Poster for the National Heritage Language Research Council 7 th Annual InstituteUniversity of Illinois, ChicagoJune 2013

HERITAGE LANGUAGE SPEAKERS AND PUBLIC SCHOOLING

Emily CurtisUniversity of Washington

PhD, LinguisticsEdD Candidate

Emily Curtis

2

My Perspectives

•Raised in Theoretical Linguistics (PhD, 2003)

•Now Doctoral Candidate in Education (Curriculum & Instruction, Teacher Ed)

• What do teachers need to know about language/linguistics?• What can Linguistics contribute in Education?• Continuing research on metalinguistic knowledge• What? Who? Whence/How? Why/what for?

•Teaching Teacher courses in Linguistics

•This Presentation: •What can Education contribute to HLMaintenance, HLSpeakers’ bilingual development?

Emily Curtis

3

Some Questions

•What are public schools doing for Heritage language speakers?

•What does teacher education need to do?

•What is the status of education research on topics related to HL and bilingualism?

Olga Kagan: HLStudies needs to have an impact on Education

Emily Curtis

4

Briefly,

• Student-age Heritage language speakers are rarely recognized as such in the “mainstream” education literature*•However, Ed. Research and Teacher Ed. has been concerned with “Cultural and Linguistic Diversity” for around 50 years

• The “needs” of CLD students most recently being addressed are (finally) approximating some “needs” of HL speakers, namely scaffolding advanced/academic English literacy

Grammatical/metalinguistic supports for HL bilingualism-biliteracy

• Some preliminary findings on what teachers know and what they take from a targeted linguistics course

*with some caveats

Socio-linguistic supports for HL

Emily Curtis

5

History of Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education

•US public schools segregated until 1954 Brown v. Board of Education• Assimilationist,1 Monolingual English, Prescriptive Grammar

• Integration starting 1960s, and Civil Rights Movement

Multicultural Education • focus on racial/ethnic minorities, pluralism• social justice: close “achievement gap” / repay “education debt” 2

• Banks, Cochran-Smith, Delpit, Gay: “cultural responsiveness”• Teacher Ed: “funds of knowledge”3 of CLD students and overturning a “deficit perspective” on differences--ESL v. bilingual• BUT schools ceased teaching English grammar in mid-grades4

1 Villegas, 2009; 2 Ladson-Billings, 2006; 3 Moll et al., 1992; 4 Wong-Fillmore & Snow, 2002

Emily Curtis

6

History of CLD in Education

• Some attention to language• dialects other than Standard (Heath 1982)• teaching the standard or “literary discourse” (Delpit, 1995)

• Lucas, Villegas: (socio)-linguistic responsiveness1 in Teacher Ed.• National studies:• Carnegie Foundation’s (2007) Teachers for a New Era, • National Academy of Education’s (2005) A good teacher in every

classroom

• Bilingual education has had a difficult time• “English-only” movements beginning in the 1980s; 17 states end bilingual

education2 • reauthorisation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in

2000 eliminated Title VII, the 1968 Bilingual Education Act (main funding for bilingual education) 2

• cultural stigma3 1 Lucas, Villegas and Freedson-Gonzales, 2008, Lucas and Villegas, 2010, 20112 Varghese, 2004 3 Hakuta, 2011

Emily Curtis

7

History of CLD in Education

• 1994: mainstream teachers have not known how to provide ESL supports2

• 2005: teachers feeling “woefully unprepared”1 to work with ELL

• 2008: most teachers (83% White,3 most monolingual) have no experiences to encourage cultural and linguistic responsiveness (or knowledge)4

• 2005: 46% of fourth-grader ELLs scored “below basic” in math and 73% “below basic” in reading nationwide • (compared to 11% and 25% respectively for White students)5

• inequalities in high school graduation rates, access to college-prep courses, “unequal access to a broad and rich curriculum that educates students to understand and to think critically, and in the disproportionate assignment of students of color and English learners to special education classes with limited educational opportunities”6 1 Valdes, 2005; also Gandara, 2005; Levine 2006; 2 Harklau, 1994; 3 Grossman and Lieb, 2008; 4Cochran-Smith and Fries, 2005; Clayton, Barnhardt, & Brisk, 2008; 5 Lucas and Grinberg, 2008; 6Zeichner, 2012; Artiles, Harry, Reschly & Chinn 2002; Hawkins, 2011

Emily Curtis

8

History of CLD in Education

•BUT, waves of immigration 1985-• Increased numbers of “English Language Learners”• formerly “Limited English Proficient” (LEP)• sometimes now called “Emergent Bilinguals” – incl. HLS• approx. 20% of public school students home lg. LOTE (in 2006)1

• Increased diversity of languages• though 80% nationally are Spanish-L1/HL2

• Over 460 languages spoken in homes of public school students nationwide2 – includes HLS• Over 100 in Seattle

1 Villegas and Lucas, 2011 2 Valdes and Castellon, 2011

Emily Curtis

9

History of CLD in Education

•Changing demographics•Cutting of ESL fundingMore ELL (ESL) students in mainstream classrooms

+ widespread Social Justice & Multicultural Education emphases in Teacher Education Programs (TEP) • equity, equal access to rigorous curricula

=> emphasis on teacher knowledge of language, linguistics, acquisition1

1Wong Fillmore & Snow, 2002; Lucas & Grinberg, 2008; Lucas, Villegas, & Freedson-Gonzalez, 2008; Valdes, Bunch, Snow, & Lee, 2005

Emily Curtis

10

Recent Focus on Language in CLD Education Research and Teacher Education

• Cummins, 1979: BICS vs. CALP (Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills vs. Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency)

• Schleppegrell, 2004: Language of Schooling (register)• Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008: SIOP method -- language learning objectives, identifying language demands• Bruner, Vygotsky, Cazden; Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007: Scaffolding•Walqui & van Lier, 2010: Amplify (language), don’t simplify• Schleppegrell & Colombi (eds.) : Advanced Literacy in L1 and L2 • Schleppegrell & colleagues: Systemic Functional Linguistics

(disciplinary language; academic language)

EXPLICIT FOCUS ON LINGUISTIC FORM AND FUNCTION (meaning) For teachers (curriculum choices) and for students (learning activities)

Emily Curtis

11

Basic “Conclusion”

Though focused on English side of bilingualism potential benefits for HLMaintenance, HLSpeakers

1. Culturally, Sociolinguisticallyrecognition of multiculturalism and bilingualism in US (and world), “bilingual” v. “ELL”; support for L1 (important for L2)1

identity, motivation, pride/capability

2. Linguistically, grammaticallymaking language explicit attention to form, metalinguistic knowledge (incl. socio-ling.)Maria Polinsky: not always bilingual advantage–why/when not? how to encourage?

1 Scarcella, 2002

Emily Curtis

12

Focus on Academic Language Scaffolding for CLD

Future Directions:Interdisciplinary collaborations and cross-fertilization in research:• Second language acquisition• Bilingualism research and bilingual education• Heritage languages• EdPsych, Teacher Education, and Policy

• Curricula also needed:• Teacher education• K-12 language/linguistic education

•What else do Public School Teachers need to know/believe/do to support HLM and HLS?

Please leave a note

Emily Curtis

13

Study underway: Knowledge, dispositions and skills of pre-service K-12 teachers in ELL Endorsement: ENTERING

Register & Code-switching (of registers!)• HAVE: “academic language” understanding of home vs. school language

contexts• NEED: multiple registers/context effects; pragmatics

Sociolinguistics • HAVE: code-switching registers & sociolects (AAVE), and funds of knowledge cultural language use and participation structures differences• NEED: naturalness of variation, inevitability of acquiring ambient variety (not

“choice” ); identity (covert prestige)

Morphology • HAVE: Latin & Greek roots (academic vocabulary), cognates (Spanish)• NEED: wider cross-linguistic/typological understanding; inflection/derivation;

other derivational patterns of English; other etymologies; disciplinary language

L2 / Heritage / Bilingualism• HAVE: focus on English (ESL), external aids (scaffolding=visuals/graphics,

repetition, word wall), sociocultural/cooperative learning, support/use of L1 • NEED: theories, stages and factors in L2, different kinds of bilingualism,

comparative understanding (transfer/interference)

Emily Curtis

14

Study underway: KSD of pre-service K-12 teachers in ELL Endorsement: GAINED

• “Concept of phoneme” • concept of transfer/influence of L1• psychological reality of grammatical structure

• Language Sketch Assignment• understanding complexity of language and task of L2• differences in structure (e.g. morphological typology)

• Language Attitudes & Knowledge Autobiography Assignment• (and other activities) • prescriptive vs. descriptive grammar – can’t teach prescriptively, but

descriptively…

• Functional Analysis Readings• Insight into specific disciplinary language (information structuring)• Methods of engaging in language analysis/discussion (with students)

toward deeper understanding and “making language explicit”

Emily Curtis

15

Focus on Academic Language Scaffolding for CLD

Future Directions:Interdisciplinary collaborations and cross-fertilization in research:• Second language acquisition• Bilingualism research and bilingual education• Heritage languages• EdPsych, Teacher Education, and Policy

• Curricula also needed:• Teacher education• K-12 language/linguistic education

•What else do Public School Teachers need to know/believe/do to support HLM and HLS?

Please leave a note