicing vocabulary, and these can be at a classroom center and used by small groups. One is Balderdash Junior, in which all but one member of a group of players create an imaginary definition for a strange word, while one person knows the correct definition. Each player reads his or her definition, and then all vote for the definition they think is the real one. The winners are the ones who identify the correct definition and the person who fooled the most others with a pretend definition. Pictionary, Name That Word, and Scattergories also deserve a special place in your ESL language arts classroom.

Book Bags One benefit of setting up a good classroom library is that the books can also circulate, with a book bag system that allows students to bring books home. A durable, waterproof book bag is like a tiny, portable bookmobile to bring books into the home. Frequent parental reading to young children has a measurable effect on L2 vocabulary acquisition (Collins,

256

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

2005). A log sheet placed in the book bag provides a way to report on home reading and should be encouraged in whichever language parents prefer. The parents, caregivers, or older siblings of younger students might read with the child, and it works best when a routine is established that works for each household. Because some families of ELLs do not read in English, and some do not read in their first language, it’s important to gently discover what kinds of support or resources are good for each family, including titles in the native languages of each student. Wordless picture books also allow families to enjoy books without needing to read at all. The critical element is to have books around and to read them. Read-­a louds are great for family together time; Trelease (2016) offers free downloadable brochures and posters, some of which are in Spanish, to support families reading aloud. There is also a definitive eighth edition of Jim Trelease’s classic read-aloud handbook (Giorgis, 2019).

Maintaining a Classroom Library Building your classroom library is a worthy project, but it can be a challenge. One middle school teacher noticed the following problem for her ESL classes. When introducing a lesson, one of my strategies is to use trade books to teach background knowledge with which my ESL students can connect. Unfortunately, my junior high is lacking in this area, and I must rely on the elementary schools or public libraries to loan me picture books to facilitate more meaningful learning.—Virginia Runge If you’re teaching at the upper elementary grades or above, include picture books with simple informational text to fill in content knowledge for ELLs whose reading levels are still in development. Finding sources for books in underresourced schools is a challenge, but where there’s a will, there’s a way. First Book (https://firstbook.org) is a nonprofit group that matches classrooms that need books with donors. Donors Choose also matches classrooms and donors, not only with books but also with iPads and other classroom materials. Garage sales, church, estate, and rummage sales, Better World Books, Little Free Libraries, and library sales are also places to find books. Used booksellers offer many titles online at very modest prices, so that shipping may cost more than the book itself. Many community members want to support their schools, and you should make sure your school is inviting them to take part. However, keeping the library in good working order is just as important as having a good collection. Messy or disheveled books and



Achieving Comprehension 257

bookshelves send the message that books don’t matter, or that they’re just for show, not for use. Bookshelves or bins should be at the right height for the learners’ size, clearly labeled, and unobstructed. Colorful posters of bookworms or other engaged reading critters can adorn the walls. A classroom job, or two jobs, might be straightening out the books at the end of the day. Students can also cull tattered or stained books to keep the collection in good shape. This is also a great job for a parent volunteer.

Building a Multilingual Library Bilingual books are a great way to support home languages and cultures, boost ELL vocabulary, and build self-­confidence in reading. There has been a great efflorescence of bilingual children’s books, in print form, digital form, and audio form, in the United States in the past decade, especially in Spanish, but also in many other languages. Bilingual books may have two separate printed versions, one in each language, with the same illustrations, or a single book with bilingual text on opposing pages or in different type fonts on the same page. When ELLs have already successfully read a book in their native language, they will know the storyline, characters, themes, and words when they go to read it in English, so it will be easier to handle the new words. There are excellent bilingual publishers and distributors such as Lectorum, which has a large catalog of K–8 children’s literature in Spanish, or smaller publishers such as Cinco Puntos. Scholastic has many Spanish titles in its catalog. Finding books in less-­represented languages takes a little more time, but it’s still easier now. One resource is the International Children’s Digital Library, which has free downloadable full-color copies of children’s books in many languages, including low-­incidence languages (http://en.childrenslibrary.org). Language Lizard is another source for wonderful children’s books in low-­incidence languages (http://languagelizard.com). If your school library does not have books in the languages of some children in your classes, that is a good starting place. Multilingual titles for all of the languages represented in your school might be best housed in a school library rather than your classroom library so that students in all classes can access them. And don’t forget the need for multiple copies!

Summer Reading and Library Visits Public libraries have many summer reading programs. Offering entertainment, prizes, snacks, certificates, and a comfortable place to read, public libraries are a core resource for families with ELL; many libraries now have Spanish-­language services and collections as well. Getting

258

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

students signed up for a summer library program might mean a field trip to the library to obtain library cards. To get students excited about the visit, you might read Tomas and the Library Lady (Mora, 1993), a great book about the thrill of discovering a library for a Mexican American boy whose family comes to Iowa to harvest crops. Whether it’s field trips to the library or writing letters home to parents about library visits, teachers of ELLs should build in regular visits to libraries right from the start. Children who visit the school library on a weekly basis are more likely to visit their neighborhood public library, especially during the summer months. Many large retail stores have reading incentive programs as well. Here is another great idea from one teacher, which she named the “Postcard Challenge”: This summer I am hoping to see what my students return to me. I created a postcard challenge in which students were provided with four postcards, my address, and instructions. I asked that they write me about the books they were reading in the summer and draw me a picture about something in their storybook. I would then give them a prize at the start of the year for completing the task, but the student who read the most books and sent me the most postcards would receive an extra special gift. I hope to be inundated with postcards this summer!—Patricia Luna With all of these options, any teacher who is committed to the idea of an extensive reading workout will find a way to do it!

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. What are some ways teachers can make vocabulary learning “multisen‑ sory”? What are some ways vocabulary can be tied in with speaking prac‑ tice, the arts, or other modes of self-­expression?  3. In your experience, what graphic organizers have been useful to you? Explain how some graphic organizers work better for you for certain pur‑ poses.  4. Look at the list of metacognitive strategies on pages  248–249 and apply them to yourself as a reader. Which of them are you aware of using on a regular basis? Are there other metacognitive strategies that you find use‑ ful? Describe them.  5. Have you ever read a graphic novel? If so, reflect on the experience. How did it feel similar to, or different from, reading a paper book?



Achieving Comprehension 259  6. How do you think text structures have changed because of growing online reading and writing? What new text structures have you shared with your students?  7. What experiences have you had, whether as a student or as a teacher, with extensive reading programs? Have you ever been in a book group or book club? Do you know others who have? Did it change members’ reading habits or reading frequency? Reflect on those experiences.  8. Think of some overt and covert messages we are given about reading. Do you think reading for pleasure is a harder sell for children than it once was? How can reading among ELLs be encouraged in school settings?  9. Which facts about digital reading listed in the chapter have been impor‑ tant in your world as a learner or educator? Have your views toward uses of paper versus digital reading changed over time? If so, how? Discuss. 10. What reading was motivating to you before you decided to become a teacher? Does it match with what you notice with your students? How about reading in a new language? 11. What soundtracks, if any, from TV shows, movies, or commercials have you been able to use with students to set a mood or preview an activity? If you haven’t, which ones would be natural choices to use in the future? 12. CHALLENGE QUESTION: If you are in a classroom, try changing the length of your wait time, record your anecdotal results, and share the results with your colleagues. 13. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Choose the reading strategy from this chapter with which you are least familiar and create a lesson plan that uses it. If possible, try it out with students. Evaluate and modify it based on feedback from oth‑ ers and your own reflections. If it works, share it with your coteachers. What did you learn?

APPENDIX 9.1

Four Useful Graphic Organizers for ELLs

Content frame (semantic feature analysis grid)

Double bubble map (continued)

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

260

Four Useful Graphic Organizers for ELLs (page 2 of 2)

T-chart

Venn diagram

261

CHAPTER TEN

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY writing workshop • linguistic complexity • vocabulary usage language control • expressive writing • responsive writing • expository writing focus on form (FoF) • recasts • uptake • sentence frames

T

he development of writing, unlike oral language, is not inevitable, and not all societies have created a written language. Writing is an invention and a way to compress, organize, analyze, store, and transmit vast amounts of information in a symbolic form. The act of writing can also be a path to understanding ourselves and others. When we write well, we feel a real sense of accomplishment—­a nd when we write well in a new language, it is something we can feel very proud about! Writing is a thinking process. Like all complex thinking, writing is not easy. We recognize the extreme complexity of teaching writing and learning to write—in any language. Still, we must always remember that although it is challenging, learning to write can be a lifesaver to a child or young adult. Teachers are offered a deeper glimpse into the life of a young person by reading his or her writing than through any other kind of exchange, and we are ever mindful of the depth and importance of that privilege. If there weren’t any writers, there would be nothing to read! Writers create the material that makes all reading possible. When other factors, such as topic, genre, difficulty, and interests, are accounted for, it is still the skilled 262

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 263

writer who makes reading pleasurable to us; alternately, poor writers make reading unpleasant. Readers, writers, and writing teachers all know this! For ELLs, writing is the language domain that will take the longest in which to achieve proficiency, and that reality is consistently reflected in yearly ACCESS scores, which show a gap between students’ other domains and writing in particular. This makes sense because writers do not have the ability to converse with a reader, and they do not know the reader’s background knowledge, motivation for reading, or even reading level. Pinker (2007) adds that writers must remove themselves from the center of focus. “This makes writing a difficult craft that must be mastered through practice, instruction, feedback, and probably most important, intensive exposure to good examples,” he notes (p. 416). The digital age has opened up many multimodal writing genres that will attract and motivate multilingual writers. Instead of the dreary five-­ paragraph essay, writers are now invited to mix and match modes and media, including such possibilities as drawing or sketching, creating a storyboard, graph, or visual timeline (called “visually representing”; McAndrews, 2020), writing a restaurant or product review, creating a meme, comic strip, or graphic novel, writing a short screenplay, starting a blog, and more. Each of these has its own protocols and models, and talented teachers are busy designing unit plans that incorporate these possibilities. Movingwriters.org has a good blog on writing topics, with many entries about ELLs as well as creative writing ideas. Certain kinds of feedback on the mechanics of writing are easily available now, too, whether it is spellcheck, grammar checks, Grammarly, Google, or a natural language processing tool, such as ChatGPT. However it is developed, learners will struggle with achieving academic success—­whether it is graduating from high school or continuing on in their careers—­if they are not able to arrange thoughts and words on a page coherently and intelligibly in a variety of genres. That kind of foundational writing continues to be our focus in this chapter.

Interactions between Reading and Writing As Pinker noted, reading many examples of good writing is a prerequisite for good writing, and there is a close and complex relationship between writing and reading, which we have summarized in Table 10.1. We can consider both reading and writing to be “drawing from a common pool of cognitive and linguistic operations” (Kucer, 1985, p. 331). Research confirms close interactions between reading and writing development (e.g., Grabe, 2003; Kucer, 2001; Tierney & Pearson, 1983, 1985;

264

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

TABLE 10.1. Similarities between the English Reading and Writing Processes

• Both activities are centered around written language and do not exist in

languages that are unwritten. • Both reading and writing consist of a wide variety of genres with which students need to be familiar in order to succeed in school settings. These genres vary in formality, complexity, and breadth of vocabulary, as well as discourse structures. • Both require an understanding of the relationship of phonemes and graphemes that make up words. • Both are complex activities with many component processes enfolded in them. • Both reading and writing are a way of creating, selecting, and organizing information that can be stored for later use. • Academic vocabulary expectations for both reading and writing become more challenging as students move up through the grade levels. • Both are context reduced. Meanings are able to be communicated through words alone. • Both reading and writing may use English structures that are more complex and lengthy than oral speech and lack the redundancies and clarifications of spoken English. Written sentences can be longer than sentences in oral English. • Reading and writing vary according to different purposes, audiences, and contexts. • Reading and writing are the cornerstones of academic success.

Van Dijk & Kintsch, 1983). Tierney and Shanahan (1990) did an exhaustive review of the reading–­writing connection and concluded, “Writing and reading together engage learners in a greater variety of reasoning operations than when writing and reading are apart or when students are given a variety of tasks to go along with their reading” (p. 272). The interrelationships between them are so close, in fact, that what used to be called “reading” is now absorbed into the more unitary concept “literacy.” Teaching reading and writing together, as tools for learning, allows students to process their academic understandings, remember things better, and develop both their literacy and their identities (Oded & Walters, 2002). Although they do not necessarily develop in parallel, they both need to move in close association to each other in any classroom teaching English as an additional language. Writing requires the conscious orchestration of the largest number of skills among the five domains of language learning (listening, speaking, reading, writing, and communicative competence). Creative and expressive writing will build fluency and confidence, but gradually, students will also need to use formal and discipline-­specific registers to report on their understandings of the material they’re studying and sharing their reasoning, supporting evidence, and their experiences, feelings, and beliefs through effective use of

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 265

language. As children advance through the school system, writing becomes more and more closely connected to overall academic success. Because of its importance and the long time frame needed to develop good writing, writing practice with ELLs needs to start as soon as possible.

Written Language: Not Just Frozen Speech! In Chapter 3 we discussed the ways oral language can be understood through context clues and redundancies, or repetitions of the same material in slightly different ways. Written language, on the other hand, relies more on the organization of the words themselves and has fewer redundancies. It also lacks the gestures and expressive qualities of human speech, and the reader is usually not present to give immediate feedback. Therefore, “writing requires a double abstraction: abstraction from the sound of speech and abstraction from the interlocutor” (Vygotsky, 1986, p. 181). Sulzby (1991) classified the way young children transition into writing as they recognize that spoken language has a representational form, and this recognition requires abstract thinking. Its inherently abstract nature makes writing the hardest domain for native speakers and ELLs alike. Written language is distinct from oral language in (at least) four important ways: 1.  Written sentences are longer. Because of the limits of our working memory, we cannot keep track of long, complex sentences when they are spoken aloud. Written language, on the other hand, does not have this restriction, because we can always go back and reread the text. The reverse is also true. Long introductory phrases and clauses are found in written English, but are rare in spoken English, because it’s too hard for the listener to keep the information in working memory. Also, written form requires well-­chosen descriptive words and elegant word order, whereas in oral speech, it is our vocal expression and body language, not just the words and syntax, that convey dramatic effect. The sign in Figure 10.1, outside a public school, is an example of a very long sentence. How could this message be conveyed more easily in visual or spoken form? How could you help an ELL—or any reader—­unpack its meaning? 2.  Written texts use a much greater range of vocabulary, both in content words and function words such as connectors. Written texts include more low-­frequency words and even rare words, more concept words in noun form (Fang, 2008), and connectors not found in contemporary spoken English. For example, the connector “hence” is found in written language, but it is seldom spoken. In spoken English, we would be more likely to say the words so or that’s why to express the meaning of hence.

266

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 10.1. Sign outside a public school.

3.  Punctuation takes on critical importance in written English. Although oral reading practice can help students read punctuation expressively, there is some punctuation that can only be understood in written form. The more “academic” punctuation marks include semicolons, apostrophes, colons, hyphens, and parentheses, and they abound in academic writing. The semicolon, for example, can be used in some of the same places as a period, but it indicates a closer relationship between the words before and after the semicolon. For example, in this sentence: “The raft was ready for release; they lowered it into the water,” the semicolon tells us that the second action came in close succession to the first, and it allows us to skip a connector such as then or after which. Academic writing is full of these “shortcuts,” which good writers use a lot, and teachers need to introduce them systematically and intentionally. 4.  Written sentences are more grammatically complex. Written text uses embedded clauses, more academic vocabulary, a wider variety of connectors, more pronoun references, and a wider variety of tenses and modals, including the passive voice. In oral language, we can clear up ambiguities by using our body language, through props and visuals, and through redundancy. We can circle back, restate, and clarify, but written language is less forgiving. For some informational text, such as science writing, the writing is extremely dense, and every word must be understood perfectly to advance through the text. None of these elements are common in the structure of oral speech, which is based on social exchanges. Explicit grammar is much more important in the writing classroom than the other domains of ESL teaching—­a nd we need to introduce it in ways that are user-­friendly for both the teacher and the students.

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 267

Writing as a Thinking Process In the early 1960s, researchers, as well as teachers, began to consider new approaches to writing instruction. Graves (1973), in researching the classroom environment, concluded that the writing curriculum, with its focus on correctness and formality, did not encourage students to become actual writers. Educators such as Atwell (1987, 2002), Clay (1968), Calkins (1984), and Fletcher and Portalupi (1998, 2001) examined writing as a thinking process. In so doing, they changed the way writing was taught in schools. This paradigm shift supported the belief that helping students think of themselves as writers is as important as helping them develop their skills and confidence in writing. In this view, writing activities can begin very early in a student’s education and can continue through all the school years, right into adult life. In this model of writing, teachers are encouraged to view themselves as writers, too, through professional development programs such as the National Writing Project. The idea is that when teachers like to write, their students are more likely to as well, so the first place to address improving student writing is to get teachers writing. When teachers are excited about their own writing, it supports the idea that learning to write is a lifelong process. Here is what one eighth-­grade teacher does. I think it is important for teachers to view themselves as writers and discuss the process of writing with students as they move through it as well. For example, in my class, I write the same papers that I ask my students to write, and we go through the process together. I edit my paper, rewrite things, and peer edit with my colleagues so that students can see how I am a writer and I work through the process as well. I think that is really important.—­Patricia Grivas We have come to see writing as part of a process of self-­d iscovery and metacognition. It is now widely understood that writing, in combination with reading and oracy, needs to be part of the academic endeavor of every kind of class, from language arts to physical education. Math teachers, for example, expect students to be able to jot down the steps they used to arrive at an answer, and in many state assessments the written description of the process earns as many points as the answer itself. Many language arts teachers ask students to keep learning logs, summarizing what they have learned or wonder about; reading logs, used during or after reading to help students apply comprehension strategies; or various kinds of notes that they share periodically with the teacher. Journaling and annotating activities help students develop metacognitive skills and use writing as a learning strategy.

268

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Writing Workshop and ELLs Writing workshop is a widely used method for elementary-­grade writing development and is employed in many classes. The idea is that writing is a process that can be divided into steps, and as these steps become commonplace, writing will be easier and more enjoyable (Calkins, 2020; Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001). The steps consist of prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. Students may engage in any one of these five processes on a given day and will cycle through them as they undertake new writing. Writing workshop usually starts with a short mini-­lesson the teacher presents to the whole class (Calkins, 2020). The purpose of the mini-­lesson is to teach a writing skill explicitly, often by means of a think-aloud or a demonstration. Then the individual work begins. Students may be working in any of the areas on a given day, and some classrooms have posters on which students indicate which stage they are in by placing a clothespin or other object next to their current stage. During prewriting, students brainstorm ideas using anything from scribbling, drawing pictures, sketching memories, or writing bits of dialogues to using semantic maps. They may also be given a prompt, or a set of prompts, to choose from. These days, the prompts may come from the teacher or the students or through natural language processing tools such as ChatGPT, which can create innovative prompts, based on recent classroom topics and activities. Prewriting helps students find personally meaningful topics and come up with details. Semantic maps, which we covered in the previous chapter about reading comprehension strategies, are very useful in the prewriting stage. On an unlined piece of paper, learners create a spider-­shaped map, with the main idea in the center and associations with it branching out in all directions—­it looks a bit like a spider. Semantic mapping helps a student brainstorm before beginning to write. A representation of the semantic map can be found in Figure 10.2. During independent writing, students put down words and sentences, creating a rough draft. Although some ELL and other classrooms, especially at higher grade levels, use Chromebooks or iPads for in-class writing, handwriting a rough draft is a great way to get students engaged in the nitty-­gritty of composing. During this time, students may engage in one-on-one conferences with the teacher or simply be working alone. They may reread and analyze their own texts and comment on the writing of others in the class. In the revising and editing stage, the teacher, tutors or classroom aides, peers, or others help writers refine their ideas by giving feedback. In this stage, students develop the discipline and stamina to create multiple drafts and share them. The process differs in length for each student and should not be rigidly timed. Finally, in the publishing phase, students complete their work by publishing it either by reading it aloud to their classmates in the “author’s

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 269

FIGURE 10.2. Semantic map.

chair” (Graves & Hansen, 1983), or by creating a finished written product, handwritten and perhaps illustrated on paper, or laid out and designed in a digital form. In some schools, the finished products may be housed in the school library, where they can be found and read during library time or by visitors, including other classes, parents, and caregivers, and they can be part of a portfolio students proudly take home at the end of the year. Students have the satisfaction of sharing a finished product with their peers and experiencing their appreciation. There are strong benefits to using writing workshop with ELLs. ­A ishwarya confirms this in a blog post from 2020: “The writing workshop has taught me the truest form of differentiation: the ability to see, respond to, and honor each student to be the unique, wonderful, and complicated learners they are. And, this has had the greatest impact for the ELLs I teach” (Aishwarya, 2020). First of all, writing workshop helps develop the writing habit, so that writing is not “inspirational” but is a consistent habit that is built into the curriculum. Like building the reading habit, building the writing habit is a cornerstone for the syndrome of success. Another benefit is the opportunity to share writing with others, which can reinforce the social rewards of writing. When a student first sees her or his own writing in print, perhaps with her or his own illustrations, it is very rewarding. All of that being said, however, writing with ELLs requires certain additional considerations. We share five: the need for closer guidance, more differentiation, problems with peer editing, cultural aspects, and plagiarism.

ELLs Need Closer Guidance from Teachers In order to perform the cognitively demanding task of “generating meaningful text in a second language” (Myles, 2002, p.  4), ELLs need considerable teacher guidance. In a process writing model, ELLs may be left in a small group without guidance from an expert peer or adult. Teachers need to guide ELL

270

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

writers in topic selection, sentence and paragraph structure, word choices, grammar, editing, spelling, and punctuation, in addition to overall cohesion and coherence, which are common goals for all writing. Even for college-­level ELLs, Silva (1993) found that when students revised their own work, the editing tended to be at a superficial level and required guidance from the teacher.

More Differentiation There is more variation between ELL writing levels in any kind of classroom setting than among L1 writers because they come into the school system from many different points of entry and with many different backgrounds in home language literacy and exposure to formal schooling. You may have a new student, even in the middle of the year, who has arrived recently and whose background you do not know. In some classrooms, a mini-­lesson might be too difficult or too easy for some students, so it is important to be able to differentiate within the model. For learners in beginning or entering levels, for example, it might be best to simply provide a sentence frame or a cloze paragraph that they can complete rather than expecting them to write a paragraph or a composition on their own. Making drawings is also an option so that some kind of written activity with a writing utensil (pen, pencil, sharpie, crayons) can occur during writing workshop time. Of course, this will quickly change as learners get a better base of language and move through the proficiency levels, and ever-­nimble ESL teachers will need to keep track of students’ zones of proximal development (ZPD; Vygotsky, 1987) so that students will move efficiently into more structured writing.

Peer Editing Requires a Language Proficiency Threshold Before ELLs can take part in or benefit from peer editing, they need two things: (1) a sufficient amount of vocabulary to be able to read, appreciate, and provide relevant comments on each other’s writing, and (2) a knowledge of the purpose of the writing, which will allow them to be able to offer and receive feedback from other students. These are sophisticated, nuanced skills, and involving ELLs in peer editing before they are at a proficiency level to benefit from it is not a good use of time for either member of the pair. Several studies of peer editing by ELLs failed to show improvement in their writing quality (Shanahan & Beck, 2006, pp. 434–435). Larry Ferlazzo recommends having simple ELL peer feedback that is “kind, specific, and helpful” (Ferlazzo, 2016).

Cultural Aspects of Writing Writing involves self-­ revelation and self-­ d iscovery, whether performed in writing workshop, journaling, essays, poetry, or blogs. Revealing oneself in

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 271

print may be alienating or even threatening to ELLs or their families if they are from cultures in which writing is not used in that way. For one thing, issues of privacy differ among cultures, and being asked to write down one’s challenges or personal experiences may seem like prying to some families. To avoid self-­d isclosure, students may feel compelled to produce “formulaic” compositions, with many platitudes. They may also fabricate stories. Also, peer editing is sometimes questioned by ELL families, who may feel uncomfortable with the idea that their children are being evaluated by peers rather than by the teacher. ELL families are eager for their children to have expert models, and they may be wary of group work. In classrooms of mixed native speakers and ELLs, there is also a valid concern that peer editing can create uncomfortable and stressful situations. Fear of writing a wrong word can cause language learners to often choose to “play it safe” by writing only the words they are absolutely sure of, making for a very dull read. Engaging in language play in the classroom will help ELLs develop the courage to go out on a limb and try to use unique words and phrases—­even if they don’t pan out the first few times. Playing with genres that include dialogue, drawings, opinions, photography, and live action can also inspire creative use of language. And praise from teachers helps a lot! In fact, teachers can add points to a rubric for trying to use new words, idioms, or figurative language.

Understanding Plagiarism Cultural norms defining copying and plagiarism differ dramatically among cultures, and the possibilities for both cutting and pasting and generating text from AI now make plagiarism both easier for students and harder for teachers to detect. In this ever-­changing landscape, teachers are being forced to constantly revisit and revise their “plagiarism talks,” and it’s no wonder students, including ELLs, are confused. Additionally, developing learners who are looking for a model from which to write may think that wholesale imitation of a valued writer is the best way to be a good student. If students don’t know what the teacher is looking for, they may provide the writing they think is most likely to please the teacher. The Common Core State Standards note the concerns about plagiarism in their Anchor Standard for Writing 8: Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism (Common Core State Standards, 2022). Although natural language processing tools such as ChatGPT are able to generate compositions from “whole cloth,” a teaching approach that sees writing more as a (joyful) process than a product and devotes class time to writing make these concerns about plagiarism less likely. In fact, with careful planning, teachers can help reluctant writers use AI tools to get “unstuck.”

272

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

All students should become comfortable with the idea that writing is a learning process that builds the brain, and it should be included in the curriculum in a meaningful way.

Guidance from the English Language Proficiency Standards The WIDA English language proficiency (ELP) standards for writing can be found in Appendix 10.1 at the end of this chapter. They summarize the writing skills needed throughout all the grades of school in three categories: linguistic complexity, vocabulary usage, and language control. Linguistic complexity refers to the ability of a writer to create complex sentences and paragraphs that are well organized, coherent, and varied. Vocabulary usage refers to knowing and choosing words and phrases that best express a wide variety of ideas and purposes while keeping the reader’s interest. Language control, an issue in teaching ELLs, refers to having enough grammatical accuracy in writing that errors do not impede comprehensibility. These three areas can be used as a yardstick for checking on the growth of ELLs’ writing skills, no matter what mode, medium, or genre they are writing in. Zwiers (2007, 2008) has unpacked the language requirements for academic writing tasks faced by ELLs. He characterizes academic language as a “dialect that describes cognitive processes, complex relationships, and abstract concepts” (2007, p. 96). This academic “dialect” is part of the cultural capital likely to be possessed by teachers and students from middle-­ class, literacy-­rich backgrounds, who have come to understand these processes, relationships, and concepts because they are part of their cultural exposure. However, the language of school and academic dialect is not familiar to everyone! It needs to be taught clearly and explicitly and made accessible to those from diverse backgrounds, including ELLs (Bourdieu, 1991; Delpit, 1995). This task might require some self-­examination on the part of teachers, who are not in the habit of examining their own academic assumptions. For example, Zwiers (2007) points out that in the process of ensuring that ELLs are receiving comprehensible input, teachers may simplify complex content temporarily, thinking they are clarifying it, but then neglect to find ways to bring the students back up to the complexity level that the content requires. If that second step doesn’t occur, comprehensible input may just end up enabling low expectations. For ELLs, the inconsistencies in what they are asked to do in writing can be bewildering. For example, McCarthey, Garcia, Lopez-­Velasquez, and Shumin (2004) took a look at writing assignments for ELLs at the fourthand fifth-grade levels in several programmatic settings and found the writing tasks and requirements to be both complicated and “fragmented.” They also discovered that interactive dialogue about the writing was infrequent.

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 273

An 8-year longitudinal study in 13 California secondary schools showed encouraging results for ELL students whose teachers implemented a cognitive strategies approach (Olson & Land, 2007). In this approach, students were exposed to a rigorous language arts curriculum; explicit teaching, modeling, and guided practice in a variety of writing strategies; and participation in a community of learners. Their academic writing showed significant improvement for 7 consecutive years. In addition, their grade-point average exceeded that of a control group, and they performed better on standardized tests and in high-­stakes writing assessments. The findings reinforce the importance of teaching critical thinking strategies, having high expectations, and exposing ELLs to a rigorous language arts curriculum.

Translanguaging in Dual‑Language and Bilingual Classrooms If students are learning in an instructional model that supports their first language over a number of years, they will also be learning to write in their first language. Remembering that some aspects of literacy are language-­ specific and others are universal, it is possible for students to develop some of their ideas in their L1 and others in English, and they may decide that on their own, so they have the power to move between languages to meet their academic aspirations and needs. First language writing skills will positively impact English writing and vice versa. Receptivity by the teacher and the program creates that space.

A Way to Classify School Writing Tasks Looking at the core WIDA writing standards and thinking about the many kinds of writing activities that are possible in a classroom, we have sorted them into three broad levels: expressive writing, responsive writing, and expository writing. This may help you think about how you organize writing with students at different proficiency levels and grade levels.

Expressive Writing This is typically performed by learners at the entering, beginning, or developing stages of English proficiency, whatever their ages or grade levels. Expressive writing is writing based on a learner’s own experiences. It uses a minimum of formal language and probably looks like a student’s oral English. In fact, the words may look like a rough transcription of their speech. Here is an example of expressive writing, handwritten by a ninth-grade ELL at the beginning

274

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

level, as a response to the prompt “What would you like to improve in your English?” What I like to improve was my Inglish because I don’t speke to much. The student is unsure of the verb tenses and spelling and is putting her basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) language in writing. As the student develops her English vocabulary, she will learn to write sentences that use more verb tenses and written conventions. Expressive writing might also be combined with drawings or emojis on the same page.

Responsive Writing Responsive writing is created in response to something in the curriculum. It might be responding to a reading, video, or class presentation; it might be part of a project or report. As learners begin to write on classroom topics, they will increasingly learn to use academic language and some formal features; now, their writing no longer simply mimics speech. Writing genres can begin to be introduced, and the connectors and vocabulary needed to frame their ideas become more important. Students learning this kind of writing are at the developing and expanding levels and need a substantial amount of modeling and guidance. During this stage, students are introduced to different kinds of writing genres in several content areas, and they develop the skills to use writing as a learning tool. Learning logs and note taking, as well as blogging, are some of the many ways ELLs develop responsive writing. Here is an example of responsive writing from a ninth-grade ELL in an ESL pull-out program, responding to a prompt to write a paragraph about the book Divergent (Roth, 2011). The paragraph reflects that he was able to read the book, so his vocabulary had grown quite a bit, and he was familiar with more verb tenses and long sentences. Divergent There are many things that the Book Divergent reminds me of. For example, when i was in eighth grade i was the tallest boy in school. Everyone else was shorter than me by a lot. Except one boy who was the same height as me. I felt divergent because i was different from everyone else. I wasn’t sad about it but i knew that i was just a little different. Being different is not bad but it is awkward sometimes. The paragraph is coherent, and it shows that the student can relate his own experiences to something he read, using varied verbs and appropriate

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 275

words and phrases. He is still in the process of developing skills such as avoiding sentence fragments, capitalizing the word I, and a few additional formal elements. The word choices, such as by a lot and just a little show that he has adopted some phrases good for narrative writing.

Expository Writing The third level, expository writing, uses the language of the content areas to demonstrate academic knowledge and skills. It is strictly CALP language. Vocabulary is domain-­specific to the genre and content area, and formal elements need to be in place. Even when they are deemed ready to exit an ESL program, ELLs may have trouble figuring out the demands of expository writing. These increase dramatically throughout the grade levels, and by high school, students are asked to perform complex, challenging, and consequential written work. For example, ninth-grade writers, both ELLs and native speakers of English, need to learn to write using the claim–­evidence–­ reasoning model in many high school districts. This model, with its shifting definitions of “claim” and “evidence,” can be bafflingly difficult, and many teachers gloss over the steps in ways that can be overwhelming to all students, including ELLs. Also, formulaic models that don’t look like text they encounter in real life may turn many students off to writing and lead them to find compositions or ask AI to create compositions that look correct but weren’t written by them. Even for expository writing, student choice is very important, and conversation about the topic is key, so that motivation to research and write remains strong throughout the multiweek training process. All too often, the writing activities taught in expressive and responsive writing do not provide a bridge to expository writing. Learners may receive praise for their strong writing in the expressive and responsive writing areas only to find that those same writing qualities did not apply to the strict demands of expository writing. Expository writing can begin in the early grades. Children can learn the principles of collecting and recording data on topics even before they are reading connected text or doing extensive writing. They can write a sentence or create a drawing to describe their findings. ELL students can learn the foundations of expository writing by the time they are at the developing level. Students do better when they are asked to write about a topic about which they already know something, so that they are comfortable with the genre by the time the content becomes more challenging. A good ESL program must incorporate a strong expository writing component, practicing specific skills, good modeling, and the regular practice of multiple rewrites.

276

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Mistakes and Errors in ELL Writing When expository writing comes around, new kinds of mistakes and errors will arise: Students may overgeneralize from language regularities, be unsure about text structures, be unclear about what they want to say, lack the vocabulary to say it, or experience L1 interference. All of these issues may be manifested as mistakes. Writing mistakes dog many a dedicated ELL writer, and the stubborn persistence of errors even after a mistake has been explained, demonstrated, or practiced in class can be exasperating both for the student and the teacher. Research on contrastive analysis (CA) found that often the errors made by ELL writers were developmental and not related to their L1 (Lightbown & Spada, 2011). Errors may be based on an incomplete understanding of a rule in the new language, including overgeneralization or simplification, rather than applying the rules of the first language directly. Learners may also refrain from trying to write certain structures in order to avoid errors, so we do not always know what the learner knows or does not know. Lightbown and Spada (2011) summarize: “It is often difficult to determine the source of errors” for ELL writing (p. 82). Focus on form (FoF) is one approach to error correction that was developed for ESL students in higher education settings but that can be used with school-­age learners (Doughty & Long, 2003; Doughty & Williams, 1998). In FoF, teachers guide ELLs in the direction of noticing and correcting errors by means of recasts. Recasts consist of restating or rewriting the incorrect form generated by the student into a grammatically correct form. Uptake occurs when students accept and use the recast. This attention to form, or grammar accuracy, “often consists of an occasional shift of attention to linguistic code features—­by the teachers and/or one or more students—­triggered by perceived problems with comprehension or production” (Long & Robinson, 1998, p. 23). The larger goal of FoF is instilling self-­monitoring strategies in learners so that they can use them outside of their classrooms. The goal should always be effective writing, as opposed to error-free writing. That being said, error correction is also increasingly possible through AI, and students will turn to this as a quick check before submitting work. We want to be sure that the correction also entails real learning, so a follow-­up reflection on the correction is a good protocol to include in order to develop a student’s metalinguistic awareness. In addition, a benefit of conversational AI programs like ChatGPT is that they can explain the corrections they suggest if they are queried. A great deal of research has been done on ESL error correction, and the reality is that despite practice and classroom techniques, many errors may persist, especially if they are not perceived. When teachers overcorrect errors, it can impede writing fluency and raise students’ affective filter, but at the same time, some students and families expect it and may be angry when the teacher does not mark every error in student writing. Will teachers begin to

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 277

use AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to lessen the time they spend giving students feedback on their writing? Very possibly, since pointing out written errors is one of the most time-­consuming aspects of a teacher’s job, but we must avoid “teacher-­proofing” the curriculum. What teachers can do is prioritize the class’s overall learning about writing and keep an eye on each student’s current needs. The errors that truly impair comprehension—­that cause a composition to not make sense to a reader—­a re the ones that are worth the most attention. One way ELL students may notice their written errors is by reading back their compositions aloud, to themselves or to a teacher, and they may often hear an error they didn’t see when they wrote silently. Also, you might read a student’s work aloud in a one-on-one conference as you do a think-aloud, saying “Hmmmm . . . I don’t understand that part. Is there some way you could make it clearer?” Google Docs is the most transformative piece of software I’ve used to teach writing. Students can submit different drafts, or, using suggestion mode, I can offer word choices and sentence structures. Adding comments, I can highlight areas to be improved upon and explain without being limited to the margin of the page. If a student is struggling I can switch to edit-mode and we can write together. I can even control whether grammar or spelling corrections are turned on. Some students want me to explain why their syntax was wrong and others prefer that I simply underline the errors so they can figure it out themselves—­all of this is possible without a tired hand or page covered in red ink!—­Gareth

Who’s Afraid of Spelling? ELLs are likely to have more spelling errors than L1 writers either because their probabilistic reasoning is less developed (see Chapter 3), because of interference from their L1, or simply because of the opacity of the English writing system. However, students’ learning to spell in English gives teachers an indication of the students’ reading development. Spelling helps assess reading because “what they can spell, we know they can read” (Bear et al., 2003, p. 76). We can think of spelling as part of the skill of “recoding,” which is a small part of the writing skill. All too many writers, however, both native speakers and ELLs, believe they cannot write simply because they make spelling errors. Let’s face it—­ opaque English is a “spelling-­problem language.” If you grew up with spelling rules, you may remember the catchy rhyme “I before E except after C, or when sounded like A as in neighbor or weigh.” Even this handy rhyme has many exceptions, and many words do not follow the “rule.” In Figure 10.3, we see an imaginary conversation in ancient Egypt between a scribe and a stonecutter writing hieroglyphics. Did stonecutters make spelling mistakes, too?

278

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

FIGURE 10.3. Did ancient Egyptian scribes have spelling errors? Reprinted with permission from Bizarro. Copyright © 2014 Dan Piraro. Distributed by King Features Syndicate, Inc.

Young writers should never feel they can’t write because they can’t spell. In fact, spelling errors these days are more likely to be homophones; spellcheck can fix garbled letter order or other common typed misspellings but it sometimes can’t tell which meaning and spelling of a word was intended. That doesn’t mean spelling shouldn’t be taught—­but it should be taught as a skill, not a proxy for writing.

Handwriting: Still Important, but Not Paramount Research about the role of handwriting in the development of literacy continues to confirm its value and its role in the curriculum (Bounds, 2010; ­Konnikova, 2014; Shaturaev, 2019). In one study, copying text using handwriting correlated with developing several reading and writing skills in the elementary grades (Jones, Abbott, & Berninger, 2014). In a longitudinal study, Berninger et al. (2006) found that children in grades 2, 4, and 6 wrote more words, wrote words faster, and expressed more ideas when they composed by hand than when they used a keyboard. In fact, the same study found that “the ones with better handwriting exhibited greater neural activation in areas associated with working memory—­a nd increased overall activation in the reading and writing networks” (Konnikova, 2014, para. 12). Other research indicates that struggles with handwriting cascade into struggles with written language performance, not only at the elementary school level but into secondary school, especially, in one study, for composing

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 279

by boys (Shaturaev, 2019, p.  950). Research also shows that when children were given focused handwriting practice, both at age 7 and in the secondary grades, the quality of their compositional writing improved (Shaturaev, 2019, p. 951). Clearly, handwriting is more than just a motor activity. Handwriting, like spelling, is also not a synonym for “writing.” There are many viable formats to create writing now, including typing documents in online software and using speech-­to-text. Also, new products make it possible to handwrite words on “e-ink” tablets, some of which are backlit and have a paper-like feel. They can even turn a writer’s handwritten notes into fonts so they can be incorporated into other formats and files. Some version of this may become commonplace in schools in the coming years. A tool that uses handwriting in an editable format and builds muscle memory with the traction, pace, and feel of handwriting may hit the sweet spot for combining the handwriting skill with writing fluency.

Practical Writing Needs for ELLs As we plan writing instruction for our ELL students, let’s not forget the critical writing many ELLs need to do outside of school, such as helping families fill out forms to communicate with the government, businesses, schools, and agencies. Although these activities sound like things adults should be doing, young ELLs must often get involved in helping older family members or caregivers. Perhaps the family bought a product or service that is defective, and the only way to get a refund is by explaining it in emails or through live chat. Perhaps the family is applying for a city parking permit, adult ESL classes, or benefits. All kinds of online written activities fall on the shoulders of young ELLs, especially when there is no nearby immigrant community to help. The problem is particularly acute for families who emigrated from less-­ represented regions and languages. Along with all the other writing activities we propose, we must never forget the extra, unacknowledged work some young learners are engaged in before they are fully grown. We must help them learn those forms of writing too, as needed.

Many Genres to Try, Including New Ones In the same way students benefit from reading many genres, students also benefit from writing in many of them. The teacher can introduce a new genre at the beginning of the week and plan to spend the week on it, then take care to review it a couple of weeks later. A few useful genres might include: a thank-you letter, a movie review, an email, an opinion essay, a product review, a tweet, a personal narrative, a biographical sketch, an interview, a poem, or an imaginative story. Start by showing a good, short example of the genre,

280

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

then model creating a piece of writing in the genre, and then scaffold as learners try it on their own. There are also many new text structures in social media. Each one has protocols and should be taught when appropriate. As we teach ways to interact with these powerful forms, we also need to ensure that students understand that their “digital footprint” (“What is a digital footprint?,” 2021) is permanent, findable by others, and can have unforeseen consequences. We can teach students basic rules of thumb, such as avoiding online rivalry, aggression, or bullying or disclosing personal information, because there are real consequences for their mental and physical health. ELLs may enter your school without this knowledge or know-how, so check to make sure safe online practices are clearly covered in the newcomer curriculum, in a course at the school, in the classroom, or, if need be, by you. Here are a few suggestions about four recent digital text structures:

Email Email looks like BICS language, due to its relatively short length and informal nature, but it isn’t. Like CALP language, emails lack visual context, and readers and writers must make judgments about their meaning based on the words alone. A 2016 study shows that people are not good at detecting the tone of their friends’ emails even though they have confidence that they are (Riordan & Trichtinger, 2017)—and if we can’t tell our friends’ tones, how can we figure out others’, especially when English is our new language? Email has plenty of text conventions. We know that the “ALL CAPS” setting is considered “shouting,” but there are other protocols as well, such as using the proper salutation for different recipients, known and unknown to the sender; or the optimal length of an email, depending on its purpose; or who should be copied and when to add or remove names to and from the list of recipients. Also, how do we know when an email exchange can be considered complete? When is it appropriate to put a typographic flourish such as an emoji at the end of a message, and when is it not? Students do not necessarily know how to do this just because they are so-­called digital natives. A colleague who teaches adults says: When an adult student sends me an email with “smileys” at the end, it’s usually about a late assignment or an unexplained absence. Although I recognize that they are sharing an emoji, it feels a bit too informal to me. I expect words, not emojis. Kristin responds with her sense of the trend line: Although it is true that my students (adult teachers) are most likely to add emojis when they’re explaining a late assignment, emojis are becoming much more common in emails than they were a couple of years ago. I realize that I have answered

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 281

students with emojis as well—­mostly sympathy or congratulations. That’s just the way emojis seem to be going.—­K ristin

Twitter/X and Threads Twitter gave us the 280-character limit, which can be a good template for writing succinct summaries. One middle school teacher observes: Writing an effective tweet is hard because you’re restricted by the amount of characters. Thus, you can have students summarize a main idea of another piece of writing into a tweet.—­Thomas Bochniak Although interacting with text-­based apps such as Twitter/X and Threads are not useful instructional tools, students can practice writing short summaries in the tweet format. If it’s written on paper, you would specify a word count (suggested 50 words), but if it’s online, a character count could also be generated. Could students write a tweet-­length summary of a field trip?

Texting Texting is something your ELLs probably do many times per day—­unless they are newcomers and have not had exposure to this technology. The language play, including clipped word forms, acronyms, memes, and alphabetic spelling, evolves as young users create what they need. Still, some suggestions about texts can keep students safe, rested, and happy. One is to make sure kids know how to block inappropriate or unwanted texts and how to report them. You can model this clearly and systematically for the whole class without looking at any student’s phone. You can also teach basic text protocols—­to say “please” and “thank you” as appropriate, whether to self-­ identify on a first text and to ask the same of a new texter, how to detect spam and spammers, to mute text delivery when it’s bedtime, and to know how and when to respond, not respond, or block. These are not writing tasks in the traditional sense, but they have ripple effects on safety, healthy growth, and school success. You might even analyze short texting “dialogs,” including bilingual ones, and discuss them as a whole class, asking such questions as “What do you think she means when she writes TTYL?” ELLs may already know these, or they may not. If they do, they’ll enjoy being the expert as they instruct you, and if they don’t, they’ll appreciate your guidance. By the way, you probably need to update your text “repertoire” regularly!

Social Media You cannot know the full range of the social media that kids in your classes are using, but you will hear about some of it. Teachers should keep current

282

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

on trends and engage actively with students on social media topics, so that students feel you are knowledgeable and caring and not just another clueless adult! Students can respond in writing to activities you find on social media, and you can create a safe, sheltered place for them to post responses. Obvious cautions about social media should guide all such lessons.

How Does This Look in the Classroom? We suggest a few activities in the areas of writing for fluency, writing skill development, and writing for learning.

Writing for Fluency Students can experience the joy of self-­expression through many writing activities, at any grade level and in any mode, using mostly expressive and reflective writing topics and activities. Here are a few. Greeting Cards For young ELLs, nothing is more rewarding than making a card for a family member. These may be some of the first words your student has ever written, and along with a drawing or pasted picture, nothing says love like a card for Mom or another family member. Valentine’s Day and Mother’s Day are natural occasions for card making, but there are many other occasions as well (including teacher appreciation!). Greeting cards can also be made for classmates’ birthdays and are a natural way to use artistic skills and build classroom community. Language Experience Approach We’ve mentioned the language experience approach (LEA; Stauffer, 1970) several times in this book because it’s such a great bridge to literacy for ELLs at the entering or beginning level. In this technique, students narrate sentences or a story to a teacher, who writes it down and then asks the student to read it back. LEA can be a powerful bridge to writing when learners have something to say but have not gained enough writing conventions yet to write it down. Even before they transition to literacy, young ELLs can illustrate their LEA stories. If students can write, they can recopy the story the teacher has transcribed for practice in using conventions of print. The class can also create a class LEA, in which each student contributes one sentence as the teacher writes the sentences on chart paper; then the students read the sentences back. A class LEA is a great debriefing activity after a field trip or a guest speaker.

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 283

Collaborative Writing Now that there are easy ways to write digitally, students can engage in collaborative writing through Google Docs. In fact, class time can be used for cowriting. Collaborative writing doesn’t need to be done only on a single shared project; it can also consist of having students respond to something another student posted. This might be done using any one of several colorful apps, many of them available on Google. Working collaboratively is a strong contributor to ELLs’ syndrome of success (­Waxman & Téllez, 2002). Writing a Comic Strip Jenna Gatsis, who teaches high school ELLs, asks students to respond to a book they read by writing an original comic strip. After listening to an audiobook version of Night, by Elie Wiesel, she asked them to create a comic in which they described an event that changed their personality and what that change was. “Their comics included topics such as becoming shy to becoming outgoing, how they used to upset their mom but don’t anymore, and more. They were not used to introspective writing, so this was a great way to ease into it, drawing comics,” she says. Poetry Writing Poetry writing can be wonderful and transformative. Illinois TESOL/ BE, the professional organization of ESL teachers in Illinois, has held an annual elementary poetry contest for ESL students grades 2–5 for more than a decade. The poetic forms are very structured: acrostic, biopoem, diamante, or haiku (Illinois Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages—­Bilingual Education, 2023). Winners are honored at the state convention and receive a small cash prize. Families come beaming with pride at their child’s poetic prowess, and a new writer is launched! Poems can also be shared in an anthology which is given to all members of the class, or in a poetry night at the school. Quick Writes It seems counterintuitive to just say “write as many words as you can in a minute,” but it’s a cheap and effective way to break open any writing blocks, and it builds writing fluency. You can just choose a simple prompt, ask them to write for a minute, and then to count how many words they wrote. Their progress can be recorded on a chart that students keep; no grades or corrections should be given for quick writes.

284

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Dialogue Journals Dialogue journals are a powerful way for students to use writing to communicate their thoughts and feelings. They are usually a written exchange between a teacher and individual students and should be set up in their own separate notebook, not on loose-leaf paper. Entries are usually dated and can be written in class or at home. They may be a response to a prompt, activity, or reading, or they can be freeform. Teachers often collect the journals on Fridays and return them with comments on Monday. The only grade, if any at all, could be for the number of entries, or their length, but not for content or correctness. It is another kind of writing workshop and is designed to build fluency. If a student doesn’t wish to have his or her passage read by the teacher, the student can be given the option to fold and staple his or her entry shut, so the teacher can see that an entry was written but not read it. Translanguaging When ELLs can choose what language, languages, or dialect they would like to write in, this can be very reassuring to students who are trying to project their identities onto paper. These days, that writing may include not only translanguaging between languages but also emojis, slang, and textual conventions. Although writing in one’s home language can help students ground their identities, it is also true that writing about one’s life in a new language can be quite liberating (Steinman, 2005). As their education proceeds, there may be a change in ELLs’ language writing dominance from their L1 to English. To avoid language loss, students can be encouraged to continue to write in both languages, especially with creative writing. Students should always be supported in continuing to write in their home languages, regardless of the school’s instructional model, and the long-range goal of multilingualism, multiliteracy, and cultural retention should always be upheld. Comic Strips for Narrative Writing Providing blank comic strips allows students to fill in speech bubbles as part of a transition from sentence writing to writing a narrative. They can also write short personal narratives by starting with a blank piece of paper with three, six, or nine boxes to form a comic strip and drawing an event from their lives. After completing their drawings, they can write captions underneath their comics. From that, students have the beginnings of a story, which can then be written again in full sentences with connectors.

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 285

Multimodal Prompts Starting out a writing activity with a fascinating prompt can make a big difference in the quality of the writing. It’s a great idea to collect a large set of interesting writing prompts, which might include short videos, intriguing images, or fanciful topics, such as writing from the point of view of a pet, an appliance, a plant, or a toy. One of these prompts may prove to be the inspiration for some terrific writing. Fan Fiction When fans of a book or movie series can’t bear to have it end or want to see it take a different direction, they write sequels, prequels, or alternate endings. Fan fiction might be based on books, movies, TV shows, or Netflix series. If preteen kids have a passion to write, fan fiction is one direction the writing might take. The Harry Potter books, the Percy Jackson books, and books with supernatural themes have hundreds of thousands of “fanfic” sites, and a lot of reading and writing occurs there. (Caution: There are also “dark” fan fiction sites, and teachers need to learn about appropriate and inappropriate places for fan fiction that might be used in the classroom.) For any book that is read in the class, there can be an assignment that asks, “What is another possible ending for the book?” or “What do you think the character did after or before the book opened?” Students can also write about extending the plot of movies or comic books. Their fan fiction products might also be shared with the rest of the class. If they are strong enough writers, they might even be inspired to adopt or parody some of the stylistic features of an admired author, such as Dr. Seuss. For ELLs, this might not be possible until their writing is highly proficient, but it also might be motivating to try.

Skill Building Some skills can be taught in a writing workshop format, through mini-­ lessons, but some need to be practiced more individually or repeatedly. Sentence Frames Sentence frames provide partially completed sentences that students can use to complete a whole sentence or a composition and are a very important technique for teaching ELL writing. Some sentence frames are “sentence starters” to help organize sentences or paragraphs. For example, an expressive sentence frame may include, “My favorite season

286

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

is        because.  .  .  . ” Others might literally call for only one word. Sentence frames can also scaffold the use of connectors. Sentence frames give students practice in using grammar and syntax patterns, too. Even when ELLs are at an advanced level, sentence frames are a great way to lock in syntax patterns. One sentence frame I’ve always enjoyed using with ELL students is “She/He/ It is as        as       .” I demonstrate several colorful phrases in English such as “The wrestler is as strong as a lion” or “That joke is as old as the hills” or “I was as cool as a cucumber” and then ask students to come up with their own. Often students have amusing phrases from their own cultures. My favorite, provided by Polish students, is “He’s as dumb as a doorknob.” It’s also a chance to talk about the roles animals play in different cultures. That in turn serves as a nice tie-in to folktales.—Kristin Some comparisons we use in Senufo, my native language (we call our language Cebaari), are “as clever as a rabbit,” and “as dumb as a hyena”—that is the role those animals play in our folktales. We also say, “as terrified as a mouse that fell into the gumbo sauce.” —  Tenena To practice comparatives, the as–as sentence frame can also be converted to a comparative sentence, which is a good practice for ELLs. For example, “She’s as much fun as a barrel of monkeys” can be changed to “She’s more fun than a barrel of monkeys.” Responding to Visual Prompts Students can practice responding in writing to a visual prompt, such as a bar graph, historical cartoon, or Venn diagram. It’s hard to write about visual prompts that ask for data analysis, and they require much practice, with oral explanations and much scaffolding. These kinds of assignments are very common in the consequential tests of high school, so it’s important to practice them both orally and in writing. Dictocomp The dictocomp helps teach summary writing while improving listening comprehension. For a dictocomp, a teacher previews a couple of key ideas in the text that he or she is about to read, explains to the students that they will be writing a response to the oral text, and then reads it aloud several times, at a relaxed pace. Then students write the main idea of the passage. A rubric that encapsulates the important points in the text can be designed in advance (Bailey, 1998, pp. 149–150).

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 287

Getting Out the Scissors As students learn to organize longer written material, especially in their content-­a rea writing, it helps to ask them to write on every other line. Doing so gives them enough room to cut up and move their written work around while trying out various potential organization patterns. Inexperienced writers often include important examples or supporting evidence in their writing but at the wrong place in the text. Cutting up and reassembling sentences reinforces the idea that writing is both messy and dynamic and that no particular arrangement of words is sacrosanct. It also visually demonstrates that reordering is a natural part of the editing process. This is a real advantage of writing on paper— it’s easier to see, without a lot of scrolling, cutting and pasting, or losing track of the outline. (In this book, in fact, several of the chapters were printed out and chopped up before they were put into the optimal order!)

Writing for Learning Activities A variety of metacognitive writing activities can help with organizing or studying. Here are some writing techniques that help build writing to learn. Think‑Alouds and Modeling Writing A great way to model writing conventions and techniques for ELLs is through the use of think-­a louds. An effective think-aloud for writing goes as follows:

• A teacher stands or sits at a document camera, facing the class, and writes a paragraph that is displayed on the board while thinking aloud. This can be done with handwriting or with a Google Doc. • As the paragraph unfolds, ELLs can both see and hear the thinking process that goes into creating the topic sentence, the word choices, the choice of examples, capitalizing letters, choosing connectors, and other skills. • Students see the text developing as the teacher handwrites or types the paragraph and edits it, always thinking aloud with slow, clear reflections. When the teacher reconsiders a word choice, corrects spelling or grammar, or reorders sentences, it models the practices of recasts and uptake (Doughty & Williams, 1998), making ELLs more aware of methods of error correction.

288

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

• Students copy the paragraph into their writing notebooks, checking carefully that it is copied perfectly.

• The teacher and the student check over the student’s copy to make sure it is copied perfectly. This careful modeling fills in the gaps for ELLs and is a powerful form of real-time learning. We know a teacher who performed this technique every Friday. She wrote paragraphs in response to different writing prompts she provided or constructed summaries of what the students had learned that week. She modeled different genres, including friendly letters, book reports, and summary paragraphs, thinking aloud as she wrote at the document camera. When the composition was completed and displayed on the whiteboard, students copied it verbatim into their writing notebooks. This process continued for several months until students could construct their own paragraphs after copying multiple examples of what a good paragraph looked like. She found that her students achieved impressive results on the writing portion of their annual test of English proficiency, well above students in the same building who did not use this practice. The teacher pointed out that this seemingly prescriptive method actually helped students grow wings to write more creatively on their own because they had more confidence after watching, listening to, and meticulously copying paragraphs that modeled what good writing should look like. Graphic Organizers Guide Writing Graphic organizers are useful not only for reading comprehension but also for writing. Many of the strategies that help ELLs construct meaning from text while reading also help them plan meaningful writing. Students at the developing level of proficiency can use semantic maps to help them brainstorm and organize their ideas. Outlines are one great way to help students see how material is going to be organized. Teachers can model them first, and it is possible to illustrate this using the outline view in Google Docs. Showing outlines for short passages helps ELLs see which are primary points and which are examples or supports. Teachers can provide the graphic organizer for the genre in which students are writing, such as cause–­effect charts or timelines. Some graphic organizers have blank templates, such as blank frames for friendly letters, lab reports, and so on. Great templates can be found on Pinterest, Teachers Pay Teachers, or in the resources and tools section at Scholastic and other publishers. Graphic organizers are especially effective when

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 289

they are displayed around the classroom and referred to frequently, so that students will naturally look at them for guidance. Reading Drafts Aloud Whether alone or to a partner, reading drafts aloud helps ELL writers become better editors of their work. Sometimes words might not “sound right” even when they look right on the page—a common phenomenon for all students, but especially ELLs. For some learners, their ears are better developed in English than their eyes (and BICS skills generally precede CALP skills). As a result, they can hear and correct mistakes when they listen to themselves read or when they read to another student. This can be built into the editing routine. After students finish writing, rubrics and checklists can help them monitor their own writing when they proofread. A Classroom Writing Theme Arlene Duval, a grade 1–5 pull-out ESL teacher, uses a number of visual supports to support her students’ writing activities. Arlene has adopted a scaffold that she calls an “Owl of Many Questions” (see Figure 10.4), which uses a laminated owl with two movable wings attached by brads; the owl’s body has lines that can be written on. When students begin to read in small groups, the first thing they do is to write the guiding strategy they are focusing upon on one wing of the owl. Then they formulate the questions that are going to guide them while reading by taking out their owl and writing questions on its body with a marker. It sits by them as they read, reminding them what questions are guiding their reading. Arlene says that students absolutely love this activity and that it works for all ages. To give students a chance to talk about books they have read, she created a tree on one of the walls of the classroom. The trunk of the tree has a poem that Arlene and her co-­teacher wrote: Minds mature fed with reading Leaves grow with lots of feeding For every book you get to know A new leaf will bud and grow. Instead of a word wall, they put up “Bee-loved words” on a hive on the tree.

Arlene Duval holding an Owl of Many Questions and showing a photo of the bulletin board.

The “Owl of Many Questions.”

Word tree, poem, and “Bee-loved” words in Arlene Duval’s classroom.

FIGURE 10.4. A tree, a beehive, and an “Owl of Many Questions.” The “Owl of Many Questions” activity is adapted with permission from CONNECT-­I T for Stranger in the Woods by Carl R. Sam II and Jean Stoick, EDCO Publishing, Inc. 290

Writing to Learn in English across the Curriculum 291

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Think about the writing instruction you received in elementary school, high school, or college. In what ways have those experiences influenced how you think about yourself as a writer and as a teacher of writing?  3. What experiences have you had learning or teaching expressive, respon‑ sive, or expository writing? How does the scaffolding you provide for these three kinds of writing activities differ according to the nature of the activ‑ ity?  4. Try creating your own activity using “as–as” sentence frames, such as the example on page 286 in this chapter, and try it out in your classroom. Report on the results.  5. Do you think handwriting is a skill ELLs should be taught? In what ways might handwriting practice enhance understanding of English reading, writing, or spelling, if any? Have you had any experience in teaching, or not teaching, handwriting?  6. Look at Appendix 10.1, showing the WIDA writing standards, and compare them with a rubric you might use for writing. Does your writing curriculum include the three language proficiency standards—­ linguistic complex‑ ity, vocabulary usage, and language control—­in assignments, rubrics, and assessments? Which one do you think is hardest to teach?  7. What experiences have you had using an AI tool, such as ChatGPT or Bard, in your writing instruction? In what ways have you found it helpful? What precautions have you set up to ensure that it is applied in a positive way with ELLs? Describe and discuss.  8. Do you think using speech-to-­text format for brainstorming writing ideas can be useful? If you have tried to use it in a class (or for yourself), what have you learned about this medium?  9. CHALLENGE QUESTION: If you teach students, find formal language on a sign such as the one in Figure 10.1 and convert it to an informal register that is closer to spoken language. Then try to change informal language that you find from an informal source, such as a text message or note, into more for‑ mal language. Discuss the experience. What did you and the students learn from doing this? 10. CHALLENGE QUESTION: If possible, analyze a writing curriculum you use or have used and determine what kinds of experiences it provides students to produce expressive, responsive, and expository writing. Think about which activities are included in, or missing from, each of the three levels of writ‑ ing. In what areas is the writing program strong? In which area(s) does it need strengthening?

APPENDIX 10.1

Writing Rubric of the WIDA Consortium Grades 1–12 Level

Linguistic Complexity

Vocabulary Usage

Language Control

6 Reaching

A variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in a single, tightly organized paragraph or in well-organized extended text; tight cohesion and organization

Consistent use of just the right word in just the right place; precise vocabulary usage in general, specific, or technical language

Has reached comparability to that of English-proficient peers functioning at the “proficient” level in statewide assessments

5 Bridging

A variety of sentence lengths of varying linguistic complexity in a single organized paragraph or in extended text; cohesion and organization

Usage of technical language related to the content area; evident facility with needed vocabulary

Approaching comparability to that of English-proficient peers; errors don’t impede comprehensibility

4 A variety of sentence Expanding lengths of varying linguistic complexity; emerging cohesion used to provide detail and clarity

Usage of specific and some technical language related to the content area; lack of needed vocabulary may be occasionally evident

Generally comprehensible at all times, errors don’t impede the overall meaning; such errors may reflect firstlanguage interference

3 Simple and expanded Developing sentences that show emerging complexity used to provide detail

Usage of general and some specific language related to the content area; lack of needed vocabulary may be evident

Generally comprehensible when writing in sentences; comprehensibility may from time to time be impeded by errors when attempting to produce more complex text

2 Beginning

Phrases and short sentences; varying amount of text may be copied or adapted; some attempt at organization may be evident

Usage of general language related to the content area; lack of vocabulary may be evident

Generally comprehensible when text is adapted from model or source text, or when original text is limited to simple text; comprehensibility may be often impeded by errors

1 Entering

Single words, set phrases, or chunks of simple language; varying amounts of text may be copied or adapted; adapted text contains original language

Usage of highestfrequency vocabulary from school setting and content areas

Generally comprehensible when text is copied or adapted from model or source text; comprehensibility may be significantly impeded in original text

Note. Level 6 is reserved for students whose written English is comparable to that of their English-proficient peers. From WIDA Consortium (2022b). Reprinted by permission.

292

CHAPTER ELEVEN

Multilingual Learners in the Multimodal Classroom

PREVIEW OF KEY VOCABULARY artificial intelligence (AI) • corpus linguistics natural language processing (NLP) • selective attention • autonomous learner flow theory • immersive environment • gamification • captioning

T

he landscape is rapidly evolving as the human inhabitants of our planet create, try out, modify, confirm, reject, improve upon, and innovate ways to live and thrive alongside the internet. Teaching and learning languages is part of this dynamic landscape. In this final chapter, we sketch how large tech developments are affecting language, literacy, and learning and how these powerful currents impact our classrooms and ourselves. Up until this chapter, we have mostly put aside the use of the term multilingual learners (as in our book’s title) in favor of English language learners because we were focusing on English-­specific standards, skills, and strategies. Here, in this chapter, we broaden the scope to holistically consider our beautiful learners around the world whose rainbow of languages and dialects and registers and living situations create an ever-changing palette. In this chapter, we observe the changes to language teaching and learning in the digital era and how our teaching practices might change so that students can read online texts with comprehension, take part in thoughtful gamification of content, make careful use of ChatGPT, embrace the power of autonomous learning, claim the right to connectivity, and even experience ways to benefit from video games. In our section “How Does This Look in the 293

294

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Classroom?” we follow up with some general ideas about online teaching and some promising multimodal projects that you can use or adapt.

New Aspects to Comprehensible Input Technology is changing the parameters of language acquisition and learning, both for first and subsequent languages. Research conducted over a dozen years by Sugata Mitra (2007) with Indian “street children” in a remote Indian village revealed that a simple hole in the wall housing a computer screen with an interactive browser enabled children who had never been exposed to English or technology to acquire 200 words by manipulating the screen and listening to the words that emerged from it as they played. The children then orally produced these English words in their village, showing that they had not only receptive but productive use of them. Lytle and Kuhl (2018) found that interactive video chats increased child language acquisition on a level equivalent to face-to-face encounters. Adults who live far away from a beloved baby find ways to bond with a child over the internet, using motherese, facial gestures, songs, puppets, toys, or even pets as props. Here’s what Gareth says about his parents and his young son, separated by two continents: My son is 7 months old now, and met my parents in person when they were able to travel to Thailand. Now, when he sees them on video calls, they share songs they had sung together, hold up teddy bears, and he smiles in recognition. They bond every day, through Facetime.—­Gareth Because there is increasing evidence that first- and second-­language acquisition can occur even without a physically present language community, teachers have some ability to set up conditions to create comprehensible input even in remote language interactions. Figuring out how to make the input both comprehensible and compelling, without losing the human touch, is the mission.

AI, Natural Language Processing, and Corpus Linguistics These dramatic phenomena and many others are possible because of the evolution of programming languages and artificial intelligence (AI), which gives computer systems the ability to perform tasks that were previously impossible. Because it can process enormous quantities of data, AI is a versatile assistive tool that can access automatic speech recognition, enhance visual perception, assess complex probabilities, perform large calculations, and



The Multimodal Classroom 295

enable rapid translation among languages. Here are three ways in which AI is transforming language teaching and learning in particular. 1.  Natural Language Processing. The branch of linguistics called corpus linguistics gathers and studies huge databases of language, both oral and written. There are more than a dozen huge databases of English words, called corpora (plural of corpus, a Latin plural), each with its own special features, and they are cataloged in several depositories (e.g., University of York). These corpora allow programmers and linguists to perform once-­unimaginable things, using natural language processing, or NLP. IBM describes NLP (“Natural language processing,” 2020) as the branch of computer science “concerned with giving computers the ability to understand text and spoken words in much the same way human beings can.” Now, AI is able to “process human language in the form of text or voice data and to ‘understand’ its full meaning, complete with the speaker or writer’s intent and sentiment” (“Natural language processing,” 2020). With ChatGPT and similar language processing programs, human language can be understood and expressed in new, powerful ways, and these will pervade classroom teaching. For example, a teacher might put in detailed specifications for a lesson plan on ChatGPT and receive a succinct and serviceable lesson plan in seconds. Gareth asked ChatGPT the following: Write a lesson plan for a class that has just finished reading Charlo�e’s Web. It should be student centered and assess the student’s understanding of the book. It should also follow Bloom’s taxonomy, last three lessons, and involve student wri�ng.

Perhaps 10 seconds later, a viable lesson plan appeared complete with objective, an assessment, and an exit slip. It’s not hard to grasp the implications for teachers trying to differentiate within a class or facing a new teaching setting. 2.  Automatic Speech Recognition. Another by-­product of NLP is automatic speech recognition (ASR), or speech-­to-text, as well as its opposite, text-to-­ speech translation. It is now not uncommon or bizarre to have the experience of seeing our spoken words appear in print, or to listen to printed words in spoken form. As the language databases enlarge, NLP now works as an AI virtual assistant, with the capability of interpreting subtle nuances of language, such as “homonyms, homophones, sarcasm, idioms, metaphors, grammar and usage exceptions” (“Natural language processing,” 2020). Here are just five of the many complexities these programs must have been able to unravel:

• Many polysemous words have multiple meanings, as we discussed in Chapter 7. Using a kind of powerful probabilistic reasoning based on its access to vast language databases, AI figures out which meaning is intended by a word’s context, even when it is spoken.

296

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

• Words may be grouped into phrasal verbs, phrases, and idioms and understood not as individual words but as “chunks.” For example, the letters atta alone convey no English meaning, but we easily understand it in the chunk “Atta boy!” to be a statement of encouragement. AI needs to—and can—­f igure this out, making vocabulary acquisition easier for a multilingual learner. • Speakers have different dialects and accents and use different sentence structures and intonation patterns. Words we say using speech-­to-text apps when we have a cold may even be transcribed differently (so that the word mark comes out as the word bark!—a true story, recounts Kristin). • NLP must decide when a word is a name or location so that it will write uppercase letters at the beginning of words like New Haven or Banksy. • Words may have figurative meanings or be metaphors. As these programs evolve, there are still serious gaps in ASR. On such sites as YouTube Kids, for example, analysts found that inappropriate taboo words are produced as captions far more often than they should be, resulting in what the authors call “inappropriate content hallucination” (Ramesh, ­K hudaBukhsh, & Kumar, 2022, p.  12108). They speculate that children’s voices, background music, and some accented speakers might produce these, but there doesn’t yet exist a good technique to flag these errors of communicative competence. Such modifications should and must take place. 3.  Translation Tools. Language translation tools are becoming nothing short of astonishing. Google Translate, the app listed as #1 for reference in app stores, can do the following:

• translate between languages by typing • translate from handwriting • instantly translate a website when its URL is provided • translate text in images and photos, identifying their language, meaning, and pronunciation, by pointing a camera at them These astonishing functions can be performed for 133 named languages at present (https://translate.google.com). Besides employing the expertise of linguists and programmers, Google translate significantly allows multilingual language users to submit improvements, enhancing the quality of the app. Google translate is surely a central worldwide hub for multilingualism. ChatGPT is also able to instantly translate written English text into hundreds of languages, including those with writing systems not shared with English. Facebook has nearly 100 default languages, and there are translation



The Multimodal Classroom 297

options below Facebook posts. Many websites, including those of school districts and municipalities, offer multiple language settings with dropdown menus. Even better, by putting its URL into Google translate, the whole site, with all of its tabs and pages, can instantly be translated into the languages of all of the families who live there. A teacher we know installed translation tools on her IPad, and this allowed her to sit across from a parent whose language she did not know and input words that were translated and spoken aloud for the parent. When the parent responded in their home language, it translated the words and answered the teacher in spoken English. Think of the implications of this in multilingual settings. Could you set something like this up at your educational venue?

ChatGPT and Other AI Chatbots Changes to teaching and learning brought about by the advent of ChatGPT and similar programs are so consequential that they deserve a section all their own. In fact, in the 6 months between submission of our manuscript and our final edits, we’ve updated it twice! ChatGPT, a powerful AI chatbot developed by OpenAI using deep learning techniques, can engage in human-like responses and interactive conversations. Its ability to understand and produce natural language in written form makes it a valuable tool. ChatGPT, Bard, and other AI chatbots offer tremendous potential for language learning. Just for fun, we provided ChatGPT with an excerpt from this book and asked it for feedback on the writing quality. Here’s what we got: Based on the provided writing sample, your writing style appears to be informative, descriptive, and scholarly. You use a combination of longer and shorter sentences, with varied sentence structures and syntax. Your writing is focused and organized, presenting ideas and concepts in a coherent manner. You incorporate references and research findings to support your points, adding credibility to your arguments. Overall, your writing style demonstrates a clear understanding of the topic and a thoughtful approach to conveying information to your readers.—ChatGPT

It’s the very first review of our book—how gratifying! Of course, ChatGPT, unlike human readers, is not distractible and can read any text of any length without checking its phone or getting up for a snack. Motivation, resilience, and learning environment are not factors for ChatGPT. The uniquely human features associated with human learning cannot be replicated by a program.

298

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

ChatGPT for English Language Learners Ironically, of all the academic areas to which it is applied, ChatGPT may be least worrisome and most beneficial for English language learners, especially when they are in a setting in which they have limited access to English, such as an EFL or ELF (English as a lingua franca) setting. Here are several ways that students are already using it, whether on their own, as motivated autonomous learners (see section below), or under the guidance of an instructor:

• Tutoring in Writing. Students can submit their own writing to ChatGPT, asking for editing and recommendations.

• Pronunciation Assistance. Students can ask ChatGPT to write practice sentences for the words and phrases they would like to practice. Once ChatGPT generates them, students can copy and paste them into a text-to-­speech (TTS) app, such as fromtexttospeech.com or naturalreader. com, and hear the words read back to them by a speaker. It can be stopped and replayed as much as needed, and at most sites, they can choose the voice of the speaker and the speed. The TTS apps have different qualities and strengths, but all of them have at least a limited free version. • Practicing (Written) Dialogue. ChatGPT can engage in written dialogue with the user. Although its responses are still somewhat “stiff,” a feature that ensures its clarity, users can practice taking part in role plays, making questions, asking for clarification, and interacting with different situations. Although these are in written form, it is still a kind of writing that can build communicative competence. Ironically, a feature of AI chatbots like ChatGPT is that the user’s queries and commands require careful writing or speaking to get what the user wants. Therefore, a good deal of back and forth negotiation, using academic language, is needed to get the best value out of AI chatbots.

ChatGPT for Teachers There are several ways that ChatGPT and Google Bard can streamline tasks teachers are required to perform, some of which can be time-­consuming and not very rewarding. Developing the skill to get what you need from this powerful tool requires learning to make careful word choices and precise syntax; the old maxim “garbage in, garbage out” might serve as a caution here. Once you figure out how to ask for what you want, ChatGPT can meet many of your needs: It can assemble lesson plans, rubrics, reading materials at several levels of difficulty, prompts for writing, outlines for slideshows, handouts, and more (Finley, 2023).

The Multimodal Classroom 299

Here are a few examples of prompts teachers can use, generated from an AI chatbot, that yield positive results:

• Write for me a two-hour lesson plan that introduces the first chapter of Charlotte’s Web.

• Please create a summary reviewing Chapter 3 of James and the Giant

Peach that will help students that need additional support understand the vocabulary and themes of the text. • I need you to give me a rubric for student presentations that focuses on delivery, language use, and body language [you fill in the skills]. • Give me 10 open-ended discussion questions about [topic]. Many more great ideas for using ChatGPT in teaching and learning can be found in articles in Edutopia, on Larry Ferlazzo’s website, and in education blogs. Cautions At the current stage of development for ChatGPT, we have the following five concerns, which are specific to the education realm. (There are concerns in other realms, of course.) 1.  If you are a subject matter expert, your combined expertise, experience, and understanding of your students should not be reduced to a set of commands, no matter how tempting. If your students knew that you have automatized your prep, why should they not automatize their responses to it? Seems only fair, especially if they’re graded. A certain amount of “sweat equity” on the part of both teacher and student is one of the unspoken agreements of the arrangement. Learning and increased cognitive skill is one of the rewards for the time spent. 2.  While AI chatbots can help create a wonderful rubric or straightforward multiple-­choice test, giving individual feedback on student progress should remain a human enterprise. Some kinds of assessments can be both generated and graded automatically, but others, especially those related to student identity, classroom community, and critical thinking, which are more varied and flexible, might need to remain in the “messier” realm. Moreover, we know that in language learning, students learn best when they make mistakes and develop the metalinguistic awareness to figure out what went wrong. That takes time! 3.  Cheating. When high stakes essays need to be written, it’s almost impossible to outsmart ChatGPT. All the anti-­cheating programs are frantically trying to catch up, but it’s clear that there are many loopholes. It’s

300

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

much better to do writing in workshops, in person, in real time, and to confer with writers than to have to spend time trying to outsmart cheaters, isn’t it? 4.  Lack of actual learning. ChatGPT and other AI chatbots can assist an intrinsically motivated learner, but it can also replace learning. 5.  It’s not a person. The worldwide pandemic shattered human relationships and led to years of interrupted schooling for many students. Many suffered and continue to suffer depression and isolation. An AI chatbot might seem like the perfect conversation partner, but it’s only through interactions with real people that students learn how to get along with others, make friends, act ethically, and participate in a community. Technology leaped ahead during that time of isolation and gave many millions of students access to new tools, but we now have the benefit and blessing of “the real thing”—being together again.

What We Know about Screen‑Based Reading Digital reading by children in K–12 doubled between fall 2019 and fall 2020 (Renaissance Learning, 2021) and promises to continue that way. Researchers know quite a bit about how readers interact with print-based text in order to achieve reading comprehension, but screen-­based reading, both linear and interactive, is only beginning to emerge from longitudinal studies. An early 10-year study of digital readers of English (Liu, 2005) found that screen-­ based reading used a different kind of process that involved more browsing, keyword searching, skimming, backtracking, and skipping. Readers did less in-depth, concentrated reading and had less sustained attention. In addition, those who used screen-­based reading (in 2005) were less proficient at annotating and highlighting than readers of print-based documents. In a wide-­ranging literature review of screen-­based reading, Cull (2011) found that screen-­based reading comprehension was lower than for linear, paper-based reading, but it seemed to be improving over time. He also noted that many cognitive processes are in play when reading on a screen, but that these can be hard to maintain due to multiple distractions. Cull cautions that in-depth reading can occur with digital text but “it is a contemplative cognitive activity somewhat at odds with the Internet’s zeitgeist of immediacy” (para. 8). So how do we combine the “zeitgeist of immediacy” with using online texts or teaching online? Just like classroom teaching, online teaching requires teacher “presence” as a key to successful teaching (Pawan, Wiechart, Warren, & Park, 2016, p.  5). Students need to know you are there to teach



The Multimodal Classroom 301

them, that you will show up and interact, and that you will teach your content expertise. As most language learning resources can now be accessed by simply visiting educational websites, we can “show up” in class or online with literacy strategies in class or across platforms. For example, a teacher might create a Google Slides presentation about elements in the story of Charlotte’s Web on her or his home PC and give all the devices in the classroom shared access to it in the class the next morning. If a student is sick at home, he or she can follow along on his or her phone or Chromebook. Teachers can use Google Classroom as a platform for Writer’s Notebook, a journaling activity. Third-grade teacher Kevin Wardzala sets up individual student files, and students can add to their own notebooks with a template Kevin provides on Google Slides (Wardzala, 2016). The big advantage of using an online format for Writer’s Notebook is that students can add to it from any location, through many kinds of devices, and at any time, even when they are absent from school.

Strategies for Reading Online In Chapter 9 we talked about some of the opportunities for students to read material online and the importance of good reading comprehension strategies. Gordon and Blass (2016) point out that book reading strategies do not automatically transfer over to the reading of interactive texts, and new strategies need to be explicitly taught. In this chapter, we cover research-­supported suggestions for online reading strategies that can be explicitly taught and practiced, whether you’re teaching in a classroom where students are reading online or teaching synchronously or asynchronously online.

Interactivity In research on students taking timed tests either online or on paper, three studies revealed that screen-­based student work consistently showed “overconfidence” and less time investment. Also, students made fewer drawings to solve logic problems (Sidi, Shpigelman, Zalmanov, & Ackerman, 2017). The researchers found that students achieved a greater depth of processing of screen-­based texts when the assignment included an interactive portion, such as writing a short answer. They speculate that students consider screen-­based reading to be less serious, as “the typical interactions on screen involve brief reading of emails, social networking posts, forums, etc.” (p. 38). If students are asked to do something as they read, they are more likely to stay on task and keep applying effort to comprehend the text.

302

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Removing Time Pressure In the same research, Sidi et al. (2017) also noted that the pressure of a time limit reduced performance on screen-­based tasks. Clearly, if students feel they must rush through an online reading, they will be less likely to take the time to reflect on its meaning. For any students, but especially for ELLs, this suggests that projects, not assessments, and certainly not timed assessments, are better choices for screen-­based reading because they will elicit deeper thinking while lowering the affective filter.

Annotation and Highlighting Research with middle school science students (not ELL-­specific) indicated that their question solving improved when they used the techniques of annotation, highlighting, and vocabulary lookup (Farhana, Rutherford, & Lynch, 2022). Some digital platforms provide support for students to practice these techniques, but you can model them in any reading program you use. Annotating and highlighting require different skills than does making written notes on paper, and students need to be trained in how to do it. Moreover, different software programs may use different keyboard operations, so you may need to teach working in different systems as well. A study about the use of digital annotation tools by EFL students in an online science course showed that students used annotating to paraphrase, extend, and synthesize ideas, improving their reading comprehension (Azmuddin, Nor, & Hamat, 2020). If you are working with ELLs reading informational text online, start to teach annotating with easy passages so that the annotating is effortless, and model it with a think-aloud. Have students practice the annotating and look at their individual performances. ELLs need practice with the instructions, too; do not assume they know these words from prior reading comprehension strategies, and make sure understanding the terms is part of the instruction. Highlighting is more straightforward and common, but it’s worth going through a simulation of it as well. Part of the value of highlighting is marking only key points and not highlighting excessively, so this can also be practiced through modeling and think-­a louds.

Vocabulary Lookup We have many ways to encourage ELLs to grow their vocabularies, and many of them are highlighted in earlier chapters of this book; however, we didn’t cover online vocabulary lookup per se. It’s easier, but it still deserves a little attention. The powerful right click can now yield a great deal of information about vocabulary words, including multiple meanings for polysemous words, synonyms, and sometimes sample sentences or etymologies. Help your ELLs



The Multimodal Classroom 303

decide when and how to click on unknown words. Also, is the vocabulary part of a listeme or idiom? Using think-­a louds, help ELLs practice confirming that the word they looked up fits into the sentence in which they were reading it. You might also use highlighting for lookups, to remind them they have learned a new word.

Selective Attention Learning to pay selective attention (strategically knowing which items to focus on and which items to overlook) is another feature of successful online reading for ELLs (Prichard & Atkins, 2019). A study of Japanese EFL students, using eye tracking, found that strategy training in advance of an online research project allowed students to pay less attention to “task-­irrelevant passages” and to use more global reading strategies, such as searching within the reading. Their score on a postreading task exceeded scores of a control group, with the strategy-­trained experimental group “recalling significantly more task-­relevant details despite spending less time reading” (p.  285). Of course, paying attention is the golden ticket for all online reading, and whatever online reading strategies you choose, the goal is to increase and improve selective attention. This can be done by asking a targeted question, such as a “right there” question, and asking them to find it in a simple online passage, so they can practice learning to overlook irrelevant information. After practicing this with “right there” questions, you can expand it to ask “think and search” questions. For example, ask students to find three adjective phrases describing a character in a digital story and report back.

Audio Audio is one more tool for digital reading, because by now, most digital reading has parallel audio tracks. Audio reading takes the decoding pressure out of reading, so that active listening comprehension can be a way to comprehend a text. This certainly makes it easier for ELLs (and others) to keep up with academic subjects as they are still working on their English proficiency. That being said, most academic activities will continue to require fluent decoding, and it will continue to occupy a central place in education.

Web‑Based Resources Although there is a plethora of online ESL teaching resources, we need time to find useful and reliable resources that won’t suddenly change URLs, change purpose, disappear altogether, or go behind a paywall. The following are some resources we are aware of, but there are many others:

304

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

• Larry Ferlazzo is a prodigious high school ESL teacher who teaches, blogs (Ferlazzo, 2023), tweets, publishes books, and curates an astounding collection of topics and websites, which he constantly updates. • Edutopia.org, created by Star Wars creator George Lucas, focuses on integrated multimodal projects that include all the senses and are very hands-on. This rich “go to” site for multimodal projects is gaining traction as more technology is entering classrooms. • Commonsense.org has collected more than 800 language learning resources, from websites to apps, complete with community reviews, ratings, and even privacy ratings. You can sort by grade from K–12 and in free or paid options. There are excellent free lesson plans on cyberbullying, and they are the premier provider of the digital citizenship curriculum. • Colorincolorado.org, maintained by the American Federation of Teachers and National Education Association, is a comprehensive and impressive site for both teachers and parents of ELLs; it includes research on best practices, and it is also bilingual in Spanish. • Wonderopolis.org lets students ask questions for other classes to answer, with a “wonder of the day” article that kids complete using an immersive reader and accessing definitions of words by clicking them. • PBSlearningmedia.org has added animated language lessons in Spanish as well as English. The site is a treasure trove of web-based resources to explore, and any computer or device can now access them. • Peardeck, Edpuzzle and Nearpod are three important student engagement platforms that can be integrated with Google products, tools, and services for both asynchronous and synchronous classes. Students can perform tasks based on the slides by typing responses, choosing multiple-­choice responses or even drawing—­a ll of which are instantly viewable by the teacher.

The Autonomous Learner Autonomous learners have intrinsic motivation to use and apply their voracious curiosity to subjects that interest them. Sometimes called self-­d irected, independent, or lifelong learners, they go after their goals, looking for and exploiting what resources they can find, until they become quite expert in an area; or they might invent or innovate something. A similar term is autodidacts, who are self-­taught individuals who make a mark on the world despite their lack of formal education. The vast list of autodidacts on Wikipedia (“List of autodidacts,” 2023) suggests that many great accomplishments can be achieved through self-­teaching, and the internet is a wonderful



The Multimodal Classroom 305

playground for them. Self-­d irected learning is correlated with both academic achievement and higher achievement in language learning (Şakrak-Ekin & Balçıkanlı, 2019). Autonomous learners use the internet to learn to cook, garden, code, take apart cars, and learn English, the lingua franca of the internet. These English language learners are not doing so in the traditional way, with exercises, study, and a teacher. Rather, they are doing it by watching Netflix, listening to music videos, and doing interactive gaming. This is occurring in both EFL and English-­dominant settings. Because of this, many ELLs are acquiring English vocabulary, both BICS and CALP, outside the classroom, and you should encourage it when it manifests. Giving autonomous learners the opportunity to engage in project-­based learning may yield surprising and extensive growth for these intrinsically motivated students.

Video Gaming Video games attract autonomous learners in great numbers, and gaming has had a huge effect on young people’s lives. Videogaming is so powerful and pervasive that it now rivals any other ways that they learn. In the United States alone, some 215 million gamers, almost equal in gender at 52% male and 48% female, play routinely (Entertainment Software Association, 2022). John Paul Gee’s early book about the power of videogaming as a teaching and learning tool (Gee, 2003) foresaw that this appealing format could motivate even the most reluctant learner with sound educational practices, such as scaffolding and formative assessments. Players can advance through a story as they master its steps, practicing story grammar. In addition, playing these games requires a great deal of language, written, spoken, and interactive. What’s more, games have rich “lore” that builds detailed background knowledge about imaginary, ancient, and idealized worlds and the vocabulary that goes with them. Serious gamers are constantly learning and challenging themselves to learn new schemata that are sometimes so vast that they require thousands of hours of study. As autonomous learners, most gamers move on to a completely new game once a game is mastered. Discovering new worlds, new players, new background knowledge, and new challenges are among the rewards of gaming. Gamers are also multilingual. The developers of the role-­playing video game Baldur’s Gate worked vigorously to translate the nearly 1 million words of English into 11 additional languages. This, however, was not enough, as Turkish players valiantly transcribed the whole game into Turkish. Their translation was added to the game, and the company was inspired to add seven more languages after that (Wilde, 2012).

306

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

Minecraft, the top-­selling game of all time, allows users to adventure together in a customizable world built from blocks. Gamers construct their own houses, harvest resources and craft tools, and it’s even possible to create one’s own games within it. Minecraft provides a creative, intensive way to expose learners to some of the skills that make up the fields of engineering, architecture, computer programming, design—­a nd teamwork. In September 2022, Minecraft released its Education Edition, offering hundreds of lessons for teachers to engage in and play with their students. Schools can download and license starter kits in the core subjects of language arts, math, and science, in English, that can be played virtually at home, with a teacher, or together in the physical classroom. Portal 2 is another massively popular game, in which players navigate through landscapes to escape frightening situations. A study at Florida State University showed that Portal 2 improved cognition skills significantly more than software designed for brain training (Shute, Venture, & Ke, 2015). Although it is not language-­centered, players experience the English vocal artistry of voice actor Ellen McLain, who plays an AI computer system villain—­a role so convincing that she won “Best Performance by a Human Female” in the Spike Video Game Awards of 2011 (“Ellen McLain,” 2022). Players use problem solving, logic, and an increasing knowledge of spatial awareness to navigate through fantastical rooms to locations blocked by obstacles or empty space they have to cross. Physics concepts include velocity, angle, and height, and the thinking processes require patience, memory, and planning. Portal 2 is nonviolent and appropriate for children.

Immersion and Identity Gaming gives participants an immersion experience, bringing them into a state of flow, sometimes called being “in the zone.” Csikszentmihalyi (1990) describes flow theory as a state in which learners are so engrossed in what they are doing that they lose track of time. Flow theory applies to many fields, including art, sports, or being in the natural environment. Immersive experiences are also found in the theater, such as “whodunits” in which one of the audience members is actually an actor playing the criminal. The hit video game Among Us, which had tens of millions of ELLs shouting “sus!” as slang for suspicious throughout classrooms in 2020, replicated this immersive experience digitally (Curry, 2022). When ELLs experience immersion and flow through gaming, they effortlessly acquire new language in a structured immersive environment. Gamers also have a chance to try on identities. Video games allow young people to move through activities in all kinds of forms, from animals to different ethnicities, ages, time periods, civilizations, or species, all the way to robots, zombies, superheroes, or aliens. These playful simulations help



The Multimodal Classroom 307

develop differing points of view, which are so important in critical thinking as well as in reading literature. Their varied requirements also help build confidence. We can bring these same features into the classroom. Immersive experiences don’t have to be virtual. A physical classroom might have an “undersea” motif, with the whole class helping decorate the walls, or a “down on the farm” theme. Spooky spiderwebs can be hung for a class Halloween party, with bobbing for apples, costumes, and read-­a louds. Online, there might be a masquerade party with funny zoom hats, mustaches, avatars, or glasses. These creative initiatives build background knowledge and vocabulary while creating class community, all of which is so important for immigrant, refugee, and newcomer students who are finding their way. ELLs and others can also try on identities in the classroom, using skits, Readers’ Theatre, role playing, and poetry performance. A multimodal, multilingual classroom is the perfect place to try creative projects such as these. Best of all, these formats give students a chance to improve their expressive reading and speaking.

Gamification and the Classroom Games are nothing new, and some classrooms have enjoyed tabletop games for years. In fact, in the summer of 2022, the International Literacy Association offered a series to encourage teachers to use Dungeons and Dragons, a tabletop fantasy game, because it engages reluctant readers, sparks writing, and supports “emotional literacy” (International Literacy Association, 2022). They laud the storytelling features of this game and encourage teachers to form D&D clubs at schools. There are plenty of phonics games and songs, math facts and vocabulary learning games, and games like charades and Pictionary, which we’ve mentioned in previous chapters. There were also early educational computer games about American history and geography, the most renowned being The Oregon Trail and Where in the World Is Carmen San Diego? These games reflected both the limits and strengths of computer software at that time. However, gamification, a term and concept that emerged from videogaming, has introduced a host of new features, and students have come to enjoy and expect these features in their classes. Gamification, in which key components of game play are added to learning activities, includes rewards, progress tracking, rankings, titles, badges, and formative quizzes, along with bells and whistles to motivate, congratulate, or lean upon learners to continue their progress. Learners find they are “on a roll,” have a “daily streak,” or are “moving up” in rank, whether against themselves or unknown others. Whether or not you are using game-based sites such as Quizlet, Quizizz, Kahoot, or Blooket to check up on learning,

308

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

you are likely to be using gamification already—­a nd you can’t go wrong if you add a little more. You can even have students create their own Blooket or Kahoot questions for the rest of the class! Letting students know an interactive quiz is coming keeps enthusiasm up—and don’t forget to add a couple of questions about recent class events (“What was the name of our recent bearded dragon visitor?” or “What was yesterday’s lunch entree?”). With a little thought about the class makeup and knowledge of students’ English proficiency levels, teachers can figure out how to keep the affective filter low while ratcheting up the fun. At the same time, don’t turn the class into an arcade. Memorizing facts can be done quickly and doesn’t need deep thinking, but careful growth of a student’s multilingual identity takes time and care. Successful gamers, who are better at classroom gaming because of their extensive out-of-­school practice, can easily swamp students who have less experience. It’s important not to let a “gaming hierarchy” emerge, while still recognizing and appreciating the impressive skills of the gamers in the class. You may also find that the winning gamers are not necessarily the orally proficient students, and that they’re not necessarily boys! It’s great to acknowledge skills, however, as this may be the first time the gamer’s lightning-­fast reflexes have received any appreciation in a classroom! There are a growing number of after-­school gaming clubs. Now, students can enroll not only in chess clubs but in online gaming as well. A game-savvy adult adviser oversees the gaming while helping to build healthy relationships. At some high schools, gaming clubs are popular with recent immigrant students, who may already be proficient in them from previous settings. They require language production and provide a welcoming “niche” for students less interested in traditional sports or service activities. It’s not only through after-­school clubs that students play video games together: When I was leaving an elementary school after school on the way to my car, I heard one of my ELL students calling across the street to another, “See you on Minecraft!” I realized this was the way they played with friends after school—­not outside in a park or an alley, like in my childhood, but just as fun for them—and able to be played in any kind of weather.—­K ristin

The Right to Internet Connectivity No more than a century ago, electricity was considered a luxury, and it didn’t take long to become a necessity. Grand rural electrification projects occurred in the United States and beyond. Internet connectivity has followed the same trajectory: It has turned from an exhilarating add-on to a basic need. As classrooms add features that move them into the cloud, and more children



The Multimodal Classroom 309

learn offsite, we call for a new right: the right to access remote instruction. If students can’t access their lessons and resources, they are left behind. School districts address this need with varying levels of success: some have provided hot spots for families without Wi-Fi; some have hubs; some give out phones or laptops with the ability to access data; and others schedule instruction through a phone. Each instructional setting has its own needs, budget, and culture. However, just like having a well-­ventilated, welllit building in good repair, schools and the communities they are set in must provide high-­quality services for remote learning. It’s a right all students deserve. Similarly, educating students about digital tools should not be left to the students to figure out, whether they’re learning in a first language or a new one. Although teachers often feel their young digital natives know more than they do, it’s the teacher, not their peers, who has the responsibility to evaluate how their class time with technology is best utilized. Ensminger (2016) advises school administrators to look at the big picture in planning for technology resources, to include “the knowledge and efficacy needs of teachers” and to schedule adequate time for teachers to “plan, experiment, and develop fluency with technology” (Ensminger, 2016, p. 478). Such districts have coherent and affirming policies, whereas districts that leave teachers (literally) “to their own devices” create obstacles to learning and confusion that can be difficult to overcome.

“Just Because” Technology? No! With all of these stunning breakthroughs, it’s tempting to just turn our learners over to technology and let AI take care of the rest. But no! We’re still the arbiters of teaching and learning in our classrooms. Andy Hargreaves (2021), in an article called “How Schools Can Stem the Toxic Tide of Technology,” concludes with this ringing endorsement: “Retain the uses of technology that offer distinctive benefits, yet ruthlessly eradicate the uses that lead to toxic effects.” In concert with colleagues, our learners and their families, and our general understanding, we need to distinguish what is a benefit and what is a toxic effect as our educational settings evolve. Journalist Maria Ressa, a Nobel Peace laureate, warns, “Social media platforms . . . divide and radicalize . . . these platforms, because they want to keep your attention, they keep you scrolling” (“Nobel Peace laureate Maria Ressa,” 2022). Students need to know, talk about, and evaluate these platforms, and discussing and participating in interactive lessons to build digital citizenship should be part and parcel of every curriculum, for every learner, at every school, from now on. A longitudinal study of children in the early elementary grades by Hanno, Fritz, Jones, and Lesaux in 2022 found that family members reported

310

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

that children learning online had poorer behavioral health, more temper tantrums, and dysregulated behavior; those in blended learning had less negative outcomes, and in-­person learning had the least negative outcomes. Despite extra stressors to adults’ own lives and the constantly changing conditions of the pandemic during the reporting period, the authors were able to draw some conclusions. It was clear that children relied on and benefited from reliable routines and that students needed opportunities to share their feelings, even if briefly. Clear, “no-­surprises” policies are comforting, and ELLs need them most of all. Asking learners how they are doing every day is also important. Incidentally, if an ELL child is in the silent period, it will manifest in synchronous online instruction just as obviously as in onsite classroom instruction, and this common feature should be planned for and accommodated. Because watching and interacting with screens is so often a solitary and silent activity, you may need to think creatively to draw children into online conversation. A friendly yes/no question about a pet might be the icebreaker. Online teaching and digital tools should be used judiciously. Consider these questions:

• Can sorting index cards into piles of known words, words to work on, and unknown words really be improved with a digital format? And even if more words can be practiced faster digitally, is it possible students retain less if they lose the kinesthetic experience of sorting the cards? • Although we might be able to “curl up with a screen” at some point in the future, there are known benefits to curling up with a book! There’s a coziness and an intimacy that can’t be captured holding a plastic or metal rectangle. Book lovers often mention the smell of a book—its paper, ink, binding. What’s more, you can see how many pages you’ve read and how many are left to go, and it’s always motivating when you pass the halfway point (or sad if you don’t want the book to end!). If students think of reading as a chore they are forced to do at a machine, with assigned articles and a comprehension check at the end, will they ever become lifelong readers? • Although classroom community can occur in limited form through Zoom sessions, young people need to occupy a common space together. When ELL students are in a mixed classroom with L1 English speakers, it helps for them to sit together and compare notes with those who share their first language. Online classes don’t give students an opportunity to have those critical side conversations in which they check in, clarify, or comment on the day’s activities and express shared interests and experiences. ELL students from different L1s will also be more likely to overcome their reticence when they can be in the same room together with a teacher. Face-to-face classes are irreplaceable for building BICS language.



The Multimodal Classroom 311

Setting up a welcoming and nurturing classroom takes good planning and commitment so that high tech is also high touch. This is the challenge of our time and will continue to be so in the coming decades. Language is social, and humans are social animals. It’s no wonder social and emotional learning (SEL) has moved to the foreground as educators strive to repair the breaches caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and other disruptive occurrences.

Teaching with Empathy, Presence, and Efficacy The pandemic had the unsought, odd “benefit” of giving online teachers a deeper look into the home lives of their learners. Interacting on Zoom, teachers learned about the daily conditions of their learners—­beloved and disruptive pets; siblings and elders; whether the student had a quiet, well-lit spot to study; traffic patterns in the home; and family interactions. In turn, family members heard and saw teachers every day, including their facial expressions, clothing, sense of humor, voice tone, and even, literally, teachers’ pets! In some ways, this deepened the relationship between families and teachers. Teachers also showed great empathy and resourcefulness. One preschool teacher drove to the driveway of each student’s home at the end of the first lockdown year to “chalk” a congratulation message on the sidewalk and leave a small graduation gift. She added that it was challenging to find a place to chalk the message when so many students lived in multiunit apartment complexes. Another dedicated teacher we know delivered a bag with cake mix, complete with an egg, to the mail delivery area of each of her second-­grade ELL students so that they could make cakes for their mothers on Mother’s Day. Students sent her snapshots standing at their finished cakes and smiles a mile wide. Some teachers regretted that this close relationship wasn’t able to be continued when students returned to class, but forward-­thinking school districts have adopted a Zoom option for parent–­teacher conferences, one of the permanent reforms from the pandemic. The first principle of the 6 Principles, published by TESOL Press to highlight best practices in English language teaching, is “Know your learners” (TESOL Writing Team, 2018). This shines as brightly as ever. Knowing one’s learners—­a nd caring about them—is enshrined in training about social and emotional learning and was already a prominent feature in many schools (e.g., Wolcott, 2019). However, it has increased dramatically since students came back into the classroom. Not surprisingly, what students said they missed the most was human contact. And what about phones? The authors of Behind Their Screens (Weinstein & James, 2022), about high school students’ use of phones, mention that teens

312

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

have differing susceptibility to experiences with their phones. Some are more like “orchids,” who are very sensitive to changes in climate, weather, and conditions, whereas others are more like “dandelions,” hardier and better able to weather changes (Anderson, 2022). Orchids need more support, and we must figure out who they are—often the quiet kids. Also, cyberbullying, still a huge concern, hurts “orchids” the most, so the community of care around students must address this systematically. No child left behind! Early in the book, we pointed to the metastudies about teacher effectiveness, and the top factor comes out as teacher collective efficacy (Hattie, 2009; Tschannen-­Moran & Hoy, 2001). Teacher efficacy is a teacher’s belief that she or he can learn, teach, rise to meet the needs of the moment, change, and grow, both alone and with others. When we truly believe—­a nd we do believe—­ that we can learn from our colleagues, learn from our students, do right by our content, and do right by ourselves, we will win the game!

How Does This Look in the Classroom? Here are a few general suggestions for incorporation of multimodal activities, followed by six successful multimodal projects that empower multilingual students to create and use all the five domains. Although their tech requirements would have seemed insurmountable only a few years ago, the tech is so simple that “even a child can do it.”

Introductions Matter Creating a low affective filter from the very first day is important. This can be done with jokes, images, or short videos to create a sense of community. When students are meeting for the first time, whether on Zoom or in the room, and do not know each other, teachers can offer introductory questions that give plenty of choice and plenty of space. I ask five questions in the first class session and ask students to write their answers on a slip of paper, so they won’t be affected by their classmates’ answers. Then I ask each student to pick only one answer that they want to share with the class, and we go around the room and share. Lately I’ve been asking these questions: What hat are you? What appliance are you? What mode of transportation are you? What animal are you? What kind of tree are you? I started this when we went to remote, but I still do it now that we’re back in a classroom together. Because the questions are metaphorical and seem less inquisitive, and since students can choose the one they wish to share, their answers are quite deep and meaningful.—Kristin



The Multimodal Classroom 313

Break Up Screen Reading Because of all the links and options in interactive texts, it is very easy for readers to lose track of where they are in the text. Fourth-­grade teacher Janis Mara Michael says that she mixes literacy modes intentionally in the classroom to reduce fatigue and give her students more options. When her students read interactive text on a screen, she asks them to take notes with paper and pencil. When they read linear text in a print edition, she asks them to take notes on their tablets. She believes altering modes keeps the students fresher, relieves eyestrain from too much screen time, and preserves the use of handwriting.

Digital Topics for Content Lessons Even a newcomer ELL with limited English proficiency has opinions about devices and how they work in his or her family. They might create a Venn diagram or double bubble map comparing, say, a laptop, a tablet, and a phone, or TikTok versus Instagram. They can share their opinions with others in the class, in oral, graphic, or written form or through a meme. Students can create a review of an app or a product to practice persuasive writing. If they have trouble coming up with a product to review, you might provide a list of common products or apps. Students adept in a program, app, or game can present a “how to” lesson for using it, which will probably be welcomed by the class and teacher alike. In fact, they might even demonstrate a game for the class (if you know exactly what it is, have checked it out, and approve it), and that can spark language use. They can write a persuasive essay or make an oral presentation about their favorite video game. They can compare and contrast several programs and conclude which one is best, giving reasons. You can have a debate, with two teams preparing arguments, comparing IOS to Android phones. Students can review an app, rank several games, or create an online review of a favorite restaurant or small business. These engaging topics exercise the five language domains and can be used with students at several levels of proficiency.

Six Surefire Multimodal Projects 1.  Creating a podcast. Students can be asked to choose a topic, research it, and create a podcast about it. Creating the podcast requires thinking about a topic, researching it through reading and listening to different sources, writing a script for the podcast, recording the podcast after practicing the script, editing the podcast, and mastering the technology needed to successfully create the podcast. A podcast requires

314

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

doing audio recording, which can be done on students’ phones or on Audacity, a free audio recording and editing program, and the teacher should demonstrate making a short one in class before asking the students to do their own. We recommend having students create podcasts in pairs, as it allows students to utilize their conversational language skills as they create the project together. Additionally, the staple of a real podcast is finding fun thematic intro music, which students will also enjoy. Encourage this, as it will hook their fellow listeners! Sharing the podcast with class members develops communicative competence; thus, all five domains are utilized as students try out a new technology they may want to use in the future. 2.  Creating a multimodal biography. Students can feature a person of their choosing, living or historical, to feature in a multimodal biography project. It might consist of a short movie with sound, lyrics, and images, a book with original poetry, a narrated photo story, and more. An inspiring example to get learners thinking is the genre of poetry biographies, in which the author writes original poems in first person “channeling” the subject of the biography. The most stunning example is the book Viva la Vida, Long Live Life! about Frida Kahlo, by Carmen T. Bernier-­Grand (2012), who has created others about César Chávez and Diego Rivera. Another inspiring multimodal project comes to us from Google. Their exhilarating short biographies appear on Google Doodles and consist of short animations featuring artists and change makers from around the world. For example, the October 10, 2022, birthday tribute to famed timbalist Tito Puente shows us, in 1 minute, where he was born, how and when he started playing timbales, what he did as a young adult, how many gold records he has won, and what street has been named after him—all without a single word of text or photograph, while his music plays (Celebrating Tito Puente, 2022). Your multipart assignment can ask students to find three sources to research the person, make a storyboard, then create the project, tweak and edit until there is a final draft, share the finished product, and talk about their process with others in the class. 3.  Creating a lyric video. Lyric videos consist of music videos in which the lyrics of the song display on the screen, usually in an artistic way, as the song plays. Once little more than captioning, now lyric videos have a Grammy category of their own, and most well-known singers could not think of omitting this connection to their fans (Lems, 2021a). For ELLs, they are a boon because they combine the appeal of the musical track, the video images of the music video, and the full set of lyrics, often enhanced with typographic art—a truly multimodal way to experience



The Multimodal Classroom 315

language. Students of English all around the world are watching, listening to, and reading lyric videos as they learn English. The first listen might be audio only, accompanied by a simple cloze activity, followed by showing the full video with lyrics shown. The relationship of the images and video clips to the song’s words and the typographic choices for the lyrics can be discussed and admired. Because students can easily caption a song now, they can make their own lyric videos, either by using several formats in combination or in a format created by the teacher (copyright is an issue, by the way, so these should be created inside a private venue, not posted on YouTube, or they will not be able to be published). 4.  Creating other videos. YouTube, Vimeo, and other video sources have wonderful videos on every imaginable topic. Using the free webbased platform Lumen5 (www.lumen5.com), students can create short videos, including multimodal inputs. Lumen5 creates video clips based on the words that the user chooses, which is a great starting point for an ELL. TikTok videos, Flip, Canva, YouTube shorts, and Facebook reels are all video-­creating methods that may or may not be adaptable to your classroom, but they are not as multimodal as Lumen5, which has more of a cinematic flair. 5.  Creating a website. Students can build a website, either in pairs, in groups, or individually, to showcase content that fully embraces the presentation of multimodality. There are many free hosting services, such as Wix, which has kid-friendly templates that can to be modified with no programming experience. Although students and teachers won’t have a standard domain name, they will be able to publish a fully functional website with multiple pages, text, graphics, and even embedded videos. Eisenlauer (2020) used short clips from YouTube videos to teach idioms to EFL learners and then wrote a simple template for students to create their own website using YouTube clips to teach English idioms and phrases. The student creations can be seen at lingo.farm, but this can be done through Nearpod as well. Websites offer the chance for projects to be shared in a sort of round-robin activity—­even with parents! Students could choose among history topics, or a protagonist from a book read in their guided reading group, or about topics within music, or health, or current events; the subject matters are endless. We recommend that teachers set clear guidelines, such as a required number of pages, graphics, or video links, while also allowing plenty of room for students to get creative. 6.  Creating an infographic. Infographics display complex data or information in a single colorful image. The images, sometimes in the form of charts or graphs, but also in other shapes and forms, are used

316

Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners

to explain core concepts in engineering, science, and medicine. They can summarize a great deal of information at a glance, and they are often interactive or even animated. The visual summary of content in infographics spares the need for long explanations, and at the same time they are succinct and accessible. Like the other forms in the visual literacy chapter, visual depictions of content can serve as scaffolds for ELLs because there is less reading; however, students need to completely and thoroughly understand the concept they are trying to depict in the infographic, because if they don’t, it won’t be understandable. The best way to get students started is to explicitly teach three or four model infographics that you have found or created, such as a color-coded blood pressure chart, and thoroughly unpack it until students can talk or write about it. Then students can use the same form for a related topic and share it. When students have talked about them together and seen how they can interpret their meaning, then you can invite them to make their own, using a similar template to the examples you have shown. For example, you might show an infographic with the life cycle of a dune and then ask students to create an infographic of the life cycle of an atoll, a river, a volcano, a forest, or a frog. If this assignment can be combined with a field trip, it’s even better. Students can create their own questions to ask their classmates to understand and explore their infographics.

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY  1. If you had to choose three important ideas from this chapter, which would you choose? How can you apply these ideas to your larger knowledge of teaching English as a new language?  2. Have you ever taught yourself something entirely by using online resources? Do you know anyone else who has done this? What reflections do you have about the process?  3. Think about something connected to your academic life (as a learner or a teacher) that has dramatically changed because of technology, and reflect on the consequences of the change. What do you miss about the “old way”? What do you consider to be better about the “new way”? What else?  4. Have you tried to learn a new language through online means? Do you know anyone who has? With what you have learned in this book about lan‑ guage learning and acquisition, different kinds of motivation, and different instructional methods for learning new languages, how do you think online language learning rates?  5. Have you ever misunderstood an email or been misunderstood from an email you sent? What do you think accounted for the misunderstanding? What did you learn from it, if anything? Have you been misinterpreted on



The Multimodal Classroom 317 Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or in a text? How would you help your young ELLs learn from this?  6. Look at the descriptions of screen-­based reading described in this chapter. Does it correspond to your own sense of your screen-­based reading expe‑ rience? In what ways do you believe you read differently if you are doing screen-­based reading?  7. Thinking about the computer as a “counter,” what kinds of things do you count in your daily life? In your job? What instruments do you use to count things? In what ways has the ability—­and the necessity—­to count more things had an effect on your quality of life?  8. What activities that you perform on a regular basis now include gamifica‑ tion? How has the presence of gamification influenced your own motiva‑ tion level? Your comfort level? Have you had any experience gamifying your classroom? How did it go?  9. Using the 12 + 4 forms of English word formation in Chapter 7, classify the computer-­era words in Appendix 11.1. We have added “Metaphor” as a pos‑ sible category—­metaphors sketch a new meaning of an old image. Compare your answers with a classmate or friend if possible before looking at the answer key on p. 319. 10. Try to think of a multimodal/multimedia project that you have experienced, and how it impressed you. For example, have you seen a play that also had slides projected at the back of the stage? Did you go to a movie that also had live actors in front of the screen? Did you attend an art show that had moving pieces, prerecorded video by the artist, or interactive portions? Think about the pieces that went into your multimodal experience and how well you thought they worked together. Share this with adult colleagues and compare notes. 11. Think about multimodal resources that you already feel comfortable help‑ ing your students use and those that require further practice or training. Do not forget the “hands-on” resources available to you, such as clay, fabric, lighting, rhythm instruments, or artifacts. What wonderful things might you be able to create? 12. CHALLENGE QUESTION: Choose an online translator and set English as the source and another language you know well as the destination. First, choose 10 individual English vocabulary words and look at their transla‑ tions. Next, choose 5 English idioms and look at their translations. Then, enter a short paragraph from an English literary work, such as a novel at the grade level in which you teach or could teach, and look at the transla‑ tion. Finally, enter a paragraph from a STEM area such as biology or phys‑ ics. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the translator for these different kinds of words and phrases? What guidance would you give ELL students about using an online translator?

APPENDIX 11.1, PART I

Technology Terms Reflecting English Word Formation Classify the technology vocabulary below according to the 12 kinds of English word formation processes in Chapter 7. We have also added a 13th category, metaphors. We explain our choices in the answer key (see p. 319)—there is often more than one correct choice! Try doing the quiz before looking at the answer key. Which word formation processes seem to predominate? Which kinds of word formation are less common?

TECH VOCABULARY terabyte Wi-Fi AI ebook keyword refresh malware

message bitcoin upload unfriend avatar TikTok metafile

metaverse minimize crash firewall automate tech dropdown

cache GIF troll text login SIM virus

blog reboot browser newbie FYI Skype app

doc spam manga pixel mouse stream podcast

phishing PDF geek BRB hotspot cloud Google

WORD FORMATION PROCESSES NEOLOGISMS (coinage)

BORROWING (loan words)

CLIPPING

BLENDS (portmanteau words)

COMPOUNDS

ACRONYMS

PAIRED-WORD SOUNDPLAY

METAPHORS

ABBREVIATIONS

CONVERSION

SCALE CHANGE

BACKFORMATION

MULTIPLE PROCESSES

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

318

APPENDIX 11.1, PART II

Answer Key NEOLOGISMS (coinage)

BORROWING (loan words)

CLIPPING

BLENDS (portmanteau words)

Google phishing geek Skype

avatar (Hindi) cache (French) manga (Japanese)

app (application) doc (document) tech (technology)

spam (spiced + ham) blog (web + log) pixel (picture + element) ebook (electronic + book) podcast (iPod + broadcast)

COMPOUNDS

ACRONYMS

PAIRED-WORD SOUNDPLAY

METAPHORS

dropdown firewall unfriend keyword bitcoin

GIF* SIM*

hotspot TikTok Wi-Fi

mouse cloud stream crash troll virus

ABBREVIATIONS

CONVERSION

SCALE CHANGE

BACKFORMATION

BRB* PDF* AI* FYI*

message text reboot login upload

terabyte metafile newbie metaverse

automate (from automation) browser (from browse) refresh (from refreshment) minimize (from minimization)

MULTIPLE PROCESSES malware (mal means bad + ware—compound with new morpheme) metaverse (a blend and also a scale change) hotspot (a paired-word soundplay and also a compound) Wi-Fi (a paired-word soundplay and also a blend for wireless fidelity) firewall (a compound and also a metaphor) troll (a metaphor and also a conversion) minimize (a backformation and also a scale change) blog (a blend and also a conversion) podcast (a blend and also a conversion) *GIF = graphics interface format; SIM = subscriber identity module; BRB = be right back; PDF = portable document format; AI = artificial intelligence; FYI = for your information.

From Building Literacy with Multilingual Learners: Insights from Linguistics, Third Edition, by Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Copyright © 2024 Kristin Lems, Tenena M. Soro, and Gareth Charles. Permission to photocopy this material is granted to purchasers of this book for personal use or use with students (see copyright page for details). Purchasers can download enlarged versions of this material (see the box at the end of the table of contents).

319

Glossary

abbreviation: creating a new word by pronouncing each of the first letters of a group of words; one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., CEO for chief executive officer). accuracy: in oral reading, proportion of words read aloud correctly, a core measure of oral reading fluency. acronym: creating a word from the first letters of a series of words, pronounced as a new word; one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., NASA [National Aeronautics and Space Administration], radar [radio detection and ranging]). affect: social–­emotional variables that influence behavior, including language learning and acquisition. affective filter: one of five key areas in Krashen’s (1982) theory of second-­ language acquisition, focusing on the emotional aspects that influence language learning. Krashen calls for creating a low affective filter for better language acquisition. affix: morpheme attached to the root or base of a word to form new words or change grammatical categories; in English, they are prefixes and suffixes. African American English (AAE): a dialect widely used by African Americans and others in the United States, influential in pop culture, and codified in a comprehensive Oxford Dictionary. AAE has survived long-­standing stigmatization to emerge as a valued dialect in American life and culture. AI chatbot: a virtual agent that mimics human communication through the use of artificial intelligence and natural language processing to both interpret and respond to questions. 321

322 Glossary

allophones: spoken variations of a phoneme that speakers of a language do not recognize as having different meanings, such as the /b/ and /p/ sounds in Arabic or the /b/ and /v/ sounds in some dialects of Spanish. An example of an English allophone is the pronunciation of “pretty” with a flap sound /ṙ/ for American English and a /t/ for British English. alphabet: the set of letters or symbols that represent sounds of a language. alphabetic/letter name spelling: a stage of English spelling development in which the sound of the letter name is written, such as c for the word sea. alphabetic orthography: writing system using symbols to represent vowel and consonant sounds. ampersand: the symbol “&,” which is an example of a logogram and cannot be decoded. artificial intelligence (AI): the ability of computer systems to perform tasks that were previously unique to human intelligence. assimilation: a linguistic phenomenon in which speakers modify the sounds in a word or between words to anticipate the sounds before or after them. assimilative motivation: the incentive to learn a new language or anything else in order to join a group or community and construct a new personal identity as part of a “melting pot.” auding: active construction of meaning while listening to an oral text, similarly to the way a reader actively constructs meaning from a written text. Also called active listening. audio imaging: using sounds or music to aid comprehension of a word, event, or idea in a text. audiolingual method (ALM): language teaching method widely used in the 1960s and 1970s in which oral language patterns are drilled and practiced using repetition and written skills are deemphasized. auditory comprehension: See listening comprehension. automaticity theory of reading: LaBerge and Samuels’s (1974) theory claiming that learning to read proficiently requires moving from effortful decoding of words to unconscious and automatic decoding. autonomous learner: a learner who takes responsibility for her or his learning, using various modes and means to access the topic(s) she or he is interested in. avatar: an icon or image a user adopts as a visible identity for video games and other online contexts. backformation: removing the end of a word (usually a noun) and creating a new word, usually a verb; one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., emit from emission; teach from teacher; opt from option).

Glossary 323

background knowledge: See prior knowledge. balanced literacy: a principled approach which combines the explicit teaching of reading and writing skills within a framework of meaning-­based activities (e.g., shared reading, interactive read-aloud, writer’s workshop). basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS): Cummins’s (1981) term for conversational language, primarily oral, that young ELLs pick up in informal and social situations, also known as playground language or survival language. See also cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP). blending: the act of combining the phonemes of a word into a word; breaking the phonemes of a word into their individual phonemes is called phoneme segmentation (also called segmenting). These are key skills for reading and writing in English. See also phoneme segmentation. blending (portmanteau words): a linguistics term used to describe words formed by combining two or more morphemes into a new word; one of the word formation processes of English (e.g., spam, brunch). No relationship to the other entry for blending. borrowing: adopting a word from another language into a new one; one of the word formation processes of English (e.g., tortilla, pajamas). Also called loan words. bottom-­up skills: word-level skills required for decoding and word recognition, used in conjunction with top-down skills. bound morpheme: morpheme that must attach to a root (base) to make a word. Bound morphemes are composed of prefixes, suffixes, and bound roots. bound root: a root that must attach to another root or affix in order to create a single morpheme (unit of meaning). callouts: visual pointers, such as arrows or text boxes, which are superimposed on an image to call attention to a certain part of it. capitonyms: two words that have different meanings based on whether or not they begin with a capital letter (e.g. polish, Polish). captioning: displays the audio portion of a video or a television program as text on the TV screen. This helps with auding. caretaker speech: See motherese. chunking: separating text into meaningful phrase or clause units. Also called parsing. clipping: shortening a word, one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., gym from gymnasium; pedi from pedicure; phone for telephone). closed class: a term indicating that new morphemes cannot be added to a lexicon; a function word is an example of a closed class.

324 Glossary

cloze: activity in which students supply missing words from a text, either oral or written. Also called fill-in-the-blank or gap-fill activities. code switching: freely drawing upon two languages, a characteristic that is nearly universal in multilingual communities. See also translanguaging. cognate: a word with a similar form and meaning in different languages and coming from the same root. Languages from the same language family share more cognates (e.g., reservation in both French and English). cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP): Cummins’s (1991) term for academic language proficiency, oral and written, that is needed in school, professions, and literate contexts. See also basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS). cognitive processing strategies: inferencing, predicting, problem solving, constructing meaning; part of the processing strategies of the hypothetical model of the reading process. coinage (neologisms): one of the processes for forming new words in English; “making up” new words from scratch (e.g., Tylenol, Kleenex). collocation: a group of words occurring together in a fixed order (e.g., listemes, phrasal verbs, and idioms), usually acquired or learned as a memorized unit or chunk. common underlying proficiency (CUP): Cummins’s concept that common features of proficiency among languages enables a learner to apply his or her L1 literacy to the learning of a new language. communicative approach (CA): See communicative language teaching (CLT). communicative competence: the ability to know when, where, and how to use language in a variety of contexts and situations, influenced by all four language domains (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and in turn influencing them. communicative language teaching (CLT): a language teaching approach in which all four domains are practiced with a goal of social interaction and communicative competence. compensatory model of second-­language reading: Bernhardt’s (2011) model in which L2 reading proficiency is accounted for by L2 proficiency (30%), L1 literacy (20%), and many unexplained variables (50%). These factors can affect each other in bidirectional ways. compounding: creating a new word from two or more free morphemes (existing words); one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., toothbrush, butterfly, snapdragon). comprehensible input: see input hypothesis.

Glossary 325

comprehensible output: see output hypothesis. concept of word: the listening ability to tell where words begin and end within the flowing stream of speech. consonantal alphabet: a writing system that relies primarily on consonants; some of the vowel sounds are left for the readers to fill in (e.g., Arabic). content area: academic subject area such as math, science, social studies, or health. content-­based instruction (CBI): a widely used language teaching methodology in which students learn English while at the same time learning academic content. content frame (semantic feature analysis grid): graphic organizer with several items classified according to a number of separate characteristics in a matrix format. content words: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and some prepositions. In English, the last content word of a phrase or clause receives the strong stress. Most vocabulary study focuses on content words. See also lexical morpheme, cognitive academic language proficiency, function words. context-­reduced language: spoken or written language that is lacking cues that can compensate for breakdowns in comprehension. In spoken language, this might include phone calls; in written language, this might include images. Context-­reduced language is more difficult for ELLs. contrastive analysis (CA): predicting or understanding errors produced by learners of a new language based on the structure of their first language. CA’s “strong form” is less accepted now, but its “weak form” is still applied. contrastive stress: in spoken language, altering normal stress patterns to emphasize a particular part of a phrase or clause for a semantic purpose. See also stress patterns, stress-­t imed language. contronyms: words that can mean their opposite, depending on context (e.g., cleave, to bind together or tear apart). conversion (category shift): creating a new word by changing its part of speech; one of the processes for forming new words in English (e.g., “Are we out of butter?” “Yes, I used it to butter the toast.”). corpus (plural corpora): very large database of words, comprising the foundation for corpus linguistics. Corpora may be composed of written or oral language. corpus linguistics: the gathering and study of huge databases of language. cross-­l inguistic homograph: a word that shares the same letters in two languages but not the same meaning (e.g., pie in English and Spanish).

326 Glossary

cross-­l inguistic homophone: a word that shares the same sounds and the same pronunciation in two languages but not the same meaning (e.g., drei, the number 3 in German, but dry, not wet, in English). cross-­l inguistic inf luence: the action, conscious or unconscious, of applying the features of a first language to the learning of a new language. This can be positive, negative, or neutral. cultural capital: Bourdieu’s (1991) concept of social assets, including literacy, that promote social mobility, including but not limited to economic means. decodable word: word with easy-to-match phonemes and graphemes. decoding: identifying words, as part of “bottom-­up” reading skills. One of the main kinds of word recognition, although many English words are not decodable. deep orthography: see opaque orthography. deficit view: the idea that students enter schools with various deficits that have to be “corrected,” rather than capabilities and resources to be developed. When schools adopt a deficit view toward students, often due to bias, there are negative effects on student self-image and success. derivational morpheme: prefix(es) or suffix(es) that combine with a root/base to create words, change word meanings, or change grammatical categories. diacritics: markings attached to or around an alphabetic symbol to clarify pronunciation features such as tone, syllable stress, vowel quality, or nasalization. Diacritic marks can also alter meaning in case-based languages. dialect: systematic, rule-­governed variations in pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, phrases, or language usage spoken by members of a language community. Nonstandard dialects, which are often stigmatized, are based on combinations of factors such as geographic region, racial identity, religion, age, economic class, politics, sex, gender, social class, and other factors. dictado: Spanish-­language activity to build listening comprehension, grammar, and spelling in bilingual or dual-­language classrooms. See dictation. dictation: intensive listening activity in which students write down words or phrases spoken or read by a teacher or a recording; can be used for practicing listening comprehension, phonological awareness, concept of word, or meanings. See dictado. dictocomp: writing exercise in which students summarize an oral text in writing. diglossia: two very different varieties of a language existing within the same language community and used exclusively for different domains.

Glossary 327

digraph: sound represented by two letters, such as the sound /f/ represented by ph. discourse markers: conversational fillers, sounds, and paralinguistic cues that help listeners keep track of the speaker’s direction at a given moment. Also applies to written text; discourse markers include numbering, punctuation, signal words, text features, and so forth. double bubble map: a graphic organizer which is a variation on the Venn diagram, showing similarities and differences between two or more items. drop everything and read (DEAR): a sustained silent reading/extensive reading technique. Ebonics: see African American English. ellipsis: missing words that proficient listeners or readers are able to fill in from context. emergent bilingual (EB): see English language learner. emoji: universal semiotic symbols that can be used to express emotions, attitudes, or situations; can be considered part of a logographic writing system. encoding: see recoding. English as a foreign language (EFL): the study of English as an additional language in countries or places where English is not the primary language of communication or schooling. English as a lingua franca (ELF): the use of English as a common language in areas in which many languages are spoken. English as a second language (ESL): the study of English as an additional language in countries or places where English is the primary language of communication or schooling. English language learner (ELL): a learner of any age whose first language is other than English. Sometimes called English learner (EL). Emergent bilinguals (EBs) may be learning English as a new language, but the new language is not necessarily English. English learner: see English language learner. eponyms: words derived a person’s name, used to characterize a behavior the person was known for (e.g., Machiavellian). etymology: the study of the origin of words and how they evolve. expository writing: writing form based on presenting or synthesizing information about a nonfiction topic. This is the most difficult form of writing for ELLs (and native speakers!)

328 Glossary

expressive writing: the early stages of writing, usually narrative and descriptive, based on observations, feelings, and experiences. For beginning writers, it may involve drawing. extensive listening activity: practice getting the main ideas of spoken word (oral texts) in order to develop strategic listening skills. See also gist. extensive reading: reading large amounts of text on self-­selected topics for general comprehension. false cognates: words in two languages that look or sound similar but have different meanings. f low theory: a state in which learners are so engrossed in what they are doing that they lose track of time, even hunger or fatigue, and intrinsic motivation takes over. f luency: the ability to recognize written words while simultaneously constructing meaning from connected text; also called reading fluency. focus on form (FoF): method in which learners create language and pay indepth attention to existing grammatical forms and meanings. free morpheme: a morpheme that can stand by itself as a word; composed of lexical morphemes and functional morphemes. free voluntary reading (FVR): an extensive reading technique in which readers choose their own reading materials. frontloading: preteaching vocabulary or background knowledge prior to reading a text or beginning a unit of study. fully decodable words: words that can be “sounded out” in their entirety, such as get. See also partially decodable words, sight words. function words: articles, conjunctions, auxiliary verbs, pronouns, and some prepositions; also called functional morphemes. These words are often overlooked in vocabulary study. See also functional morphemes, content words. functional approach: see systemic functional linguistics (SFL). functional morphemes: class of free morphemes made up of articles, conjunctions, auxiliary verbs, pronouns, and some prepositions; also referred to as function words. gamification: an inclusion of key components of game play in learning activities, including rewards, progress tracking, and formative quizzes for learner motivation. generative: in linguistics, ability to create an infinite number of new words from a fixed set of letters or words, a remarkable feature of human language.

Glossary 329

genre: a category of artistic work, including writing, music, and film, that has certain characteristics in form and content that are in common with others; in reading, students benefit by exploring different genres (e.g., mystery, biography, historical fiction). GIF (graphic interface format): invented in 1987, a still photo attached to emails or internet posts to feature an iconic feeling or thought. gist: the main ideas of a spoken or written text; finding the gist is a strategic skill acquired over time through extensive listening and/or extensive reading. grammar: the deep structure of a language, which includes its phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics and is unique to each language. grammar translation method: a historical language teaching approach focusing on the reading and writing domain, with little or no attempt to build oral skills or communicative competence. grammatical category: classes of words having certain features in common, such as verbs or nouns, sometimes called “parts of speech.” grapheme: a written symbol that represents spoken language; graphemic is its adjective form. graphic organizer: a visual system for organizing and remembering information in written texts. grit: see resilience. homograph: words with the same spelling but different sounds and meanings (e.g., bass for bass fishing or bass guitar). homonym: term used to describe two words that look or sound alike; the three kinds of homonyms are homophones, homographs, and polysemous words. homophone: words sharing the same pronunciation but different meanings and spellings (e.g., bear/bare; to/too/two). hyponym: a word whose definition is included in a larger category, such as dashiki for clothing. hypothetical model of the reading process: reading model focusing on activating an interaction between processing strategies and knowledge bases in order to process the meaning of a text (Birch, 2015). idiom: expression that cannot be understood from the meaning of the individual words; memorized as a unit (e.g., straight from the horse’s mouth, raining cats and dogs); idioms are one kind of collocation. immersive environment: simulations that give the participant the feeling of being in a completely different world.

330 Glossary

independent reading level: stage at which a reader is able to read a specific text with 95–100% accuracy. inferencing: ability to read between the lines or make connections within a text, whether oral or written; a strategy in one of the QAR methods called “think and search.” inf lectional morpheme: grammar markers that show the categories of tense, number (singular/plural), possession, or comparison of a word. They are bound morphemes and are always the last suffix of a word. information gap activities: effective technique to stimulate speaking practice, usually done in pairs. Each member of a pair has some information the other lacks. input hypothesis: one of five key areas of Krashen’s (1982) theory of second-­ language acquisition. Large amounts of comprehensible input that are just above the learner’s current level facilitate the acquisition of new language. instructional conversation: planned, directed conversation on an academic topic between a teacher and a small group of students. instrumental motivation: the incentive to learn a new language or anything else for a specific purpose (e.g., school, work, relationships). integrative motivation: the incentive to learn a new language or anything else in order to integrate into a community while keeping one’s identity, as in a “salad bowl.” intensive listening activity: listening practice focusing on specific elements of an oral text. interactive process: a description of reading as a process combining bottom-­up and top-down skills and strategies, along with active construction of meaning by a reader. interactive read-aloud (IR): a core early literacy technique using picture books, done over several days. Many skills can be practiced through teacher-­led prereading, during-­reading, and postreading activities. interdependence hypothesis: Cummins’s (1979, 1981) widely accepted hypothesis that knowledge of one language assists the learning of another language. interference: features of the first language that impede second-­language acquisition. intonation patterns: the vocal changes of pitch and duration occurring in the normal course of speaking. These vary among different dialects of a language and among different speakers. intrinsic motivation: the incentive to engage in activities for no apparent reward except the activity itself or the feelings which result from the activity.

Glossary 331

invented spelling: a stage of learning in writing and spelling development in which learners start to put letters together to make words based on partial knowledge of the alphabet. Also known as inventive spelling. key: also called the legend, gives the list of symbols and icons that are used on a map. keyword method: a word-­learning technique based on forming mental images and connecting them to new words, often through the word’s sound. language acquisition: innate, universal, and automatic human endowment; all normally developing children acquire a first/native/home language. language-­based theory of learning: Halliday’s (1993) theory that all learning is a linguistic process with three interconnected areas: learning language, learning about language, and learning through language. language control: WIDA writing standard regarding amount of grammatical accuracy available to produce comprehensible written text. language distance: the amount of similarity between two languages with regard to their phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and cognates. Also called linguistic proximity. language experience approach (LEA): Stauffer’s (1970) early literacy approach using a student’s dictated stories as the basis for reading a text. language knowledge: sounds, letters, words, phrases, and sentences, the language-­specific part of the knowledge base of Birch’s (2015) hypothetical model of the reading process. language learning: purposeful, effortful, and conscious attainment of a language, including academic language, usually through school, including literacy. language processing strategies: letter recognition, word identification, accessing word meaning, and chunking into phrases, part of the processing strategies of the hypothetical model of the reading process; they are language-­ specific. language-­specific: a linguistic feature that is particular to a given language. learning logs: journals kept by students to keep track of their metacognitive awareness. lemma: a single form of a word, a “dictionary entry” of a word. lexeme: the set of variations of a lemma that come from adding different derivational and inflectional morphemes to a root or stem. Sometimes called word families.

332 Glossary

lexical morpheme: class of free morphemes making up the majority of words in a language. See also content words. lexicon: the set of all of the words in a language. lingua franca: a language used by speakers of diverse languages to communicate. See also English as a lingua franca (ELF). linguistic capital: social mobility based on a person’s access to cultural resources and his or her ability to make use of those resources. linguistic complexity: complex, organized, and coherent writing, with varied sentences and paragraphs. linguistic proximity: See language distance. listeme: a memorized string of words which does not necessarily follow a pattern (e.g., up and down, after all is said and done); a listeme is one kind of collocation. listening comprehension: the ability to understand spoken language (oral text). Key concept in the simple view of reading (SVR), where it is also called language comprehension. See also oral text, simple view of reading. listening vocabulary: the storehouse of words known orally in a language; a larger listening vocabulary facilitates learning to read. Native speakers naturally acquire a larger listening vocabulary than learners of a new language before entering school. literacy: historically, the designated skills of reading and writing and all of their associated activities, but more recently may include oral skills and metalinguistic skills as well. logograms: symbols or signs that represent a whole word, concept, operation, emotion, or idea. logographic writing system: a writing system using characters or logograms that represent morphemes but with limited phonological information (e.g., Mandarin). memes: visual images with possible audio or video elements that represent situations, feelings, and opinions and are spread through social media. metacognition: conscious awareness of one’s own thinking and learning processes, including planning, monitoring, and evaluating one’s comprehension. Also called metacognitive awareness. metalinguistic awareness: ability to think about, reflect on, and manipulate the forms and functions of language apart from their meaning. metaphor: words extended from a literal, material meaning to a more abstract association. Metaphors are important in understanding many content areas, not only poetry and literature.

Glossary 333

miscues: term used in the reading field to describe errors in oral reading that may or may not be based on misunderstandings. modal auxiliary verbs: verbs that precede main verbs and are used to indicate likelihood, ability, permission, and obligation (e.g., can, may, should). They are functional morphemes and are also called modal auxiliaries. morpheme: the smallest linguistic unit of meaning. morphology: one of the four language universals. The study of the units of meaning of a language and the ways in which they can combine to make words. morphophonemic: description of a language which contains words with phonemic, morphological, and etymological information, such as English. motherese: simplified speech, exaggerated intonation, and slow, deliberate pacing used with young children or beginning language learners to aid comprehension. Also called caretaker speech. motivation: See assimilative motivation, instrumental motivation, integrative motivation, and intrinsic motivation. multilingualism: the ability to share meanings with others in more than one language. multiliteracy: the ability to read and write in more than one language. multimodality: the use of two or more means of communication at the same time. multiple processes: combination of word formation processes (e.g., dashcam; epipen). natural language processing (NLP): this allows programmers and linguists to transform written language into spoken form and spoken language into written form. non-­effect: the lack of influence, or irrelevance, of first-­language features on second-­language acquisition and, in particular, literacy. numeracy: the ability to understand and to use numerical symbols and to perform operations with them, such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. numeric spelling: the use of numbers with alphabet letters to spell a word (e.g. d8 for date). See also alphabetic/letter name spelling. onset: the beginning sound(s) of an English syllable (e.g., /k/, /b/ and /fl/ are the onsets for the words cat, bat, and flat, with the rime -at.) See also rime. opacity: degree of decodability of a writing system, based on many historical factors.

334 Glossary

opaque: a writing system whose words are unable to be easily decoded because the sounds and graphemes do not match consistently, or a word that cannot be decoded easily. opaque orthography: writing systems whose sounds and symbols are not closely matched, so that learning to read in them requires strategies other than decoding. open class: content words, such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs that can be added to a lexicon. oracy: the combined skills of listening comprehension and oral proficiency (speaking); used as a parallel to literacy. oral proficiency: measure of one’s speaking skill, part of oracy. See also oracy. oral reading f luency (ORF): reading text aloud, often measured by words correct per minute, or rate, accuracy, and expression; shown to correlate closely with silent reading comprehension in native speakers of English. oral text: words that are being spoken (as opposed to written text, words that are written). See listening comprehension, orthographic depth hypothesis: idea that shallow orthographies (e.g., Italian or Spanish) are easier to learn to decode and read, whereas deep orthographies (e.g., English) take longer to read and are harder to decode. orthographic distance: similarities and differences between two or more writing systems, a subcategory of language distance. orthographic transparency or depth: the degree of decodability of a writing system. See opacity. orthography: the writing system of a language. output hypothesis: Swain’s 2005 hypothesis that opportunities to interact with spoken and written language, in addition to language input, are essential for second-­language acquisition. paired-­word sound play: two combined sounds in which the second word sounds like the first except for a change of vowel or consonant; change of a consonant is a rhyme; a process for forming new words in English (e.g., hip-hop, wishy-washy, fuzzy wuzzy). See also rhyme. paralinguistic features or cues: non-word-based behaviors, such as facial expressions, gestures, or body language, which convey meanings. These are language-­specific and culture-­specific. partially decodable words: words that can be decoded with knowledge of onsets and rimes, such as snail. See also fully decodable words, sight words. performance definitions for ELLs: descriptors of language behaviors based on

Glossary 335

agreed-­upon language proficiency standards. ELL performance definitions form part of the WIDA standards. phoneme: smallest unit of sound that carries meaning (e.g., back and sack differ by one phoneme; a different phoneme changes their meaning). Each language has a different set of phonemes. Phonemic is its adjective form. phoneme segmentation: the act of breaking a word into its individual phonemes (also called segmenting). Combining the phonemes into a word is called ­blending. These are key skills for reading and writing in English. See also blending. phonetic: about the system of sounds in a language. phonics: the study of the letter–­sound and sound–­letter relationships and spelling patterns of a language; opaque alphabetic orthographies require phonics practice. phonological awareness: the ability to recognize sounds, an important foundational skill for reading success in any language. phonological decoding: accurately pronouncing written words, one of the key skills in learning to read in English. phonological loop: process of moving visual or auditory data from short-term to long-term memory through repetition, or retrieving it from long-term memory through phonological recognition. phonology: one of the four language universals. The study of the sounds and sound patterns of a language and the rules governing how they combine; the distinct auditory identity of a language. phrasal verb: the combination of a verb and one or more prepositions or occasionally a verb and an adverb (e.g., get up, sit down); these can be considered collocations. picture walk: teacher technique of previewing an interactive read-aloud by looking at and discussing each of the pictures with children. pinyin: use of the Roman alphabet to represent Chinese characters based on their pronunciation; a learning alphabet which is pulled away when students are ready. Pin Yin literally means “spell sound.” polysemous words: words with the same spelling and pronunciation but multiple meanings (e.g., bank: for money, land at the side of a stream, to tilt an airplane wing in order to turn). positive cross-­l inguistic inf luence (PCI): the facilitating effects of the first language on second-­language acquisition. prefix: affix(es) placed at the beginning of a word or root/base.

336 Glossary

preteaching: for reading and vocabulary study, introducing vocabulary before students read a text, using many possible methods. prewriting: one of phases of writing workshop, including brainstorming, scribbling, or representing thoughts on a spider map. prior knowledge: general knowledge we acquire by living in the world; not language-­specific. Activating prior knowledge helps unlock student learning. probabilistic reasoning: a cognitive skill people develop to recognize patterns; it improves as their knowledge increases. In language learning, probabilistic reasoning helps learners make increasingly accurate predictions in all five language domains. process writing: model focusing on the process of writing as much as the end product; stages include prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. processing efficiency: term used by Koda (2005) to describe the ease experienced when one is proficient at something, such as fluent reading. prompt: an oral or written cue to respond to in either speaking or writing. prosody: vocal patterns and inflections used in speaking or reading aloud; can be an indicator of reading comprehension. Prosody is language-­specific. publishing: sharing writing with an audience; a stage in process writing. punctuation: written conventions representing oral speech in written form (e.g., commas, periods, exclamation marks). Important clues for reading comprehension. rate: speed at which words are read aloud or silently; key measure of oral reading fluency. Below a certain rate, it is impossible to comprehend connected text. reading comprehension: the ability to construct meaning from a written text. reading comprehension strategy: a conscious or unconscious process for constructing understanding of a written text. There are many reading comprehension strategies, at both the micro and macro levels of text. reading logs: journals kept by students during or after reading to apply and report on reading comprehension strategies. reading strategies: deliberate actions that readers take to establish and enhance their comprehension. realia: using real-world objects or artifacts, such as tools, food items, seeds, flowers, menus, and so forth, to build background knowledge. reasoning by analogy: the development of children’s ability to predict the meaning of unknown items by recognizing their underlying similarity to known items and making a mental leap.

Glossary 337

recasts: creating a grammatically comprehensible form by rephrasing or rewriting an incomprehensible form. See also uptake. recoding: representing spoken words in written form, sometimes called encoding. redundancy: the built-in overlap and repetition in oral and written texts that make it possible to discern meaning even if the message is incomplete; more redundancies are available to aid comprehension of oral text than in written text. resilience: a person’s ability to persevere to overcome obstacles or recover from setbacks. Also called grit. responsive writing: descriptions, directions, book or movie reviews, interviews, newsletter articles, reports, and summaries made in response to something seen, heard, or read. revising and editing: refining ideas and preparing text for publishing; a critical stage in the process writing model. rhyme: a kind of paired-­word sound play in which two words have the same phonemes except for the first sound (e.g. wild child); see also paired-­word sound play. rime: the vowel and consonant pattern in an English syllable preceded by an onset (e.g., -ang is the rime for sang, bang). See also onset. root: morpheme containing the primary meaning of a word, which cannot be cut into smaller parts; also called the base. Affixes attach to roots or bases. scale: the part of a map that tells the relationship, or ratio, of items in distance. scale change: adding a prefix or suffix to show quantity, size, or familiarity, one of the processes of forming new words in English (e.g., macroeconomics, minimart, hoodie, Bobbie). schema (pl. schemata): the array of what is learned about something, combining knowledge with the processes for applying it. second-­language acquisition (SLA): the academic field related to acquiring, learning, or teaching a new language (e.g., SLA theory, SLA research, SLA methods). selective attention: strategically knowing which items to focus on and which items to overlook. semantic feature analysis grid: see content frame. semantic map: a graphic organizer used to connect a concept, theme, or word with many associations; often used as a prewriting activity or for activating prior knowledge; has a “spider web” appearance. semantic processing: process of deriving word meanings from logographic orthographies, as opposed to phonological processing.

338 Glossary

semantics: one of the four language universals. The combination of meanings contributed by the sounds, word meanings, word patterns, and context of oral and written text. Semantic is the adjective form of semantics. semiotic domains: a set of practices that communicates meanings in one or more modalities. semiotic system: making meaning from signs and symbols. sentence frames: partially completed sentences that can be used to complete the sentence with a few words. sentence stress: rules that govern how to assign stress to phrases and sentences. Native speakers learn these unconsciously, but ELLs must often learn them explicitly. See also syllable stress, stress patterns, stress-­t imed language. shallow orthography: a writing system whose symbols or graphemes closely match the phonemes of the language (e.g., Spanish, Turkish). See also transparent orthography, opacity. sheltered instruction: enhanced and elaborated lessons of academic content adapted to ELLs’ language proficiency levels; used in content-­based instructional models, which are not necessarily exclusively in the target language. sheltered instruction observation protocol (SIOP): widely used and research-­ supported eight-part model of sheltered instruction that strives to build learners’ language skills while they are learning grade-level content. short-­circuit hypothesis: Clarke’s (1980) hypothesis that high levels of second-­ language proficiency are necessary for first-­language reading skills to facilitate second-­language reading. See also threshold theory. sight word: a word that is not easily decodable and must be memorized through sight recognition, such as certain. See also partially decodable words, fully decodable words. signal words, transitions, and connectors: words in a text conveying the direction the text is going (e.g. because, additionally, thus, therefore, so, although, but); important as reading comprehension strategies. silent period: an early stage of language acquisition, sometimes called the preproduction period, in which the learners focus on listening to and understanding language. Although no language production may occur, it is an active period of language learning and acquisition and may occur at any age. simple view of reading (SVR): Gough and Tunmer’s (1986) theory that reading comprehension is the product of decoding times listening comprehension. Listening comprehension (also called language comprehension) is what remains when decoding has been accounted for. In second-language acquisition research, SVR confirms the importance of listening comprehension.

Glossary 339

social constructions: understandings based on social interactions that provide frameworks for learning. sociocultural theory: study of the social nature of language and its uses in order to function and live in the world. See also systemic functional linguistics, translanguaging. sound–­symbol correspondence: how closely the sounds and symbols match within a language, or across two languages. See also orthographic transparency or depth. story grammar: pattern of predictable events that a reader or listener can expect over the course of a story, helping them develop probabilistic reasoning. Story grammar varies among cultures. Standard steps are exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution. stress patterns: the patterns of strong and weak syllables, words and phrases in a language and part of knowing a language. Stressed syllables are louder, longer, and more effortful to pronounce than unstressed syllables. See also stress-­t imed language, syllable stress, sentence stress. stress-­t imed language: a language, such as English, in which every multisyllable word has strong and weak stresses. There are stress patterns within phrases as well. See also stress patterns, syllable stress, sentence stress. suffix: affix(es) placed at the end of a word or root. There are two kinds of suffixes, derivational and inflectional; inflectional suffixes come only at the end of a word. sustained silent reading (SSR): students and teacher reading silently on a regular basis; an extensive reading technique. syllabary: the set of syllables that makes up a writing system, equivalent to an alphabet for an alphabetic writing system (e.g., Korean, Gujarati). syllabic writing system: a writing system in which each symbol represents a consonant–­vowel combination (e.g., Korean, Japanese Hiragana, and Hawaiian). syllable: a consonant–­vowel pattern. All syllables have a vowel. All English words contain one or more syllables. syllable stress: the set of rules governing which syllables in multisyllable words receive strong and weak stress. See also stress-­t imed languages, stress patterns. syndrome of success: factors which, alone and in combination, enable success in developing proficiency and literacy in additional languages. syntax: one of the four language universals. It is the set of rules governing the word order of phrases, clauses, and sentences in a word-order-based language, or through endings in a case-based language.

340 Glossary

systemic functional linguistics (SFL): an outgrowth of Halliday’s (1993) language-­based theory of learning. SFL explains language use as a set of choices that govern a learner’s linguistic repertoire and deserve acceptance; also called the functional approach. T-chart: graphic organizer for organizing basic information with two sets of information alongside each other. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL): worldwide professional organization of ESL experts and educators; holds annual international convention and has state and national affiliates, has publications, training. text structure: the organization of texts according to their purpose and genre; examining text structures before reading can be an important comprehension strategy. think-aloud: metacognitive technique in which readers orally model their own reading comprehension process. When teachers do this, it can be a model for students; think-­a louds can also be used as formative assessments (also called verbal report). threshold theory: Alderson’s theory (1984, 2000) that L2 proficiency, more than L1 literacy, determines reading and writing proficiency in a new language. top-down skills: analytical and cognitive skills needed for reading comprehension, used in conjunction with bottom- ­up skills. total physical response (TPR): Asher’s 1988 widely used listening comprehension strategy in which students learn and demonstrate comprehension of language and content through movement activities. This key technique for beginning and early learners can also be used in advanced content areas. transfer: catchall term to describe influence resulting from similarities and differences between a target language and a previously acquired language. translanguaging: development and use of a speaker’s full linguistic repertoire beyond strictly separated “named languages” and its application to the classroom. transparent orthography: a writing system with a close match between its phonemes and its graphemes (e.g., Spanish, Dutch). uptake: accepting and incorporating recasts provided in which students correct their own grammatical errors. See also recasts. Venn diagram: graphic organizer with overlapping ovals for representing similarities and differences; can be used to guide reading or writing. See also double bubble map.

Glossary 341

visual complexity: the amount of complexity of a writing system, aside from whether it is opaque or transparent. visual display: the way a writing system is arrayed, such as handwriting, different fonts, and typographic art. visual language theory (VLT): Cohn’s (2018) narrative structure of comics, with four constituents: establishers, which set up a scene or interaction; initials, which start tension in the narrative; peaks, which denote a climax in the action; and releases, which visualize the aftermath of the occurrence. visual literacy: the ability to construct and create meaning through visual images. visualization: forming a visual image in the mind in order to remember or evoke a word, event, or idea. vocabulary usage: the use of a repertoire of words for reading and composing. wait time: amount of time a teacher pauses after asking students a question or after listening to student responses. Longer wait time helps ELLs. word calling: decoding words of a text while reading aloud with little or no comprehension of their meaning. word recognition: the process of recognizing and accessing individual words. See decoding. World Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) Consortium: a multistate working group that created and regularly updates PreK–12 language proficiency standards, including performance definitions for ELLs, and creates and curates the ACCESS test. world knowledge: people, places, events, and activities, part of the knowledge base of Birch’s hypothetical model of the reading process. writing workshop: name used for well-known K–8 process writing method; emphasizes collaboration and support during all stages of composing. zone of proximal development (ZPD): Vygotsky’s term for the level or “zone” at which learners can perform tasks with the assistance of a peer or “expert other,” resulting in new learning.

References

Abdelhadi, S., Ibrahim, R., & Eviatar, Z. (2011). Perceptual load in the reading of Arabic: Effects of orthographic visual complexity on detection. Writing Systems Research, 3(2), 117–127. ACCESS for ELLs. (2023). The WIDA consortium. (2023). Retrieved from https://wida. wisc.edu/assess/access Achugar, M., Schleppegrell, M., & Oteiza, T. (2007). Engaging teachers in language analysis: A functional linguistics approach to reflective literacy. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 6(2), 8–24. Aishwarya, M. (2020). 4 reasons to choose writing workshop for ELLs. Retrieved from https://movingwriters.org/2020/10/07/4-reasons-to-choose-­writing-workshop-forells Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem? In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language (pp. 1–24). London: Longman. Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. American Library Association. (2023). ACRL visual literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved from https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/­visualliteracy. Anderson, J. (2022). Harvard EdCast: The complex world of teens and screens. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from www.gse.harvard.edu/ news/22/10/harvard-edcast-complex-world-teens-and-screens Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Applegate, M. D., Applegate, A. J., & Modla, V. B. (2009). “She’s my best reader; she just can’t comprehend”: Studying the relationship between fluency and comprehension. Reading Teacher, 62(6), 512–521. Arbib, M. A. (1992). Schema theory. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216722005_Schema_Theory. Asher, J. (1988). Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher’s guidebook. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks. 343

344 References Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Atwell, N. (2002). Lessons that change writers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. August, D., Calderon, M., & Carlo, M. (2002). Transfer of skills from Spanish to English: A study of young learners. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-­language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-­Minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Azar, B. S., & Hagen, S. A. (2022). Fundamentals of English grammar (5th ed.). New York: Pearson. Azmuddin, R. A., Nor, F. M., & Hamat, A. (2020). Facilitating online reading comprehension in enhanced learning environment using digital annotation tools. IAFOR Journal of Education, 8(2), 7–27. Baddeley, A., Gathercole, S., & Papagno, C. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105, 1158–1173. Bailey, K. (1998). Learning about language assessment. Pacific Grove, CA: Newbury House. Baker, S. K., & Good, R. (1995). Curriculum-­based measurement of English reading with bilingual Hispanic students: A validation study with second-­grade students. School Psychology Review, 24(4), 561–578. Bamford, A. (2003). The visual literacy white paper. Retrieved from https://aperture. org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/visual-literacy-wp.pdf Bamford, J., & Day, R. R. (1997). Extensive reading: What is it? Why bother? Language Teacher, 21(5), 6–8, 12. Baumann, J. F., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1991). Research on vocabulary instruction: Ode to Voltaire. In J. Flood, J. J. D. Lapp, & J. R. Squires (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 604–632). New York: Macmillan. Bear, D. R., Helman, L. A., Templeton, S., Invernizzi, M., & Johnston, F. (2007). Words their way with English learners: Word study for phonics, vocabulary and spelling instruction. New York: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Bear, D. R., Templeton, S., Helman, L., & Baren, T. (2003). Orthographic development and learning to read in different languages. In G. Garcia (Ed.), English learners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy (pp. 71–95). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Beeman, K., & Urow, C. (2013). Teaching for biliteracy: Strengthening bridges between languages. Philadelphia: Caslon. Beijing says 400 million Chinese cannot speak Mandarin. (2013, September 6). Retrieved from www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-23975037 Bernhardt, E. B. (2011). Understanding advanced second language reading. New York: Routledge. Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16, 15–34. Bernier-­Grand, C. T. (2012). Frida: Viva la vida, long live life! Seattle, WA: Amazon. Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Jones, J., Wolf, B. J., Gould, L., Anderson-­Youngstrom, M., et al. (2006). Early development of language by hand: Composing, reading, listening, and speaking connections; three letter-­writing modes; and fast mapping in spelling. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1), 61–92.

References 345 Biemiller, A. (1970). The development of the use of graphic and contextual information as children learn to read. Reading Research Quarterly, 6, 75–96. Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books. Birch, B. M. (2007). English L2 reading: Getting to the bottom (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Birch, B. M. (2015). English L2 reading: Getting to the bottom (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. Bogaerds-­Hazenberg, S., Evers-­Vermeul, J., & van den Bergh, H. (2021). A meta-­ analysis on the effects of text structure instruction on reading comprehension in the upper elementary grades. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(3), 435–462. Bounds, G. (2010, October 5). How handwriting trains the brain. Retrieved from www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704631504575531932754922518# Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press. Boushey, G., & Moser, J. (2014). The daily 5 (2nd ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Brazil, D. (1995). A grammar of speech. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Bremner, P., & Leonards, U. (2016). Iconic gestures for robot avatars, recognition and integration with speech. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3389. Britannica Dictionary. (2023). Name that thing. Retrieved from www.britannica.com/ dictionary/eb/quiz/name-that-thing-start Brown, D. (1950). “And having ears, they hear not.” Journal of the National Education Association, 39, 586–587. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language: An approach based on the analysis of conversational English. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Buchweitz, A., Mason, R. A., Tomitch, L. M. B., & Just, M. A. (2009). Brain activation for reading and listening comprehension: An fMRI study of modality effects and individual differences in language comprehension. Psychology and Neuroscience, 2(2), 111–123. Buehl, D. (2014). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International Literacy Association. Calderon, M. (2006). Quality instruction in reading for English language learners. In K. Téllez & H. Waxman (Eds.), Preparing quality educators for English language learners (pp. 121–144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Calkins, L. (1984). Learning to think through writing. In A. Jagger & M. T. SmithBurke (Eds.), Observing the language learner (pp. 190–198). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Calkins, L. (2020). Teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47. Caravolas, M., & Bruck, M. (1993). The effect of oral and written language input on children’s phonological awareness: A cross-­l inguistic study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55(1), 1–30. Caravolas, M., Lervåg, A., Mousikou, P., Efrim, C., Litavský, M., Onochie-­Quintanilla, E., et al. (2012). Common patterns of prediction of literacy development in different alphabetic orthographies. Psychological Science, 23(6), 678–686. Carlisle, J. F., Beeman, M. B., & Shah, P. P. (1996). The metalinguistic capabilities and English literacy of Hispanic high school students: An exploratory study. In D.

346 References J. Leu, K. Kinzer, & K. A. Hinchman (Eds.), 45th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 306–316). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference. Carver, R. P. (1981). Reading comprehension and rauding. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas. Celebrating Tito Puente. (2022, October 10). Google Doodles. Retrieved from www. youtube.com/watch?v=MBzi6hRrkww&t=58s Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-­H ill. Chall, J. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt. Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1986). A cognitive academic language learning approach: An ESL content-­based curriculum. Wheaton, MD: National Clearinghouse on Bilingual Education. Chaney, C. (1992). Language development, metalinguistic skills, and print awareness in 3-year-old children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(4), 485–514. Chen, M.-L. (2018). A data-­driven critical review of second language acquisition in the past 30 years. MDPA Publications, 6(3), 1–29. Chen, X. N., Ko, E. K., Han, X., & Thamotharan, V. (2023). Integrating STEM, language, and visual literacy for multilingual learners. In J. Lee, W. Huang, X. Chen, F. Rodrigues, L. Okan, S. Beene, C. Huilcapi-Collantes, Connecting and sharing: the book of selected readings 2023 (pp. 26–40). International Visual Literacy Association. Cherry, M. (2008, March–April). Interview: Emel Gokçen. Humanist, 68(2), 24–26. Chomsky, N. (1964). Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. (1972). Language and mind. New York: Harcourt. Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short-­circuit hypothesis of ESL reading—­or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 64(2), 203–209. Clay, M. (1968). A syntactic analysis of reading errors. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 434–438. Cloud, N. (2016). Learning about students’ prior experiences. Retrieved from www. youtube.com/watch?v=De7JkhvWfvs Clyne, M., Hunt, C. R., & Isaakidis, T. (2004). Learning a community language as a third language. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(1), 33–52. Cobb, C., & Blachowicz, C. (2007). Teaching vocabulary across the content areas. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Cohn, N. (2018). Visual language Theory and the scientific study of comics. In A. Dunst, J. Laubrock, & J. Wildfeuer (Eds.), Empirical comics research: Digital, multimodal, and cognitive methods (pp. 305–328). New York: Routledge. Collins, M. (2005). ESL preschoolers’ English vocabulary acquisition from storybook reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 406–408. Common Core State Standards. (2022). Read the Standards. Retrieved from https:// learning.ccsso.org/common-core-state-standards-initiative Common Sense Education. (2023). Digital citizenship curriculum. Retrieved from www.commonsense.org/education/digital-citizenship/curriculum Comrie, B., Matthews, S., & Polinsky, M. (Eds.). (1996). The atlas of languages. New York: Facts on File.

References 347 Conboy, B. T., & Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Impact of second language experience in infancy: Brain measures of first and second language speech perception. Developmental Science, 14, 242–248. Crosson, A., & Lesaux, N. (2010). Revisiting assumptions about the relationship of fluent reading to comprehension: Spanish-­speakers’ text-­reading fluency in English. Reading and Writing, 23(5), 475–494. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Collins. Retrieved from https://blogs.baruch.cuny.edu/­authenticityandastonishment2/ files/2013/04/Mihaly-Csikszentmihalyi-Flow1.pdf Cull, B. W. (2011, June). Reading revolutions: Online digital text and implications for reading in academe. Retrieved from firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ view/3340/2985. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251. Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In Schooling and language minority education: A theoretical framework (pp. 3–49). Sacramento, CA: State Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education. Cummins, J. (1991). The development of bilingual proficiency from home to school: A longitudinal study of Portuguese-­speaking children. Journal of Education, 173(2), 85–98. Cummins, J. (1996). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society. Los Angeles: California Association for Bilingual Education. Cummins, J. (2007, April 17). Accelerating second language and literacy development. Paper presented to SDR Associates, Rosemont, IL. Curry, D. (2022). Among us: Revenue and usage statistics. Retrieved from www.­ businessofapps.com/data/among-us-statistics Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-4446-9 De Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (2002). Effects of phonological abilities and linguistic comprehension on the development of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(1), 51–77. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children. New York: New Press. De Luca, C. (2018). Mother tongue as a universal human right. International Journal of Speech–­L anguage Pathology, 20(1), 161–165. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-­based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232. De Zutter, H. (1993). Who says a dog goes bow wow? New York: Doubleday. Dockterman, E. (2016). Barbie’s got a new body. Retrieved from https://time.com/barbienew-body-cover-story Dolgunsöz, E. (2021). Numeral processing in second language oral reading: An eye-­ tracking study. Reading Matrix, 21(2), 133–144. Dorner, L., Orellana, M., & Li-­Grining, C. (2007). “I helped my Mom,” and it helped me: Translating the skills of language brokers into improved standardized test scores. American Journal of Education, 113(3), 451–478. Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (Eds.). (2003). The handbook of second language acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

348 References Doughty, C. J., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Douglass, F. (1845). Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass, an American slave, told by himself. Retrieved from www.gutenberg.org/files/23/23-0.txt Dowhower, S. (1991). Speaking of prosody: Fluency’s unattended bedfellow. Theory Into Practice, 30(3), 165–175. Dressler, C., & Kamil, M. (2006). First- and second-­language literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second language learners (pp.  197–238). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, N. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(51), 525–544. Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37–53. Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1977). Remarks on creativity in language acquisition. In M. Burt, H. Dulay, & M. Finocchiaro (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 95–126). New York: Regents. Dymock, S. (1993). Reading but not understanding. Journal of Reading, 37(2), 86–91. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2018). Making content comprehensible for English language learners: The SIOP model (3rd ed.). New York: Pearson. Eisenlauer, V. (2020). The EFL–­YouTube remix: Empowering multimodal and computational literacies for EFL purposes. Journal of Visual Literacy, 39(3-4), 149–166. Ellen McLain. (2022). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_McLain Eller, R. G. (1989). Johnny can’t talk, either: The perpetuation of the deficit theory in classrooms. Reading Teacher, 42(9), 670–674. Ellis, N. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Ellis, N., & Beaton, A. (1993). Psycholinguistic determinants of foreign language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 43, 559–617. Ellis, N. C., Natsume, M., Stavropoulou, K., Hoxhallari, L., Van Dall, V. H. P., Polyzoe, N., et al. (2004). The effects of orthographic depth on learning to read alphabetic, syllabic and logographic scripts. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 438–468. Ensminger, D. (2016). Technology planning in schools. In N. Rushby & D. W. Surry (Eds.), Wiley handbook of learning technology (pp. 455–483). New York: Wiley. Entertainment Software Association. (2022). 2022 Essential facts about the video game industry. Retrieved from www.theesa.com/resource/2022-essential-facts-aboutthe-video-game-industry Epstein, A. (2007). The intentional teacher: Choosing the best strategies for young children’s learning. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Eric Carle, picture writer: The art of the picture book. (2011). Retrieved from www. youtube.com/watch?v=S0INNN6jh74 Escamilla, K., Hopewell, S., Butvilofsky, S., Sparrow, W., Soltero-­Gonzalez, L. Ruiz-­ Figeuroa, O., & Escamilla, M. (2014). Biliteracy from the start: Literacy squared in action. Philadelphia: Caslon. Eskelson, T. C. (2021). States, institutions, and literacy rates in early-­modern Western Europe. Journal of Education and Learning, 10(2), 109–123. Essley, R., Rief, L., & Rocci, A. L. (2008). Visual tools for differentiating reading and writing instruction. New York: Scholastic.

References 349 Eversull, C. (2010). Most confusing two-­letter word. Retrieved from www.­proofreadnow. com/blog/bid/48170/Most-Confusing-Two-Letter-Word Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the “Fab Five”: Helping students cope with the unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in the middle grades. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487. Farhana, E., Rutherford, T., & Lynch, C. F. (2022). Predictive student modeling in an online reading platform. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 36(11), 12735–12743. Fender, M. (2001). A review of L1 and L2/ESL word integration skills and the nature of L2/ESL word integration development involved in lower-level text processing. Language Learning, 51(2), 319–396. Ferlazzo, L. (2016). Peer review, Common Core, and ELLs. Retrieved from www.­ edutopia.org/blog/collaborative-peer-review-core-ells-larry-ferlazzo-katie-hull-sypnieski Ferlazzo, L. (2023). Larry Ferlazzo blog. Retrieved from https://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org Field, J. (2008). Bricks or mortar: Which parts of the input does a second language listener rely on? TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 411–432. Filderman, M. J., Austin, C. R., & Boucher, A. N. (2021). A meta-­a nalysis of the effects of reading comprehension interventions on the reading comprehension outcomes of struggling readers in third through 12th grades. Exceptional Children, 88(2), 163–184. Finley, T. (2023). 6 ways to use ChatGPT to save time. Edutopia. Retrieved from www. edutopia.org/article/6-ways-chatgpt-save-teachers-time Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English-­a s-a-­second-­language reading instruction in the United States: A research review. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27(2), 115–152. Flavelle, M. (2017). The sticky truth about modern written language. Retrieved from https://digitalculturist.com/the-sticky-truth-about-modern-written-languagedde65c2854af Fletcher, R., & Portalupi, J. (1998). Craft lessons: Teaching writing K–8. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Fletcher, R., & Portalupi, J. (2001). Writing workshop: The essential guide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review 85(2), 149–171. Fraser, C. A. (1999). Lexical processing strategy use and vocabulary learning through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 225–241. Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2004). Essential linguistics: What you need to know to teach reading, ESL, spelling, phonics, and grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2014). Essential linguistics: What teachers need to know to teach ESL, reading, spelling, grammar (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), 239–256. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20–29. Garcia, G. E. (2000). Bilingual children’s reading. In M. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 813–834). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

350 References Garcia, J. R., & Cain, K. (2014). Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-­ analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English. Review of Educational Research, 84, 74–111. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitude and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gee, J. P. (2003). What videogames have to teach us about learning and literacy. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Genesee, F., Geva, E., Dressler, C., & Kamil, M. (2006). Synthesis: Cross-­linguistic relationships. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-­ language learners (pp. 153–183). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Genzlinger, N. (2020, February 28). Lisel Mueller, Pulitzer-­w inning poet, dies at 96. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2020/02/28/books/lisel-­ mueller-dead.html Gersten, R., & Baker, S. K. (2000). Practices for English-­language learners: An overview of instructional practices for English-­language learners. Newton, MA: National Institute for Urban School Development. Gersten, R., Baker, S. K., Shanahan, T., Linan-­Thompson, S., Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for English learners in the elementary grades. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Geva, E. (2006). Second-­language oral proficiency and second-­language literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-­language learners (pp. 123–139). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Giorgis, C. (Ed.). (2019). The Jim Trelease read-aloud handbook (8th ed.). New York: Penguin Random House. Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Goodman, K. (1970). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In D. Gunderson (Ed.), Language and reading: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 107–122). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Gordon, D., & Blass, L. (2016, April 7). Digital vs. print reading: Teaching appropriate skills for both modalities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Baltimore, MD. Goswami, U. (2013). The development of reasoning by analogy. In P. Barrouillet & C. Gauffroy (Eds.), The development of thinking and reasoning (pp. 49–70). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press. Gottlieb, M., Katz, A., & Ernst-­Slavit, G. (2009). Paper to practice: Using the TESOL English language proficiency standards in pre-K–12 classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. Grabe, W. (2001). Reading–­writing relations: Theoretical perspectives and instructional practices. In D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Eds.), Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading–­writing connections (pp. 15–47). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Grabe, W. (2003). Reading and writing relations: Second language perspectives on research and practice. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 242–262). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

References 351 Grabe, W. (2012). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University. Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow, UK: Longman & Pearson. Graves, D. (1973). Children’s writing: Research directions and hypotheses based upon an examination of the writing process of seven-year-old children [Doctoral dissertation, University of New Hampshire]. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 6255A. Graves, D., & Hansen, J. (1983). The author’s chair. Language Arts, 60, 176–183. Guilloteaux, M. J., & Dornei, Z. (2008). Motivating language learners: A classroom-­ oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 55–78. Gwynne, F. (1998). A little pigeon toad. New York: Aladdin Books, Simon & Schuster. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-­based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5(2), 93–116. Hamilton, C., & Shinn, M. R. (2003). Characteristics of word callers: An investigation of the accuracy of teachers’ judgments of reading comprehension and oral reading skills. School Psychology Review, 32, 228–240. Hanley, R., Masterson, J., Spencer, L., & Evans, D. (2004). How long do the advantages of learning to read a transparent orthography last? An investigation of the reading skills and reading impairment of Welsh children at 10 years of age. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A—Human Experimental Psychology, 57(8), 1393–1410. Hanno, E. C., Fritz, L. S., Jones, S. M., & Lesaux, N. K. (2022). School learning format and children’s behavioral health during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Pediatrics, 176(4), 410–411. Hargreaves, A. (2021). How schools can stem the toxic tide of technology. Retrieved from www.edweek.org/technology/opinion-how-schools-can-stem-the-toxic-tide-of-­ technology/2021/11 Harris, C. (2018). I’m just no good at rhyming: And other nonsense for mischievous kids and immature grownups. London: Two Hands. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-­analyses leading to achievement. London: Routledge. Heath, S. B. (2012). Words at work and play: Three decades in family and community life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Helman, L. (2005). Spanish speakers learning to read in English: What a large-scale assessment suggests about their progress. In E. Maloch, J. V. Hoffman, D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, & J. Worthy (Eds.), 54th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 211–226). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference. Hern, A. (2021, August 11). Student proves Twitter algorithm bias toward “lighter,” slimmer, younger faces. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/ aug/10/twitters-image-cropping-algorithm-prefers-younger-slimmer-faces-with-lighterskin-analysis Herrera, S. G., Martinez, M. I., Olsen, L., & Soltero, S. (2022). Early literacy development and instruction for dual language learners in early childhood education. [White paper.] The National Committee for Effective Literacy. Retrieved from https://multilingualliteracy.org /wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NCEL _ECE_White_ Paper.pdf

352 References Hess, K. (2013). A guide for using Webb’s Depth of Knowledge with Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from https://smartlearningsystems.com/wp-content/ uploads/2014/10/WebsDepthofKnowledgeFlipChart_nobleeds_05142013_0001.pdf Hiebert, E. H., Brown, Z. A., Taitague, C., Fisher, C. W., & Adler, M. A. (2004). Texts and English language learners: Scaffolding entrée to reading. In F. Boyd, C. Brock, & M. S. Rozendal (Eds.), Multicultural and multilingual literacy and language (pp. 32–53). New York: Guilford Press. Hiebert, E. H., & Fisher, C. W. (2006). Fluency from the first: What works with first graders? In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-­based best practices (pp. 279–294). New York: Guilford Press. Hoffman, J. V. (1987). The oral recitation lesson: A teacher’s guide. Austin, TX: Academic Resource Consultants. How many languages are there in the world? (2023). Retrieved from www.ethnologue.com How to use, and break, the rule of thirds. (2023). Retrieved from www.adobe.com/­ creativecloud/photography/discover/rule-of-thirds.html Hoyt, L. (2002). Make it real: Strategies for success with informational text. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Huxley, A. (1932). Brave new world. New York: Bantam Books. Hymes, D. (1981). On communicative competence. In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching (pp.  5–26). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1971) Igoa, C. (1995). The inner world of the immigrant child. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Illinois Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages—­Bilingual Education. (2023). Elementary poetry contest. Retrieved from www.itbe.org/elementary_ poetry_contest.php International Literacy Association. (2022). Dungeons and Dragons. Retrieved from www.literacyworldwide.org/meetings-events/ila-digital-events/free-for-everyone/­ dungeons-dragons Jimenez, F. (1997). The circuit: Stories from the life of a migrant child. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Jimenez, R. T., Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, D. P. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latino/a students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90–112. Johnson, R., & Moore, R. (1997). A link between reading proficiency and native-­like use of pausing in speaking. Applied Language Learning, 8(1), 25–42. Jones, J. N., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2014). Predicting levels of reading and writing achievement in typically developing, English-­speaking 2nd and 5th graders. Learning and Individual Differences, 1(32), 54–68. Jozwik, S. L. (2021–2022). Leveraging technology applications to make texts accessible for English language learners. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 50(1), 62–66. Jung Woo reading self-­a ssessment. (2010). Dvimont. Retrieved from www.teachertube. com/videos/jung-woo-reading-self-assessment-153379 Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. E. N. (2014). “I’m not going to be, like, for the AP”: English language learners’ limited access to advanced college-­preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848–878. Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.),

References 353 Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland Press. Kempen, G., & Huijbers, P. (1983). The lexicalization process in sentence production and naming: Indirect election of words. Cognition, 14(2), 185–209. Khote, N. (2018). Translanguaging in systemic functional linguistics: A culturally sustaining pedagogy for writing in secondary schools. In R. Harman (Ed.), Bilingual learners and social equity (pp. 153–178). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2008). The role of derivational morphology in the reading comprehension of Spanish-­speaking English language learners. Reading and Writing, 21(8), 783–804. Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2009). Breaking down to build meaning: Morphology, vocabulary and reading comprehension in the urban classroom. Reading Teacher, 61(2), 134–144. Kim, Y. S. (2012). The relations among L1 (Spanish) literacy skills, L2 (English) language, L2 text reading fluency, and L2 reading comprehension for Spanish-­ speaking ELL first grade students. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 690– 700. Kimmel, E. C. (1999). Balto and the great race. New York: Random House. Kimmel, E. C. (2002). Anansi and the magic stick. Holiday House. Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Konnikova, M. (2014, June 3). What’s lost as handwriting fades. Retrieved from www. nytimes.com/2014/06/03/science/whats-lost-as-handwriting-fades.html?_r=0 Koskinen, P. S., Blum, I. H., Tennant, N., Parker, E. M., Straub, M. W., & Curry, C. (1995). Have you heard any good books lately? Encouraging shared reading at home with books and audiotapes. In L. M. Morrow (Ed.), Family literacy: Connections in schools and communities (pp. 87–103). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Kozub, R. (2000). Reader’s theatre and its effect on oral language fluency. Retrieved from www.readingonline.org/editorial/august2000/rkrt.htm. Krashen, S. (1977). Some issues relating to the Monitor Model. In H. D. Brown, C. A. Yorio, & R. H. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL ‘77 (pp. 144–158). Washington, DC: TESOL. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. Beverly Hills, CA: Laredo. Krashen, S. (1987). Applications of psycholinguistic research to the classroom. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 33–44). New York: Newbury House. Krashen, S. (1993). The power of reading. Englewood, NJ: Libraries Unlimited. Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann and Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Krashen, S. (2018, May 1). The conduit hypothesis. Language. Retrieved from www. languagemagazine.com/2018/05/01/the-conduit-hypothesis Krashen, S. (2022, February 27). A pleasant and effective path to high levels of language competence. Paper presented at the annual state meeting of the Illinois Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages/Bilingual Education.

354 References Krashen, S., & Terrell, T. (1998). The natural approach. Herefordshire, UK: Prentice-­Hall Europe. Krashen, S., & Ujiie, J. (2005). Junk food is bad for you, but junk reading is good for you. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(3), 5–12 Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. New York: Routledge. Kucer, S. B. (1985). The making of meaning: Reading and writing as parallel processes. Written Communication, 2(3), 317–336. Kucer, S. B. (2001). Dimensions of literacy: A conceptual base for teaching reading and writing in school settings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kutchasuwanmanee, P. (2023). Carefree Carol takes a walk. Retrieved from www.­ deviantart.com/carefreecarol/gallery/all LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323. Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular (Vol. 3). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and woman’s place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45–80. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Lems, K. (2001a). An American poetry project for low intermediate ESL adults. English Teaching Forum, 39(4), 24–29. Lems, K. (2001b). Using music in the adult ESL classroom. ERIC Digest (ED459634). Lems, K. (2002). Music hath charms for literacy  . . in the ESL classroom. Indiana Reading Journal, 34(3), 6–12. Lems, K. (2005). A study of adult ESL oral reading fluency and silent reading comprehension. In E. Maloch, J. V. Hoffman, D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, & J. Worthy (Eds.), 54th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 240–256). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference. Lems, K. (2011). Pun work helps English language learners get the joke. Reading Teacher, 65(3), 202–205. Lems, K. (2012a). The effect of L1 orthography on the oral reading of adult English language learners. Writing Systems Research, 4(1), 61–71. Lems, K. (2012b). Reading fluency and comprehension in English language learners. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-­based best practices (2nd ed., pp. 243–254). New York: Guilford Press. Lems, K. (2013a). Laughing all the way: Teaching English using puns. English Teaching Forum, 51(1), 26–33. Lems, K. (2013b). Boosting fluency of English language learners with music and poetry performance activities. In T. Rasinski & N. Padak (Eds.), From fluency to comprehension (pp. 150–156). New York: Guilford Press. Lems, K. (2016). Learning English through music in the digital age. TESOL Video News. Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/ outputs/267938160 Lems, K. (2017). Talkin’ oracy and SVR. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 45(4), 74–78. Lems, K. (2018). New ideas for teaching English using songs and music. English Teaching Forum, 56(1), 14–21.

References 355 Lems, K. (2021a). Lyric videos: Sound, image, and meaning for English language learners. English Teaching Forum 59(1), 1–10. Lems, K. (2021b). Music, our human superpower. Academia Letters, Article 304. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/faculty_publications/95. Lems, K. (2022). Arranged marriage or marriage of convenience? Oral reading fluency and English language learners. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 50(4), 75–79. Lems, K., & Abousalem, S. (2014). Interactive read-aloud: A powerful technique for young ELLs. In P. Spycher (Ed.), The Common Core Standards in English language arts (pp. 5–16). Arlington, VA: TESOL. Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Faller, S. E., & Kelley, J. G. (2010). The effectiveness and ease of implementation of an academic vocabulary intervention for linguistically diverse students in urban middle schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 196–228. Lewis, J., Aydin, A., & Powell, N. (2013–2016). March trilogy. New York: Top Shelf Productions. Li, D., & Nes, S. (2001). Using paired reading to help ESL students become fluent and accurate readers. Reading Improvement, 38(2), 50–62. Li, L. (2002). The role of phonology in reading Chinese single characters and two-­ character words with high, medium and low phonological regularities by Chinese grade 2 and grade 5 students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 372–374. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2011). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. List of autodidacts. (2023). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ List_of_autodidacts List of English words with dual French and Anglo-Saxon variations. (2023). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_ with_dual_French_and_Anglo-Saxon_variations Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700–712. Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lytle, S. R., & Kuhl, P. K. (2018). Social interaction and language acquisition: Toward a neurobiological view. In E. M. Fernández & H. S. Cairns (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 615–634). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-­Blackwell. MacSwan, J. (2017). A multilingual perspective on translanguaging. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 167–201. Markell, M. A., & Deno, S. L. (1997). Effects of increasing oral reading: Generalization across reading tasks. Journal of Special Education, 31, 233–250. Martin, B., Jr., & Carle, E. (1967). Brown bear brown bear what do you see? New York: Henry Holt/Harcourt Brace. McAndrews, S. L. (2020). Literacy assessment and metacognitive strategies: A resource to inform instruction preK–12. New York: Guilford Press. McCarthey, S. J., Garcia, G. E., Lopez-­Velasquez, A. M., & Shumin, G. Y. (2004). Understanding writing contexts for English language learners. Research in the Teaching of English, 38(4), 351–394.

356 References McCauley, J. K., & McCauley, D. S. (1992). Using choral reading to promote language learning for ESL students. Reading Teacher, 45(67), 526–533. McGuinness, D. (2004). Early reading instruction: What science really tells us about how to teach reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. McTague, B., Lems, K., Butler, D., & Carmona, E. (2012). ELL fluency scores: What can they tell us? In T. V. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-­based best practices (2nd ed., pp. 278–288). New York: Guilford Press. McTeer, J. S., Rasinski, T. V., & Bintz, W. P. (2022). Teaching fluency through wholeclass repeated reading. Journal of Teacher Action Research, 9(1), 1–22. Meisinger, E. B., Bradley, B. A., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Kuhn, M. R., & Morris, R. D. (2009). Myth and reality of the word caller: The relation between teacher nominations and prevalence among elementary school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(3), 147–150. Mercer, N. (2014). Oracy skills framework. Retrieved from www.educ.cam.ac.uk/ research/projects/oracytoolkit/oracyskillsframework/OracySkillsFramework.pdf Messing, S., Jabon, M., & Plaut, E. (2016). Bias in the flesh: Skin complexion and stereotype consistency in political campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(1), 44–65. Messing, S., & Plaut, E. (2016, January 11). What color is Obama?: These researchers examined reactions when his skin looks darker. Retrieved from www.­ washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/01/11/what-color-is-obama-theseresearchers-examined-reactions-when-his-skin-looks-darker Miller, J., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2006). Prosody of syntactically complex sentences in the oral reading of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 839–843. Mitra, S. (2007). Kids can teach themselves [Video]. TED conferences. Retrieved from www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_kids_can_teach_themselves Mohammad, A. (2015). Tanzania dumps English as its official language and opts for Kiswahili. Retrieved from https://qz.com/355444/tanzania-dumps-english-as-itsofficial-language-in-schools-opts-for-kiswahili Mohr, K., & Mohr, E. (2007). Extending English-­language learners’ classroom interactions using the response protocol. Reading Teacher, 60(5), 440–450. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect home and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. Moll, L. C., Estrada, E., Díaz, E., & Lopez, L. (1997). The organization of bilingual lessons: Implications for schooling. In M. Cole, Y. Engeström, & O. Vásquez (Eds.), Mind, culture, and activity: Seminal papers from the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition (pp. 254–268). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mora, P. (1993). Tomas and the library lady. New York: Knopf. Morris, D. (1993). The relationship between children’s concept of word in text and phoneme awareness in learning to read: A longitudinal study. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(2), 133–154. Mueller, L. (1996). “Things.” In L. Mueller, Alive together: New and selected poems. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press. Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. Retrieved from tesl-ej.org/ej22/a1.html

References 357 Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of English language learners’ word decoding and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 20(7), 691–719. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. National Indian Education Association. (2023). Resources for schools, teachers, parents, and students. Retrieved from https://www.niea.org/virtual-resources-forparents-and-teachers. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health. (2004, September 15). Children follow same steps to learn vocabulary, regardless of language spoken. Retrieved from www.sciencedaily.com/ releases/2004/09/040915113243.htm National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-­based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Natural language processing (NLP). (2020, July 2). Retrieved from www.ibm.com/ cloud/learn/natural-language-processing NOAA Fisheries. (2023). NOAA to fund environmental literacy efforts in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Retrieved from www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaafund-environmental-literacy-efforts-chesapeake-bay-watershed Nobel Peace laureate Maria Ressa on return of the Marcos dynasty and social media disinformation. (2022, May 11). Retrieved from www.democracynow. org/2022/5/11/maria_ressa_philippines_ferdinand_marcos_jr Oded, B., & Walters, J. (2002). Deeper processing for better EFL reading comprehension. System, 29(3), 357–370. Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-­linguistic influences in language learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Odlin, T. (2003). Cross-­linguistic influences. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 436–486). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Ogle, D., Blachowicz, C. L. Z., Fisher, P. J., & Lang, L. (2015). Academic vocabulary in middle and high school: Effective practices across the disciplines. New York: Guilford Press. O’Higgins, S. (2021, April 1). The best online art galleries for stay-at-home inspiration. Retrieved from https://www.creativebloq.com/inspiration/best-online-art-galleries Olson, C. B., & Land, R. (2007). A cognitive strategies approach to reading and writing instruction for English language learners in secondary school. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(3), 269–303. O’Shea, L. J., & Sindelar, P. T. (1983). The effects of segmenting written discourse on the reading comprehension of low- and high-­performance readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 458–465. Oteguy, R., Garcia, O., & Reid, W. (2015). Clarifying translanguaging and deconstructing named languages: A perspective from linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(3), 281–307. Padrón, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., Powers, R. A., & Brown, A. (2002). Evaluating the effects of the pedagogy to improve resiliency program on English language learners. In L. Minaya-­Rowe (Ed.), Teacher training and effective pedagogy in the context of student diversity (pp. 211–238). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Pang, E., & Kamil, M. (2003, March 22). Cross-­linguistic transfer of reading skills in bilingual

358 References children. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics (AAAL), Arlington, VA. Parish, H. (1963–2013). Amelia Bedelia (series). New York: HarperCollins. Park, B. (1992–2013). Junie B. Jones (series). New York: Random House. Parkin, S. (2016, September 3). How emojis outgrew the aubergine allotment. Guardian Weekly, 195(17), 40. Paulesu, E., McCrory, E., Fazio, F., Menoncello, L., Brunswick, N., Cappa, S. F., et al. (2000). A cultural effect on brain function. Nature Neuroscience, 3(1), 91–96. Pawan, F., Wiechart, K. A., Warren, A. N., & Park, J. (2016). Pedagogy and practice for online English language teacher education. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Press. Pearl, J. (2014). Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Peebles, J. L. (2007). Incorporating movement with fluency instruction: A motivation for struggling readers. Reading Teacher, 60(6), 578–581. Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (2005). Reading, writing and learning in ESL (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Perfetti, C. A., & Dunlap, S. (2008). Learning to read: General systems and writing system variations. In K. Koda & A. M. Zehler (Eds.), Learning to read across languages: Cross-­linguistic relationships in first- and second-­language literacy development (pp. 13–38). New York: Routledge. Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Basic Books. Pinker, S. (2000). The language instinct: How the mind creates language (First Perennial Classics Edition). New York: Harper. Pinker, S. (2007). The language instinct: How the mind creates language (First Harper Perennial Modern Classics). New York: Harper. Pluck, M. (2006). “Jonathon is 11 but reads like a struggling 7 year old”: Providing assistance for struggling readers with a tape-­a ssisted reading program. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-­based best practices (pp. 192–208). New York: Guilford Press. Pratt, C., & Grieve, R. (1984). The development of metalinguistic awareness: An introduction. In W. Tunmer, C. Pratt, & M. Herriman (Eds.), Metalinguistic awareness in children: Theory, research, and implications (pp. 2–35). New York: Springer-­Verlag. Prichard, C., & Atkins, A. (2019). Selective attention of L2 learners in task-based reading online. Reading in a Foreign Language, 31(2), 269–290. Pritchard, R., & O’Hara, S. (2008). Reading in Spanish and English: A comparative study of processing strategies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(8), 630– 638. Pyle, N., Vasquez, A. C., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Gillam, S., Reutzel, D. R., Olszewski, A., et al. (2017). Effects of expository text structure interventions on comprehension: A meta-­a nalysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 469–501. Quirk, M., & Beem, S. (2012). Examining the relations between reading fluency and reading comprehension for English language learners. Psychology in the Schools, 49(6), 539–553. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, K. (1989). A comprehensive grammar of the English language (2nd rev. ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Rafael, T. E., & Au, K. H. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades and content areas. Reading Teacher, 59(3), 206–221.

References 359 Raimes, A. (2004). Grammar troublespots: A guide for student writers (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ramesh, K., KhudaBukhsh, A. R., & Kumar, S. (2022). “Beach” to “bitch”: Inadvertent unsafe transcription of kids’ content on YouTube. In Proceedings of the Thirty-­ Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 12108–12118). Palo Alto, CA: AAAI Press. Ramirez, C. M. (2001). An investigation of English language and reading skills on reading comprehension for Spanish-­speaking English language learners [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Oregon, Portland. Rasinski, T. V. (1990). Investigating measures of reading fluency. Educational Research Quarterly, 14(3), 37–44. Rasinski, T. (2000). Speed does matter in reading. Reading Teacher, 54(2), 146–151. Rasinski, T. (2003). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency, and comprehension. New York: Scholastic. Rasinski, T., Blachowicz, C., & Lems, K. (Eds.). (2012). Fluency instruction: Research-­ based best practices (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Read, C. (1975). Children’s categorization of speech sounds in English (ED 112–426). Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED112426 Renaissance Learning. (2021). World’s largest annual study of K–12 reading habits finds digital reading doubled from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020. Retrieved from www. renaissance.com/2021/03/02/news-worlds-largest-annual-study-reading-habits-digitalreading-doubled Renaissance Learning. (2023). What kids are reading. Retrieved from www.renaissance. com/resources/wkar Richard-­A mato, P. A. (2010). Making it happen: From interactive to participatory language teaching: Theory and practice (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman. Riedel, B. W. (2007). The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension, and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546– 567. Riordan, M. A., & Trichtinger, L. A. (2017). Overconfidence at the keyboard: Confidence and accuracy in interpreting affect in e-mail exchanges. Human Communication Research, 43(1), 1–24. Rivers, W. M. (1981). Developing foreign-­language skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rodriguez, R. (1982). Hunger of memory: The education of Richard Rodriguez. Boston: BantamDell. Roth, V. (2011). Divergent. HarperCollins. Rothenberg, C., & Fisher, D. (2007). Teaching English language learners: A differentiated approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43–50. Rowling, J. K. (1997–2016). Harry Potter (series). New York: Scholastic. Royer, J. M., & Carlo, M. S. (1991). Transfer of comprehension skills from native to second language. Journal of Reading, 34(6), 450–455. Rumelhart, D. E. (1994). Toward an interactive model of reading. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed.,

360 References pp. 864–894). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. (Original work published 1977) Şakrak-Ekin, G., & Balçıkanlı, C. (2019). Does autonomy really matter in language learning? Journal of Language and Education, 5(4), 98–111. Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. Reading Teacher, 32, 403–408. Samuels, S. J. (2007). Afterword for B. W. Riedel, The relation between DIBELS, reading comprehension and vocabulary in urban first-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(4), 546–567. Satrapi, M. (2007). Complete Persepolis. New York: Pantheon Books. Saunders, W., & Goldenberg, C. (1999). The effects of instructional conversations and literature logs on the story comprehension and thematic understanding of English-­proficient and limited English-­proficient students. Santa Cruz: Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence, University of California. Savignon, S. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice: Texts and contexts in second language learning. Reading, MA: Addison-­Wesley. Scarborough, H. (2001). Connecting early language to later reading (dis)abilities. In S. Neuman & D. Dickensen (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). New York: Guilford Press. Scharenborg, O., & van Os, M. (2019). Why listening in background noise is harder in a non-­native language than in a native language: A review. Speech Communication, 108, 53–64. Schmandt-­Besserat, D. (2015). The evolution of writing. In J. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of social and behavioral sciences (pp. 761–766). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Retrieved from https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/the-evolution-of-writing Scholastic Teacher. (2022). Guided reading leveling resource chart. Retrieved from https://shop.scholastic.com/teachers-ecommerce/teacher/guided-reading-leveling-chart. html Schoonen, R., Hulstijn, J., & Bossers, B. (1998). Metacognitive and language-­specific knowledge in native and foreign language reading comprehension: An empirical study among Dutch students in grades 6, 8, and 10. Language Learning, 48, 71–106. Seppa, N. (1997). Ancient Cahokia: Metropolitan life along the Mississippi. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/march/12/cahokia.htm Shanahan, T., & Beck, I. (2006). Effective literacy teaching for English language learners. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-­language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-­minority children and youth (pp. 415–488). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Share, D. L., & Stanovich, K. E. (1995). Cognitive processes in early reading development: Accommodating individual differences into a model of acquisition. In J. S. Carlson (Ed.), Issues in education: Contributions from psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 1–57). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Shaturaev, J. (2019). The importance of handwriting in education. International Journal of Advanced Research, 7(12), 947–954. Shinn, M. R., Knutson, N., Good, R. H., Tilly, W. D., & Collins, V. (1992). Curriculum-­ based measurement of oral reading fluency: A confirmatory analysis of its relation to reading. School Psychology Review, 21, 459–479. Shute, V. J., Venture, M., & Ke, F. (2015). The power of play: The effects of Portal 2

References 361 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Computers and Education, 80, 56–67. Retrieved from https://myweb.fsu.edu/vshute/pdf/portal1.pdf Sidi, Y., Shpigelman, M., Zalmanov, H., & Ackerman, R. (2017). Understanding metacognitive inferiority on screen by exposing cues for depth of processing. Learning and Instruction. [Advance online publication]. Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 657–677. Silverman, R. D. (2007). Vocabulary development of English-­language and English-­ only learners in kindergarten. Elementary School Journal, 107(4), 365–383. Silverstein, S. (1974). Where the sidewalk ends. New York: Harper & Row. Silverstein, S. (1981). A light in the attic. New York: Harper & Row. Skutnabb-­K angas, T., & Toukomaa, P. (1976). Teaching migrant children’s mother tongue and learning the language of the host country in the context of the sociocultural situation of the migrant family. Helsinki: Finnish National Commission for UNESCO. Sobol, D. (1967). Two-­minute mysteries. New York: Apple Paperbacks. Sokolowski, P. (2017, February 24). Mind your manners: English usage for teachers. Keynote address given at the annual meeting of Illinois Teachers of English as a Second Language/Bilingual Education, Lisle, IL. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407. Stanovich, K. E. (1996). Word recognition: Changing perspectives. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 418–452). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Stauffer, R. (1970). The language-­experience approach to the teaching of reading. New York: Harper & Row. Steig, W. (1987). CDB! New York: Simon & Schuster. Steig, W. (2003). CDC? New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Steinman, L. (2005). Writing life 1 in language 2. McGill Journal of Education, 40(1), 65–79. Sticht, T. G., & James, J. H. (1984). Listening and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 293–317). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Sulzby, E. (1991). Assessment of emergent literacy: Storybook reading. Reading Teacher, 44(7), 498–500. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Tafa, E., & Manolitsis, G. (2008). A longitudinal literacy profile of Greek precocious readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 165–185. Taguchi, E., Gorsuch, G., Lems, K., & Rozzwell, R. (2016). How repetition and an auditory model helps readers. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(1), 101–117. Taguchi, E., Takayasu-­Maass, M., & Gorsuch, G. J. (2004). Developing reading fluency in EFL: How assisted repeated reading and extensive reading affect fluency development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16(2), 70–96.

362 References Takei, G., Eisinger, J., & Scott, S. (2019). They called us enemy. Marietta, GA: Top Shelf Productions. Tan, L. H., Xu, M., Chang, C. Q., & Siok, W. T. (2013). China’s language input system in the digital age affects children’s reading development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 110(3), 1119–1123. Taylor, W. L. (1953, Fall). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 1–19. Téllez, K., & Waxman, H. C. (2006). A meta-­synthesis of qualitative research on effective teaching practices for English language learners. In J. M. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 245–277). Philadelphia: Benjamins. Terrace, H. S. (2019). Why chimpanzees can’t learn language and only humans can. New York: Columbia University Press. TESOL Writing Team. (2018). The 6 principles for exemplary teaching of English learners. Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Tharp, R. G., Doherty, R. W., Echevarria, J., Estrada, P., Goldenberg, C., Hilberg, R. S., et al. (2003, March). Research evidence: Five standards for effective pedagogy and student outcomes (Technical Report No. G1). Center for Research, Education, Diversity, and Excellence. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/ citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=yFEtUU YAAAAJ&citation_for_ view=yFEtUUYAAAAJ:ufrVoPGSRksC Thiong’o, N. (1986). Decolonizing the mind: The politics of language in African literature. East African Educational Publishers. Thiong’o, N. (2020). I won the Premi International Prize while on a hospital bed, had written a will. Retrieved from www.standardmedia.co.ke/nairobi/article/2001385283/ ngugi-wa-thiongo-i-won-the-premi-while-on-a-hospital-bed-had-written-a-will Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Santa Cruz: University of ­California, Santa Cruz Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence. Thorndike, R. L. (1973). Reading comprehension in fifteen countries. New York: Wiley. Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D. (1983). Toward a composing model of reading. Language Arts, 60, 568–579. Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D. (1985). New priorities for teaching reading. Learning, 13(8), 14–18. Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1990). Research on the reading–­writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 246–280). White Plains, NY: Longman. Toprak, T. E. (2019). The natural approach. In I. Yaman, E. Ekmekci, & M. Senel (Eds.), Basics of ELT (pp. 127–142). Ankara, Blackswan. Torgeson, J. K., & Burgess, S. R. (1998). Consistency of reading-­related phonological processes throughout early childhood: Evidence from longitudinal-­correlational and instructional studies. In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 161–188). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2002). Preparing young learners for successful

References 363 reading comprehension: Laying the foundation. In C. C. Birch & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-­based best practices (pp.  219–233). New York: Guilford Press. Trelease, J. (2016). Free parent brochures on reading. Retrieved from www.trelease-onreading.com/brochures.html Trickey, E. (2017). Where did the term “gerrymander” come from? Ask Smithsonian 2017. Retrieved from www.smithsonianmag.com/history/where-did-term-­gerrymandercome-180964118 Truss, L. (2003). Eats, shoots and leaves: The zero tolerance approach to punctuation. New York: Penguin Books. Truss, L. (2006). Eats, shoots and leaves: Why commas really do make a difference! New York: Penguin Young Readers. Tschannen-­Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. Turello, D. (2017). Emoji, texting, and social media: How do they impact language? Retrieved from https://blogs.loc.gov/kluge/2017/06/emoji-texting-and-social-mediahow-do-they-impact-language Ujiie, J., & Krashen, S. (1996). Is comic book reading harmful? Calaveras Station Literary Journal, 19(2), 27–28. Retrieved from http://sdkrashen.com/content/articles/1996_ is_comic_book_reading_harmful.pdf U.N. General Assembly Resolution 61/266. (2007, May 16). Multilingualism (A/ RES/61/266). United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2013). Literacy. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/education-building-blocks/ literacy Urow, C., & Beeman, K. (2014). El dictado adaptado. Center for Teaching for Biliteracy. Retrieved from www.teachingforbiliteracy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ El-dictado-in-English.pdf van der Hoek, A. (2010). Meaningless mantras and birdsong? Discovering the Vedas. The Newsletter (International Institute for Asian Studies), 53, p. 35. Vanderwood, M. L., Linklater, D., & Healy, K. (2008). Nonsense word fluency and future literacy performance for English language learners. School Psychology Review, 37(1), 5–17. Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press. Van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., De Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., et al. (2007). Linguistic knowledge, processing speed, and metacognitive knowledge in first- and second-­language reading comprehension: A componential analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 19–30. Venezky, R. L. (1970). The structure of English orthography. The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton. Vogel, S., & Garcia, O. (2017). Translanguaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Available at https://tinyurl.com/ye2acjpr Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wagner, R. G., Torgeson, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). The development of

364 References reading-­related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional caus­a lity from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87. Walters, J. (2022, August 1). Personal communication with G. Charles. Wang, M., & Koda, K. (2007). Commonalities and differences in word identification skills among learners of English as a second language. Language Learning, 57(1), 201–222. Wardzala, K. (2016, September 29). Integrating writer’s notebooks with Google Classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Illinois Reading Council, Peoria, IL. Waxman, H. C., & Téllez, K. (2002). Research synthesis on effective teaching practices for English language learners (ERIC Document Retrieval No. ED474821). Philadelphia: Temple University, Mid-­Atlantic Regional Educational Laboratory, Laboratory for Student Success. Webb, N. L. (2002). Depth-of-­knowledge levels for four content areas. Madison: University of Wisconsin Center for Educational Research. Weinstein, E., & James, C. (2022). Behind their screens: What teens are facing and adults are missing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. What is a digital footprint? (2021, April 22). Retrieved from https://netsafe.org.nz/­ digital-footprint What Works Clearinghouse. (2009). Accelerated reading intervention report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute for Education Studies. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/InterventionReports/wwc_­ acceleratedreader_120809.pdf White, E. B. (1952). Charlotte’s web. New York: Harper & Bros. WIDA Consortium. (2020). WIDA writing rubrics grades K–12. Retrieved from https:// wida.wisc.edu/resources/wida-writing-rubric-grades-1-12 WIDA Consortium. (2022a). WIDA English language development standards framework, 2020 edition: Kindergarten–­g rade 12. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/resource/WIDAELD-Standards-Framework-2020.pdf WIDA Consortium. (2022b). Performance definitions for the levels of English language proficiency. Retrieved from https://education.wm.edu/centers/sli/events/ ESL%20101/wida-performance-definitions.pdf Wilde, T. (2012). How fans translated “close to a million words of dialog” in new Baldur’s Gate localizations. Retrieved from www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gatecontains-close-to-a-million-words-of-dialog-and-how-fan-translations-helped-theenhanced-edition Wilford, J. N. (2009, June 22). Carvings from Cherokee script’s dawn. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/science/23cherokee.html?ref=science&_r=1 &mtrref=undefined Willekes, N. (2014). Disrupting the flow: The detrimental effects of Accelerated Reader on student motivation. Language Arts Journal of Michigan, 29(2), 32–40. Williams, C. (1994). Arfarniad o ddulliau dysgu ac addysgu yng nghyd-­destun addysg uwchradd ddwyieithog [An evaluation of teaching and learning methods in the context of bilingual secondary education]. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Wales, Bangor, UK.

References 365 Williams, N. (1995, March 28). The comic book as course book: Why and how. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Long Beach, CA, United States. Retrieved from www.researchgate.net/ publication/234607767_The_Comic_Book_as_Course_Book_Why_and_How Williams, T., Hakuta, K., Haertel, E., Woody, E., Levin, J., Levine, R., et al. (2007). Similar English learner students, different results: Why do some schools do better? A follow-­up analysis, based on a large-scale survey of California elementary schools serving low-­income and EL students. Mountain View, CA: EdSource. Wisconsin Film Festival. (2020, March 6). 2020 Wisconsin Film Festival film guide. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/wifilmfest/docs/wff2020_fullguide_reduced Wolcott, G. (2019). Significant 72: Unleashing the power of relationship in today’s schools. Winneconne, WI: First Educational Resources. Wolf, M. (2008). Proust and the squid: The story and science of the reading brain. New York: HarperCollins. Woodall, B. (2010). Simultaneous listening and reading in ESL: Helping second language learners read (and enjoy reading) more efficiently. TESOL Journal, 1(2), 186–205. Word frequency data: Corpus of contemporary American English. (2016). Retrieved from www.wordfrequency.info/free.asp?s=y. Word frequency data: Corpus of contemporary American English. (2023). Retrieved from www.wordfrequency.info/free.asp?s=y Word of the year 2015. (2023). Retrieved from https://languages.oup.com/word-of-theyear/2015 Xiao, Y., & Hu, J. (2019). Assessment of optimal pedagogical factors for Canadian ESL learners’ reading literacy through artificial intelligence algorithms. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(4), 1–14. Yang, G. L. (2008). American born Chinese. New York: Squarefish Macmillan. Yang, G. L. (2017). American born Chinese. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/ watch?v=FYCZqt5WSOM Yang, G. L. (2018). Comics belong in the classroom. TED Talks. Retrieved from www. ted.com/talks/gene_luen_yang_comics_belong_in_the_classroom Yang, G. L. (2020). Dragon hoops. New York: First Second. Yigsaw, A. (2013). Students first language writing skills and their English language proficiency as predictors of their English language writing performance. Journal of Language and Culture, 4(6), 109–114. Yuan, G. (2008). American born Chinese. New York: Squarefish Macmillan. Yuan, G. (2017). American born Chinese. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/ watch?v=FYCZqt5WSOM Yule, G. (2010). The study of language (4th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Zhang, Q., & Reilly, R. (2016, July 13–16). The reading of handwriting: An evaluation of Chinese written by CFL learners. Paper presented at the twenty-­third annual meeting of the Society for Scientific Studies of Reading, University of Porto, Portugal. Retrieved August 22, 2022, from www.researchgate.netpublication/327467205_ The_reading_of_handwriting_An_evaluation_of_Chinese_written_by_CFL_learners Zimmer, B. (2011, February 4). If worst comes to worst. Retrieved from www.nytimes. com/2011/02/06/magazine/06FOB-onlanguage-t.html?_r=0

366 References Zipke, M. (2008). Teaching metalinguistic awareness and reading comprehension with riddles. Reading Teacher, 62(2), 128–137. Zutell, J., & Allen, J. (1988). The English spelling strategies of Spanish-­speaking bilingual children. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 333–340. Zutell, J., Donelson, R., Bevans, J., & Todt, P. (2006). Building a focus on oral reading fluency into individual instruction for struggling readers. In T. Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, & K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-­based best practices (pp. 265–278). New York: Guilford Press. Zwiers, J. (2006). Integrating academic language, thinking, and content: Learning scaffolds for non-­native speakers in the middle grades. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(4), 317–332. Zwiers, J. (2007). Teacher practices and perspectives for developing academic language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 93–116. Zwiers, J. (2008). Building academic language: Essential practices for content classrooms. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2011). Academic conversations: Classroom talk that fosters critical thinking and content understandings. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Index

Abbreviations, 179–180. See also Word formation processes in English Academic language. See also Academic writing; Cognitive academic language proficiency; Writing to learn in English as a new language academic idioms, 192. See also Collocations as dialect to be learned, 272 importance of instructional conversation, 22 morphemes from content areas, common, 169 shortcuts in academic writing, 266 using cognates, 172 written language different from oral language, 71–72 Academic writing. See also Academic language; Expository writing as a dialect, 272 importance of punctuation in, 266 Access to L1 literacy, 102. See also Orthography and English language learners Accuracy in oral reading, 208, 211. See also Fluency; Fluency and English language learners; Reading rate Acronyms, 179. See also Word formation processes in English Active listening, 66–67. See also Auding; Oracy Adolescent learners. See Middle school; Secondary school Affect, 12. See also Affective filter

Affective filter, 12, 24, 77 how music lowers, 195–196 in oral reading, 208–209 ways to lower, 24–25 Affixes, 146–148. See also Morphemes; Roots African American English, 34 AI. See Artificial intelligence AI Chatbots, 297–298. See also ChatGPT Alderson, J. Charles, 49, 50, 232. See also Threshold theory ALM. See Audiolingual method Alphabet, 95, 98–99. See also Orthography and English language learners opaque, 95–99. See also Opaque orthography transparent, 95–99; See also Word calling Alphabetic writing systems, 92–93. See also Orthography and English language learners Ambiguous vocabulary in English, 174–175. See also Homographs; Homophones; Polysemous words Anime. See Middle school, graphic novels Annotation and highlighting, 302 Arabic in grammar translation method, 15 numeracy, 110–111 syntax, 44 writing system, 92–93, 97, 101, 102. See also Consonantal alphabet; Orthography and English language learners; Visual complexity

367

368 Index Artificial intelligence, 294. See also AI Chatbots; ChatGPT uses for teachers, 268 Assessment of English language learners fluency, 207, 212. See also Fluency and English language learners formative in WIDA standards, 272, 292 removing time pressure, 302 to build metacognitive skills, 249 to keep affective filter low, 77 using gamification, 307–308 using multimodality, 25 using think-alouds, 303 oracy, 76–77 Oracy Skills Framework, 74 performance definitions, 55, 58 writing modeling think-alouds for writing, 287–288 WIDA writing rubric, 292 Assimilative motivation, 13 Auding, 66–67. See also Active listening; Oracy Audio-assisted reading, 216–217. See also Fluency and English language learners; Online resources Audio imaging, 247. See also Song lyrics Audiolingual method, 14, 15 Audiolingualism (ALM). See Audiolingual method Autodidacts. See Autonomous learning Automaticity theory, 206–208. See also Fluency and English language learners; Laberge and Samuels Autonomous learning, 304–305. See also Video games Backformation, 180, 318, 319. See also Word formation processes in English Background knowledge, 7–8, 24, 36–38 builds semiotic domain, 121 compensates for ellipsis in oral language, 71 increased through interactive read-aloud, 82 increased with guest speakers, 81 key role in reading comprehension, 47 playing video games, 305 through immersion, 307 Balanced literacy, 9, 111, 204 Basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS), 51, 52. See also BICS and CALP; Cognitive academic language proficiency; Oral language, characteristics of characteristics of BICS and CALP, 52 fallacies about BICS and CALP, 54 in person classes build, 310

Bernhardt, Elizabeth, 35, 36. See also Compensatory model of secondlanguage reading BICS. See Basic interpersonal communicative skills BICS and CALP, 51–55, 149, 305. See also Basic interpersonal communicative skills; Cognitive academic language proficiency Bilingual education. See Dual language; Instructional models for language teaching and learning books in classroom libraries, 257 Bilingualism, 273. See also Multilingualism as a kind of giftedness, 22 as normal, 3 cognitive benefits of, 22 Biliteracy, 239. See also Bilingualism, cognitive benefits; Multiliteracy; Translanguaging Birch, Barbara, 36–39, 41, 47, 65. See also Hypothetical model of the reading process Blends (portmanteau words), 178–179, 318, 319. See also Word formation processes in English consonant blends in onsets and rimes, 61. See also Onset and rime Book bags, 255–256. See also Classroom libraries Borrowing, 178. See also Word formation processes in English Bottom-up skills, 47–49, 50, 90, 206, 232. See also Decoding; Interactive reading process; Phonics; Top-down skills Bound morphemes, 153–156. See also Morphemes; Bound roots derivational, 148, 153 inflectional, 148, 154–155 Bound roots, 155–156. See also Bound morphemes; Morphemes Bourdieu, Pierre, 4, 34, 272 CALP. See Cognitive academic language proficiency Capital. See Bourdieu, Pierre; Cultural capital; Linguistic capital Capitonyms, 184. See also Word formation processes in English Captions. See Closed captions and subtitles Caretaker speech, 10. See also Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills; Motherese Case-ending languages, 151 Category shift, 180. See also Word formation processes in English CBI. See Content-based instruction

Index 369 Challenging curriculum, 22, 53. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners as students move through grade levels, 264, 275 Chart for repeated reading, 228. See also Fluency and English language learners ChatGPT, 295, 297–299. See also AI chatbots; Artificial intelligence cautions, 277, 299–300 example of, 295 for creating prompts, 268 for pronunciation assistance, 298 for teachers, 298–299 to explain writing errors, 276 Cherokee writing system, 103. See also Orthography and English language learners; Sequoyah; Writing system reforms Chinese writing system, 94, 98, 104. See also Logographic writing systems; Orthography and English language learners; Pinyin; Visual complexity; Writing system reforms Chomsky, Noam, 6, 31, 181 Chunking. See also Prosody breaking text into smaller units, 24, 189 easier than prosody for ELLs, 213–214 language-specific, 36, 37 listemes, 192–193 The Circuit (Jimenez), 66 Classroom libraries, 25, 255–257 bilingual books in classroom libraries, 224 maintaining good, 256 multilingual digital, 257 Clipping, 179. See also Word formation processes in English Closed captions and subtitles, 186 for listening comprehension, 80. See also Intensive listening activities Closed class words, 149. See also Functional morphemes; Open class words Closeness of written and spoken language, 71–72. See also Orthography and English language learners Cloze, 78–79. See also Intensive listening activities CLT. See Communicative language teaching approach Code switching, 33, 45, 178. See also Translanguaging Cognates, 35, 39, 42, 185–187, 239. See also Translanguaging false cognates, 44, 187–188 false cognates between Spanish and English, 202

for vocabulary growth, 172 function words not cognates with Latin roots, 150 Spanish English cognates with common Latin roots, 186, 187, 203 Cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP), 47–51. See also Academic language; Basic interpersonal communicative skills characteristics of BICS and CALP, 52 fallacies about BICS and CALP, 54 in oral language, 72 Cognitive strategies approach to writing, 273. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language Coinage, 178. See also Neologisms; Word formation processes in English Collaborative learning, 21. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners collaborative writing for ELLs, 283 Collocations, 188–192. See also Idioms; Listemes; Phrasal Verbs Common underlying proficiency, 32, 33. See also Interdependence hypothesis; Translanguaging Communicative competence, 9–10, 15. See also Domains of language learning Communicative language teaching approach, 14, 15–16 Compensatory model of second-language reading, 35–36 Compound noun game, 163–164, 170–171. See also Gamification Compounding, 178. See also Word formation processes in English Comprehensible input, 10–11. See also Input hypothesis avoiding oversimplification, 272 easier with multimodality, 217 new forms of, 294 techniques to provide, 11 Comprehensible output, 11 techniques to promote, 11. See also Speaking activities Comprehension. See Listening comprehension; Reading comprehension Concept of word, 7, 62, 68 Connectors, 243–244. See also Transition words in writing, 237 Consonantal alphabet, 93. See also Arabic Content-based instruction, 16–18. See also Sheltered instruction Content frames, 246–247. See also Graphic organizers useful for expository writing, 246

370 Index Content words, 148–149. See also Free morphemes; Lexical morphemes content-specific word meanings, 51, 176 in phrase and sentence stress, 63 often polysemous, 175 Context-reduced oral language, 71. See also Listening comprehension Contrastive analysis (CA), 31–32 Contronyms, 185. See also Word formation processes in English Conversion, 180. See also Category shift; Word formation processes in English Corpus linguistics, 295. See also Artificial intelligence; ChatGPT Cross-linguistic homographs, 187–188. See also Cognates, false cognates; Homographs Cross-linguistic homophones, 187–188. See also Cognates, false cognates; Homophones Cross-linguistic influence, 41. See also Interference; Non-effect; Positive cross-linguistic influence definition, 41 Cultural capital, 4. See also Bourdieu, Pierre Culturally responsive instruction, 22, 24, 25, 139, 239, 259. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners body language, 123 maintaining a good multicultural library, 25, 255–257 Cummins, Jim, 31–33, 51–52, 71, 186. See also BICS and CALP; Interdependence Hypothesis CUP. See Common Underlying Proficiency; Translanguaging Decodable words, 89–90. See also Decoding; Partially decodable words; Sight words; Transparent orthography Decoding, 89–90, 105, See also Automaticity theory; Bottom-up skills; Phonological decoding; Phonics; Word calling fully decodable words, 89–90 partially decodable words, 89. See also Onset and rime; Phonics sight words, 89 with opaque writing systems, 110 Deep orthography. See Opaque orthography; Orthography and English language learners Deep structure, 6. See also Chomsky Deficit view, 19–20, 33, 34. See also Multiliteracy; Translanguaging Deno, Stanley, 206–207

Derivational morphemes, 148, 153. See also Bound morphemes; Morphemes Diacritics, 45 Dialect devaluing of, 19, 32, 34. See also Deficit view distance from written language, 102 Dialogue journals, 284 Dictation, 74. See also Intensive listening activities dictado, 78 different kinds of, 78 math operations as, 78 Dictionaries, 161, 197–200, 240–241 source for etymology, 198 using daily, 240–241 Dictocomp, 286. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language Differences between L1 and L2 reading, 44 Differences between reading and writing, 264 Differences between speaking and writing, 71–72 Differentiation, 19, 163. See also Flexible grouping; WIDA Standards need to provide for writing, 270 ways to provide, 22 Digital citizenship curriculum, 140 Digital reading. See also Online reading factors to consider in, 252–254 reading programs and websites, 251–252 screen-based reading, 300–302 social media, 281 text structures, 244–245 word formation of technology words, 318–319 Diglossia, 102 Discipline-specific language or registers, 176, 264. See also Cognitive academic language proficiency Discourse markers, 71. See also Connectors Domains of language learning, 8. See also Communicative competence; Listening; Reading; Speaking; Writing Double bubble map, 245, 256. See also Graphic organizers Douglass, Frederick, 218, 224, 226 Drawing dictation, 83. See also Gamification; Information gap activities; Speaking activities Early childhood. See also Vocabulary development audio-assisted reading for first grade, 216 classroom ideas, 85 Eric Carle books, 125 expository writing in early grades, 246 hula hoop Venn diagrams, 246

Index 371 interactive read-aloud, 81–82 labeling items in room, 236 language experience approach, 282 online picture book read-alouds, 222 oral dictation, 85 pantomime, 85 picture books, 185 repeated reading fluency for first grade, 216 speaking practice for the youngest learners, 85. See also Speaking activities spelling, 115 teacher support during and after pandemic, 311 think-alouds, 219, 249 total physical response (TPR), 80–81 using pictures, 137, 139 Effective teaching strategies for English language learners, 21–23 EFL. See English as a Foreign Language ELF. See English as a Lingua Franca ELL. See English language learners Ellipsis, 71 Email text structure, need to teach, 280–281 Emojis, 112, 113, 133. See also Visual literacy Encoding. See Recoding. English as a Foreign Language, 14 instructional models for, 14 English as a Lingua Franca, 14 techniques for teaching, 14 English language learners (ELLs) choice of term, 2, 5 reading strategies of successful, 22–23 English language proficiency standards. See World Class Instructional Design and Assessment Standards (WIDA) English word formation processes, 172–203. See Etymology; Word formation processes in English Eponyms, 184–185. See also Word formation processes in English Errors. See also Miscues correction in ELL writing, 276–277 correction using think-alouds, 287 in spelling, 277–278 in WIDA writing standards, 272, 292 ESL Teacher Toolkit, 8 Etymology, 143, 173. See also Word formation processes in English dictionaries, 197–198 English as a richly generative language, 173 online resources for, 198–199 studying, 161 Explicit instruction, importance of, 22, 26, 272 alternating with practice, 233 in teaching text structures, 244

minilessons in Writing workshop, 268 need to explicitly teach reading strategies, 253, 301 Expository writing, 246, 273, 275. See also Academic language; BICS and CALP; Expressive writing; Responsive writing; Writing to learn in English as a new language Expressive reading, 77, 174, 177. See also Fluency and English language learners; Interactive read-aloud; Oral reading fluency; Prosody as benefit of fluency practice, 174 ELLs may do chunking before, 177. See also Chunking Expressive writing, 273–274. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language Extensive listening activities, 80–82. See also Intensive listening activities guest speakers, 81 interactive read-aloud, 81–82 total physical response, 80–81 Extensive reading, 253. See also Silent reading Extensive writing, 273, 274. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language False cognates. See Cognates, false cognates; Cognates Family involvement as guest speakers in class, 38, 81 asking about home language, 106 background knowledge differs, 239 benefits of digital books, 252 book bag projects, 255–256 celebrating writing systems, 115–116 help by young ELLs to families, 279 making greeting cards, 282 performance events for fluency, 217 poetry contest performance, 283 postcard challenge project, 258 providing connectivity for, 309–310 read-alouds, 256 summer reading programs, 257–258 teacher involvement during pandemic to help, 311 views toward peer editing, 271 wordless picture books, 256 Fan fiction, 285. See also Secondary school First language, 5. See also Dual language; Language acquisition; Multiliteracy; Translanguaging as a resource, 19 for reading, 236 journaling in, 34 making use of, 38 use in studying content, 16 Flexible grouping, 19, 23. See also Differentiation

372 Index Flow theory, 306 Fluency, 204–218. See also Fluency and English language learners bridge between word recognition and comprehension, 204–205 definition different from language teaching field, 208 reading rate, 179 Fluency and English language learners, 204–218 assessments cold reading, problems with, 208 norms, establishing classroom, 221 problems specific to ELLs, 209–212 problems with, 208 words correct per minute, 206–207 digital resources to practice, 222 instruction, 215–218 audio-assisted reading, 216–217 benefits to ELLs, 212–215 buddy reading, 221 choral reading, 219–220 components, 212 echo reading, 219–220 popcorn reading, 219–220 Readers’ Theatre, 217 reading rate, increasing, 210, 219 repeated reading, 216 rhythm walks, 221 Focus on form, 276. See also Errors, correction in ELL writing Fonts as factor in learning to read, 101–102, 131, 257 changing handwritten notes into, 279 Foreign accent, influence on oral reading, 209–210. See also Fluency and English language learners Free morphemes, 148–153. See also Morphemes functional, 149–150 lexical, 148–149 Freeman, David and Yvonne, 12, 143, 149, 160, 185, 234 Freire, Paolo, 38 French language, 3, 11, 20, 151, 240, 241 as a Romance language, 40, 185 as an opaque orthography, 95, 100, 104, 105, 111 influence on English word formation, 178–179 mistranslations with English, 187, 188 Norman conquest influence on English, 98 online art gallery of the Louvre, 126 pronunciation of /ch/ in French, 92 scale change, 180. See also Word formation in English Frontloading, 234. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners; Vocabulary development

Function words, 150–151. See also Functional morphemes; Morphemes, functional difficulties with, 150–151 easily overlooked in ELL listening, 63 interference from another language, 151 Functional morphemes, 149–150. See also Free morphemes; Morphemes, functional; Function words Games. See Gamification and the classroom. Gamification and the classroom, 307–308 computer game recommendations, 305–306 for young children, 46. See also Early childhood adding words to sentences, 85 during silent period, 75 Geometry Simon Says, 80 I Spy with My Little Eye, 85 pantomime, 85 Total Physical Response, 80 morpheme games, 163 – 165, 170 animal compound noun game, 164 Call my bluff, 164 compound noun games, 163 – 165, 170–171 rhythm walk, 221 speaking practice. See also Speaking activities drawing dictation 83 half Crosswords, 83–84 information gap activities, 83–84 oral dictation, 83–85 Twenty Questions, 84 tabletop, for literacy development, 307 vocabulary development, 163–165 Balderdash Junior, 255 idiom matching, 197 in the manner of the word, 84 word list contest, 163 word formation games, 196 new product and company names, 196 Gist, 67, 68, 80. See also Extensive listening activities oral retelling practice, 218 retaining, while reading in new language, 230 Grabe, William, 36, 42, 43, 49, 50, 69, 248, 263 Grammar of oral versus written language, 71–72 Grammar translation method, 14, 15 Graphemes, 89–91. See also Orthography and English language learners and phonemes, 89–91. See also Phonics Graphic novels, 120, 131, 247, 251, 263 Graphic organizers, 18, 25, 245–248 content frames, 246–247, 260 double bubble map, 246

Index 373 for polysemous words, 234 example of, 235 for writing, 288. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language, strategies for learning online resources for, 245 semantic feature analysis grid. See Content frames; Graphic organizers, content frames semantic map, 269 T-chart, 245, 246 Venn diagram, 246 Grit. See Resilience Gujarati, 94. See also Syllabic writing systems Half crosswords, 83. See also Gamification; Information gap activities; Speaking activities Halliday, M.A.K., 4–5, 10, 12, 15. See also Language-based theory of learning; Systemic functional linguistics Handwriting. See also Orthography and English language learners as component of writing, 278 Hangul Day, celebration of, 115–116. See also Korean Hattie, John, 21, 23, 312. See also Teacher self-efficacy Heath, Shirley Brice, 19 Helman, Lori, 45, 115, 209, 211 High school. See Secondary school Home language. See First language Homographs, 174–175. See also Ambiguous vocabulary in English; Crosslinguistic homographs Homophones, 160, 174. See also Ambiguous vocabulary in English; Crosslinguistic homophones difficulty of spelling, 278 often function words, 150 Hyponyms, 185. See also Word formation processes in English Hypothetical model of the reading process, 36–39, 41, 47. See also Reading models Idioms, 188–192, 198–199. See also Collocations calendars, 193–194 in song lyrics, 194 matching game, 196–197. See also Gamification Immersion method, negative consequences of, 20. See also Deficit view; Translanguaging Inferencing, 36, 37, 48, 242 using memes, 133 using questioning techniques, 250

Inflectional morphemes, 148, 154–155. See also Bound morphemes; Morphemes Infographics, 315–316. See also Graphic organizers; Multimodality; Visual literacy students creating their own, 316 Information gap activities, 83–84. See also Speaking activities Informational text. See also text structures denseness of, 266 for interactive read-aloud, 82 Input hypothesis, 10–11. See also Comprehensible input; Krashen, Steven; Output hypothesis Instructional conversation, 11, 19, 242, 246. See also Interactive dialogue; Vygotsky, Lev benefits of, 73 need for daily, 22, 25, 73 student example of, 218 Instructional models for language teaching and learning, 14–16 Instrumental motivation, 13 Integrative motivation, 13 Intensive listening activities, 77–80. See also Extensive listening activities cloze, 78–79 dictation, 78–79 transcribing lyrics, 79 using closed captions and subtitles, 80 Interactive dialogue, 73, 254, 272. See also Instructional conversation; Oracy Interactive process of reading, 47. See also Bottom-up skills; Hypothetical model of the reading process; Topdown reading skills Interactive read-aloud, 81–82. See also Oracy Interactivity, 301 in screen-based reading, 301 Interdependence hypothesis, 32 Interference, 42–45. See also Cross-linguistic influence; Non-effect; Positive crosslinguistic influence examples of L1, 43–45 function words from L1 can cause, 150–151 Intonation patterns, 63–65. See also Listening comprehension; Oracy vary among dialect speakers of a language, 64 Intrinsic motivation, 13. See also Autonomous learning Inverted morphemes pyramid, 147, 148, 153–154. See also Morphemes Journaling activities. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language as cultural expression, 267 in first language, 34 using Google classroom, 301

374 Index Keyword method, 240. See also Vocabulary development Koda, Keiko, 41, 42, 45, 112, 206 Korean, 95, 96, 99, 111, 161, 179. See also Hangul day Krashen, Stephen, 10, 12, 18, 31. See also Affective filter; Comprehensible input; Input hypothesis; Secondlanguage acquisition L1, See First language L1 literacy. See Interdependence hypothesis; Literacy, as a gift L2, See Second language LaBerge and Samuels, 206. See also Automaticity Theory Language acquisition, 11, 31. See also Input hypothesis; Second-language acquisition first critical period, 60 through video chats, 294 versus language learning, 31 Language-based theory of learning, 4–5, 9, 12, 15, 47. See also Halliday, M.A.K. Language distance, 39–40. See also Orthography and English language learners Language experience approach (LEA), 282 Language loss, avoiding, 284 Language-specific, 6. See also Reading models bottom-up skills, 48 derivational morphemes, 239 in dual-language classrooms, 273 language processing strategies, 36 listening skills, 60 punctuation, 39, 241 word boundaries, 62 world knowledge is not, 36 LEA. See Language experience approach Learning logs, 267, 274. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language Lemma, 234–235, See also Lexeme; Vocabulary development Letters. See Graphemes Lexeme, 234–235, 240. See also Lemma; Vocabulary development Lexical morphemes, 147–149. See also Content words; Free morphemes; Morphemes Lexicon definition, 149 large size of English, 173 Libraries. See Classroom libraries Lingua franca, English as, 14 Linguistic capital, 4. See also Bourdieu, Pierre Linguistic proximity. See Language distance Listemes, 192, 193. See also Collocations Listening. See Domains of language learning; Listening comprehension

Listening and reading, similarities and differences, 68–69 Listening comprehension, 69–70. See also Oracy; Simple view of reading components, 60–66 difficulty in assessing, 76–77 fatigue from, 66 role in reading comprehension, 69–70 similarities to reading comprehension, 68–69 ways to practice, 77–82 Listening vocabulary, 90–91. See also Listening comprehension importance of, 69–70 newcomer programs to build, 70 ways to build, 77–82. See also Extensive listening activities; Intensive listening activities Literacy, 4–5. See also Biliteracy; Multiliteracy; Visual literacy as a kind of wealth, 4 right to, 3–4 Loan words (borrowing), 178. See also Word formation processes in English Logograms, 92, 94–95. See also Logographic writing systems; Orthography and English language learners Chinese, 104 emojis as, 112. See also Emojis; Visual literacy in English writing system, 95 of math symbols, 113–114 Logographic writing systems, 94–95. See also Logograms; Orthography and English language learners Lyric videos, 314–315. See also Music Maps, reading, 127–128. See also Visual literacy Marking text for oral reading, 219. See also Fluency and English language learners Mathematics articulating numeral difficult for ELLs, 210 common mathematics morphemes, 169 content specific meanings, 175–176 dictation using math terms, 78 different numbering systems, 111–112 Geometry Simon Says, 80 logograms that must be learned, 113–114 mastering basic math before advanced, 47 Minecraft math lessons, 306 reading charts, graphs, and table, 128–130 signal words in word problems, 243 using academic vocabulary to teach, 54–55 using learning logs, 267 word wall, 237 Memes, 133–135. See also Visual literacy Metacognition, 247. See also Metacognitive skills and strategies

Index 375 Metacognitive skills and strategies, 248–249. See also Reading comprehension strategies Metalinguistic awareness, 45–46 children’s book to foster, 46 cognates raise, 239 self-correction of errors increases, 276 Metaphors with new technology words, 318–319 Metastudies of ELLs, 21–23 Middle school. See also Secondary school annotation and highlighting for online reading, 302 graphic novel use, 131, 247 need for picture books in libraries, 256 need to read maps by end of, 128 tweet-length summary writing, 281 Miscues, 276, 277. See also Errors; Fluency and English language learners Modal auxiliary verbs, 149. See also Functional morphemes Modeling writing, 287–288. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language, strategies for learning Models of second-language reading, 34–38 Modes, 9. See also Multimodality visual, 286 Morpheme analysis, 152, 155. See also Morphemes; Orthography and English language learners Morphemes, 142–171 across languages, 185–187. See also Cognates affixes, 146–148. See also Bound morphemes; Prefixes; Suffixes bound, 147–148, 153–156. See also Derivational morphemes; Inflectional morphemes categories of English, 148 common language arts, 169 common mathematics, 169 common science, 169 common social studies, 169 derivational, 148, 153. See also Bound morphemes free, 149–153; See also Lexical morphemes functional, 149–150. See also Free morphemes games to learn vocabulary using, 163–165 inflectional, 148, 154–155. See also Bound morphemes; Suffixes inflectional morphemes of English, 148, 154–155 inverted morphemes pyramid, 147, 148, 153–154. See also Morphemes lexical morphemes, 148–149. See also Content words prefixes, See also Bound morphemes suffixes, See also Bound morphemes

Morphology, 6, 7, 143. See also Morphemes; Universals of language Morphophonemic nature of English, 151 -s/-es and -ed/-d endings, 156–158, 159 Motherese, 10 Motivation, 12–13 assimilative, 12–13 integrative, 12–13 instrumental, 12–13 intrinsic, 13, 253. See also Autonomous learning Moving images, 136–137. See also Movies; Visual literacy Multilingualism, 1–2. See also Deficit view; Translanguaging as giftedness, 22 as normal and desirable, 3 Google translate as hub for, 296 United Nations support for, 2 Multiliteracy, 1–2. See also Deficit view; Translanguaging as giftedness, 22 Multimodality, 9, 119–120. See also Effective Teaching Strategies for English language learners; Multiple represen­ tations of content; Online reading activities, 21, 80, 312–316 benefits of for ELLs, 137 projects, 293, 304, 312–316 prompts, 285 students creating multimodal materials, 137 texts, 9 Multiple processes of word formation, 181. See also Word formation processes in English Multiple representations of content, 21, 25. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners; Multimodality Music. See also Song lyrics for lowering affective filter, 195–196 for teaching ELLs, 79–80 National Reading Panel (NRP), 173, 204 Natural approach, 31 Natural language processing (NLP), 295–297. See also Artificial intelligence, ChatGPT; Corpus linguistics Navajo, 103. See also Writing system reforms Neologisms, 178, 318–319. See also Coinage; Word formation processes in English Non-effect, 45. See also Cross-linguistic influence; Interference; Positive cross-linguistic influence Numeracy. See also Arabic; Orthography and English language learners dictation using math terms, 78 not universal, 110–112

376 Index Odlin, Terence, 39, 41 Online reading, 251–253, 300–302. See also Reading online annotation and highlighting for, 302 cautions about assigning to ELLs, 253 databases about language and words, 295. See also ChatGPT dialogue journals, 284 dictionaries, 161, 197–200 as source for etymology, 161, 198 bilingual, 241 importance of, 240 online versus print, 240–241 using daily, 240–241 digital reading programs and website, 251–252 fan fiction, 285 for idioms, 198–199 for word study, 198 generating visual images with AI, example, 138 memes, 133 example of template, 135 picture book read-alouds, 222 resources, 251–252 resources for word study, 198–199 selective attention, 303 translation tools, 295–296 Onset. See Onset and rime Onset and rime, 61, 89, 100. See also Partially decodable words; Phonics; Sight words Opacity. See Opaque orthography; Orthography and English language learners Opaque orthography, 95–98. See also Orthographic depth hypothesis; Orthography and English language learners; Transparent orthography historical factors contributing to English, 98–99 Open class words, 149. See also Closed class words; Lexical morphemes Oracy, 59–87 and school success, 77 listening comprehension, 69–70 oral proficiency, 72–77. See also Oracy Skills Framework; Speaking practice silent period, 75–76 Oracy Skills Framework, 73, 74. See also Oracy; Speaking activities Oral language. See also Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills differences from written language, 71–72 Oral reading. See also Oral reading fluency as performance, 209–210, 215, 217–218, 220 as proxy for reading comprehension, 206–207

problems as reading assessment for ELLs, 208–212 scoring chart for repeated reading, 228 ways to mark text, 219 Oral reading fluency, 204–228. See also Fluency and English language learners; Oral reading; Word calling Oral text, 59–60. See also Oracy ORF. See Oral reading fluency Orthographic depth hypothesis, 99–101. See also Orthography and English language learners implications for teaching, 100–101 orthographic factors influencing L1 literacy, 101–102 Orthographic distance. See Language distance Orthography, 6, 88–119. See also Orthography and English language learners Orthography and English language learners, 88–119 alphabetic writing systems, 92–93 deep. See Opaque orthography influence of visual complexity on learning to read and spell, 101. See also Arabic influence of visual display on learning to read and spell, 101–102 influence on learning to read and spell, 101–102. See also Orthographic depth hypothesis logographic writing systems, 94–95 opaque orthography, 95–98 examples of, 98–99 orthographic depth hypothesis, 99–100 shallow. See Transparent orthography syllabic writing systems, 93–94 transparent orthography, 95 examples of, 98–99 Output hypothesis, 11, 24. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners Paired reading, 216, 218, 221. See also Reading comprehension strategies Paired-word sound play, 180. See also Word formation processes in English Paragraph and discourse level reading strategies, 244. See also Reading comprehension strategies Paralinguistic features, 64–65. See also Listening comprehension Parental involvement. See Family involvement Parsing. See Chunking Partially decodable words, 89. See also Decodable words; Sight words Partner reading. See Paired reading

Index 377 Pausing. See Expressive reading; Prosody PCI. See Positive cross-linguistic influence Performance definitions for ELLs, 55, 58. See also WIDA standards Persian alphabet, 93 cross-linguistic homophone, 188 Phonemes, 89. See also Phonology and Graphemes, 89–91. See also Phonics listening comprehension more difficult when unfamiliar, 67 of English, 98 Phoneme segmentation, 61 Phonics, 89–90, 114, 307 bottom-up skills, 47–49, 50, 90, 206, 232. importance of, 90. See also Bottom-up skills Phonological awareness, 60–61. See also Phonological decoding; Phonological loop amount needed for different orthographies, 111 developmental stages of, 60–61 for L1 Chinese readers, 94 importance for reading proficiency, 71, 89 needed for opaque orthographies, 110. See also Phonics Phonological decoding, 100, 214–215. See also Decoding; Phonological loop Phonological loop, 214, 215, 233. See also Phonological awareness; Phonological decoding Phonology, 6. See also Oracy; Universals of language Photographs, 126–127, 139. See also Visual literacy bias in, 127 creating a photo album, 140 Phrasal verbs, 188–189, 196, See also Collocations examples with Latin equivalents, 190 language-specific nature of, 150 Phrase and sentence level, 241–244 pronunciation stress, 63. See also Contrastive Stress; Syllable stress in reading comprehension strategies, 241 Pinker, Steven, 6, 60, 146, 188, 190, 192, 193, 263 Pinyin, 104. See also Chinese writing system; Orthography and English language learners; Writing system reforms Plagiarism, 269, 271. See also AI chatbots in the Common Core State Standards, 271 Poetry for fluency practice, 217–218 for multimodal projects, 307 writing contest for ELLs, 283

Polysemous words, 175. See also Ambiguous vocabulary in English Portmanteau words. See Blends Positive cross-linguistic influence (PCI), 42. See also Cross-linguistic influence; Interference; Non-effect benefits of L1 literacy, 7, 32, 49, 88. See also Interdependence hypothesis; Multiliteracy; Translanguaging examples of, 42–43 facilitated by background knowledge, 239 from common writing system, 40 Prefixes, 144, 147, 153, See also Affixes; Bound morphemes; Derivational morphemes; Suffixes assimilation changes spelling of, 145 call my bluff game, 164 word list contest game, 163 Preteaching. See Frontloading Prior knowledge. See Background knowledge. Probabilistic reasoning, 65–66 for reading, 90–91, 100 for spelling, 105, 277 in listening, 68 with interactive read-aloud, 81–82 Process writing. See Writing workshop Processing time differences in, 210. See also Fluency and English language learners need for, 77 Prompts conversational, using photos and images, 126–127 created by students to understand tests, 250. See also Questioning techniques for autobiographical visual storytelling, 138 multimodal, 285 writing, generated by AI, 268 Pronunciation guide, xv–xvi of –s/–es and –ed endings, 156–158, 159. See also Inflectional morphemes; Morphophonemic nature of English Proper nouns and names difficulty spelling, 105 in fluency assessments, 210 Prosody, 207, 213, 214. See also Chunking; Expressive reading benefit from fluency instruction, 174 Punctuation, 39, 41, 241 academic, 266 importance in written language, 266 in different orthographies, 111–112 in oral reading, 207, 214, 226 Puns, 46, 176, 177, 200. See also Homographs; Homophones; Word formation processes in English

378 Index QAR. See Questioning techniques Questioning strategies, 250 depth of knowledge (DOK), 250 question–answer relationship (QAR), 250 Quipu, 117, 118 Rasinski, Timothy, 212, 215–216, 217, 219 Rate. See Reading rate Readers Theatre, 217. See also Fluency and English language learners, instruction Reading. See Domains of language learning Reading aloud. See Oral reading reading drafts aloud for editing, 289. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language, strategies for learning Reading buddies, 255. See also Paired reading; Reading comprehension strategies Reading comprehension, See also Reading comprehension strategies affected by background knowledge, 73, 77 relationship to writing, 263 similarities to listening comprehension, 68–69 Reading comprehension strategies, 229–261 for visual literacy, 120 metacognitive strategies, 248–249 online, 301–303 paired reading, 216, 218 reading buddies, 255 Reading fluency. See Fluency Reading online. See also Reading comprehension strategies strategies, 301–303 Reading rate, 211. See also Accuracy; See also Fluency and English language learners Reading while listening. See Audio-assisted reading Realia, 25 Reasoning by analogy, 91. See also Probabilistic reasoning Recasts, 276, 287. See also Uptake Recoding, 89, 227. See Spelling Recursive, 8 Redundancies of oral language, 265 Repeated reading, 215, 216. See also Fluency and English language learners procedure, 219, 222 score chart for rereading single passage, 228 Resilience, 13, ways to build, 14 Responsive writing, 274–275. See also Expository writing; Expressive writing; Writing to learn in English as a new language

Retell rope, 244. See also Reading comprehension strategies Rhymes, 46, 60, 61, 148, 180 build phonological awareness, 60, 61 for paired-word sound play, 180. See also Word formation processes in English Rime. See Onset and rime Romance languages, 40, 185, 186, 188. See also Orthographies; Language distance Roots, 146–147. See also Morphemes bound, 155–156 generating words in English and Spanish from common, 186 Samuels, S. Jay, 204, 211, 216 Scale change, 180. See also Word formation processes in English Schema. See Semiotic domain Screen-based reading, 300–302. See also Strategies, for online reading need to break up, 313 Second language. See also Language acquisition; Second-language acquisition definition, 5 reading models for, 34–37 Second-language acquisition, 1. See also Language acquisition order of, 9 Secondary school. See also Middle school fan fiction, 285 increasingly difficult expository writing, 275 manifestation of silent period for adolescents, 76 math word wall, 237 science word walls, 236, 162 video games, 305–308 writing a comic strip, 283 Segmenting text, 61, 219. See also Chunking; Fluency and English language learners Self-regulation in reading, importance of, 70 Semantic feature analysis grid. See Content frame Semantic map, 268, 269. See also Graphic organizers; Writing Workshop Semantics, 6, See also Universals of language Semiotic domain (schema), 121–122, 131 Sentence frames, 285–286. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language Sequoyah, 103. See also Cherokee writing system; Orthography and English language learners; Writing system reforms Shallow orthography. See Transparent orthography

Index 379 Sheltered instruction, 16–18 Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP). See Sheltered instruction Short-circuit hypothesis, 50. See also Threshold theory Sight words, 89, 98, 110, 111. See also Decodable words; Whole word recognition function words as, 150 in spelling, 115 recognition, 89, 92, 100, 150 See also Decoding using word cards and word walls to practice, 236 Signal words, 243–244. See also Connectors Silent period, 75–76. See also Oracy during online teaching, 310 pantomime during, 75 Silent reading, need for, 253–254. See also Extensive reading classroom techniques, 254 summer reading, 257–258 Simple view of reading, 70. See also Listening comprehension; Oracy SIOP. See also Sheltered instruction SLA. See Second-language acquisition Socially constructed nature of learning, 10, 18. See also Sociocultural theory; Vygotsky, Lev Sociocultural theory, 32–33, 55. See also Translanguaging; Vygotsky, Lev Song lyrics,196. See also Music, for teaching ELLs collocations, 194, 196 phrasal verbs, 196 transcribing lyrics, 79–80. See also Intensive listening activities Sounds. See Phonemes Spanish. See also Transparent orthography; Romance languages alphabet, 40 bridging techniques, 186 cognates with English and common Latin root, 186, 187 decoding versus comprehension, 99. See also Word calling dictado, 78 dual-language classrooms, 186, 239 false cognates, 187–188, 202 morphemes, 138 read-alouds for families, 256 research involving Spanish ELLs, 41, 44, 50, 51, 70, 208, 211, 232 shares Romance language, 40, 185, 186 spelling development differs from English, 50 surface versus deep structure, 44

syntax differs from English, 44 word formation processes, Spanish examples, 195 word play in images, 195 word wall, 238 Speaking. See Domains of language learning; Oracy; Oral proficiency; Speaking activities; WIDA standards Speaking activities, 82–85. See also Gamification; Oracy; Oral proficiency for the youngest learners, 85. See also Early childhood using optical illusions, 140 ways to build proficiency, 82–85 Speech to text, 174, 279, 295, 296, 366 automatic speech recognition, 295. See also Natural language processing. Spelling, 88–105 alphabetic spelling, 107 benefits from phonological awareness, 110 easier in transparent orthographies, 110 examples of simplified, 108–109 faster to learn in transparent orthographies, 104 French, an opaque orthography105 harder in opaque orthographies, 98, 102 ideas for early spelling instruction, 115 invented, 115 letter name, 107 non-English words spelled in English, 106 numeric, 107 probabilistic reasoning helps with, 90, 91–92 proper nouns and names, 105 role in writing, 246 simplified, 107 Spanish spelling development differs from English, 50 stages of, 114–115 vowels in English, 106–107 morphophonemic nature of English, 151 Spider map, 234, 268. See also Graphic organizers; Semantic map Stages of writing, 265 Stanovich, Keith, 70, 214, 23 Story grammar, 82, 132, 305. See also Interactive Read-aloud Strategies. See also Reading comprehension strategies fluency instruction, 216–222 for decoding, 110 for online reading, 300–302 listening comprehension, 60–72 extensive, 80–82 intensive, 77–80

380 Index Strategies (cont.) reading comprehension, 233–258 audio imaging, 247. See also Music, for teaching ELLs extensive reading, 253–254 first-language use, 238 graphic organizers, 245–247 metacognitive, 248–250 paragraph and discourse level, 244–245 phrase and sentence level, 241–244 questioning strategies, 250 text structures, 244 using cognates, 239 using dictionaries, 240–241 visualization, 247–248 wait time, 251 word level, 233–241 word learning, 233–240. See also Vocabulary development writing, 282–290. See also Writing to learn in English as a new language for learning, 287–290 Stress patterns, 62–63. See also Oracy contrastive stress, 63 phrase and sentence stress, 63 syllable stress, 62–63 Stress-timed language, English as, 62–63 Subtitles, to practice comprehension, 80 Suffixes, 147, 151, 153,155. See also Affixes; Derivational morphemes; Inflectional morphemes; Morphemes; Prefixes compared to Spanish suffixes, 239 derivational, 148, 153 inflectional, 148, 154–155 scale change, 180. See also Word formation Sulzby, Elizabeth, 265. See also Early childhood; Stages of writing Surface structure, 6. See also Chomsky SVR. See Simple view of reading. Swain, Meryl, 11, 18. See also Output Hypothesis Syllabary, 93–94, 111. See also Gujarati; Syllabic writing systems Syllabic writing systems, 92–94. See also Orthography and English language learners Syllables, 45, 61–62, 93 dangers of analyzing words by, 151–153 syllable-based writing systems, 92–94. See also Orthography and English language learners syllable stress, 62–63. See also Oracy; Phrase and sentence stress unstressed syllables, difficulty of spelling, 106 Syndrome of success, 7–8, 36, 77, 105, 143, 229, 231, 269, 283

Syntax, 6, 44 Systemic functional linguistics (SFL), 12, 32. See also Sociocultural theory; Vygotsky, Lev T-chart, 245, 246, 261. See also Graphic organizers Teachers importance of empathy, presence, efficacy, 311 self-efficacy, 21, 23, 312. See also Hattie Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), 340 Text structures, 244–245, 280–282 benefits of comic books, 131 email, 280–281 extensive reading helps students learn, 253 microblogging (Twitter/X), 281 social media, 281 texting, 281 Text-to-speech (TTS), 295, 298. See also Natural language processing Texting, 91, 107, 179, 281. See also Text structures Thai language, 101, 106, 214 cross linguistic homophone, 188 orthography, 40 Think-alouds, 17. See also Metacognitive skills and strategies three benefits of, 249 to confirm vocabulary, 303 to model highlighting online text, 302 to model writing, 287 Thiong’o, Ngugi-wa, 3, 27 Thomas and Collier, 52, 75 Threads. See Twitter/X Threshold theory, 49–51, 53, 70. See also Alderson, J. Charles reading comprehension, 232 writing, 270 Top-down skills, 47–49, 232. See also Bottom-up skills; Interactive process of reading; Strategies, reading comprehension Total physical response (TPR), 80–81, 124. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners; Oracy TPR See Total physical response Transcribing to practice listening comprehension, 78–80. See also Intensive listening activities Transfer, 32, 41. See also Contrastive analysis hypothesis; Cross-linguistic influence; Interdependence hypothesis; Interference; Non-effect; Positive cross-linguistic influence of strategies between languages, 44 problems with, 40–41

Index 381 Transition words, 243–244, 248. See also Connectors; Reading comprehension strategies Translanguaging, 33–34, 161, 163, 273, 284. See also Common Underlying Proficiency; Interdependence Hypothesis Transparency, 95, 98–99. See also Orthography and English language learners; Transparent orthography Transparent orthography, 95, 98–99. See also Orthographic depth hypothesis; Orthography and English language learners; Opaque orthography Turkish, 95, 103–104, 111,305. See also Orthography and English language learners; Writing system reforms Twenty questions, 84. See also Gamification; Information gap activities; Speaking activities Twitter/X, 281. See also Text structures writing short summaries, 281 Two-word verbs. See Phrasal verbs United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 4 Universals of language, 6, 143 Uptake, 276, 287. See also Recasts; Errors Venn diagram, 245–246, 261, 286, 313. See also Graphic organizers Video games, 305–308 gamers as autonomous learners, 305 Viewing as expansion of reading domain, 9, 120 Visual complexity, 101. See also Orthography and English language learners Visual literacy, 119–141 bar graphs, 129–130 body language, 123–124 comic strips, 131–132 139 concepts, 120–122 definition, 122 emojis, 133 Google doodles, 139–140 in the standards, 122 maps, 127–128 memes, 133–135 movies, 136. See also Moving images nature, 124–125 need for, 140 photographs, 126–127, 139 bias in, 127 creating a photo album, 140 pictures, 137, 139. See also Early childhood realia, 123 works of art, 139

Visualization, 247–248. See also Strategies, reading comprehension audio imaging, 247 Visually representing, as extension of writing domain, 9 Vocabulary. See also Etymology; Vocabulary development English as largest, reasons, 173 Vocabulary development, 22, 233–250. See also Effective Teaching Strategies for English language learners; Strategies, reading comprehension as part of continuum, 234 keyword method, 240 labeling items in room, 236. See also Early childhood listening vocabulary, 69–70 metacognitive, 248–249 need for explicit, 22, 26 online resources for, 198–199 paragraph and discourse level, 244–248 phrase and sentence level, 241–244 polysemous words, 174–175 preteaching, 234. See also Frontloading providing enough repetition, 240, See also Phonological loop song lyrics, 196 word cards, 234. See also Word walls word learning strategies, 233–240 word walls, 114, 236, 237 Vygotsky, Lev, 18–19, 30, 32, 47, 265. See also Sociocultural theory; Zone of proximal development Wait time, 24, 73, 251. See also Strategies, reading comprehension Web-based resources, 251–252, 303–304 Whole word recognition, 89, 92, 100, 150. See Sight words WIDA Standards, 51, 56, 65, 75, 120, 122, 250. for writing development, 272, 292 performance definitions for ELLs, 55, 58 supporting multimodality, 120 Word calling, 99–100, 151, 152, 211–212, 230. See also Decoding in transparent orthographies, 95, 98–99 oral reading by ELLs, 211–212 Word formation, 172, See also Word formation processes in English Word formation processes in English, 172–203 abbreviations, 179–180 acronyms, 179 backformation, 180 blending/blends (portmanteau words), 178–179 borrowing (loanwords), 178

382 Index Word formation processes in English (cont.) capitonyms, 184 category shift (conversion), 180 clipping, 179 coinage, 178 compounding, 178 contronyms, 185 conversion (category shift), 180 eponyms, 184–185 examples of, 177, 182–184 hyponyms, 185 loanwords (borrowing), 178 multiple processes, 181 neologisms, 178 new technology words, 318–319 paired-word sound play, 180 rhymes as, 180 portmanteau words (blending/blends), 178–179 scale change, 180 Spanish, examples of word play, 195 ways to practice, 194 Word learning strategies, 233–240. See also Vocabulary development compound noun game, 163–164, 170–171. See also Gamification; Morphemes Word recognition, 89. See also Decodable words; Partially decodable words; Sight words Word walls, 114, 236, 237. See also Vocabulary development; & and labeling, 236, 237 examples of, 236, 238 for phonemic awareness, 114 morphemes, 162 science, 236, 162 Spanish, 238, 239 to highlight connectors for writing, 243 word formation, 194 Words, most common English, 167–168. See also Morphemes World Class Instructional Design and Assessment Standards (WIDA). See WIDA standards Writing. See Domains of language learning; Writing to learn in English as a new language Writing system reforms, 102–104. See also Orthography and English language learners; Navajo; Pinyin; Sequoyah; Turkish

Writing systems, 92–95. See also Orthography; Orthography and English language learners alphabetic, 92–93 ease of learning, 90 emojis as, 112, 113. See also Emojis; Visual literacy logographic, 94–95 origins of, 6 syllabic, 93–94 Writing to learn in English as a new language, 262–293 as a thinking process, 267 cultural aspects, 270–271 expository, 273, 275. See also Academic language need to write for academic success, 275 expressive, 273, 274 plagiarism, 269, 271 reflective, 273, 274–275 relationship to reading, 263 skill building activities, 285–287 strategies for learning dialogue journals, 284 dictocomp, 286 quick writes, 283 techniques for expressive, 282–285 think-alouds, 287 WIDA writing standards, 272, 292 writing tasks, 273–275 Writing workshop, 268–270, 284. See also Effective teaching strategies for English language learners; Writing to learn in English as a new language drawbacks for ELLs, 269–272 stages, 268–269 Written language, 95, 265–266 changes more slowly than spoken language, 95 closeness to spoken form affects learning to read, 101–102 comparison to spoken language fewer redundancies, 265 more grammatically complex, 266 punctuation more important, 266 sentences longer, 265 wider vocabulary range, 265 Zone of proximal development (ZPD), 18–19, 72, 270. See also Vygotsky, Lev. ZPD. See Zone of proximal development Zwiers, Jeffrey, 51, 73, 85, 192, 272