English language learners (ELLs) are a rapidly growing population in the United States, accounting for 9.1 % or 4.4 million students in public K-12 schools (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2015). By the year 2025, ELLs are predicted to make up 25 % of the student population (National Education Association [NCES], 2005), with the largest number of these students found in California, Florida, Illinois, New Mexico, New York, Puerto Rico, and Texas. However, significant changes in the student population have already occurred in many states, with Arkansas, Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia experiencing more than 200 % growth in the numbers of ELLs in schools (NCES, 2015).
With such growth in the ELL population, these students have been mainstreamed at an increasingly rapid rate, frequently attending content area classes with their native English speaking peers and receiving additional language support with an English as a second language (ESL) teacher or other specialist a few times a week. In fact, ELLs generally spend about 80 % of their school day in mainstream classrooms (Dong, 2002). Given the expected ELL population growth in schools and the increasing responsibility of mainstream classroom teachers to work with them, the need to prepare all teachers for the learning needs of ELLsānot just ESL teachers or bilingual specialistsāis a pressing concern (Lucas & Grinberg, 2008). Most teacher education programs across grade levels and content areas do not adequately prepare teacher candidates with the knowledge of specific methods to differentiating curriculum, instruction, and assessment for the needs of ELLs (Ray, Bowman, & Robbins, 2006). Teacher preparation is a crucial time, however, for those learning to teach in order to counter the tendency for teachers to operate from deficit models and assumptions about ELLs (Cutri & Johnson, 2010). To develop school-based forms of language, ELLs need teachers prepared to counter the linguistic, cultural, and social barriers to their learning (Fry, 2007; Schleppegrell, 2004).
As a result of the increasingly diverse student population, the role of the English language arts (ELA) teacher has naturally expanded to include specific attention to the learning of ELLs. Recognizing the diversity of students in the classroom is not a modern concept for ELA teachers, of course. The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) has taken active positions on the learning needs of diverse students for over 40 years, from the preparation of ELA teachers to the effective teaching of linguistically diverse students (1974) to the need for multicultural curriculum (1975) to the importance of bilingual education (1982a, 1982b, 1999) to the rights of students to retain their own language (2003). In 2006, NCTE addressed the need for ELA teachers to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to support the development of ELLsā language, literacy, and identity; in 2008, the organization published a policy brief outlining the increasing growth of the ELL student population and the resultant increasing need for ELA teachers to be prepared more effectively to address their specific learning needs. Acknowledging that āless than 13 percent of teachers have received professional development on teaching ELLs ā¦ and only three states have policies that require all teachers to have some expertise in teaching ELLs effectively,ā (NCTE, 2008, p. 6), NCTE identified the insufficiency of English teacher candidatesā coursework on and preparation with this particular student population and offered recommendations for effective instructional practices for ELLs in the ELA classroom.
The educational landscape has not remained static, however, and preparation for ELL teaching and learning continues to lag behind the need for such. For example, a national study of teacher preparation curricular content found that ELL-specific subject matter was infrequently incorporated as part of practicum experiences in any of the degrees offered (Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008). Specific to ELA, the Common Core State Standards (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010) movement has increased the linguistic demands associated with learning texts and tasks, focusing on such high-level skills as engaging in discussions, expressing ideas clearly and fluently, reading and writing complex texts, and using language at an advanced level. This increased focus on higher-order literacy tasks intensifies the challenges ELLs already face in achieving academic success in the ELA classroom.
As the chapters in this book attest, while ELA teacher educators recognize the importance of educating pre-service and practicing teachers to teach ELLs, they continue to struggle with how to do so. The increasing diversity and established needs of todayās student population, however, require English teacher educators to consciously consider what is needed to prepare ELA teachers for ELL students. Recognition without action is no longer an acceptable response. Rather, English teacher educators must askāand answerādifficult questions. What does ELA teacher preparation look like when it meaningfully incorporates preparation to teach ELLs? How does ELA curriculum change when teacher educators address ELL learning, specifically? How can ELA teachers learn to work more effectively with ELLs in their current classrooms?
Luciana C. de Oliveira and Melanie Shoffner open the book with a chapter that examines their collaborative efforts to better address the teaching of ELLs in a university methods course. As an ESL teacher educator and a secondary English teacher educator, respectively, they consider the need for such collaboration, describe their work with pre-service ELA teachers, and share strategies that integrate ELL issues and instruction into ELA methods. The examination of collaboration in the ELA methods course continues in Chap. 3, with Laura Baecher and Melissa Schieble describing collaborative efforts to develop ELL pedagogy for both English teachers and teachers of English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) specialists. Through co-planning, ELA and TESOL teacher candidates learn strategies to differentiate teaching for linguistically diverse adolescents, necessary skills for the effective teaching of ELLs. Heidi Hallman examines the English education methods course more broadly in Chap. 4, reporting on the findings of a nationwide survey focused on the preparation of secondary ELA teachers. After considering how the teaching of ELLs has (or has not) been incorporated in ELA methods, she examines how English teacher educators see ELL preparation within English education and what those stances mean for ELA methods.
In Chap. 5, DelliCarpini and Gulla discuss the need for ELA teacher preparation to better support the development of ELLsā academic language skills through the use of Two-way Content Based Instruction. Using this collaborative practice and the subsequent classroom activities, ELLs are able to achieve language-driven content objectives in the ESL classroom as well as content-driven language objectives in the ELA classroom.
Chapter 6 turns to specific elements of the ELA classroom. Bernadette Musetti, Spencer Salas, and Beth Murray look at literature, considering its ability to sustain the culture of ELLs while serving as authentic curriculum. In Chap. 6, they examine the potential of young adult literature to engage ELLsāand all studentsāwith issues of class, culture, language, and race/ethnicity while creating humanizing and responsive ELA instruction.
Chapters 7 and 8 examine another component of the ELA classroom: writing. In Chap. 7, Melinda McBee Orzulak examines specific methods to better prepare pre-service ELA teachers to work with ELL writing in their future ELA classrooms. Acknowledging that effective writing instruction is a complex task, she considers different ways in which to develop pre-service ELA teachersā linguistically responsive pedagogy during their university preparation. Mark Lewis and Margarita Zisselsberger also consider how to better prepare pre-service ELA teachers to support the writing of ELLs. In Chap. 8, they describe engaging pre-service ELA teachers with writing samples from ELL middle school students; through their analysis, the pre-service teachers were able to identify strengths and challenges of the ELLsā writing while recognizing the disconnect between their future studentsā abilities and their expectations of bilingual writers.
Chapters 9 and 10 focus more specifically on grammar in the ELA classroom. In Chap. 9, John Haught and Deborah Crusan consider how TESOL training has the ability to better prepare ELA teachers for their work with ELLs. Offering possible curriculum, activities, and strategies for the teaching and assessment of grammar, they conclude with the need to establish TESOL standards for ELA teacher education to develop the needed knowledge and skills for classroom teachers. Tammy Slater and Shannon McCrocklin examine the possibilities offered to ELA teachers through an understanding of systemic functional grammar in Chap. 10. With a professional development workshop as the setting, they examine how engaging ELA teachers in literary analysis through systemic functional grammar may support the teachersā ability to develop their ELLsā ability to understand literature.
In the last chapter, Megan Peercy and Maria Austria offer an examination of curriculum designed to support ELLsā learning of ELA and, consequently, their graduation from high school within a four-year time frame. In describing the scaffolded course sequence, they explore how ELLs are able to develop a foundational knowledge of ELA and encourage teacher education programs to consider rethinking how pre-service ELA teachers ...