CHAPTER 2
Changing Times, Changing Teacher Expertise
Pedagogical Shifts That Support Ambitious Learning for ELLs
College and career ready standards have ushered in an era of reform in U.S. education. In chapter 1, we noted that the college and career ready standards place increased demands on all students, and in particular on ELLs. We also discussed that ensuring that ELLs meet the standards requires a reformulation in teachers’ classroom practices. In this chapter, we focus on this reformulation of pedagogy for ELL students, which involves a series of shifts in the design of learning materials and pedagogical approaches.1
Understanding and implementing these pedagogical shifts is pivotal to success in the education of future generations of ELLs. We characterize the shifts in table 2.1 below.2 The “From” column represents much of contemporary pedagogical practices with ELLs, while the “To” column signals the shifts that we propose that ELL teachers need to make in their pedagogy.
TABLE 2.1 Shifts in Pedagogy for ELLs
. . .
Changing the Nature of Teacher Expertise
Let us begin our exploration of the shifts with a vignette that illustrates some of the major changes required to build college and career readiness for ELLs.
Tanya Warren, a teacher at the International Newcomer Academy in Fort Worth, Texas, a high school that receives newly arrived immigrant teenagers for one year before they are transferred to their community schools, is teaching her science class. Her students come from diverse language, cultural, political, and educational backgrounds. It is mid-October, and her students have been working in English for five and a half weeks. In Ms. Warren’s class, there are a few students who have had uninterrupted schooling in their home countries; the large majority, however, have experienced major interruptions in their lives and schooling.
While Ms. Warren hands out materials for the main lesson activity on subatomic particles, a slide is projected onto the whiteboard with directions for the first task of the day. “Before we start our investigation,” Ms. Warren announces, “we need to think about what we already know.” Directing students’ attention to the handout, she points to the front page, which contains pictures of items students are familiar with, each object named by a label beginning with the prefix “sub” (such as “submarine”). Students are directed to look at the pictures with a partner, to take turns reading the labels, and to then discuss the guiding question, What do you think the word “sub” means?
At one table, María and José work together. María uses the question written on her paper and says, “What do you think the word ‘sub’ means?” She pauses. “I think sub means below or under. What do you think, José?” He nods. “Yeah, under. SUBmarine.” He makes a gesture with his hand, miming a submarine diving under the water.
After they decide on their answers, Ms. Warren asks students at the different tables to share their answers, and she records them on the board. “Now that you have an idea of what ‘sub’ means,” she tells them, moving them into the next part of the activity, “I want you to write what you think the word ‘subatomic’ might mean. I also think it might help if you draw a picture of what you think subatomic might mean on your whiteboard.” At their tables, groups of four students using their definitions of “sub” work to come up with a collective answer and to draw an accompanying picture. After a few minutes, Ms. Warren invites students to take their pictures to the front of the room so that groups can share them with the class.
Juan, sharing his team’s picture, says, “We think the word subatomic means the structure inside the atom.” Representing the next team, María traces the picture she and her partners have drawn of a large circle with a smaller core inside as she says, “The subatomic is under, under the atoms.” She makes a gesture with her hand moving downward to emphasize “under.” “OK, under,” confirms Ms. Warren. “Great job!”
With the pictures on the whiteboards lined up behind her, Ms. Warren gestures to the drawings. “You all did a great job of using the idea of ‘sub’ as down, or under. And here there’s even this word, ‘inside.’ And here you drew inside of the atom. And if we keep going down and down and down, and smaller and smaller and smaller”—here Ms. Warren punctuates her words by making circles with her hands, which become smaller and smaller as she moves downward toward the floor—“what do we have?”
“Subatomic,” several students respond in chorus.
“Smaller, inside. Yes, so subatomic means inside, smaller than atoms.” She moves to the next slide on her whiteboard, displaying the next set of written directions. “Now we are going to watch a simulation. First you are going to watch the simulation, and I just want you to observe what is happening—only what is happening, what you see. The second time we watch the simulation, I want you to draw what you see and write down your observations.”
Students then watch the simulation, a short video showing subatomic particles moving around the atom and providing a close-up shot of the particles inside the nucleus. After the second viewing, Ms. Warren says, “Now, with your partner, I want you to think of questions you have about the simulation, using your observations. Remember, you are only writing what you saw—don’t make any inferences.” Ms. Warren invites students at their tables of four to first work with their “shoulder partners,” exchanging their questions. They will then share their questions with the other dyad in their groups of four. At one table, José and María work together:
María: For me the question is: because the s- the size is different.
[silence between José and María]
The size color is . . . different.
José: The size and color?
María: Yes, because the size and color is different. What is YOUR question? Other, other question.
José: No—It’s not a question because you have because. It’s WHY.
María: Ah! why! Why the size and color is different? For me, is my question. What is your question?
José: Mmm . . . Why (Spanish: Es que no sé cómo se dice alrededor.)
María: Round. Round.
José: Round . . . No, no, no, no, “around.”
María: Yes, around
José: Why . . . ? Wait.
María: Why the—the circles?
José: No, no. Why the atoms are together
María: Why the- Why the- ah, bueno. [beginning to write down José’s questions]
José: Why the atoms . . .
María: The atoms . . . ?
José: ARE together or IS together?—ARE together
María: Is together?
José: I don’t know.
María: Is together.
José: Why the atoms is together?
María: Uh . . . other question is, eh, why the electron is there round on the neutron and proton?
José: [inaudible] Why the atom do not have the same, the same, the same
María: