Educating Multilinguals Dr. Elenita Irizarry Ramos

instructional planning includes not only planning what students will learn but how they will learn it. Planning should include both short-term goals and long-term goals, and for students with exceptionalities, should address the goals on their Individualized Education Program (IEP).

Price, K. M., & Nelson, K. L. (2018). Planning effective instruction: Diversity responsive methods and management. Cengage Learning.

Kozak, S., & Martin‐Chang, S. (2019). Preservice teacher knowledge, print exposure, and planning for instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(3), 323-338.

Cosgrove, D. F. (2019). Collaborative Planning for Instruction. Supervision Modules to Support Educators in Collaborative Teaching: Helping to Support & Maintain Consistent Practice in the Field, 177.

Backward design, also called backward planning or backward mapping, is a process that educators use to design learning experiences and instructional techniques to achieve specific learning goals. Backward design begins with the objectives of a unit or course—what students are expected to learn and be able to do—and then proceeds “backward” to create lessons that achieve those desired goals. In most public schools, the educational goals of a course or unit will be a given state’s learning standards—i.e., concise, written descriptions of what students are expected to know and be able to do at a specific stage of their education.

Selected References

Mills, J., Wiley, C., & Williams, J. (2019). " This Is What Learning Looks Like!": Backward Design and the Framework in First Year Writing. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 19(1), 155-175.

Condrat, V. (2018). Backward design: when a good ending makes a good beginning. Inspiring Professional Excellence in Teaching Languages, 64-75.

In this episode, I explore key concepts for Curriculum Desing. 

Reference include:

Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. N. (1980). Curriculum development: Theory into practice (p. 30). New York: Macmillan.

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Ernst Klett Sprachen.

Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience. Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Ave., New York, NY 10027.

Naito, M. (2019). An information literacy curriculum: a proposal. College & research libraries news, 52(5), 293-296.

This episode addresses some issues about the controversial topic of English teaching in Puerto Rico. Understanding language policies established in Puerto Rico since the island became a U.S. colony (1898) helps us figure out why after more than a century of U.S. occupation, the majority of Puerto Ricans do not consider themselves bilingual.

References

Tollefson, J.W. (Introduction). (2002). Language policies in education: Critical issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Torres González, R. (2002). Idioma, bilingüismo y nacionalidad: La presencia del inglés en Puerto Rico Rio Piedras, PR: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.

Trías-Monge, J. (1997). Puerto Rico: The trials of the oldest colony in the world. New Haven: Yale University.

Algrén de Gutiérrez, E. (1987). The movement against teaching English in schools of Puerto Rico. New York: University Press of America.

Statistics on Puerto Rican Literacy in 1890-1900

As teachers, we must think about literacy and its consequences – beyond both “neoliberal claims about literacy as a pathway to individual growth, self-esteem and so forth and past neomarxian claims about literacy as a pathway to social emancipation and revolutionary action” (Carrington and Luke, 1997, p.100). In this podcast, I talk about Bourdieu's sociological theory and how it reframes literacy.

Reference

Carrington, V., & Luke, A. (1997). Literacy and Bourdieu's sociological theory: A reframing. Language and education, 11(2), 96-112.

In this week's episode, I explore how language planning can invisibilize or empower minority language communities. Language planning encompasses policies that attempt to bring about changes in the structure and functions of languages and/or language varieties. I mention several cases where the language is seen as a problem, right, or resource, and how public policy is enacted based on those orientations. Tune in next week where I explore how the controversial political status of Puerto Rico has played a starring role in the history of the teaching English on the island.

This week's references:

Doğançay-Aktuna, S. (1997) Language Planning. In: Hornberger N.H., Corson D. (eds) Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4535-0_2

Pennycook, A. (2016). Politics, power relationships and ELT. The Routledge handbook of English language teaching, 26-37.

Ruiz, R. (1984). Orientations in language planning. NABE journal, 8(2), 15-34.