This article explores the development of a guidance document titled the “Framework for Equitable Instruction” (Framework), which aims to support multilingual students’ content-area learning and language development. The Framework was developed by WIDA, a national consortium of states, as part of its system of language standards, assessments, and professional learning. The article discusses the Framework using a protocol originally created for the alignment of content-area and language standards. The protocol highlights the rigorous theoretical foundations of the Framework, the research-based rationale behind its conceptualization of language trajectories, and the tight linkages between the Framework, content-area standards, and classroom instruction. The systematic exploration of the Framework’s features in this article can inform the future design of language standards and related documents and serve as a foundation for the constructive critique of existing ones.
AlimS. (2005). Critical language awareness in the United States: Revisiting issues and revisiting pedagogies in a resegregated society. Educational Researcher, 34(7), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034007024
2.
ArielyM.LivnatZ.YardenA. (2019). Analyzing the language of an adapted primary literature article. Science & Education, 28(63), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00033-5
3.
BaileyA.HuangB. (2011). Do current English language development/proficiency standards reflect the English needed for success in school?Language Testing, 28(3), 343–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211404187
4.
BazermanC. (1994). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In FreedmanA.MedwayP. (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 67–86). Taylor & Francis.
5.
CookH. G.MacDonaldR. (2016). Reference Performance Level Descriptors: Outcome of a national working session on defining an “English proficient” performance standard. In LinquantiR.CookH. G.BaileyA.MacDonaldR. (Eds.), Moving toward a more common definition of English learner: Collected guidance for states and multi-state assessment consortia (pp. 73–84). Council of Chief State School Officers. https://www.wested.org/resources/common-definition-of-english-learner/#
6.
CórdovaR. A.BalcerzakP. (2016). Co-constructing cultural landscapes for disciplinary learning in and out of school: The next generation science standards and learning progressions in action. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(4), 1223–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9678-4
CummingA. (2008). Assessing oral and literate abilities. In ShohamyE.HornbergerN. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 7. Language testing and assessment (2nd ed., pp. 3–17). Springer.
11.
de JongE.HarperC.CoadyM. (2013). Enhanced knowledge and skills for elementary mainstream teachers of English language learners. Theory Into Practice, 52(2), 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2013.770326
12.
DevittA. (2015). Genre performances: John Swales’ genre analysis and rhetorical-linguistic genre studies. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 19, 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.008
13.
FaltisC.AriasM. B.Ramirez-MarinF. (2010). Identifying relevant competencies for secondary teachers of English learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 33(3), 307–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2010.529350
14.
FloresN.RosaJ. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149
15.
FloresN.SchisselJ. L. (2014). Dynamic bilingualism as the norm: Envisioning a heteroglossic approach to standards-based reform. TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 454–479. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.182
16.
GeeJ. (2005). Language in the science classroom: Academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In YerrickR.RothW.-M. (Eds.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research (pp. 19–37). Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
GibbonsP. (1998). Classroom talk and the learning of new registers in a second language. Language and Education, 12(2), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500789808666742
18.
GutiérrezK.RogoffB. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032005019
19.
GutiérrezK.Sengupta-IrvingT.DieckmannJ. (2010). Developing a mathematical vision: Mathematics as a discursive and embodied practice. In MoschkovichJ. (Ed.), Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research (pp. 29–71). Information Age.
20.
HakutaK.SantosM. (2012). Understanding language: Challenges and opportunities for language learning in the context of Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards [Conference overview paper]. Stanford University. https://ell.stanford.edu/publication/understanding-language-conference
21.
HanksW. (1996). Language and communicative practices. Westview Press.
22.
HeritageM.WalquiA.LinquantiR. (2015). English language learners and the new standards: Developing language, content knowledge, and analytical practices in the classroom. Harvard Education Press.
23.
HornbergerN. H.LinkH. (2012). Translanguaging and transnational literacies in multilingual classrooms: A biliteracy lens. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.658016
24.
JohnsA. (2015). Moving on from genre analysis: An update and tasks for the transitional student. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 19, 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.04.005
25.
KiblerA.ValdésG. (2016). Conceptualizing language learners: Socioinstitutional mechanisms and their consequences. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 96–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12310
26.
KiblerA.ValdésG.WalquiA. (2014). What does standards-based educational reform mean for English language learner populations in primary and secondary schools?TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.183
27.
Larsen-FreemanD.TedickD. (2016). Teaching world languages: Thinking differently. In GitomerD.BellC. (Eds.), AERA handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 1335–1388). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6_22
28.
LeeO. (2018). English language proficiency standards aligned with content standards. Educational Researcher, 47(5), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18763775
29.
LeeO. (2019). Aligning English language proficiency standards with content standards: Shared opportunity and responsibility across English learner education and content areas. Educational Researcher, 48(8), 534–542. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19872497
30.
LeeO.QuinnH.ValdésG. (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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13480524
31.
LeungC.ValdésG. (2019). Translanguaging and the transdisciplinary framework for language teaching and learning in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 348–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12568
32.
LowM. (2015). In more than one tongue: Academic literacies at work as living texts. In MolleD.SatoE.BoalsT.HedgspethC. (Eds.), Multilingual learners and academic literacies: Sociocultural contexts of literacy development in adolescents (pp. 33–52). Routledge.
33.
MartinezD.MoralesP.AldanaU. (2017). Leveraging students’ communicative repertoires as a tool for equitable learning. Review of Research in Education, 41(1), 477–499. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X17691741
MoschkovichJ. (2013). Principles and guidelines for equitable mathematics teaching practices and materials for English language learners. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 6(1), 45–57.
36.
National Council for the Social Studies. (2013). College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for enhancing the rigor of K–12 civics, economics, geography, and history. https://www.socialstudies.org/standards/c3
OttenS.KeazerL. M.KaramanR. (2019). Teachers’ talk about the mathematical practice of attending to precision. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 22(1), 69–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-017-9375-1
39.
PozaL. E.ValdésG. (2016). Assessing English language proficiency in the United States. In ShohamyE.OrI.MayS. (Eds.), Language testing and assessment (Encyclopedia of Language and Education book series; pp. 1–14). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02326-7_30-1
40.
PriorP. (2009). From speech genres to mediated multimodal genre systems: Bakhtin, Voloshinov, and the question of writing. In BazermanC.BoniniA.FigueiredoD. (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 17–34). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2009.2324.2.02
41.
RogoffB. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In WertschJ.del RioP.AlvarezA. (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). Cambridge University Press.
ThompsonJ.HagenahS.KangH.StroupeD.BraatenM.ColleyC.WindschitlM. (2016). Rigor and responsiveness in classroom activity. Teachers College Record, 118(5), 1–58.
WolfM. K.WangY.HuangB.BloodI. (2014). Investigating the language demands in the Common Core State Standards for English Language Learners: A comparison study of standards. Middle Grades Research Journal, 9(1), 35–52.
48.
ZimmermanH. T. (2012). Participating in science at home: Recognition work and learning in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 597–630. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21014
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
