Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Annual Meeting Registraion, Housing and Travel
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Purpose. This presentation will address how mainstream teachers are supported in enacting pedagogical principles and instructional strategies that leverage linguistic diversity so as to position linguistically diverse students (LDS) as intellectually capable (Gibbons, 2002; Molle, Sato, Boals, & Hedgspeth, 2015). It draws on sociocultural theoretical perspectives that view learning as co-constructed and, specifically, whole group discussions (WGDs) as an opportunity for students (and teachers) to contribute mutually to joint understandings (Pacheco & Gutiérrez, 2008; Vygotsky, 1978). It highlights the following strategies: (1) leveraging linguistic diversity as an intellectual resource, (2) scaffolding, and (3) addressing participation structures.
Grounding Framework. Drawing on sociocultural perspectives, research demonstrates first, that linguistic diversity is typically ignored and even suppressed as teachers minimally exploit this invaluable resource (Lucas, Villegas, & Freedson-Gonzalez, 2008). Second, even in classrooms where linguistic diversity is acknowledged, LDS intellectual contributions are often marginalized (Gutiérrez, Morales, & Martinez, 2009; Pacheco, 2010). Third, failure to leverage linguistic diversity can have detrimental cumulative consequences for LDS long-term academic success (see Kanno & Harklau, 2012).
Teaching Methods. This presentation will highlight how teachers are supported initially to leverage students’ linguistic repertoires to position LDS as intellectually capable by taking a language-as-tool view. They initially examine research that illustrates the hybrid language forms and multimodal expression LDS employ to co-construct content-area learning (Moschkovich, 2002; Poza, 2018). Teachers undertake case studies of LDS to analyze their novel, creative, and innovative language practices and how these practices might be leveraged to promote intellectual engagement during WGDs.
Second, teachers are asked to identity scaffolding strategies that create multiple entry points for LDS, which requires addressing two fundamental questions:
1. What are the language demands of WGDs?
2. What do students currently know about WGDs and what are their language-learning needs? (Gibbons, 2002, p. 121).
Teachers explore, for example, sentence starters to help LDS appropriate the discourses specific to WGDs. Also, they examine models that shift student roles during WGDs, such as reciprocal teaching wherein students enact summarizing, questioning, clarifying, and predicting roles to foster collective understanding (Palinscar & Brown, 1984). The accountable talk framework helps teachers explore WGDs that discursively promote accountability to the learning community, to standards of reasoning, and to knowledge (Michaels, O’Connor, Hall& Resnick, 2002).
Lastly, this presentation will illustrate how teachers are encouraged to organize flexible participation structures, or the defining verbal and non-verbal practices constitutive of WGDs (Erickson & Schultz, 1997; O’Connor & Michaels, 1996). As they design and implement lessons, teachers are asked to be explicit about what counts as participation in WGDs and to consider how flexible norms might build on the unique participation structures linguistically diverse students acquire in home-community spaces (González, 2006; Heath, 1983; Pacheco, 2009). For example, Au (1980) demonstrated that when conventional recitation in reading groups with LDS was transformed to reflect Hawaiian ‘talk story’ (e.g., overlapping talk, joint performance), academic performance improved.
Significance. This presentation demonstrates how teachers are encouraged to elevate linguistic diversity as a key pedagogical principle to transform WGDs into equitable learning opportunities for all.