Educators of Asian Bilingual Students: Pedagogical Techniques ...

Educators of Asian Bilingual Students: Pedagogical Techniques, Strategies and Challenges Christine J. Yeh, Jennifer Chen, Agnes Kwong, Lillian Chiang, Yu-Wei Wang and Florence Pu-Folkes Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, New York, NY, 10027 USA This two-part study explored the challenges and teaching strategies of 133 Asian bilingual educators using a detailed questionnaire developed specifically for the purposes of this investigation. Participants were asked to rate how important specific practices, strategies, and challenges were in their teaching of Asian bilingual students. These teachers were also asked to rate each of ten statements concerning their teaching competency, performance, comfort, preparation, satisfaction, and collaboration. Part two of the survey inquired about: (1) teachers’ strengths; (2) areas of improvement: (3) beliefs about activities to facilitate improved teaching. Our findings indicated pedagogical challenges such as lack of culturally relevant materials,varying language proficiency, and working with students with different styles of learning. Teachers who were older reported that they were more prepared to address the social, cultural and psychological needs of their bilingual students than were their younger counterparts. Teachers who self-reported their teacher preparation level as low had received limited teacher education training and had also limited collaborative interactions with parents and the community. Teachers who were not satisfied with their job tended to lack culturally appropriate teaching materials and had limited staff meetings. Implications for teacher education and professional development are addressed.

The number of students in the United States who are classified as limited English proficient (LEP) and who exhibit the need for bilingual education has dramatically increased (Cheng, 1995; Nieto, 1992). Statistics indicate that the population of students with English speaking difficulties increased from 1.25 million in 1979 to 2.44 million in 1995 (National Center for Education Statistics, 1997). According to the 2000 United States Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2000) an estimated 10% of children between the ages of 5 and 17 who spoke an Asian or a Pacific Island language indicated that they spoke English ‘not well’ or ‘not at all’. Moreover, the number of Asian children in the United States will double, surpassing the number of children from Spanish-speaking countries (Natriello, McDill & Pallas, 1990) and thereby increasing the number of Asian LEP school-aged children in the United States. The dramatic increase of Asian LEP school-aged children suggests that public school teachers and administrators will need to adapt teaching strategies and practices to the shifting demographics of the school environment. Recent trends indicate that while there is a rising demand for educators of bilingual students, there is an inadequate supply of teachers who are prepared and qualified to work with language-minority students (Boe, 1990; Gay, 1993; Rivera-Batiz, 1996; Rundall & Hernandez, 1986; Soto, 1991; Torres-Guzman &

0143-4632/02/04 0296-20 $20.00/0 JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

296 Challenges of Asian Bilingual Educators

© 2002 C.J. Yeh et al. Vol. 23, No. 4, 2002

Challenges of Asian Bilingual Educators

297

Goodwin, 1995). Moreover, numerous academic and cultural challenges are emerging from this unique population (Cheng, 1995). Although bilingual education is critical for many Asian students, few research efforts have investigated the teachers’ experiences when working with Asian bilingual students (Cheng, 1998). To date research examining Asian students centres heavily on student academic achievement, rather than teachers’ perspectives (Kester, 1991; Mau, 1997; Oakeley, Urabazo & Yang, 1998; Olsen, 1988; Sung, 1985; Tong, 1996; Zhang & Carrasquillo, 1992). Furthermore, the research and theory that does address the challenges of teaching bilingual students focuses primarily on Spanish-speaking populations (i.e., Bos & Reyes, 1996; Goldenberg, 1996; Jimenez, Gersten & Rivera, 1996; Montero-Sieburth & Perez, 1987). Research and case studies on bilingual teachers of Hispanic children indicate that bilingual teachers are confronted with frequent fluctuations in the number of students in class, a large range in age amongst the students attending class, and students who were often in the United States alone or with an older sibling because the parents were unable to leave the country (Montero-Sieburth & Perez, 1987). Strategies used by bilingual teachers of Hispanic students include giving explicit advice about behaviour patterns, involving both the family and community in students’ learning experiences, and weaving culture into the curriculum (Bos & Reyes, 1996; Jimenez, Gersten & Rivera, 1996; Montero-Sieburth & Perez, 1987). Despite the paucity of research on teachers’ experiences when working with Asian bilingual students, there is literature available on general issues of bilingual teacher preparation such as general characteristics of effective bilingual teachers, the attitudes of effective bilingual teachers, and the roles that they take in class. Effective bilingual teachers have been found to utilise LEP students’ native language for a part of the class instruction, to integrate the development of students’ Engligh-language abilities with the content of the class, and to use information from LEP students’ native culture during instruction (Tikunoff, 1982). Attitudes important in an effective bilingual teacher include positive attitudes towards the students’ culture and native language, an expectation that the students have the ability to learn, and positive attitudes regarding the usefulness and importance of bilingual education (Acosta & Blanco, 1978; Clark & Milk, 1983). Case studies and surveys have found that bilingual teachers give themselves emotionally as well as cognitively (Rodriguez, 1994) and that the role of a bilingual teacher often extends beyond that of someone who simply teaches to include playing the role of a surrogate parent (Montero-Sieburth & Perez, 1987) . As the number of Asian immigrants in the US dramatically grows, numerous pedagogical challenges emerge in our school systems. Numerous researchers have concurred that the bilingual students’ identification of their home culture is strongly linked to their adaptation to a second culture as well as to the learning of a second language (e.g. Ada, 1986; Tong, 1996). Tong found that while striving to adapt to the mainstream culture and trying to learn English, bilingual students often show a strong desire to maintain their native culture and language with which they feel more comfortable. Research has substantiated the fact that bilingual students bring with them a wealth of linguistic and cultural repertoires into the classroom. Thus, it is essentially important that teachers create a culturally responsive learning environ-

298

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development

ment in which these students can learn with great confidence and ease (Au, 1993; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). While it is imperative to create a culturally responsive learning environment for bilingual students, it is equally important for teachers to organise learning activities that can reinforce such an environment (Au, 1993). Culturally sensitive instructional materials would help validate and support the cultural and linguistic experiences of the bilingual students (Anderson & Roit, 1996; Au, 1993) and should be integrated into teaching activities (Goldenberg & Gallimore, 1991). While educators are striving to find ways to help immigrant students learn, one of the challenges facing teachers of Asian bilingual students is the lack of specific training and exposure to theory and research concerning the unique needs of Asian students. We are living in a multicultural society, yet many teachers are not trained or prepared to address the educational, psychological, and sociocultural needs of their bilingual students (Howard, 1983; Jew, 1986; Nieto, 1992; Soto, 1991). Due to the lack of previous research in this area, our investigation is primarily exploratory. Our study will address the following research questions: (1) What pedagogical strategies, techniques, and challenges are reported by educators of Asian bilingual students? (2) How do various demographic characteristics and pedagogical trends relate to teachers’ self-reported competency levels? (3) What are Asian bilingual educators’ strength’s and weaknesses when teaching Asian bilingual students? (4) What activities, training and resources do Asian bilingual educators believe would help to facilitate improvement in their teaching? We believe this research offers strong implications for professional development, teacher training programmes, research, and curriculum theory.

Method Participants The sample consisted of 133 teachers of Asian bilingual students in New York City public schools. Of these teachers, 27.8% (n = 37) were male and 72.2% (n = 96) were female. The age range was 18 to 68 years (M = 41.64, SD = 11.02). The ethnic make-up of the sample was as follows: 72% Chinese/Chinese American (n = 95); 11.4% Korean/Korean American (n = 15); 9.1% Taiwanese/Taiwanese American (n = 12); 4.5% other Asian (n = 6); 3.0% other mixed (n = 4). Moreover, 63 (47.7%) of the teachers were born in China; 19 (14.4%) in Hong Kong; 14 (10.6%) in Taiwan; 12 (9.1%) in the United States; 14 (10.6%) in Korea; and 6 (7.6%) in other countries. Teachers in our sample also reported their educational background: 95 (73.1%) had a masters degree; 30 (23.1%) had a bachelors degree; 2 (1.5%) had received a doctorate; 2 (1.5%) were still in college. The number of years these teachers had been living in the United States ranged from one to 49 (M = 17.67, SD = 10.58). Our sample also reported a range of one to 28 years of teaching experience with Asian bilingual students (M = 7.38, SD = 6.21). Of the 133 teachers, 57 (44.2%) are currently teaching in a transitional bilingual education programme, 12 (9.3%) in a two-way bilingual/dual


299

language, 14 (10.9%) in a maintenance bilingual, and 3 (2.3%) in an immersion bilingual education programme. The remaining teachers taught in programme that reflected a combination of pedagogical strategies or they did not specify the type of bilingual education programme they were in. Forty-eight (36.4%) of the teachers are currently teaching in high school, 28 (21.2%) in middle school, and 48 (36.4%) in elementary school. Teachers also listed the New York City Borough that they worked in. Seventy-one teachers (53.4%) worked in Manhattan, 24 (18%) worked in Brooklyn, 35 (26.3%) in Queens, and 2 (1.5%) worked in Staten Island. Instruments Participants completed a Teachers of Asian Bilingual Education Survey (TABES) developed specifically for the investigative purposes of this project. An extensive literature search revealed no current questionnaires or surveys designed to assess teaching strategies, techniques, and challenges of this unique population.

Survey development These lists were generated from numerous individual and group interviews with educators of Asian bilingual students. We generated items for a preliminary list for the TABES in the following two ways, as suggested by Crocker and Algina (1986): (1) using a review of the literature on bilingual education and teacher education (see above for references); and (2) in two focus-group discussions each with six teachers of Asian bilingual students. In addition, we interviewed four experts in the area of Asian bilingual education about the content of the survey and solicited feedback from them. The review of the literature included sources such as manuscript articles, books, book chapters and dissertations by researchers in the areas of bilingual education, Asian cultural values, and teacher education. The review revealed some primary areas of consideration: teaching practices, teaching strategies, teaching challenges, and teacher preparation. The initial list of topics was used as a starting-point for the two focus groups. In the focus groups, Asian bilingual teachers generated items and statements for each of the topic areas in Asian bilingual teaching. Across the two focus groups, 12, 14, 17 and 10 items were generated for the areas of teaching practices, teaching strategies, teaching challenges, and teacher preparation, respectively. In addition, focus group members were asked to consider and generate any additional open-ended questions that were relevant to their teaching experiences. The final list of questions related to teachers’ strengths; teachers’ areas of improvement; and teachers’ beliefs about activities, training and resources to facilitate improved teaching. The initial version of the TABES was disseminated to 30 participants to review for readability and comprehension. Participants were asked to write comments about each of the surveys and note any desired changes. Items receiving the most changes and comments were revised and rewritten. Items that were deemed confusing were deleted from the original survey. There were only four such items.

300


The final version of TABES consisted of two main parts. The first part comprised three sections: (1) demographic information, (2) teaching practices, strategies, and challenges and (3) various teaching beliefs. The second part of questions relating to the following areas: (1) teachers’ strengths; (2) teachers’ areas of improvement; (3) teachers’ beliefs about activities, training and resources to facilitate improved teaching. (1) Demographic information. The survey inquired about gender, age, marital status, ethnicity, birthplace, years in the US, educational background, previous teaching experience, and language fluency. (2) Teaching practices, strategies and challenges. Teachers were provided with three separate lists of various teaching practices, strategies, and challenges (Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996) and were asked to rate on a Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (most) how important specific practices, strategies, and challenges were in their teaching of Asian bilingual students. At the bottom of each list, the teachers were asked to include additional responses not provided for in the survey. (3) Teaching beliefs. Teachers were also asked to rate on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) each of ten statements concerning their teaching competency, performance, comfort, preparation, satisfaction, and collaboration. Surveys were sent by mail to approximately 200 educators of Asian bilingual education in the New York City Metropolitan Area. This list was taken from the mailing list of the Asian Language Bilingual Assistance Center of the New York Board of Education. This is a complete list of Asian bilingual educators in the New York City Metropolitan area. Of the 200 surveys mailed, 133 were returned. The surveys were completed individually and at home by each participant within one week of the date sent. Part 2 of the survey consisted of open-ended questions inquiring about the following areas: teachers’ strengths, teachers’ areas of improvement, and teachers’ beliefs about activities, training and resources to facilitate improved teaching. Of the 133 surveys that were returned, 85 of the participants completed Part 2. Data were coded by three raters who were trained in data analyses. In Part 1, each item was coded according to its Likert scale rating with an inter-rater reliability of (j = 0.99), using Cohen’s Kappa. For Part 2, data were coded by two of the three raters. First, the raw data were read several times and coded for main themes and patterns in the responses using procedures in the discovery-oriented-exploratory approach (Hill, 1990; Mahrer, 1988). After categories were determined, the two raters established an inter-rater reliability of ( j = 0.97), using Cohen’s Kappa. For more information about this process, see ‘Part 2 Results’ below. Regression analyses at the alpha level of 0.05 were used to determine the factors predicting the self-reported competencies of Asian bilingual teachers. In addition, in Part 1, one-way Analysis of Variance analyses were used to assess significant differences based on demographic variables among teachers in terms of teaching challenges, strategies and practices and areas of improvement. In Part 2, due to the open-ended and exploratory nature of the questions, data were used for descriptive purposes only using frequency tables.


301

Results Part 1 results On a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = least challenging, 5 = most challenging), we calculated the top five challenges that negatively affect optimal teaching. These challenges were: a lack of culturally appropriate material available (M = 3.83, SD = 1.16); teaching students with different language proficiency abilities (M = 3.78, SD = 1.11); overcrowded class size (M = 3.72, SD = 1.31); limited funds provided for buying relevant teaching materials (M = 3.66, SD = 1.18); and teaching students with different learning styles (M = 3.52, SD = 1.09). Participants also rated the teaching strategies they deemed important on a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = not important at all, 5 = most important). The top five most important teaching strategies are: organise lessons around themes (M = 3.89, SD = 1.05); create hands-on activities (M = 3.83, SD = 0.89); provide opportunities for students to engage in independent reading (M = 3.75, SD = 1.02); have students work independently (M = 3.67, SD = 0.89); have students engage in cooperative group work (M = 3.62, SD = 0.93). In addition, on a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = not important at all, 5 = most important), the top five most important teaching practices were: prepare lessons (M = 4.38, SD = 0.76); observe and evaluate students’ learning performance (M = 4.24, SD = 0.78); plan and grade homework and tests (M = 3.94, SD = 0.83); conferencing with students individually (M = 3.79, SD = 0.89); use English as the medium of instruction (M = 3.78, SD = 0.93). Regression analyses at the alpha level of 0.05 indicate that there were several factors influencing the self-reported competencies of Asian bilingual teachers. Teachers were asked to rate how prepared they were to address their students’ needs and these ratings were analysed according to numerous demographic characteristics and factors. Our results indicate that teachers who were older (t = 3.159, p = 0.002) considered themselves to be better prepared to address the social, cultural and psychological needs of their bilingual students. Lack of collaboration with parents (t = -2.497, p = 0.015) and community (t = 2.036, p = 0.045) along with limited teacher education training (t = 2.240, p = 0.028) were challenges that significantly affected the teachers’ self-reported ratings of how prepared they were to address the social, cultural, and psychological needs of students. Teachers were asked to rate how effectively they worked with parents and colleagues. Teachers who worked less effectively with parents tended to be younger (t = 2.019, p = 0.047), had insufficient resources at schools (t = 2.057, p = 0.043), lacked teaching aides (t = -2.321, p = 0.023), and worked with students with different styles of learning (t = 2.206, p = 0.030). Factors that significantly impaired teachers’ work effectiveness with colleagues negatively were overcrowded classrooms (t = 2.372, p = 0.020) and lack of encouragement and support from their school (t = -2.671, p = 0.009). Teachers also rated their job satisfaction as well as their willingness to continue working as a bilingual education teacher. Our results show that variables such as the lack of appropriate teaching materials (t = -2.193, p = 0.031) and limited staff meetings (t = 3.124, p = 0.002) predicted negative job satisfaction of Asian bilingual teachers. Teachers who were older (t = 2.620, p = 0.011) were likely to continue working as bilingual teachers. Overcrowded classrooms (t =

302


2.630, p = 0.011) and having students with interrupted formal schooling (t = -2.446, p = 0.018) were challenges that influenced teachers’ willingness to continue working as bilingual teachers. One-way ANOVA analyses indicate no significant differences among teachers in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens boroughs in terms of teaching challenges, strategies and practices and areas of improvement. Differences were also not evident when comparing elementary, middle, and high school teachers. However, ethnicity did have an effect on teaching challenges and areas of improvement in that Chinese teachers were significantly more likely to perceive that their lessons were appropriate for teaching bilingual students than were Taiwanese teachers, F (4, 126) = 6.112, p < 0.05. In addition, Chinese and Korean teachers felt more satisfied with their own teaching performances than Taiwanese teachers, F (4, 128) = 5.528, p < 0.05). However, these findings are cautioned since small sample sizes limit the statistical power of these analyses. Part 2 results Across all four areas of inquiry, the raw data were read several times by two graduate research assistants and coded for main themes and patterns in the responses using procedures in the discovery-oriented-exploratory approach (Hill, 1990;Mahrer, 1988). Each researcher went through a portion of the responses and sorted them into newly determined categories. All of the coding schemes were combined into a preliminary category system that was then used on a large section of the data. After considerable discussion, a new iteration began in which each section would be recoded to empirically ground the new categories. Each section was subjected to several discussions and iterations leading to the final determination of the coding systems. The respondents were permitted to write more than one answer.

Teacher strengths In total, 5 categories were developed to describe the strength that teachers perceived themselves to possess. They were as follows: Language Ability (n = 44), Teaching Ability (n = 40), Cultural Experience/Sensitivity/Awareness (n = 33), Emotions (n = 17), Trust/Communication ( D = 15). In addition, the following 12 categories were generated to represent the teachers’ perception of their areas that needed improvement. They included: Poor English Language Ability (n = 18), Lack of Trust/Communication (n = 15), Poor Teaching Ability (n = 42), Poor Instructional Materials for Class (n = 19), Professionalism (n = 9), Work with Teaching Aids (n = 7), Managing Class Size/Space (n = 7), Managing Time/Workload (n = 6), Working with Administration (n = 5), Learning From Others (n = 4), Promotion of a Bilingual Program (n = 7), Teachers’ Personality (n = 3). Resources needed for improvement In order to capture teachers’ perception of the resources they desired to facilitate the improvement, 12 categories were created. They were Language Ability training (n = 21), Cultural Experience/Sensitivity/Awareness (n = 14), More Trust/Communication Building (n = 13), Teaching Ability (n = 8), Cultural Instructional Materials for Class (n = 6), Professional Development (n = 30), Teaching Aids (n = 7), Smaller Class Size/Space (n = 5), Time/Workload (n = 9),


303

Support from Administration (n = 4), Learning from Others (n =10), Parental Education (n = 4). These resources corresponded closely with our determined categories for Teacher Areas of Improvement (see Table 1).

Desired training and resources Moreover, 9 categories were used to describe the training and resources that teachers desired. They were Cultural Experience/Sensitivity/Awareness, Teaching Ability, Instructional Material, Professional Development, Teaching Aids, Funding, Support from Administration, Class Size/Space, Learning from Others, Support from Parents. To determine their inter-rater reliability, the two raters coded a randomly selected set of 20 protocols from each separate section and achieved a high overall level of inter-rater reliability (j = 0.97), as determined by Cohen’s Kappa. Disagreements about coding categories were resolved through discussion. Table 1 Pedagogical challenges and resources needed for improvement Pedagogical challenges 1. Poor English Language 2. Lack of Trust/Communication 3. Teaching Ability 4. Instructional Materials for Class 5. Professionalism 6. Working with Teaching Aids 7. Managing Class Size/Space 8. Promotion of Bilingual Program 9. Managing Time/Workload 10. Working with Administration 11. Learning from Others 12. Teachers’ Personality 13. Miscellaneous

Resources needed for improvement Language Ability Trust/Communication Building Teaching Training More Cultural Instructional Materials Professional Development Teaching Aids Smaller Class Size/Space Cultural Experience/Sensitivity/Awareness Time/Workload Support from Administration Working with Others Parental Education No Idea/Miscellaneous

Discussion Our findings indicate that the most common pedagogical challenges our sample of teachers tend to experience when working with Asian bilingual students are: lack of culturally relevant materials, varying language proficiency, overcrowded class size, limited funds for resources, and working with students with different styles of learning. In order to address these challenges, teachers organise lessons around specific themes, create hands-on activities, provide opportunities for students to engage in independent reading, offer time for students to study independently, and engage students in cooperative group work. In addition, the most common pedagogical practices of the teachers in our sample are to: prepare lessons, observe and evaluate student learning performance, plan and grade homework and tests, conference with students individually, and use English as a medium of instruction. Teachers who were older reported that they were more prepared to address the social, cultural and psychological needs of their bilingual students than were their younger counterparts. Teachers, who self-reported their preparation level

304


as low, had received limited teacher education training and had also limited collaborative interactions with parents and the community. Furthermore, teachers who reported that they worked less effectively with parents tended to be younger, had insufficient resources at schools, lacked help from teaching aides, and worked with students with different styles of learning. Teachers who reported that they did not work effectively with colleagues, tended to have overcrowded classrooms and lacked encouragement from schools. Finally, teachers who were not satisfied with their job tended to lack culturally appropriate teaching materials and had few staff meetings. We also found that older teachers were more likely to continue working as bilingual teachers. However, teachers with overcrowded classrooms and students with interrupted formal schooling were less willing to continue working in bilingual education programmes than were teachers who did not have such experiences. Pedagogical challenges

Lack of culturally relevant materials Our results highlight the need for curricular materials to adapt to the shifting demographics and number of different Asian immigrant groups. Culturally sensitive instructional materials would help validate and support the cultural and linguistic experiences of bilingual students (Anderson & Roit, 1996; Au, 1993) and should be integrated into teaching activities (Goldenberg & Gallimore, 1991). However, many classrooms do not have instructional materials that appropriately meet the needs of our linguistically and culturally diverse students (Jew, 1986), even though culturally relevant teaching materials are instrumental in providing optimal instruction and assessment. Culturally inappropriate instruments can lead to misunderstandings about bilingual students’ capabilities (Torres-Guzman & Goodwin, 1995). Varying language proficiencies Asian bilingual students pose a challenge to teachers because they represent varying language proficiency abilities. Cheng (1998) contends that many Asian immigrants find the linguistic and social rules of the classroom to be more formal than their experiences outside of the classroom. Thus, while some Asian students communicate actively with peers and teachers, other students feel isolated and have difficulty with group and one-to-one interactions. Furthermore, although the sample of teachers in our study is bilingual, the amount of time they have been in the United States varies, which may influence their English and native language proficiencies. Since one of the characteristics of a competent bilingual education teacher includes being proficient in English and the native language (Clark & Milk, 1983), one of the pedagogical challenges includes maintaining the ability to communicate effectively and fluently in both English and the native language. Overcrowded class size The recent influx of immigrant students has also contributed to the overcrowding of LEP students in urban schools (Burnett, 1996). Research conducted by the Institute for Urban Minority Education (IUME) at Teachers College, Columbia University determined the following top three concerns and chal-


305

lenges among 599 students and 213 teachers in overcrowded New York City schools: 88% reported student overcrowding; 87% reported the need for more classroom space; and 62% reported staff stress management associated with overcrowded classrooms.In addition, 75% of the respondents believed that overcrowding has a detrimental effect on classroom activity, pedagogy, and student performance. Overcrowding and increases in class size place increased financial burdens on urban school systems, especially schools with large immigrant populations. In fact, previous research reports that limited funds for pedagogical resources (i.e. Asselle, 1988; Rivera-Batiz, 1996), in particular, federal and state funding for schooling immigrant children, is especially limited (Rivera-Batiz, 1996). The counterpart to overcrowded classrooms is the inadequate supply of teachers to support the influx of students who need and can benefit from bilingual education. As discussed by Rundall and Hernandez (1986), Asian bilingual teachers are either American born or foreign born. Many American-born Asian teachers may not be fluent in an Asian language. Conversely, to be qualified as a bilingual teacher, foreign-born individuals need to be fluent in English and to be able to tolerate and work with the discipline and class control problems.

Different styles of learning Teachers in our sample experienced the variation in student learning styles as a pedagogical challenge. Previous research has indicated that differences in learning style due to culture can be accounted for by ethnic background (Dunn & Griggs, 1990; Pearson, 1992) as well as developmental (Barbe & Milone, 1981), specific cultural (Reid, 1987), and environmental influences (from Suh & Price’s study as cited in Hong, 1995). Teachers in our sample may have experienced variation in student learning styles due to differences in student age at time of immigration, development, educational background, and academic adaptability. The increase of Asian LEP students in our classrooms also contributes to challenges associated with varying styles of learning due to cultural differences (Bempechat & Omori, 1990), immigration status, and level of acculturation (Hong, 1995). Cheng (1998) reports that culturally varied methods of communication among Asians may impact learning. For example, teachers may misunderstand Asian patterns of communication as inadequate or inappropriate student performance. Due to differing cultural values, Asian students may delay or hesitate in response to questions, shift topics frequently, take fewer risks, participate less, and limit their eye contact with authority figures. Pedagogical strategies Research concerning classroom instruction has identified some potentially helpful strategies for teaching bilingual students. In response to numerous pedagogical challenges associated with educating Asian bilingual students, teachers in our sample utilised strategies that were similar to the reported teaching strategies of ‘effective’ teachers in a study by Garcia (1991). Due to the ongoing debate over how to best educate bilingual students, Garcia examined strategies of effective bilingual education teachers and found several common pedagogical strategies that are also reflected in our findings. The term ‘effective’ was determined by colleague and peer nomination as well as by high student engagement in

306


academic tasks (from Tikunoff’s study as cited in Garcia, 1991). Many characteristics of effective bilingual teachers are similar to those of other teachers (e.g., organisation of lessons around themes). Strategies unique to effective bilingual teachers include using both English and the students’ native language in order to ensure clarity and understanding, and utilising information from students’ native culture during instruction in order to obtain maximum participation (Tikunoff, 1982). These are methods that teachers from our study used in their implementation of the strategies below.

Organisation of lessons around themes As found in our study, Garcia (1991) also reported that the most effective teachers organised instruction around themes, so that instructional activities focused on material that was meaningful to the students. Theme-based curriculum offers teachers a sense of direction, and students a sense of ownership over their instruction (Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). In order for learning to be motivating, Perez and Torres-Guzman suggest that themes must stem from the students’ interests. In order to accommodatethe wide range of educational needs of the students, the teachers must provide a variety of reading materials and tailor their lessons according to the particular needs and interests of their students (Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). Creative hands-on techniques Effective teachers also incorporated ‘active teaching methods’ (Garcia, 1991: 136) that involved the bilingual student in a series of hands-on activities developed to promote understanding of a specific concept or subject area. These active teaching methods involved classroom activities encouraging both independent and group work. In particular, effective teachers provided time dedicated to active (actual) versus instructional, reading and writing (Garcia, 1991). Engagement of students in cooperative group work Furthermore, effective teachers in Garcia’s (1991) study engaged students in cooperative group work. Instruction was organised so students spent significant instructional time working collaboratively on numerous activities. These teachers placed students in small heterogeneous groups in order to foster cross-cultural interactions. Moreover, previous research has demonstrated that peer-to-peer interaction enhances linguistic development (Garcia, 1983), cooperation skills (Opitz, 1994), and second-language acquisition (Wong et al., 1986) and is consistent with cultural interactional styles among Mexican-Americans (Kagan, 1986). Due to the group orientation of many Asian cultures, this cultural inclination towards group activities may be an equally relevant pedagogical strategy for Asian students. Pedagogical practices

Prepare lessons In order to address the varying language proficiency levels and different learning styles of Asian bilingual students, educators in our sample commit time and effort to preparing lessons that are culturally appropriate. Due to a lack of culturally relevant instructional materials, however, teachers must spend time


307

organising thematic lessons and hands-on activities that incorporate students’ experiences and interests.

Observe and evaluate student learning performance Educators of Asian bilingual students also emphasise observing and evaluating student learning in their teaching practices. Teaching without assessment is inadequate and ineffective. To understand students’ abilities, it is necessary and important that teachers engage in ongoing assessment by keeping a journal reflecting on their teaching and on students’ progress (Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). Close monitoring of student progress provides teachers with important information for offering students feedback (from Tikunoff’s study as cited in Garcia, 1991) and allows teachers to recognise student differences in learning style and linguistic performance. In addition, portfolio assessment that involves collecting reading and writing samples from the students to be assessed by the teachers also has been found to be a valuable practice (Au, 1993; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). Plan and grade homework and tests Another important method of evaluating Asian bilingual student learning is through grading homework. While the classroom is considered the primary learning environment, it should not be treated as the only environment for learning. Since Asian students may be culturally inclined to be soft-spoken and less active in verbal classroom discussions (Cheng, 1998), written homework offers an alternative source for evaluating student progress. Moreover, Asian students often provide very short responses and take few risks in the classroom due to shame and embarrassment over their accent or language proficiency (Cheng, 1998). Such cultural tendencies underscore the need to emphasise homework in understanding student performance. Conference with students individually In order to plan lessons that are culturally relevant, teachers must understand how students learn. Thus, student evaluation may also entail organising teacher–student conferences, during which students as well as parents are interviewed (Au, 1993; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). Such individual conferences offer teachers opportunities to understand the students’ learning style, language fluency, and cultural background. Use English as a medium of instruction Teachers in our sample also reported that they used English (as well as an Asian language) as a medium of instruction in their bilingual classrooms. Numerous researchers working with Spanish-speaking bilingual students have documented the pedagogical benefits of using two languages in teaching practices. Teaching practices that incorporate and validate the students’ cultural experiences and using two languages as the medium of instruction (Au, 1993; Hernandez, 1997; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996) help provide authentic learning opportunities for bilingual students. Jimenez et al. (1995) found that what distinguishes proficient Spanish-English bilingual readers from those who are less proficient is that proficient readers appear to have metacognitive awareness of the similarities between the two languages. Jimenez et al. (1995), observed that as Spanish bilingual readers

308


become cognisant of the similarities between Spanish and English, these readers tend to employ similar strategies for learning to read in English as they would in Spanish, thus helping them to enhance reading comprehension in English. This observation suggests that an effective teaching strategy would be for teachers to make explicit to the students how the transference of skills from Spanish to English could help them better learn English (Block, 1986; Jimenez et al., 1995). Jimenez et al. (1995) observed that by highlighting the relationship between Spanish and English, teachers enhance vocabulary knowledge and encourage students to respect their native language as a resource for reading in either language. Furthermore, Jimenez, Garcia, and Pearson (1996) believe that teachers will benefit from understanding how native-language proficiency can foster English-language literacy. Unlike Spanish, Asian languages are distinctively different from English. Nonetheless, many of the skills the students learned in their native Asian languages can also be applied to learning English (Hansen-Strain, 1989; Robinson, 1995; Weinstein, 1984). Thus, the core of effective pedagogy is not simply teaching English to bilingual children, but rather finding ways to incorporate the cultural experiences and knowledge of these children into their learning (Au, 1993; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996). Teacher characteristics In addition to uncovering pedagogical challenges, strategies and practices of Asian bilingual educators, we also examined teacher characteristics influencing teachers’ self-reports of competency, preparation and collaboration. Teachers who were older considered themselves to be better prepared to address the social, cultural, and psychological needs of their bilingual students than their younger counterparts. In fact, previous research shows that older teachers are more effective in their teaching of bilingual students (Garcia, 1991), perhaps due to more years of experience, maturity, and increased training opportunities. This finding is consistent with our results indicating that teachers who were less likely to perceive themselves as prepared to work with bilingual students had received limited training. In addition, these same teachers also lacked collaborative efforts with parents and the community. Furthermore, teachers who reported that they worked less effectively with parents tended to be younger, had insufficient resources at schools, lacked teaching aides, and worked with students with different styles of learning. With the dramatic increase of Asian immigrant students into bilingual education programmes, the need for sufficient resources and teaching aides is well justified, especially given the variation of learning styles among students. Teachers who have more experience as well as support from the school, in terms of financial and staff resources, will have more time and opportunity to build collaborative relationships with parents. Teachers who reported that they did not work effectively with colleagues tended to have overcrowded classrooms and experience a lack of encouragement from the school. In a research study conducted at IUME at Teachers College, Columbia University, 70% of responding teachers and students reported that overcrowding led to staff burnout (Burnett, 1996), which may contribute to decreased collaboration among colleagues.


309

In addition, previous research on teachers’ attitudes towards bilingual education may also negatively impact working relationships with colleagues. It is clear from the recent events in California bilingual education programmes that bilingual education is a highly controversial and not universally accepted topic. Shin and Krashen (1996) sampled non-bilingual education teachers and found that although there was a general acceptance of the underlying principals of bilingual education, only 50–60% of respondents supported actual participation in bilingual education programmes. This ambivalence and lack of encouragement and support from non-bilingual education teachers may have a negative impact on our bilingual education teachers’ ability to effectively work with colleagues. Teachers in our sample who were not satisfied with their job tended to lack appropriate teaching materials and had limited staff meetings. Providing optimal instructional activities to bilingual students involves having sufficient resources in terms of curricula and staff. As discussed previously, teaching materials that are culturally inappropriate posed the top instructional challenge to teachers of Asian bilingual students. Additionally, Garcia (1991) found that more effective teachers tended to have more routine staff development efforts, during which they were able to take courses and attend workshops relating to educating bilingual students. Teachers who were older were likely to continue working as bilingual teachers, which may be due to their increased feelings of competency and preparation. In contrast, younger teachers have less experience working with Asian bilingual students and fewer opportunities for professional development and training, which may decrease their teaching efficacy and job satisfaction. Our findings also indicate that teachers who were less willing to continue working in bilingual education programmes tended to have overcrowded classrooms and students with interrupted formal schooling. As reported earlier, overcrowding can cause staff burnout and stress (Burnett, 1996), which may facilitate job dissatisfaction and career change. Moreover, students who come from varied cultural and ethnic backgrounds tend to have interrupted formal schooling due to immigration as well as geographic and job-related relocations. Managing an overcrowded classroom of students with interrupted formal schooling is a particular challenge for teachers who must negotiate student learning styles and cultural values. Finally, we were interested in exploring teachers’ self-reported strengths and weaknesses. Language ability, teaching ability, and cultural experiences are the three top strengths acknowledged by bilingual teachers in our sample. This finding reflects the core competencies of all teachers (Carrasquillo & Rodriguez, 1996). Teachers especially recognised that being able to share similar cultural backgrounds with students and communicate with them in their native language is very important. This might relate to the notion that multicultural education programmes should be compatible with students’ home languages and traditions (Contreras, 1983). Teachers also realised that they need to understand how their students view the world, taking consideration of historical and current cultural factors (Schwartz, 1998). Teachers acknowledged the need for improving their language ability. This may be due to the fact that some teachers were not bilingual. Not all teachers have to be bilingual and bicultural, but a large number of such teachers

310


is helpful to the bilingual education programme (Gonzales, 1983). Students in the bilingual programme come from more than one country, and it is impossible for teachers to speak all the different languages. In some New York City schools, teachers have students coming from 45 different countries, so it is not realistic to expect teachers to be able to comunicate with all pupils in their native tongues (Rivera-Batiz, 1996). Teachers had strongly expressed their desire to grow professionally. Since teaching is a profession, teachers need both pre- and in-service training in order for them to teach and to know their materials well (Kelly, 1969). However, there is a lack of effective training programmes for bilingual teachers when they are in great demand (Calderon, 1997). Administrative details can be influential. A high percentage of teachers said that improving instructional materials, funding and decreasing workload would help them improve their effectiveness. Having an appropriate class size is helpful to teachers; otherwise they will need outside help (Kelly, 1969).

Limitations There are several limitations of this research that should be addressed. First, the questionnaire used has not yet been proven to be a valid or reliable instrument. Since no previous research has been conducted in this area, this instrument was developed for the specific purposes and goals of this investigation. Due to the exploratory nature of this research, the questionnaire is primarily descriptive in nature. Future research might use our findings to develop a more comprehensive survey across numerous aspects of teaching. Second, our research was conducted with a sample of educators of Asian bilingual students from the New York City Metropolitan area, which limits the generalisability of our sample across samples from other places. area. This sample was selected due to the availability and high percentage of educators of Asian bilingual students in New York. Moreover, due to the lack of research concerning teachers of Asian bilingual students, we sought to explore a much-needed and neglected population. Future investigations could focus on comparisons of teachers across additional language populations as well as various geographic locations. Although participants in our study were questioned about their pedagogical challenges and practices, information regarding how the participants responded to particular challenges was not obtained in our research study. Thus, further research could include questions about the various types of methods that teachers use to resolve certain challenges in order to examine these relationships. Finally, the results of the study were obtained using self-report measures. Inherent in self-report measures is the possibility that some teachers may have answered in a socially desirable manner. Future research using self-report measures to assess teachers’ self-reports on their characteristics such competency, performance, preparation, and so forth could include a scale to assess social desirability in the responses, such as the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960).


311

Implications for Teacher Education and Training Working with Asian students who are faced with linguistic, sociocultural, and academic barriers poses a serious challenge to teachers. Although the number of Asian students in New York public schools has increased dramaticallyin the past decade, teacher preparation programmes have not greatly adapted their curricula and teacher training activities to accommodate these demographic shifts. Thus, teachers of Asian bilingual students have not received the appropriate training necessary to work with these students. Restructuring schools for linguistic and cultural diversity requires ongoing professional development which will educate teachers about recent findings in educational research and innovative pedagogical strategies and techniques (Miller, 1994). Analyses of the challenges and experiences of Asian bilingual teachers provide strong implications for professional development. For example, teacher training efforts must address how to structure appropriate instructional activities in an overcrowded classroom and how to seek effective ways to accommodate varying student learning styles, academic experiences, and language abilities. Teacher education activities and curriculum may be tailored to discuss many specific pedagogical strategies and practices when working with Asian bilingual students, such as organising curriculum around themes, creating hands-on learning opportunities, and providing a balance of independent and group work in the classroom. Teacher education that incorporates the unique experiences of bilingual educators can indeed offer teachers encouraging support, such as providing them with culturally appropriate teaching material and resources, promoting collaborationamong teachers as well as with parents, and developing techniques for teaching the English language more effectively and efficiently. These training programmes will not only enhance teaching practice and knowledge, they will also provide teachers of Asian bilingual students with the appropriate support and services necessary to improve the quality of education. Teacher training and staff development programmes can also help prevent job dissatisfaction, poor collaboration, and low teaching competency among educators of Asian bilingual students. For example, since older teachers reported that they were more prepared and more likely to continue to work with Asian bilingual students, mentoring might be viewed as a crucial aspect of teacher professionalisation (Zimpher & Rieger, 1988), recruitment and preparation (Leighton, 1995), and ongoing professional development (Torres-Guzman & Goodwin, 1995). Collaborative relationships between experienced and novice teachers may help to socialise new teachers into the profession as well as the school context and culture (Torres-Guzman & Goodwin, 1995) through teaching, sponsoring, encouraging, counselling, and befriending (Anderson & Shannon, 1988). Based on this idea, mentorship programmes for novice bilingual teachers have been found to be valuable, and results validate the need for mentoring of novice bilingual teachers (Sosa & Gonzales, 1993). Students do not learn solely in the classroom. Their learning involves the help and encouragement of several people including their teachers and parents. Various educators and researchers (e.g. Allen, 1994; Bermudez & Padron, 1987; Cheng, 1998; Perez & Torres-Guzman, 1996) have long recognised parental

312


involvement to be a strong component contributing to the academic success of bilingual students. Parents, however, are not always cognizant of the important role they play and often do not understand how to participate in their children’s education (Bermudez & Padron, 1987). Furthermore, the language barriers of the parents are often the source that hinders them from getting involved in their children’s learning. Bilingual teachers are in a unique position of being able to communicate with these parents in their native language about the importance of parental involvement and the ways in which they can participate in their children’s education. Bermudez and Padron (1987) found that providing opportunities for teachers and parents to work together to help the children learn has resulted in improved home–school partnerships We strongly believe that teacher bilingual education programmes should emphasise the importance of parental involvement. Teachers could discuss school policies and translate school documents (Bempechat & Omori, 1990) and learn to develop appropriate materials for parents to enhance their awareness and involvement (Bishop, 1985; Kester, 1989). Moreover, Jimenez, Garcia & Pearson (1996) found that an in-depth understanding of students’ families and cultural upbringing enhanced communication between teachers and parents. Thus, teachers can facilitate learning and involve parents if they question existing stereotypes of Asian parents (Yao, 1988) and familiarise themselves with the students’ cultural background, immigration history, and demonstrate respect for cultural differences (Bempechat & Omori, 1990). Correspondence Any correspondence should be directed to Dr Christine J. Yeh, Assistant Professor of Psychology and Education, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, Box 102, New York, NY 10027, USA ([email protected]). References Acosta, R. and Blanco, G. (1978)Competencies for University Programs in Bilingual Education. Washington, DC: HEW Publishers. Ada, A. (1986) Creative education for bilingual teachers. Harvard Educational Review 56, 386–394. Allen, P. (1994) Working with parents: When children speak a different language. Day Care and Early Education 22, 38–39. Anderson, M.E. and Shannon, A.L. (1988) Toward a conceptualization of mentoring. Journal of Teacher Education 39, 38–42. Anderson, V. and Roit, M. (1996) Linking reading comprehension instruction to language development for language-minority students. The Elementary School Journal 96, 295–309. Asselle, M.G. (1988) John Jay High School Project TRIUNFE. Brooklyn, NY: New York City Board of Education. Au, K.H. (1993) Literacy Instruction in Multicultural Settings. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Barbe, W.B. and Milone. M.N. (1981)What we know about modality strengths. Educational Leadership 38, 378–380. Bempechat, J. and Omori, M.C. (1990) Meeting the Educational Needs of Southeast Asian children. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse for Urban Education.


313

Bermudez, A.B. and Padron, Y.N. (1987) Integrating parental education into teacher training programs: A workable model for minority parents. Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership 7, 235–244. Bishop, T. (1985) Listen, Practice, Converse: A Communication Approach to Second Language Acquisition in the Torrance Unified School District. First Annual Evaluation Report. Downey, CA: Los Angeles County Office of Education. Block E. (1986) The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly 20, 463–494. Boe, E.E. (1990) Demand, supply, and shortage of bilingual and ESL teachers: Models, data, and policy issues. In Proceedings of the Research Symposium on Limited English Proficient students’ Issues (1st, Washington, DC, September 10–12). Washington, DC: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Bos, C.S. and Reyes, E.I. (1996) Conversations with a Latina teacher about education for language-minority students with special needs. The Elementary School Journal 96, 343–351. Burnett, G. (1996) Enrollment Growth and Overcrowding in New York City Schools. New York: Institute for Urban and Minority Education. Calderon, M. (1997) Staff Development in Multilingual Multicultural Schools (Report No. EDO-UD-97-5). New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED410368) Carrasquillo, A. and Rodriguez, V. (1996) Language Minority Students in Mainstream Classrooms. Clevedon: Mulitlingual Matters. Cheng, L.L. (1995) Service delivery to Asian/Pacific LEP children: A cross-cultural framework. In D.T Nakanishi and T.Y. Nishida (eds) The Asian American Educational Experience (pp. 212–220). New York: Routledge. Cheng, L.L. (1998) Enhancing the Communication of Newly-arrived Asian American Students. New York: Institute for Urban and Minority Education. Clark, E.R. and Milk, R.D. (1983) Training bilingual teachers: A look at the Title VII graduate in the field. Nabe: The Journal for the National Association for Bilingual Education 8, 29–30. Contreras G. (1983) Irrelevance and bias in multicultural curricula: Toward an authentic curriculum. In T.H. Escobedo (ed.) Early Childhood Bilingual Education: A Hispanic Perspective (pp. 105–118). New York: Teachers College Press. Crocker, L.M. and Algina, J. (1986) Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Educational and Psychological Measurement 46, 789-791. Crowne, D.P. and Marlowe, D. (1960) A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology 24, 349–354. Dunn, R. and Griggs, S.A. (1990) Research on the learning style characteristics of selected racial and ethnic groups. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities International 6, 261–280. Garcia, E.E. (1983) Bilingualism and Early Childhood. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Garcia, E.E. (1991) Effective instruction for language minority students: The teacher. Journal of Education 173, 130–141. Gay, G. (1993) Ethnic minorities and educational equality. In J.A. Banks and C.A.M. Banks (eds) Multicultural Education (pp. 171–194). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Goldenberg, C. (1996) The education of language-minority students: Where are we, and where do we need to go? Elementary School Journal 96, 353–361. Goldenberg, C. and Gallimore, R. (1991) Local knowledge, research knowledge and educational change: A case study of early Spanish reading improvement. Educational Researcher 20 (8), 2–14. Gonzales F. (1983) Reinforcing culture in three bilingual education programs. In T.H. Escobedo (ed.) Early Childhood Bilingual Education: A Hispanic Perspective (pp. 105–118). New York: Teachers College Press. Hansen-Strain, L. (1989) Orality/literacy and group differences in second-language acquisition. Language Learning 39, 469–496.

314


Hernandez, H. (1997) Teaching in Multilingual Classrooms: A Teacher’s Guide to Context, Process, and Content. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Hill, C.E. (1990) Exploratory in-session process research in individual pyschotherapy. A review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 58, 288-294. Hong, E. (1995) Cultural influence on learning style change: An analysis of Korean-American and Korean students. NABE News 19 (30), 9–10. Howard, R.A. (1983) Education for Language Minorities: The Perspectives of Administrators, Parents, and Youth. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Boards of Education. Jew, V. (1986) Literacy Skills Development and the Asian LEP Students. [Paper presented at the Annual Bilingual/Bicultural Conference of the National Association for Bilingual Education]. Chicago: ERIC Clearinghouse (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED272036). Jimenez, R.T., Garcia, G.E. and Pearson, P.D. (1995) Three children, two languages, and strategic reading: Case studies in bilingual/monoling ual reading. American Educational Research Journal 32, 67–97. Jimenez, R.T., Garcia, G.E. and Pearson, P.D. (1996) The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly 31, 90–112. Jimenez, R.T., Gersten, R. and Rivera, A. (1996) Conversations with a Chicana Teacher: Supporting students’ transition from native to English language instruction. The Elementary School Journal 96, 333–341. Kagan, S. (1986) Cooperative learning and sociocultural factors in schooling. Beyond Language: Social and Cultural Factors in Schooling Language Minority Students (pp. 231–298). Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination, and Assessment Center, California State University. Kelly, L.G. (1969) 25 Centuries of Language Teachimg. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Kester, D.L. (1989) Bridging The Gap: A Sheltered Approach to Language Acquisition and Academic Success in the Six Middle Schools of Torrance Unified School District. First Evaluation Report (1988–1989).Downey, CA: Los Angeles County Office of Education. Kester, D.L. (1991) Bridging The Gap: A Sheltered Approach to Language Acquisition and Academic Success. Third Evaluation Report (1990–1991). A Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Transitional Bilingual Program Funded Under Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in Torrance Unified School District, Torrance California. Downey, CA: Los Angeles County Office of Education. Leighton, M.S. (1995) Model Strategies in Bilingual Education: Professional Development. Washington D.C.: Department of Education. Mahrer, A.R. (1988) Discovery-oriented psychotherapy research: Rationale, aims and methods. American Psychlogist 43, 694-702. Mau, W.C. (1997) Parental influence on the high school students’ academic achievement: A comparison of Asian immigrants, Asian Americans, and White Americans. Psychology in the Schools 34, 267–277. Miller, K.W. (1994) Blending effective strategies for teacher inservice and staff development for the twenty-first century. The Teacher Educator 30, 28–42. Montero-Sieburth, M. and Perez, M. (1987) Echar Pa’lante, Moving Onward: The Dilemmas and Strategies of a Bilingual Teacher 18, 180–189. National Center for Education Statistics (1997) The Condition of Education 1997: Public Schools with Bilingual or ESL Programs, Indicator 45 (Report No. NCES 97–388). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Natriello, G., McDill, E.L. and Pallas, A.M. (1990) Schooling DisadvantagedChildren: Racing Against Catastrophe. New York: Teachers College Press. Nieto, S. (1992) Affirming Diversity: The Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education. New York: Longman Publishing Group. Oakeley, C., Urrabazo, T. and Yang, H. (1998) When can LEP Students Exit a BE/ESL Program: Predicting Academic Growth Using a Test that Measures Cognitive Language Proficiency. Dallas, TX: Dallas Public Schools.


315

Olsen, L. (1988) Crossing the Schoolhouse Border: Immigrant Students and the California Public Schools. A California Tomorrow Policy Research Report. Los Angeles, CA: California Tomorrow. Opitz, M.F. (1994) Learning Centers: Getting them Started, Keeping them Going. New York: Scholastic. Pearson, C.S. (1992) Women as learners: Diversity and educational quality. Journal of Developmental Education 16 (2), 2–39. Perez, B. and Torres-Guzman, M.E. (1996) Learning in Two Worlds: An Integrated Spanish/English Biliteracy Approach. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers. Reid, J.M. (1987) The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly 21, 87–111. Rivera-Batiz, F. (1996) The Education Of Immigrant Children in New York City. New York: Institute for Urban and Minority Education. Robinson, W. (1995) ESL and dialect features in the writing of Asian American students. Teaching English in the Two-Year College 22, 303–309. Rodriguez, J.C. (1994) Educational Ideologies of Southeast Asian Bilingual Teachers: Exploring the Elusive. Rundall, R. and Hernandez, F. (1986) Asian teachers: A new dimension. Clearing House 60 (2), 91–92. Schwartz, W. (1998) Standards: Their impact on urban students. Teacher - Librarian 26 (1), 28-30. Shin, F.H. and Krashen, S. (1996) Teacher attitudes toward the principles of bilingual education and toward students’ participation in bilingual programs: Same or different? The Bilingual Research Review 20, 45–53. Sosa, A.S. and Gonzales, F. (1993) Teachers Need Teachers: An Induction Program for First Year Bilingual Teachers. San Antonia, TX: Institution Intercultural Development Research Association. Soto, L.D. (1991)Teacher preparation and the linguistically diverse young child. Education 111, 487–490. Sung, B.L. (1985). Bicultural conflicts in Chinese immigrant children. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 15, 255–269. Tikunoff, W. (1982) An Emerging Description of Successful Bilingual Instruction. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory. Tong, V.M. (1996) Home language literacy and the acculturation of recent Chinese immigrant students. The Bilingual Research Journal 20 (3&4), 523–543. Torres-Guzman, M.E. and Goodwin, A.L. (1995) Urban bilingual teachers and mentoring for the future. Education and Urban Society 28, 48–66. US Census Bureau (2000) Age by Language Spoken at Home by Ability to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over. Retrieved January 27, 2002 from http://factfinder. census.gov/servlet/BasicFactsServlet. Weinstein, G. (1984) Literacy and second language acquisition: Issues and perspectives. TESOL Quarterly 18, 471–484. Wong, N., Fillmore, L. and Valdez, C. (1986) Teaching bilingual learners. In M.C. Wittrock (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd edn) (pp. 684–685). New York: Macmillan. Yao, E.L. (1988) Working effectively with Asian immigrant parents. Phi Delta Kappan 70, 223–225. Zhang, S.Y. and Carrasquillo, A.L. (1992) Chinese-American students: A Review of the Literature. Zimpher, N.L. and Rieger, S.R. (1988) Mentoring teachings: What are the issues? Theory into Practice 27, 175–182.