A University and District English-for-Speakers-of-Other-Languages Partnership: Collaboration Within the Context of Common Core State Standards Implementation

• In Event: From No Child Left Behind to Common Core: How Do New Standards Affect Practices and Policies for English Learners?

Abstract

Objective
The number of English learners (ELs) in our schools continues to increase, while the academic achievement of ELs consistently lags behind native-English-speaking peers (Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010). With the implementation of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) the academic demands placed on ELs will grow. Consequently, there is increased need to provide effective professional development (PD) for teachers of ELs (Hakuta, 2011). As district-sponsored opportunities for classroom-embedded PD (Ball & Cohen, 1999) become scarce, universities are positioned to take on collaborative endeavors with districts that can be mutually beneficial. As a field, however, we lack a clear understanding of what these partnerships can and should look like when it comes to supporting English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) teachers in an era of CCSS.
Perspectives
The approach used to analyze this collaborative work draws on sociocultural learning theory (Vygotsky, 1978). Research suggests that sustained, classroom embedded PD can impact teacher learning (Hawley & Valli, 1999; Teemant, 2010). In addition, coaching can impact the implementation level of research-based EL strategies (Penner-Williams & Worthen, 2010). Research is scant concerning what we know about classroom-based PD vis-à-vis university and district partnerships.
Methods/Data Sources
This is a qualitative case study of a pilot university and district ESOL coaching partnership. This project engaged eight teachers in four high schools in one linguistically diverse urban district. I utilized case study data including observations, documents, a needs assessment survey, interviews, and a field journal. Data analysis was iterative (Glesne, 2006) and I used the constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The use of grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) guided analysis, coding of the data, and the development of conclusions.
Findings and Conclusions
Data revealed three important findings. (1) Based on a quick rollout, teachers were not sure of the purpose of their involvement and were concerned about the nature of the project in relation to the new teacher evaluation system being implemented in their district and implementation of CCSS. (2) Developing relational trust was key to successful coaching sessions. However, this took time and meant that it was initially challenging to address ESOL instruction without pushback from the teachers. Furthermore, there was little accountability, teachers did not feel vested, and the work seemed disjointed from their professional responsibilities. (3) There was a lack of focus across stakeholders in identifying goals for ESOL teachers. A focus across stakeholders could have been helpful for directing ESOL teachers’ attention and encouraging accountability and alignment given a new teacher evaluation system and implementation of CCSS. Findings suggest the need to develop shared frameworks and goals before implementing such a university-district partnership (Wenger, 1998).
Significance
The implementation of CCSS requires increased rigor for ELs and necessitates an emphasis on content knowledge as well as English language development (Hakuta, 2011). As districts reduce instructional support (Steinbacher-Reed & Powers, 2011), innovative PD models are needed. A university-district partnership has the potential to mutually benefit – in particular, when the university relies on the district for placement and mentoring of their teacher candidates.

Author

• Felice Atesoglu Russell, Kennesaw State University