Layout 1


1 F O for UNDATION EVELOPMENT D HILD C Challe ng in g Common Myths About Youn g English Langu age Le ar ners Lin da M. Es pi nos a FCD Pol icy Brief Adv an cin g PK-3 No . Ei ght Jan ua ry 2008 8

2 Cha ll engi ng Co mm on Myths Abo ut You ng English Learners Language Pa ge 2 Summ ary a variet y of discip lines ab ou t dual lang uag e de velo pment and This re vie w of res ea rc h from r the imp ac t of di ffer en t ed uc at iona l appr oa ches for chil dr en ag es three to eig ht runs counte to much conv en ti ona l th inkin g. g ELL chi ldre n ar e qui te capa ble of le arni ng subje ct ti fic studi es sugg est that youn Scien the y may be nef it co gnitive ly from learning mor e matte r in two lang uag es . In fact, one lang uag e. Tra nsitio ning from their first langu ag e to Englis than h bef or e they hav e a firm grasp us ually by the end of Third Grade , may be of the ir firs t lang uage, al in the long skills le arned in the ho me languag e do det riment ru n. Early literacy r to English. Th e childre n who we re taught transfe h-o nly clas sro oms or in Englis transitio ned to Eng lish instru ctio n be fo re they demo ns trate d well-e stab lish ed or al lang uag e abilit ie s in their own lang uag e fre qu ently ne ver achiev ed hig h le vels of Englis h flu ency and did not fare as wel l as had the opp ortunity to lear n in tw o thos e who itiv el y, lang uag es . All child re n can benef it cogn ling uistically , and cu ltu rally, fro m le arn in g 32 more than one lang uag e. icant The re are signif am ong child ren dif ferences who are bec om in g fluent in En gli sh that wi ll ence how the y le arn En gl ish. These incl ude influ the langu ic age spo ken at home, the soc ioec onom ci rcu ms ta nc es of th e fam ily , the age of th e ch il d an d ext ent of ex po sur e to Engl ish , flu ency in the home langu age , circu mstance s sur rou nd in g the family ’s immig n to the U. S., and th e ratio lar valu es and cu stoms of the fami particu ly. Each of the se facto rs may re qu ire prog rams to adapt, becau se no EL L mod el wi ll fit all po pulatio ns and co ntexts . In add itio n to dif fe rences al so wil l amo ng ELLs , pro grams dif fe r with res pect to the exp ertis e of th ei r staf f, their re sources and cap acity, an d commu nity prio ritie s.

3 Cha llen gin g Com mo n My ths Abo ut Yo ung Eng lish Language Le arners Pa ge 3 Chal leng in g Comm on Myt hs Ab out Young Eng lish Language Lear ners it h the in crea si ng dem and s fo r ac coun tab il ity and high acad em ic achie nal policymake rs are ve me nt fo r all stude nts , edu catio the ir atte ntion child re n (ag es three to asing to young incre ng lish spe aking backg eight) fro m non-E rou nd s. Chi ldre n wh o r than Eng lish in the ho me and are not W sp eak a lang uag e othe fu lly flue nt in Eng lish are desig nate d as Englis h Lang uage Le arners (EL Ls ). ol syste ms has been dramatic over the past The rat e of gro wt h of ELLs in the scho e, wit h som e Southe experiencing 300 to 40 0 pe rcent increa ses . In decad rn states of the pre scho 50 percent ol popu lat io n comes so me parts of the cou ntry , mo re than (1 ) As a grou p, ELL stu de nts have stru gg led to aking home fro m non-Eng lish-spe s. beco lag ge d we ll be hind in te rms of acad emic achiev ement, and me flu ent in Eng lish, 2 out rate s almost twice thos e of native Eng lish spe akers . had school drop co nf lue nce of the se facto rs has created The an urg ent nee d to des ign and implement s and scho ol stru cture EL L stud ents will ens ure that ap proache inst ruct ional s that ve at hig h le vels . The is sue of ho w to bes t ed ucate our no n-English thrive and achie st ude nt s to full Eng lis h flue ncy and high acad emic sp eaking s has often be en standard clo ude d by dee ply he ld belie fs and myths ar e no t info rmed by curre nt resear ch . that ha ve bee n adva nce s in ne urosc ien ce, ri gorous Fort unat ely, in the pa st two de cades there on dual lang uag e deve lop ment, early child ho od pro gram evalu ati ons, an d re search int ernatio nal rese arch on mu ltiling ual dev elo pme nt that can pro vid e us ef ul guidance on be st policie s and pra ctice ELL childre n . s for young care fu lly analy zed , this ne w re se arch icts co mmonly he ld be liefs When ofte n co ntrad onal and myth s tha t have in flue nc ed the inst ruct ion, asse ssm ent prac tic es, and org anizati se rve ELL rams that ional child ren age s three to ei ght. st ruct ure of educat prog ne w re se arch show s that The istent, co herent ap pro ach to ed ucation that a cons pro vid es cont s, enhanced le arning opp ortunities fro m Prekind erg arten thro ugh inuou Grad e (P K-3 ) off ers the be st cha nce for imp ro ved acad emi c per fo rm ance. Third ELL ch ild ren in PK -3 pro gr am s wou ld have th e adva nt age of six years of continu ous edu catio n wit h a cu rriculum integ rating stand ards , co ns iste nt ins tru ctiona l method s, and ong oing asse ssme s. nts of the ir progres PK-3 r the ess ential giv es ELL child ren mo re time both to maste The app roach eleme age and to learn challenging acad emic co ntent. nts of the Eng lish langu Acad em ic succe ss at the end of Third Grade will incre ase the like lihoo d that ELL child ren will do we ll during emic careers . the re st of the ir acad This s six commonly held belie fs ab out the deve lop ment and le arning brief hig hlight of young childre n who are le arning Englis h as their se cond langu age and pr ese nts re search ev ide nce that can be tter gu ide ed ucatio nal policies .

4 Cha ll engi ng Co mm on Myths Abo ut You ng English Learners Language Pa ge 4 MYT H 1: yea rs wi ll overwhel m, Lea rni ng two languag es during the early childhood of English. con fus e, and /or de lay a ch ild’s ac quisition When ren pres cho olers ins ert Spa nis h in to thei r En gl ish sent en ces or sch oo l- age child al ter nat e betw een the tw o lang uag es while socializing with the ir pee rs, con ve ntional the two lang uag es. Becaus e langu age learning wi sdo m con cl ud es tha t the y are confu sing umen ta l an d cha lle ng in g task dur in g th e fir st ye ars of life , it is al so logi cal is suc h a mon exp ect ing you ng children to learn no t one , but tw o lang uag es as they to believ e that 3 to spe ak may de lay ove rall langu ag e flu ency . are just be ginning ite ho lds tr ue. Most youn g chil dr en thr ough out th e wor ld successfull y In fac t, the oppos lea rn mor e th an one lan gua ge fro m th ei r ear lies t yea rs. Ex ci tin g new res ear ch from neur two langu ages dur ing os ci en tis ts and ps ycho li ngu is ts on the imp act of le arning -to ddle r year s has hig hlighte d the hu man brain’s to learn the infant exte ns ive cap acity iple lang uag es, as well as the inf ant’s to se parate out each lang uag e and to mult ability 4 lang uage is ap pro priate in a give n context. int erp ret co nte xt ual cu es to know which that The re is wid e scie nt ific co nse nsus al inf ants dev elo p tw o sep ar ate but bilingu 5 ed ling uist ic sy stems du ring co nnect We now know that infan ts the first year of lif e. hav e the innat e capacity to learn two langu age s fro m birth and that this ear ly du al lang uag e exp osure does not de lay dev elo pme nt in either langu age . su gg ests that ages be nef its th e brain nt rese arch the de ve lop me nt of two langu Rece brain throu re lated to lang uage , gh the de velo pm ent of gre ater tis sue dens ity in areas 6 You ng ch ild ren learn ing two lan gua ges al so have mor e neu ral ry , and at te nt ion . memo 7 Th is incre ase d ac ti vi ty in the part s of th e bra in as soc ia ted wi th lan gua ge pro ces si ng. bra in activit y an d neu ra l den si ty may ha ve lon g-t erm posi tive ef fects on specific type s as thos e that req uire focu sing on the details of a task and of co gnit ive ab ilit ie s, such 8 lang uage is stru cture d and us ed . kno wing how The se stu die s hav e also de mo ns trated kno wing mo re than one lang uag e does not that ish when the acq ui sitio n of Engl delay c ach ievemen t in Engl is h or impede ac ademi bo th la ngua ges ar e supp orted . Re se arch on childre n who le arn Englis h af ter their ho me lang uag e has be en establis hed — usually aro und age thre e — has als o sho wn that n are cap able of add ing a seco nd lang uag e du ring the PK -3 mo st you ng childre years and that this dual lang uag e ability conf ers lo ng-te rm co gnitiv e, cu ltur al, and 9, 10, 11 econo mic ad vant ag es.

5 Cha llen gin g Com mo n My ths Abo ut Yo ung Eng lish Language Le arners Pa ge 5 MYT H 2: To ta l En glish imm ersio n from Prekinder garten th rough Thi rd Grade is the be st wa y for a young En glis h Lang uage Learner to acqui re Engli sh. Co mmo time chil dre n spe nd lis tening to and sp eaking n sense su gg ests that the more of the Englis h languag e. For r the fundamentals English, the fast er the y will maste stab lishe d first langu age , this may be the ad ults and olde r childre n who hav e a well-e n ne ed su ff icient is true that childre t in a lang uage to gain flue ncy. In case . It also inpu d that re n are no t instr ed ucat ors are co ncerne ucted in ad ditio n, many if yo ung child fro m the very be ginning, the child ren will be co nfu sed and English-o nly prog rams acquisit ion of Eng lis h flue ncy and literacy skills will be delay ed . their arch Rese io n pro grams for EL L stu dents on the effect s of early Eng lish immers icts this belie f. The ev ide nce sugge re n in the se prescho ol pro grams co ntrad st s that child sh te nd to lose the ir abil ity to com mun icate in th ei r fi rst langu age, start to pr efer the Engli la ngua ni cat ion pr ob lem s wi th the ir exten de d fami lie s, an d ge, fre que ntly devel op co mmu 12 expe ve ment in Eng lish. rience depre sse d acade mic achie childr en wh o ar e acti ve ly pr oce ssing and hav e not ye t ma ste re d th e eleme nts For young com pl et el y sh iftin g fr om the ir first of their firs t la ngu age, liar lan gua ge to a ne w, unfami ive ef fec t on Engl la ngu age to o ear ly may have a negat ish fl uen cy and acad emic ac hi evem ent dur ing th e PK -3 years and bey on d. Whi le En gl ish can be succes sfu lly and children in tr od uc ed during th e pres ch oo l yea rs , if it repl aces th e home langu age, do not have the op por tu nit y to co nti nue to lea rn in the la ngua ge they know, their tual, and acad emic dev elopment in Englis h is at ris k. fut ur e lin gu is ti c, co ncep Syst ema ti c, del ibera te ex posur e to En glish durin g ear ly ch ildh ood combin ed with on goi ng opport uni ti es to le arn imp ortant lang uag e re su lts in co nce pts in the home achie vement in bo th the home h by the end of Thir d the highest lang uage and Englis 13 d. Gra de and beyon t for the home la nguag e duri ng Th e most rec en t evi denc e sug ge st s tha t in te nsiv e suppor ent in English. You ng children at tainm the pre sch ool yea rs wi ll help , no t hu rt, lo ng-t erm nu rsery rhym can learn s, extend ed vo cabu lary, and early literacy skil ls in es, song English e langu age with adu lt su pp ort. EL L childre n who receive and the ir hom sy ste matic op portunitie s in their home langu age fro m ag es thre e to eight le arning co nsiste ntly ou tp erf orm thos e who attend Englis h-only pro grams on mea su res of 14, 15 , 16 acad the midd le and high schoo l ye ars. em ic achie ve ment in Eng lish during age le arning s can occu r during The se du al langu de sig nated cl ass roo m opp ortunitie inst ruc ti ona l ti me throug the day in each langu age, in ad ditio n to ext end ed activities hout con du cted in th e hom e by fam ily me mb ers in the child’ s first langu age . Enco urag ing ELL ren’ s fam ilie s to continue to talk with, rea d to, an d sing to the chil d and to child us e th e hom e la ngua ge in ev er yday acti vi tie s wil l promot e conti nuous de velo pment of 17, 18 the child’ s first lang uage while the child als o is acq uiring Eng lis h.

6 Cha ll engi ng Co mm on Myths Abo ut You ng English Learners Language Pa ge 6 MYTH 3: inall of Becaus eschools don’ tha ve the capacity to provide instruction En gl ish-on ly ted by the childr en ,they should provide the lan gua ges represen ins tr uc ti on . Early n pro gra ms throug hou t the cou ntry are re porting not only mor e ELL ed ucatio but also more diff ere nt lang uag es re pres ente d amo ng their childr en and child ren, les Co unty, than 55 percent of the five-y ear -old s ente ring more s. In Los Ange familie n who se primary ho me langu age is not kind erg arte n in 2004-2 005 we re childre 19 from Sp anis h-s peaking English, wit h 88 pe rce nt coming Head Star t has ho mes . do cum ente d more than 140 diff ere nt lang uag es amo ng the ir familie lled . At the s enro , le ss than 10 pe rcent sam e time one languag e, of our teache rs are flu ent in mo re than ce rt ifi ed in early od ed ucatio n have any training in cu ltu ral and fe w te achers childho 20 div ersit y. istic and lingu se scho the ne ed s of all lingu strato rs canno t meet Becau is tic grou ps , they ol ad mini s se nse to ad opt Englis h-only ap proache s. While it may make arg ue that it make se nse fro m a narrow sta ff ing pe rspe ctive, this wou ld be a mis guid ed co nclu sio n. Fro m the pre ced ing discussio n, it is cle ar that acad emically , socially, and in ord er to thrive yo ung n ne ed syste matic support for their ho me langu age co gnit ively, EL L childre while the y are acq uirin g Eng lish. when teache rs do not spe ak the child ’s firs t lang uag e, the re are many specific Even 21 Teach er s an d teaching practice e langu ag e de ve lo pment. s that will support nativ staf f can suppo rt child re n’ s home lang uag e thro ug hou t the day in all kinds of ancillary le arning situ atio ns; they als o can train parents , commu nity me mbe rs, and voluntee rs to work with EL L childre n in their langu age. Ideally , ed ucators will prov id e home ort thro ugh the eleme ntary grad es. ho me lang uag e supp It is possible for all PK-3 te ache rs to introd uce yo ung ELL child re n to En glish whil e also pm ent of th e chi ld’s fi rst langua ge — even wh en the teacher has sup port ing develo no exp eri en ce wi th th e langu age. While this is a challe nging go al, it sho uld be a high prio rity for classroo ms in which childre n speak many langu age s.

7 Cha llen gin g Com mo n My ths Abo ut Yo ung Eng lish Language Le arners Pa ge 7 MYT H 4: and lang uage del ays Nat ive Englis h speake rs will experience academic if th ey are en rol le d in du al la ng ua ge programs. hold s that pare nts and ed ucat ors may na tive Co nv enti on al wi sdom be re luct ant to enroll n in prog rams whe re mu ch of the ir acad emic ins truction Eng li sh-sp ea kin g childre is age the childre n hav e not mas tere d. Th ey fear that the ir child re n may “lose in a langu grou comp ared with their mo no lingu al Englis h-s peaking nd ” ov er the PK -3 years pee rs. Because achie veme nt te sting is co nd ucte d in Englis h, there also all imp ortant will be dis ad vantage d by the amo unt of instru cti onal time is the fear that the stu dents sp ent le arning a se cond lang uag e. In fact, re cent evaluat ions show that the dual lang uage ap proach is eff ective for bo th ELL stu dent s and fo r nativ . Du al langu age pro grams educate all e Eng lish spe akers ren in tw o lang uag es . The child goal is to pr om ot e bi lin gua lis m an d bi cu lt ur alis m for ts. In thes e cla ssro om s, all stu den ts ex per ien ce the bene fits and challenges al l st uden d with learning asso ciate language during the early child hoo d year s as we ll as a se cond the richness of be ing intro du ce d to many cultu res and social cus to ms. Th e du al la ngu age ap pr oach is on e of th e few inst ruc ti on al met hods tha t can fu lly ent gap for EL L stud ents while not ad vers ely aff ecting non-E LL cl ose th e ac hievem st ud ent s. All stu de nts se em to bene fit, as meas ure d by stand ard ized achieveme nt 22, 23 testing and posit iv e repo rts from parents , te achers, and ad ministrato rs .

8 Cha ll engi ng Co mm on Myths Abo ut You ng English Learners Language Pa ge 8 MYT H 5: c delay s wh en Span ish -speaking Lat inos show socia l as well as academi ent er in g Kind erg arten . c ach ievemen t gap for yo un g La ti no ELLs Th e aca demi is si gn if ic ant at Ki ndergarten natio years . In a large nal stu dy , lo w-income ut the school en try and pers is ts thro ugho n scor ed more than Hisp dev iation belo w the natio nal anic childre half a standard 24 at ind erg arten entry . in mat h and read ing achiev av erage ement ement disp arities re n who are no t native Eng lis h spe akers The se achiev pe rsis t as child e to have lo wer lev els of edu catio nal achiev ement, incl ud ing high co ntinu su bst antially ol co mple tion and colle scho nt rate s, than their peers fro m En gl ish- onl y ge enrollme 5, 26 2 backgro unds. mic discre s are well docu me nted and we ll kno wn among pancie Alt hou gh the se acade the ed ucat ional co mm unity , almo st no attentio n has bee n paid to the so cia l 7 2 ELL child s of young co mp et encie ren. emo tio nal and soc ial co mp ete nce of yo ung ELL child re n is imp ortan t to their The t and aca dem ic ac hievem sch oo l ad ju stmen en t. Youn g chi ldr en mu st be ab le to reg ulat e th eir em oti on s, fo ll ow di rect io ns , for m po si ti ve soci al bo nds, and ex press the ir feeli ngs ly to succe ed in scho ol. Acco rding ap prop riate to mu ltip le me as ure s of famil y risk fac tor s, e.g. , poverty, immi gran t st atu s, Engl ish lan gua ge fl uen cy, an d ac cess to men tal and phy sical he alt h se rv ice s, Latino ELL child ren wo uld ap pe ar to be at gr eater risk than their e and non-H ispanic pe ers fo r po or mental he alth. whit child immigran t families re n fro m Mexican Ho weve r, rece nt re sear ch has fou nd that ha d low er levels of in ter nal izi ng and ext ernal izi ng sym ptoms tha n both the ir wh ite an d 28 Tea chers rat ed the child fam ilies at ren of Mexican im mig rant an- Am eri can peer s. Afric ar ten ent ry as mor e soc ial ly an d em otiona lly co mpe tent than the ir pe ers fro m Ki nderg rou nds. sim ilar backg finding that the se child ren were rated as having a “mental The he alth adv antag e” is note wo rthy, giv en the multip le ris k facto rs ass ociated with Mexican imm fam ilies . ig rant so ci al- emo tio na l st rengt hs amo ng a pop ul at ion of ten vi ewed Th ese unrec ogn ized only th ro ugh the “at -ri sk ” lens of fers a potent ial sour ce of res il ienc e that sch oo l pers onnel nize , su ppo rt, and enhance. Be caus e yo ung Mexican immigra sho uld recog en nt childr are judg ed to be at leas t as intra- and inter -pe rso nally co mpe tent as their peer s, if no t more so , than their pe ers , Hispanic child -rearing practice s have like ly promote d their child y to control their emo tio ns and ge t alo ng with others at scho ol entry ren’ s abilit ss . social compe te ncies fo r scho ol succe — tw o hig hly prized

9 Cha llen gin g Com mo n My ths Abo ut Yo ung Eng lish Language Le arners Pa ge 9 MYT H 6: are less likely to be enrol le d in Lati no English language learners values. cultural Pr ek ind erg art en prog ram s, bec ause of their families’ ll the ir child enro arch re n in early ed ucatio nal Rese families do cum ent s that Latino r rate s than their African-American, White , and As ian pro grams at much lowe to half of childre n in Ca lif orn ia ages thr ee to fi ve acr os s al l art s. Close co unterp ra cia l/ ethn ic gro up s ar e en ro ll ed in pres choo l/ ch ild ca re (47 per cen t), while only 29 ch ildre 37 pe rcent to five are similarly enro lled . of Latino Whe n Lati no n ag es three pre scho ole rs li ve in a hou se hold h fluently whe re no one ov er the age of 14 sp eaks Englis istically ed), the enro llment rate drop s to 32 pe rcent. In contra st, abo ut (lingu isolat of Asian 50 pe rcent re n in California attend pre scho ol/ child care irre spe cti ve child of the abilit y of peo ple over the ag e of 14 to sp eak Englis h flu ently . The co nve ntio nal wisd om ho lds that this lo w attend ance fo r Latino child re n, de spite the we ll-known be nef its of hig h-quality edu cation, is base d on the ir familie s’ early se the Latino has a stro ng emp has is on “la cu ltu ral valu es and belie fs . Becau cu lture familia” and tend s to turn to the family fo r eco no mic and ins tru me ntal suppo rt, many pe aking mo thers hav e infe rre d that Spanish-s childr en in cho ose to ke ep the ir young the hom e rathe r than enrolling the m in early edu catio n pro grams . Rece nt stu die s cast do ubt on this ass umptio n. The y suggest that Latino chil dr en ci al at tend r-base d prog rams at low er rate s becau se of finan e cente ou t-of -hom 30, 31 co nstraint s and lack of acce ss, not be cau se of any cu ltu ral re luctance . In fact, oo d Latina iste ntly placed a hig h valu e on quality early childh mo the rs hav e cons pro grams, but oft en cannot find af fordab le pro grams in their neig hb orho ods .

10 Cha ll engi ng Co mm on Myths Abo ut You ng English Learners Language Pa ge 10 Con cl us ion s co nclusi ons res t on the cu rrent res earch and practice . The following are capabl e of lea rni ng two lan gua ge s. Be comi ng bil ingual g children 1. All youn has long -t er m cog ni ti ve, acad emic, social, cu ltu ral, and eco no mic bene fits . Biling ualis m is an asset . stu den ts req uire sys te matic su ppo rt for the cont inu ed dev elo pment 2. Yo ung ELL of e langua ge. the ir hom 3. Loss of the hom e lang uag e has potential e lo ng-te rm co ns eq ue nces for negativ acade mic, social, the EL L child’s and emo tio nal dev elo pme nt, as well as fo r the family ics. dynam rs and prog ra ms can adop gies to support ho me lang uage 4. Teache t effe ctiv e strate al Englis are mo no lingu rs . dev elo pm ent even whe n the te achers h speake 5. Du al la ngu age pro gram s ar e an eff ecti ve appr oa ch to im pr ovi ng aca dem ic ac hi evemen t re n while fo r ELL child pro vid ing benef its to nativ e Englis h speake rs. also 6. Hisp Spanish-spe aking childre anic Kind ergarte n with many soci al str engths n enter that are the re sult of pos itive parenting practices that nee d to be ackno wl ed ged and enhance d. anic pare nts valu e high-q early ed ucatio n and will enro ll thei r young 7. Hisp uality s are af fo rd ab le and acces sib le. child ren if pro gram Fi na lly, reco gniz ing th e perio d fro m ages thr ee to ei gh t as cri tic al for langu age develo sary for prov iding the continu ity and exte nd ed time for childr en pm ent is neces to fully be nef it from the se pro grams . The PK-3 years are critical years for deve lopin g mastery of the so unds, stru cture , and functio ns of langu age, and thu s are an ideal 7, 22, 25 time ages . to exp ose childre n to the be ne fits of tw o langu gs, we ca n im prov e the education Wit h reg ula r and con ti nue d appl ica tion of the se findin al ou tco mes for ELL child ren as well as the social and econo mic stre ngth of our dive rse com mu nitie s. Howe ver , doing so will req uire that we all ab and on outd ated misconce pt ions and dilig ently inf orm ou r practices with curre nt scientif ic fi nd ings .

11 Cha llen gin g Com mo n My ths Abo ut Yo ung Eng lish Language Le arners Pag e 11 Foot notes 8. Ha kut a, P. K. Ea rly lang ua ge acqu isi tion. 1 . Ol sen, L. Ensu sh learners. ring acad emic success c for Engli UC Lin guisti 1 , (4), Summer v15 Newsletter rc h In st it ute, Resea Minority 2006. at ion, Edu ca tiona l Dem og ra phi cs 19. Ca li for nia Dep artm ent of Educ . 2006. Sta tew id e Eng li sh Lea rner s by La ng ua ge and Grade, 200 5-0 6 Unit . 2. Gandara , P., R. Rumberger, J. Maxwe ll-Joll y, & R. Call ahan. English http://d q. cde.c a. go v/da ta quest /LE Pby La ng 1. asp ?cCh oice= Lepby La ng 1&c Year = Educ at ion Polic y Anal ysis lea rne rs in Calif ornia ou tcomes. schools : Une qual, 200 5-0 6&c Level =Sta te&c Top ic =LC&m yTim eFra me= S&su bmi t1 =Su bmi t. ,11(3 6), 200 3. Retrie . ht tp ://e u.e du/e paa v11n 36/v 11n3 6.pd f ve dfrom Arc hi ve s 20. Ra y, A., B. Bow ma n, & J. Robbi ns. Pr ep ar in g Ear ly Ch il dh oo d Teac he rs awa reness and read ing 3. Chiap pe, P., & L.S. Siegel. Phonological to Suc cessfu ll y Ed uc at e Al l Ch ild ren , Founda tion for Chi ld De ve lopm ent acq uisitio ing Canad ia n children. nd Punjabi-speak ish-a n in Engl Pol ic y Report , Sep te mbe r 20 06 . Re tr ie ve d from Jou rna l of Educati onal Psychology, 91 , (1999), 20-28. urc es_ sh ow.h tm?do c_ id =463 59 9. http://w ww. fcd -us. or g/r esou rc es/reso the speech 4. Kuhl , P.K. Ear ly langua ge acquisition: crac king code. osa , L. En gl ish-l ang ua ge le arner s as the y ent er sc hool . 21. Espin 83 1-843. (2004), (11), 5 Na tu re Rev iew s Neuroscience, is h 22. Collier, V., & W.P. Thomas . Refo rmi ng edu catio n po li ci es for Engl 5. Ge ne see, F. , J. Paradis, Crag o. Dual Language Dev elopm ent and M.B. The State Ed ucati on Standa rd , 3(1), learn ers me ans be tte r schoo ls for all . an d Dis order s: A Handbook on Bilin gu ali sm and Second Language Learning . (2002), 30- 36. & Collier, V., & W.P. Thomas . The asto unding effecti veness 2004. Baltimo re, MD: Broo kes Pu blishing, ch an d Pra ct ic e NABE of dual languag e for all . , 2:1 (Wint er Jo ur nal of Resear 6. Mech el li , A., J.T. Crinio J. O’Dohert n, U. Noppeney, y, J. Ashburner, 200 4), 1- 20. R. Frack Plasticity in the Bilingual ow iak, & C.J. Pri ce. “Structural Brain,” eff ec tive ness. 23. Th om as, W. A nat iona l st udy of sc hool 757. Na tu re , Vo l. 431 (2004), 24. Le e, V., & D. Bur ka m. In equ al it y at the st art ing ga te: So ci al bac kg ro un d l “Bi lingual & L.A . Petitto. n, I., S. Bakers, 7. Kov elma and Monolingua diffe re nce s in achi eve me nt as chi ldr en beg in school omi c Econ DC: . Washi ngton, al Si gnatu St udy of a ‘Neurologic s Com par ed: An fMRI Brain re’ of Pol ic y In sti tut e, 200 2. Bilingu alism. ” Pa per pres ented at the annual meet ing of the Soc iet y for Ne uro scien ce, Atl ant a, GA, Oct ober 2006. 25. Ga nda ra , P. En gli sh le arne rs in Ca li for ni a sc hools. ed E. , F. I. M. Craik, 8. Bial ystok, & J. Ryan. “Executi ve Con trol in a Modifi e sc ho ol dropout 26. Rum be rg er , R. W. Wha t can be done to reduc s? In alis m, ” An ti sa cc ade Task: Effects Jo urna l of Experimen of Agi ng and Bilingu tal Gary Orfi ed (Ed. ), ic a: Co nfr ont in g th e Gr ad uat io n Ra te Dr opou ts in Amer , Vol. 32, No. 6. (2006), and Cognition Ps ych olog y: Learni ng, Memory (pp. 24 3- 254 ). Ca mbridg e: Ha rva rd Educ Crisis ation Pr ess, 2004 . . 1341-1354 osa , L. En gl ish-l ang ua ge le arner s as the y ent er sc hool . 27. Espin Literacy, 9. Bialy stok , E. Bi li ng ualism in Development: Language, and . Ca mb ri dge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press , 2001. Cog nition 28. Espin osa , L. En gl ish-l ang ua ge le arner s as the y ent er sc hool . ta , K. , Y.G. But ler, & D. Witt 10. Haku How Long Does It Take En glish . Pres ch ool an d chil dcare enroll ment in Calif ornia . 29. Lopez , E.S ., & de Co s, P. L. 2000. Lea rner s to Att ai n Proficiency? Sa cra men to, Califo rnia , 2004. No: CR B99009. Ca lifo rnia Res ear ch Bu reau akuta.pdf ublications/00_h . Febru ary 13, 2007) (accessed ht tp: //l mri. 30. Ful ler , B. Ma ppi ng the ava ila bili ty of ce nte r- bas ed car e in Lati no 11. Ku hl, P.K.Ea rl y language acquisition. communities . Pape r pre sent ed at the tec hni cal wor k gr oup me et ing of the Na tion al Task Forc e on Ea rly Chil dhood ation for Hispa nic s, Educ 12. Haku ta , K. How Long Does It Take Tuc son , AZ, 200 5. 13. Thomas, ness for r. A na tio nal stud y of scho ol eff ective W., & V. Collie 31. He rn andez , D. De mogr aphi c cha ng e and the li fe cir cum st anc es of la ngua ge mi nority student ac hievement. Santa Cruz , s’ lon g-t erm ac ademic Fou nda ti on fo r Chi ld Devel imm ig ra nt fa mili es. op men t . Univ er sit y at Al ba ny, on Educ CA : Center for Research Diversit y & Exc ellence. 2002. ation, SUNY , 20 04 . Re trie ved from : al .org/crede/pubs/ResBrief10.htm . http ://www.c eff ec tive ness. 32. Th om as, W. A nat iona l st udy of sc hool 14. Campo s, S.J. Th e Carp enteria preschool program: A long-t erm effec ts (Eds.), Meeting th e challenge of stu dy . In E. E. Ga rc ia & B. Mc Lau ghlin 33. Espin osa , L. En gl ish-l ang ua ge le arner s as the y ent er sc hool . diversit (pp.34-48 ood education lin guist ic and cultural ). y in early childh 34. Rod rig uez , J. L., D. Dura n, R.M . Diaz , & L. Esp inosa . The im pa ct of Ne w York: Teac her s College Press , 1995. bi lin gual pr esc hool ed uca tion on the la ngua ge de ve lopm ent of Spa nish- 15 . Gut ie rrez-C lellen, V. Language choice in interven ti on with bil in gual sp eak in g childre n. Ea rl y Ch il dh ood Resea rc h Qu art erl y , 10 , (1 995), 475 -490. , 8, (1999), gy ng uage Patholo an Jour nal of Speech-La Americ chi ldren. 291-302. 35. Win sl er, A. , R.M. Di az, L. Es pinos a, & J.L. Rodri gu ez. When learn ing tical charact 16. Re strep o, M.A ., & K. Krut eristics h. Gramma of a the fi rst : Bi ling ua l lang ua ge not mean losing a se con d lan guag e does bilingu impairment. language al stud en t wit h specific ak ing chil dre n at tending de ve lopm en t in low- inc ome , Spa ni sh-spe Quarterly Commun 66-76. , 21, (2003), icat io ns Di sorders , 70(2) , (1 99 9) , 34 9-3 62. op men t Ch ild Devel bi lin gual pr esc hool . learners as they enter school. nguage 17. Es pino sa , L. En glish-la , M. Cox, (Eds.) & K. Snow In R. Pianta , School readiness and the transition re, MD : to kind er garten in th e era of accountabil ity (pp .175-196). Baltimo Paul H. Br ook es , 2007.


Related documents

Early Childhood Standards of Quality for Prekindergarten

Early Childhood Standards of Quality for Prekindergarten

Early Childhood Quality of Standards for Prekindergarten Michigan State Board of Education Initially approved March 8, 2005 Revised March 12, 2013 powered by the ® Collaboratives Michigan’s Great Star...

More info »
PS technology WEB2

PS technology WEB2

POSITION STATEMENT ADOPTED JANUARY 2012 A joint position statement of the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at...

More info »