The federally funded Training All Teachers (TAT) project is an innovative program of curricular enhancement for preservice and inservice educators across disciplines. The project focuses on English language learners (ELLs) in U.S. schools and the fact that the training of school personnel in issues related to these learners’ needs has not kept pace with the growing numbers of these learners. The goal of the TAT project is to increase opportunities for all pre-/inservice teachers, pupil services personnel, administrators, and other education personnel to learn about issues specific to ELLs. To these ends, School of Education faculty across departments and disciplines participated in a variety of activities designed to support integration of ELL issues into their teacher/professional graduate courses. The goals and structure of these faculty development activities and their outcomes are discussed, as well as the implications of such training.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdgerC., and LockeJ. (2000). Broadening the base: School/community partnerships serving language minority students at risk (Educational Practice Rep. No. 6). Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence.
2.
AllingtonD. (1994). The schools we have, the schools we need (National Research Center on English Learning and Achievement Report Series No. 1.12). Albany, NY: Center on English Learning and Achievement.
3.
AugustD., and HakutaK. (1998). Educating language-minority children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4.
BurnsM., GriffinP., and SnowC. (Eds.). (1999). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
5.
CarterT., and ChatfieldM. (1986). Effective bilingual schools: Implications for policy and practice. American Journal of Education, 95, 200—232.
6.
CazdenC. (1986). ESL teachers as language advocates for children. In RiggP., and EnrightD. (Eds.), Children and ESL: Integrating perspectives (pp 9—21). Washington, DC: TESOL.
7.
Center for Applied Linguistics (1999). Enriching content classes for secondary ESOL students. Washington, DC: Delta Systems.
8.
ChamotA., and O'MalleyJ. (1989). The cognitive academic language learning approach. In RiggP., and AllenV. (Eds.), When they all don't speak English: Integrating the ESL student into the regular classroom (pp. 108—125). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
9.
ClaireN. (1998). Teacher study groups: Persistent questions and promising approach. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 465—492.
CollierV. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 617—641.
12.
CollierV. (1989). How long? A synthesis of research on academic achievement in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 509—531.
13.
CumminsJ. (1989). Empowering minority students. Sacramento: California Association for Bilingual Education.
14.
CumminsJ. (2001). Author's introduction: Framing the universe of discourse. Are the constructs of power and identity relevant to school failure?Harvard Educational Review, 71, 649—655.
15.
Darling-HammondL. (1997). The right to learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
DelpitL. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press.
IogaC. (1995). The inner world of the immigrant child. New York: St. Martin's Press.
21.
LightR. (1997). A note on myths about language, learning, and minority children. Working paper, University at Albany, State University of New York. Retrieved from http://www.albany.edu/lap/Papers/myths.html
22.
LucasT., HenzeR., and DonatoR. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino language minority students: An exploratory study of six high schools. Harvard Educational Review, 60, 315—340.
23.
New York State Education Department, Office of Bilingual Education. (2000). The teaching of language arts to limited English proficient/English language learners: A resource guide for all teachers. Albany, Office of Bilingual Education, New York State Department of Education.
PierceB. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9—32.
26.
de la Luz ReyesM. (1992). Challenging venerable assumptions: Literacy instruction for linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 427—446.
27.
de la Luz ReyesM., and LalibertyE. (1992). A teacher's “Pied Piper” effect on young authors. Education and Urban Society, 24, 263—278.
28.
RoacheM., ShoreJ., GouletaE., and ButkevichE. (2003). An investigation of collaboration among school professionals in serving culturally and linguistically diverse students with exceptionalities. Bilingual Research Journal, 27(1), 117—136.
29.
SamwayK., and McKeonD. (1999). Myths and realities: Best practices for language minority students. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
30.
Schinke-LlanoL. (1983). Foreigner talk in content classrooms. In SlingerH., and LongM. (Eds.), Classroom centered research in second language acquisition (pp. 146—164). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
31.
SnowC., and Wong-FillmoreL. (2002). What teachers need to know about language. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
32.
SotoL. (1997). Language, culture, and power. Albany: State University of New York Press.
33.
Strategies for All Teachers. (n.d.). [Internet resource.] Albany: Language Advocacy Project, State University of New York at Albany. Retrieved from http://albany.edu/lap
34.
ValdesG. (2000). Nonnative English speakers: Language bigotry in English mainstream classrooms. ADE Bulletin, No. 124 (Winter). Retrieved May 4, 2003, from http://www.mla.org/ade/bulletin/n124/124012htm
35.
Van LierL. (1996). Interaction in the language classroom: Awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. New York: Longman.
36.
WallaceB. (2000). A call for change in multicultural training at graduate schools of education: Educating to end oppression and for social justice. Teachers College Record, 102(6), 1086—1111.
