Choosing and Using Interactional Scaffolds: How Teachers' Moment-to-Moment Supports Shape Emergent Bilinguals' Engagement With Challenging Texts

• In Event: Title: A Critical Look at Pedagogical Scaffolding During Literacy Instruction With Emergent Bilinguals

Abstract

Objectives/Purpose: Recent scholarship points to the need for teachers of emergent bilinguals (EBs) to provide challenging, yet scaffolded instruction (August & Shanahan, 2006; Understanding Language, 2013). Yet, studies suggest that, in their efforts to make language and content more comprehensible, well-intentioned teachers of EBs may over-scaffold tasks and texts, which can diminish the rigor of instruction. Given the large achievement gap in reading between emergent bilinguals and native-English speakers, particularly among adolescents, it is crucial that EBs experience instruction that Gibbons (2009) characterizes as “high challenge/high support.” Yet we know little about what such teaching looks like moment to moment or how students respond.

Theoretical Framework: I use Gibbons’ conceptual framework of challenge/support to analyze data from a comparative case study of two exemplary teachers’ instruction of middle school EBs. Both teachers provided interactional scaffolds (in-the-moment supports for language and content) as students read and discussed challenging texts. I investigated how the two teachers differed in their use of interactional support and the varied ways in which students responded to their teacher’s scaffolded instruction. Finally, I examined the patterns of instruction that may have contributed to differences between the two classes in terms of student talk, English language development, and reading achievement.

Data Sources: Data include transcripts of eight video-recorded reading lessons led by two exemplary English Language Development (ELD) teachers working in one large urban district serving a high percentage of EBs. Because assessment data were unavailable due to Common Core assessment piloting, district English Learner coaches, who were familiar with teachers’ practice, nominated individuals who met at least five of six criteria that addressed the teachers’ knowledge of ELA content and instructional strategies, especially for emergent bilinguals; their colleagues’ regard for their teaching; their students’ positive responses, based on observations of teaching; teaching credentials and awards; and teaching experience. Data also include six interviews with the teachers to better understand how they were attempting to help students read and discuss challenging text.

Methods: I first analyzed instructional transcripts for evidence of challenge (use of complex texts, rigorous tasks, higher-order questions). Then, using, sociocultural discourse analysis (Mercer, 2004) I examined teachers’ interactional scaffolds for their broader means (van de Pol, Volman, Beishuizen, 2010; e.g., modeling) and specific discourse moves (e.g., modeling academic language). Finally, I examined students’ responses to scaffolded instruction, including the quantity (e.g. mean numbers of words, turns, and questions) and quality of talk (e.g. evidence of higher-order thinking).

Results: Although both teachers introduced high challenge, one’s use of “generative” scaffolds (via highlighting and directing) maintained that challenge and promoted discussion, while the other’s use of “directive” scaffolds (via explaining and hinting) seemed to reduce both challenge and interaction. Their approaches appear to explain differences in student talk, reasoning, and inquiry.

Scholarly Significance: The findings have theoretical implications for conceptualizing “high” support for challenging literacy instruction as well as practical implications for helping teachers of EBs become skillful at providing appropriate and effective support for their students.

Author

• Erika Moore Johnson, Stanford University