Language in the English as a Second Language and

Language in the English as a Second Language and General Education Classrooms: A Tutorial Alejandro E. Brice University of Central Florida Kevin J. Miller Buffalo State College Roanne G. Brice University of Central Florida

As the culturally and linguistically diverse population of the United States continues to increase dramatically, speech– language pathologists (SLPs) and special education teachers in particular face the challenge of how best to assess and teach those students whose primary language is not English. The changing U.S. demographics are driving a need for a more comprehensive understanding of students learning English as a second language and the effect upon their education of learning English as a second language. A substantial number of English language learner (ELL) students, with and without disabilities, may not possess the requisite classroom discourse or pragmatic skills, may face difficulties, and may be incapable of fully benefiting in their learning. This tutorial will discuss factors related to describing classroom discourse in the context of five ethnographic studies, with particular attention paid to pragmatic language skills for ELL students with and without disabilities. This article will also discuss strategies for what these students need to know regarding pragmatic language skills and which strategies school professionals need to implement for bilingual ELL students (i.e., regarding planning and communication in delivering instruction). This knowledge should assist school professionals in making more appropriate decisions in assessment and instruction for these students. School professionals today repeatedly face the challenge of how best to provide instruction for students who 240

are English language learners (ELL). The issue is compounded when speech–language pathologists (SLPs) and special educators must provide instruction to ELL students from bilingual homes. The need for a more comprehensive understanding of students learning English as a second language and the effect upon their education of learning English as a second language is warranted by the changing U.S. demographics (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001, 2003). This was noted by Whitworth (2000): Not only is there a continuing need for special education teachers, but there is a need for teachers appropriately trained in, and equipped with, the skills that special education teachers are going to need in the new century. As our student population becomes more diverse [italics added] . . . we must prepare special education teachers who are capable of being successful in the school of tomorrow. (p. 3) Bilingual students do not come to school with the same degree of English language skills and academic preparedness that monolingual, English-speaking children possess (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Steifel, Schwartz, & Congel, 2003). In addition, bilingual students may be provided with less than optimal instruction due to language and cultural differences (Banks, 2006; Cummins, 1984; Donovan & Cross, 2002). There-

Communication Disorders Quarterly 27:4 • pp. 240–247

Communication Disorders Quarterly • vol. 27, no. 4 / Summer 2006

fore, the issue of adequate instruction is a serious dilemma that needs to be addressed by educators today.

PROBLEMS WITH COMMUNICATION For ELL students, the problems with communication may be acute and exacerbated by the dual demands of learning to speak English and concurrent academic learning (Baca & Cervantes, 1998; Cummins, 2000; Krashen, 2000). A substantial number of students who are ELL may not possess the requisite classroom discourse or pragmatic skills, face difficulties, and be incapable of fully benefiting from their learning (A. Brice, 2002; A. Brice & Montgomery, 1996; Ortiz & Yates, 2002, 2003). By the time children reach school, they should exhibit a wide range of language abilities (e.g., speaking English fluently) that are critical to their school success in accessing the general curriculum (e.g., learning to read) (R. G. Brice, 2004a, 2004b). A. Brice, Mastin, and Perkins (1997a) suggested that how teachers use language in classrooms has an effect on how students interact, and consequently learn. This point was also mentioned by Guthrie and Guthrie (1987) when they stated that how teachers and students use language [i.e., classroom discourse], rather than particular linguistic aspects of speech, may have more to do with the way children learn, and the miscommunication, misunderstanding, and educational difficulty students encounter. (p. 206) Thus, the student’s ability to respond to and use language appropriately in classrooms becomes an issue for many students who are ELL. A student who is learning English may not possess all the language skills needed for inclusive instruction in the general education classroom. Such a student may appear to have difficulties (e.g., not be able to ask for help) and consequently suffer in learning.

PURPOSE OF THIS TUTORIAL This tutorial will discuss factors related to classroom language by English language learner students and strategies that can assist in their learning. The data were obtained from our five previous qualitative research studies. These studies involved bilingual students (e.g., Mexican and Puerto Rican Spanish–English speakers) in general education classrooms (second and fourth grades), English as a second language (ESL) classrooms (first, second, and fourth grades), and speech and language rooms

241

(first grade), with particular attention to the discourse skills among the school professionals and their respective students. The studies were qualitative and descriptive of English, and sometimes Spanish, discourse spoken by both school professionals and students. The purpose of these studies was to determine what aspects of language were crucial for bilingual students with and without disabilities (at different grade levels) transitioning from the ESL classroom to the general education English classroom. Please refer to our previous studies for further detail (A. Brice, 2003; A. Brice, Mastin, & Perkins, 1997a, 1997b; A. Brice, Miller, & R. G. Brice, 2006; A. Brice & Perkins, 1997). Therefore, the purpose of this tutorial was to develop instructional strategies for use with bilingual students in school classrooms—for example (a) the general education classroom, (b) the English as a second language classroom, and (c) the speech and language or special education classrooms. It is anticipated that use of appropriate instructional strategies will improve the language abilities of students who are ELL with normal language lags due to learning a second language, and students who are ELL with language-based learning disabilities (LBLD). According to the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (2005), “Language-based learning disabilities interfere with age-appropriate reading, spelling, and/or writing. . . . Learning disabilities are caused by a difference in brain structure that is present at birth, is often hereditary, and often related to specific language problems” (p. 1). Therefore, knowledge gained from this tutorial should assist speech–language pathologists and special education teachers become more knowledgeable about English language acquisition issues and classroom language issues. A better understanding of language discourse demands in the classroom, therefore, may ameliorate some learning issues for the ELL students. From our previous studies (A. Brice, 2003; A. Brice, Mastin, & Perkins 1997a; A. Brice, Mastin, & Perkins, 1997b; A. Brice, Miller, & R. G. Brice, 2006; A. Brice & Perkins, 1997), the authors have developed (a) strategies for what ELL bilingual students (with and without disabilities) need to know, presented as Pragmatic Skills Strategies; and (b) strategies for what SLPs, special education teachers, and other teachers need to know, presented in the form of a Planning and Communication strategy program.

PRAGMATIC SKILLS STRATEGIES Pragmatics for students in school are an important aspect of functioning within the classroom. Pragmatic

242


skills are critical to the academic progress and building of peer relationships. ELL students and bilingual students with language-based learning disabilities LBLD may need specific instruction in pragmatics skills (A. Brice, 2002; A. Brice & Absalom, 1996; A. Brice & R. G. Brice, 2000; R.G. Brice, 2004b). This instruction may take the form of direct instruction (i.e., teaching to the task). In addition, school professionals need to be aware of the language demands that classrooms place upon students and that their instructional practices may have to be modified to match the learners’ special needs. Table A1 in the appendix lists 12 recommended language and pragmatic skill strategies to facilitate learning for students who are ELL with and without languagebased learning disabilities. The literature has shown that these strategies may be applied flexibly with all English language learners along the entire continuum of language proficiency in a variety of settings (A. Brice & Roseberry-McKibbin, 1999; Goldstein, 2000; Langdon & Cheng, 1992; Peregoy & Boyle, 1997).

PLANNING AND COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES Studies (Brice, 2002; Brice, Miller, & Brice, 2006; Figueroa & Hernandez, 2000) have shown that students in ELL classrooms, speech and language or special education classrooms, and general education classrooms all benefit from more lesson planning and co-planning with other school professionals (e.g., the speech–language pathologist and the general education classroom teacher; the speech–language pathologist and the special education teacher), as well as communication with students and other school professionals (e.g., special education and general education classroom teachers; A. Brice, 2002; A. Brice, Miller, & R. G. Brice, 2006; Figueroa & Hernandez, 2000). Five recommended instructional planning and communication strategies drawn from research are recommended and are presented in Table A2 in the appendix.

CONCLUSION The types of language used and the language demands of classrooms should be noted by the speech–language pathologist or special education teacher when assessing and carrying forth Individualized Education Programs. Collaboration among ESL and general education teachers furthers the educational needs of ELL students. Collaborative assessment and teaching practices should not

be neglected by speech–language pathologists or special education teachers when working with ELL students. Preparing students who are ELL, with and without disabilities, to succeed in the general education classroom requires an understanding of the language and pragmatic skills they are likely to encounter. It may well be that a lack of understanding of the language and pragmatic skills used by general education teachers, ESL teachers, and students is a major contributing factor to the less than optimal instructional practices often used with ELL students. Conversely, having an understanding of the language that teachers and students use can help guide the development of programming for bilingual students with and without LBLD who are included in general education settings. When bilingual students are immersed in Englishlanguage-enriched classrooms, then learning of English will be better facilitated. The above suggestions may assist speech–language pathologists and special education teachers working with ELL students in achieving school and classroom success. In summary, Grosjean (1998) stated that bilingualism is present in every country, in all classes of society, and at all age levels and is the norm worldwide. As more children enter U.S. schools from non-English-speaking homes, speech–language pathologists and special education teachers should develop a deeper understanding of English language learning issues. It is hoped that school professionals approach English language learning in an informed manner. ABOUT THE .AUTHORS

Alejandro E. Brice, PhD, CCC-SLP, is an associate professor in communication sciences and disorders at the University of Central Florida. His research has focused on issues of transference or interference between two languages in the areas of phonetics, phonology, semantics, and pragmatics related to education and pedagogy. Kevin J. Miller, EdD, is an assistant professor in the Exceptional Education Department at Buffalo State College. His research has focused on cultural competency and teaching, effective interventions for children and youth with emotional and behavior difficulties, and classroom/behavior management. Roanne G. Brice, PhD, CCC-SLP, is the early childhood coordinator and assistant to the chair for the Department of Child, Family and Community Sciences at the University of Central Florida. Her research interests have focused on language and beginning literacy skills in bilingual children and students with disorders/disabilities. Address: Alejandro E. Brice, University of Central Florida, 3374 Sterling


Lake Circle, Oviedo, FL 32765; e-mail: [email protected] .edu REFERENCES Aguirre, A. (1988). Code switching, intuitive knowledge, and the bilingual classroom. In H. Garcia & R. Chavez (Eds.), Ethnolinguistic issues in education (pp. 28–38). Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2005). Languagebased learning disabilities. Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http:// www.asha.org/public/disorders/Language-Based-LearningDisabilities.htm Baca, L. M., & Cervantes, H. T. (Eds.). (1998). The bilingual special education interface (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Bahamonde, C., & Friend, M. (1999). Teaching English language learners: A proposal for effective service delivery through collaboration and co-teaching. Journal of Educational Psychological Consultation, 10(1), 1–24. Banks, J. (2006). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Beaumont, C. (1992). Language intervention strategies for Hispanic LLD students. In H. W. Langdon with L. L. Cheng (Eds.), Hispanic children and adults with communication disorders (pp. 272– 342). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen. Brice, A. (2002). The Hispanic child: Speech, language, culture and education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Brice, A. (2003). A comparison of language use by a bilingual firstgrade teacher and a bilingual speech-language clinician: A case study of their impact on bilingual learners. Journal of the New York State Association of Bilingual Education, 14, 55–81. Brice, A., & Absalom, D. (1996). Classroom pragmatics skills: Investigating adolescents learning English as a second language. Journal of Children’s Communication Development, 18(2), 19–29. Brice, A., & Brice, R. G. (2000). Language in the classroom: Comparison of four bilingual environments. The South African Journal of Communication Disorders, 47, 91–98. Brice, A., Mastin, M., & Perkins, C. (1997b). Bilingual classroom discourse skills: An ethnographic study. Florida Journal of Communication Disorders, 17, 11–19. Brice, A., Mastin, M., & Perkins, C. (1997a). English, Spanish, and code switching use in the ESL classroom: An ethnographic study. Journal of Children’s Communication Development, 19(2), 11–20. Brice, A., Mastin, M., & Perkins, C. (1997b). Bilingual classroom discourse skills: An ethnographic study. Florida Journal of Communication Disorders, 17, 11–19. Brice, A., Miller, K., & Brice, R. G. (2006). Multiple voices for ethnically diverse exceptional learners. Manuscript submitted for publication. Brice, A., & Montgomery, J. (1996). Adolescent pragmatic skills: A comparison of Latino students in ESL and speech and language programs. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 68–81. Brice, A., & Perkins, C. (1997). What is required for transition from the ESL classroom to the general education classroom? A case study of two classrooms. Journal of Children’s Communication Development, 19(1), 13–22. Brice, A., & Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (1999). Turning frustration into success for English language learners. Educational Leadership, 56(7), 53–55.

243

Brice, R. G. (2004a). Identification of phonemes and graphemes in Spanish-English and English-speaking kindergarten students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida. (ProQuest Digital Dissertations AAT 3144882.) Brice, R. G. (2004b). Connecting oral and written language through applied writing strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(1), 38–47. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Avon, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters. Cummins, J. (2000). Bilingual children’s mother tongue: Why is it important for education? Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http://www .iteachilearn.com/cummins/mother.htm DeBoer, A., & Fister, S. (1998). Working together: Tools for collaborative teaching. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Díaz-Rico, L. (2004). Teaching English learners. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Dieker, L., & Barnett, C. (1996). Effective co-teaching. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(1), 5–7. Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (Eds.). (2002). Representation of minority students in special and gifted education. In Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education (pp. 35–89). Retrieved July 5, 2003, from http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309074398/ html/R1.html Figueroa, R., & Hernandez, S. (2000). Teaching Hispanic students in the United States: Technical and policy issues. Jessup, MD: President’s Advisory Commission of Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans. Figueroa, R. A., & Ruiz, N. T. (1997, January). The optimal learning environment. Paper presented at the Council for Exceptional Children Symposium on Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Exceptional Learners, New Orleans, LA. Goldstein, B. (2000). Cultural and linguistic diversity. A resource guide. San Diego, CA: Singular. Grosjean, F. (1998). Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues: Bilingualism. Language and Cognition, 1(2), 131–149. Guthrie, L. F., & Guthrie, G. P. (1987). Teacher language use in a Chinese bilingual classroom. In S. R. Goldman & H. T. Trueba (Eds.), Becoming literate in English as a second language (pp. 205–231). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Krashen, S. (2000). Why bilingual education? (ERIC Digest No. RC 020895) Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http://www.englishfirst .org/eff/krashen.html Johnson, B. A. (1996). Language disorders in children: An introductory clinical perspective. Albany, NY: Del Mar Publishers. Langdon, H. W., & Cheng, L. (Eds). (1992). Hispanic children and adults with communication disorders: Assessment and intervention. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen. Langdon, H., & Saenz, T. (Eds.). (1996). Language assessment and intervention with multicultural students. Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication Associates. Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2004). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. McGregor, G., & Vogelsberg, R. T. (1998). Inclusive schooling practices: Pedagogical and research foundations. Baltimore: Brookes. Nye, C., Foster, S., & Seaman, D. (1987). Effectiveness of language intervention with the language/learning disabled. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 52(4), 348–357.

244


Ortiz, A., & Yates, J. R. (2002). Bilingual exceptional education and bilingual speech–language pathology. Interview with Dr. Alba Ortiz and Dr. James Yates. Retrieved April 30, 2002, from http:// www.asha.ucf.edu/roannebrice.html Ortiz, A., & Yates, J. R. (2003, April). Serving English language learners: Trends and issues in general and special education. Paper presented at the 2003 Council for Exceptional Children Annual Conference, Seattle, WA. Owens, R. (1996). Language development (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Simon and Schuster. Pearl, C. (2005, January). Maximizing the potential of co-teaching as a service delivery model. Paper presented at the Florida Division of Learning Disabilities Annual Conference, Orlando, FL. Pennington, M. C. (1995). Eight case studies of classroom discourse in the Hong Kong secondary English class (Research Report No. 42). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong, Department of English. Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. S. (1997). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A resource book for K–12 (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. Ramírez, J. D. (2000). Bilingualism and literacy: Problem or opportunity? A synthesis of reading research on bilingual students. Proceedings of A Research Symposium on High Standards in Reading for Students From Diverse Language Groups: Research, Practice & Policy (pp. 9–41). Washington, DC: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs. Reed, V. (2004). Introduction to children with language disorders (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Roseberry-McKibbin, C. (2002). Serving multicultural students with special language needs: Practical strategies for assessment and intervention (2nd ed.). Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication Associates.

Roseberry-McKibbin, C., & Hegde, M. N. (2000). Advanced review of speech-language pathology: Preparation for NESPA and comprehensive examination. Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Roy, M. B., Roseberry-McKibbin, C., Rau, C. L., Lamberth, E., McLean, K., & Madding, C. C. (2000). Beyond linguistic barriers: Practical strategies for intervention with ESL students. Short course presented at the Annual Convention of the California Speech and Hearing Association, San Diego, CA. Seymour, H. N., & Valles, L. (1998). Language intervention for linguistically different learners. In C. M. Seymour & E. H. Nober (Eds.), Introduction to communication disorders: A multicultural approach (pp. 89–109). Newton, MA: ButterworthHeinemann. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1996). Inclusion: A guide for educators. Baltimore: Brookes. Steifel, L., Schwartz, A. E., & Conger, D. (2003). Language proficiency and home languages of students in New York City elementary and middle schools. (ERIC Document Reproductions Service No. ED474013) U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). The Hispanic population in the United States: Population characteristics. Washington, DC: Author. U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). The Hispanic population in the United States: Population characteristics. Washington, DC: Author. Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., & Schumm, J. S. (2003). Teaching exceptional, diverse, and at risk students in the general education classroom (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Whitworth, J. (2000). Preparing, recruiting, and retaining special education personnel in rural areas. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED439893)

Resources Banks, 2006; Beaumont, 1992; Brice, 2002, 2004a, 2004b; Cummins, 2000; Figueroa & Ruiz, 1997; Goldstein, 2000.

Brice, 2004b; Brice, Mastin, & Perkins, 1997b; Peregoy & Boyle, 1997; Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002.

Banks, 2006; Beaumont, 1992; Brice, Mastin, & Perkins, 1997b; Langdon & Saenz, 1996; Goldstein, 2000; Roseberry-McKibbin & Hegde, 2000. Brice, 2003; Goldstein, 2000; Langdon & Saenz, 1996; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2004; Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002. Brice & Montgomery, 1996; Langdon & Saenz, 1996; Roy, RoseberryMcKibbin, Rau, Lamberth, McLean, & Madding, 2000.

Brice & Montgomery, 1996; Cazden, 2001; Langdon & Saenz, 1996; Ortiz & Yates, 2003.

Pragmatic strategy

1. Build lessons on the student’s background knowledge and related to the textbook readings as an advanced organizer.

2. Provide written copies of directions and assignments to complement oral instruction.

3. Ask prediction questions, such as “What do you think . . . ?” (i.e., to encourage skills related to expressing oneself).

4. Teach self-study skills such as note taking, self-questioning, organizing, and test-taking (to encourage expressing self).

5. Encourage students to ask questions. Higherlevel questions should be encouraged, such as questions of application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

6. Model correct language forms. Employ more pauses and wait for responses to allow ELL students to process oral language (to encourage active listening).

TABLE A1. Pragmatic Skills Strategies Examples

Model Correct Language Example: Student: “I finish to watch TV when it’s four o’clock.” SLP/Teacher: “Oh, you finished watching TV when it was four o’clock.” (table continues)

Higher-Order Questions: Encourage your students to ask questions such as (a) Do you agree with the actions . . . ? with the outcomes . . . ? (b) What is your opinion of . . . ? (c) How would you prove . . . ? disprove . . . ? (d) Can you assess the value or importance of . . . ? (e) Would it be better if . . . ? (f) Why did they (the characters) choose . . . ? (g) What would you recommend . . . ?

Self-Study Skills: 1. Write down key words when taking notes. 2. Organize your notes according to themes.

Prediction Questions Examples: 1. What would happen if we put your names in alphabetical order? 2. Why did they take down the sign they made in church?

Written Directions: 1. Open science book to page 10. 2. Read the story of “Benjamin Franklin’s Kite.” 3. Write five sentences that describe what happened in the story. 4. Draw a picture of Benjamin Franklin and his kite.

Questions for Discussion Examples: Have you ever flown a kite?–Describe. What type of weather is good for kite flying?–Why? Do you think it would be a good idea for you to fly your kite during a lightning storm?–Why or why not? What are other dangers we need to be careful of when flying our kites?

APPENDIX

245

Resources Baca & Cervantes, 1998; Brice, 2002, 2004b; Figueroa & Ruiz, 1997; Pennington, 1995.

Nye, Foster, & Seaman, 1987.

Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002; Pennington, 1995; Seymour & Valles, 1998. Aguirre, 1988; Brice, Mastin, & Perkins, 1997b; Ramírez, 2000.

Johnson, 1996; Owens, 1996; DíazRico, 2004.

Brice, 2004a, 2004b; Reed, 2004; Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002.

Pragmatic strategy

7. Increase student-to-teacher or SLP interactions to encourage the development of regulatory (i.e., commands), heuristic (i.e., questions), informational (i.e., providing information), and instrumental (i.e., language used to satisfy one’s needs) language.

8. Use grammar drills and direct instruction (i.e., teaching specific skills such as asking questions).

9. Practice formalized, structured speaking situations.

10. Allow for code switching and code mixing behaviors to occur. Code switching, code mixing, and native language use have been shown to promote and accelerate English language learning.

11. Once students reach a higher level of English language proficiency, use longer and more complex sentences to teach and reinforce language. This will increase memory skills and attention, specifically memory for sentences and the cognitive skill of increased attention span.

12. Expand your vocabulary use in instructional lessons. It has been noted that bilingual and monolingual students with language-based learning disabilities need additional and repeated instruction in vocabulary.

(Table A1 continued)

Vocabulary: 1. Give synonyms and antonyms of less common classroom words. 2. Use lesson words in classroom teaching contexts. 3. Repeat new words throughout lessons and the day.

Longer Sentences Example: “Okay, third grade. Pull out your math book and turn to page 11 and start problems 1 through 10 and then continue with problems 20–30. After you finish those problems, put your workbooks aside so that I can check your addition problems with the 10’s carryover.”

Code Switching/Mixing Example: Student: “Vamos a comer lunch?” SLP/Teacher: “Si, we are going to have lunch.”

Formalized Speaking Situations Example: “Fourth-grade class, today we are going to prepare speeches thanking X Company for their recent donations to our school.”

Grammar Drills and Direct Instruction Example: SLP: “Javier, I want you to ask for help. Please say, ‘Ms. Jones, can you help me with the math problems?’”

Student-to-Teacher/SLP Interactions: 1. Circulate in the classroom during lesson time and individual practice. Encourage students to ask clarification questions if needed. 2. Allow for students to answer responses. 3. Allow for students to make comments.

Examples

246


247

TABLE A2. Planning and Communication Strategies Planning and communication strategies

Resources

Examples

1. Plan lessons and establish what expected learning outcomes should result from the lessons. Outline what adaptations may be needed for children learning English and students with disabilities. Engage in teaching and demonstrating learning strategies that students may incorporate.

Bahamonde & Friend, 1999; DeBoer & Fister, 1998; Dieker & Barnett, 1996; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2004

Plan lessons beyond the use of workbooks, i.e., working through 20 math problems on the board or overhead or reading 30 /br/ blends in segmenting initial consonant-consonant words.

2. Plan lessons jointly with other school professionals so that continuity of information may occur across classrooms. Key terms and concepts should be reinforced in both classrooms to enhance vocabulary and concept acquisition.

DeBoer & Fister, 1998; Dieker & Barnett, 1996; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2004

Reinforce the same key terms in both classrooms. Reiterate key concepts in both classrooms to reinforce continuity of instruction.

3. Plan lessons that allow students to be successful and allow for opportunities to use language in purposeful dialogue.

Cazden, 2001; McGregor & Vogelsberg, 1998; Pearl, 2005

Engage students in small-group assignments, speak out loud, provide information, ask questions. Also engage in turntaking and other classroom discourse events.

4. Establish a routine of communicating with students. Engage in turn-taking and exchanging ideas. Incorporate pauses and listen to the students. Communicate frequently with students in one-to-one exchanges. Involve all students in whole-classroom and small-group activities.

Brice, 2004b; Cazden, 2001; Pennington, 1995; RoseberryMcKibbin, 2002; Seymour & Valles, 1998

Provide an advance organizer to each lesson (what is to be covered); teach; and then provide a summary of what has been learned. Throughout the lessons, pause after every 3rd sentence.

5. Establish a pattern of communicating with other school professionals. This should be formalized for discussing lessons, students, and educational outcomes. Specific times and days should be set for these co-professional conferences.

Roseberry-McKibbin, 2002; Stainback & Stainback, 1996; Vaughn, Bos, & Schumm, 2003

Schedule meeting times with the other teachers. Attend regularly. Topics should include lessons and student outcomes for each lesson.