school language policies. by tracey tokuhama-espinosa. rome. april 2016

School Language Policies: How Informed Choices Can Enhance Not Only Cultural Adaptation and Communication, but also Cognitive Potential

Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa, Ph.D.

tracey.tokuhama@gmail.com

www.traceytokuhama.com

April 2016

ECIS, Rome

Background ¤ Interdisciplinary researcher in neuroscience, cognitive

psychology and education (cultural anthropology and linguistics).

¤ Boston University: BA, BS, magna cum laude

¤ Harvard University: Master’s in International Educational Development

¤ Capella University: Ph.D. In Professional Studies in Education (Mind, Brain and Education Science)

¤ Professor, Harvard University Extension School: Psych 1609 “The Neurobiology of Learning: An Introduction to Mind, Brain, Health and Education”

¤ OECD: Member of the expert panel on Teachers New Pedagogical Knowledge based on contributions from Technology and Neuroscience

¤ Former Director of the Teaching and Learning Institute at the Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

¤ Former Dean of Education at the Universidad de las Américas, Quito, Ecuador

¤ Author of six books and dozens of peer review articles on Mind, Brain, and Education science, multilingualism, sense and meaning in classroom planning and design, standards and learning profiles.

¤ Teacher at all levels of education (K-University) with more than 26 years of experience in 28 countries.

M a k i n g

C l a s s r o o m s B e t t e r

L E S S O N S

from the

C O G N I T I V E

R E V O L U T I O N

that

T R A N S F O R M

our T E A C H I N G

Today:

1.  Demographics and Definition ¤  Current Challenges For Schools and Languages

¤  What Do Language Policies Do?

2.  The Role of Languages in Shaping Brain Potential ¤  The Bilingual and Multilingual Edge

¤  Levels of Language (written versus spoken)

3.  Language Policies in Your Context ¤  “Problems Related to Languages in My School”

¤  (Partial) Solutions to Language Problems Through Technology

¤  Successful Models

¤  Your School’s Language Policy

Demographics and Definitions

Current Challenges: True in your setting?

1.  More and more schools require at least one foreign language for graduation, but not all schools have an adequate official language policy.

2.  Students’ origins vary more widely than in the past.

3.  Changing demographics lead to shifting (language) priorities.

4.  ?

Language Policies at Different Levels

¤  Country

¤  Community

¤  School

¤  Classroom

Language Policies at Different Levels

¤  Country

¤  Community

¤  School

¤  Classroom

What School Languages Policies Do

1.  Clarify individual roles (what the family does and what the school offers)

2.  Highlight priorities (how the school languages are managed time- and curriculum-wise within the setting)

3.  Display the school’s vision, use and understanding of the role of language in intellectual development.

In the Past

¤  In the past language policies in multilingual settings were focused primary on ¤  Leveraging power (“high status” versus “low status” languages

¤  Equity issues (school achievement impacted by home versus school language) and determining whose responsibility it is to provide sufficient opportunities to learn the academic language

¤  Methodological issues (“English-only” versus bilingual transitional versus other models)

Bastardas-Boada, Albert (2002). "World language policy in the era of globalization: Diversity and intercommunication from the 'complexity' perspective", Barcelona, Spain: Noves SL. Revista de sociolingüística (Barcelona); Spolsky, Bernard (2012). The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy. Cambridge University Press.

“Typical Programs”

1.  Immersion: These programs provide no specific language support: students are “immersed” in the language of instruction within mainstream classrooms.

2.  Immersion with systematic language support: Students are taught in the mainstream classroom, but they receive specified periods of instruction aimed at increasing proficiency in the language of instruction over a period of time.

3.  Immersion with a preparatory phase: Students participate in a preparatory program before making the transition to mainstream classes.

4.  Transitional bilingual: Students initially learn in their native language before teaching gradually shifts to the language of instruction.

5.  Maintenance bilingual: Students receive significant amounts of instruction in their native language; programs aim to develop proficiency both in the native and the second language.

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

Most Common

1.  Immersion: These programs provide no specific language support: students are “immersed” in the language of instruction within mainstream classrooms.

2.  Immersion with systematic language support: Students are taught in the mainstream classroom, but they receive specified periods of instruction aimed at increasing proficiency in the language of instruction over a period of time.

3.  Immersion with a preparatory phase: Students participate in a preparatory program before making the transition to mainstream classes.

4.  Transitional bilingual: Students initially learn in their native language before teaching gradually shifts to the language of instruction.

5.  Maintenance bilingual: Students receive significant amounts of instruction in their native language; programs aim to develop proficiency both in the native and the second language.

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

1.  “First, they have systematic programs with explicit standards and requirements in place” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

http://www.performanceinpeople.co.uk/blog/setting-explicit-standards/?f=Company%20News

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

2.  “Second, they have curricula that may be determined at the local level but that are based on centrally developed key curriculum documents, including language development frameworks and progress benchmarks” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

http://www.clt-net.com/icwe/corporatelanguagetraining/CEF.Info.htm

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

3.  “Third, there are high standards for the program so students acquire language skills in the context of the mainstream curriculum and can integrate into the appropriate level of instruction” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

http://slideplayer.com/slide/696007/

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

4.  “Fourth, they have time‐intensive programs,” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

O'Neill, J. (2000). SMART goals, SMART schools. Educational Leadership,57(5), 46-50.

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

5.  “Fifth, their programs tend to offer continued support in both primary and lower secondary school,” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

6.  “Sixth, their teachers who instruct second‐language learners have received specialized training either during their initial studies or through in‐service training. Some teachers have completed postgraduate degrees in teaching the language of instruction as a second language,” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005

Most Successful Programs: Seven Characteristics

7.  “Finally, their teachers of second‐language learners tend to cooperate with class teachers to ensure they meet the needs of immigrant students,” (p.7).

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005.

Least Successful Programs

¤  “In countries with large differences in student performance, the language support programs tend to be less systematic. If programs exist, they may only be available at the primary level,” (p.7).

¤  Little additional language support

¤  No explicit curriculum framework

¤  No time limit

¤  Little or no teacher training or certification for teaching second language learners.

¤  No long-term support: Systems that don’t offer systematic support (Kindergarten through secondary)

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005.

Exemplar Structures

¤  Constant re-assessment to confirm need and progress (e-portfolios)

¤  Individual Teaching Plan for each student (personalized goals and realistic trajectories)

¤  Additional services (special instruction in language acquisition; writing; in-class and/or after school assistance)

¤  School support to teachers related to student language needs

¤  Schools document services and progress

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005.

Exemplar Structures

¤  Schools maintain a language audit of their students and know their needs.

¤  Choose and invest in efficient, systematic, and effective models of language support at all education levels. ¤  Phases: reception, transition and integration (preparatory

course)

¤  Ensure that the programs have guiding principles, goals and standards, and benchmarks for measuring progress.

¤  Train (all) teachers in second‐language acquisition (“All teachers are language teachers”)

Christensen, G., & Stanat, P. (2007). Language policies and practices for helping immigrants and second-generation students succeed. The Transatlantic Taskforce on Immigration and Integration, Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and Bertelsmann Stiftung based on data from PISA 2005.

Educators as Policy Makers

Classroom Language Policies:

¤  Interpret school policies

¤  Negotiate multilingual spaces in classrooms

¤  Decide teaching strategies (translation or…?)

¤  Lead bottom-up planning

¤  Respect languages (honor mother tongue, honor school policy, honor minority languages, honor “all”)

Menken, K. & Garcia, O. (Eds.) (2010). Negotiating language policies n schools: Educators as policymakers. New York, NY: Routledge

http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2014/09/shanghai-tpeg-tennessee/

The Role of Languages in Shaping Brain Potential

Intangible and inevitable (cultural) Most visible Intangible and complex to measure

24

Cultural benefits Economic benefits Social benefits Communication benefits Personal benefits Academic benefits Cognitive benefits Executive Function benefits

The Bilingual Edge: Why everyone should be at least bilingual ¤  Increased Executive Functions

¤  Working Memory

¤  Inhibitory Control

¤  Purposeful Attention (attentional control)

¤  Cognitive Flexibility

¤  Metalinguistic awareness

¤  Abstract and symbolic representation skills

¤  Enhanced first language skills

¤  Extended age of expected cognitive decline (“use it or lose it”)

¤  Bilingualism enriches the poor enhanced cognitive control in low-income minority children. 

¤  Greater brain use.

Ever-growing evidence that bilingualism enhances Executive Functions… (sample articles)

Executive Functions

Definition (Center for the Developing Child, 2011)

Center for the Developing Child, 2011, p.4

28

29

Benefits of well-developed EFs

Better:

⬜ Creativity and cognitive flexibility

⬜  Self-control: Inhibitory control (selective attention)

⬜ Discipline and perseverance

⬜ Working memory (which influences academic achievement in all subject areas)

30

Diamond, 2013, p.3 31

The Bilingual Edge: Why everyone should be at least bilingual

¤  Adesope, O. O., Lavin, T., Thompson, T., & Ungerleider, C. (2010). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the cognitive correlates of bilingualism. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 207-245;

¤  de Abreu, P. M. E., Cruz-Santos, A., Tourinho, C. J., Martin, R., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingualism enriches the poor enhanced cognitive control in low-income minority children. Psychological science, 23(11), 1364-1371;

¤  Abutalebi, J., Canini, M., Della Rosa, P. A., Sheung, L. P., Green, D. W., & Weekes, B. S. (2014). Bilingualism protects anterior temporal lobe integrity in aging. Neurobiology of aging, 35(9), 2126-2133;

¤  Burgaleta, M., Sanjuán, A., Ventura-Campos, N., Sebastian-Galles, N., & Ávila, C. (2016). Bilingualism at the core of the brain. Structural differences between bilinguals and monolinguals revealed by subcortical shape analysis.NeuroImage, 125, 437-445.;

¤  Schweizer, T. A., Ware, J., Fischer, C. E., Craik, F. I., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingualism as a contributor to cognitive reserve: Evidence from brain atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease. Cortex, 48(8), 991-996.

Native bilinguals have higher scores on executive functioning tasks than late bilinguals or monolinguals

“…Possible explanations for this evidence of a bilingual advantage are greater inhibitory control, greater metalinguistic understanding, and a greater sensitivity to sociolinguistic interactions with interlocutors.”

“…These results confine the bilingual advantage found previously to complex tasks requiring control over attention to competing cues (interference suppression).”

“…bilingual advantage in processing complex stimuli in tasks that require executive processing components for conflict resolution, including switching and updating…”

“… enhanced ability of bilingual children to coordinate the executive control components required in performing this complex task.”

“… monolingual-bilingual comparisons suggest that cognitive control mechanisms can be shaped by linguistic experience…”

“…Cognitive and neurophysiological assessments show that although EF emerges during the first few years of life, it continues to strengthen significantly throughout childhood and adolescence.”

Beyond Language: Childhood Bilingualism Enhances High-Level Cognitive Functions

“… In both studies, level of proficiency in the language of testing was related to performance on metalinguistic tasks and length of time in the immersion program was related to performance on executive control tasks.”

“…7-month-old infants, raised with 2 languages from birth, display improved cognitive control abilities compared with matched monolinguals.”

  “…memory tasks based primarily on executive control are performed better by bilinguals.”

“…adolescent bilinguals, listening to the speech syllable [da], encoded the stimulus more robustly than age-matched monolinguals… This enhancement was associated with executive function advantages.”

The Differences Between the Spoken and Written Word

http://reimaginepr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/brain-writing.jpg

The Differences Between the Spoken and Written Word

1. Cummins (1981); 2. Gibbins (1999); 3. Corson (1993, 1995) cited in Tokuhama-Espinosa, 2008

The Differences Between the Spoken and Written Word

Yabe, Tsuji-Akimoto, Shiga, Hamada, Hirata, Otsuki, Kuge, Tamaki & Sasaki (2012).

Language Policies in Your Context

Language Policies: “I used to think… now I think…”*

¤  On a piece of paper make a list of things you used to believe about ¤  “language”

¤  “language policies”

¤  “brain and language”

¤  “your current language policy”

And what your news ideas are about each

Visible thinking routine: Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. John Wiley & Sons.  

Challenges to Executing Strong Language Policies?

¤  Non-native teachers

¤  Dominant minority languages

¤  …?

http://www.uni-regensburg.de/international/austausch-programmstudierende/medien/fotos/image_auslaendische_studierende_mm__14_.jpeg

http://www.languagelink.ru/services/camps/programmes/camp-samara2012.php

Successful International School Models Related to Languages

¤  Examples of Language Policies:

¤  https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8RaPiQPEZ9ZTWVkeDZfcWFaelU&usp=sharing

IB Language Policy

Recognizes and responds to three different categories of languages in schools:

¤  Working languages: The languages in which the organization communicates with its stakeholders and in which it is committed to providing all services needed for the implementation of the programmes. Currently, the IB’s three working languages are English, French and Spanish.

¤  Access languages: Languages that the IB has identified as being of strategic importance to meet its access goals and objectives to develop a more inclusive and diverse IB community. The organization will provide selected services and documentation in those languages, mainly to support teachers, as specified in this policy.

¤  Internal working language: English is the organization’s internal working language, in which most operational and developmental activities take place. It is also the language of its governance, management and academic committees.

Available on: http://www.ibo.org/language-policy/

IB Language Policy

Levels of support for languages:

¤  Working Languages ¤  Level 1

¤  Level 2

¤  Access Languages ¤  Level 3

¤  Level4

¤  Level 5

¤  Decided by a Language Committee

Available on: http://www.ibo.org/language-policy/

IB Language Policy

Decisions based on:

¤  Numbers of students

¤  Numbers of schools

¤  Perceived and understood linguistic proficiency of teachers

Available on: http://www.ibo.org/language-policy/ https://mamassetti.wordpress.com/2015/08/07/so-you-really-enjoy-being-a-supply-chain-professional-part-2/

Examples:

How Can Educational Technology Help?

Technology and Lanaguge Support

Problem

¤  Not enough native language speakers (teachers or students)

¤  Not enough practice time

¤  Not personalized

Partial Solution

¤  Use of native language speaker recordings

¤  Contract native speakers and teach remotely

¤  Use of programs to differentially rehearse pronunciation, writing

Note!

¤  Nothing replaces a real human being, but video conferencing can be enough…and virtual platforms can even offer more related to written language improvement

¤  Blake, R. J. (2013). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning. Georgetown University Press.

¤  Holland, V. M., Sams, M. R., & Kaplan, J. D. (2013). Intelligent language tutors: Theory shaping technology. Routledge.

¤  Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: a review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70-105.

¤  Grgurović, M., Chapelle, C. A., & Shelley, M. C. (2013). A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL, 25(02), 165-198.

¤   Inconclusive results (small studies)

¤  Putnam, C. E. (2013). Foreign language instructional technology: The state of the art. CALICO Journal, 1(1), 35-41.

Your School’s Language Policy

Elements of Good Language Policies

¤  Who: Which students populations (age, level)

¤  What: Which (balance of) languages

¤  When: Length of program

¤  Where: Shared responsibilities with families

¤  How: Curriculum design, standards, methodology

¤  Why: Justification of elements

Contact:

Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa, Ph.D.

tracey.tokuhama@gmail.com

www.traceytokuhama.com