Effective ESL Strategies for Math · EFFECTIVE ESL STRATEGIES FOR MATH 9!!!! ! Audience Definition...

EFFECTIVE ESL STRATEGIES FOR MATH

Effective ESL Strategies for Math

For classroom teachers at Occoquan Elementary School

Brenda Huber, Youliduzi Niyazi, and Gloria Xie

George Mason University

Instructional Design EDIT 705

Dr. Kevin Clark

1 EFFECTIVE ESL STRATEGIES FOR MATH

Table of Contents

Problem Identification .................................................................................................................. 4

Table A ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Aim ................................................................................................................................................. 6

Brainstorming Goals ..................................................................................................................... 6

Refined Goals ................................................................................................................................ 7

Final Goals ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Audience Definition ...................................................................................................................... 9

General Characteristics ................................................................................................................ 9

Specific Characteristics ................................................................................................................ 9

Prior ESL Training And Attitudes Toward Training ............................................................. 10

Motivations And Preferences For Learning And Course Content ........................................ 10

Contextual Analysis .................................................................................................................... 11

Orienting Context ....................................................................................................................... 11

Instructional Context .................................................................................................................. 13

Transfer Context ......................................................................................................................... 13

Task Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 14

When Planning A Lesson ........................................................................................................... 14

When Introducing A Lesson ...................................................................................................... 15

Comprehensible Input ................................................................................................................ 15

Strategies ...................................................................................................................................... 15

Interaction ................................................................................................................................... 16


Practice/Application ................................................................................................................... 16

Lesson Delivery ........................................................................................................................... 16

Review/Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 17

Workshop Outline ....................................................................................................................... 18

Week 1, Module 1 (Mandatory Workshop) .............................................................................. 18

Week 1, On-Line Discussion Homework .................................................................................. 19

Week 2, Module 2 (Recommended Workshop) ........................................................................ 19






Objectives And Instructional Strategies ................................................................................... 21

Workshop 1 ................................................................................................................................. 21

Objective 1 ................................................................................................................................ 21

Objective 2 ................................................................................................................................ 22

Objective 3 ................................................................................................................................ 22

Objective 4 ................................................................................................................................ 22

Workshop 2 ................................................................................................................................. 23

Objective 5 ................................................................................................................................ 23

Objective 6 ................................................................................................................................ 23

Objective 7 ................................................................................................................................ 24

Workshop 3 ................................................................................................................................. 24


Objective 8 ................................................................................................................................ 24

Objective 9 ................................................................................................................................ 25

Objective 10 .............................................................................................................................. 25

Objective 11 .............................................................................................................................. 26

Workshop 4 ................................................................................................................................. 26

Objective 12 .............................................................................................................................. 26

Objective 13 .............................................................................................................................. 26

Objective 14 .............................................................................................................................. 27

Objective 15 .............................................................................................................................. 27

Objective 16 .............................................................................................................................. 28

Pre-Instructional Strategy (Advance Organizer) .................................................................... 28

Sequencing Content (World Related Sequencing) ................................................................... 29

Evaluation .................................................................................................................................... 30

Formative Evaluations ................................................................................................................ 30

Summative Evaluations .............................................................................................................. 31

Confirmative Evaluations .......................................................................................................... 32

Appendix A .................................................................................................................................. 34

Appendix B .................................................................................................................................. 38

Appendix C .................................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix D .................................................................................................................................. 40

References .................................................................................................................................... 41


Effective ESL Strategies for Math

Problem Identification

In Virginia, English as a Second Language (ESL) students are expected to learn grade

level mathematics and demonstrate their learning on end-of-year Standards of Learning (SOLs)

mathematics tests. However, due to learning mathematics in another language than what is

spoken in their homes, ESL students often have difficulty accessing and retaining the

mathematics knowledge and achieving at same level as native English-speaking students. The

ESL students’ difficulty is reflected in math SOL scores for students at Occoquan Elementary

School, Woodbridge, Va., in Table A (Virginia Department of Education, 2014). For ESL

students to access mathematics instruction at the same level as native language speakers of

English, they require scaffold instruction and specialized learning activities that many classroom

teachers are not trained to provide. In 2014, according to the school’s registration database

records, the ESL student population at Occoquan Elementary was about 270 students. The ESL

enrollment figure fluctuates because of frequent student transfers.

In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) has signed an agreement with Prince

William County Schools (PWCS) to ensure equal access to education for ESL students. Per the

agreement (U.S. Department of Justice, 2013), general educational teachers are required to be

trained in effective EL (English learner) instructional techniques to ensure ESL students access

to their learning. Both new and experienced teachers are required to receive 60 hours of training

to learn EL instructional techniques. Also, the DoJ agreement requires that teachers to be

monitored to ensure that they are implementing EL instructional techniques in their classrooms.


Table A Math Standards of Learning scores at Occoquan Elementary School

Grade 3

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

All Students 89 62 73

White 95 -- 100

ESL 85 55 60

Grade 4

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014


White -- 93 --

ESL 67 63 89

Grade 5

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014


White 75 -- 90

ESL 100 74 54

-- Not statistically significant


Based on the gap in ESL and general education student scores on recent Math SOL tests

and the requirements of the DoJ agreement, it is clear that there is a training need for classroom

teachers at Occoquan Elementary School. The opportunities for training include the following:

better teacher knowledge of EL instructional techniques; more consistent implementation of EL

instructional techniques in math instruction; and better understanding of the specialized

instructional needs of ESL students.

Aim

Increased math scores on end of year SOL math tests by ESL students compared to

previous years through consistent implementation of effective EL instructional techniques in

mathematics. We propose the creation of a program to provide classroom teachers in the SOL

grades (grades 3-5) with targeted instruction and practice in using EL techniques that are

important to ESL student learning but not necessarily addressed fully during professional

development offered by PWCS.

Brainstorming Goals

Together, our group consisted of an ESOL teacher and two adult ESL students. We

brainstormed a list of actions or activities teachers have done that have made learning English

easier or more difficult for ESL students. We used this list to determine our goals for effective

strategies for math instruction.

• Teachers talk too fast.

• Don’t write things down on the board.

• Give too many instructions at one time,

• Correct me too often, which lower my confidence.

• Didn’t give me enough encouragement when I tried to speak English.


• Not a good listener, interrupting me before I was finished with my idea.

• Learners need to feel respected.

• Students need time to practice speaking in different situations.

• Didn’t give me immediate feedback on my mistakes in a respectful way.

• Positive feedback is important.

• Activities like drama, role-playing, recitations, poetry, song, and skits are of high interest

to students and can motivate them to practice.

• On-line practice websites like Rosetta Stone and Tell Me More are good because students

can listen, the website will correct their speech for them.

• It helped to learn new vocabulary when we could learn it in context, in sentence, in a

story, in a song, or when watching at TV show or a movie.

• Encourage students to make mistakes so they will keep trying to use English.

• Teachers need to encourage students to ask questions.

• Students need to feel relaxed in order to express themselves in English.

Refined Goals

Based on Morrison, Ross, Kalman, and Kemp’s (2013) recommendation, we organized

the goals, putting similar ideas together and ranking them by their importance to ESL students.

• Teachers need to speak slower.

• Teachers need to repeat important information.

• Teachers need to write important information on the board clearly.

• Teachers need to give positive and immediate feedback.

• Students need multiple, varied opportunities to practice their new vocabulary.

• Students need to learn English language in context.


• Teachers need to give students plenty of time to think and answer without interruption.

• Teachers need to give instructions in a limited amount, based on students’ proficiency.

• Teachers need to encourage students to ask questions.

• Teachers need to pace lessons so students are not confused and stressed.

• Teachers need to create a relaxed environment for learning.

We further refined the list and re-ranked the goals.

1. Teachers need to speak slower and repeat important information.

2. Students need to learn English language and vocabulary in context.

3. Students need multiple, varied opportunities to practice using new vocabulary.

4. Students need interactive opportunities to practice the language.

5. Students need immediate, positive feedback.

6. Students need to see and hear new vocabulary in order to understand it better.

Final Goals

From those six goals, we selected four goal statements that we determined to be the most

important to ESL students when learning math. Our final ranking is as follows.

1. Speak at an appropriate pace for ESL students.

2. Visually support speech using charts, displays, and audio-visual equipment.

3. Scaffold vocabulary and concept instruction during math.

4. Provide students with structured opportunities to use math vocabulary in speaking,

reading, and writing.


Audience Definition General Characteristics

The primary audience for this training program is the 12 classroom teachers in grades 3-5

at Occoquan Elementary School. The secondary audience is the school’s math specialist and the

school’s two Special Education teachers. The teachers ranged in experience from less than one

year to more than 20 years. Most of the audience had more than five years of teaching

experience. We gathered this information and more using an on-line survey through Survey

Monkey. Of the 12 teachers surveyed, five responded. The survey questions and their responses

are displayed in Appendix A. We used teacher responses to make decisions about the format,

timing, and duration of training sessions.

Specific Characteristics

Experience and education: The majority of teachers have earned a master’s degree. The

survey respondent group was equally divided by their level of teaching experience that one-half

of the teachers reported having from 0-3 years of experience. The other one-half reported having

between 4 years to more than 20 years of teaching experience. As a prerequisite to being hired

by PWCS, all the teachers in the target audience passed the Praxis I and II teaching exams and

possess current Virginia teacher’s licenses. None of the group is working toward an additional

ESOL teaching certification. The teachers are also experienced with integrating Microsoft

Office programs, document cameras, LCD projectors, SMART Boards, and on-line resources

into their instructional presentations.

Experience with other languages and cultures: The majority of teachers in the group

have explored and experienced other cultures through family, travel and educational programs.

However, only one respondent reported being fluent in a language other than English.


Prior ESL Training And Attitudes Toward Training

We knew our instructional outcomes would be affected by the amount and type of

training the classroom teachers had already completed and their attitudes toward receiving more

training.

Prior knowledge: All of the teachers in the target audience have received some training in

EL techniques through professional development opportunities offered by PWCS. These have

included half or full-day classes held off-site or short, on-site workshops held during common

planning time. Two have completed the Sheltered Instructional Observation Protocol (SIOP)

graduate classes offered on-line though PWCS.

Attitudes about teaching math to ESL students: The majority of survey respondents said

they think that some teaching modifications are necessary for teaching math to ESL students. A

few of them reported that they think there was no difference in teaching math to ESL and general

education students.

Self-evaluation of teaching effectiveness: Three surveys respondent expressed the opinion

that they effectively teach math to their ESL students. One teacher admitted that she is not sure

about how to teach math to ESL students.

Motivations And Preferences For Learning And Course Content

It was important to consider teacher preferences for the timing of the training due to their

lack of flexibility due to the structured school day and their frequent need to work before and

after school hours.

Motivation: Three of the five teachers reported being very interested in this training. The

other two reported being “interested, but not enthusiastic about it,” in the on-line survey.


Preferences: Four respondents noted a preference for receiving training during their 45-

minute common planning period. One teacher preferred to that the training be held before

school. Two teachers asked that the training be held after school. The majority of respondents

preferred to learn with other SOL-grade level teachers. The choice of learning with all the

teachers at the school was rejected by all but one respondent, the others stating a preference to

learn with the teachers in their own grade level.

Contextual Analysis Orienting Context

Teachers’ goals: To be effective, the content of the instruction must meet teachers’

professional and personal needs. Teachers want to learn effective ways to teach math

vocabulary, concepts, problem-solving strategies and algorithms to their ESL students. They are

also motivated by the desire to increase their students’ test scores on the math SOL in order to

receive a high score on their professional evaluation. The teachers also want to increase their

personal efficacy and satisfaction with work. Training is also an opportunity for teachers to

demonstrate their expertise by sharing instructional resources and strategies with each other. It is

important to the teachers that the training will provide them with strategies that can be applied

immediately in their classrooms.

Teachers’ perceived utility of the instruction: Most English-only teachers have

difficulties in communicating with and teaching ESL students, especially the newcomers to the

United States who have little knowledge of English and are unfamiliar with American algorithms

and math applications. Most of survey respondents were not fluent in another language and did

not have a second language learning experience. Many of the teachers who responded to the


survey felt that they were effective in teaching math to ESL students. However, 20 percent were

not as confident about their effectiveness.

In addition, all PWCS students in grades 3-5 are required to take the Math SOL exams,

regardless of their proficiency with the English language. As part of the No Child Left Behind

Act (2002), schools must report the percentage of ESL students who take and pass the end of

year assessments. Schools must meet Annual Measurable Objectives for ESL students, students

with disabilities, and other subgroups of students. Teachers at Occoquan need effective strategies

to help their ESL students score well on the Math SOL because of the emphasis that is placed on

ESL student achievement by the school division and the federal government.

Teachers’ perception of accountability: Teachers know that 40 percent of their end of

year professional evaluation is based on student performance on the SOLs and other summative

assessments. Low scores by ESL students in their classes will have an impact on their

professional rating. They also know that the school’s principals use a detailed checklist

(Appendix B) to look for evidence of culturally-responsive teaching practices during formal and

informal teacher observations. If they can provide clear evidence of meeting ESL student

language needs during math instruction, the principals will be able to note on a form that can be

viewed by DoJ representatives. As part of the DoJ agreement, teachers are required to record

their progress toward completion of EL training requirements on a PWCS website and that

information is reviewed by both the principals and DoJ representatives.

Based on feedback from our peers about teachers who have taken the SIOP class, we

have chosen to make only the first workshop will be mandatory because it covers content not

fully addressed in SIOP. The other three workshops will be recommended. Principals at PWCS

schools are evaluated based on student performance on SOL tests, and subgroup scores have a


large impact on school ratings, awards, and bonuses. In addition, PWCS school principals are

evaluated on how closely they comply with all aspects of the DoJ agreement.

Instructional Context

The first workshop will be held in the school’s computer lab because of the need for

several computers with headsets and microphones, an LCD projector, speakers, and a SMART

Board. The other workshops will be held in the school’s library because of the central location,

large tables, SMART Board, and space to move around during activities. We originally planned

on two workshops, but based on peer feedback about time allotted to accomplish all of our

objectives, we decided to divide the content into four workshops. The training will take place

over four consecutive weeks, alternating between face-to-face workshops during grade-level

planning periods and on-line follow-up sessions, which can be completed independently. The

face-to-face training designed to be completed in 40 minutes that the time is available to the

teachers after they drop their students off at specials. The on-line follow up sessions are designed

to take 10 minutes to complete but can last longer if teachers engage in an on-line dialogue with

each other. The teachers will be able to access the on-line discussion using their school-supplied

laptops or home computers via the Internet.

Transfer Context

Teachers are likely to implement the strategies taught if they have an easy application or

materials are readily available to plan with and use during instruction. Our peers recommended

that we make our instructional materials and resources available on-line after the workshops.

They reported that teachers are more likely to use materials if they are easily available on-line

and that teachers benefit from follow-up support of their learning. To meet these teacher needs,

the materials and resources used in the training will be applicable in the classroom. Instructional


materials will be based on the math unit teachers are currently working on, or will be working on

in the immediate future. Lesson-plans, visual aids, and on-line resources will complement the

PWCS math curriculum. The use of actual lesson plans, personal selection of strategy use goals,

follow-up discussions, and resource sharing will facilitate the consistent application of new

strategies in the math classroom.

Task Analysis

We used the SIOP lesson plan checklist developed by Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2012)

to list the tasks and decisions a teacher must make when preparing a mathematics lesson for ESL

students.

When Planning A Lesson

1. Write content objectives for students based on PWCS math standards.

2. Write language objectives for students based on type of language used during the lesson,

key vocabulary and phrases.

3. Chose content concepts appropriate for student language proficiency, plan for

differentiation based on students’ language proficiency.

4. Identify supplemental materials list audio-visuals, manipulative worksheets, games,

Foldables ™ (Zike, 1999), etc.)

5. Adapt content to meet student proficiency needs (plan for read aloud, videos, partner

work, scaffolding assignments, etc.)

6. Plan meaningful activities that integrate lesson concepts with language practice

opportunities for the four skills. (Interactive writing, partner work, games, journaling,

group assignments, etc.)


When Introducing A Lesson

1. Explicitly link concepts to students’ backgrounds and experiences (What do they already

know? What is a connection they can make to their lives?)

2. Explicitly link past learning and new concepts (How does it build on what they know?

What can they use to solve these problems?)

Comprehensible Input

1. Emphasize key vocabulary (use student glossaries, word walls, pictures, diagrams,

graphic organizers, look for cognates)

2. Use speech appropriate for students’ proficiency level (speak clearly, repeat when

necessary, keep directions one-two steps)

3. Explain academic tasks clearly (use a diagram, write on the board, provide work through

examples)

Strategies

1. Use a variety of techniques to make concept concepts clear (use visuals, manipulative,

SMART board, document camera, student participation)

2. Provide opportunities for students to use learning strategies (encourage more than one

strategy to solve problem. Link to reading strategies: prediction, find main idea and

details, beginning-middle-end, visualize, cause and effect, etc.)

3. Use scaffolding techniques consistently

4. Use a variety of question types to promote higher order thinking (get beyond factual

recall, work on comprehension, analysis, synthesis, evaluation, etc.)


Interaction

1. Provide frequent opportunities for interactions and discussions between teacher/student

and among students (turn and talk, compare answers, partner work, etc.)

2. Use group configurations that support language and content objectives of the lesson

(work in pairs, groups of 3 or 4, teams, whole group on the carpet, etc.)

3. Allow for sufficient wait time (count to 10)

4. Give students the opportunity to clarify key concepts in heritage language as needed.

(Language partner, Google translate, Spanish glossary in back of book, bilingual

dictionary)

Practice/Application

1. Provide hands on materials or manipulatives (Base 10 blocks, cubes, dry erase boards,

dry erase charts, model clocks, plastic money, measuring tools, 3-D shapes, etc.)

2. Provide activities for students to apply content and language knowledge (real life

problem solving situations with groups, explain thinking to partner, write your thinking)

3. Provide activities that integrate all language skills (reading, writing, speaking, and

listening) (journals, posters, reports, chants, songs, poems, sentence frames, cloze

sentences, turn and talks, etc.)

Lesson Delivery

1. Support content objectively clearly (Do your students know what they are supposed to

achieve today?)

2. Support language objectives clearly (Are students using the language in speech and

writing?)

3. Engage students approximately 90-100% of the time (you talk less, students talk more)


4. Pace lesson appropriately to students’ ability level. (Are you going too fast? Are you

leaving some students behind? Check for understanding/completion before moving on.)

Review/Assessment

1. Give a comprehensive review of vocabulary (Return to student glossary, anchor charts,

word wall, etc.)

2. Give comprehensive review of key content concepts (Today we learned….)

3. Provide feedback to students regularly on their output (language, content, work) (restate

their ideas in correct form, have them read their writing to you, etc.)

4. Conduct assessments of student comprehension and learning on all lesson objectives

(informal formative assessments) (what did you learn today? Tell your partner two

vocabulary words, etc.)

During the workshops, the teachers will focus on strategies to meet the needs of the ESL

students they have targeted as the most in need of assistance in their classes. The goal of the

training is for them to develop actual lesson plans and test study guides that incorporate the

strategies to be used in their classrooms. To assist teachers in their implementation of the

strategies, workshop participants will be asked to set personal goals for consistently

implementing the strategies. The on-line discussions will provide them with the opportunity to

reflect on their progress toward their goals. Also during the on-line discussion, the teachers can

receive constructive ideas and support from other teachers taking the course as well as resources

they might want to use in future lessons.

Feedback gained from the on-line discussions can serve as formative information for the

development of expanded sessions. Data gathered from principal’s observation checklists,


teacher on-line reflections, ESL student surveys, and math test scores, when compared to the

previous years’, will serve as measures of strategy implementation and success.

Teachers will work with actual lesson plans based on state and county math standards for

their grade level. To facilitate strategy use in the future, training materials will be available on-

line for access at school and at home. Teachers will be encouraged to add their own materials to

the resource bank to be shared school-wide.

Workshop Outline Week 1, Module 1 (Mandatory Workshop)

I. Who is your targeted ESL student(s)?

a. What is their English language proficiency?

b. What are their WIDA scores for listening, speaking, reading, and writing?

c. What are their ESL goals for the quarter in listening, speaking, reading, and

writing?

d. What are their test scores on previous unit tests, assessments, etc.?

II. Targeted ESL students need Comprehensible Input (Krashen and Terrell, 1983),

a. What is Comprehensible Input?

b. Instructor’s speech must be comprehensible for target students

c. What is a comprehensible rate of speech for ESL students?

d. Demonstration of too-fast vs. comprehensible rate of speech for ESL students to

comprehend.

e. Compare own speed of speech to target rate (Audacity practice)

f. Learn self-monitoring techniques

g. Learn ways to solicit feedback from students (red, yellow, green)


h. Set goal for adjusting rate of speech in contract

Week 1, On-Line Discussion Homework

I. On-line discussion on Google forum

a. Teachers share reflections on meeting rate-of-speech goal.

b. Make peer recommendations

c. Share resources for rate-of-speech modifications

Week 2, Module 2 (Recommended Workshop)

I. ESL students need visual support for your speech

a. How can you use SMART Board so ESL student can read what he/she is hearing?

b. How can you use the document camera so ESL student can read what he/she is

hearing?

c. How can you use anchor charts/ word walls so ESL student can read what you are

saying?

d. Modify lesson plan to include visual supports to speech for target students.

e. Set goal for increased visual support of speech.



a. Teachers share reflections on meeting visual support of speech goal.

b. Make peer recommendations.

c. Share resources for visual support of speech goal


I. Targeted ESL students need to learn the language of math.


a. New vocabulary must be scaffolded to create comprehensible input for targeted

students.

b. Why and how to pre-teach vocabulary to targeted ESL students.

c. Activities: Foldables ™ with pictures/diagrams, interactive notebooks

d. Why and how to visually/tactile support of vocabulary development.

e. What activities can you think of that would use realia, demonstrations /

manipulatives/charts/visuals/word walls that would reinforce targeted ESL

students’ vocabulary use and comprehension?

f. Modify a lesson plan with vocabulary scaffolds appropriate for targeted students

g. Set vocabulary scaffold goal.


I. On-line discussion on Google forum.

a. Teachers share reflections on meeting vocabulary scaffold goal.

b. Make peer recommendations

c. Share resources for vocabulary scaffolds


I. Targeted ESL students need opportunities to apply new vocabulary

a. Sentence frames/cloze sentences scaffold oral and written language for ESL

students.

i. What are sentence frames/cloze sentences?

ii. How to use sentence frames in lesson with targeted students and entire

class.

iii. How to write your own sentence frames using math text book.


iv. Modification of unit test study guide to include sentence frames

b. Turn-and-talk scaffolds use of math vocabulary in speech.

i. Why use turn-and-talk with targeted ESL students and entire class?

ii. How to scaffold turn-and-talk discussions to make them most effective.

iii. How to modify a lesson plan to include turn-and-talk times.

iv. Set goal for incorporating turn-and-talk into own lesson plans.



a. Teachers share reflections on meeting sentence frame/cloze sentence goal.

b. Teachers share reflections on meeting turn-and-talk goal.

c. Make peer recommendations

d. Share resources for turn-and-talk, and sentence frame/cloze sentences

Objectives And Instructional Strategies

While the majority of the objectives we chose involved cognitive tasks, we did select a

psychomotor objective for teachers to both feel and hear how it sounds when they speak at a rate

appropriate for their targeted students.

Workshop 1

Objective 1

After completing this program, the teacher will know their target ESL students’ English

language proficiency and math levels. (Principle-Comprehension)

Initial Presentation: Instructor will demonstrate how to locate information on WIDA

reports to identify a student’s English language proficiency in listening, speaking, reading, and

writing as well as what they can be expected to accomplish linguistically in those areas.


Generative Strategy: After the presentation, teachers will use WIDA and math data to

complete a form about a targeted student that outlines their language proficiency and math

strengths and weaknesses.

Objective 2

After completing this training, the teachers’ speech will know what it feels likes and

sounds like to speak at a rate comprehensible to their targeted ESL student. (Procedure-

Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will use PowerPoint presentation and demonstration of

inappropriate and appropriate rates of speech during math instruction using videos.

Generative strategy: The teacher will create an audio file of a familiar speech at a rate of

approximately 120 words per minute using Audacity software, a computer, and headphones with

microphone attachment.

Objective 3

After completing this training, the teachers will set a personal goal for using feedback

from students to regulate their rate of speech during math instruction. (Procedure-evaluation)

Initial presentation: Demonstration of a different ways to solicit feedback from students

on teacher’s speaking rate during instruction and how to complete a personal learning contract.

Generative strategy: The teacher will select at least one method to solicit feedback from

students and set goals for implementing the comprehensible input strategy and feedback method

for the upcoming week.

Objective 4


After completing this training program, the teachers will reflect on their progress toward

meeting their strategy use goal and participate in discussions to share ideas and resources to

support that goal. (Procedure-evaluation)

Initial presentation: Instructor will demonstrate how to locate and interact with Google

forum on-line discussion site.

Generative strategies: Teachers will log onto the Google forum site and review the

questions posed and the resources listed.

Workshop 2

Objective 5

After the completion of this training program, teachers will effectively use visual support

for their speech during math instruction. (Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will use a PowerPoint presentation and a demonstration of

instruction with and without visual support of speech to demonstrate the increase in

comprehension.

Generative strategies: Teachers will discuss and share ideas for opportunities for them to

use their document cameras, SMART Boards, anchor charts and word walls to increase the

visual support of their speech.

Assessment: Teachers will use color coded markers to add ideas to group posters listing

ideas for visually supporting speech using document cameras, SMART boards, anchor charts,

and word walls.

Objective 6


After completion of this training program, teachers will modify a model lesson plan to

include more visual support of speech during instruction and will set a personal goal to visually

support speech during math instruction. (Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will share model lesson plan and invite teachers to identify

occasions when it is best for their students that teacher speech is supported.

Generative strategy: Teachers will modify a model lesson plan to include at least two

occasions where they will use visuals to support their speech to create comprehensible input for

their students. (Procedure-Application)

Assessment: Copies of modified lesson plans.

Objective 7



support that goal. (Procedure-Evaluation)





Workshop 3

Objective 8

After completing this training program, teachers will use effective strategies to pre-teach

math vocabulary to ESL students. (Procedure-Application)


Initial presentation: Instructor with use PowerPoint presentation and an examples of

effective ways to scaffold math vocabulary for ESL students and make it comprehensible by

linking it to their prior learning.

Generative strategy: Teachers will explore and create samples of Foldables ™, interactive

math journals, student picture glossaries and practice linking new vocabulary to students’ prior

learning or knowledge.

Objective 9

After completing this training program, teachers will use effective strategies to use

visuals and manipulatives to support vocabulary development. (Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Demonstration of structured activities that use realia, manipulatives,

charts, etc. that reinforce the use of math vocabulary by ESL students in speaking, listening,

reading, and writing.

Generative strategy: Teachers will explore and practice structured activities that reinforce

ESL student use of new vocabulary.

Objective 10


include at least one structured vocabulary activity and will set a personal goal to support ESL

students’ vocabulary development during math instruction. (Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will display a model lesson plan and will demonstrate how

to include a hands-on activity that would require students to talk with each other and use new

math vocabulary.


Generative strategy: Teachers will discuss possible hands-on activities that would require

students to interact with each other and use new math vocabulary, select one and modify a

sample lesson plan from an upcoming unit to include their choice.

Objective 11








Workshop 4

Objective 12

After completing this training program, teachers will effectively use cloze sentence or

sentence frames to scaffold math vocabulary for target ESL students. (Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will use PowerPoint to describe cloze sentences and

sentence frame use during math instruction. Instructor will demonstrate how to use math

textbook to write cloze sentences/sentence frames to scaffold math vocabulary for a lesson.

Generative strategy: Teachers will use key information from math textbook to write

cloze sentences or sentence frames to use with students during an upcoming math lesson.

Objective 13


After completing this training program, teachers will effectively use sentence frames in a

test study guide to support the use of math vocabulary for target ESL students. (Procedure-

Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will use PowerPoint to demonstrate how ESL students can

use sentence frames to scaffold their vocabulary on open-ended math problems on a unit test

study guide.

Generative strategy: Working as a group, teachers will write sentence frames to provide

scaffolding for target ESL students on an open-ended question on a sample unit test study guide.

Objective 14

After completing this training program, teachers will effectively use the turn-and-talk

discussion strategy to scaffold the oral use of math vocabulary by their ESL students.

(Procedure-Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will demonstrate how to structure effective turn-and-talk

sessions by providing an oral sentence starter, reading from a sentence frame, and stipulating

which vocabulary words must be used when explaining mathematical thinking.

Generative strategy: Working in a group, the teachers will each take turns role playing,

directing a pair of teachers to discuss their mathematical learning using sentence starters, to read

from sentence frames, or requiring them to use certain vocabulary words during their discussion.

They will then ask one partner to retell what the other partner said.

Objective 15


include at least one turn-and-talk session and will set a personal goal to support their ESL


students’ vocabulary development through turn-and-talk during math instruction. (Procedure-

Application)

Initial presentation: Instructor will display a model lesson plan and will demonstrate how

to include a turn-and-talk session that would require students to discuss their math learning with

a partner and use new math vocabulary.

Generative strategy: Teachers will review model lesson plan, select new vocabulary

words and phrases, and determine which parts of the lesson would be most appropriate for

planning a turn-and-talk session and modify the lesson plan from an upcoming unit to include

their choices.

Objective 16








Pre-Instructional Strategy (Advance Organizer)

The instruction will be built around the learning needs of a target ESOL student in each

teacher’s class. Teachers will be introduced to the content through a series of constructivist

activities that will allow teachers to discover and explore new learning and share with each other.

This method was chosen because of the differences in teaching experience among the group and

the valuable prior knowledge each teacher brings to the workshop. Teachers will be asked to


practice activities that will assist and enhance the mathematical learning of their targeted ESL

students. They will also be asked to modify example lesson plans and set strategy use goals to

facilitate the immediate transfer of knowledge to their classroom. On-line follow-up sessions are

designed to provide support to teachers in the strategy implementation and easy access to

materials used in the workshops or by other teachers in their classrooms. Pretesting was not

chosen as a strategy because it would require self-measurement of strategy use and the data

would not be valid. Attitudinal measures were gathered during the learning analysis phase with a

teacher survey.

Behavioral, cognitive and affective objectives were chosen as strategies because of the

complex activities required when teaching. Teachers must be aware of students’ needs, plan in

advance for them, perform instructional and assessment tasks as planned, and reflect on the

effectiveness of their instruction on student learning. The pressure from federal government and

administrative oversight creates an intense sense of self-motivation for teachers to perform at

high levels at Occoquan Elementary school. The explicit statement of purpose will not be

necessary as a strategy. However, the strategies of providing teachers with a clear list of

objectives and offering activities that are immediately applicable to their classroom will be

necessary to comply with adult learning theory.

Sequencing Content (World Related Sequencing)

The temporal sequence of instruction reflects how a classroom teacher would prepare and

present a math lesson. The sequence of the workshops begins with determining the students’

needs, exploring different ways to implement a strategy, and planning when to implement the

strategy during the lesson. Reflection after a lesson is an essential part of effective teaching, and


each workshop also requires teachers to set a goal and reflect on their attainment of the goal in

their own classroom.

Evaluation Formative Evaluations

Content objectives, course content, and training outcomes will be evaluated during the

instructional design phase. The formative assessment will be conducted in two parts: During the

design phase and after the first workshop.

During the design phase: Evaluations were conducted in the forms of interviews and peer

reviews. During the goal setting phase of the process, interviews with adult ESL students helped

to determine which teaching strategies and materials were needed to meet the needs of ESL

students in math classrooms. Prior to workshop implementation, a group of ESL teachers at

Occoquan will review the materials and activities to provide feedback on effectiveness of the

instructional approach and the course content. In addition, retired classroom teachers will

participate in a pilot course to provide feedback on content, assessments, and time allotted for

completion. Retired teachers were chosen because they are perceived as more objective and are

expected to be less retrospective in expressing their opinions, and the target audience of active

teachers at the school is so small.

After the first workshop: Teacher reflections in the on-line discussion will give us insight

into the functionality of the Google forum and will allow us to adjust the format of the forum to

better elicit teacher comments or facilitate their sharing of resources.


Summative Evaluations

Summative assessments are used to evaluate student learning, skill acquisition, and

academic achievement at the conclusion of a defined instructional period. The evaluation will be

conducted in two parts: during each workshop and after the completion of all four workshops.

During Workshop 1: Teachers will assess their rate of speech on a 3 points scale (with 1

being too slow, 2 being just right, and 3 being too fast), and practice giving instruction at a

comprehensible rate using Audacity recording and playback software. Teachers will set a goal

for self-monitoring their speech during math instruction on a daily basis in a personal learning

contract. Teachers will identify two ways to seek input from their students regarding rate of

speech.

During Workshop 2: Teachers will list at least three ways to use SMART Board,

document camera, anchor charts, and realia to visually support speech during a Carousel activity

(Guillaume, Yopp, & Yopp, 2007). Colored markers will identify each teacher’s response on

labeled posters hung around room. Teachers will modify a model lesson plan to include two

occurrences of visually supported speech to students during one lesson. Teachers will set a goal

to visually support speech two or more times during math instruction in a personal learning

contract.

During Workshop 3: Using a 3-2-1 writing activity (Guillaume, 2007), teachers will list

at least two methods of pre-teaching vocabulary with scaffolding and two or more ways to utilize

concrete or visual models in math instruction. Teachers will modify a model lesson plan to

include one method of pre-teaching vocabulary in a single lesson. Teachers will set a goal for

using at least one activity that scaffolds math vocabulary during math instruction in their

personal learning contract.


During workshop 4: Teachers will write two sentence frames and cloze sentences based

on an upcoming math unit using student math textbook as guide. Teachers will modify one

question of an upcoming unit test study guide to include two sentence frames appropriate for the

task required. Teachers will modify a lesson plan to include at least one time during a math

lesson that would be appropriate for turn-and-talk. Teachers will set a goal for incorporating

turn-and-talk time daily during math instruction in each lesson in their personal learning contract.

Teachers will set a goal to incorporate turn-and-talk into their daily math lesson plans in a

personal learning contract.

After completion of all workshops: On-line teacher reflections will give us insight into the

use of ESL strategies in math classrooms. School principals will also note evidence of individual

teachers implementing the taught strategies during math instruction during informal and formal

teacher observations on their checklists. In addition, teachers will be asked to complete the

Prince William County class evaluation survey on-line to measure the effectiveness of the

training and solicit suggestions for improvements (Appendix C).

Confirmative Evaluations

Confirmative evaluations will be conducted several months after the workshops have

been completed to measure the long-term impact of the workshop training. To provide for

triangulation of data, three evaluations will be conducted. The first evaluation will be the

comparison of student test scores from end-of-unit math tests and quarterly benchmark

assessments to students’ scores from the previous years to measure the impact of the workshop

training on student learning. To measure the application of strategy use in the classroom we will

survey a group of ESL students from the participating teachers’ classrooms and ask them to rate

the frequency of their teachers’ use of strategies during math. (Appendix D). To get another


measure of strategy use, we will ask the principals to share their checklist reports on ESL

strategy use in math classrooms.


Appendix A Teacher Survey Results





Appendix B Principal’s Checklist


Appendix C PWCS Course Evaluation Survey

1. I am certified in ESL.

2. My level of knowledge on how to design effective learning experiences for ELs has increased.

3. I will be able to implement EL instructional techniques.

4. My level of knowledge about EL instructional techniques based on each student's English language proficiency level has increased.

5. My learning will have a positive impact on student learning in my classroom.

6. Overall, this professional learning opportunity met expected outcomes.

7. How will you use the content presented in this learning opportunity to enhance instructional practice for ELs?

8. What topics from this professional learning opportunity should be expanded in future presentations or workshops?

9. What recommendations do you have for future professional learning?

Submit


Appendix D Student Survey

During math, my teacher:

Speaks slowly so I can understand him or her. always most of the time sometimes never

Teaches me vocabulary I will need for the lesson. always most of the

time sometimes never

Writes important information on the board or shows me she is saying on the SMART Board, or an anchor chart, word wall, or other poster.

always most of the time sometimes never

Let’s me use cubes, place value charts, Base 10 blocks, number lines and other math tools to help me learn math concepts.


Makes sure I get a chance to use math vocabulary when I talk with a partner during math class.


Makes sure I write using my math vocabulary. always most of the time sometimes never

Uses sentence starters or fill in the blank sentences to help me explain my mathematical thinking when I write.



References Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2012), Making content comprehensible for English

learners; the SIOP model (4th ed.), Pearson, Columbus, OH.

Guillaume, A., Yopp, R., & Yopp, H. (2007), 50 strategies for active teaching, Pearson

Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Krashen, S. & Terrell, T. (1983), The natural approach: language acquisition in the classroom,

The Alemany Press, San Francisco.

Mazzoni, D. (2009). Audacity (Version2.0.6) [Computer software]. Available from

http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/

Morrison, G., Ross, S., Kalman, H, & Kemp, J. (2013). Designing effective instruction, (7th ed.),

John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).

Prince William County Schools, Course reflection and feedback [online survey]. Retrieved from

https://ero4.eschoolsolutions.com/User/evaluation.taf?_function=evaluate&sessionID=16

888&evalID=35&evalType=E

Rosetta Stone® English (2010). [computer software] Rosetta Stone, Inc., Arlington, VA.

Tell Me More. [computer software] Rosetta Stone, Inc., Arlington, VA.

U.S. Department of Justice (2013). Settlement agreement between the United States of America

and the Prince William County School District.

Virginia Department of Education, Occoquan Elementary School, Prince William County Public

Schools [online report card]. Retrieved from https://p1pe.doe.virginia.gov/reportcard/

WIDA Consortium (2012), Amplification of the WIDA English language development standards,

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.


Zike, D. (1999). Teaching with Foldables ™ math & science, McMillian/McGraw-Hill,

Columbus, OH.

Date post:	01-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

Effective ESL Strategies for Math · EFFECTIVE ESL STRATEGIES FOR MATH 9!!!! ! Audience Definition...

Documents