Classroom Observation Project

 

​

Cynthia B. Mallard

Department of Middle and Secondary Education

Georgia State University

TSLE 7250  Applied Linguistics for the Bilingual/ English as a Second Language Teacher

 

 

Garrett Delavan, Ph.D.

April 5,  2023

 

Classroom Observation Project

 

My classroom observation project experience was such an eye opening experience.   Through  my video observation I was able to observe second language educators  provide instruction  that was informed, empowered, committed and engaged; the goal to be reach by all instructors when guiding students on this path to English proficiency.    The classrooms I observed included one Sheltered Instruction Protocol, an Integrated English Language Development Kindergarten classroom and an Integrated 2nd grade class.  I must say all three classrooms had some similarities, but also differences that were super apparent.   As future ESL educators it was really great to see what really works and what doesn’t work inside of the classroom.   For the observation I made noticings and wonderings in the themed areas of classroom environment or set up,  teacher facilitation or instruction, interactions and social emotional learning.

 

 

Classroom Environment and Set Up

The first classroom was a  sheltered instruction  class  led by ESL instructor  Mrs. Casey.   Mrs. Casey was providing  language and content area instruction.  Mrs. Caseys lesson today was  on  the different types of nouns in English.  Mrs. Casey  had her  students desk set  for collaboration as they were set in groups facing each other.   Her classroom décor considered the background of the students as there were flags representing the students heritage, very culturally relevant.   She used a whiteboard to model  or demonstrate her lesson.  Students engaged in  the lesson only at their desk . This class along with one instructor also included a second teacher who was bilingual.   I noticed in a sheltered environment, some students really depended on the bilingual teacher.  At points Mrs. Casey referred to the bilingual teacher to translate English instruction.    The environment for our next class was very different than Mrs. Caseys’.  This class led by Deidre Wilson was an integrated English Language Development Kindergarten.  In her class students were not at desk. She instead opted for the students to be on the carpet.  The instruction for this class  was a science lesson on the phenomenon of force in the science world.  She also used her whiteboard or writing pad where students could clearly see it.  My third classroom was  an integrated second grade classroom.   The educator Sabrina Chamberlain  delved into the social studies lesson on supply and demand of goods and services.  In this class students were allowed to be seated on carpet.  I did not observe any culturally relevant material on the walls  or anywhere that students could see it.

 

Teacher Facilitation/ Instruction

In our interaction again the classrooms had some similarities and differences.  Mrs. Casey class, our SIOP class was most facilitated by the teacher and the bilingual teacher.  Mrs. Casey did most  of the talking and teaching while students listened.  I did notice as the lesson progressed

 Teacher engaged students allowing them to decide  what category  to place the nouns in  as a  whole  group.  Mrs. Casey also used  strategies such as  the wait time allowing students  to learn from their struggle to figure the correct noun categories.   Mrs. Casey also used repetition in her lesson  with linguistics  frames on the board  that students could see.  Mrs. Casey also asked the students if they understood repeatedly.  For this class she asked them to show thumbs up to signal if they understood.  I liked that Mrs. Casey used  flashcards of nouns that  were pictures or visuals with the written words.  Mrs. Casey proceeded  to use opportunity to use the noun /word in a sentence for  meaning and context.  She then  progressed into sentence structure and what words can and cannot go together. 

 

She modeled them side by side on the Whiteboard.  In our second  classroom, the  integrated kindergarten class  it was so different.   It was also a teacher led and teacher focused class but the students were super engaged in feedback.   She immediately started with the strategy we call building background. She asked what the students knew based on the objects they saw before them.  I really loved this and they did too.   Mrs. Wilson really took the opportunity to make this lesson fun and engaging.  She did read a-louds with words, she added in games to drive home how English structure works.  She even added music with songs and chants  so that students would be learning and not even realize it.   I can observe Mrs. Wilson used a whole or balanced approach  combining vocabulary, sentence structure  and meaning to drive home lesson.  

 

Mrs. Wilson also allowed student to use translanguaing.  She accepted that a student answered a question in Spanish, but she then repeated the Spanish and then asked what the word is in English. Loved that and felt it was wonderful that she was encouraging additive bilingualism. Mrs. Wilson also used linguistic frames on the board with a lot of scaffolding in the frames.   She conducted  multiple guided readings with the entire class.   This class also used the Think- pair-share method that was super effective in getting the students to really go into higher order thinking about force and the two objects of the lesson.   I also loved that she allowed the students to come to the board to model their answers.  In our third  classroom I noticed she had an integrated class of different level of English proficiency students so she had to differentiate her lesson.   I loved that she differentiated while in small group.  She had a small group of English learners  while allowing the bridging group to independently read, while another group  worked collaboratively on  sequencing and the comparison between a jean and denim factory.   Mrs. Chamberlain in her lesson  introduced the vocabulary and sentence structure to prime students for the lesson.

​

Interactions

In Mrs. Casey’s class when it came to interaction she gave them an assignment requiring students to sort nouns in  a group collaborative activity.  She referred them to a strategy  called  productive talk moves where I was able to see students really discuss with each sentence structure and the categories for nouns.  I noticed  the interpreter or bilingual teacher worked from group to group  along with Mrs. Casey. At the end Teacher models how sentences should be structured. She asked them questions in both the correct and incorrect way to let them decide.  In this activity she did a lot of recast to help them decide the correct structure. One noticing that I felt could have done better was her activity  requiring students to produce language  by writing  a sentence and speaking their sentences. Teacher did not monitor efficiently how they were producing language before the students were allowed to go to the next student to produce language in  the sentence.  I saw that students in this model of class asked questions in their home language and I also saw that students really engaged with their peers more so than with the teacher.    I don’t feel the students were  excited or engaged enough.  In Mrs. Wilson’s class I feel as though the students were really engaged.  Students were able to sing with each other. Although teacher led class, I felt like the interaction was also led by students. Students repeated instruction and were able to  progress thinking and  conversations with what we call teacher prompts. 

 

I feel as though the students talked as much as the teacher did  making it a student centered class instead of a teacher focused class.  They also did a think- pair – share strategy  in brainstorming what would happen in the science lesson about force.    I feel as a result it was easier for students to share their thinking in front of the whole class.   In our third class that includes three levels of English Language Learners  it was similar to Mrs. Wilsons class.  I feel the students were engaged.  I observed  Mrs. Chamberlain did the super targeting vocabulary and sentence structure with the small group that needed extra help in spelling, pronunciation and meaning.

​

Social Emotional Learning

We know that social emotional learning  is part of the every day of students no matter the content area or the grade.   I liked that I saw Mrs. Casey had a chart  of social emotional learning, but the chart was on the floor not on the wall where students could see it readily.

his is your About section. Every website has a story and users want to hear yours. This is a great opportunity to give a full background on who you are and what your site has to offer. Double click on the text box to edit the content and add all the information you want to share. You may like to talk about how you got started and share your professional journey. Explain your core values, your commitment to customers and how you stand out from the crowd. You can also add a photo, gallery or video for even more engagement.

​

Summative Assessment Project

​

Cynthia B. Mallard

Department of Middle and Secondary Education

TSLE 7250 Applied Linguistics for the Bilingual/English as a Second Language Teacher

Georgia State University

Garrett Delavan, Ph.D.

Spring 2023

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

      The world of second language acquisition is fascinating, future forward and sometimes mind boggling.   It is a phenomenon that has been studied producing theories, some of those theories debunked and others  proven consistent and effective.   The success in learning a second language depends on many factors.  When we delve in to second language acquisition we have to ask ourselves what do we know.   There are beliefs that shape how we as educators approach teaching English Language Learners that will affect  their success and proficiency in the targeted language.  During this summative assignment  we will explore highly debated methods and strategies  to second language acquisition.  When we think of second language acquisition there are questions that come to mind initially when preparing instruction for ELLs.  There are questions such as do we learn language mainly through  imitation, should teachers teach simple language structures before complex one, should educators  respond to students errors by rephrasing,  can  ELLs  learn  both language  and academic content simultaneously and what’s the best approach?  

 

TEACHING APPROACHES

 

      We are very fortunate that we exist in a time in education where we have standards, research and methods of teaching to rely on and to refer to.  Here we will explore  the varied  teaching approaches and methods.  They are defined as the grammar-translation method where students learn the rules of grammar,  the natural approach; students acquiring language by being immersed in the environment,  audiolingual method ; repetition drills of language, communicative language teaching method; students learn language through  authentic interaction,  content-based instruction; where subject areas are the basis for instruction, whole language; the teaching of reading and meaning in context and critical pedagogy where students are taught only essential knowledge to the content.  I  mention these approaches, but it is important to  state that trying to adhere to only one of them  or all of them can hamper  a teachers creativity (Richards & Rogers, 2014).   I go even further and say one can lead you down the wrong path when trying to reach an ELL.  For instance,  I analyzed the scenario in the beginning of chapter two of Wrights Foundation for Teaching English Language Learners  where Rosa a student always switched words around in a sentence.  She should have not been viewed as having dyslexia.  The teacher failed to understand or did not think the ELL may have a problem with syntax. It was not dyslexia it was knowing the acceptable rules for forming an English sentence.   In teaching approaches, an educator must ask a few questions.  What are my students strengths?  What are the academic goals?  What strategies am I going to use?  How do I know if these strategies are effective?   I think that it is very effective that teachers are encouraged to try the above strategies and produce  our personal approach.  I know for me during instruction it is critical to use  a variety or layered modes to  successfully reach our goal.   In my teaching approach It is mandatory that I use maximum activities  such as think-pair-share task that encourage  peer to peer collaboration.   Instead of teacher talk, my ELLs  should be the focus of the lesson.

 

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

 

     We all know there are four major theories on how ELLs acquire a second language.  There is the theory of behaviorism , cognitive, sociocultural and the innatism perspective.

I found each of these theories amazing and it reorganized my brain in understanding why in instruction an ELL may or may not grasp the content.  Working through the theories it was difficult for me to say  I could only design my lessons  based on only one.   In Cognitive Approaches I was drawn to the Monitor Model. This model has five interrelated  hypotheses developed by Krashen. The first hypothesis is the  acquisition learning hypothesis that says there is a distinction between learning a language and acquiring a language. One is the  conscious learning of the language and the latter one is unconscious learning that would be acquiring language that we as humans are not even aware of.  Another part to the Monitor Model is Natural Order hypothesis that says we acquire language in a predictable pattern that has many debaters.  The Input Comprehension hypothesis of the model says  we gain a language when we understand messages or what is being said to us. The last part of the model is the Affective  Filter hypothesis which  says this filter controls how much we understand and that other factors like what a child may be feeling like anxiety or low self-esteem can cause input to be blocked.  As I’ve said before this totally explains when students shut down in class they learn nothing.  One particular second language theory that intrigued me because of its’ effectiveness is the Interaction Hypothesis.  This theory says input to ELLs can be made comprehensible through interaction.  I am in total agreement.  Interaction is a key component from what I can tell in the classrooms where I’ve taught and observed.   In a nutshell I believe to really become English proficient you have to allow students to practice the language. Students must be able to respond to the language.  Students have to be able  to understand and produce the language. It is magic to witness this interaction whether it be between student to student or teacher to student.  It absolutely is effective when the content is recast in the interaction.  Students comprehension jumps light years ahead.  I felt this was a major finding.   Another major component in cognitive approaches  that peaked my interest and that holds a significant place in second language acquisition is  the Critical Period hypothesis that says  young children have an advantage  cognitively  that enables them to learn languages better and faster.   If you watch children they are motivated and have more opportunities to  become proficient in the second language.

 

LINGUISTIC AND INDIVIDUAL LEARNER VARIABLES

 

     There is no one size that fits all that’s in most things in life. Why do we expect all students to learn the same and at the same pace.  You and a friend may want the same shoe, but you may have to get different sizes. We make the adjustment based on the circumstances. Our students are no different but  of course more complex. There are Linguistic and individual learner variables that may affect second language learning and teaching.  Setting  achievable expectations and monitor language learning.  My goal is to change the lives of our English Language Learners so they are successful in a country where English is the primary and dominant language.  Sometimes it is easy to forget the goal. To me the goal is supporting our ELLs.    Researchers Fillmore and Snow identified five functions that teachers perform in their work with ELLs (Fillmore, 2018).  I agree that a teacher must have a deep understanding of language.   I believe an educator must function as a communicator, an educator, an evaluator as a human being and an agent of socialization (Wright, 2019).   Of the teachers I know very few encompass all the five functions.   It is a multitask that must be consciously strived for.  I may know an educator that is good at presenting a lesson, but then lacks the socialization part.  Another  may be great as an evaluator, but cannot communicate effectively.  Our ELLs are so special and many come to the classroom  from low income families. It is important to point out just like Wright did in his text  the U.S.  education system has done an inadequate job  in making sure education is equitable.   I point this out because now is our time  as educators to grab up the baton to correct some wrongs in educational achievement.  

 

     Our ELLs are human.  Humans are different.  We all have different brains and we all learn differently.  This variance has been studied and recorded by WIDA.   ELLs come to our classrooms  with different levels  of English proficiency.   It is much easier for me to understand it as we have to decode what level they are at and what that level means they can do when it comes to reading, writing and speaking.  We have to avoid the occurrences I have seen in some classrooms where teachers assumed  all the ELLs in their  class were the same  and grouped them all together and ignored each of their English needs.  Earlier I mentioned we should ask ourselves as educators who are our students and what can our students do in the English language.  According to WIDA and its’ Can Do Descriptors, there are five levels that our ELLs fit in . There is level 1 or Entering where visuals are a main source of learning. Level 2 or emerging, level 3 or developing, level 4 or expanding and the most English proficient of our ELLs  level 5 or Bridging where they are able to engage in debates, draw conclusions and connections.  WIDA  makes these distinctions  among our domains of writing, reading, speaking and listening(WIDA, 2019).  These descriptors are super guides for us as educators to create  content and strategies in our content areas of math, social studies, English  and science to best serve ELLs. 

 

     I want to make sure our ELLs have a good handle on pragmatics.  Good pragmatics allows a student to know what is meant by a language or conversation simply in context. I’m hoping to assist them in reading  and writing in the content area and allowing them to maintain their home language along with the second language.   In learning a second language  there were assumptions I had.  One assumption that I had was its easy to go from L1 to L2.  Absolutely not true.  Transferring languages from L1 to L2 doesn’t always work the way you think it would. This was very jarring for me because as a native English speaker you would think to just use the English version or translation of ELLs  primary words and sentence structure.  As we know it’s not that simple. Wright in his book  Foundations for Teaching says students are drawing upon what  they know in L1  to acquire L2, but that the transfer from L1 to L2 can also cause interference known as negative transfer (Wright, 2019).  Some L1 languages may not use a certain symbol or phoneme so it doesn’t  transfer to English  because it doesn’t exist in their primary language. Acquisition of English happens quicker and more efficiently if the L1 is close in structure to the L2.  I felt this was a major finding.  When studying how language is learned  we have  to mention how language is learned.  Lightbrown  & Spada reinforce a main key to understanding  how language is learned is to reference babies, the preschool years and the school years when developing language (Lightbrown & Spada, 2013). 

 

     We know  in the pre-school years children begin to develop metalinguistic awareness.  They are able to recognize significant  flaws in the structure of a sentence, the choice of word and the meaning  and correct themselves.   Another aspect that is significant is the early stages of learning language is the acquisition of vocabulary.   By the time early learners enter schools they know more than several thousand words.  Once in school students are learning thousands more words  from reading or being read to and from fiction and non-fiction books that introduce frequent and non-frequent vocabulary.  In L1, students are learning different registers, the difference between how the targeted the language is written versus how it is spoken.  When developing language Lightbrown & Spada states there are simply three theoretical perspectives as to how language is developed.  There is the behaviorist theory championed by psychologist and researcher B. F. Skinner.  The theory says when learners or children imitate what they are hearing, it forms a pattern, behavior of correctly using the language if done repetitively.  The innatist theory is built upon human nature and that our natural abilities to learn language is prewired without being taught.   Researcher and psychologist  Noam Chomsky developed this theory.  I have to admit observing babies and small children  who were not subjected to imitation, the innatist theory really made me a believer as saw small children developing words, producing language without being taught. 

 

     The last theory in how languages are learned is the  interactional/developmental perspective.  I agree with psychologist Jean Piaget  and Lev Vygotsky in this view.  In classrooms it has been the social interactions, the social activities that have allowed ELLs to grow their second language proficiency by leaps and bounds.   The interaction gave the learning meaning and absolutely was accepted comprehensible input.   We have learned there are  variables that allow students to be successful in acquiring the targeted language.  Personality plays a role  along with  motivation plays a role.  An inhibited student may not take risk in learning something new and anxiety, worry and fear may block input.   Learners who view the second language in a positive light and who see it as way to move ahead in society and in class are motivated. So motivation plays a key role.  Age is variable  Again we have myriad variables with individual learners. Now that we know this fact, it is incumbent upon us to differentiate lessons and our approaches.

 

LANGUAGE STRUCTURE AND USAGE

 

     In learning a second language  it is crucial that we as educators understand how our students use language and its’ structure.   The usage of  language  and structure is not  static and can change and interchange given the environment.   There are three structures that we’ll explore that are applied in second language acquisition. There is  the natural instructional setting.   In this setting unlimited vocabulary and structure  is experienced for several hours.  Errors in speech in this setting would not be corrected.   There is structure  based settings where a strong emphasis is placed on reading and writing  and proper structure in isolation.  In this language learning, errors are readily corrected and students are pressured to speak and write the targeted language from the beginning.   The language instruction is also modified greatly to ensure students understand.   In communicative instructional settings meaning is at the forefront versus  proper structure.  

 

     Discourse is introduced through peer to peer  and peer to group.  Another practice of how language is used is the phenomenon practiced by ELLs is described as code-switching. In this art bilinguals are able to use words and phrases from the their L1, L2 or L3 in conversation interchangeably (Lightbrown & Spada, 2021).  I thought this occurrence super spectacular because I have witnessed it in class with students I have taught.  The code switching made it more comfortable for students to interact and produce the targeted language.   It is a way that bilinguals adapt to the targeted language and environment.   But a drawback as mentioned by critics is code-switching can indicate they have not yet mastered the word or phrase in the targeted language. In assessing ELLs there are many methods to accomplishing how effective students are learning the targeted  language.  Assessments can range  from corrective feedback with recast, questions in the classroom with display and referential questions with linguistic frames that I prefer in my instruction.  Also a great assessment  tool is  classroom observation with no set predetermined  categories.   The instructor is  taking  notes of the activities,  and interactions looking for discoveries.

 

     Our ELLs come to us  from all over the world.   Just like any other group in the world they are defined in the United States and with that definition comes best  practices  on how to advocate for their access to effective and  empowering  instruction.  The federal government defines English learners  as students who were not born in the United States and whose home language is other than English.  To me the most important  part of the ESSA definition is  a group whose difficulties in speaking, reading , writing or understand the English language may be  sufficient to deny the individual .  What we educators are providing is a civil right.  We have the responsibility of making sure our ELLs  meet challenging  state academic standards and be able to fully participate in American society equally.  Along with assisting ELLs with the targeted language, Wright includes points that display if educators, administrators and government officials were to ignore ELLs needs of maintaining their home language.  Some of the consequences would be  students have fewer job opportunities, students would  experience  difficulty or embarrassment when returning home and  students lose respect for parents Wright, 2019.  

 

     In my experience with ELLs in class the best way that I have found to advocate for them comes from viewing the students whole life or whole environment.  Advocating for ELLs includes input from them as individuals, their parents, extended family, their religious family and anything that contributes to who they are.  Another great way to make sure we are compliant in advocating for ELLs is following guidelines outlined in the Southern Poverty Law Centers’ Learning for Justice.  We can see the domains of engagement when it comes to anti-bias education. There are the domains of identity, diversity, justice and action.

 Earlier we described language learning theories and their basis such as behaviorism and innatism  along with how they led to practices in second language instruction.  Some of those current practices include grammar-translation, direct method and audiolingual methods.  Lightbrown & Spada explain behaviorism  had a profound effect  from the 1940 through the 1970’s. Mimicking and habit formation was the rule in second language, but it was found that researchers could not account for the predictability of the mistakes that students were making. Students were learning based on what they knew. We have found that language is not just habits, but it is identifying similarities that they can use into the targeted language.  From the innatism perspective was born the concept of universal grammar that permits students to learn the language of the environment.  They contended every human  has a dedicated neural component for automatic language learning.  From this belief  Stephen Krashen’s Monitor Model surfaced.  The model is rooted in what students know and what they are exposed to. The model says there is a natural  order  and not acquired by every student the same  way.  The model also introduces the significant  affective filter still referenced today.  It says when students  have feelings of  anxiety or have a negative attitude about what they are learning it decreases their comprehensible input.  The cognitive perspective took over in the 1990’s.  It is the perspective  that today’s second language practices grab from.   This perspective or the information processing model  looks at the mind as a computer in processing language.   The brain is automatized with words and are recalled in meaning to string words together to make sense.  This perspective  says a student has the ability to learn.  This framework has led to communicative language teaching, immersion, content based and task based language teaching that can be found in classrooms today.

 

     Finally it is critical that we educators  are aware and understand there are discourses that we can apply to help our students from a  cultural,  familial  and socio political approach.    To have a student and not consider who they are totally does the student and disservice and hinders their learning and  upholds the status quo of antiquated  instruction and the concept of Whiteness.  For instance as Wright says its inclusive  to refer to ELLs language  as the home language instead of native  or first language (Wright, 2019).  We must look at our  ELLs constantly through what is explained as a bilingual lens when we are making decisions  about curriculum and assessment.   Wright references fellow psychologist who  offers guiding principles  to make sure we are in action through a bilingual lens(de Jong, 2011).   First we must strive to be equitable across the board.  Next it is a reminder we have to support and encourage our students  linguistic and cultural  identities.  Classrooms should be promoting bilingualism through stories, visuals  that represent our students lives inside the class, but also that neighborhood they go home to.   When students realize their culture matters inside the classroom they are motivated to engage.  Learners identities or perceived identities assigned to them by educators  can impact  what they do  in  classrooms.  For example the labels of successful/unsuccessful or quiet/talkative (Lightbrown & Spada, 2013).  It imperative that we stay away from the judgement and labels of our ELLs.

 

​

REFERENCES

 

A framework for Anti-bias. Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved April 21, 2023

https://www.learningforjustice.org/frameworks/social-justice-standards

 

de Jong, E. J. (2011). Foundations for multilingualism in education: From principles to practice.

 

Lightbrown, P.M., & Spada, N (2013). How Languages Are Learned (pp 31-33).

 

Lightbrown, P.M., & Spada, N (2013). How Languages Are Learned (pp 151-155).

 

Proven tools and support to help educators and multilingual learners succeed. WIDA. (n.d.).

Retrieved April 21, 2023 from https://wida.wisc.edu

 

Wright, W.E. (2019).  Foundations of Teaching: English Language learners, Research, Theory, Policy and Practice (pp 2-4).

 

Wright, W.E. (2019).  Foundations of Teaching: English Language learners, Research, Theory, Policy and Practice (pp 24).

​

​​

​​

​

Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Philosophy

​

Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Philosophy 

(Part1) 

  

Cynthia Mallard 

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY 
Department of Middle and Secondary Education 
TSLE 7250, Applied Linguistics for the Bilingual / English as a Second Language Teacher 

Spring Semester 2023 

​

 

Garrett Delavan PhD 

January 22, 2023 

​

​

Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Philosophy 

 

     My teaching philosophy and convictions about how languages are best learned are based upon almost 50 years of experience that I have been alive in this world. It is amazing to think we are here in the year 2023 when it seems as though the 90’s was just yesterday, and I was in high school or the 80’s when I was in elementary school. Reflecting on my education and learning language, I realize I learned language from everywhere. When I say everywhere let me say that I learned language from everyone and everything. I would wake up every morning and my mother would have the local news on covering New York Citys' five boroughs at the time. I would empty the garbage every morning walking to the incinerator meeting up with best friends who were from Puerto Rico, Haiti, and New Jersey to walk to school. My philosophy and convictions about how languages are best learned come from this everyday experience. Languages are best learned by experiencing different people, diverse cultures and of course using different languages. I have learned in language learning that everything about a person and their environment matters. It matters if they are male. It matters if a person comes from another country or if they were born in the United States. A persons’ religion plays out in education. When learning a language, a persons’ native customs are at play and should be considered along with everything else that makes up their world.  

 

      My positive experiences in learning language that has led me to this philosophy is just congregating with friends who did have different languages and diverse cultures. Even as a child when I would be invited to a family function like a birthday party of my friends of Puerto Rican descent I would notice greetings, customs, and the language native to them. My friends' parents would speak to me in their native tongue to complete certain simple tasks for them. I remember in the beginning I did not understand, but the more I was around my friends’ family and the more I was using the language with them I began to understand everyday words and conversation. I would also acquire customs of what was unfamiliar to them, which explained a lot about my friends and the things they were not open to saying or doing.  I did not think much of it then as a child and teenager and I am not sure they did either. If I did not understand, they would say it repeatedly until I understood. If I did something wrong or unacceptable, they did not hesitate to say that either. 

 

      Negative experiences in learning language that has led me to this philosophy is watching fellow educators who do not understand the philosophy that education is everywhere and is acquired through everything. I am on this journey of learning to be an educator and have been fortunate to substitute in schools where there is a rich ethnic and cultural mix of students. I have seen teachers discount students or ignore students when they do not understand the lesson in the English language. I have heard fellow teachers say, “I gave him the lesson to read, that’s all I can do.”   They moved on to something else and forgot that student. The teacher did not group the student with another child that was bilingual. The teacher did not think of all the options that could be used to reach that child. That Childs's world was not even a factor for the teacher that I observed. It was more important about completing the lesson and being on time in the district's modules. It is a widespread practice that I hope to avoid throughout my career.  

 

      I hope my initial second language acquisition philosophy is a good one to start with being that I come from a different area of undergraduate work other than education.  I am hoping that my positive and negative experiences can craft a solid and effective model of how to meet students where they are.  

​

​

​

​