Synthesis of Research
The research articles and pedagogical resources provide tangible ways to engage English language learners in classroom and peer discussions, creating a more inclusive classroom environment. Winsor (2007), Moschkovich (1999) and Gutierrez (2002) all based their research in classroom observations and interviews, and focused on teachers who were either trying to or excelled at engaging ELLs in their class. A common conclusion was that teachers should utilize group work and class discussions to engage ELLs, increase their access to content, and develop their language and mathematics skills.
This research informs my inquiry question, as it shows how group work and class discussions can engage ELLs in the mathematics classroom. Gutierrez’s (2002) research shows that working with peers allows students to “make meaning of math” in whatever language is most comfortable (p. 1069). Winsor (2007) even recommends that teachers utilize the students who are more proficient in English to lead groups in discussions. However, Moschkovich (1999) places higher preference on teacher-led mathematical discussions to guide the students’ development of mathematical language and understanding of concepts. In both cases, the underlying importance is that ELLs are provided with opportunities to engage in discussion and to use language to express mathematics.
Whether teachers decide to focus on group work or whole-class discussions, the research recommends a particular framework for viewing language in the classroom. The researchers and teachers studied focused on how students’ language abilities can be utilized to promote learning and engagement, rather than focusing on the students' lack of English. The research shows that when teachers possess a nuanced understanding of each particular student’s language abilities , it “positively informs their teaching practices and respects the identity of their students” (Gutierrez, 2002, p. 1066). This understanding allows teachers to facilitate productive group work and to design discussion questions that are tailored to different proficiency levels, among other things (Bresser, et al., 2010; Chen & Li, 2008). When teachers assess the individual needs of students and allow them opportunities to communicate in both their primary language and English, a language-deficit lens is avoided and a more inclusive environment is created for English language learners.
Some of the questions raised in the research and pedagogical articles concerned the importance of bilingual teachers and the translation of materials. For example, in the Gutierrez (2002) article, the researcher was interested in both the students’ and teachers’ view on the importance of a new math teacher being bilingual. Would it be more beneficial academically or socially, and does it matter if the teacher is able to translate vocabulary words or if students can speak to the teacher in their primary language? Regardless of these new wondering, the research proposes that monolingual teachers can be just as effective in engaging language learners as bilingual teachers if using the right tools (Gutierrez; Winsor, 2007).
If I were to engage in the inquiry process for this question, I would begin by surveying the students to find out which languages they spoke and which they were the most comfortable in, as well as noting the participation levels of the ELLs in whole-class discussions and group work. After gaining an understanding of the individual students and group dynamics, I would begin to implement group work for homework, projects and classwork. I would experiment with different ways of pairing students by language ability, encouraging them to communicate in their primary language if possible. I would also focus on structuring class discussions so that each student had the opportunity to participate, tailoring questions to match proficiency level and modeling the format of a well-crafted answer. For example, rather than asking "What did you do to solve?", I would ask "What is the first step in solving? The second?", etc. (Bresser, et al., p. 29).
By observing and interacting with the students, as well as monitoring test scores, I could assess the English language learners’ engagement with the activities, participation in discussions, and understanding of the content. Through these observations and reflections, I would make adjustments in my strategies and continue to monitor how they promote participation and understanding. I believe this approach to the inquiry process would be effective because it is aligned with reflective teaching practices, focused on the unique needs of my students, and leaves room for continual improvement.
This research informs my inquiry question, as it shows how group work and class discussions can engage ELLs in the mathematics classroom. Gutierrez’s (2002) research shows that working with peers allows students to “make meaning of math” in whatever language is most comfortable (p. 1069). Winsor (2007) even recommends that teachers utilize the students who are more proficient in English to lead groups in discussions. However, Moschkovich (1999) places higher preference on teacher-led mathematical discussions to guide the students’ development of mathematical language and understanding of concepts. In both cases, the underlying importance is that ELLs are provided with opportunities to engage in discussion and to use language to express mathematics.
Whether teachers decide to focus on group work or whole-class discussions, the research recommends a particular framework for viewing language in the classroom. The researchers and teachers studied focused on how students’ language abilities can be utilized to promote learning and engagement, rather than focusing on the students' lack of English. The research shows that when teachers possess a nuanced understanding of each particular student’s language abilities , it “positively informs their teaching practices and respects the identity of their students” (Gutierrez, 2002, p. 1066). This understanding allows teachers to facilitate productive group work and to design discussion questions that are tailored to different proficiency levels, among other things (Bresser, et al., 2010; Chen & Li, 2008). When teachers assess the individual needs of students and allow them opportunities to communicate in both their primary language and English, a language-deficit lens is avoided and a more inclusive environment is created for English language learners.
Some of the questions raised in the research and pedagogical articles concerned the importance of bilingual teachers and the translation of materials. For example, in the Gutierrez (2002) article, the researcher was interested in both the students’ and teachers’ view on the importance of a new math teacher being bilingual. Would it be more beneficial academically or socially, and does it matter if the teacher is able to translate vocabulary words or if students can speak to the teacher in their primary language? Regardless of these new wondering, the research proposes that monolingual teachers can be just as effective in engaging language learners as bilingual teachers if using the right tools (Gutierrez; Winsor, 2007).
If I were to engage in the inquiry process for this question, I would begin by surveying the students to find out which languages they spoke and which they were the most comfortable in, as well as noting the participation levels of the ELLs in whole-class discussions and group work. After gaining an understanding of the individual students and group dynamics, I would begin to implement group work for homework, projects and classwork. I would experiment with different ways of pairing students by language ability, encouraging them to communicate in their primary language if possible. I would also focus on structuring class discussions so that each student had the opportunity to participate, tailoring questions to match proficiency level and modeling the format of a well-crafted answer. For example, rather than asking "What did you do to solve?", I would ask "What is the first step in solving? The second?", etc. (Bresser, et al., p. 29).
By observing and interacting with the students, as well as monitoring test scores, I could assess the English language learners’ engagement with the activities, participation in discussions, and understanding of the content. Through these observations and reflections, I would make adjustments in my strategies and continue to monitor how they promote participation and understanding. I believe this approach to the inquiry process would be effective because it is aligned with reflective teaching practices, focused on the unique needs of my students, and leaves room for continual improvement.