I just gave a talk with my colleague Samantha Daley at the American Psychological Association (title above). We addressed issues of digital technologies, literacy development, and bilingualism in the context of increasing ubiquity of digital affordances, and what that means for instruction in the elementary and middle school grades. We targeted 3 dimensions of affordances that digital technologies provide in the current era:

ACCESS
●Supporting learner to access text content accounting for maximum learner variability (e.g., text-to-speech, speech-to-text)
     ○Potential barriers: e.g., visual impairments, decoding challenges
     ○Leveraging existing capabilities: e.g., alternative modalities
PROCESSING
●Getting the learner to metacognitively process language and literacy to better understand their relation to learning and comprehension (e.g., embedded vocabulary supports or comprehension strategy applications)
     ○Potential barriers: e.g., emergent English proficiency
     ○Leveraging existing knowledge: e.g., native language proficiency
INTERNALIZATION
●Getting the learner to internalize learning, to feel expert and engaged in the content (e.g., motivation, self-efficacy)
     ○Potential barriers: e.g., limited reading proficiency
     ○Leveraging existing knowledge: e.g., high-interests texts 

Our powerpoint is here. The video will be posted soon on the APA website.

Recently the MA senate joined the House to pass legislation undoing 15 years of English-only mandate in this state. They still need to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate versions, but this is the closest we've come in this state to overturning what has amounted to a violation of bilingual students' linguistic rights and school districts' abilities to implelent language education policies that align with their specific needs. The law on the books now is from 2002 but draws a direct line with the kind of xenophonic and nationalistic rhetoric that defines our present day politics. It is a good thing that this might pass. It is a truly sad thing that this is not done yet (first house-senate reconciliation then Governor Baker muat sign). For more than an academic generation we have dealt with the painful implications of this law. Here's to its undoing.

As of June 2017, the Lynch School has provided 3 years of funding for us to develop the Teaching Dual Language Learners (TDLL) micro credential program. This short sequence of courses prepares elementary or reading specialist licensure candidates to teach in both monolingual and bilingual instructional settings. Click here to see current requirements for the TDLL. We have been funded to add two new courses: Foundations of Dual Language Education and Bilingual Literacy and Literature. These are being developed this summer, and are set to be brought to our Educational Policy Committee for approval in the Fall 2017. We expect to have a fully functional TDLL program, alongside a masters in multilingual education, in Fall 2018. This aligns with the (hopeful) and coming expansion of bilingual programming here in Massachusetts, per recent reporting by the Boston Globe. Stay tuned!

The research teams at University of Maryland and Boston College are finishing up the field trial of the Comprehension, Linguistic Awareness, and Vocabulary in English and Spanish (and Portuguese!), aka, CLAVES. Over 2 years our teams worked to develop a 3-unit, multi-lesson curriculum that targets language development via text reading, metalinguistic awareness, and small-group discussions. We'll be assessing implementation effects over the summer after data are collected, but here is a link to our implementation site, with a link to one of the CLAVES lesson sequences.

Beginning the 2017 - 2018 academic year, I'll be taking over directorship of the Curriculum and Instruction doctoral program at the Lynch School of Education at Boston College. If you have any interest in learning more about the program, please email me!

Nelson Flores recently posted "5 guidelines for white people who speak Spanish to consider when deciding when it may or may not be appropriate for them to use Spanish with Latinxs in the US". They are (see Dr. Flores' post for elaboration on each of these):

1) Mock Spanish is not Spanish
2) Not all Latinxs speak Spanish
3) Not all Latinxs who speak Spanish want to use Spanish with white people
4) Don’t expect Latinxs to be your Spanish teacher
5) Being bilingual doesn’t automatically make you an ally to the Latinx community

These are all critical and important dimensions of which White native English speaking Spanish speakers ought to be aware, but I am not sure they help me decide when specifically it is appropriate for me, a white English-Spanish bilingual (who speaks more than mock Spanish), to speak Spanish to Latinxs in the US. I don't pretend to know the answer here, but with critical humility, I offer a second set of guidelines, that are undergirded by Dr. Flores' 5 above. I try to mindful of these when I consider whether to speak Spanish to Latinxs in the US:

1) If I am spoken to in Spanish by a Latinx in the US, who I do not know, I will converge to Spanish, or feel free to do so. Otherwise, I typically use English as a default. There are some contextual exceptions, but this is the general rule.
2) If, in that default, it is clear that my Latinx interlocutor is emergent in their English proficiency, then I will often say something in Spanish as an overture to bilingualism. The nonverbal and verbal responses here tell everything about whether the person would rather switch to Spanish or remain in English. Or it sets up the possibility to translanguage as the conversation continues;
3) If I have a close friend or colleague with whom I have developed a dynamic linguistic relationship, I feel free to speak in English, Spanish, or translanguage as the situation/topic warrants;

English is the language of centralized and institutionalized power here in the US. We leverage it in schools, employment, civic engagement. Spanish and other languages are deliberately and conspicuously minoritized (see this recent reaction to bilingual communication in Arizona), which can make it easy for the do-gooder White bilingual to think that just because they speak Spanish they should because it legitimizes bilingualism, and/or elevates Spanish. Dr. Flores, particularly in his disdain of Tim Kaine's obsequious use of Spanish on the campaign trail, makes the important point that it is not this simple, and that White, native English speaking Spanish-speakers have a responsibility that goes beyond embracing the "celebrate diversity" model of bilingualism.

Recently at a block party on my street, I was talking with a Latinx neighbor and his spouse, both of whom I knew to be fluent Spanish speakers, but with whom I had only ever spoken English (per #1 above). However, my neighbor's Venezuelan mother was visiting and attending the event. She spoke very little English. My friend introduced me to her in English (he didn't know I spoke Spanish), and she said hi to me. I asked her how long she was visiting for, in English, and was met with silence. I repeated, "Cuánto tiempo estará Ud. visitando?", o algo asi. This began a 30-minute conversation, in Spanish, that allowed us to learn more about one another, and for me to learn more about my neighbor (#2 above). That conversation that would have been impossible in English. My friend and his wife also learned that day that I speak Spanish. Now, with them, the default language is still English, but a translanguaging precedent was set (#3 above), which gave me some important insights about when it is appropriate to speak Spanish with Latinxs in the US. Thanks to Nelson Flores!

See Michael Kieffer and me presenting on the IES Practice Guide to teachers in Hartford, CT last November about implementing recommendations in the guide. Link to the video here and click on the Multimedia tab. 

From the Boston Globe, 4.10.15
Boston’s failings highlight flaws in state’s English immersion law


THE DEPARTMENT of Justice continues to find some Boston Public Schools failing to meet the needs of their bilingual students (“Schools’ language barriers persist,” Page A1, March 30). This may be due to the fact that the Boston schools are indeed failing, but maybe these schools are implementing our laws exactly as intended.

In Massachusetts, the “English for the Children” ballot initiative effectively abolished bilingual education in 2002, replacing it with Sheltered English Immersion, an untested approach to instruction for English learners. This law mandated that children who do not speak English fluently attend SEI programs “during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one school year.” The result? Thousands of English-learning children mainstreamed into classrooms with many teachers understandably unprepared to meet these students’ needs.


After 12 years of herculean efforts by the state to regulate SEI implementation with thoughtful diligence, the federal government continues to fault how English learners are educated. Could it be that the Boston schools are actually doing a good job of implementing a flawed law, and as a result our bilingual learners continue to struggle?

The Massachusetts law is ignorant with respect to second-language acquisition, bilingualism, and the instructional approaches that support English-learning children. We need innovative and diverse program models that are specifically designed to meet the unique needs of bilingual learners.

The great irony here is that, implemented correctly, this law may decrease learning outcomes for bilingual students, ensuring visits from the US department of Justice and Education in perpetuity. Our best option is to reconsider this pernicious law that neglects our students’ learning needs.

Patrick Proctor

Newton

Mariela Páez

Newton



The writers are associate professors at the Lynch School of Education at Boston College.

So nice to see this headline from the Pew Research Center showing that, among Latino/a adults in the US, bilingualism is more common than English or Spanish dominance. In a recent survey, 36% of respondents claimed to be bilingual, while 25% spoke mainly English. However, 6 in 10 out of those 25% English dominant speakers also spoke Spanish (that is, they're bilingual too!). And, 38% reported mainly using Spanish. It all makes one question why we continue to use terms like language minority in research with people who speak multiple languages. The reality suggests linguistic forces in the US remain vibrant and we need to move toward additive, not subtractive, terminology.

There appears to be some steam gathering in the news media's reporting of the increasing popularity of dual language programs. Recent empirical evidence shows that English learning bilinguals in these programs are reclassified to fluent English proficient at slower, but higher, rates than their peers in non-dual language programs. New York City recently announced a push to increase the number of such programs city-wide, and now Prince George's County, Maryland has added 3 new programs. Catholic schools across the country are also moving forward, and attempting to link themselves with one another to promote biliteracy outcomes for an increasingly Latino population. Key going forward is to monitor whether and how these programs function in serving bilingual children who speak home languages other than English, as well as monolingual, minoritized children who are typically underserved in US schools.