How to Submit Proof Corrections Using Adobe ...

How to Submit Proof Corrections Using Adobe Reader Using Adobe Reader is the easiest way to submit your proposed amendments for your IGI Global proof. If you don’t have Adobe Reader, you can download it for free at http://get.adobe.com/reader/. The comment functionality makes it simple for you, the contributor, to mark up the PDF. It also makes it simple for the IGI Global staff to understand exactly what you are requesting to ensure the most flawless end result possible. Please note, however, that at this point in the process the only things you should be checking for are: Spelling of Names and Affiliations, Accuracy of Chapter Titles and Subtitles, Figure/Table Accuracy, Minor Spelling Errors/Typos, Equation Display As chapters should have been professionally copy edited and submitted in their final form, please remember that no major changes to the text can be made at this stage. Here is a quick step-by-step guide on using the comment functionality in Adobe Reader to submit your changes. 1.

Select the Comment bar at the top of page to View or Add Comments. This will open the Annotations toolbar.

2.

To note text that needs to be altered, like a subtitle or your affiliation, you may use the Highlight Text tool. Once the text is highlighted, right-click on the highlighted text and add your comment. Please be specific, and include what the text currently says and what you would like it to be changed to.

3.

If you would like text inserted, like a missing coma or punctuation mark, please use the Insert Text at Cursor tool. Please make sure to include exactly what you want inserted in the comment box.

4.

If you would like text removed, such as an erroneous duplicate word or punctuation mark, please use the Add Note to Replace Text tool and state specifically what you would like removed.

This proof is copyrighted by IGI Global. It is being provided as a courtesy to the author to review prior to publication. Posting on any online site (for example, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, ArXiv) or distributing this proof without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited and a violation of copyright law.

Handbook of Research on Cross-Cultural Approaches to Language and Literacy Development Patriann Smith University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Alex Kumi-Yeboah University at Albany–State University of New York, USA

A volume in the Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies (ALCS) Book Series

Detailed Table of Contents

Foreword............................................................................................................................................. xvii Preface.................................................................................................................................................. xxi Acknowledgment............................................................................................................................. xxxiv Section 1 Learners’ Language and Literacy Practices in Cross-Cultural Contexts Chapter 1 An Assessment Project on the “Literacy-on-the-Job” Needs of Young Adults in Sierra Leone............. 1 Amma Akrofi, Texas Tech University, USA Amy Parker, Western Oregon University, USA This chapter outlines and describes a sponsored needs assessment process wherein a small group of researchers from various disciplines designed an approach for the burgeoning population of youth in Sierra Leone to learn literacy skills in a practical, motivating and sustainable way- “literacy-on-the-job”. In order to create a responsive and aligned intervention, the authors used a participatory methodology to understand the values and needs of representatives situated in industrial, governmental, educational and community-based youth organizations. The voices and perspectives of individuals across various businesses, schools, civic offices, and social groups were woven together to create a portrait of the complex landscape where young adults, in particular, are struggling to achieve and survive. Recommendations for a process of full implementation of the” literacy-on-the- job model” in both Sierra Leone and nations with similar landscapes are provided. Chapter 2 Biliteracy and Human Capital in Texas Border Colonias...................................................................... 28 Patrick H. Smith, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Luz A. Murillo, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA In this chapter we explore the literacies of people living in Texas border colonias, economically marginalized communities along the U.S.-Mexico border that are among the fastest growing and most bilingual (Spanish/ English) communities in the U.S. Deficit perspectives characterize public and educational discourses about the literacy abilities of colonia residents, despite a lack of empirical research on the topic. We present an ethnographic counter portrait that takes into account the intersecting roles of geographic, socio-economic, demographic, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural factors in the literacies of border colonia

residents. We draw on human capital theory to show how residents utilize their biliteracy to develop six forms of human capital and to mediate exchanges between them. The chapter concludes with implications for language and literacy research and educational practice in globalized and transnational settings. Chapter 3 International Family Configurations in Tokyo and their Cross-Cultural Approaches to Language Socialization........................................................................................................................................... 56 Donna M. Velliaris, Eynesbury Institute of Business and Technology, Australia For children raised in a primarily monocultural setting, where their passport or ‘home’ and their residential or ‘host’ countries are the same, the knowledge/skills developed in one area may be applied in the broader contexts of their lives in a gradually more complex and fulfilling manner. Some of the knowledge/skills learned by ‘cross-cultural children’, however, may be applied in a restricted range of settings and may be of limited use in ‘other’ contexts of living. A prime example relates to ‘language’ proficiency. This may be well developed in the particular language of one context (e.g., English), but not yet acquired in the language needed for a different context (e.g., Japanese). For this exploratory study, face-to-face interviews were conducted with ‘international parents’ residing in Tokyo, Japan. Of the four themes that emerged from the qualitative data, this chapter is specifically focused on one—Language Socialisation—of cross-cultural child(ren). Chapter 4 Constructing a Third Space: Positioning Students’ Out-of-School Literacies in the Classroom.......... 86 Pauline Millar, University of the West Indies – Cave Hill Campus. Barbados S. Joel Warrican, University of the West Indies – Open Campus, Barbados Burgeoning technologies are changing the global practices of youth to embrace a form of literacy which encompasses both skills and multimodal forms. In Barbados this has been perceived as disengagement from conventional literate practices and has caused concern among the wider Barbadian community. This view is reinforced by the seemingly ubiquitous engagement of youth with various forms of communications technology rather than traditional text. This chapter presents some insight, in the context of a Barbadian secondary school, into an action research project which sought to bridge the existing divide between traditional and semiotic literacies. This investigation confirmed that students were engaged in literate acts in diverse ways. Indeed, the creation of third space required revised assumptions about the nature of literacy and redefined roles for teachers and students. This chapter concludes with recommendations for increased dialogue, collaboration and professional development among Barbadian secondary English teachers on issues related to literacy. Chapter 5 Leveled Literacy Intervention: An Elementary Reading Intervention for English Language Learner Newcomers............................................................................................................................. 117 Kelli Campbell, Rossville Middle School, USA In this chapter the qualitative study will investigate and evaluate the effectiveness of the Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI) framework with English Language Learners, (ELL) newcomers and their literacy achievement using the case study method and cross case analysis. Student case studies will consist of LLI pre and post assessment data, guided reading data, and information gathered from student interviews. The triangulation of student interviews, teacher surveys, and extant literature provide the foundation for

answering questions regarding the effectiveness of LLI with the ELL newcomers. Findings are presented through student case studies, resulting from cross case analysis that identified themes, patterns, and commonalities in student reading achievement data and teacher survey results. Results show that ELL newcomers needed to develop social, academic, and content-related language. Findings from the study show that the students made progress while participating during the intervention but have not maintained or increased their reading levels after the intervention that provides opportunities for future research. Recommendation for future studies and conclusion are discussed. Chapter 6 Parental Perspectives on Dual Language Classrooms: The Role of the African American Parents... 138 Eurydice Bouchereau Bauer, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Dorian Harrison, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Although limited research studies exist on African-Americans in dual language programs in general, even less exist on African American parents’ experiences within dual language programs. In this chapter, we present the voices of nine African-American parents. These voices serve as a lens to understand the ways in which the program impacted these parents’ homes and the lives of their children. The data was gathered within the first two years of a dual language program. Each of the families was interviewed twice across two years. Three major findings emerged. First, the capital that students gained in school impacted the adults at home. Second, these new home interactions based on students’ school learning influenced parents’ and students’ views of themselves and their community. Third, in the home and in the community, ambivalence was reflected regarding learning basic school concepts in a second language. This study captures the tug and pulls associated with families wanting to provide their children with the best opportunities within a racialized society. Section 2 Teachers’ Language and Literacy Practices in Cross-Cultural Contexts Chapter 7 Pedagogical Challenges in Cross-Cultural Chinese Language Teaching: Perceptions and Experiences of Chinese Immersion Teachers in the U.S..................................................................... 158 Wenying Zhou, Michigan State University, USA Guofang Li, Michigan State University, USA In this chapter, a qualitative approach was used to enlist Chinese immersion practitioners in the identification and elaboration of issues and challenges in Chinese immersion language teaching. Through extensive individual interviews and reflection writings, six pre--1 Chinese immersion teachers recruited from China in five school settings served as informants. Data analyses revealed that the Chinese immersion teachers encountered significant challenges in six major areas of their immersion teaching: curriculum development, use of the target language, classroom management, subject area teaching, teaching style, and working with American partners and parents. These varied challenges suggest that professional development for Chinese immersion teachers needs to include training in cross-cultural classroom management skills, curriculum development, content-based Chinese language teaching, and host country school culture education.

Chapter 8 Cross-Cultural Affordances of Digital Storytelling: Results from Cases in the U.S.A. and Canada.. 183 Deborah Kozdras, University of South Florida, USA Christine Joseph, Pinellas County School District, USA Karen Kozdras, Halton District School Board, Canada In this chapter, the authors consider the use of digital storytelling as a tool for boundary crossing. Media, as an extension of self, has potential to help cross-cultural learning that benefits all stakeholders, but specifically, immigrants and English Language Learners, who often experience school literacy challenges. The authors used Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) as a lens to view two teacher case selfstudies, one in Canada and one in the U.S.A., and to examine how their use of digital storytelling helped elementary ELL students to learn the language of school as well as transfer their knowledge to other students and educators. The findings indicated the importance of creating avenues through which immigrant English learners can develop interpersonal communication skills critical to being successful across cultures. Through an analysis of the cases, the authors present language learning implications for educators. Chapter 9 Using Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Electronic Storybooks in ESL Teacher Education........ 208 Ho-Ryong Park, Murray State University, USA Deoksoon Kim, University of South Florida, USA In this chapter, a qualitative approach used to investigate the experiences and learning of 110 preservice teachers in English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses when they read electronic storybooks for their school projects. During their online class, participants were asked to read one culturally and linguistically familiar electronic storybook (e-storybook), develop a reading lesson plan, and participate in two online discussions after reading four culturally and linguistically familiar or unfamiliar e-storybooks. After these discussions, the participants revised their lesson plans. The findings provide insight into what ESOL preservice teachers learn and the strategies they use in reading e-storybooks. The participants revised the original lesson plan based on these reading experiences and learned about their future students who will study English as a second language. The article concludes by discussing the influence of this online task-based instruction on ESOL preservice teachers’ learning and technology use in teacher education courses. Chapter 10 Exploring the Interstices of Literate, Linguistic, and Cultural Diversity............................................ 237 Patriann Smith, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Alex Kumi-Yeboah, University at Albany – State University of New York, USA In this chapter, we examine an English-speaking Caribbean multilingual teacher’s response to linguistic diversity by examining his linguistic and literate experiences and responses to language in various geographical and social contexts. Through in-depth semi-structured topical interviews, we identified three distinct recursive “pathways” representative of the teacher’s experiences. These pathways constituted his processes of attitude transformation, strategy use, and identity formation. The findings highlight the need for further exploration of multilingual teachers’ linguistic diversity and indicate the need to examine teachers’ capacity to respond to linguistic and cultural diversity based on their personal experiences.

Chapter 11 Becoming Teacher Researchers: Using English Learners’ Linguistic Capital to Socially ReOrganize Learning............................................................................................................................... 261 Aria Razfar, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA Beverly Troiano, Elmhurst College, USA. Ambareen Nasir, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA Eunah Yang, Independent Researcher, South Korea Joseph C. Rumenapp, Judson University, USA Zayoni Torres, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA Drawing on three years of data, we show how an embedded university research team and eleven K-8 educators reorganized learning and negotiated innovative curricular activities for English learners (ELs) in spite of restrictive curricular mandates in an urban Midwestern district. We analyze how participating teachers appropriated theoretical constructs such as cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), third space, funds of knowledge, as well as using discourse analysis to design curriculum aimed at improving language learning through mathematics, science, and community-based problem solving. The learning of teachers was purposefully designed to develop new professional identities. The learning was also designed to move teachers from deficit views of mulitlingualim to dynamic stances grounded in polyglot language ideologies. We examine the challenges and opportunities of participants’ movement from resistant, procedural, and ethnographic identities towards teacher researcher identities. Chapter 12 Diversity and Teacher Education: Cultural and Linguistic Competency for Teachers........................ 299 Molly Zhou, Dalton State College, USA Teachers’ knowledge and skills in working with students of diverse backgrounds depend largely on their knowledge of ethnic groups and appreciation of culture and language differences. This chapter examined preservice teachers’ preparation for diversity in a teacher education program at a university in southeastern United States. Study participants were preservice teachers enrolled in an education course in the school of education at the said university. Thirty preservice teachers’ semester long reflections from a diversity education course were collected and analyzed. Two questions guided the discussion of the chapter: 1) What was the learning experience of preservice teachers in the course? 2) What was the collective conscience of preservice teachers on teaching students in increasingly diverse classrooms? The findings revealed that the course experiences facilitated preservice teachers’ critical thinking skills on history, cultural identity, family and language difference, ethnic experiences. Implications on diversity in education were discussed.

Section 3 Conceptualizing Cross-Cultural Language and Literacy Research and Practice Chapter 13 Transnational Immigrant Youth Literacies: A Selective Review of the Literature.............................. 322 Robert T. Jiménez, Vanderbilt University, USA Caitlin Eley, Vanderbilt University, USA Kevin Leander, Vanderbilt University, USA Patrick H. Smith, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA This chapter examines transnationalism, social-literacy practices theory, the history of immigrant literacy in the United States, and an examination of central Mexican literacy practices. We then review and examine what is known concerning the literacy practices of immigrant youth living in the U.S. We define transnationals as individuals who participate in flows of people, ideas, capital and goods between regions. These flows are bi-directional, span national boundaries and are sustained over time. After examining historical and cultural influences on the ways that literacy is conceptualized and actualized in Mexico, we argue that all immigrant students, regardless of their ethno-linguistic backgrounds, bring to their host nations assemblages of information, ideology, and specific practices that we believe are full of either potential resources or possible damaging effects. Deeper understanding of these practices by educators provides a potential mechanism for bringing about desirable change or for maintaining oppressive racial and linguistic hierarchies. Chapter 14 Sociolinguistic and Educational Perspectives on Code Switching in Classrooms: What Is It, Why Do It, and then, Why Feel Bad about It?............................................................................................. 344 James R. King, University of South Florida, USA In educational contexts, codeswitching (CS) is deployed in a binary fashion. Either CS is a productive strategy (a translanguaging, revisionists’ claim), or CS is a “bad habit” signaling linguistic deficits. Some of the variance in understanding CS results from specific contexts. When a second language is used in a content classroom, the productive use of CS as a viable strategy for explication, management, and community building may also suffer from confusion. Yet, CS in language classrooms is a concern for teachers. Confusion emanates from two theoretical accounts for CS (structural and functional). For educational uses, CS suffers from this “split personality,” with resolution found in a “contact zone” account. I draw from the cross-cultural and cross-linguistic contexts of South Africa to explain notions of CS, and specifically as CS relates to literacy in some cases. The cross-cultural components play a role in explaining CS as it relates to literacy.

Chapter 15 Fostering True Literacy in the Commonwealth Caribbean: Bridging the Cultures of Home and School.................................................................................................................................................. 366 S. Joel Warrican, The University of the West Indies Open Campus, Barbados This chapter takes a close look at literacy in the Commonwealth Caribbean and explores factors that contribute to its status in the region. It links the current state of literacy to historical roots of education and relates it to other educational phenomena such as democracy in education, universal secondary education and technology in education. It argues that the current reported literacy rates for the region may be misleading as evidence suggests that for years, many students have been leaving school with insufficient literacy skills. The chapter proposes that the disconnect between the home or out-of-school culture of students and the academic/school culture contributes to poor literacy development which disempowers young people, especially males. It reports on what is being done to promote literacy in the region and concludes by sharing a vision of the way forward. Chapter 16 Consolidating Commonalities in Language and Literacy to Inform Policy: Bridging Research Cultures in the Multilingual English-Speaking Caribbean.................................................................. 392 Patriann Smith, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Alex Kumi-Yeboah, University at Albany – State University of New York, USA This chapter demonstrates how literacy and language planning and policy (LPP) research may be consolidated to inform recommendations for local language policy development and pedagogical literacy instruction in the English-speaking Caribbean region. To achieve this goal, we first identify patterns in literacy research across countries and contexts in the English-speaking Caribbean region, noting the assumptions underlying the literature. We then discuss the ways in which language use evolved in one of these English-speaking Caribbean countries, noting the impact of historical and global forces. In presenting St. Lucia as a critical case where Language Planning and Policy (LPP) research, and particularly, the ways in which the historical epochs in which this research has been undertake influenced the evolution of language use in the country, we identify strategic, epistemological and macro sociopolitical insights emanating from our discussions of language use in this Majority World nation. Chapter 17 The Role of Context in Defining Secondary Language Arts Instruction: A Cultural Perspective...... 420 Sandra Robinson, The University of the West Indies – Cave Hill Campus, Barbados Warrican’s (2009) report on the literacy instructional implications for secondary teachers resulting from the implementation of Universal Secondary Education (USE) in the Eastern Caribbean considered secondary teachers’ perceptions of their pedagogical competence–from feelings of frustration to a growing sense of inadequacy. Meanwhile, the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) continues to report dissatisfaction with the delivery in English at the secondary level. This chapter offers a snapshot of the context of secondary education in general and English Language Arts in particular in the Eastern Caribbean. It draws the teaching of secondary English towards a particular set of answers to the question of pedagogical knowledge that should be of concern to secondary teachers of English. These ideas include the use of context as a central factor in interpreting secondary schooling; examination and classroom practice; and the use of professional development and collaborative practice to anchor pedagogical knowledge and experience.

Chapter 18 Critical Bilingual Leadership for Emergent Bilingual Students.......................................................... 445 Joseph Wiemelt, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA & Urbana School District 116, USA The overarching goal of this chapter is to examine and understand the role that school leadership plays in fostering the educational space where language and literacy development are central to the vision of a school community for emergent bilingual students. With this in mind, traditional school leadership theory and practice are insufficient to truly foster the culturally and linguistically responsive schools that are needed for emergent bilingual students. Therefore, this chapter presents critical bilingual leadership theory as an innovative conceptual framework aimed at answering this challenge. Drawing from transformative leadership and Latin@ critical race theory, this framework situates the role of equity-oriented leadership in the context of fostering language and literacy development for emergent bilingual students. Chapter 19 Learning Arabic through Language of Journalism.............................................................................. 470 Mai Samir El-Falaky, Arab Academy for Science and Technology, Egypt Second language learning requires more than memorizing rules and vocabulary detached from contexts. Language teachers have to encourage the exposure to real context to enable their students to ‘acquire’ the language in the same way they acquire their first language. This could entail an unconscious induction called ‘analogy’. Analogy may enable language learners to create neologisms for the purpose of communicating. This could also enable them to obtain a better understanding of lexical items in context. This chapter highlights the benefits of direct exposure to neologisms in journalistic texts, which influences learners’ morphological choice. Mass media in general and journalism in particular are thought to be a perfect means of learning any language in its natural context. About the Contributors..................................................................................................................... 499

499

About the Contributors

Patriann Smith is a Faculty Member in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her areas of research include examining challenges in the cross-cultural literacy, language and assessment practices of adolescent immigrant multilingual learners and international multilingual teachers. Across these areas, Patriann is concerned with the ways in which standard and localized language ideologies, language discrimination, and assumptions embedded in discussions of linguistic human rights affect cross-cultural literacy practice and assessment. Patriann has taught internationally in the Caribbean and the United States is an International Reading Association (IRA) Hall of Fame Young Scholar (2013-2016) and a recipient of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Language and Social Processes (LSP) Emerging Scholar Award (2015). Alex Kumi-Yeboah is an Assistant Professor of Education at the School of Education, Department of Educational Theory and Practice, University at Albany, New York in the United States. He earned a Bachelor’s degree in Social Studies Education from the University of Cape Coast, Ghana and received his Master of Arts in Social Sciences Education in 2004 and Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction with a cognate in Research Methods from the University of South Florida. His areas of research include immigrant issues in education focused specifically on the educational and non-educational experiences of immigrant students from Africa, cross-cultural learning experiences of Black immigrant students, the cultural contexts of education, international education (education in sub-Saharan Africa), and multicultural online education. His work has appeared in journals such as Transformative Education, Adult Learning and International Forum of Teaching and Studies. *** Amma K. Akrofi is an associate professor of Language and Literacy in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Texas Tech University. Courses she currently teaches include global literacy, critical studies in children’s literature, applied linguistics and the teaching of reading, and elementary ESL reading instruction. Her research interests cover elementary level classroom and home literacy practices in the U.S. and Africa. She recently served as a member/chair of Texas Tech University’s Transdisciplinary Research Team that focuses on illiteracy, education, and community development in Africa. She has also co-chaired the Literacy Research Association’s (LRA) International Innovative Community Group (IICG), a group dedicated to conducting research and disseminating reports on language and literacy in global/international contexts. She has chapter publications in books on research on literacy in Africa and second language learning. Journals that have published her articles include Reading Psychology, Literacy Research & Instruction, and Childhood Education.


Eurydice Bouchereau Bauer holds the rank of Associate Professor in the Departments of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her research focuses on the literacy development, instruction, and assessment of students (preschool-grade 5) from diverse linguistic, economic, and cultural backgrounds, with a specific focus on bilingual reading. In the last 10 years, she has been co-Principal Investigator and a senior researcher on two US Department of Education grants totaling $2,751,154. In addition, Dr. Bauer has been the recipient of two Spencer Foundation grants. Dr. Bauer served on a number of national committees: Member of National Research Agenda Planning Panel for ELL Students; NAEP Reading Framework Study Comparison Expert Panel; Member of the Spencer Foundation Special Panel on Reconceptualizing and Reducing Risk in Early Childhood Development; and Member of a task force on Children in Poverty (International Reading Association). Dr. Bauer’s research has been published in the Journal of Literacy Research, Reading Research Quarterly, Research in the Teaching of English, International Journal of Bilingualism, and The Reading Teacher, among others. Kelli Campbell has taught 19 years in the K-5 setting and is currently teaching 8th grade Language Arts at Rossville Middle School. She graduated from Argosy University with her Ed. D in Educational Leadership. She has served as a Primary Grades Literacy Coordinator implementing the Literacy Collaborative Framework. She is also the founder of Rossville Reads, a summer reading program that provides free books to children in her home community. Her research interests include literacy, language development, instructional models, and school reform. Mai Samir El-Falaky is a Lecturer in the Department of Language and Translation with a specialization in English and Arabic Linguistics at the College of Language and Communication in the Arab Academy for Science and Technology and Maritime Transport where she has been a faculty member since 2000. Mai functions as the head of the Department of Languages in the College of Language and Communication and researches and teaches on functional linguistics and lexicology. She is especially interested in the major learning problems that non-native English learners encounter, and therefore studies how to implement successful teaching methodologies and work on the issues that students encounter during their learning process. Teaching undergraduate courses such as Phonetics, Academic Writing, and General Linguistics enable Mai to be more oriented with such pedagogical issues related to a variety of students. Dorian Harrison received her MA in Learning and Teaching from Lipscomb University in 2010. In 2014 she became a doctoral student at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. She is currently a newsletter writer for the literacy research association, works as a teaching assistant, and doctoral student. Robert T. Jiménez received his B.A. from the University of the Americas in Puebla, Mexico, and his M.Ed. and Ph.D. from the University of Illinois. He is a professor of Language, Literacy and Culture at Peabody College, Vanderbilt University. Jiménez is working on an instructional approach called Project TRANSLATE, designed to support the reading comprehension of intermediate and middle school students who are learning English as an additional language. He has received three Fulbright awards and the Albert J. Harris Award from IRA. He was also just inducted into The Reading Hall of Fame. He has published in Reading Research Quarterly, the American Educational Research Journal, the Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, The Reading Teacher and numerous other journals.

500


Christine Joseph received her Ph.D. In Curriculum and Instruction/Elementary Mathematics and Literacy from the University of South Florida. She is currently working as a mathematics coach and providing professional development to elementary educators for effective use of literacy strategies to teach mathematics. Her research interests lie in the area of writing to learn mathematics and using multimedia to help students learn concepts. Deoksoon Kim is Associate Professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning at the University of South Florida. Her research focuses on second language literacy, sociocultural theory in language learning, and incorporating instructional technologies into teacher education through social media. She has published in Computers and Education, Language Learning Journal, TESOL Journal, CALICO Journal, IALLT Journal, English Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Reading Education, Journal of Educational Computing Research, and Multilingual Education, among others. She has done research, teaching, and professional development in South Korea, the U.K., Canada, and the U.S.A. James R. King is a professor of Literacy Education at the University of South Florida in Tampa, where he researches and teaches in early literacies, new literacies, history of literacy, linguistics, qualitative research and queer theory in education. Deborah Kozdras received her BA and M.Ed. from Brock University in St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada, and her Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction Literacy Studies from the University of South Florida, Tampa. Florida, U.S.A. In her position at the Stavros Center at the University of South Florida, she provides professional development for K-12 educators in content area literacy, technology and literacy, and global literacies. Her research, publications, and conference presentations focus on digital literacy, strategies for disciplinary literacy, and multimedia composition. Karen Kozdras received her MA and BA from the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. She holds a specialist in reading and has held a variety of teaching roles in literacy and special education. In her current role with the Halton District School she works with junior students diagnosed with a learning disability that attend a specialized program focused on developing advocacy, literacy, math and technology skills. She writes and presents widely on issues related to learning disabilities, reading, assistive technology and executive functioning. Kevin M. Leander is Associate Professor of Language, Literacy and Culture at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. His research interests include the new literacy practices of youth, spatial approaches to understanding youth identity and learning, research on new media, and media and migration. Leander is most recently engaged in thinking about and designing new learning environments, including hybrid environments that traverse online and physical spaces. Leander has published widely in venues such as Review of Research in Education, Ethos, Reading Research Quarterly, Journal of Literacy Research, and Cognition and Instruction. He has also authored and co-authored handbook chapters on youth and new media, multimodality, and mobile technologies.

501


Guofang Li is a Professor of second language and literacy education in the Department of Teacher Education, Michigan State University. Li’s research focuses on immigrant students’ home literacy practices and their relationships to schooling framed around issues of culture, race, class, and gender; Asian immigrants’ education, their social processes of learning, the impact of the “model minority” myth on first and second language and literacy development; and research-based practices in ESL/EFL education. Li is the recipient of the 2011 Publication Award of the Association of Chinese Professors of Social Sciences in the U. S. (ACPSS), the 2010 Early Career Award at American Educational Research Association (AERA), the 2008 Division G Early Career Award of AERA, and the 2006 Ed Fry Book Award of the National Reading Conference (NRC). Li has published 9 books and over 60 journal articles and book chapters. Her recent works include Handbook of Asian education: A cultural approach (Routledge, 2011), Best practices in ELL instruction (2010, Guilford Press). Multicultural families, home literacies, and mainstream schooling (2009, IAP), Model minority myths revisited: An interdisciplinary approach to demystifying Asian American education experiences (2008, IAP), and Culturally contested literacies: America’s “rainbow underclass” and urban schools (2008, Routledge), which won the 2013 Ed Fry Book Award from the Literary Research Association (LRA). Li teaches undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral courses in second language literacy education at MSU. Pauline Millar has just successfully defended her PhD dissertation at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus in Barbados. She began her public school career as an English teacher in 1987 at an all boys’ school. Since 2002, she has been employed as an Education Officer at the Barbados Ministry of Education, Science, Technology and Innovation. She currently develops and monitors Language Arts and English curricula, presents workshops on methodologies for literacy instruction, assists in setting high- stakes national examinations and works with a team to offer an annual Summer School programme for struggling students. Luz A. Murillo is an Associate Professor of Bilingual, Literacy, and Reading Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. As an educational anthropologist, she uses ethnography to study how children and teachers develop and practice minority languages and literacies in multilingual families, schools and communities in the U.S., Colombia, and Mexico. Her work draws on border theories, critical ethnography, and decolonizing pedagogies to understand the literacies of (im)migrant, Indigenous, Latina/o, and other minoritized groups. Professor Murillo’s work has appeared in journals including Anthropology & Education Quarterly, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, Language Arts, Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada, and the Yearbook of the Literacy Research Association. Ho-Ryong Park is an assistant professor of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) in the Department of English and Philosophy at Murray State University. His research interests focus on TESOL/ESOL education, second language acquisition and literacy (reading) development, and technology incorporation in diverse learning contexts. He has published in Computers and Education, CALICO Journal, Journal of Reading Education, and The Language Educator, among others. He has done research, teaching, and professional development in South Korea and the U.S.A

502


Amy Parker has over 20 years experience in working with people with disabilities as an employment specialist, independent living teacher, in-home parent trainer and advocate. She received her doctorate in special education with an emphasis in deaf-blindness in 2009 through an Office of Special Education Programs funded leadership and enrichment fellowship. Since then, Amy has been working on national special education projects. She also happens to be the sister of an adult who has multiple disabilities who reminds her about what’s important in life. She lives with her husband and two children in Monmouth, Oregon and loves to travel. Sandra Robinson holds PhD in Curriculum and Instruction in English. Since 2009 she has been a lecturer in English Education at The University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados where she co-ordinates the English program for the postgraduate Diploma in Education as well as the Associate Degree in Education for teachers in the Eastern Caribbean. Her specialty is teacher education and development in English and for the past ten years she has conducted a number of workshops focusing on professional development and instructional methodologies for teachers and teacher educators throughout the Anglophone Caribbean. She has also been a keynote speaker at seminars and conferences on issues of critical thinking, literacy, critical literacy and the teaching of Caribbean poetry. Dr Robinson is the author of a number of journal articles on issues of teacher education. Patrick H. Smith is an Associate Professor of Bilingual Education and Literacy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. As an educational linguist, he studies the language and literacy practices of multilingual, immigrant, and transnational households, communities and schools, with emphasis on Mexican-origin learners. Smith’s work on Mexican and transnational literacies has been published in literacy and applied linguistics journals such as Reading Research Quarterly, Southwest Journal of Linguistics, Lectura y Vida, the Bilingual Research Journal, and the International Multilingual Research Journal. With Christopher Hall and Rachel Wicaksono, he is co-author of Mapping Applied Linguistics: A Guide for Students and Practitioners (Routledge, 2011). Donna M Velliaris is Academic Advisor at the Eynesbury Institute of Business and Technology (EIBT). EIBT is a specialist pre-university institution where international students work towards the goal of Australian tertiary entrance. Donna holds two Graduate Certificates in: (1) Australian Studies; and (2) Religious Education, two Graduate Diplomas in: (1) Secondary Education; and (2) Language and Literacy Education, as well as three Masters in: (1) Educational Sociology; (2) Studies of Asia; and (3) Special Education. In 2010, she graduated with a PhD in Education focused on the social and educational ecological development of school-aged transnational students. Her research interests and expertise include: academic literacies; human ecology; Third Culture Kids (TCKs); and schools as cultural systems. Donna is first-author of 15+ book chapters to be published in 2014-2015. Zayoni Torres received her PhD in Curriculum and Instruction, with a concentration in Gender and Women’s Studies, from the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). She is the project coordinator for the English Learning through Math, Science, and Action Research (ELMSA) program at UIC. She is also a former research fellow for the Center for the Mathematics Education of Latinos/as (CEMELA). Her research interests are grounded in sociocultural and feminists perspectives in exploring the teaching of mathematics and science literacy for English Learners (ELs). Her dissertation research focuses on (1) how teacher’s construct language, gender, and race in relation to mathematics and science learning and (2) how teachers’ language, gender, and racial ideological stances mediate curriculum and instructional practices. 503


S. Joel Warrican has been in the field of education for over 25 years, with teaching experience at all levels, from kindergarten to tertiary. He holds a B.Ed. in Language and Literacy education from The University of the West Indies, an MPhil in Research Methods and a PhD in Language and Literacy Education, both from the University of Cambridge. Dr Warrican has worked as the principal teacher education specialist with the Caribbean Centre of Excellence for Teacher Training (CETT), the largest regional literacy initiative. He spent four years as the Director of the St. Vincent and the Grenadines Community College and is currently the Director of the Academic Programming and Delivery division within The University of the West Indies Open Campus. His research interest interests include influence of the colonial past on Caribbean education systems, with special emphasis on implications for language teaching and learning. Joseph T. Wiemelt, Ed.D., is currently the Director of Equity & Student Learning; Bilingual & Multicultural Programs for Urbana School District #116 in Urbana, Illinois, where he oversees dual language, ELL, and bilingual programs as well as equity initiatives across the district. He is a former high school principal and bilingual/ELL teacher. Joseph received his undergraduate degree in Elementary Education from Millikin University, ESL/Bilingual certification from Illinois State University, master’s and doctorate of education degrees in Educational Policy, Organization and Leadership from the University of Illinois Urbana - Champaign. Joseph’s research interests include transformative and social justice leadership for culturally and linguistically responsive education for emergent bilingual students. Joseph also has worked as a consultant for bilingual education for the Regional Office of Education for Champaign and Ford Counties in Illinois and is an adjunct instructor in bilingual education for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Millikin University. Molly Zhou is a faculty member in the School of Education at Dalton State College. Her research interests are education, culture and diversity, technology, assessment and teacher preparation. Dr. Zhou received her Bachelor’s degree in English. She earned her Master’s Degree in Educational Administration. Dr. Zhou continued further studies in curriculum studies and she earned her doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction from University of West Florida. She has published articles on education, teaching and learning, and clinical teacher education. She has coauthored two books on diversity and teacher preparation. She is currently working on her third book on diversity in higher education. Her research studies were presented at regional, national and international conferences. Dr. Zhou loves nature and enjoys gardening, walking, hiking, and swimming. Wenying Zhou is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology and Special Education at Michigan State University, working as Director of Chinese Curriculum and Teacher Support at Confucius Institute. Having provided training Chinese immersion teachers for ten years and taught Chinese Teacher Certificate courses for the past few years at Michigan State University, she has conducted research in early Chinese reading instruction, cross-cultural classroom management, and integrating technology into Chinese language instruction. Her research interests include early Chinese literacy instruction, Chinese teacher training, second language vocabulary instruction, use of technology in Chinese language instruction, and related cross-cultural issues.

504

261

Chapter 11

Becoming Teacher Researchers: Using English Learners’ Linguistic Capital to Socially Re-Organize Learning Aria Razfar University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

Eunah Yang Independent Researcher, South Korea

Beverly Troiano Elmhurst College, USA.

Joseph C. Rumenapp Judson University, USA

Ambareen Nasir University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

Zayoni Torres University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

ABSTRACT Drawing on three years of data, we show how an embedded university research team and eleven K-8 educators reorganized learning and negotiated innovative curricular activities for English learners (ELs) in spite of restrictive curricular mandates in an urban Midwestern district. We analyze how participating teachers appropriated theoretical constructs such as cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), third space, funds of knowledge, as well as using discourse analysis to design curriculum aimed at improving language learning through mathematics, science, and community-based problem solving. The learning of teachers was purposefully designed to develop new professional identities. The learning was also designed to move teachers from deficit views of mulitlingualim to dynamic stances grounded in polyglot language ideologies. We examine the challenges and opportunities of participants’ movement from resistant, procedural, and ethnographic identities towards teacher researcher identities.

INTRODUCTION As multicultural students, they are accustomed to moving across linguistic and cultural boundaries as well as dominant and non-dominant ideological spaces. In the context of global linguistic flows

and transnational movements, it is a phenomenon that is increasingly prevalent in urban schools across the world. Teacher education programs across the world are expected to prepare educators to leverage such movements for classroom learning. In the United States, English Learners

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-8668-7.ch011

Copyright © 2015, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Becoming Teacher Researchers

(ELs) are the fastest growing segment of the student population, and the U.S. Department of Education has recognized the need for increased teacher professional development that addresses the needs of this population. ELs often do not share the dominant discourse practices of the classroom; as a result, their ability to participate in discussions is constrained and learning opportunities are lost. Teachers are often unaware of the consequences for how their own underlying language beliefs, attitudes, and practices, or language ideologies can inform how they impede or enhance teaching linguistically diverse learners (Razfar, 2011b). Thus, it is necessary for teachers to consciously reflect on how to design academic activities that leverages ELs’ linguistic funds of knowledge. In this chapter, we present multiple case studies of teachers becoming researchers of their instructional and discursive practices. We examined how mainstream teachers socially re-organized learning to foster ELs’ primary languages through integrated mathematics and science activities. As ELs have rapidly transitioned into mainstream classrooms throughout the United States, it is critical that teachers become conscious of ELs’ language ideologies vis a vis their linguistic and cultural funds of knowledge. In this chapter we present a professional development model geared toward developing teacher researchers who critically reflect on language practices in the classroom. Our embedded partnership positioned teachers as active learners, curriculum designers, and problem-solvers (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2004). We adopted a sociocultural approach to doing action research where sociocultural tools of language and learning were used to empower teachers to become teacher researchers and curriculum designers (Razfar, 2011a). Since 2007, with the support of the Department of Education, we have partnered with twenty-six Midwestern urban public schools with the explicit goal of “transforming literacy practices though mathematics, science, and action research” (Razfar, 2007). Under the Next Generation Science

262

Standards (NGSS), teachers of ELs are accountable for raising the rigor of science to emphasize engagement in scientific and engineering practices, comprehension of core knowledge and ideas, and the application of crosscutting concepts to link multiple science domains. Many teachers struggle to make NGSS comprehensible for ELs because they have limited expertise in second language acquisition or inadequate pedagogical content knowledge to integrate ELs’ language and culture with science content. The NGSS address this gap to enable teachers to draw on funds of knowledge (FoK) that connect science learning with ELs’ everyday language practices. The NGSS (2013) recommendations emphasize that effective teachers ask questions that elicit students’ FoK in relation to science and that they use community resources in academically and culturally relevant and sustaining ways (Paris, 2012). In the following section we provide an overview of the conceptual frameworks that guided our study. The primary objectives of this chapter are to show: 1. How teachers working with university researchers take up research identities in the context of building curricular activities that integrate literacy, mathematics, and science through students’ FoK; 2. How teachers move from deficit to dynamic language ideologies in order to foster ELs’ primary languages through integrated mathematics and science activities.

BACKGROUND Participants For nearly a decade, the university research team has worked with more than ninety teachers spanning twenty-six K-8 schools in a large urban Midwestern school district. In most cases, several teachers from the same school collaborated on the action research projects. A member of the research


Table 1. Teacher Demographics (Cohort 1, n=11) Teacher

School

Grade

Years of Teaching

Language Fluency

% of ELs School*

Susan

Adams

Combined 7th/8th

11

English

24.2%

Eva

Adams

6th

7

Romanian/English

24.2%

Cara

Adams

2

nd

2

Serbian/English

24.2%

Lourdes

Jarman

5th

7

Spanish/English

49%

Dana

Jarman

5

th

3

English

49%

th

Vanessa

Poplar

5

15

Bilingual (Spanish/English)

39.4% (LEP)

Ana

Poplar

6th

4


39.4%

Mona

Poplar

4

3


39.4%

Mai

Velka

Kindergarten

14

Vietnamese/English

48.7%

Lola

Velka

5th/6th gifted

6

Spanish/English

48.7%

Sally

Velka

7 grade

35

English

48.7%

th

th

* Data from School Report Card

team was assigned to each site conducting fieldwork observations, focus groups, and weekly study group. To date, forty-two (n=42) teachers have completed the program at the Masters level where they have completed an action research project. In this chapter, we focused on teachers from the first and second cohorts spanning the first five years of the project (n=22). Our analysis of teacher learning and becoming a teacher researcher focuses on the first cohort of teachers (n=11) (Table 1). Our analysis of language ideological shifts focuses on both cohorts (n=22). Each site consisted of significant percentages of ELs (greater than 25%). The teachers at Adams (Cara, Eva, and Susan, all names are pseudonyms) had a supportive principal and during the period of our collaboration experienced significant gains, as measured by standardized tests, for ELs who were predominantly Spanish speakers. The Jarman teachers (Lola and Dana) conducted the research in Lola’s fifth grade classroom. Dana was a middle school special education teacher. Velka was one of the more linguistically diverse sites in the project with 45% identified as EL and over 23 languages (Arabic, Spanish, Urdu, and Vietnamese constituting the largest). Poplar Elementary

was a year round school, predominantly Latina/o, 40% designated EL, and more than 90% on free or reduced lunch.

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND TIMELINE Action Research Course All teachers began the program by taking a course on action research and content integration for ELs, mathematics, and science (Razfar, 2007). The course introduced them to the project’s sociocultural theoretical framework through primary research articles. The teachers participated in online discussion, led classroom presentations, conducted fieldwork, and carried out a pilot action research study implementing all of the theoretical and methodological tools they would utilize for their year-long action research. At the beginning of this course, teachers completed a language attitude survey as a measure of their language ideological stances. During the course, each school cohort created an action plan designed to provide participants with

263


practice designing, implementing, and studying an integrated mathematics, science and literacy unit based on FoK. Participating teachers worked individually and as a cohort to develop an inventory table that aligned students’ FoK with state mathematics and science standards and the teachers’ curricular objectives. Engeström’s (1999) activity triangle was used as a heuristic to develop and analyze an activity system. The activity triangle framework was an essential component of the course instruction and later the development of curricular units. In addition, teachers were introduced to a social organization of learning protocol designed to assess learning from a sociocultural perspective (Razfar & Rumenapp, 2011). For example, the protocol focused attention on spatial configurations, grouping arrangements, discourse practices, mediational tools, assistance strategies, learner identity shifts, and points of disagreement in student talk. In addition, each cohort, working with the research team, coded all the videos from the pilot study and selected representative vignettes for more detailed transcription and discourse analysis. This process culminated in the development and presentation of an action plan.

Action Research Project Timeline In the academic year following the course, each cohort worked with the research team to conduct a year-long action research project. The process mirrored the one modeled during the action research course with variations in terms of time, space, and depth of content. Each team designed and implemented three thematic units according to the following timeline: 1) Funds of Knowledge inquiry (September); 2) Unit 1 implementation followed by analysis (October-December); 3) Unit 2 implementation followed by analysis (FebruaryApril); 4) Unit 3 implementation followed by analysis (May-June). Each unit was initially designed using the FoK Inventory Table and Activity Triangle. The FoK Inventory Table helped participants to align and

264

organize state standards, academic content objectives, students’ FoK, and values and principles of mathematics, science, and literacy for each unit. The Activity Triangle helped the research team design the broader activity system for each unit and to contextualize student learning within the activity system. The research team led weekly meetings with teachers to discuss developments in the field including video recordings from at least three class periods of the unit (one at the beginning, middle, and end). Teachers were asked to initially probe videos using a coding sheet that captured fundamental sociocultural practices. They tallied observable instances of the following: peer assistance, funds of knowledge use, the use of multiple languages/discourses, questions, points of disagreement, episodes of third space, shifts in learner? participation, learner role shifts (expert/ novice), and rule negotiation. These codes were intended as a starting point for discourse analysis, and over time, especially by unit 3, teachers often expanded and/or deleted codes as they deemed appropriate. Teachers used their summative coding sheets to then identify episodes for more detailed transcription and discourse analysis. After each unit, teachers individually reported emergent themes across their data corpus and addressed key issues regarding content integration, language development, and modifications for subsequent units. After discussing individual reports, each cohort synthesized their collective findings to be shared with the research team.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS Our project built on the Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) of learning to examine teacher learning and development. Within this framework, the ideas of third space and funds of knowledge were foundational to how learning was organized, discussed, and assessed. In addition, the concept of language ideologies was central to our analysis


Table 2. Integrated Curriculum Units School Cohort Adams

Unit 1 Video Games

Unit 2 Community

Unit 3 Video Games/ Community

Jarman

STC Microworlds

FOSS Levers and Pulleys

FOSS Solar Energy

Velka

Water Crisis

Recycling

Earth Hour/ Global Warming

Poplar

Community Awareness

Graffiti/Violence

Community Clean-Up/Safety

of how teachers moved from reductive to critical views of language as a mediational tool in EL learning. Overall, we adapted a collaborative model of teacher inquiry fostering interdependence, shared goals and responsibilities, flexible agendas, collective analysis, and open exchange of ideas (Nelson, Slavit, Perkins, & Hathorn, 2008).

Cultural Historical Activity Theory as Social Action We took an explicit sociocultural and critical approach to doing action research where we used sociocultural tools of language and learning to empower teachers to become teacher researchers and curriculum designers (Razfar, 2011a; Wells, 2001). Action research in general assumes that change comes from the ground up rather than top-down, and is an effective form of professional development (Freire, 1970; Lewin, 1948; McNiff, 2013). More specifically, we adopted a culturalhistorical activity theory (CHAT) framework to learning and development (Engeström, 1999; Wertsch, 1998), which allows for diachronic and synchronic analysis of instructional practices. The term “activity” in CHAT refers to an evolving and emergent system of human actions that are coordinated in purposeful ways. Learning is a socially organized process of bidirectional change between individual subjects working collectively to accomplish concrete goals or “objects.” These learning goals are achieved through interacting components depicted in the activity triangle below (Figure 1) (Roth & Lee, 2007). Learning is the

process of solving problems through organized, mediated activity where language and discursive actions are the primary mediational tools. Thus, discourse analysis was one the primary tools of analysis and assessment (Razfar, 2012). Through microgenetic analysis of classroom interactions, teachers can become aware of how language is intricately related to the learning of language, mathematics, and science (Gee, 2010). More significantly, the intersection of discourse and “Discourse” provide for broader social, ideological, and institutional analysis. The awareness produced by discourse analysis, especially when done in collaboration with university partners and other teachers, has the potential to lead to broader shifts in pedagogy and policy (Troiano, 2012). Several prominent theoretical constructs mediated the conceptual and methodological learning of the participating teachers: language ideologies, third space, and funds of knowledge. These perspectives also anchored our analysis.

Language Ideologies In this study, we focus on the significant role of teachers’ language ideologies as mediational tools in learning and instruction (Razfar & Rumenapp, 2011). Language ideologies are not only beliefs and ideas about how language works, but language practices that index widespread systems of belief about language (Silverstein, 2003). The teacher, as a participant in the activity system, contributes to the design of the learning context by promoting or limiting the types of mediational tools. This

265


Figure 1. Activity Triangle for Project

design, in turn, can bring about the changes in the entire activity system. For example, a teacher may initially enact a scripted and rigid classroom discourse style with narrow learning goals. As they develop metalinguistic consciousness, they can re-organize learning to promote more dialogic interactions with robust learning goals. A teacher’s ideas about social and linguistic relationships are filled with moral interests with implications for student learning (Irvine & Gal, 2000). These language ideologies are “shared bodies of commonsense notions about the nature of language in the world” (Woolard, 1998, p. 4). From a language ideologies perspective, classroom discourse practices and patterns are language ideologies. For example, a classroom script of teacher initiation, student response, and

266

teacher evaluation (IRE) suggests both a reductive view of language as well as learning. This also reflects a teacher-centered epistemology. In contrast, a conversational, open-ended, and dialogic discourse pattern reflects a more sociocultural orientation toward meaning-making and learning. Corrective practices in the classroom are another good example of how language ideologies mediate classroom discourse (Razfar, 2005). Furthermore, when teachers reflect upon these corrective practices they can potentially develop metalinguistic consciousness and consider the ethical implications of correcting non-standard varieties in the classroom (Razfar, 2010). Contrastive analysis of multiple languages and speech varieties is an effective way for teachers and students to collectively discuss language (Charity, Hundley, Mallinson,


2011). Charity Hudley and Mallinson (2011) note, “[e]ducators and students who come from different racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds may be unaware of, confused by, or ill equipped to understand each other’s linguistic and cultural behaviors” (p. 77).

Language Ideologies in the Third Space When leaning is organized through multiple mediational means, contestation and tension is inevitable (Razfar, 2013). Third space is a space of cultural, social, and epistemological challenge and change. It is a space where multiple epistemologies “converse” with one another in order to reshape existing assumptions about student life-worlds. The goals of university-based teacher educators and teachers are sometimes divergent, yet through third space they can foster productive spaces of mutual learning. Recently third space has been reconceptualized from an abstract psychological space to physical spaces of learning (e.g., Cuenca, Schmeichelb, Butlerd, Dinkelman & Nichols, 2011; Martin, Snow & Franklin-Torrez, 2011; Zeichner, 2010). For example, “breakout sessions” with student teachers revealed three major benefits to field instructors: (1) accessing new kinds of conversations; (2) providing a more refined focus for observation visits; and (3) cultivating deeper relationships (Cuenca et al., 2011). Designing activities that lead to epistemic uncertainty and conceptual tensions can be uncomfortable. However, it may be necessary in order to engender productive spaces of development even if teachers’ views/ experiences conflict with children’s life-world experience (Eppley, Shannon, & Gilbert, 2011). When classroom interactions are intentionally organized around the fostering third spaces to promote content learning, then teachers and students can organically engage each other (Flessner, 2009). Third space also opens the possibility of accessing

student life-worlds through multimodal means of communication such as poetry (Wiseman, 2011).

Language Ideologies and Funds of Knowledge Funds of knowledge (FoK) reveal the exchange of social networks, particularly the essential bodies of knowledge and skills that households use for their well-being and survival (Vélez-Ibañez and Greenberg, 1992). In education, there is a special focus on non-school spaces of knowledge and learning (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). Teachers and researchers conduct ethnographic home visits to access household funds, including household labor/social practices and adult-child learning interactions. Over the years, FoK has become has evolved in terms of type of funds and how they are accessed (Gonzalez & Moll, 2002). More recently, FoK has moved beyond the household as a unit of analysis to include “family beliefs” and “values” (Riojas-Cortez & Flores, 2010), “popular culture” and ‘interests’ (Hedges et al., 2011; Moje, 2004), “linguistic and cultural knowledge” (Fitts, 2009), and “lived experiences” (Upadhyay, 2005). Furthermore, the sources where funds are accessed vary across the research literature, including “community scans” within a few mile radius around the school (Smythe & Toohey, 2009), classroom discourses (Bouillion & Gomez, 2001; Fraser-Abder et. al 2010; Moje, 2004; Upadhyay, 2005), and “family stories” (Dworin, 2006). In this study, teachers designed an activity system mediated by students’ linguistic, mathematics and science funds. Thus, non-school linguistic repertoires and epistemologies were valued and central to the curriculum design principles of their action research. They used multiple methods to access FoK, such as home surveys, student work, journaling in formal and informal settings, and other ethnographic tools such as community walks and home visits. The use of multiple strategies broadened the types of FoK acquired by teaches.

267


They could move beyond household spaces and access students’ life-worlds. Thus, FoK consisted of historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for an individual’s life-worlds functioning and wellbeing that may be utilized by the classroom teacher to contextualize academic learning (Moll, 1992).

METHODS Data Sources Given the action research model as well as the sociocultural perspective that informs the design and analysis, this research is primarily qualitative and ethnographic in nature consisting of naturalistic observations, field-notes, video/audio-recordings of activities designed by teachers in collaboration with the research team. Each cohort of teachers worked collaboratively to develop and implement three activity units spanning between 3-4 weeks over the course of the academic year. Activities were designed after conducting extensive inquiry into students’ funds of knowledge and aligning them with state standards. Teachers’ classroom interactions were videotaped at least 12 times throughout the school year with each recording being approximately one hour (120 hours of video). As the teachers implemented each unit, they took field-notes and studied videos of their classroom interactions. In analyzing their data, they used a preliminary coding sheet to summarize key aspects of the data. They later selected episodes to transcribe based on high frequency of codes. Research assistants met with the teachers in weekly study groups to discuss planning and implementing the units as well as analyzing data. Upon completion of each unit, we conducted focus groups with teachers about their views of language learning, teaching, the analytic process, and action research (3 total). Emergent patterns were summarized and results were used to reshape and plan subsequent

268

units. At the conclusion of year 1, teachers spent year 2 along with the research team organizing and analyzing their qualitative and quantitative data with respect to teacher practice and student learning and produced an action report (AR) of changes in self, site, and students. In the following section we illustrate our coding scheme with preliminary findings.

GLOBAL DOMAINS OF CHANGE: CODING AND ANALYSIS Defining Domains of Change As previously mentioned, each teacher watched the twelve videos of their teaching and used a coding sheet to count instances of mediational tools, assistance, funds of knowledge, multiple languages/discourses, prosody, questions, tension, third spaces, shifts in participation, and role shifts. The research team then proceeded to conduct a thematic analysis of the teacher coding as well as other data sources. Using QSR International’s NVivo 9 software (2010), we inductively coded the data for generative themes and developed categories. We examined the data for areas of change in teachers’ awareness and change in practice. Five domains of change were identified as most salient to our research question(s): teacher authority, third space, integrated curriculum, multiple language use, and funds of knowledge. The use of multiple languages and discourses was a main indicator of language ideological shifts. Table 3 shows how we defined each domain as the teacher’s reported awareness of each and provided evidence in their fieldwork. We examined study group transcripts and focus groups for teachers reported awareness of the codes. We then triangulated our findings by examining classroom video transcripts for evidence of observed change in practice(s).


Table 3. Definitions of Domains of Change Domain of Change

Defined Awareness – (Teacher Consciousness of Terms)

Defined Practice – (Evidence from Fieldwork/Video Data)

Teacher Authority (TA)

Realization of IRE discourse pattern, teacher; teacher dominant voice of the floor (controlling student behavior/classroom management)

Shift from IRE to conversational/dialogic; Shift from teacher dominant discourse to shared discourse

Third Space (TSp)

Awareness that students bring up other topics not explicitly aligned with their intended topic/ curriculum (recognized by students going off task/ topic, off script, tension)

Teacher extends on counterscript (in the discourse, extends on or develops new curriculum)

Integrated Curriculum (IC)

Thematic approach integrating Literacy/math or literacy/science

Thematic approach integrating Literacy/math or literacy/science

Multiple Language (ML)

Awareness that ML can be used

Encouraging ML discourse

Funds of Knowledge (FoK)

Awareness of student expert knowledge outside of school (peer culture, pop culture, household).

Seeking (learning about) FOK to develop curriculum; Incorporating FOK into the curriculum

Shifts in Teachers’ Awareness and Practice Figure 2 compares the total number of teachers’ reported awareness and observed change in practice. All eleven teachers reported an awareness of funds of knowledge and teacher authority. The data showed evidence of every teacher incorporating students’ funds of knowledge into the curriculum at some level. All but one teacher showed a shift in teacher authority. Ten out of eleven teachers developed and taught integrated literacy/math or literacy/science thematic units. Teachers had the most difficulty appropriating the third space and multiple language use. While nine teachers recognized how students brought up other topics not explicitly aligned with their intended topic/ curriculum, eight were able to extend on apparent “tangents” in the discourse. They were able to develop new curriculum to incorporate studentinitiated topics not explicitly aligned with the original topic/curriculum. Likewise, almost all teachers became aware of students using multiple languages for learning in the classroom, and eight encouraged and provided opportunities for students to draw on all their linguistic resources. Table 4 shows when the first instance by code of reported awareness and observed change in

practice(s) occurred for each teacher. For example, all but one teacher reported awareness of their teacher authority in the pilot study (PS). Mai reported her awareness of teacher authority in Unit 1 (U1). We point to the first instance to show when teachers verbally articulated their awareness of the concept. Table 4 is categorized by new teacher identity(s) of teacher researcher, ethnographic inquiry teacher, procedural, and resistant. Each identity is defined by specific observable practices (Table 5).

Teacher Learning as Shifts in Identities Table 5 outlines how each teacher identity was defined. Two teachers, Vanessa and Mai, consistently resisted focal ideas such as third space (TSp) and funds of knowledge (FoK). They showed no change (NC) for both of these areas, and thus appropriated a resistant or procedural identity throughout the program. As teachers became aware of the focal ideas and attempted to use them in practice, they generally took on a procedural identity. While they did not disagree with the concepts, they simply followed procedures without a deeper understanding of why they were doing it. An example of this was most clearly seen in how the teachers

269


Figure 2. Shifts in Teachers’ Awareness and Practice

talked about using research methodological tools such as coding or discourse analysis. At the end of the Unit 3, Eva reflected on how during Unit 1 the Adams teachers “coded for third spaced because [researchers] told us to.” This type of talk was marked as procedural display. While teachers incorporated funds of knowledge into the curriculum, not all teachers explicitly aligned their teaching with students’ funds of knowledge. Hence, not all teachers became ethnographic inquiry teachers. Eight of the eleven (73%) teachers showed evidence of the teacher researcher identity. These teachers appropriated at least one of the five major theoretical constructs in a profound way. Appropriation meant they showed evidence of being strategic, reflective, and in command of discourse analytic tools and/or key concepts.

Language Ideologies Our analysis of language ideologies focused on explicit articulations during focus group discus-

270

sions about the nature, function, and purpose of language in their units. Data was collected through four focus group interviews for one hour over the course of the year, which was prompted by questions regarding the role of language (i.e. language use in social interactions) for mathematics and science. These focus groups were used to observe conceptual shifts in teachers’ views of bilingualism, ranging from deficit to an additive or dynamic language ideology (Flores and Schissel, 2014). We defined the dynamic stance of bilingualism, in contrast to the additive view, as one where bilingualism is seen through a polyglot imagination rather than the prevailing monoglot standard that preserves the subordinate status of languages other than English (Silverstein, 1996). We were able to calculate the percentage of teachers expressing views on this spectrum through triangulation with teacher artifacts. The research team recorded three curriculum units designed by the teachers for a total of nine classroom videos per classroom and shared these videos with the


Table 4. Shift in Teachers’ Awareness and Practice Teacher

Reported Awareness TA

TSp

IC

ML

Observed Change in Practice(s) FoK

TA

TSp

IC

ML

FoK

Susan

PS

PS

U1

PS

U1

U1

U1

U1

U1

U1

Eva

PS

U1

U1

PS

U1

U1/U3

U1

U1

U1

U1

Cara

PS

PS

U1

U1

U1

U2

U2

U1

U2

U1

Lourdes

PS

U2

PS

PS

U1

U2

U2

U1

U2

U2

Dana

PS

U2

PS

U1

U1

U2

U2

U1

U2

U2

Lola

PS

U1

U1

PS

U1

U1

U1

U1

NC

U1

Sally

PS

NC

U1

PS

PS

NC

NC

U1

U1

U1

Ana

PS

U1

PS

PS

U1

U2

U2

NC

U1

U1

Mona

PS

U1

PS

PS

U1

U1

U1

U2

U1

U1

Vanessa

PS

U1

PS

PS

U1

U3

NC

U1

NC

U1

Mai

U1

NC

NC

NC

U1

U3.2

NC

U1

NC

U2

teachers for them to reflect on their own language practices. Furthermore, we triangulated our data from teacher artifacts, including daily field notes and journals. We open coded the data using tri-

angulation analysis to develop emerging themes and then observed shifts in the ways teachers’ conceptualize language. Our coding followed along the categorization of three views expressed

Table 5. Definitions of Teacher Identities Identity

Definition

Example

Resistant

Teacher explicitly disagrees with some aspect of the professional development.

For example, a teacher may state that she doesn’t believe ‘Third Space’ or ‘Funds of Knowledge’ works in the classroom.

Procedural

Teacher exhibits ‘Procedural Display’ and simply goes along with some aspect of the PD. Maintains a Teacher-Centered stance throughout the project.

For example, “I coded for third space because you told us to.” Teacher-Centered stance is exhibited through IRE discourse pattern.

Ethnographic Inquiry Teacher

Teacher explicitly aligns with funds of knowledge demonstrates appropriation of idea in practice. This does not include ability to connect with content. Teacher not able to actualize a targeted curriculum using the documentation of student lives.

A teacher’s journal: “Students continued to mention a great deal of problems they see with gang violence, graffiti, and pollution. I’m finding myself letting my students lead the conversation as I try to guide them. This difficult because I’m unsure of when to stop the lesson and begin to discuss a topic that is more important for students at the moment.”

Teacher Researcher

Teacher researcher has clearly appropriated at least one of the major constructs and utilizes research tools to build an integrated curriculum. More importantly, they are all able to be strategic, reflective, and in command of discourse analytic and other research tools.

“What I heard through this transcription, which I would have totally missed if I hadn’t done this, were the ways that the kids were trying to help them. The peer assistance they were giving.”

271


Table 6. Language Ideology Codes Definition

Examples

Deficit

Language Ideology Stances

The first language of students is not the goal of academic instruction. Additionally, these teachers were unaware of how to use the first language as a resource for mathematics and science learning.

“Students are aware they are going to school to learn English so I focus with English because they are tested in English not Spanish.”

Emerging Dynamic (Additive)

Teacher considers first language as a resource for learning. However, teachers did not necessarily appropriate these views in practice.

“I want students to use Spanish in the classroom, but they don’t because they know I can’t speak Spanish so I won’t understand them.”

Dynamic

Teachers empirically demonstrated changes in their teaching practices around multiple language use.

“I can foster students’ native language by making it a necessary tool to complete the activity.”

by teachers, the deficit stance, the emerging dynamic stance, and the dynamic stance (Table 6).

FLIPPING THE SCRIPT: NEGOTIATING A SOCIOCULTURAL CURRICULUM The learning of teachers was socially organized and purposefully designed to achieve new social identities and in particular movement toward the teacher researcher identity. All participants learned to and through dialogic interactions and meaning-making tensions typical in learning and development. The process of building new learning environments required a reframing of the inevitable tensions that arose from conflicting institutional and individual goals. For example, the goals of the school-based mandated curriculum, restrictive curricular and linguistic ideologies, and individualistic views of learning were natural points of contestation between project participants (teachers, research assistants, and faculty). We explicitly used sociocultural theories of learning and language as a means for action in order to foster a negotiated curriculum between various micro and macro forces. Hence, the teacher researcher identity was an emergent phenomenon grounded in the joint activity and movement of

272

all subjects from novice forms of inquiry toward active members of a research community. In this section we demonstrate the emergence of a teacher researcher identity through shifts in coding practices, shifts in language and learning ideologies, shifts in grouping practices, and shifts in literacy and numeracy stances.

Emergence of Teacher Researcher Identity The negotiated model of curricular design necessitates a teacher researcher identity. Theory is an essential tool for dynamic responses to fluid classroom conditions and the pressures of district mandates. This became essential when the goal of the curriculum was to foster integration of literacy, mathematics, and science in spaces where separate times were designated for each subject area. Since the opportunities for integration tend to be emergent, theory allowed for teachers to be consciously ready to see and seize the opportunities for mediation when they arise. In addition, theory allowed for conscious design-based methods that foster such moments of interdisciplinary and integrated learning. While this type of curriculum was more challenging than a scripted, procedural curriculum, it also demanded a more engaged teacher as well as a more engaged collaborative


team for teacher development. As teachers became researchers, they were able to bring literacy and language development, mathematics and science, and funds of knowledge together in their practice through using the research tools. Figure 3 shows the identities for each teacher exhibited over the duration of the project. These identities deepened over time. An example of this is how some teachers took greater ownership of the discourse analytic and methodological tools by strategically redefining codes within the context of their own classrooms. During Unit 1, teachers only marked the presence of a code following procedures. By Unit 2, teachers began to include comments on the coding sheet with descriptions of classroom events and interpretative notes, asterisks to mark important parts, and other discourse features characteristic of transcription conventions (gestures, silence, and overlap talk) that went beyond the initial coding scheme. By Unit 3’s implementation period, the Adams’ teachers had developed new codes, such as role negotiation and scientific discourse, after they had observed students defining their roles within the group and using scientific discourse. Figure 3 shows how their teacher researcher identity evolved from Unit 1 to Unit 3 (Figure 4). The two coding sheets shown in Figure 4 demonstrate how Susan’s teacher researcher identity shifted as she questioned, redefined, and appropriated codes for her own purposes. This type of participatory appropriation served as a key explicit marker of teacher learning through the use of sociocultural tools, methods, and engagement with university researchers.

Becoming Teacher Researchers The analysis of teacher learning as shifts in participation and discursive identities is consistent with sociocultural principles of learning and development (Razfar & Rumenapp, 2011). Thus, learning was conceptualized as being socially mediated as seen through shifts in participation and discursive

identities (Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1998). University researchers purposefully designed activities with the explicit goal of socializing teachers toward becoming autonomous members of the research community. As we expected teachers to analyze the learning of their students through shifts in participation and discursive identities, we, as researchers of the teacher’s learning, did the same. For example, in doing discourse analysis across the data corpus, we looked for shifts in status and solidarity markers. Furthermore, our unit of analysis for understanding teacher learning was the shifts in mediation, especially in the context of university researcher and teacher interactions. Learning occured as participants (in this case, the teachers) “shift[ed] from reliance on concrete mediational tools and assistance from others to more independent applications of meaning and understandings of the mediational tools” (Razfar, 2011). Hence, teacher learning was conceptualized as a shift from procedural and formal aspects of mediation toward authentic appropriation of mediational tools. Vygotsky referred to this as a shift in the form to function ratio (Vygotsky, 1978), which signals the movement from novice learner identities to expert learner identities within an activity. Shifts in mediation, as represented by changes in the form to function or action to meaning ratio occurs within designated social practices (Razfar, 2013).

Shifting Language and Learning Ideologies Given the centrality of linguistic tools, signs, and symbols in learning and development, it was essential for teachers to develop a dynamic language ideological stance toward non-school linguistic and cultural repertoires. Of the twenty-two teachers we have studied, 21/22 (95%) began with a reductive, subtractive, or deficit stance toward non-English, and non-school languages. This included all of the teachers from the first cohort (11/11). In addition, all of these teachers stated

273


Figure 3. Emergence of Teacher Identity

that the development of primary languages and/ or discourses “was not” the goal of academic instruction. In addition, these teachers were unaware of how to use the first language as a resource for mathematics and science learning. The teachers viewed academic English as accessible, free from status differentiation, and inherently neutral. After the initial pilot project conducted in the action research course, many of the teachers began to articulate conceptual movement from deficit toward dynamic stances. However, it was difficult to determine how these shifts would be demonstrated during curricular design and implementa-

274

tion. The analysis of observation and focus group data conducted after Unit 1 revealed that 13/22 (60%) participants moved toward an “emerging dynamic” stance on language and learning. This was evident by how teachers organized groups, the mediational tools employed, and the nature of the discourse. By the end of the second unit, only 3/22 (14%) remained in a deficit stance. These shifts are further elaborated in Figure 5. After the completion of the teacher action research units, we found only 1 teacher maintaining a deficit stance. This teacher, Vanessa, who we will discuss later, was consistently resistant to


Figure 4. Shift in Coding Sheets from Unit 1 to Unit 3

various aspects of the professional development. She continued to rationalize her assimilationist stances towards Spanish, citing her ten years of classroom teaching in post Proposition 227 California. The English-Only and anti-bilingual policies she experienced in California mediated her ideological stances, not only towards language policy but learning and instruction of ELs. Several teachers (3/22, 14%) articulated a language ideological shift where they explicitly took affirmative stances towards the use of students’ primary languages and discourses as resources for academic achievement; however, we did not find

evidence of multiple languages being leveraged in classroom instruction. Therefore, we called this an emerging dynamic language ideology because they regularly used English for mathematics and science instruction. The overwhelming majority of teachers, (18/22, 82%), exhibited an dynamic language ideology in which they leveraged (at some level) their students’ linguistic funds of knowledge. These teachers clearly designed for languages other than English to be critical mediational tools in their unit activities. These teachers empirically demonstrated changes in their teaching practices around multiple language use. In

275


addition, analysis of survey and focus group data showed that these teachers shifted from deficit toward dynamic language ideologies. More importantly, their thinking about the nature, function, and purpose of language in learning also shifted. They started with a limited and decontextualized view of academic English and moved toward an expanded sociocritical stance of language and learning where meaning, status, power, and identity were integral to how they conceptualized language (Razfar, 2011b). As teachers designed activities that integrated mathematics and science with literacy, it was evident that language ideologies mediated how they organized learning. As mentioned earlier, there were shifts in language ideological stances that reflected reductive and limited stances toward language and learning that reflected more expanded stances (See Table 7). These shifts were demonstrated in classroom practice, primarily in three areas: 1) grouping of learners; 2) use of primary languages/discourses as mediational tools; 3) use of non-school numeracy and scientific funds of knowledge.

Shifts in Grouping Practices One-way in which teachers’ changed was in relation to the organization of their classrooms (Figure 6). In the first row we see a teacher initially setting up her first grade classroom during reading time with students sitting on a carpet facing her. As she attempts to facilitate conversation about the book, she notices that she is always talking bilaterally, that is only between the teacher and students authorized to speak. Later, she reorganizes this reading activity into a circle where students can not only talk to her, but also to other students. This facilitated expansive opportunities for talk (Figure 6). Teachers changed how they socially organized learning by arranging and rearranging student grouping to capitalize on native language use (Figure 7). For instance, teachers shifted from

276

grouping students based on homogenous academic and language ability to heterogeneous abilities and languages. This shift emerged through teacher analysis of their own discourse practices and reflections during study groups. Teachers noted how students ascribed differentiated status to nonstandard languages and registers in small group interactions. This awareness lead to re-organizing groups so that accessing mathematics and science discourses through multiple languages was more likely (Table 8).

Shift in Literacy and Numeracy Stance A third practice in which change was seen is from a dominant, single literacy to multiliteracies (Figure 7). Teachers became curriculum designers to develop multliteracies to teach mathematics and science such as engaging in surveys, using digital literacy (online resources), analyzing nutrition information, and creating public health announcements. In order to solve the student-posed social problems in their curricular units, teachers had to move beyond traditional literacy texts to allow for “out-of-school” literacies to be used as meditational tools (Figure 7). Another major shift was teachers moving from direct language instruction to holistic learning through language (Figure 8). Drawing on cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), teachers reconceptualized the role of language in mathematics and science learning as fundamentally mediated through language. Language shifted from being the object of learning to the mediational tool for accomplishing learning goals rooted in scientific and mathematical identities. For example, in one classroom, Spanish was strategically positioned to mediate participation as a result of neighborhood surveys and interviews, which needed to be translated to show, for example, the need for a new school playground. Students then proceeded to make their case for a playground by conducting descriptive analysis of the surveys. In doing


Figure 5. Teacher Language Ideologies by Action Research Timeline

so, English and Spanish were essential to make meaning of statistical data and for validation of the results (Figure 8). Finally, the teachers shifted from autonomous notions of numeracy and science literacy practices toward multimodal and situated approaches to mathematics and science (Street, Baker, Tobin, 2006). We see in this final role a shift from au-

tonomous mathematical practices to embodied and contextualized ones (Figure 9). Students attempted to graph how often they used technology during a given weekend. One group struggled with counting, and the teacher provided the familiar math counters so they could practice counting by tens. Then the students charted on their paper; however the teacher-constructed chart was not large enough.

277


Table 7. Teachers Language Ideological Shift Limited Language Ideologies • Focus on Structure (Code) • Focus on Individual Acquisition • Language is target of learning • Goal is Academic Literacy • Autonomous numeracy

Expanded Language Ideologies • Focus on Sociocultural Context (Meaning) • Focus on Socialization and Interaction • Language is meditational tool for learning • Goal is Multiple Literacy(ies) • Numeracy as cultural practice

Students problem solved to “cut out” larger “bars” in their bar graphs. The final product was a chart of the students’ technology use that was created by all students contributing to the mathematical activities. The teachers demonstrated some of their conceptual shifts through these practices (Figure 9).

Learning and Language Awareness through Coding and Discourse Analysis We illustrate with examples from each cohort, how, as time progressed, the teachers became increasingly independent, self-regulating, and strategic in the appropriation of researcher practices such as using theory and methods to navigate issues of language and learning. Through joint collaboration, most teachers shifted from deficit stances of

language and ELs toward dynamic, sociocultural perspectives. This is the type of metalinguistic awareness and consciousness of language we believe is necessary to optimize learning outcomes for ELs (Siegal, 2006). To further examine cases of resistance and the durability of monolingual and standard language ideologies (Mai at Velka & Vanessa at Poplar), the research team used Focus and Study Groups (FG and SG) to meet regularly with teachers to discuss and analyze what transpired in the classroom. In the following sections we examine the action research journeys of Adams, Jarmn, and Velka.

Using Coding and Transcripts to Inform Practice The Adams cohort implemented classroom examined how video games and linguistic funds could

Figure 6. Shift in Grouping Practices (Unit 1 and Unit 3)

278


Figure 7. From Literacy to Multiliteracies

be leveraged to learn mathematics. Unlike Jarman, and to some extent Velka, the Adams cohort was not confined to a mandated curriculum but had flexibility to make connections to the standards and students’ funds of knowledge. During the first unit the Adams teachers found that coding videos made them aware of which students talked in a group, the conflict and power dynamics of groups, and the topics (such as video games) that engaged less vocal students, particularly ELs, to participate. The teachers also spoke of challenges with coding, such as needing to view videos multiple times and the difficulty of understanding and appropriating the categories that were established by the program. In their action report, they wrote: “more student dialogue created tension, this allowed for

the appearance of third spaces and represented an important change in how students conducted group work” (AR, p. 64). They showed how students modeled and used instructional conversation in their groups. Eva chose the following transcript (lines 1-14) of focal EL students to demonstrate peer assistance (Isabella, lines 1, 7). 1: Isabella: So what do we know about this paragraph? 2: Sophia: It’s talking [about] 3: Diego: [Antioxidants] helps you grow. I think. 4: Isabella: Not (inaudible) 5: Diego: Na na na (making a face) 6: Angelo: Disease fighting 7: Isabella: Yeah. So it helps us by

Table 8. Grouping Students by Linguistic Funds Grouping ELs by English Proficiency Grace: [Tú escribes mejor sin nosotros (You write better without us.) No te quejes. (don’t complain) Sonia: Pa’ que escribas bonito. (so you write nicely) Felix: (speaking quickly) Shut your {language}. Sonia: Tú cállate! (Be quiet!)

Grouping ELs by Funds of Knowledge Expertise and English Speaker’s Language Attitudes Arthur: Raise taxes as high as they’ll go Sonia: (controlling the keyboard) Iris: They’ll go on strike. Sonia: Donde era? (Where is it?)

279


Figure 8. From Autonomous to Sociocultural Language Learning

8: Sophia: By prevent can::cer 9: Diego: (leans over to Sophia) Can:cer 10: Sophia: (puts her arm up to push Diego away) 11: Diego: And other 12: Sophia: And other 13: Diego: I don’t know why you gotta hate. 14: Angelo: And it protects our cells’ Eva reflected on Isabella’s mediation in the group as: … a tool for students to make connections from earlier lessons but also draw on their funds of knowledge about antioxidants related to cancer and disease fighting … [Isabella] played the role of the teacher as facilitator engaging students in their understanding about antioxidants, which I [Eva] had not provided. Students imposed their own interpretations of the new concepts covered in the readings and created ideas that made sense to them. Isabella’s guided questions in the focal

280

group provided an appropriate amount of struggle, and at times tension. (AR, pp. 52-53) Eva points to the importance of contested dialogue mediated through students’ FoK. She also noted the shifts in learner identity where novice learners become experts and vice versa. Finally, in Isabella’s guided questions (line 1), she framed? discursive tensions and “struggle” as crucial to learning mediated by peers as exemplified. This type of reflection was typical throughout the action research project. Despite these affirmative developments, the Adams teachers reverted to a more controlled curriculum and discourse style in Unit 2. While they viewed the contested discourse as important to learning, they found the loss of teacher control and authority to be daunting. Eva explained, “I’m not yet confident of this [referring to video games]. Because you are not in control…[there are] moments when you doubt yourself.” Susan agreed, “The old way can come back so quickly.”


Figure 9. From Discrete Mathematics to Numeracy

In their analysis of Unit 2, the teachers agreed that they had taken back control over the curriculum resulting in loss of student voice and agency. They cited evidence of decreased student participation, shifts in participation, and use of their complete linguistic repertoire. This realization led them to redesign unit 3 by connecting to the video games content of Unit 1 in order to leverage student expertise. The following vignette is an example of how SimCity IV mediated a third space episode of applied economics1 (Table 9, lines 1-22). This episode was representative of a third space interaction amongst students around the concept of taxation. In lines 1-10, Arthur, Sonia, Grace, and Iris, debate whether to lower or raise taxes in their virtual city. Arthur was typically positioned as an expert learner with the others novice learners. Nevertheless, in this sequence, the novice learners strongly challenge Arthur with Iris appealing to emotion (line 5), Iris appealing to authority, and Sonia categorically rejecting Arthur’s proposal to “destroy the city” (lines 10-11). In lines 13-18, Susan observed negotiation amongst the contested positions and new positions emerged through third space. Susan noted a qualitative shift in the

nature and purpose of the contestation from what she observed in previous units. The tension in Unit 3 was conceptual rather than personal. She noted how Sonia and other students used multiple languages fluidly, engaged in non-verbal forms of participation (e.g., controlling the keyboard), and assumed greater epistemic authority.

Teacher Researchers as Innovators through Constraints While the teachers at Jarman worked with an administration that was less amenable to curricular innovation, the Jarman cohort and the university research team managed to leverage funds of knowledge within the school’s official curriculum. Lourdes’s and Dana’s action research examined how they incorporated students’ funds of knowledge through extension projects for STC Microworlds, FOSS Levers and Pulleys, and FOSS Solar Energy science kits (all part of the mandated curriculum). While this was a challenge during the initial phase of the project, by Unit 2, the cohort developed strategies to open new possibilities despite the school’s restrictive policies. Dana explained that in order to develop effective

281


Table 9. Expert Script 2: Arthur: I’m being practical. 11: Arthur: Destroy the city. 19: Arthur:(takes control of keyboard (inaudible) 21: Arthur: Raise taxes as high as they’ll go

Negotiated Space

Novice Script

13: Iris: You know what we should have done [like] fifty percent taxes. 14: Grace: [No] 15: Arthur: You know what raise taxes as high as they’ll go. 16: Sonia:(controlling the keyboard) Iris: They’ll go on strike. 18: Sonia: Donde era? (Where is it?)

1: Grace: Fix it. 3: S/G: No:::: 4: Grace: (reaches for the keyboard) 5: Iris: Arthur, no. I’m going to cry. 6: Sonia: Iris. 7: Grace: See the taxes. I told you guys to leave the taxes alone. 8: Iris: (points to screen) Raise the taxes. (2sec) 9: Grace: (laughs) 10: Iris: It’s telling us to raise them. 12: Sonia: NO! 20: Sonia: No::: 22: Sonia: No::: (2sec)

extension activities from a mandated curriculum “you need to have familiarity with the topics covered so that you know where they can come together” (FG 2). In this section, we show how Lourdes and Dana leveraged students’ funds of knowledge, shifted in teacher authority through discourse analysis, and re-organized learning through multiple language use.

Leveraging Students’ Funds of Knowledge Prior to implementing Unit 1, Lourdes and Dana developed a written student survey to begin accessing their students’ funds of knowledge. They designed open-ended questions about family activities and vocations while making connections to the mandated science curriculum and maintaining fidelity to the scientific process. They started with an activity where students would conduct tests to determine water quality. The students performed trials to gather data, which ultimately led towards a fuller investigation about daily water use, conservation, and recycling disposable plastic water bottles.

282

The students initiated questions that quickly transformed the activity from “daily water use” to water quality. In her field-notes, Lourdes described an activity where students looked at organisms living in water and discussed why water could be dirty and harmful to drink. The students made connections to their experiences outside of the classroom. For example, in one conversation, students referenced trips to Mexico and talked about how their families became ill from drinking polluted water. The Jarman teachers were opportunistic and leveraged these student funds about dirty water to conduct water-testing experiments within the students’ neighborhood. Students contributed ideas regarding the water sources that could be tested as teachers guided the experiments. The analysis of Unit 1 revealed how the Jarman teachers’ consciously planned and designed activities to leverage students’ lived experiences outside of the classroom. Even in a restrictive curricular environment that mandated teachercentered instruction, the teachers re-organized science learning so that it was culturally responsive to community needs (Emdin, 2012). In developing the subsequent units, the teachers provided


students more opportunities to make authentic choices, which included more control over learning concepts, research questions, and preparation of group presentations. They analyzed the curricular goals of the unit and decided where they could open up spaces for eliciting and leveraging students’ funds of knowledge.

Analyzing Student Discourse and Shifts in Teacher Authority One of the principal agents of change and teacher learning was the use of discourse analysis to assess their own practice as well as student learning. Lourdes and Dana reflected on the impact of analyzing video recorded student discourse after Unit 1. Initially, Lourdes and Dana described much of the student interactions as purposeless and “offtask” arguing. After much analysis and discussion with the research team, the teachers concluded that seemingly “off-task” conversations were important, not only when purposeful and salient to the topic, but also because they were essential to student learning. Lourdes commented on the importance of allowing students time to explain their ideas, “[students] fought to have their ideas heard and shared what they knew especially when it connected to their lives outside of school” (AR, p. 26). In the following vignette (lines 1-26), the teachers concluded that Dana challenged students to develop their thinking: 1: Dana: What is the purpose? You said click it or ticket. What is the 2: purpose of that? 3: Thomas: Oh, that if you don’t have your seatbelt on, you get a ticket. 4: Dana: So he’s worried about an emergency, but what, what might cause 5: your car to become on fire? 6: Maria: To crash with another car. 7: Armando: Crash. 8: Dana: If you don’t have your seatbelt on and you crash do you really

9: need to worry about getting out of the car? 10: Maria: No, because maybe you are going to die. 11: Dana: [Maybe you’re not going to be able to get out of the car 12: in the first place.] 13: Armando: [But what about, but what about] 14: Thomas: I know,that’s [what happened to my dad, he couldn’t get out] 15: Armando: [But what about if you are throwing gas and] there’s a como 16: se dice una chispa de fuegito? {like a little spark of fire} 17: Daniel: Umm. 18: Thomas: Like if they put like. 19: Armando: Like a little spark of fire 20: Dana: A firecracker? Or fire? Like a cigarette bud or something 21: Armando: Yeah when you just go like that and. 22: Dana: Like a spark? 23: Armando: Yeah. And then what about if they throwing in the gas and the 24: spark? 25: Dana: Well if you’re. You shouldn’t do that. You shouldn’t do that 26: if you’re by gas. In lines 1, 4, 8, 20, and 22, the teachers noticed how Dana, instead of providing quick responses, used questions to expand student thinking. In addition, as the teachers offered more time for students to talk in small groups, they found that students used more English and asked for assistance in Spanish for unfamiliar vocabulary (e.g., line 15-16). Over time, the nature and quality of the mediation changed. By the third unit, Lourdes and Dana balanced offering guidance to the students with giving them voice and more control over their projects: “We found as we gave up control, the students took more ownership of the projects and our roles shifted from the experts to facilitators” (AR, p. 22). In analyzing student discourse, they recognized a shift in the way they mediated this discourse, noting how they increased response

283


time and missed less opportunities for students to express their ideas and develop new discursive practices, especially in regards to scientific vocabulary.

Mediating Multiple Language Use As activities were organized to mediate greater opportunities for student interaction, students were able to access a fuller range of their linguistic repertoire by drawing on multiple languages to explain their reasoning and solve problems. This was an example of a clear language ideological shift we observed in practice. Multiple languages were explicitly part of the activity design as mediational tools toward accomplishing the activities’ learning goals. The following transcript was selected by Jarman teachers (Unit 3, lines 20-35) as evidence of how students engaged in purposeful “code-switching” language practices. In this episode, Maria and Lupe worked together to construct a traffic sign. Alex tried to direct them to put the sign where he wanted on the model. Lupe, who had not transitioned to conversational English, continued to speak mostly in Spanish. Although not in the conversation transcribed, Lupe’s presentation turned the conversation to Spanish because Maria and Lupe were the members in control of building the sign (lines 20-35): 20: Alex: No, no se ponen allí. {No, don’t put it there} Not the side, the 21: middle. (motions with hands to form a column coming up from the 22: middle of the expressway model) 23: Maria: Aquí? {Here} In the middle? (motions with hands to create two 24: columns coming up from either side of the expressway) 25: Alex: Aquí {Here} in the middle. (repeats gesture of column in middle) 26: Maria: Okay, okay okay. (Ignores advice and puts sign along the side of

284

27: the expressway) 28: Alex: Allí no, allí no. {Not there, not there} 29: Maria: Aquí Lupe, vamos a poner el. {Here Lupe, we are going to put 30: it}(Continues to ignore Alex and directs her conversation 31: towards Lupe) 32: Alex: No, aquí por aquí. {No, here right here} (Gestures where he wants 33: sign) 34: Maria: That’s why: Aquí y va a quedar aquí. {Here and it will stay here} 35: (Defiantly makes final decision about sign placement.) In lines 20-22, Alex emphatically directs Maria to place the sign in the middle of the road, and he persisted with several attempts using Spanish/English code-switching accompanied with gestures to show placement (e.g., lines 25, 28, 32). Maria didn’t accept Alex’s proposition and provided an alternative placement accompanied with a limited explanation (lines 34-35). This transcript along with annotations was done by the teachers to show how multiple languages mediated peer interactions in purposeful ways. The teachers reported that students often chose to use English during whole group discussions; however, when placed in small groups, they were more likely to use multiple languages and discourses: “within the small group context, students were comfortable with both languages; however, most times the students’ L1 was used as a clarifier. Students would use Spanish to further explain their ideas or words they were uncertain of” (AR, p. 34).

Teacher Researchers Making a Difference: Scientific Activism and “Dark” FoK The Velka cohort successfully developed units that inspired students to become environmental advocates on a local and global scale. Drawing on student and family surveys, they decided on


a “Going Green” theme for all their units. Many of the students came from agricultural and rural backgrounds. Each of the units addressed real environmental problems within their lives and the kids wanted to make a change. For example, Sally, an eighth grade science teacher, developed units about Flooding and Planting, Global Warming, and Earth Hour. Lola developed similar environmentally conscious units through social studies. In this section we demonstrate shifts in language ideologies and how teacher researchers appropriated an activist stance through action research.

Shifts in Language Ideologies Through conducting action research, Sally became aware of the importance of socializing students into scientific discourse through their funds of knowledge and multiple language use. As she coded her videos, she added “scientific discourse” as a new category on her coding sheet. Sally looked for the intersection of multiple codes such as scientific discourse, multiple language use, and peer assistance to select episodes for more detailed transcription and discourse analysis. Recent flooding in the community led Sally to encourage students to discuss their experiences with flooding from their home countries as a way to contextualize a soil experiment. Sally commented, “At first they felt afraid to show you know how they did it in their culture or explained it, but now a lot of ELL were eager like ‘oh in my country we do it like this’” (FG 4). While whole class discussions were predominantly IRE from Unit 1 to Unit 3, Sally encouraged more student discourse and peer interaction during small group work. After the second unit, she explained how her language attitudes had changed: Before I was like, well, he doesn’t wanna talk. He is bilingual. That was my attitude at first. I wouldn’t force them. Which just led them/they’ll just participate when they want to. But now, I’m

pulling at them more to participate and to speak up more, and they are. (FG 2) Becoming aware of her language ideologies had implications in the classroom—from students translating for peers to Sally redesigning activities to promote writing in students’ native languages. The goal of the activity, creating posters and fliers was to raise an awareness of global warming within the community, used students’ and parents’ knowledge and languages as resources. Sally organized the groups with the purpose of writing in other languages to get the message out to members of the community, and observed how her focal students worked together. Yunus was an English dominant bilingual student who read Arabic but was less competent in writing. Hala had recently arrived to the U.S. and did not speak any English, but she was able to assist the group in writing the poster in Arabic. Up until this point, Hala had only had information translated into English for her. Sally’s design of the global warming poster activity mediated peer assistance and collaboration using multiple languages.

Appropriating an Activist Stance Lola began her action research with the goal of shifting her classroom discourse patterns from IRE to conversational discourse. As she analyzed her data from unit to unit, she documented increases in peer-to-peer assistance, use of funds of knowledge, and learner role shifts. Her original action research plan was to help students become more involved in irrigation systems. However, the student led discussion centered on the water use in their homes, and finally identified a problem of our “water crisis in the world.” As the students learned about the water crisis, they wanted to bring awareness to students in the school as well as their community. As a first step, they presented their water project to other classrooms along with activities-the activities were modified to the grade appropriate level. The next step was to plan a

285


“water awareness week” to ask students to participate in different activities to understand water crisis in the world. The students created flyers and a DVD, set up a fundraising, sent letters to the teachers, parents, and the principal, and gave a speech and daily announcement to the school community. Lola talked about how her students wanted to make a difference, “It opened the door to students becoming active participants in society as well as allowing them to promote social justice” (AR, p. 45). As she moved away from an IRE discourse pattern, Lola relinquished her control of power in the classroom. In her unit reports and action report, she cited how self-reflection became part of her everyday practices, describing her role as a facilitator and a learner: “My role as teacher was geared towards facilitator… Unit 2 was ninety percent student directed” (Individual Report, Unit 2). Lola discursively constructed students’ social identities as knowledgeable students who are capable of teaching others: “Remember, everything that you find out, you are teaching rest of us about it, including me… You are setting up this whole lesson based on what information you found out” (Transcript, Unit 1.3). The teachers at Poplar school exhibited a range of identities. While most teachers connected with sociocultural ideas, especially FoK, the depth of scientific connections hinged on content expertise and ability to leverage “dark” funds of knowledge (Zipin, 2009). The unique challenge at Poplar school was that many of the students were intimately connected with gang life, racial conflict, and crime outside of school. These “dark” funds constituted a challenge for scientific inquiry for multiple reasons, and content expertise was an essential tool for developing robust activities through dark funds. Mona was a science teacher with a college degree in engineering who was very successful at leveraging these funds for science. Mona initially had a limited view of teaching academic content through students’ FoK. She also wasn’t convinced about the usefulness of

286

discourse analysis. Initially?, she procedurally tallied aspects of classroom discourse but fell short of incorporating such research practices as part of her teaching. However, Mona began to show shifts after Unit 1. Her observations of her own IRE discourse pattern revealed how students were not developing deeper conceptual understandings of mathematics or science. As a result, one of the biggest changes she made in her own practice was to “ask questions” in order to mediate a “conversational discourse pattern” (AR, p. 48). Mona repositioned herself as a novice learner and the students as experts. This was uncomfortable but a risk she increasingly became willing to take because she felt it was “essential to learning.” She asked open-ended, higher-order questions to which students did not have direct answers in order to mediate greater peer collaboration. The students became “scientific researchers” of their communities. They analyzed, tallied, and graphed crime statistics data in their neighborhoods. They examined reasons for joining gangs and read relevant articles about illegal drugs and their negative effects. Survey results opened up new areas of research as the students drew parallels with their neighborhoods. The discussions became contested and nuanced as they challenged essentialist notions of urban spaces. For example, some students claimed that their neighborhood had a rich history and did not witness violence due to “all the old people living on [their] block.” These students made their claims using data such as online statistics and their personally created demographic graphs (Figure 10). The cases of teacher researchers presented above illustrate similarities and variance amongst teachers. Each teacher researcher ultimately took ownership of key cultural historical ideas, engaged in the rigors of discourse analysis, and made connections to mathematics and science practices. The demonstrated ability to practice research AND integrate content areas with FoK is what distinguished teacher researchers from inquiry


teachers. In the following section, we explore the ethnographic inquiry teacher’s identity.

Ethnographic Inquiry Teacher: Saving the Curriculum or Saving Lives All of the teachers in the project needed to enter students’ lives in non-school contexts to some degree. It was a requirement and an essential characteristic of our professional development. However, there was significant variation in the extent to which teachers were committed to this type of inquiry. Ethnographic inquiry teachers demonstrated an ability to be immersed in the lives of students as well as foreground their nonschool epistemologies and social practices. They also adeptly used ethnographic methods to document the lives of students; however, in contrast to teacher researchers, they did not successfully leverage FoK to develop mathematics and science literacy practices. We illustrate this phenomenon with Ana, a teacher from Poplar School. Ana was a teacher who was adept at accessing FoK, especially “dark” funds, but struggled with identifying scientific funds or leveraging FoK to mediate mathematics and scientific learning goals. Unlike her Poplar colleague, Mona, Ana considered her knowledge of mathematics and science to be “extremely limited.” As previously mentioned, Poplar school was a community imbued with “dark” FoK which had inherent challenges for designing school curriculum in general, let alone accessing science and mathematics funds. The Poplar teachers began their action research with a community mapping activity. This was intended to promote the scientific practices of observation and data recording as well as establish a baseline for accessing scientific funds. They mapped and graphed structural elements of their block such as houses, fire hydrants, and trees. When the students shared their findings from these activities, they also described gang activities, drug deals, trespassing, vandalism, shootings, and

robberies found in their community. The legitimacy of these funds for school was a contested discussion. Only Mona and Ana were amenable to building learning opportunities through “dark” funds. Although the university research team was supportive of this line of inquiry, we were novices as well in terms of how to leverage dark funds for science learning. Each teacher documented in their journals personal discussions with students during class, lunch, and after-school about their lives outside of school with much of the content creating moral dilemmas. While there was variation amongst the teachers in their willingness to engage “dark” funds, they collectively explored these despite their personal levels of comfort.

Learning to be an Ethnographic Inquiry Teacher While all of the teachers had some discomfort with incorporating “dark” funds, Ana persisted to have her students teach her about contentious issues in their neighborhood. As students shared their stories, other teachers tried to maintain control of the classroom by limiting the stories students would share and redirecting the conversation back to content objectives, but Ana embraced, with some trepidation, these funds even if she struggled to connect to content. The ongoing struggle to balance student and teacher participation caused Ana to reexamine her stances regarding appropriate classroom talk. Ana explained the urgency of providing a space for student talk: I was observing the information my kids were providing and trying to see which means did I have to help them… come to some kind of a safe zone where they can communicate those issues whereas other classroom when rigid with curriculum kids can’t express themselves and allow themselves to be themselves in the classroom. (FG 3) Alarmed by the amount of criminal activity and violence their fourth and sixth graders were

287


Figure 10. Sample “race pie graph” (zipskinny.com)

experiencing, Ana felt compelled to use students’ funds as an opportunity to help them make informed decisions about their lives. The stories shared by the students were rich, profound, and unsettling. For Ana, especially, they sparked a sense of social obligation; however, finding ways to make connections to curricular language, mathematics, and science objectives remained a challenge. I take more of a role as counseling them more than I do actually being an enforcer you have to do this academically … being more of a counselor was a moment of session where they got to let out what they felt.” (FG 3) In an effort to open up spaces for conversation and empowering dialogue, Ana relinquished control of the classroom. It seems that Ana relinquished too much of her teacher authority in order to privilege student voice and integrate their funds with academic content. In fact, she considered her teacher identity to be at odds with helping students navigate personal and social problems. She began to refer to herself as a “counselor” who provided a space for students to talk about issues and concerns while collectively researching possible solutions.

288

After implementing the community project, she let go of scripting her own lesson plans and became a listener of her students as she “counseled” and documented their problems. She wrote, “A teacher has to be okay with relinquishing her power as well as being able to allow for her curriculum to be altered” (AR, p. 53). The majority of the lessons became “therapeutic discussions” surrounding “dark” funds with little connection to the original “academic” objectives. Ana’s ethnographic commitment and immersion in the context of her students’ lives was an overwhelming burden. As a research team, we also struggled with the boundaries of such advocacy, especially as it diverged from our curricular objectives. Ana became heavily entrenched in her new “counselor” identity. In the following episode (lines 1-12), Ana and Rodrigo discussed Alberto’s decision to join a gang. Rodrigo offered a powerful rationale (lines 1-2) for why Alberto joined a gang stating “That’s because his parents don’t fill his heart and he finds that spot in the gangs.” Ana pushed his thinking with questions (lines 3, 6, 8) to establish the need to open communication with parents. In effect, she had modeled this in her classroom since many of the children felt


unable to communicate about “dark” funds with their parents. 1: Rodrigo: That’s because his parents don’t fill his heart and he finds 2: that spot in the gangs. 3: Ana: Why do you feel that way? 4: Rodrigo: Because I don’t see what’s the point, like if you want you can 5: communicate 6: Ana: Communicate with people who are joining? 7: Rordigo: Like why don’t they just explain to them talking 8: Ana: Like why aren’t they talking to their parents and explaining. 9: Rodrigo: So they have a nice long talk knowing why and maybe they have 10: reasons 11: Ana: Okay, so you feel kids should take the initiative and talk 12: to parents on something that is bugging them. For Ana, saving students’ lives became a higher priority than academic rigor or funding ways to connect dark funds to mathematics and science. As Ana reflected on her authority in the classroom, and relinquished control, she opened up “therapeutic spaces.” This was a goal that the entire research team had to re-consider in light of the “dark” funds narratives. While balancing “therapeutic” spaces with academic content was challenging for Ana, her case illustrates the culturally sustaining possibilities of a committed ethnographic inquiry teacher.

Teacher Resistance and Procedural Display: An Essential Learning Identity Every teacher in the project struggled and in many instances, resisted various aspects of the project. In most cases, whether the resistance was conceptual, methodological, or personal, the teachers

and research team together moved through these points of contention and ultimately implemented a negotiated curriculum. This was a function of the project’s flexible design and shifts in mediation. However, Vanessa and Mai struggled throughout the entire project to implement the action research. Here, we use the term “struggle” in a positive sense to emphasize individual agency and autonomy in learning. While most teachers appropriated many conceptual and methodological aspects of the project, Vanessa and Mai had strong ideological resistance to key conceptual ideas and its relevance to EL pedagogy. In particular, the ideas of funds of knowledge and third space were particularly challenging given their propensity to fostering a symmetric power relationship between teachers and students. Vanessa and Mai were reluctant to relinquish their epistemological and pedagogic authority in the classroom. They justified their reluctance with powerful arguments and evidence.

An Ethnographic Inquiry Teacher on Her Own Terms Vanessa viewed students’ funds as a distraction to students’ learning. She described how the English-Only policy in California shaped her view of language learning: I focus more so with English because they are getting tested in English instead of Spanish. Not only that, I do come from California where there is no bilingual program. And to support bilingual makes it hard to make it for me to get back into that thought. (FG 1) Vanessa was pragmatic and had adopted an assimilationist language ideology from her California experience. She limited non-English linguistic funds and student voice vis a vis “dark” funds since it might tacitly legitimize them. She said, “[I] don’t want to promote the topic of gangs and have students take the wrong interpretation and believe it’s okay” (AR, p. 40). In her action report,

289


she reflected on her views of teacher authority and third space: “I did not want to use third space. I do not believe it, it is nonsense talk” (p. 42). Although she engaged students in a community walk, she was highly selective and acted as a gate-keeper for allowable and non-allowable knowledge. She changed the nature of the activity by selecting what she saw as “non-controversial topics” to research such as sewers, demographics, light poles, and trash. Vanessa continued to regulate student choice with community problems and solutions in Unit 2. As students created a survey for distribution to other grade levels, she controlled the topics to ensure that gangs and drugs were not listed as item responses. As such, her students identified cracked sidewalks to be the most pressing issue and came up with hypothetical solutions to solve it. For the final unit, Vanessa took students on a field trip to the downtown area where students were fascinated by the various ethnicities in the city. Vanessa based Unit 3 on her students’ interests, not funds of knowledge, to have them choose an ethnic group found in their community to research the ‘heroes and holidays’ of that culture. Thus, she adopted a more static and neutral approach to funds of knowledge that was akin to the “heroes and holidays” approach to multicultural education (Banks and Banks, 1993). While Vanessa displayed some ethnographic tendency, she refused to adopt an emic approach to the students’ lived experience. She maintained her role as a distant observer who would only consider perspectives that were amenable to her. The community walk represented her personal compromise with the demands of the project. It was a negotiation between the project’s push to be more ethnographic and her firm ideological and epistemic opposition. An ethnographic inquiry teacher takes uncomfortable “semiotic” risks and challenges the status quo. While Vanessa appears to adhere to the broader status quo, her resistance to the project’s goals and her ultimate negotiation, however limited, was a powerful demonstration of a typical stage of teacher learning from a cultural

290

historical point of view: resistance and procedural display.

Clash of Learning Ideologies Mai and Vanessa practiced didactic instruction and articulated a linear model of development. Mai argued that kindergarten students need direct instruction and the sociocultural view learning was untenable. In her view, the students were simply not ready for the types of tasks we were expecting them to do, “I have to sit there with them and guide them because at their age, they need more guidance. You need a lot of scaffolding. You have to be there. To leave them alone and just for them to explore… that’s not going to work” (FG 1). Thus, development preceded learning and five-year olds were not capable of inductive learning. The essence of sociocultural theory is that a teacher should mediate the zone of proximal development by identifying the distance between what the child can do independently and what they can do with assistance. Mai’s notion of scaffolding was procedurally driven inundated with “nextstep” forms of assistance. Children were cast as passive learners who were developmentally not ready for greater autonomy and self-regulation. Learning was conceptualized as primarily driven by biological predispositions and innate talent. She added, “Maybe if all of my students were in gifted classes, the results would have been more dynamic and advanced” (FG 1). Mai wrote extensively about the roots of her ideological conflict with aspects of the project’s cultural historical view of learning. She was particularly concerned with “students as expert learners” and relinquishing teacher control. She described how both her parents were teachers in Vietnam, leading her to view “teachers [as] in control and planning out the lesson according to what they wanted the students to learn” (AR, p. 35). Mai expressed being “uncomfortable,” “unfamiliar,” and “doubt[ful]” with re-positioning students as expert facilitators of whole class or


even small group discussions. Her personal conflict was severe enough where she said, “I was not sure if this was possible to do and had my doubts as to whether I should continue with this program or not. After many discussions with my cohort, I decided to stay and finish the project” (AR, p. 36). While Mai was deeply resistant to the core principles guiding the project’s view of learning, her cohort convinced her to negotiate a type of procedural identity where she would adapt a minimalist approach the project, fulfill its requirements, and not really assimilate any of its values, especially her view of children as passive learners lacking agency. It was an identity that was evident for two units; however, during the final unit, the children showed an alternative view. During the final unit, How Plants Grow, although Mai was concerned with the noise level, she finally allowed students space to talk in small groups. As she eavesdropped to many conversations, she was surprised to find that most of the students were discussing on-task topics: I was very uncomfortable that the classroom was loud and I wasn’t teaching them as I normally do. After ten minutes, although it seemed like forever, the students came back as whole group and discussed what they knew about how plants grow. As I called on each group to see what they knew about the subject, I was surprised to see how much information they gave me. (AR, p. 37) She documented shifts in participation and the quality of work. As individual students presented their posters, the class asked questions and provided peer critique. Hence, Mai experienced a shift in teacher-authority and a conversational discourse style emerged. She identified the following episode as an example of Jerry presenting his drawing for peer critique (lines 1-31): 01: Jerry: I see the water fountain. 02: Adam: Bi::g wa::ter fountain! 03: T: Where is this water fountain?

04: Jerry: (Shrugging his shoulders) 05: T: You don’t know? (Looking at the class) Questions. 06: Adam: That’s a big water fountain. 07: T: That’s a big water fountain. Right. Adam! Alexis! Sit like 08: a pretzel. Everyone take a breath and sit like a pretzel 09: right now. 10: Sam: I have a question. Where is him? 11: T: (Facing to Jerry) Where are you? 12: Jerry: (Shrugging his shoulders) 13: T: You don’t know? 14: Allen: (Waving his hand) 15: T: (Facing mic to Allen) 16: Allen: Um Is that in [NAME OF CITY]? 17: T: (Facing to Jerry) Is this in [NAME OF CITY]? 18: Jerry: (Shaking his head) 19: T: Where is it? 20: Jerry: (Silent) 21: T: (Taking the drawing) Okay. That’s it. 22: Max: Wait! I got a question. 23: T: (Giving it back to Jerry) Sorry, he got a question. 24: ax: Maybe you should slide down the water. And then, we can 25: see. 26: T: Okay. So, he want you to slide down the water. So, you 27: gotta add yourself sliding down the water. 28: Max: In the middle though. 29: T: In the middle. 30: Jack: Don’t fo:rget putting your hands like this (Raising both 31: arms high up) Up until Unit 3, Mai strictly adhered to an IRE discourse pattern whereby she asked the questions, evaluated, and students provided short responses. However, toward the end of Unit 3, there were more peer-to-peer conversations. For example, in the transcript above, Sam and Allen asked questions to Jerry (lines 10 and 16). Furthermore,

291


Max provided suggestions to improve the picture drawing (lines 22, 24-25), and Jack expands on Max’s point (lines 30-31). These peer critiques were a new practice in the later portion of Unit 3 that were not present in Units 1 or 2. Mai shared some changes in her awareness and practice during the Unit 3 focus group, thesis writing process, and final presentation.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS In this chapter we have aimed to show how inservice teachers working in collaboration with university researchers developed new insights into their own practice. Consistent with current research on professional development, our longitudinal and embedded approach to teacher development focused on positioning teachers as active learners who were encouraged to be designers of their own, as well as their students’ learning, while working together as a cohort (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2004). This model of professional development focused on what was happening in the teachers’ classrooms, the students’ communities, as well as the educational research community. This approach to action research was not completely open-ended or “teacher-driven” in that the research team articulated clear theoretical approaches such as CHAT, funds of knowledge, and third space as well as the methods for transforming beliefs and practices for ELs in urban schools. The integration of language and STEM content was another critical principle focal point. Thus, the model of action research presented here was purposefully designed to foster theorizing amongst teachers as the principal agents of change. The interactions with teachers were designed to be dialogic, with teachers posing questions, collecting and analyzing the data, and re-organizing learning of and for ELs. According to Razfar (2013), “while a dialogic activity system can lead to contradictory views, this type of meaning-making tension is essential for learning” (p. 179). Contesta-

292

tion was welcomed and served as the impetus for discussion, convergence of ideas, and generation of new practices. Significant to development for all participants, however, was how contestation, tension, and struggle were used between teachers and students and among students to achieve the objects of activities. Sometimes the outcomes were not the desired ones as planned by the research team. Several teachers chose to avoid contestation, tension, and struggle and chose to appropriate resistant/procedural identities to aspects of the project. While these identities may seem counter to project objectives, their existence was evidence of the symmetrical footing that characterized the relationship between teachers and university researchers. This was perhaps an unintended outcome of the joint action research project, but a significant insight nonetheless. Rather than casting these teachers in a deficit light vis a vis predetermined project goals, the agency exhibited by these teachers served to mediate changes in theoretical constructs and methodological approaches. It may have seemed that these teachers “were not able” to fully appropriate the teacher researcher identity we were expecting. In fact, through the process we collectively recognized the importance of naming tensions while remaining committed to the process even if expectations were not fulfilled within a predetermined timeline. Ultimately, teachers like Mai, while maintaining a strong resistant stance, became aware of ideas and the possibilities of transformative learning. The research team also learned through Mai’s resistance the complexities of making changes in classroom discourse patterns, utilizing funds of knowledge, integrating content with language, and shifts in teacher authority. Resistance in teacher preparation and professional development for second language learners is not new; however, it can be a constructive site of learning, especially when the model of professional development is grounded in theoretical perspectives that value resistance and contestation as mediums of learning (Levine, Howard, and Moss, 2014).


The findings presented in this paper have several implications for university-school partnerships, teacher education programs, and professional development. Our implications are relevant for both U.S. schools navigating mandates in the Common Core and NGSS era, as well as international contexts aiming to improve teacher professional development through university-school partnerships. First, it is important to recognize the multiple and often conflicting interests teachers must “negotiate” in order to fulfill their commitments as teachers while maintaining a sense of professional agency. In this work, the curricular activities were organized to satisfy the expectations of multiple constituents who sometimes had divergent interests. The teachers continuously had to: 1) negotiate mandated school expectations that were often driven by state and district mandates; 2) negotiate expectations of the university research team; and 3) consider their own philosophical positions vis a vis that of their students. Second, as embedded researchers of teacher practice, it is vital to maintain flexibility and develop a sense of solidarity with teachers in order to optimize professional development through all the challenges. As Troiano (2012) demonstrates, switching the venue of study groups has a profound impact on rapport building, solidarity, and ultimately the depth of engagement with theory and methods.

CONCLUSION The negotiated curriculum serves as a metaphor for teacher learning as they mediate multiple fronts of tension, contestation, and expectations. The teacher researcher identity empowers teachers across these spaces long after their formal ties to the university program. One of the former Velka teachers stated during a guest lecture to a new cohort of action researchers, “The theoretical and methodological tools have been empowering for me long after my time in the project” (Velka Teacher, Guest Lecture, 2014). Several teachers

from this cohort have continued to mentor new teachers and deepen their researcher identity. We have also continued to study and build this community of teacher researchers serving ELs in the larger metropolitan area. This type of longitudinal study of teacher professional development is critically needed to see how teacher education research impacts teaching and promote growths within their students and in schools (Zeichner, 2003). This is particularly urgent now in a time when teacher education programs are under pressure from politically motivated interest groups to demonstrate their impact on teacher preparation (Fuller, 2013).

REFERENCES Banks, J. (1993). Approaches to multicultural curriculum reform. In J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Bouillion, L., & Gomez, L. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878–898. doi:10.1002/tea.1037 Charity Hudley, A. H., & Mallinson, C. (2011). Understanding English language variation in U.S. schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2004). Practitioner inquiry, knowledge, and university culture. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (Vol. 1, pp. 817–869). Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

293


Cuenca, A., Schmeichelb, M., Butlerd, B. M., Dinkelman, T., & Nichols, J. R. (2011). Creating a “third space” in student teaching: Implications for the university supervisor’s status as outsider. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7), 1068– 1077. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.05.003 Dworin, J. E. (2006). The family stories project: Using funds of knowledge for writing. The Reading Teacher, 59(6), 510–520. doi:10.1598/RT.59.6.1 Emdin, C. (2012). Reality pedagogy and urban science education: Towards a comprehensive understanding of the urban science classroom. In B.J. Fraser. K.G. Tobin, & C.J. McRobbie (Ed.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 59–68). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_5 Eppley, K., Shannon, P., & Gilbert, L. K. (2011). “Did you like living in a trailer? Why or why not?”: Discourse and the third space in a rural pen pal exchange. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 289–297. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.011 Fitts, S. (2009). Exploring third space in a duallanguage setting: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Latinos and Education, 8(2), 87–104. doi:10.1080/15348430902750668 Flessner, R. (2009). Working toward a third space in the teaching of elementary mathematics. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 425–446. doi:10.1080/09650790903093334 Flores, N., & Schissel, J. L. (2014). Dynamic bilingualism as the norm: Envisioning a heteroglossic approach to standards-based reform. TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 454–479. doi:10.1002/tesq.182 Fraser-Abder, P., Doria, J. A., Yang, J., & DeJesus, A. (2010). Using funds of knowledge in an ethnically concentrated classroom environment to teach nutrition. Science Activities, 47(4), 141–150. doi:10.1080/00368121003642204

294

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder & Herder. Fuller, E. J. (2013). Shaky methods, shaky motives: A critique of the National Council of Teacher Quality’s review of teacher preparation programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(1), 63–77. doi:10.1177/0022487113503872 Gee, J. P. (2010). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York, NY: Routledge. Gonzalez, N., & Moll, L. C. (2002). Cruzando el Puente: Building bridges to funds of knowledge. Educational Policy, 16(4), 623–641. doi:10.1177/0895904802016004009 Levine, T., Howard, E., & Moss, D. (2014). Preparing classroom teachers to succeed with second language learners: Lessons from a faculty learning community. New York, NY: Routledge. Lewin, G. W. (Ed.). (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Martin, S. D., Snow, J. L., & Franklin Torrez, C. A. (2011). Navigating the terrain of third space: Tensions with/in relationships in school-university partnerships. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(3), 299–311. doi:10.1177/0022487110396096 McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice. New York, NY: Routledge. Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrilo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third spaces in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and Discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70. doi:10.1598/RRQ.39.1.4 Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Qualitative Issues in Educational Research, 32(2), 132–141.


Nelson, T. H., Slavit, D., Perkins, M., & Hathorn, T. (2008). A culture of collaborative inquiry: Learning to develop and support professional learning communities. Teachers College Record, 110(6), 1269–1303.

Razfar, A. (2013). Multilingual mathematics: Learning through contested spaces of meaning making. International Multilingual Research Journal, 7(3), 175–196. doi:10.1080/19313152 .2012.665204

Next Generation Science Standards. (2013). All standards, all students: Making the next generation science standards accessible to all students. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/ sites/ngss/files/Appendix%20D%20Diversity%20 and%20Equity%206-14-13.pdf

Razfar, A., & Rumenapp, J. C. (2011). Developmental context(s): Mediating learning through language ideologies. Human Development, 54(1), 241–269. doi:10.1159/000330296

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy a needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. doi:10.3102/0013189X12441244 Razfar, A. (2005). Language ideologies in practice: Repair & classroom discourse. Linguistics and Education, 16(4), 404–424. doi:10.1016/j. linged.2006.04.001 Razfar, A. (2007). Transforming literacy, science, and math through action research (LSciMAct). Grant funded by U.S. Department of Education. Razfar, A. (2011a). Action research in urban schools: Empowerment, transformation, and challenges. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(4), 25–44. Razfar, A. (2011b). Ideological challenges in classroom discourse: A sociocritical perspective of English learning in an urban school. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 8(4), 344–377. doi :10.1080/15427587.2011.615621 Razfar, A. (2012). Discoursing mathematics: Using discourse analysis to develop a sociocultural & critical perspective of mathematics education. The Mathematics Educator, 22(1), 39–62.

Riojas-Cortez, M., & Flores, B. (2009). Supporting preschoolers’ social development in school through funds of knowledge. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 7(2), 185–199. doi:10.1177/1476718X09102651 Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Roth, W. M., & Yew-Jin, L. (2007, June 01). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232. doi:10.3102/0034654306298273 Siegel, J. (2006). Language ideologies and the education of speakers of marginalized language varieties: Adopting a critical awareness approach. Linguistics and Education, 17(1), 157–174. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2006.08.002 Silverstein, M. (1996). Monoglot ‘standard’ in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In D. Brenneis & R. Macauley (Eds.), The matrix of language: Contemporary linguistic anthropology (pp. 284–306). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Silverstein, M. (2003). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language & Communication, 23(3), 193–229. doi:10.1016/ S0271-5309(03)00013-2

295


Smythe, S., & Toohey, K. (2009). Investigating sociohistorical contexts and practices through a community scan: A Canadian Punjabi-Sikh example. Language and Education, 23(1), 37–57. doi:10.1080/09500780802152887

Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 1–20, 89–99. doi:10.1177/0022487109347671

Troiano, B. (2012). Developing professional teacher researchers: Transforming language learning through discourse analysis (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Zipin, L. (2009). Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy: Exploring boundaries between lifeworlds and schools. Discourse (Abingdon), 30(1), 317–331. doi:10.1080/01596300903037044

Upadhyay, B. R. (2005). Using students’ lived experiences in an urban science classroom: An elementary school teachers’ thinking. Science Education, 90(1), 94–110. doi:10.1002/sce.20095 Velez-Ibanez, C. G., & Greenberg, J. B. (1992). Formation and transformation of funds of knowledge among U.S.-Mexican households. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 23(4), 313–335. doi:10.1525/aeq.1992.23.4.05x1582v Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wells, G. (Ed.). (2001). Action, talk, and text: Learning and teaching through inquiry. New York: Teacher College Press. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Wiseman, A. (2011). Powerful students, powerful words: Writing and learning in a poetry workshop. Literacy, 2(45), 70–77. doi:10.1111/j.17414369.2011.00586.x Woolard, K. A. (1998). Introduction: Language as a field of inquiry. In B. B. Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard, & P. V. Kroskrity (Eds.), Language ideologies: Practice and theory (pp. 3–50). New York: Oxford University Press.

296

ADDITIONAL READING Atweh, B., Forgasz, H., & Nebres, B. (2001). Sociocultural research in mathematics education: An international perspective. New York, NY: Routledge. Barwell, R. (Ed.). (2009). Multilingualism in mathematics classrooms: Global perspectives. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters. Bevin, B., Bell, P., Stevens, R., & Razfar, A. (Eds.). (2013). Learning about out-of-school time (LOST) learning opportunities (Vol. 23). New York, NY: Springer. Brown, B. A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 810–834. doi:10.1002/tea.20228 Chval, K. B., & Pinnow, R. (2010). Preservice teachers’ assumptions about Latino/a English language learners. Journal of Teaching for Excellence and Equity in Mathematics, 2(1), 6–12. Freire, P. (1970). Cultural action for freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119–169.


Guitiérrez, K. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164. doi:10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3 Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511611834 Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303. doi:10.1080/10749039909524733 Gutiérrez, K. D., Morales, P. Z., & Martinez, D. C. (2009). Re-mediating literacy: Culture,difference, and learning for students from nondominant communities. Review of Research in Education, 33(1), 213–245. doi:10.3102/0091732X08328267 Gutiérrez, R. (2002). Beyond essentialism: The complexity of language in teaching mathematics to Latino students. American Educational Research Journal, 39(4), 1047–1088. doi:10.3102/000283120390041047 Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold. Irvine, J., & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In P. Kroskrity (Ed.), Regimes of language: Ideologies, polities, and identities (pp. 35–83). Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press, James Currey, Oxford. Kroskrity, P. V. (2010). Language ideologies: Evolving perspectives. In J.-O. Östman, J. Verschueren, & J. Jaspers (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics highlights: Society and language use (pp. 192–211). Herndon, VA: John Benjamins Publishing. Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Moje, E. (2000). “To be part of the story”: The literacy practices of gangsta adolescents. Teachers College Record, 102(3), 651–691. doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00071 Moll, L. (2000). Inspired by Vygotsky: ethnographic experiments in education. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry (pp. 256–268). New York: Cambridge University Press. Razfar, A. (2012). Narrating beliefs: A language ideologies approach to teacher beliefs. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 43(1), 61–81. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1492.2011.01157.x Razfar, A., & Rumenapp, J. C. (2013). Applying linguistics in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. New York, NY: Routledge. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press. Street, B., Baker, D., & Tomlin, A. (2005). Navigating numeracies: Home/School numeracy practices. London, UK: Springer. doi:10.1007/14020-3677-9 Street, B. V., & Lefstein, A. (2007). Literacy: An advanced resource book. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203463994 Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University. Wortham, S. (2003). Accomplishing identity in participant-denoting discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 13(2), 1–22. doi:10.1525/ jlin.2003.13.2.189 Zeichner, K. M. (2005). A research agenda for teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp. 737–759). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

297


KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Action Research: Research conducted for the purpose of addressing real problems in education and developing transformative solutions. CHAT: Cultural Historical Activity Theory is a sociocultural theory of learning and human development that is premised on how people learn through socially organized activities and the use of mediational tools. English Learners (EL): The designated term for second language learners in the United States. Funds of Knowledge (FoK): The non-school epistemologies of learners. Originally used to refer to household knowledge, but now includes students’ life-worlds and experiences. Language Ideologies: The beliefs and attitudes about the nature, function, and purpose of language in everyday interactions. There is an emphasis on beliefs as practice. Embedded Professional Development: A continuous, context driven form of professional development where university and school partnerships are based on mutual trust and deep engagement in solving collective problems. STEM Education: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics education. Third Space: It is a unique space of meaningmaking that emerges through conflict, difference, and disagreement to create a new understanding or identity. It explains the uniqueness of each actor or context as a “hybrid.”

ENDNOTE

1

298

Transcript conventions adapted from Razfar (2005) bold=emphasis,:=vowel elongation, [=overlapping talk

How to Submit Proof Corrections Using Adobe ...

How to Submit Proof Corrections Using Adobe ...

Suggest Documents