Education 286

Second Language Acquisition Research

Winter Quarter, 2011

Friday 12:15-3:05

Instructor:  Kenji Hakuta

Second language acquisition represents a strong convergence area for educational research, policy and practice. This course will look at the research from the perspectives offered from the vantage points of current U.S. federal and state (primarily California) policy. The class discussion will be framed in terms of some basic questions, to which students are expected to add based on their interests and prior knowledge. Discussion will be about the research, but with the goal of improving policy and practice in the area of the development of English language learners. Students are expected to play a major and active role in classroom discussion.

January 7: Introduction to the field and to the educational context. (Lecture, no reading required). Slides

Questions to be addressed:

1. What is the nature of the interdisciplinary field of research (linguistics, psychology, sociology, anthropology) that comprise second language acquisition?
2. What areas of education policy and practice requires knowledge about the second language acquisition process?
3. What is the difference between second language acquisition and foreign language learning?
4. How have researchers addressed the relationship between language and cognition?

January 14: Federal and state policy framework. Slides

Questions to be addressed:

1. How does federal law and policy address the needs of English language learners (ELLs)?
2. How do the policies reflect the distinction between language acquisition and cognitive development for English language learners?
3. What is the accountability framework with respect to the academic development of ELLs?
4. What potential influence does the Common Core Standards have on standards, instruction, and expectations for ELLs with respect to their acquisition of English?

Ramsey, A. & O'Day, J. (March, 2010) Title III Policy: State of the States. ESEA Evaluation Brief: The English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act. American Insitutes for Research. Click here.

Boyle, A., Taylor, J., Hurlbut, S & Soga, K. (March, 2010). Title III Accountability: Behind the Numbers. ESEA Evaluation Brief: The English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act. American Insitutes for Research. Click here.

Tanenbaum, C. & Anderson, L. (March, 2010). Title III Accountability and District Improvement Efforts: A Closer Look. ESEA Evaluation Brief: The English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act. American Insitutes for Research. Click here.

Working Group on ELL Policy Recommendations for ESEA Reauthorization. Click here.

Common Core Standards (English Language Arts). Click here.

January 21: Linguistic theory.

Questions to be addressed:

1. How has linguistic theory treated differences between languages?
2. What implications does the theoretical stance have on our understanding of second language learners?
3. Does the first language matter in the acquisition of the second language?

Deutcher, G. (2010). Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. New York: Metropolitan Books. On reserve.

January 28: Developmental expectations.

Questions to be addressed:

1. What expectations should we have about the rate of second language acquisition?
2. What factors might condition the rate of acquisition?
3. How should accountability systems set targets for English language proficiency development?

Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. How languages are learned. New York: Oxford. On reserve.

Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. & Witt, D. (2000). How Long Does It Take English Learners to Attain Proficiency?  University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute Policy Report 2000-1. Click here.

Cook, H. G., Boals, T., Wilmes, C. & Santos, M. Issues in the Development of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for WIDA Consortium States. Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Click here.

Linquanti, R. & George, C. Establishing and Utilizing an NCLB Title III Accountability System: California’s
Approach and Findings to Date. In Abedi J. (ed.) English Language Proficiency Assessment in the Nation: Current Status and Future Research. UC Davis School of Education. Click here.

February 4: Language acquisition in school settings.

Questions to be addressed:

1. How valid are standardized measures of second language acquisition?
2. To what extent is linguistic knowledge stand-alone or the product of the relationship between the student, the context, and language?

Valdés, G., Capitelli, S. & Alvarez, L.  (2011).  Latino children learning English:  Steps in the journey.  New York:  Teachers College Press. On reserve.

February 11: Explicit direct instruction of English in classroom instructional settings.

Questions to be addressed:

1. Is explicit direct instruction of language forms and functions effective?
2. Is language different in any way from other domains of cognition such as reading and math?

Ellis, R. Instructed second language acquisition: A literature review. Report to the Ministry of Education, New Zealand. Click here.

Snow, M. A. & Katz, A. (2010). English Language Development: Issues and Implementation in Kindergarten through Grade Five. In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. California Department of Education. On reserve.

Dutro, S. & Kinsella, K. (2010). English Language Development: Issues and Implementation at Grades Six through Twelve. In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. California Department of Education. On reserve.

Saunders, W. & Goldenberg, C. (2009).  Research to Guide English Language Development Instruction.  In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. In Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches. California Department of Education. On reserve.

Gersten, R., Baker, S., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P. & Scarcella, R.  (2007)  Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades.  IES Practice Guide.  Click here.

February 18: The ELD Curriculum

Questions to be addressed:

1. How is the English language development (ELD) curriculum shaped by theories of linguistics and language acquisition?
2. What is the relationship between the state standards in English language proficiency and the curriculum?
3. What are the prospects for the influence of the Common Core Standards in re-shaping state English language proficiency standards?
4. How have theories of first language acquisition influenced ways of thinking about second language acquisition?

Thompson, K. (September 2009). The Role of Research-Based Ideas about Language Acquisition in California’s Curriculum Materials for English Language Development. (Unpublished qualifying paper). Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Click here.

California State Board of Education. (2007). Reading/Language Arts framework for California public schools. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education (especially pages 270-274, 296-298). Click here.

California State Board of Education. (2002). English Language Development standards for California public schools, kindergarten through grade 12. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education. Skim to get a sense of State ELD standards. Click here.

February 25: Constraints on second language acquisition: age, SES, etc.

Questions to be addressed:

1. Is there a critical period for second language acquisition?
2. What is the relationship between socioeconomic status and second language acquisition?
3. Are there other constraints (non-universal claims) that might be advanced about second language acquisition?

Hakuta, K., Bialystok, E. & Wiley, E. (2003) Critical Evidence:  A Test of the Critical Period Hypothesis for Second Language Acquisition.  Psychological Science, 14 (1), 31-38. Click here.

Hoff, E. (2009). Do Vocabulary Differences Explain Achievement Gaps and Can Vocabulary-Targeted Interventions Close Them? Paper prepared for the National Research Council Workshop on Lnaugage Diversity, School Learning, and Closing Achievement Gaps. Click here.

March 4: What is "academic language"?

Questions to be addressed:

1. What does CELDT (the California English Language Development Test) measure?
2. How is it aligned to the state English Language Proficiency Standards?
3. Is there more to the concept of academic language than what it is *not*?
4. How might academic language be situated within disciplinary contexts?
5. What is the best way to think about how teachers develop "language objectives" in programs such as sheltered instruction?

Common Core Standards.

Schleppegrell, M. Language in academic subject areas and classroom instruction: what is academic language and how can we teach it? Paper prepared for the National Research Council Workshop on Lnaugage Diversity, School Learning, and Closing Achievement Gaps. Click here.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Third Edition. Pearson. Read especially Chapter 3, focusing on language objectives. On reserve.

March 11: Teacher qualities for supporting second language acquisition.

Questions to be addressed:

1. What do teachers need to know about language in order to be effective in teaching English language learners?
2. What kinds of expectations might be built into state certification requirements for such teachers?

Lucas, T. & Grinberg, J. (2008). Responding to the linguistic reality of mainstream classrooms: Preparing all teachers to teach English language learners. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser & K. Demers (eds.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. New York: Taylor & Francis (2008), pp. 606-636. On reserve.

Adger, C., Snow, C. & Christian, D. (2004). What Teachers Need to Know about Language. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Click here.