Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:58:20.355Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progressions of a New Language: Characterizing Explanation Development for Assessment With Young Language Learners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 September 2017

Alison L. Bailey
Alison L. Bailey*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Few studies have detailed the emergence and growth of the oral language and discourse characteristics of school-age students at different grades and across time (Bailey, 2010; Hoff, 2013). Yet general education teachers and English language specialists need well-articulated, preferably empirically derived progressions of language learning to support their students’ oral language development, particularly with those students who are acquiring English as a new or second language. Explanation skills, which encompass the development of many different language and discourse features, were the focus of this study. The language learners whose elicited oral explanations were used to characterize the order of emergence of features were in kindergarten and third grade (5–6 and 8–9 years old). These students were acquiring English in school with predominantly Spanish as their first language. Development of explanations by a cohort of English monolingual or proficient students provides grade-specific comparison language trajectories. The results are placed within the context of a formative assessment framework in order to assist teachers and students in placing explanations at different phases of sophistication on the progressions. This facilitates charting development and identifying with greater specificity which language and discourse features might be effective targets of contingent instruction to promote students’ oral explanation abilities.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 37 , September 2017 , pp. 241 - 263
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aukrust, V. G. (2004). Explanatory discourse in young second language learners’ peer play. Discourse Studies, 6, 393–412.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L. (2010). Assessment in schools: Oracy. In James, M. (Section Ed.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 285–292). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L. (2016, November). How best to know what our students know. Keynote address presented at the 14th Shanghai International Curriculum Forum, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., Blackstock-Bernstein, A., & Heritage, M. H. (2015). At the intersection of mathematics and language: examining mathematical explanations of English proficient and English language learner students. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 40, 6–28.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., Blackstock-Bernstein, A., Ryan, E., & Pitsoulakis, D. (2016). Data mining with natural language processing and corpus linguistics: unlocking access to school-children's language in diverse contexts to improve instructional and assessment practices. In El Atia, S., Zaiane, O., & Ipperciel, D. (Eds.), Data mining and learning analytics in educational research (pp. 255–275). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., Butler, F. A., Stevens, R., & Lord, C. (2007). Further specifying the language demands of school. In Bailey, A. L. (Ed.), Language demands of school: Putting academic language to the test (pp. 103–156). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., & Heritage, M. (2008). Formative assessment for literacy, grades K–6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin/Sage Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., & Heritage, M. (2014). The role of language learning progressions in improved instruction and assessment of English language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 48 (3), 480–506.Google Scholar
Bailey, A. L., & Heritage, M. (2017). Imperatives for teacher education: Findings from studies of effective teaching for English language learners. In Peters, M., Cowie, B., & Menter, I. (Eds.), A companion to research in teacher education. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
Beals, D. (1993). Explanatory talk in low-income families’ mealtime conversations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14 (4), 489–514.Google Scholar
Christie, F. (2012). Language education throughout the school years: A functional perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cosentino de Cohen, C., & Chu Clewell, B, (2007). Putting English language learners on the educational map. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (2012). Framework for English language proficiency development standards corresponding to the common core state standards and the next generation science standards. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
Covitt, B., & Anderson, C. W. (2018). Assessing scientific genres of argument, explanation and prediction. In Bailey, A. L., Maher, C., & Wilkinson, L. C. (Eds.), Language, literacy, and learning in the STEM disciplines: How language counts for English learners. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor Francis.Google Scholar
Donaldson, M. L. (1986). Children's explanations: A psycholinguistic study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flores, S. M., Batalova, J., & Fix, M. (2012). The educational trajectories of English language learners in Texas. Washington, DC: The Migration Policy Institute.Google Scholar
Goldman, S. R., & Wiley, J. (2011). Discourse analysis: Written text. In Duke, N. K. & Mallettee, M. H. (Eds.), Literary research methodologies (2nd ed., pp. 104–134). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M., & Martin, J. (Eds.). (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, M. (2008). Learning progressions: Supporting instruction and formative assessment. Retrieved from Council of Chief State School Officers website: http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2008/Learning_Progressions_Supporting_2008.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hill, H. C., Charalambous, C. Y., & Kraft, M. A. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough: Teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study. Educational Researcher, 41 (2), 56–64.Google Scholar
Hoff, E. (2013). Interpreting the early language trajectories of children from low SES and language minority homes: Implications for closing achievement gaps. Developmental psychology, 49 (1), 4–14.Google Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33,159–174.Google Scholar
Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to next generation science standards and with implications for common core state standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42 (4), 223–233.Google Scholar
McCabe, A., & Peterson, C. (1985). A naturalistic study of the production of causal connectives by children. Journal of Child Language, 12 (1), 145–159.Google Scholar
Moje, E., Peek-Brown, D., Sutherland, L., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2004). Explaining explanations: Developing scientific literacy in middle school project based science reform. In Strickland, D. & Alvermann, D. E. (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Improving literacy learning for preadolescent and adolescent learners in grades 4–12. (pp. 227–251). New York, NY: Carnegie.Google Scholar
National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). Fast facts. Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/fastfactsGoogle Scholar
National Education Association (2011). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educator's guide to the “four Cs.” Retrieved from National Education Association (NEA) website: http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-to-Four-Cs.pdfGoogle Scholar
National Governors Association (NGA) & Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: NGA Center for Best Practices and CCSSO.Google Scholar
Nippold, M. A., & Scott, C. M. (2010). Expository discourse in children, adolescents, and adults: Development and disorders. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, S. M., & French, L. (2008). Supporting young children's explanations through inquiry science in preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23 (3), 395–408.Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E. (1991). The theoretical basis for relationships between language and literacy in development. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 6, 5–10.Google Scholar
Songer, N. B., Kelcey, B., & Gotwals, A. W. (2009). How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (6), 610–631.Google Scholar
Taylor, A., Bailey, A., Cooper, P., Dwyer, C. A., & Lieb, B., (2007). Gender differences in reading and communication skills. In Klein, S. S. (Ed.), Handbook for achieving gender equity through education (pp. 281–303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Valdés, G. (2005). Bilingualism, heritage language learners, and SLA research: Opportunities lost or seized? The Modern Language Journal, 89 (3), 410–426.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, L., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Introduction to this special issue: Vocabulary growth and reading skill. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15 (1), 1–7.Google Scholar
Zhao, W., Mok, I. A. C., & Cao, Y. (2016). Curriculum reform in China: Student participation in classrooms using a reformed instructional model. International Journal of Educational Research, 75, 88–101.Google Scholar