lost opportunities: challenges confronting four teachers of english-language learners

Lost Opportunities: Challenges Confronting Four Teachers of English-Language LearnersAuthor(s): Russell GerstenSource: The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 100, No. 1 (Sep., 1999), pp. 37-56Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002160 .

Accessed: 31/10/2014 18:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheElementary School Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.223.86.31 on Fri, 31 Oct 2014 18:40:19 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002160?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Lost Opportunities: Challenges Confronting Four Teachers of English-Language Learners

Russell Gersten Eugene Research Institute

Abstract

This article presents findings from a qualitative study of instruction provided by 4 monolingual English-speaking teachers to English-language learners in grades 4, 5, and 6. During these years, students are experiencing the transition from specialized or native-language academic instruction to exclusive instruction in English. Based on classroom observations during language arts/ literacy lessons and teacher interviews, I articulate and discuss challenges and obstacles facing teachers of these students. In particular, I focus on the unresolved tension between the teachers' sense that they should patiently provide students with opportunities to express their ideas and thoughts in a relatively unfamiliar language and their desire for fast-paced lessons and correct English-language usage. I also describe the sense of distance these teachers feel toward their students. I describe how this tension is exacer- bated by the unfocused and unstructured language arts curriculum in the school district, which provides few guidelines for teaching essential English-language skills and provides im- proper techniques for vocabulary development. I attempt to help readers understand the reasons so many teachers retreat from meaningful, focused instruction with English-language learners. The article concludes with several suggestions for addressing this serious national problem.

For the last 5 minutes, Michael Wells' has been moving quickly through the vocabulary words for the novel The Whipping Boy (Fleischman, 1986) on the overhead, making sure that all of the words in the chapter that would create problems for students have been defined before they begin reading. Earlier, students looked up the definitions of these words and attempted to paraphrase the information. Pointing to the next word on the overhead, Mr. Wells asks:

The Elementary School Journal Volume 100, Number 1 ? 1999 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 0013-5984/100/10001-0003$02.00



38 THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

What does this word mean: snarl? Luis: Tangle or knot. Mr. Wells: Right.... What does hind

mean? Maria (from the side of the class): Back,

rear. Mr. Wells: What would be the hind end

of a dog?

A murmur of answers follows, and Michael Wells, seeming to acknowledge that most students understand, returns to the list: "wince."

When Michael provides the definition, he tries to ground it in everyday experiences, offering examples like "the school nurse swabbed alcohol on a cut, only to have the injured child wince." These appear to be intermittent attempts to interject something concrete, even a bit provocative, into the routine task.

The rapidly paced give and take of word and definition continues for another 10 minutes. Michael queries: "This sentence has the word edge. What's another name for

edge? Who remembers? Yes, edge means brink. What about precious? What does that word mean? Yes, valuable, very valuable."

The last word on the list, humble, is problematic. The dictionary defines the word as "low in place or condition." Maria and Thomas had copied that definition and volunteer it as an answer.

Michael sighs as he writes the phrase on the overhead, realizing that this definition, though correct, is too formal for students to understand. Groping for an alternative, he

suggests: "The opposite of humble is proud. Do you know what proud means, Thomas?" Thomas does not respond, so Michael answers it himself. "It's like what happens on a spelling test. If you don't do very well, you're humbled."

It is unclear whether Thomas really un- derstands the concept, or how many other students get lost as Michael switches from synonym to antonym. Struggling to extri- cate himself and the increasingly listless students from the definition activity, Mi- chael instructs the students to open their books to the next chapter.2

Later, when an observer examined the

chapter from which Michael had been

working, it appeared that many of the words selected were not central to under-

standing the chapter but were chosen because they were likely to be unfamiliar to the students. In fact, in an interview, Mi- chael told our research team that building English-language vocabulary is one of his most critical concerns.

In Michael Wells's class of 32 fifth graders, all students are Latino; most are immi-

grants from Mexico. This is the students' second year of academic instruction conducted primarily in English. The districts call this a "transition" classroom. The term transition in this context refers to the

change from a classroom environment where most instruction occurs in Spanish to an environment where most instruction occurs in English. In the primary-grade (K-3) classrooms, the Latino students were taught all academic content (reading, math, sci- ence, language arts) in Spanish while also receiving a 30-45-minute English-language development lesson each day. This was the district policy. Observations in these classrooms by the three bilingual members of the research staff confirmed that this policy was

uniformly implemented. (For a sample transcript, see Jimenez and Gersten, in

press.) Although most students possess good English-language conversational abilities, there are numerous problems in their

reading comprehension and their use of grammar in written English-language products.

The transition from native-language (Spanish) instruction (in grades K-3) to all- English instruction (in grades 4-6) seems difficult and at times even torturous for students as we observe them and Michael la- boring through another chapter in The Whipping Boy. The chapter contains many unknown words, and comprehension of this fifth-grade novel appears to be difficult for many students. Vocabulary drills like the one described above, which can last as long as 25 minutes on some days, seem only

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 39

marginally useful for helping students understand the nuances of this novel, a fact consistently supported by research (Beck, Perfetti, & McKeown, 1982; Graves, 1997; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986). During portions of the lesson, Michael seems to flounder as much as his students.

Although this is Michael Wells's eighth year teaching elementary school, it is only his second year teaching inner-city Latino students. Three-fourths of the students in this school of nearly 1,000 are Latino. He perceives his job as preparing students for junior high school and helping them make the transition into an instructional day that is conducted predominantly in English. He worries about meeting these objectives, fearing that he is unable to teach everything that should be taught. Michael notes that his students are not prepared for standardized achievement tests and that "it takes a long time to get the students to write a good complete sentence"-one of his major goals. During an interview, he laments: "There are days when I don't think what I do makes much difference to these kids. They have so many other things to deal with in their lives. Some days I don't think anything that I do ever gets through. But there are other days when I feel that if I at least teach the basics, I've done something" (Woodward, field notes, 1991).3

One of Michael's colleagues, Margot Fontaine, expressed her frustration during another interview: "I probably was just pushing them so hard, wanting so much for them to achieve at the highest level, and they're feeling frustrated, and you're feeling frustrated .... [Often] the students didn't know, the students didn't care" (Unok-Brengelman, 1995, p. 40).

The situation in which Michael Wells and Margot Fontaine find themselves is common in many parts of the country, particularly metropolitan areas such as New York and Los Angeles that have experienced large influxes of immigrants in recent years.

Context Recent data from the National Center for Educational Statistics (1996) showed that 25.3% of teachers whose students are limited in their English-language proficiency have had no training in English-language acquisition or relevant instructional strategies for this population. Ashton (1996) re- ported, based on the 1991 Metropolitan Life Survey, that 30% of new teachers "did not believe that training had prepared them to teach students from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, and 15% had abandoned their strong belief that they could really make a difference in the lives of their students" (p. 21). As will be seen, teachers like Michael and Margot fit into this category.

During the last decade, the United States experienced the largest wave of immigra- tion in its history. The 1990 census revealed that one out of every seven individuals over the age of 5 grew up speaking a language other than English (Barringer, 1993). This rapid escalation of learners overwhelmed many districts. Severe shortages of teachers with training in bilingual education or English-as-a-second-language/ sheltered English teaching methods have led to numerous instances of monolingual English-speaking teachers like Michael Wells and Margot Fontaine who, with es- sentially no preparation, face classes of students who need extensive assistance in their English-language development.

Although most classroom teachers con- front classes of diverse learners, teachers working in "transition" classrooms experience not only the normal variation in student ability and motivation but also varia- tions in the often unrelated phenomenon of English-language competence. Although there are significant disagreements in the field about when and how this transition should take place (Gersten, 1996b; Golden- berg, 1996; Thomas & Collier, 1997), in many school systems this transition occurs in the third through sixth grades. A major frustration for teachers in transition classrooms is the wide variability in both En-




glish-language oral and reading proficiency. In these settings, reading material may often be too hard for many students and too easy for others.

Goldenberg (1996) noted, "The transition years are beset with difficulty and frustration for both students and teachers. Dur- ing and following transition, students' classroom participation and achievement often go down; uncertainty, confusion, and special education referrals go up" (p. 8). He noted that educators still lack a professional knowledge base about the modifications that need to be made so that English-language instruction is comprehensible to these students and yet still cognitively demanding. According to Goldenberg (1996), "these are questions about which there are strong opinions, many recommendations, but little to go on empirically.., for teachers dealing with this transition" (p. 9).

Background of the Research Study In 1991, we began a large-scale research project to document the instructional problems and dilemmas faced by English-language learners making the transition from specialized bilingual programs to classrooms where the entire day was conducted in English. Our earlier research (Gersten & Woodward, 1994a) as well as others' (Gol- denberg, 1996; Ramirez, 1992) suggested that these were years when both students and teachers experienced difficulty and uncertainty.

To understand these issues, our team of researchers observed language arts and reading instruction in 19 classrooms (grades 4-6) in a large urban school district in California. We used both naturalistic observations and interviews to understand the dilemmas teachers faced and to determine patterns of practices that appeared to be productive or ineffective. In previous articles and research reports that were outcomes of this large project (Gersten, 1996a, 1996b; Gersten & Jiminez, 1994; Gersten & Woodward, 1994b; Jim~nez & Gersten, in press), we attempted to delineate which

practices appeared to promote English-language learning and cognitive growth and to articulate underlying principles of best and promising practices.

However, from the beginning of the research project, we were confronted with a stark reality. Within the first month of the study, it became clear to us that the majority of the students in the classrooms we were observing were taught by monolingual Eu- ropean-American teachers who had not re- ceived any training for working with En- glish-language learners. These assignments would be challenging even to veteran teachers, and assigning them to teachers with limited experience was not likely to lead to success for the teachers or the students. However, the seniority system ensured that the most challenging assignments--those in the poorest schools-often went to those with the least experience.

We observed confusion and despair in school personnel at all levels. For example, in the orientation interview with an assis- tant superintendent during the second month, he commented, "We've tried everything for the schools in the Eastside [the low-income, primarily Latino section of the city]. If I knew what to do, I'd have done it. We just don't know what to do" (Gersten, field notes, September 1992). Everyone interviewed during the first few months of the project (e.g., teachers, administrators) was aware that appropriate instruction for this group of students was one of the big- gest problems facing the district and that many of the teachers were overwhelmed. Sarason noted, "As long as teachers view themselves as powerless ... plagued with feelings of guilt because they do not know how to be helpful to their students ... there is no basis whatsoever to expect that student outcomes will generally improve. What happens to teachers-emotionally, intellectually and socially-very much af- fects how children experience classrooms and learning" (1993, p. 5).

In this study, we investigated a subsam- ple of our larger study to determine the

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 41

challenges facing these teachers. Using qualitative analysis, we first describe problems facing teachers of English-language learners. Then, using cross-case qualitative analysis, we articulate what seem to be underlying causes of these problems. We con- clude with what appear to be relevant professional development approaches that can help teachers move beyond many of their current uncertainties and dilemmas.

Method

Participants and Setting For the current analysis we focused on

four teachers. Information on their teaching experience is presented in Table 1. These teachers were representative of a sample of teachers who were relatively inexperienced in working with English-language learners. In fact, of the 19 teachers from the larger project, nine were judged by the research team as having significant difficulty working with this population. From these nine teachers, the research team selected the four teachers for whom we had the richest database for this analysis (e.g., Kolar, 1995; Unok-Brengelman, 1995). These teachers taught in three large, low-income K-6 schools. All had been with the district less than 5 years; that is, all were low in seniority. None had any formal training in teaching English-language learners, although one had attended a series of summer workshops conducted by the county, and all had attended a series of brief 1-hour district in- service meetings at their schools during the year.

Research Team/Research Method The research team included five mem-

bers. The team was assembled to represent

the various knowledge bases important in teaching and learning with English-language learners. The perspectives of the members were distinct. One had a strong background in research on effective teaching and professional development; two had strong backgrounds in cognitive approaches to instruction. One researcher had a strong background in bilingual education, English-language acquisition, and multicultural education. Two team members repre- sented a practitioner's perspective. Both were on leave from school district positions; one was a bilingual special educator, and one was a bilingual school psychologist. All five team members had public school experience teaching culturally diverse students; three had experience teaching Latino students in urban districts.

As the team of five attempted to analyze and interpret what was observed, they often supplied different, complementary perspectives. For example, the researcher with a cognitive orientation tended to focus on the coherence of the lesson, the saliency of examples selected, and the cognitive challenge. Others focused more on student en- gagement, the pacing, and the extent to which accommodations were made to assist students learning English as a second language.

Data Sources and Analysis Classroom observations. An open-

ended qualitative classroom observational method was used as the primary means of describing and analyzing the teaching of English-language learners. Observers re- corded verbatim segments of lessons that seemed to capture the nature of instruction.

TABLE 1. Teaching Information on Case Study Teachers

Years Teaching Years English-Language Years with

Teacher Grade Teaching Learners District

Michael Wells 5 8 2 2 Margot Fontaine 6 1 1 1 Joyce Davenport 5 2 2 2 Victoria Douglas 4 4 3 4




All four teachers were observed over the course of the study by at least three members of the research team. Each teacher was observed for at least six full language arts/ literacy lessons (lasting between 1 hour and 1 hour and 45 minutes) resulting in a total of approximately 36 hours of observation. The first observations were conducted on three consecutive mornings. Observations were conducted over a period of 4 months.

To organize the observations and observation notes, we coded them according to a

system used in our earlier research (Gersten & Woodward, 1992). Conventional qualitative research methods call for letting an

analytic framework emerge from the data

(Bogdan & Taylor, 1990; Patton, 1990). Our

system, however, constituted a rather

unique, evolving conceptual framework that used the following instructional constructs to ground the observational procedures: (a) challenge, involvement, and success of students; (b) teacher scaffolding, mediation, and feedback; and (c) teacher re-

spect for cultural diversity. These constructs reflected aspects of instruction that seemed

particularly important to the research team's attempts to understand the process of literacy instruction for language-minority students. We viewed this study as a con- tinuation and extension of previous research and thought it desirable to have a framework that would reflect what was known about effective instructional vari- ables yet not preclude us from incorporat- ing new insights or new information.

Eight of the approximately 24 observations were conducted jointly by two of the project researchers. After each joint observation, the two observers identified what they considered to be the critical incidents and episodes. These joint observations allowed researchers to ascertain and discuss similarities and sometimes subtle differences in how they interpreted the instructional interactions observed. To discern our independent reliability, two researchers completed Likert scales based on joint ob-

servations of three classrooms. Interob- server agreement averaged 88%.

We debriefed, either formally or informally, after each set of three observations. We noted problematic instructional situa- tions and any other recurrent themes. Our discussions provided a venue to frame, re- frame, and verify hypotheses and insights developed by individual researchers. As part of the larger study, our observations and discussions continued for 2 years.

Teacher interviews. Initially, each teacher was interviewed twice by one or two members of the research team. In these semistructured interviews, teachers were asked to describe their background, training, and years of teaching experience and to discuss a range of issues related to literacy/ language arts instruction for English-language learners in the intermediate grades. They were asked to describe current district guidelines and policies, the quality of their training, the sources of support available, and conflicts that arose, both within themselves and with other school staff, in teaching language arts to English-language learners. They were also asked to describe their goals in teaching these students and to assess how effective they felt their current instructional strategies were. We also probed issues such as effective practices for these students and what additional training they would like to receive to teach English- language learners more effectively.

In addition to the semistructured interviews, we also talked with teachers after classroom observations or during breaks (e.g., when students were at recess or at the computer lab) to obtain further information on important instructional issues such as the purpose of a particular activity, why a book was selected, or why an instructional strategy (such as semantic mapping) was chosen. This is a standard qualitative research procedure (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Data Analysis Raw field notes were coded and ana-

lyzed in order to discern emerging themes,

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 43

especially themes that recurred across teachers. Our goal was that analyses would traverse the multiple perspectives of our research team. Ultimately the diversity of viewpoints and perspectives seemed to en- rich our mutual understanding of events (see Gersten, 1996a, for further details on the method). We examined the data through several different but complementary lenses. The first lens encompassed the literature on teacher development (Har- greaves, 1996; Huberman, 1993; Richard- son, 1994), including the research on beginning teachers in urban settings (Carter & Richardson, 1989; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1995; Weiner, 1993). We also considered issues raised in research on literacy instruction and vocabulary development (e.g., Graves, 1997; Pearson & Fielding, 1991) and the teaching of linguistically and culturally diverse learners (e.g. Au, 1993; Banks & Banks, 1993; Delpit, 1988, 1996; Greene, 1993; Ladson-Billings, 1995; McElroy-John- son, 1993; Nieto, 1996a; Tatum, 1992; Tiku- noff, 1987).

In our analysis we borrowed freely from the suggestions of major qualitative meth- odologists such as Miles and Huberman (1994) and Wolcott (1994). As we began to note patterns within the data, we started looking for what Miles and Huberman re- ferred to as the "critical case" (i.e., the case that "proves" or solidifies a finding or interpretation) as well as potential "discon- firming cases." Analysis of potentially dis- confirming cases can actually "teach us much about the assumptions that guide [the various data sources]" (Noblit & Hare, 1988, p. 62).

Our goal was to develop valid interpretations (Wolcott, 1994) from these data sources. For the analysis, we followed Wol- cott's dictum "to open things up rather than seal them ... offering a new perspective gained after extended reflection" (p. 260). Our approach was influenced by symbolic interactionism (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992) in that we continually contrasted participants' perspectives and their interpretations with

those that the research team developed as a group based on our observations and interviews.

Use of memos to guide hypothesis generation. An important part of our method included the writing and exchanging of in- formal "memos" of hypotheses and impressions generated by field observations (Miles & Huberman, 1994). These memos were written by a designated researcher on the team and then discussed at meetings. They allowed members of the team to respond to each others' interpretations and to provide alternative perspectives on what was observed.

The following are examples of researchers' memos based on a series of three observations, two of which were conducted jointly. The first researcher wrote, "Copy- ing is pervasive. For example, one student copied a picture and a few sentences from the book and then copied answers to some questions from a friend. After recess, she copied several formal, lengthy definitions and sentences from the board" (Woodward, field notes, November 15-17, 1990). The second researcher responded with, "Devel- opmentally, imitation of a competent peer or adult can be a precursor to independent activity-and one can see real benefit for the students in reproducing accurate sentences in English. Yet this teacher seemed desperately to struggle for a framework for slowly 'pushing' students to a level where they would feel comfortable creating as well as copying" (Gersten, field notes, No- vember 15-17, 1990). In the final case study we concluded, "Faced with the decision to either create or copy, many students chose to copy. The fact that sentences copied from the book would be syntactically correct and properly spelled-whereas even the most advanced students in the class would make errors in tense agreement and spelling when they created sentences on their own-provided great incentive for students to copy. Since large portions of the language arts block each day were devoted to accurate English-language production,



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254074787_Toward_a_Theory_of_Culturally_Relevant_Pedagogy?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232486415_Giving_voice_to_the_voiceless?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279741690_Talking_About_Race_Learning_About_Racism_The_Application_of_Racial_Identity_Development_Theory_in_the_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==


students were sent a contradictory mes-

sage" (Gersten & Woodward, 1994b). A major purpose of these memos was to

identify patterns that were replicated over

many lessons versus those that seemingly occurred rarely. During the study our research team met regularly to discuss recur-

ring and emerging themes. We began a cy- clical process of defining and then refining critical issues.

Triangulation. Thus, triangulation occurred in several ways. The first was veri- fication of themes, issues, and findings across multiple observations of the same class. The second and most informative was examination of consistencies and inconsis- tencies in observations and interpretations across multiple observers. Finally, triangulation occurred as the team searched for

consistency and dissonance between the observation and interview material. This too

proved productive in that certain observed

practices that appeared to be anomalous (either extremely creative or poorly con- ceived) frequently turned out to be inter-

pretations of district policy. After the debriefing meetings among re-

search team members, written products (memos and/or drafts of case studies) were revised to reflect the issues addressed. At times, additional evidence was provided or

questionable interpretations were dropped or reframed.

For each of the four teachers in the sub-

sample, individual case studies or portraits were written (Gersten & Woodward 1994b; Kolar, 1995; Unok-Brengelman, 1995). Each case study had a primary author who worked closely with me. Other researchers and the project directors read drafts until a final version was written. Each case study went through a minimum of five revisions. The research team continually looked for

replications of themes and patterns across the four individual case studies and for evidence supporting (or failing to support) hypotheses.

External researchers with backgrounds in ethnography (Harry Wolcott), bilingual

education and literacy (Claude Golden-

berg), and literacy research (Annemarie Pal- incsar) also reviewed the case studies and our cross-case analysis. These external re- views helped make certain implicit issues

explicit. For example, Palincsar urged us to revisit our notes to refocus on the social as-

pects of learning. This led to articulation of the theme of "distance" described later.

Goldenberg stressed that all teachers of students undergoing the transition to all-En-

glish instruction face dilemmas, and that the four teachers in our study perhaps face them with less background and fewer de- fenses. Palincsar pushed us to identify potential solutions, whereas Wolcott thought the generation of solutions based on this small database was premature. All of our reviewers argued against the use of conventional member checks, that is, showing the draft report to the participating teachers, because of the discomfort it might cause.

However, we decided to conduct a series of four meetings with several of the teachers in the larger study because we wanted to be sure that some of our findings aligned with their impressions. During these meetings, members of the research team presented some of the major findings from the earlier research (Gersten, 1996b; Gersten & Jimenez, 1994; Gersten & Wood- ward, 1994a) relating to productive practices and perceived problems. In part, this served as a member check of the veracity of our observations. We also gave these teachers several relevant articles by others and facilitated discussions. Finally, we asked teachers to document what they envisioned as areas where they most wanted or needed professional development. These activities served as an indirect "member check." Teachers' articulation of problems was, by and large, consonant with our analyses of major problems.

Results and Discussion

The results are organized around three major themes or issues that emerged from the data. The first section addresses tension be-

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 45

tween pushing students to express their ideas in a new language, however hesi-

tantly or awkwardly, and the simultaneous desire on the teachers' part for acceptable, grammatically correct written products. The second section is an attempt to understand how and why teachers retreated from the potential richness and stimulation inherent in a literature-based curriculum. The third section provides our ideas for potential solutions to the problems observed.

An Unresolved Tension: The Process/Product Dichotomy As we observed and spoke with the four

teachers, the scope and complexity of the issues they encountered impressed us. Stu- dents were experimenting with expressing thoughts and information in what was often still a strange language. The fear of failure, of making some mistake in grammar, pro- nunciation, or word order, was often great. Many students played it safe and hesitated to volunteer.

In the interviews, three of the four teachers talked about the importance of the process: of encouraging students to express ideas, to analyze, and to summarize. For example, one teacher, Victoria Douglas, told us she wanted to know "what's worked, different ways to get the kids excited about writing ... ways to give the children more self-esteem with the English language" (Ko- lar, 1995, p. 89). Yet, in the context of their day-to-day teaching routines, teachers were more concerned with receiving written products that were grammatically correct. In fact, in the same discussion, Victoria talked about her concern with improvement in students' English-language spelling scores on standardized achievement tests.

Teachers seemed to zigzag unpredicta- bly between these two objectives, at times stressing content over form, at other times form over content. In the words of Victoria, "You don't know where you're starting or where you need to go" (Kolar, 1995, p. 66). There was a tension between their goal of pushing students toward meaningful con-

nections with quality literature and the realities they confronted each morning in the classroom. This was apparent, for example, as Michael Wells quickly moved from ask-

ing prediction questions, where students were given sufficient time to think about the answer, to an onslaught of rapid-fire literal comprehension questions (Gersten & Woodward, 1994b).

It is important to note that teachers desired acceptable written products from students because they reasoned that their students were, after all, in the upper-elementary grades. Several excerpts from students' compositions about plans for the

Thanksgiving holiday appear in the appendix. These provide a flavor for the level of

English-language writing of the fifth graders in this study. Note the range of responses-from a coherent (if not terribly in-

spired) compound sentence with spelling and capitalization problems (sentence 1) to a response that shows little knowledge of conventions of sentence construction in any language (sentence 4) to ones that illustrate numerous other problems in English-language usage (sentences 2 and 3).

To improve students' products, teachers frequently relied on instructional practices that involved little risk or challenge. They tended to lower their sights, accepting some simplistic indication of success rather than engaging students in more complex activities that might promote discussion or reflect a deeper interpretation of the text. At the extreme, students merely copied answers from the board, the dictionary, or the book to show that they could complete the assignment and thus could succeed at something.

The teachers seemed to understand what a typical fourth or fifth grader should be doing, and they knew these students fell short. Michael Wells reiterated this numerous times in his concern that his students succeed in junior high school. Over- whelmed by the discrepancy between where the students were and where the teachers thought they should be by the end of the year, teachers tended to narrow their




language arts and reading focus to vocabulary development, grammar, and spelling. By highlighting these areas, teachers could at least feel they were moving toward some objective. These teachers were faced with a very real dilemma. They wanted their students to be-and feel-successful in read-

ing comprehension and written expression. Yet they knew that when left to their own devices, most students would produce brief, truncated prose and brief answers to

comprehension questions. By allowing teacher models of grammatically correct sentences that were appropriate for the creative writing assignment to remain on the board, teachers allowed students to copy them, although they urged students to create their own. Thus there was a sort of com-

promise negotiated between the teacher and students. By allowing students to copy, even while officially discouraging them, teachers enabled students to produce ac-

ceptable written products. For years, researchers such as Allington

(1983) have noted how many teachers use

techniques characteristic of the four case

study teachers with their low-ability students, that is, an overreliance on literal

questions and vocabulary drill. The tragedy is that the teachers we observed used these strategies with all of their students, not just the low-performing students.

There was great variety in how teachers reduced the cognitive demands on their students. One teacher adapted this way: "So I just take them back, and I use first- and second-grade grammar materials that I

brought to the fifth grade with me, and I have my aide work with them because they [at-risk students] do not fit into the reading program that we teach the entire group"/ (Kolar, 1995, p. 89).

Carter and Richardson (1989) noted this tendency to reduce demands in their research on beginning teachers. They found that a typical response to the overwhelming pressures some teachers experience is to "[compromise] student work demands and accountability in subtle ways, such as reduc-

ing risk by prompting students heavily [em- phasis added] ... by regularizing and fa-

miliarizing work patterns so that the intellectual effort students must expend to accomplish assignments is substantially reduced, and by negotiating down academic requirements" (pp. 411-412). An alarming feature of our observations was that these teachers seemed to experience many of the problems and use many of the coping mechanisms that typify first-year teachers (and have been documented by Carter and Richardson among others), even though one was in his eighth year of teaching, and one in her fourth year.

Understanding the Retreat There are several major reasons teachers

retreat from the potential richness, chal-

lenge, and ambiguity inherent in literature- based instruction toward the right/wrong atmosphere that so often typified these teachers' classrooms (and those of many of their peers), including (a) a desire to see at least some semblance of success, (b) ambi-

guities in the curriculum, and (c) distance between teachers and students. Each of these themes is discussed below.

The semblance of success. Observations over several consecutive mornings suggested that some of the teachers' frustration arose from their awareness that potential failure could be circumvented by accepting limited answers or by providing correct answers. One of the teachers was clearly both- ered by the process. He rationalized students' difficulties (and his own) by referring to their difficult life circumstances. He told us, "I need to get them to realize that they have the ability to be successful.... They'll drop out of school, join gangs ... if they're not successful.... People want to forget about these schools and the kids that are here" (Jim6nez, interview, March 23, 1992).

Occasional attempts to push students to elaborate and expand on incomplete or vague statements were often unsuccessful, in part because Michael, Joyce, Victoria, and Margot were unable to guide students by

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 47

using explicit strategies or supportive struc- tures. For example, Michael asked Roberto, "What happened to the coach?" Roberto, however, merely repeated what Martha had just said. Michael said to Roberto, "Don't repeat what she just said. Don't let her answer for you. I'll read it [the question] again" (Woodward, field notes, Feb. 25, 1990). Ironically, these unsuccessful at-

tempts further inhibited his ability to push students beyond literal recall tasks, creating a cycle in which students' lack of success perpetuated teachers' reliance on literal recall tasks, round-robin reading, or dictio-

nary writing. As students struggled with more chal-

lenging assignments, the teachers' frustration contrasted with their mood during more successful, less challenging round- robin reading and vocabulary activities. This illustrates a dilemma that the teachers faced every day. For students thrust into this new English-language environment, the materials and the activities can easily be

overwhelming. Thus, one can understand, if not condone, the teachers' tendency to drill the students on new vocabulary words with the hope that they will better compre- hend the story, learn more English, and be better able to answer correctly the comprehension questions in the district guide.

All teachers but Joyce were prone to assign isolated, simple-to-implement activities that could be completed quickly. Even- tual mastery of the material-a goal and not necessarily a reality-was pursued through drills and review. The vocabulary exercises epitomized this pattern of instruction. Students looked up words, the words appeared on an overhead, and, ideally, students accurately restated their meanings when they appeared in a story. Unfortu- nately, the type of vocabulary instruction these teachers provided has consistently been linked with weak growth in vocabulary knowledge and has virtually no effect on comprehension (Beck et al., 1982).

Teachers' change in instructional practices seemed to be related to the difficulty

they had in identifying goals and expectations for students. The degree of student

risk-taking called for is great as English-language learners make the transition into En- glish-language instruction in grades 4 and 5 (Ramirez, 1992). As the ethnographic research of Moll (1988) has demonstrated, during the first year or two of English-language instruction, these students often cannot express their ideas fully or completely in English. Sometimes they will come up with the wrong word or an unusual or un- grammatical construction. Sometimes they simply cannot recall the appropriate En- glish phrase and thus appear to be incom- petent. They have much to lose and little to gain by volunteering. Thus, they often retreat into silence. They feel most comfortable reading definitions they have copied from a dictionary or text or reading something the teacher has written.

In our study, this problem was exacer- bated because the teachers did not feel ef- ficacious and did not believe they were able to convey information to students clearly or support their students' intellectual development. For example, Margot noted, "You want to see these kids achieve and excel and be at grade level. I mean, that's to me what my expectations had always been-to get them at grade level. The hardest part of teaching there is the fact that you feel like a failure as a teacher, because your kids aren't up to par, grade level. I just thought, 'My God, I must be a horrible teacher. How come these kids aren't passing their tests?"' (Unok-Brengelman, 1995, p. 41). This quo- tation is noteworthy not only for its candor and clear articulation of a perceived problem, but also because when Margot talks about "teaching there," she is talking about teaching at her own school.

After a brief interview with Michael, one observer wrote in a memo, "In talking to him, ... he wafts between feeling like he was doing a decent job to not knowing if he has any impact at all.... He's frustrated by the lack of motivation and by the fact that many things seem irrelevant to kids. That




they seem, in his words, 'turned off"' (Woodward, research memo, Feb. 25, 1991).

An ambiguous curriculum. Ironically, al-

though the teachers stressed the importance of teaching "the basics," that is, the importance of acceptable written products at

grade-level standards, they had problems helping students to develop the requisite skills and abilities (e.g., English-language usage, punctuation, grammar, etc.). The district provided them with no texts or teachers' guides to accomplish this type of skill

development. The core language arts curriculum was a series of novels.

Modulating traditional assignments re-

quires skill in planning and a sophistication surpassing many teachers. This type of ad-

aptation and mediation involves relatively complex skills-selection of the three or four key words that are essential for under-

standing the chapter from a list provided by the district, understanding how to use story grammar elements and visual mapping techniques to guide students in summariz-

ing a story, or knowing when to use cooperative learning groups so that students of mixed levels of English-language proficiency can informally pool their knowledge.

The four teachers in this study admitted to difficulties in teaching reading to En-

glish-language learners in the absence of guidelines or curricula to help them build students' English-language grammatical skills. One veteran teacher concurred: "My main concern is whether they get all the skills that they need.... I think a lot of the new teachers coming in don't have a strong base in what this program's about and the skills that need to be taught. That is where I worry" (Kolar, 1995, p. 94).

As students advanced in their written English-language development and wanted to produce grammatically correct pieces, teachers were unsure how to structure their feedback and how to systematically teach grammatical skills in the context of literature. For example, one teacher commented:

The main thing we need is a grammar element. Some people tell me to make up

lessons from the literature book. Where will I find the time to do all that? I need something that says, "These are the concepts that need to be covered in grammar by grade 5. Here is the lesson." A guide- book with worksheets and pieces from the literature they're doing would be useful, so you don't have to do everything yourself. They're telling us that kids will get grammar by pulling it out of the literature. I remember learning it by using a grammar book. I want a grammar book that we can take out to learn a different lesson each day. (Kolar, 1995, p. 94)

We began to believe that a major dis-

advantage of the series of novels used as the core for language arts instruction was that no teachers' guides or student activities were provided and teachers were essen-

tially asked to develop these activities on their own. Although occasionally teachers would develop some interesting activities, none of the teachers had the time or skill to

perform this challenging task on a regular basis. One of the teachers, Victoria Douglas, put the dilemma this way: "I have to pull so much of it together. I haven't found any materials that work for my language-minority kids. When you had the basal readers, they have the key terms--vocabulary and questions. But when you use a book, you have to find something to go with it or make it up yourself. So it puts a lot of extra work on us, and as a new teacher I wonder if I'm doing the right thing. I wonder if it's above, below, or at their skill level. It's always going to be too easy for some, too hard for others" (Kolar, 1995, p. 94). In other words, the task of developing a viable lan-

guage arts curriculum out of a set of high- quality children's literature was over-

whelming for all four of the teachers. It is important to note that many veteran

teachers in the same schools loved developing their own curriculum using children's literature as a base. It also is important to note that all four of the case study teachers thought that use of literature was the best approach to take. In other words,

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 49

no teacher wanted to go back to the basal series, but all four wanted useful materials to help them plan lessons.

The district had not provided these teachers with clear direction for how to ad- just the typical grade-level curriculum for English-language learners. One teacher articulated: "To be honest, I have never been given any guidelines as to how I am to work with these children. I've just developed what I think works for all kids, and have used that with the language-minority students. I've never been given any guidelines" (Kolar, 1995, p. 89). Others taught the normal grade-level curriculum with virtually no adaptations or adjustments, settling for minimal student responsiveness.

When asked about the quality of training and professional development, one teacher laughed. She then went on to say, "That's really an area where I think something needs to be done. I mean I have no background, absolutely no background, as far as limited-English-speakers or anything like that. There is support here, which is nice, where I can go to someone and get help if I don't know what to do with a child that has a language problem. But as far as training-not that I'm aware of anyway" (Kolar, 1995, p. 89).

Margot stated her views on the ade- quacy of ongoing support for teacher development this way:

The staff development person [assigned to the district to provide ideas for reading instruction to language minority students] would bring things that she wanted to talk about, new ideas, or something to kind of direct the meeting. ... It was pretty quick. They were only 50 minutes or an hour long, so it wasn't a big deal.

We'd talk about concerns with the program, or whatever.... Sometimes I was so stressed out, I'd go, "Oh my God, not another meeting." But, in general, I think they helped more, because.., you found out that other people have the same frustrations you do. (Unok-Bren- gelman, 1995, p. 45)

The distance between teachers and students. At certain moments during interviews or conversations with the researchers, all the teachers in this study confessed to feeling distant from their students. The students were from different countries, cultures, and social classes and had different religious backgrounds. This sense of distance was prevalent, evidenced, for example, in one teacher's allusion to the students having "so many other things to deal with in their lives." Teachers frequently expressed their uncertainty about whether anything ever "gets through" to their students.

Thus, it became difficult for teachers like Michael Wells or Joyce Davenport to "read" the students and use the information students provided in class to modulate instruction. "You don't know where you're starting or where you need to go, and you think the kids have got the skill, but you don't really give them a 'test.' You kind of check it orally. Or you could do a little test. So it's kind of hard to know: Have they mastered the skill or do I need to do more? And how do I do this? And how do I make this fun? As opposed to a worksheet. It's hard to know how to do it. You think, 'I've done verb, noun, adjec- tive all year,' and I think the kids have got it and they don't know (how to do it)" (Ko- lar, 1995, p. 66).

The forced nature of so much teacher- student dialogue, and the reticence many students displayed in expressing themselves in a relatively new language, made it easy for teachers to retreat into areas where there were clear right and wrong answers: definitions, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. In these areas, the teacher could feel like a successful teacher, one who knows and provides clear answers. In addition, these areas provide more opportunities for students to respond accurately. Margot described how getting responses was important for her to feel a sense of connection with her students: "It's hard. I mean, because you want them to feel connected, you want to feel that you mesh. To me, it's a big




deal when they get my joke. There have been so many times where I've said some-

thing and you get one kid [who] gets your joke. And, let me tell you, when you're working with kids who are limited in En-

glish language, you are happy when they're responding. You are happy when they com- municate with you, let alone the fact that

they know the answer" (Unok-Brengelman, 1995, p. 38).

In four classrooms, the issue of old clothes came up in novels read. In each case, the main character of the story, who was

poor, was ashamed to attend a party because she only had old clothes. In each case, the teacher seemed overwhelmed at the issue of how to discuss poverty, knowing full well that many of the students often wore hand-me-down clothes.

Two of the teachers seemed temporarily upset by this rather naked invasion of real- world social class issues. They shied away from confronting the issue by awkwardly telling the students how to think rather than

asking students about their thoughts and

feelings. Teachers talked about how they sometimes wore old clothes, how there was

nothing wrong with wearing old clothes, and how the character really should not have felt ashamed. The students often looked puzzled as the teachers attempted these uncomfortable explanations. Clearly, old hand-me-down clothes can mean some-

thing different to someone from the lower class than they do to someone from the mid- dle class. What the teachers provided seemed counterproductive to students un-

derstanding the novel and unwittingly pre- empted the students' expressions of their own perspectives. The desire by the teachers to maintain the illusion of egalitarian- ism, contradicted every day by these students' life experiences, may have motivated what Nieto (1996a) called the "fear of nam- ing." The tension and discomfort in these classrooms were obvious.

Observing these awkward encounters, we were left with the sense that the teachers avoided a meaningful encounter with

their students and an opportunity prompted by the literature to help students explore dimensions of their lives. Greene (1993) re-

ported numerous instances of these com- munication breakdowns between inexperienced teachers and minority students. Greene (1993) noted, as did we, the "un- natural silences" that frequently followed these awkward interchanges, and she documented the negative effect these experiences often have on minority students.

It takes patience and self-confidence to allow students to phrase ideas somewhat

hesitantly in their own words in a new lan-

guage. The patience to listen to these at-

tempts (which often involve awkward

phrases and simplified language) requires a belief that the end result will be worth- while. In the words of Delpit (1996), "It is

painful as well, because it means turning yourself inside out ... and being willing to see yourself in the unflattering light of another's angry gaze. It is not easy, but it is the only way to learn,.., to start dialogue" (p. 297).

In contrast, two of the veteran teachers observed in a parallel study (Gersten, 1996a; Jim6nez & Gersten, in press) did not

sidestep the issue of poverty when it came up. These teachers allowed students to write about broken-down television sets and trucks and to describe their thoughts and feelings on the effects of these losses on their lives. These teachers allowed the students to express their perspectives on issues or events. Thus, the integrity of the experiences was maintained. Although merely al-

lowing free expression of not-so-pleasant experiences is hardly a panacea to the complex tasks facing teachers, it does serve as one means of beginning to break down barriers. When teachers allowed this breaking down, students became less reticent. In a recent article, Vald6s (1998) discussed the experiences of two recent immigrants with American schools, focusing on "the distances between homes and schools, countries and cultures" (p. 4). She noted that the distances students and their families travel

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 51

are vast, that "the distances are physical, emotional and psychological," (p. 4), and that almost invariably these students face serious problems with the American educational system. Her observations of the problems by and large parallel ours. She noted that limited success in educating immigrant students is a major problem in every industrialized nation in the world, and that no country has developed ade- quate solutions.

Nonetheless, in the concluding section, we provide our thinking on viable solutions, following Sarason's (1993) dictum that meaningful change in teaching must begin with an understanding of the dilemmas faced not only by students, but by their teachers.

Toward Potential Solutions: Minimizing the Retreat As we reflected on the 2 years of obser-

vations, a recurrent term that came up in discussions was "lost opportunities." So often, teachers shied away from authentic encounters of the sort that Au (1993), Greene (1993), and Moll (1988) view as the crux of improving the achievement of English-language learners. As Sarason's (1993) quote near the end of the section entitled "Back- ground of the Study" suggests, teachers need to feel like good teachers if they are going to affect the learning outcomes of their students. Proposing solutions to these deeply rooted problems is a humbling task (Nieto, 1996b). The enormity of the challenge facing teachers like Michael Wells, Victoria Douglas, Margot Fontaine, and Joyce Davenport cannot be underestimated. Until these individuals feel better about themselves as teachers and believe that they have something to offer their students, it is unlikely that they will take the necessary risks to engage in authentic encounters with their students and use strategies that foster expression and the development of complex knowledge and skill. The proposed series of solutions is predicated on that hypothesis. The framework for professional

development proposed in this section is grounded in our sense of what might be successful and feasible for the one teacher in four who teaches classes of English-language learners with virtually no training.

Smylie (1996) suggests that change "is best achieved not by regulation, but by developing the knowledge, skills, and com- mitments of teachers and by creating supportive conditions" for both their intellectual and technical development as professionals (p. 10). Delpit (1996) artfully addresses the issue of creating supportive environments for teachers working with students from other cultures. She argues that potential solutions for enhancing education for culturally diverse students must address the "nuts and bolts" that make sense, such as reasonable expectations, curriculum guides that improve lesson design, and teaching procedures that engage students.

Similarly, McLaughlin (1991) stresses that teachers learn best when their opportunities to learn focus on specific tasks in- volving day-to-day work with students and when opportunities are coherent, intensive, and ongoing. She suggests that the content of productive teacher development is fluid and grows out of teachers' own problems. Weiner (1993) concurs that professional development is doomed to failure unless it is rooted in teachers' explicitly stated instructional concerns.

I envision three overlapping compo- nents to a meaningful professional development program. The first component addresses reducing the professional isolation of teachers through activities that connect them to other professionals. The second component addresses supporting teachers in developing their instructional repertoire (i.e., how to systematically develop written and oral English-language competence, how to build vocabulary, how to design lessons in literature that engage students and foster analysis and comprehension). An- other way of viewing this need is to con- ceptualize it as helping teachers with ad-




dressing the process/product dichotomy mentioned earlier. Finally, the third com-

ponent addresses reducing the distance between teachers and students.

Reducing isolation and building professional connections. The idea of a study group where teachers could informally discuss research and draw implications for their own teaching and could discuss and

analyze their experiences while implement- ing new practices seemed appealing to the teachers interviewed. When asked during an interview about their interest in participating in such a study group, the response by the four teachers in this study was unan-

imously positive. One teacher noted, "We need to get together to share our ideas, problems, and brainstorm some solutions. Most importantly, I believe it will help our students. That's what we're here for. It's

funny, but I never feel like we know

enough. There just seems to be so much to learn in the field of picking up a second lan-

guage. I feel our students and fellow work- ers can teach us a great deal" (Kolar, 1995, p. 105). Another indicated, "I feel this group would be a needed project for teachers. It will give us time to discuss, critique, and understand others' styles, ideas, etc. Teach- ers are very isolated, and we do need to team up with others for feedback, imple- mentations, and professional growth. Teachers need to learn and continue learning 'what works"' (Kolar, 1995, p. 105).

Teachers desired ongoing professional development. Our interview data suggest that teachers were interested in two types of professional development. The first was primarily instructional. The second was primarily personal and cultural-that is, help with breaking down the distance and barriers between teachers and students. Based on my analysis of the observations and interviews, it seems best to begin with in-service programs on both fronts simulta- neously. However, immediate attention should be paid to what the teachers specify as most important to them.

Teachers consistently indicated that

they wanted specific procedures and strat-

egies for providing lessons that made sense to their students. One teacher liked the idea of "researchers coming in and telling me what's working, research that says this works with second language students, this does not work" (Kolar, 1995, p. 83). She proposed the following to the researchers: "I would say, just send us what research you have. Here's literature to back it, here's the idea. Let's give it a whirl and see if we're successful" (p. 83).

Another teacher clearly indicated the desire for specific feedback on her classroom teaching: "It's important to watch someone in action.... I think you need a

peer tutor or peer teacher. When you come into a new school, you need somebody there that's coming in and watching you and saying, 'Great. That works. I would have done this different. With your lan-

guage minority students, you should be do-

ing these types of things.' Somebody to come in and say, 'This is working. You need help here'" (Unok-Brengelman, 1995, p. 80).

Victoria Douglas, the most experienced of the four teachers, nicely articulated a pro- gression for those new to teaching English- language learners or new to using literature: "When I started, I needed to get a backbone and understand what was ex- pected of me to do-in a book." She went on to discuss how arduous it was to have to hunt for this information at workshops or by asking colleagues.

Expanding the instructional repertoire. Fortunately, there is considerable research available to teachers as they search for effective instructional techniques. For example, recent research by Fashola, Drum, Mayer, and Kang (1996) indicates that "errors" in spelling and usage that Latino students make in English-language written expression are by and large predictable. Fashola et al. found that most of the transition students studied "have had [only] partial exposure to a second language (i.e., English) and sometimes ... use skills in their primary language to spell words in

SEPTEMBER 1999



CHALLENGES 53

their second language [English]" (p. 841). Students need to learn strategies to decide when Spanish spelling and grammatical rules can be used and when they are not appropriate in English.

Fashola et al. (1996) recommend that teachers "explicitly point out that the pho- nological or orthographic rule in English is different than the one in Spanish rather than marking the error as incorrect" (p. 840, em- phasis added). Training and guidance in this approach were needed in all four classrooms. This type of professional development would meet teachers' expressed needs for their students' written products to look acceptable and be comprehended easily by others. It also would be of great benefit to students (Reyes, 1992). I also see the benefits of focused instruction not only on spelling and orthography, but also in tense agreement, plurals, and other areas in English- language grammar and usage that are pre- dictably problematic.

Obviously, instruction in grammar and spelling should not be the core of language arts instruction. There is also a need to address the teaching of literary analysis and expressive writing. Here, too, research provides numerous examples of promising practices. Enhancing literacy instruction will be a more complex endeavor, but one for which teachers have expressed a strong commitment. In the research team's view, meaningful professional development would include all the topics suggested both in the teacher interviews we conducted and by leading researchers. That is, (a) cognitive strategy instruction for second-language learners (Anderson & Roit, 1996; Chamot & O'Malley, 1994); (b) instructional methods for promoting transfer (Cummins, 1984); and (c) strategies for teaching expressive writing through a process approach (Reyes, 1992). Fitzgerald (1995) found that many of the same cognitive strategies successful for native English speakers were equally effective for English-language learners. It is critical that teachers have in-depth training in using cognitive strategies such as semantic

maps or story mapping (Beck, 1991) rather than the cursory exposure provided by basal texts. As the research of Pressley et al. (1992) has demonstrated, implementation of these strategies requires intensive effort and support. Based on our interviews and observations, given knowledgeable support and curricula guides to assist them, teachers would be highly interested in learning how to use these strategies.

The focus of instruction should be less on accuracy of English-language usage than on understanding, so discussions that encourage expression of ideas, regardless of grammatical sophistication, would be acceptable and encouraged. We concur with Weiner (1993) that the first priority must be learning how to present concepts to students in a fashion that makes sense to them and knowing how to probe and support student efforts at thinking and problem solving. Also, at least part of the solution is to provide teachers with a framework and structure for helping students develop their English-language writing abilities without unduly frustrating them.

Reducing the distance. Unless professional development also addresses and deals empathetically with underlying issues, such as teachers' isolation and sense of distance from their students, the success of such efforts will be limited. Thus, the final issue is reducing the vast sense of distance from one another that many teachers and their students feel. I believe it is essential for teachers to get to know their students. However, the current situation, where management of a class of 30-35 is a paramount concern, precludes this process for many.

Teachers whom the research team considered as highly expert were able to or- chestrate cooperative groups, writers' and readers' workshops, and other activities that allowed them to get to know their students as people and to engage in the types of both intellectual and interpersonal com- munication that are essential. I believe that a good first step in addressing this problem




is to allow each teacher to spend a certain

portion of each day (or every other day) working with a small group of three to five students on areas related to literacy. During this time, the management concerns would be abated, and with appropriate mentoring and sharing of materials and ideas, teachers could see some of their students write and talk about their writing and experiences, solve problems, make conjectures about sto- ries read, and read to their teachers and

peers. This "gift," though in the short term

expensive for districts, could help break down the persistent and consistent barriers that we observed and enhance teachers' un-

derstanding of their students and of new

ways of teaching them. Small-group work could go a long way toward helping teachers believe they can be effective educators for English-language learners. It also can ac-

complish what Vald6s (1998) considers a crucial issue in reform of educational programs for English-language learners--"try- ing to change the ways students understand their lives and the possibilities with which

they are presented" (p. 16). These experiences can convincingly and

compellingly help teachers appreciate individual differences and create a desire for teachers to continue to get to know their students as individuals. Although Weiner (1993) suggests that individual tutorial ses- sions with students are crucial in preservice training, they may be an important part of

ongoing professional development as well. Few of the teachers in this study had a chance to steal a few minutes during the

day to develop sustained relationships with their students. Weiner suggests that a critical part of teacher training is intensive academic work with either one or two students from nonmainstream cultures. She notes how those in training typically either observe others teach or take over teaching a full class as practicum students. She argues that small tutorials allow teachers and students to get to know each other better. Tutorials "encourage them to become fa- miliar and comfortable with individual stu-

dents so that students become real people" (Weiner, 1993, p. 118).

The reasons for the retreat that Michael and his colleagues make from the type of

meaningful, cognitively demanding inter- action that one hopes will occur in classrooms are complex and multifaceted. By understanding the difficulties these teachers experienced, one can begin to identify what types of professional development and curricula restructuring might lead to more productive learning environments.

Appendix

Examples of Fifth Graders' English- Language Writing

1. In thanksgiving I am going to a party and I'm going to have lotes of fun.

2. Wat a will do in may vacation go to Beach. 3. I was sorrounded from my teacher. 4. I cop was poisend.

(Rodriguez, field notes, Jan. 16, 1991).

Notes

This research was supported in part by grant no. H023H00014 from the Division of Innovation and Development, U.S. Department of Educa- tion, Office of Special Education Programs. I wish to thank Thomas Keating, Mark Harniss, Susan Marks, David Chard, Shanna Hagan, and Claude Goldenberg for their assistance in the preparation of this article and Annemarie Pal- incsar, Harry Wolcott, Sharon Vaughn, Robert Jimenez, and Chris Kolar for their incisive feedback on earlier versions of the article. I especially want to thank Scott Baker for his collaboration during the latter stages of the project and John Woodward for his contribution to the early phases of this project.

1. All teachers' and students' names are pseudonyms, matched for ethnicity.

2. The previous section was adapted from Gersten and Woodward (1994b).

3. Ibid.

References

Allington, R. (1983). The reading instruction provided readers of differing abilities. Elemen- tary School Journal, 83, 548-559.

SEPTEMBER 1999



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249134169_The_Reading_Instruction_Provided_Readers_of_Differing_Reading_Abilities?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==



CHALLENGES 55

Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1996). Linking reading comprehension instruction to language development for language-minority students. Elementary School Journal, 96, 295-310.

Ashton, P. T. (1996). Improving the preparation of teachers. Educational Researcher, 25(9), 21- 23.

Au, K. (1993). Literacy instruction in multicultural settings. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanov- ich.

Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (1993). Multicul- tural education (2d ed.). Boston: Allyn & Ba- con.

Barringer, F. (1993, April 28). When English is a foreign tongue: Census finds a sharp rise in 80's. New York Times, pp. 1, 10.

Beck, I. L. (1991). Story map. In J. M. Macon, D. Bewell, & M. E. Vogt (Eds.), Response to literature: Grades K-8 (pp. 9-10). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Beck, I. L., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. G. (1982). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psy- chology, 74, 506-521.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (2d ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S. J. (1990). Looking at the bright side: A positive approach to qualitative policy and evaluation research. Qualita- tive Sociology, 13(2), 183-192.

Carter, K., & Richardson, V. (1989). A curriculum for an initial-year-of-teaching program. Ele- mentary School Journal, 89(4), 405-420.

Chamot, A., & O'Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: How to implement the Cognitive Ac- ademic Language Learning Approach. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1995). Color blindness and basket making are not the answers: Confronting the dilemmas of race, culture, and language diversity in teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 493-523.

Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. San Diego: College-Hill.

Delpit, L. D. (1988). Literacy for empowerment: The role of parents in children's education. New York: Falmer.

Delpit, L. D. (1996). Other people's children: Cul- tural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press.

Fashola, O.S., Drum, P.A., Mayer, R.E., & Kang, S. (1996). A cognitive theory of orthographic transitions: Predictable errors in how Spanish-speaking children spell English

words. American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 825-844.

Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English as a second-language learners' cognitive reading processes: A review of research in the United States. Re- view of Educational Research, 65(2), 145-190.

Fleischman, S. (1986). The whipping boy. New York: Greenwillow Books.

Gersten, R. (1996a). The double demands of teaching English-language learners. Educa- tional Leadership, 53(5), 18-22.

Gersten, R. (1996b). Literacy instruction for language-minority students: The transition years. Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 227- 244.

Gersten, R., & Jimenez, R. (1994). A delicate bal- ance: Enhancing literacy instruction for students of English as a second language. Read- ing Teacher, 47(6), 438-449.

Gersten, R., & Woodward, J. (1992). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: Strategies for assisting classroom teachers' work with "at risk" students and students with disabilities. In D. Carnine & E. Ka- meenui (Eds.), Higher cognitive functioning for all students (pp. 201-218). Austin, TX: Pro- Ed.

Gersten, R., & Woodward, J. (1994a). The language minority student and special education: Issues, themes and paradoxes. Excep- tional Children, 60(4), 310-322.

Gersten, R., & Woodward, J. (1994b). Lost opportunities: Observations of the education of language minority students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educa- tional Research Association, New Orleans.

Goldenberg, C. (1996). The education of language-minority students: Where are we, and where do we need to go? Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 353-361.

Graves, A. (1997). Comprehension instruction: A research agenda for the 21st century. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Ameri- can Educational Research Association, Chi- cago.

Greene, M. (1993). The passions of pluralism: Multiculturalism and the expanding com- munity. Educational Researcher, 22(1), 13-18.

Hargreaves, A. (1996). Resisting voice. Educa- tional Researcher, 25(1), 12-19.

Huberman, M. (1993). The model of the independent artisan in teachers' professional rela- tions. In J. W. Little & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers' work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts (pp. 11-50). New York: Teachers College Press.

Jim~nez, R., & Gersten, R. (in press). Lessons and dilemmas derived from the literacy instruc-




tion of two Latina/o teachers. American Edu- cational Research Journal.

Kolar, A. C. (1995). Searching for solutions: A de- scriptive study of two early career teachers' instructional practices in reading and language arts for low-income Hispanic students. Unpub- lished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Edu- cational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.

McElroy-Johnson, B. (1993). Giving voice to the voiceless. Harvard Educational Review, 63(1), 85-104.

McLaughlin, M. W. (1991). Enabling professional development: What have we learned? In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Staff development for education in the 90s: New demands, new realities, new perspectives (pp. 61- 82). New York: Teachers College Press.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M., (1994). Quali- tative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2d ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Moll, L. C. (1988). Some key issues in teaching Latino students. Language Arts, 65(5), 465- 472.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (1996, December). Are limited English proficient (LEP) students being taught by teachers with LEP training? Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

Nieto, S. (1996a). Affirming diversity: The sociopo- litical context of multicultural education (2d ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Nieto, S. (1996b, April). Constructing a knowledge base for urban teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2d ed.). London: Sage.

Pearson, P. D., & Fielding, L. (1991). Compre- hension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Hand- book of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 815-860). New York: Longman.

Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schu- der, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transac- tional instruction of reading comprehension

strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92, 513- 555.

Ramirez, J. D. (1992). Executive summary: Lon- gitudinal study of structured English immer- sion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transi- tional bilingual education programs for language-minority children. Bilingual Re- search Journal, 16(1), 1-62.

Reyes, M. de la Luz (1992). Challenging vener- able assumptions: Literacy instruction for linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62(4), 427-446.

Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5-10.

Sarason, S. B. (1993). The case for change: Rethink- ing the preparation of educators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Smylie, M. A. (1996). From bureaucratic control to building human capital: The importance of teacher learning in education reform. Edu- cational Researcher, 25(9), 9-11.

Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model- based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72-110.

Tatum, B. D. (1992). Talking about race, learning about racism: An application of racial identity development theory in the classroom. Harvard Educational Review, 62(1), 1-24.

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. (1997, December). School effectiveness for language minority students. Unpublished manuscript, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, George Washington University, Washing- ton, DC.

Tikunoff, W. J. (1987). Mediation of instruction to obtain equality of effectiveness. In S. H. Fradd & W. J. Tikunoff (Eds.), Bilingual education and bilingual special education: A guide for administrators (pp. 99-132). Boston: Little, Brown.

Unok-Brengelman, S. (1995). Learning to teach: A qualitative study of coaching beginning teachers on effective teaching practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.

Valdes, G. (1998). The world outside and inside schools: Language and immigrant children. Educational Researcher, 27(6) 4-18.

Weiner, L. (1993). Preparing teachers for urban schools: Lessons from thirty years of school reform. New York: Teachers College Press.

Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

SEPTEMBER 1999






https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44816925_Qualitative_Data_Analysis_A_Source_Book_of_New_Methods?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274203905_Transforming_Qualitative_Data_Description_Analysis_and_Interpretation?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==






https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238209087_Conducting_Research_on_Practice?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238209087_Conducting_Research_on_Practice?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268445978_Preparing_teachers_for_urban_schools_Lessons_from_thirty_years_of_school_reform?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240538821_From_Bureaucratic_Control_to_Building_Human_Capital_The_Importance_of_Teacher_Learning_in_Education_Reform?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==




https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269803061_The_World_Outside_and_Inside_Schools_Language_and_Immigrant_Children?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==







https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249797772_The_Effects_of_Vocabulary_Instruction_A_Model-Based_Meta-Analysis?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==




https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240558619_Beyond_Direct_Explanation_Transactional_Instruction_of_Reading_Comprehension_Strategies?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==






https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283737399_Some_key_issues_in_teaching_Latino_students?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-01809a6d3fe8750daace9ce339f536e3-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI0OTEzNDc1NjtBUzoxNTg0Nzc3NTg1MDkwNTZAMTQxNDc5NTQ1MTAwNQ==



lost opportunities: challenges confronting four teachers of english-language learners

Documents