Language Power. Margo Gottlieb
how you might wish to approach it; there is a corresponding blank template of each resource at the close of each chapter for your personal use. We thank our friends at BrainPOP® (www.brainpop.com) for sharing their wealth of resources to help us bring key uses of academic language to life.
Resource P.1 Reasons for Promoting Academic Conversations in School
Individually or in teacher teams, brainstorm how you might strategically increase the quantity and quality of academic conversations in your classroom. You are welcome to borrow ideas from Figure P.3 and suggest others on your own. Refer to this resource throughout the year to evaluate the extent you are reaching the whole student.
Teacher or Teacher Team: _____________________________________ Date: _____________
Copyright © 2017 by Corwin. All rights reserved. Reprinted from Language Power: Key Uses for Accessing Content by Margo Gottlieb and Mariana Castro. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, www.corwin.com. Reproduction authorized only for the local school site or nonprofit organization that has purchased this book.
References and Further Reading
Bailey, A. L. (2007). (Ed.). The language demands of school: Putting academic English to the test. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of speech genres (V. McGee, Trans.). In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 60–102). Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bernstein, B. (1970). Education cannot compensate for society. New Society, 15(387), 344–347.
Brice-Heath, S. (1983). Way with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Donohoo, J., & Velasco, M. (2016). The transformative power of collaborative inquiry: Realizing change in schools and classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Ferguson, R. F. (2007). Toward excellence with equity: An emerging vision for closing the achievement gap. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Francis, D. J., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, H. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English language learners: Research-based recommendations for instruction and academic interventions. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from http://centeroninstruction.org/files/ELL1-Interventions.pdf
Gottlieb, M., & Ersnt-Slavit, G. (2014). Academic language in diverse classrooms: Promoting content and language learning: Definitions and contexts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Grant, C. A., & Brueck, S. (2011). A global invitation: Toward the expansion of dialogue, reflection and creative engagement for intercultural and multicultural education. In C. A. Grant & A. Portera (Eds.), Intercultural and multicultural education: Enhancing global interconnectedness (pp. 3–11). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gutiérrez, R. (2007). (Re)defining equity: The importance of a critical perspective. In N. S. Nasir & P. Cobb (Eds.), Improving access to mathematics: Diversity and equity in the classroom (pp. 37–50). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Heppt, B., Henschel, S., & Haag, N. (2016). Everyday and academic language comprehension: Investigating their relationships with school success and challenges for language minority learners. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 244–251.
Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1994). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In B. Stierer & J. Maybin (Eds.), Language, literacy and learning in educational practice (pp. 232–247). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Rigby, J., & Tredway, L. (2015). Actions matter: How school leaders enact equity principles. In M. Khalifa, N. W. Arnold, A. F. Osanloo, & C. M. Grant (Eds.). Handbook of urban educational leadership (pp. 329–348). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2001). Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12(4), 431–459.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of school: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Skria, L., & Scheurich, J. J. (2004). (Eds.). Educational equity and accountability: Paradigms, policies, and politics. London, UK: Routledge.
Soffel, J. (2016, March 10). What are the 21st-century skills every student needs? [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/21st-century-skills-future-jobs-students
Tate, W. F., & Rousseau, C. (2007). Engineering change in mathematics education: Research, policy, and practice. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1209–1241). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). For each and every child: A strategy for education equity and excellence. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2011). Academic conversations: Classroom talk that fosters critical thinking and content understandings. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Chapter 1 Examining Key Uses of Academic Language
The verbal and nonverbal interaction in which the learner engages are central to an understanding of learning . . . they do not just facilitate learning, they are learning in a fundamental way.
—Leo van Lier (2000)
Teaching is a balance of reflection in action and reflection on action. We reflect in action when we respond to our students’ needs in the moment. We reflect on action when we think about our students’ overall strengths and goals. We plan for instruction and assessment based on our reflection on action while we react spontaneously during instruction and its embedded assessment based on our reflection in action. The conceptualization of key uses of academic language is a result of our own reflection on action. In our experiences, both in the classroom and in working with teachers, we have realized that great teaching is no accident but a result of deep reflection on action. Key uses are meant to guide teacher planning and reflection on action.
Ask
What is the nature of key uses of academic language? What is the language associated with each key use?
The overhaul of academic content standards in 2010 and beyond across the United States has increased the rigor of the curriculum, assessment, and instruction in classrooms. Consequently, students need to possess the language to think about and engage with content in classroom activities intended to mediate their learning. In reviewing the existing academic content standards, instructional materials, and linguistic theories, particular purposes for academic language use emerge: namely, discuss, argue, recount, and explain (DARE). These are the overall purposes we equate with DARE, and in doing so, we DARE teachers and school leaders to advocate for advancing key uses of academic