Friday, November 1, 2013

Strategies for Academic Language Acquisition: Relationships are the Key


“Knowledge of, and effective classroom implementation of techniques such as use of graphic organizers, cooperative learning, total physical response, developing learning strategies, peer tutoring, dialogue journals, authentic assessment, and so on are important but they do not necessarily translate into effective instruction. Much more crucial is the recognition that human relationships are fundamental to students’ academic engagement…For students to invest their sense of self, their identity, in acquiring their new language and participating actively in their new culture, they must experience positive and affirming interactions with members of that culture” (p. 132).

In chapter 5, Cummins lays out a framework for effectively teaching academic language to English Language Learners. The framework focuses on meaning, language, and use, with specific strategies in each component. However, Cummins’ larger argument is the necessity of this framework taking place in the scheme of positive and identity-shaping teacher-student interactions. In short, even the best strategies, the most researched techniques, and the most thoughtfully planned lessons are ineffective without interactions that affirm students’ cultural and linguistic background and knowledge.

Although the majority of the chapter is spent developing the focuses within the framework, Cummins never fails to point out that identity negotiations are always occurring. These negotiations can take place within coercive relations of power or collaborative relations of power. What Cummins does well in this chapter is spell out how strategies used within a classroom can foster the affirmation and positive creation of students’ identities. I found these strategies helpful; I can imagine them taking place in an average classroom (albeit one in which the teacher is striving for the well-being of the ELL students) and I have seen many of them in my own classroom.

One of the most intriguing aspects of Cummins’ framework is his third focus, a focus on use. This includes speaking and writing, two of what I believe are some of the most ignored aspects of academic language learning, especially for ELLs. One point the author makes is that for the use of language to be meaningful, students need to be provided with an authentic audience. I remember our instructor, Maria, sharing a similar concept last summer in our literacy class. She displayed a “big book” her class had collaboratively made. They wrote the story – each page was about Clifford – and illustrated it. They were motivated because they had an authentic audience: other classes. They were not students working on an assignment. They, in that moment, were authors and illustrators. I asked Maria in my reading notes how realistic it is that students consistently be provided with an authentic audience for their works of writing. She replied wisely: it is possible if the teacher is willing to make it possible. She suggested writing a newsletter to be sent home, working on a book to be published in the classroom library (which Cummins also discusses on p. 146), or sharing writing with other classes. These are all doable by teachers, with even minimal planning. I hope to instill in my current and future students a sense of purpose in their writing, encouraged in part by the knowledge that they are authors.

Interested in the subject of writing for a real audience, I did a quick Google search and came across an article explaining the importance of real audiences for student writers, but at the high school level. For the National Writing Project, high school English teacher and author Anne Rodier (2000) writes, “[Our students] have to believe that what they have to say is important enough to bother writing. They have to experience writing for real audiences before they will know that writing can bring them power.” (Here is the full article.) This ties in with what Cummins argues throughout his writing. Writing can bring power not only in the ways Rodier writes of (telling a story and providing a platform to elicit change). It can also form identity – especially for the bilingual student.

In oral language use children also need authentic audiences and they need the space to simply produce language. In my classroom, the students are preparing research projects for our upcoming “Diversity Day.” This project affords countless opportunities to produce language, and language of different kinds. When speaking to group members, students typically use colloquial language. When writing their research, their language is more formal and precise. The key component to this project, however, is that students will stand next to their project boards on the final day to share with parents, staff, and other students what they have learned. Providing this kind of audience motivates students to work hard on their presentations, but also gives them opportunities to be important. They are the ones sharing knowledge with others. They are becoming the experts.

However, there is always room for growth. Cummins writes that teachers and principals believe that too much time devoted to writing and language production will cause students to “suffer on the standardized tests used to police instruction” (p. 147). I have seen this to be true. Beyond the large project the students are working on, both the ELLs and the English-only students rarely write. Occasionally they work on guided writing assignments, but I have seen this mostly in conjunction with preparation for a trimester assessment. Authentic, identity-shaping writing, and even speaking, rarely occurs. This is not because the teacher does not want her students to develop these language skills. It is because she wants to provide her students with strategies to be successful when the test does come around. However, I wonder if in the long term of a student’s life it is more important that they know which bubble to fill in or if they have a positive and meaningful identity and feel confident in their language and communication abilities. I suspect it is the latter.

Cummins suggests daily writing or dialogue journals, in which the teacher responds to the student’s writing. I would love to incorporate some of these ideas into my own classroom, and I think it could be done with little interruption to the daily schedule. With some of my ethnography focus students, at least one of whom will be an ELL, I want to focus on literacy, both reading and writing. Journal writing might be a good tool to implement. However, as Cummins refers to throughout the chapter, I want to keep in mind the importance of striving to foster positive identity negotiations and be a learner of my students’ cultures. Through my ethnographic research I would like to learn how to better incorporate their linguistic and cultural backgrounds into their learning process. As Cummins writes, “in order to teach effectively [teachers] must learn from their students about students’ culture, background, and experience” (p. 133).

Reference

Rodier, A. (2000). A cure for writer’s block: Writing for real audiences. The Quarterly, volume 22 (number 2). Retrieved from http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/817

1 comment:

  1. When reading this chapter, I was also drawn to and inspired by the idea of providing our students with authentic audiences. Not only will this motivate them to add purpose to their words, but it would also provide validation to their words and help them see their own thoughts as important in the larger world. In my classroom, we make classroom books throughout the year and the lessons fit fairly seamlessly into our day. Our first one was an introductory book at the beginning of the year where each student was assigned a partner and had to introduce them to the class saying, "This is ____, they would rather swim in the ocean/a pool." We also made one with our big buddy classroom, and one after a field trip to Willowbrook farm in which each student wrote and illustrated a page about their favorite part of the trip. Each of the books is laminated, bound, and in the Class Books section of our classroom library, along with books from the previous years. Being there, the students know that not only will their books be there for years to come, but the audience for their work could be anyone who comes into our classroom.
    Of course, like you say, there is always room for growth, and I think what we lack in our writing projects is teacher response to student work. While we provide them with immediate verbal feedback, I think it would be beneficial if we also provided concrete written feedback, especially for the first grade journals. That way, the students would know that we take the time to read their writing, that their thoughts are important to us. This is something I am also interested in incorporating into my own classroom.
    I'm curious, however, about your concern about test preparation versus development of language skills. What test strategies are being emphasized and how are they being taught? Would it be possible to teach those strategies and then have the students apply the skills to an open or prompted writing assignment? It is always difficult to balance the district politics and mandates with the individual needs of our students, but I am sure that there is a creative balance in there somewhere.

    ReplyDelete