Search
On-Site 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 Housing and Travel
Sign In
Purposes: In this presentation, we describe CUNY-NYSIEB team members’ work and experience in bilingual education, ESL, ELA, and community engagement alongside one another. We highlight different experiences of the authors and how our work overlapped with common goals.
Perspectives: CUNY-NYSIEB approached our work with a commitment to work with all types of schools, programs, and stakeholders to support the success of emergent bilingual students. Here, we present several examples of our work across distinct contexts, schools, and program types, describing how this work overlapped with mutually held objectives.
Modes of inquiry: The project carefully sought out the participation of teacher education faculty and researchers, both established as well as those who were doctoral students and entering the profession, school leaders and teachers in both bilingual education and ESL programs. We worked with schools that established different types of programs based on their student population, community, or in some cases, simply through legacy. Through our observations of classrooms and lessons, we supported new practices from teachers and students who often struggled to fully participate in ways that validated their knowledge and abilities.
Data sources: We examined teacher preparation programs for bilingual education classrooms and how teachers negotiated bilingual education policies, programs, and translanguaging practices. We also investigated how teachers in English as a Second Language programs were able to open up space for translanguaging. Lastly, we attended school community meetings to explore how translanguaging could engage family and community.
Conclusions: All of our work in CUNY-NYSIEB was united around supporting emergent bilingual students. We recognized that emergent bilingual students often experience different program types and diverse students in their schools. At a time in which the profession is more divided than ever into separate interest groups, those of bilingual educators and those of the TESOL profession, we were able to negotiate different interests as our larger purposes were the same. Our work demonstrates that different program types and structures may not be as restricting as expected and it is the practices that benefit radicalized and minoritized bilinguals, their families and communities that matter the most.
We saw that translanguaging practices leveraged bilingualism as a resource for learning in school. Many of the practices and experiences were similar regardless of program type and school. By integrating students’ home languages and practices, teachers were able to engage students and their families. Although there was resistance at times encountered by teachers reluctant to change previous approaches, once teachers were able to become familiar with translanguaging pedagogies and have the opportunity to use them in their classrooms, they were enthusiastic to learn and integrate them more into their practices.
Significance: Our work showed that the different program types and structures may not be as restricting as expected. It is the practices that reach the students that matter most. These are not practices that are ideological; rather they reflect those of the families and communities of the students.