An Examination Of English As Second Language Teachers Integrating Their District’s Curriculum

AN EXAMINATION OF ENGLISH AS SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHERS INTEGRATING THEIR DISTRICT’S CURRICULUM by Patricia A. Alvara

© Patricia Alvara, 2004

Abstract

Cognitive and linguistic research provides promising links to what English as second language (ESL) teachers may do to engage their limited English proficient (LEP) students in learning in English. Through this action research study, the researcher and four ESL participant teachers strategically collaborated, discussed, selected, implemented, adapted, analyzed, and reflected upon thematic integration in their sheltered English immersion (SEI) classrooms. The goal of this study was to foster LEP students’ English language and academic development so that they would be able to participate and transition into English mainstreamed classrooms. To accomplish this task, participants implemented three thematic instructional approaches: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction. The results of this study determined which approaches were the most effective models to employ in their SEI classrooms in order to maximize student involvement and learning. By uncovering particular obstacles ESL teachers and students encountered, these ESL teachers will be able to address more effectively those barriers and further enhance their LEP students’ learning opportunities in the future.

Dedication

This study is dedicated to my family and students who continuously inspire me to strive to seek better ways to teach and reach new heights in education.

iii

Acknowledgements

First, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank several people who have dedicated an insurmountable amount of their time, effort, and emotional support to me during my program of study, without them, I would not have been able to complete this study; they are: Kathleen A. Newkirk, Julie L. Pfeffer, Herbert P. Ricardo, and Jose Valles. Second, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude and thanks to everyone who made this study possible: my study team, the participants, the School, the District, and most importantly our students, whose names shall remain and will continue to remain anonymous as promised. Third, I would like to acknowledge my dissertation team from Capella University; they are: Dr. Kim Spoor, Dr. David Balch, Dr. Kate Green, Dr. Carl Beekman, Dr. Carol Thompson, and Clarisa Harper. Finally, I would like to express my ultimate gratitude to my family: Elyse Hobson, Brian Alvara, my parents, Carol and Roland Seneff, my 6 siblings, and my 14 nieces and nephews.

iv

Table of Contents Acknowledgements

iv

Table of Contents

v

List of Tables

vii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1

Introduction to the Problem

1

Background of the Study

5

Statement of the Problem

7

Purpose of the Study

8

Rationale

8

Research Questions

13

Significance of the Study

14

Assumptions and Limitations

14

Nature of the Study

15

Definition of Terms

16

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

17

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

19

Brain Research

19

Interdisciplinary Curriculum

42

Curriculum Integration

44

Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction

45

Conclusion

51

v

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies

52 52

Action Research

55

Research Design

58

Problem Formulation

59

Data Collection

60

Unit One: Interdisciplinary Curriculum

65

Unit Two: Curriculum Integration

66

Unit Three: Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction

67

Validity and Reliability

68

Summary

70

CHAPTER 4: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Participants' Demographics

71 72

Data Analysis

72

Statistical Methods

73

Reliability and Validity

74

Discussion of Data: Question 1

75

Findings

75

Discussion of Data: Question 2

82

Findings

82

Discussion of Data: Question 3

86

Findings

86

vi

Discussion of Data: Question 4

93

Findings

93

Summary Findings

102

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

104

Summary and Discussion

104

Question 1

106

Question 2

108

Question 3

110

Question 4

111

Conclusion

113

Limitations of the Study

115

Challenges

116

Recommendations

116

Final Thoughts and Comments

120

REFERENCES

122

APPENDICES

136

Appendix A Unit One: Interdisciplinary Curriculum

136

Appendix B Unit Two: Curriculum Integration

149

Appendix C Unit Three: Cross Curricular Thematic Instruction Planning Process

159

Appendix D LEP Students’ Language Levels Defined

171

vii

List of Tables Table 1: General Rules for Interpretations

73

Table 2: Identified Themes/Trends Obtained from Reflective Journals

78

Table 3: Breakdown of Identified Themes/Trends by Participants

80

Table 4: LEP Students’ Preferred Instructional Activities

85

Table 5: Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of LEP Students Overall Performances Satisfactory or Higher

94

Table 6: Side-by-Side Unit Comparison Gender Differences and Overall Performances

96

Table 7: Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of DPI Language Levels and Overall Performances

98

Table 8: Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of Teacher Groups and Overall Performances

viii

101

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction to the Problem “Most school districts in the United States have multiple languages represented within their schools” (ELLKBase, 2004, p. 1). With the ever-increasing immigration from non-English speaking nations and the proliferation of non-English speaking households, more limited English proficient (LEP) students enter U. S. public school systems each day (ELLKBase, 2004; Freeman, 1998; Krashen 1981, 1985; Tolerance Education, 2004). “English as a second language (ESL) teachers continue striving to successfully guide and facilitate their LEP students’ learning while at the same time meeting the rigorous demands of their individual states and school districts” (Tolerance Education, 2004, p. 1). ESL teachers are seeking alternative instructional approaches to foster their LEP students’ English language and academic development (ELLKBase, 2004; Freeman, 1998; Krashen 1981, 1985; Tolerance Education, 2004). “There are over 8.6 million immigrant children in the U. S. public school system and nearly 40% require some sort of language assistance, totaling 3.2 million LEP students nationwide”(Hakuta, 2001, p. 1). This statistic continues to escalate daily. “Over the past two decades, America’s classrooms have undergone an unmistakable metamorphosis” (Friedlander, 1991, p. 1). In the last decade alone, the enrollment of LEP students in the nation's public school system has increased by 105% (ELLKBase, 2004, p. 1). “There is seldom a school district, whether rural or urban, that has not been affected by this influx of LEP students” (Short, 1998, p. 1). Over half of the language assistance programs (LAPs) nationwide enroll students from four or more different native language backgrounds (Short, 1998).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 2 Large states, such as California, Florida, Texas, and New York, have historically absorbed the brunt of the immigration expansion (Brown, 2000; Crawford, 1997; Duignan, 2001; Garcia, 1991; Hakuta, 2001; Hernandez, 2002; Midwest Equity Assistance Center, 1997). “Less populous states, such as North Carolina and Wisconsin, are also experiencing tremendous growth” (Pabst, 2001, p. 1). As of March 2003, “Wisconsin public schools provided an education for over 34,000 LEP students in 170 different school districts, 85 different home languages with Spanish and Hmong speakers accounting for the largest number of new students” (Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, 2004, p. 1). Milwaukee Public Schools, the largest school district in the state, has had an increase of LEP students, while their monolingual student population decreased overall (Pabst, 2001). The school district in this study, “The District” had “over 1,300 LEP students enrolled in its language assistance programs (LAPs) in the 2002-2003 school year. That same year, the SEI K-5 program in this study had a multilingual LEP student population that represented over 25 languages” (The District, 2003, p. 1). When dealing with this influx of LEP students, school districts, administrators, and teachers (including the District and its SEI program in this study) are facing a multitude of barriers as they struggle to meet their student population’s unique educational needs (Brown, 2000; Crawford, 1997; Duignan, 2001; Garcia, 1991; Hakuta, 2001; Hernandez, 2002; Short, 1998; The District, 2003). The barriers the District has experienced include but are not limited to the following: “program inconsistencies, lack of standards and/or curriculum guidelines, inadequate and/or unequipped classrooms, lack of resources (financial and/or materials), and/or have limited supplies” (The District, 2003, p. 1). In addition, the District’s schools are also facing rigorous reforms and educational accountability mandates due to pressure from various segments of society (The District, 2003). These reforms have mandated that states, school districts, and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 3 schools adopt challenging academic content standards, develop assessments, and align the assessments with their standards (ELLKBase, 2004; OCR, 2000). Research studies indicate that LEP students have a higher rate of dropping out of school (Brown, 2000; Crawford, 1997; Duignan, 2001; Garcia, 1991; Hakuta, 2001; Hernandez, 2002; Short, 1998; OCR, 2000; The District, 2003). “Seldom do older LEP students with deficient academic preparation ever successfully transition to fluent English proficiency; they most often remain several years below normal grade levels, and/or drop out of school” (Johnston & Viadero, 2002, p1). Their achievement gaps are so pronounced that in 1996, “several national tests found 12th grade Hispanic students scoring at roughly the same levels in reading and math as Caucasian eighth grade students” (Johnston & Viadero, 2002, p. 1). For most LEP students, acquiring English proficiency necessary to succeed academically is an arduous process. Collier and Thomas (1989), Cummins (1981), and Hakuta (2001) asserted that it would take an average of five to seven years of specialized English instruction for many LEP students to reach academic fluency. “The blame for student drop out is often placed upon the students; the action of the school is seldom cited as a cause” (Garcia, 1991, p. 1). Garcia (1991) found that one of the major contributors to LEP dropout is that the students felt alienated from the curriculum. “Alienation may result when beliefs expressed in the mainstream curriculum differ from those held by minority students” (p. 2). In most cases, the “traditional” curriculum was seen as irrelevant to LEP students’ immediate needs. This disconnect ultimately blocked the students' involvement in school (Garcia, 1991). According to Garcia (1991), “alienated students cannot visualize being in a scenario which would demand skills such as those used in math or science” (p. 2). An excellent example of how LEP students “overcome alienation of the curriculum” can be seen in the story

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 4 and teachings of Jaime Escalante, an East Los Angeles math teacher in the popular movie called, “Stand and Deliver” (Escalante, 2003, p. 1). Mr. Escalante was successful in stimulating his Hispanic students to identify with the subject of calculus (Garcia, 1991). He successfully prepared his students to succeed on the Advanced Placement Examination Calculus exam, “which is one of the most difficult examinations administered nationally to secondary school students” (Escalante, 2003, p. 1). According to Escalante (2003), “less than 2% of high school seniors nationally even sit for the exam. Of all the Hispanics attempting the test nationwide, 2530% originate from my program” (Escalante, 2003, p. 1). Research data conducted by Collier and Thomas (1989), Garcia (1991), and Hakuta (2001) on instructional strategies that work with linguistically and culturally diverse students have found that thematic instruction is one of the most effective instructional approaches language teachers can implement in their classrooms as it helps eliminate students’ feelings of alienation. “For education to be effective, students must make meaningful connections within their own minds. These connections are explicit, interdisciplinary, and integrated” (Caine & Caine, 1997, p. 37). To be meaningful, students must be able to relate the content to their own experiences, their previous learning, their personal lives, and to the world around them. “Without connections, learning is merely a fragmented and irrelevant acquisition of isolated facts” (Lipson, 1993, p. 1). According to Beane (1997) and Jacobs (1989), a teacher can choose to assist directly each student in this process by providing them with a cohesive curriculum that is enriched with meaningful learning activities. Research on the brain provides promising links to what language teachers may do to engage their students in learning. With the findings of brainbased research, ESL teachers are now more effectively enabled to design classroom instruction that coincides with how their students learn. ESL teachers must continually accumulate,

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 5 investigate, evaluate, and apply the contributions of cognitive research to effectively instruct, present materials, and contribute to the cognitive development of their LEP students (Collier & Thomas, 2001; ELLKBase, 2004; Fogarty, 1991b; Freeman & Freeman, 1998; Garcia, 1991; Krashen, 1981, 1985; Short, 1998; Wolfe, 2001). This study explored “thematic instruction” (or “integration of the curriculum”) as a “viable method” for ESL teachers to foster their LEP students’ English language and academic development in their SEI classrooms (Collier & Thomas, 2001, p. 1). Thematic instructional approaches used in this study were divided into the following three types: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Vogt, 1997). This study closely followed five ESL elementary teachers as they strategically collaborated, discussed, reflected, analyzed, selected, implemented, and adapted these three methods of thematic integration into their SEI classrooms.

Background of the Study The decision on how to “best educate” the LEP student population has been left in the hands of the individual school districts and most often with the teachers themselves (Hernandez, 2002, p. 1). The District used in this study has left this decision of how to “best educate” its LEP student population primarily with its LAP teachers (The District, 2003, p. 1). Some school districts have elected to adopt instructional reform models to ensure that their teachers comply with the new educational legislation (Hernandez, 2002). “Still other school districts have opted to adopt reform models that revert to teaching just the basics” (Hernandez, 2002, p. 1). The latter method affects “what” and “how” LEP students acquire knowledge; it may cause a narrowing of the curriculum and may not be an effective way to educate LEP students (Garcia, 1991;

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 6 Henderson & Landesman, 1992; Hernandez, 2002). This type of instruction emphasizes “skill and drill” and is often a mere fragmentation of the curriculum (Beane, 1997; Fogarty, 1991b; Garcia, 1991; Henderson & Landesman, 1992; Hernandez, 2002; Jacobs, 1989, 1997). “By narrowing the curriculum, teachers are limiting their language minority students’ equal educational opportunities” (Garcia, 1991, p. 3). Teachers are obligated to help LEP students gain the knowledge and skills that are expected of all students. This obligation includes providing meaningful learning opportunities for LEP students to acquire the academic knowledge and skills covered by tests required for graduation or other educational benefits (Henderson & Landesman, 1992; Hernandez, 2002; NCLB, 2001). Some language teachers in other districts are forced to adhere to strict or rigid traditional methods of teaching language that can be defined as grammarbased (Henderson & Landesman, 1992). These methods of teaching do not allow these teachers to focus on integration of skills and high-order thinking skills (Henderson & Landesman, 1992). Alternately, some schools, including the SEI program in this study, are electing to adopt effective instructional reform models that are research-based (Henderson & Landesman, 1992; Hernandez, 2002; The District, 2003). Some top performing language assistance programs (LAPs) use linguistic research as well as cognitive research for the basis of their programs. Linguistic researchers such as Garcia (1991), Collier and Thomas (1997a), and the Freemans (1992, 2002), have all documented effective instructional strategies for teachers to adopt in their classrooms when working with LEP students. Their research coincides with cognitive educational researchers such as the Caines (1994, 1997), Jensen (1998b) and Wolfe (2001). Research data across all LAP types have indicated that LEP students have a higher rate of success when their language teachers implemented the following: (a) socially structured classrooms; (b) thematic instruction; (c) balanced literacy; (d) writing across the curriculum; and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 7 (e) problem solving and critical thinking strategies (Collier & Thomas, 1997a; Freeman & Freeman, 2002; Garcia, 1991; Henderson & Landesman, 1992).

Statement of the Problem The District and its SEI program continued to face unprecedented challenges when dealing with the decision on how to “best educate” its increasingly large linguistically diverse student body (The District, 2003, p. 1). For many LEP students enrolled in the District’s LAPs, both equality and excellence in education remained out of reach (The District, 2003). As is true nationwide, if the District cannot effectively educated its LEP students, these students may ultimately drop out of school and may fail to contribute fully to their surrounding communities and to society as a whole (Garcia, 1991). The reality was that the District’s language assistance programs were not meeting the academic needs of all of their LEP students enrolled, including many of the LEP students enrolled in the District’s SEI K-5 program (The District, 2003). In order to be successful, the ESL teachers in this study prescribed to a unified curriculum that would fully prepare their LEP students to transition into the mainstreamed English-only classrooms. Second, these ESL teachers fostered their LEP students’ second language acquisition and critical reasoning skills, which involved adopting new pedagogical methods and developmental theories. This required these ESL teachers to re-examine “what” and “how” they were teaching in their SEI classrooms. The participant ESL teachers in this study kept in mind the diverse needs of their highly heterogeneous student population as they reexamined how their LEP students learned and acquired new language. Thus, participants continually constructed and applied the three learning methodologies based on linguistic and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 8 cognitive best practices, which were built upon their LEP students’ language abilities, reasoning, and problem-solving skills.

Purpose of the Study There were several purposes of this action research study. The researcher planned to help ESL teachers strategically collaborate, discuss, select, implement, adapt, analyze, and reflect upon thematic integration in their SEI classrooms. The goal was to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development so that they were ready to be able to participate successfully and transition into English mainstreamed classrooms. To accomplish this task, the participant teachers utilized three thematic instructional approaches: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction. The results of this study determined which approach(es) were the most effective models to employ in their SEI classrooms in order to maximize student involvement and learning. More specifically, the researcher discovered the implications of thematic instruction had on developing LEP students’ language and academic skills. The researcher uncovered particular obstacles these ESL teachers encountered as they implemented these instructional strategies into their SEI classrooms. Finally, the study examined themes and identified patterns that hindered the learning process of some LEP students.

Rationale The multiplicity of cultures and languages in the District presents many challenges not only for its LEP student population, but also for all parties involved (The District, 2003; Tolerance Education, 2004). School districts, administrators, and teachers are not effectively

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 9 prepared or equipped to handle the unique needs of their LEP students (ESL Mini Conference, 2002; Friedlander, 1991; Igoa, 1995; Midwest Equity Assistance Center, 1997; Short & Boyson, 2002; Short, 1998). More specifically, these school districts, administrators, and teachers are not adequately trained in how to address or meet all of their LEP students’ unique language, academic, and cultural needs (Midwest Equity Assistance Center, 1997; Tolerance Education, 2004). Therefore, school districts, administrators, and teachers are desperately investigating alternative instructional methodologies to educate their LEP students more effectively (ESL Mini Conference, 2002; Friedlander, 1991; Igoa, 1995; Short & Boyson, 2002; Short, 1998; Wolfe, 2001). Scientific research on the brain has transformed and enhanced how language instruction is delivered in classrooms across the globe (Bueno, 1999; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). According to the Caines (1997), Jensen (1998b), and Wolfe (2001), the brain is the only organ in the body that sculpts itself based upon outside experiences. In a sense, experience becomes biology. People used to think that genetics predetermined brain function. However, neuroscience has determined that learning experiences change and reorganize the brain’s structure and physiology. “Learning is a matter of making connections between cells and the brains of students are shaped by their experiences” (Wolfe, 2001, p. 1). Obviously, students do learn from reading and conceptualizing, but the strongest connections made are through concrete experiences (Caine & Caine, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Jensen (1998b) stated, “The brain is hard-wired to remember those experiences with an emotional component” (p. 14). Because our strongest neural networks formed are from actual experience, teachers should involve students in solving authentic problem solving activities based on school or their community (Caine & Caine, 1997).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 10 Figuring out the area of the playground is a more effective approach to measurement than a simple pencil and paper mathematical problem (Wolfe, 2001). Yvonne and David Freeman (2002) outlined three characteristics of a successful LAP: (a) teachers should use a theme-based curriculum; (b) teachers should build on students’ prior knowledge; and (c) teachers should implement collaborative activities. Thematic learning involves introducing a topic thematically and combining two or more subjects to render the connections to learning more meaningful (Freeman & Freeman, 2002). Research studies on effective instructional strategies for educating LEP students (Collier & Thomas, 1997a, Freeman & Freeman, 2002, and Garcia, 1991), have suggested that when learning is orchestrated throughout the curriculum, students become fully engaged; in return, they enjoy learning and take ownership of it. The research results have further indicated that LEP students across all program types have a higher rate of success when participating in thematic instruction (Collier & Thomas, 1997a; Garcia, 1991; Freeman & Freeman, 2002). Therefore, implementing integratedthematic instruction is an effective way to engage LEP students. Students are taught to link content and language learning in a meaningful way, which helps them to develop critical thinking skills. The use of these skills is necessary for all content subjects, so that thematic instruction may improve performance “across the board” (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; D’Arcangelo, 2000). “This type of instruction allows students to exchange information, knowledge, and experience; in return, they will make neural connections between the content and the language” (Caine & Caine 1997, p. 38). To enhance language acquisition, teachers should provide their LEP students with appropriate meaningful experiences and then capitalize on those experiences. These activities will help to build their oral language development and increase vocabulary needed to build comprehension (Bower, 1998; Bueno, 1999; Garvin, 1996;

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 11 Hancock, 1994; Krashen, 1981, 1985; McLaughlin, 1995; Peterson, 2002; Snow, Met, & Genesee, 1989). Research on the brain indicates that the brain plays the pivotal role in language acquisition; hence, activities building LEP students’ language should be based upon brain functioning and research (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Krashen 1981, 1985). The best way to teach a new language is to provide ample amounts of opportunities to practice the new skills; it is also vital that students interact meaningfully with each other (Bueno, 1999; Garvin, 1996; Hancock, 1994; Krashen, 1981, 1985; McLaughlin, 1995; Peterson, 2002; Snow et al., 1989). Research has indicated that language acquisition may be facilitated by providing the following elements into the LAP classroom: (a) comprehensible input in the target language, (b) interactive learning, (c) opportunities for learners to negotiate meaning in the target language with the teacher’s assistance, (d) ample opportunities for learners to communicate with one another in the target language, (e) conversations and tasks that are purposeful and meaningful to the learner, and (f) a non-threatening environment that encourage self expression (Bueno, 1999; Garvin, 1996; Hancock, 1994; Krashen, 1981, 1985; McLaughlin, 1995; Peterson, 2002; Snow et al., 1989). Second language is learned most effectively when it is used as a medium to convey informational content of interest and relevance to the learner (Krashen, 1981, 1985; Snow et al., 1989). “Most limited English proficient students arrive in their classrooms already distressed and/or even threatened psychologically. They often feel threatened because of the seemingly insurmountable language barriers due to ‘emotional baggage’ from previous experiences” (Tolerance Education, 2004, p. 5). When a person is threatened, “the short-term impact includes impaired spatial-episodic memory, weakened ability to prioritize, and the greater likelihood of

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 12 repeated behaviors” (Jensen, 1998b, p. 15). Evidence from neuroscience indicates that learning requires the formation of complex, multilayered neural networks; neural connections are formed when experiences are novel and coherent. If experiences are familiar and repetitive, the existing connections may be strengthened (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). If experiences are incoherent or fragmented, the result may be loss of learning (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Fogarty, 1991b; Jensen, 1998b; Krashen, 1981, 1985; Wolfe, 2001). Curriculum integration may be the key to increasing LEP student’s linguistic and academic success (Garcia, 1991). By implementing a high quality, complex integrated curriculum, language teachers open up more learning opportunities for their “at-risk” LEP students who are not traditionally well served (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Fogarty, 1991b; Garcia, 1991). With LEP students, traditional instruction has been proven to be an ineffective mode of education (Fogarty, 1991b; Garcia, 1991; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lipson, 1993; Shoemaker, 1989). The education that LEP students receive in schools is for the most part fragmented because the connections to the academic and content materials are unclear (Beane, 1997; Fogarty, 1991b; Freeman & Freeman, 2002; Garcia, 1991; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lipson, 1993; Shoemaker, 1989). This type of education results in lack of empowerment for the students (Beane, 1997; Fogarty, 1991b; Freeman & Freeman, 2002; Garcia, 1991; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lipson, 1993; Shoemaker, 1989). Integration of the curriculum builds bridges between content areas, by using physical and concrete means, such as musical and artistic activities (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997). According to Shoemaker (1989) when the curriculum is integrated …education is organized in such a way that it cuts across subject-matter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study. It views learning and teaching in a holistic way and reflects the real world, which is interactive. (p. 5)

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 13 Students are able to make a connection to learning a new language as meaningful and a representation of the language in the real world (Freeman & Freeman, 2002). This research project attempted to show that when ESL teachers provided a challenging and engaging curriculum by using instructional approaches such as thematic instruction, their LEP students were able to lessen and/or close the achievement gap and succeed academically.

Research Questions Through this action research study, the researcher aimed to answer the following research questions: 1. How do ESL teachers strategically collaborate and discuss pertinent issues that arise when dealing with their LEP students and the SEI curriculum? 2. How do ESL teachers reflect, analyze, and select materials to be used in their SEI classrooms? 3. How do ESL teachers implement and adapt thematic instruction in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development? 4. Which thematic instructional approach: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction generates LEP students’ language and academic success?

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 14 Significance of the Study This research explored the use of thematic teaching as a successful instructional methodology for fostering LEP students’ English language and academic development. The research study provided the participant ESL teachers with three avenues on how to instruct their LEP students and at the same time endeavor to eliminate or at least lessen the academic achievement gap. The ESL teachers were able to design lessons where all of their LEP students were able to participate and learn, regardless of their language ability or academic background. Furthermore, this study aimed to demonstrate the importance of these ESL teachers working collaboratively, as teachers met to discuss and reflect upon the three instructional approaches.

Assumptions and Limitations The assumptions in this study were: (a) the U. S. public school systems' primary function is to provide a "free" education for all students residing in the U. S.; an education, which does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or primary language spoken; (b) English is the functioning language taught in the mainstream classrooms throughout the U.S., and it is the primary language used in SEI classrooms; (c) ESL teachers have had specialized training in meeting the needs of their LEP students in SEI, possess an ESL teaching credential, and/or were in training; (d) the primary goal of the SEI is to successfully develop LEP students’ English language skills so that these students can succeed in English mainstream classrooms; (e) the development of oral language is not a sufficient indicator of English proficiency; (f) LEP students must develop the cognitive-academic language proficiency (CALP) required for scholastic success; and (g) language teachers must use multiple instructional approaches and be

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 15 able to differentiate from the traditional curriculum to meet the diverse needs of their student population. There were “natural” linguistic and educational limitations of this study. They were: (a) the group being studied consists of ESL teachers and LEP students within a specific SEI program, and the experiences and meanings obtained from this study could be generalized to other programs; (b) the number of participants used in this study is low; (c) the participants used in this study are not representative of the entire ESL or SEI teaching and LEP student population; and (d) the attrition rate of the LEP student population was relatively high and represented a problem for the continuity of this study.

Nature of the Study The study was conducted within the parameters of five Sheltered English Immersion classrooms (K-2, 4-5). The Sheltered English Immersion program in this study was a K-5 program. The design of this study took place in the realm of action research. Action research is a powerful qualitative research tool most often utilized in education (Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003). Action implies the need for change and research implies a need to clarify or increase understanding (Burnaford, Fischer & Hobson, 2001; Carr & Kremmis 1986; Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003; Smith, 2002). Researchers who conduct action research often use various qualitative and quantitative data to determine the usefulness of the innovation or method under study (Smith, 2002). Researchers who use this method of research observe carefully and reflect systematically. Most often, researchers will generate potential solutions to original problems, implement a chosen intervention, assess the outcomes, and/or modify the solution(s) (Burnaford, Fischer & Hobson, 2001). Many researchers are drawn to action research because it is firmly

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 16 located in the realm of the practitioner, often tied to self-reflection. The practitioner is actively involved in the cause for which the research is conducted (Burnaford, Fischer & Hobson, 2001; Carr & Kremmis, 1986; Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003; Smith, 2002).

Definition of Terms Cognitive academic language proficiency, otherwise known as CALP, is the degree of language proficiency necessary for academic achievement. Comprehensible input was defined by Stephen Krashen (1981) in his Monitor Model of Second Language Acquisition. Language learners acquire second language through exposure to language samples that contain mostly familiar forms and a few novel expressions. The familiar forms resemble "motherese" forms, which is a special form of language that caregivers use with their children as they develop language. In school, language teachers speak at a slower rate, use clear articulation, longer pauses, paraphrases, and gestures; they also use objects or pictures frequently. English language learner (ELL) is a student who is limited-English-proficient (LEP). See definition of LEP. English as a Second Language (ESL) is a program specially designed to teach LEP students English language skills that includes listening, speaking, reading, writing, study skills, content vocabulary, and cultural orientation. Fluent (or fully) English proficient (FEP). A student who has full command of the English language, for both social and academic purposes. L1: First language or native language L2: Second Language or less familiar language.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 17 Language Assistance Programs (LAPs) are programs offered within the District that provide specialized learning environment for non-English speakers. Limited-English-proficient (LEP) is the legal term used to identify students, who were not born in the United States, or whose native language is not English, and those students who cannot participate effectively in regular classrooms because they lack fluency in spoken and written English. Low affective filter, a term coined by Stephen Krashen (1981), refers to how emotions, such as motivation, self-confidence, self-image, and anxiety, influence learning. Students learn more effectively when they are motivated, their confidence and self-image are strong, and their anxiety remains low. Non-English-proficient (NEP) is used to identify students who are recent arrivals (immigrant-status) from non-English speaking countries. Structured English Immersion is a language program in which LEP students’ English language skills are developed so that they can succeed in English-only mainstream classrooms. All instruction in aligned with immersion strategies and classes are conducted in English. SEI teachers have specialized training in meeting the needs their LEP students.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study Chapter Two discusses the relevant literature related to the aforementioned research problem. The review of the literature focused on the following areas: (a) brain-based research, (b) thematic instruction, (c) interdisciplinary curriculum, (d) curriculum integration, and (e) cross-curricular thematic instruction. The literature review served as a foundation for understanding the role of brain-based research in second language acquisitioning and showed the

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 18 connectedness and importance of thematic instruction in SEI education. Chapter Three describes and discusses methodological and design issues. The nature of action research is discussed as well as the reasoning behind using a collaborative approach to this study. Methods of data collection and analysis are discussed, including the role of the researcher and data collection procedures. Chapter Four presents and analyzes the data collected in methods. Chapter Five is a summary of conclusions; final thoughts were drawn from the data analysis and recommendations for further research.

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Brain-based research is confirming what experienced language teachers already know about how people learn and acquire language. “What the research adds, at this point, is a partial understanding of why certain procedures or strategies work” (Wolfe, 2001, p. V). The research provides promising links to what language teachers may do to enhance the active learning process that occurs in the brain naturally. This literature review explores brain research as it relates to SEI. First, new knowledge about how the brain processes language is reviewed. Second, the researcher explores how classroom instruction relates to language acquisition. Third, the educational models that have emerged from the study of cognition, including interdisciplinary curriculum, curriculum integration, and cross-curricular thematic instruction, are examined closely. These approaches are each examined for use with LEP students, in order to help these students succeed academically. However, research on cognition can be applied to any student population.

Brain Research Scholars have been studying the anatomy of the brain for thousands of years (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). For over a century, neuroscientists have tried to understand how the human brain learns, stores, and process all information, including language. This task has been rather difficult because there are no animals that have symbol systems as rich as human's spoken language (Jensen, 1998b). For a long time, information about how the brain processed language

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 20 came only from the studying effects of brain disease, known as neurological disease (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Scientists dissected and studied the brains of people who had suffered and died from a neurological disorder (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). The adult brain weighs about three pounds; it is made up of predominately water (78%); the remaining weight is fat (10%); protein (8%), and other materials (4%) (Jensen, 1998b). The brain is about 2% of an adult’s body weight but uses about 20% of the energy of the body. It contains about 100 billion nerve cells (or neurons) and about 1 trillion supporting cells, known as glia (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). These neurons are the only cells in the body that process and store information (Christison, 1999a). The nerve cells of the brain make about one thousand trillion synaptic contact points with each other (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). These neurons pass information at a speed of up to 200 miles an hour (Jensen, 1998b). “A single neuron can receive thousands of signals from other neuronal sources although they do not make physical contact with one another. The neurons send and receive chemical messages over the synaptic space” (Jensen, 1998b, p. 10). Neurons are constantly firing electrical and chemical messages, gaining strength through usage (Christison, 1999a; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). With a few exceptions, new neurons do not grow, however new connections between neurons are always forming. It is these connections in the brain that constitute learning and memory (Christison, 1999a). Neuroscientists have indicated that the human brain has developed all the neurons it will ever have at birth (Christison, 1999a; Jensen, 1998b; Sousa, 1998; Wolfe, 2001). However, neural connections continue to form (Wolfe, 2001). A newborn's brain makes connections at an incredible pace as the child absorbs its environment. The richer the environment, the greater the number of interconnections that are made, and learning takes place faster and with greater meaning. As the child grows, the brain selectively strengthens and prunes connections based on experience. Although this process continues throughout our

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 21 lives, it seems to be most pronounced between the ages of 2 and 11, as different development areas emerge and taper off. (Sousa, 1998, p. 1) Therefore, newborn neural connections result from experiences that greet them and will continue to form throughout their lives (Christison, 1999a). In the past decade, exciting new evidence on brain imaging techniques has allowed researchers to view the brains of live people. Using positron emission tomography (PET), functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetoencephalography, and special analyses of electroencephalograms (EEG), researchers can now view the brain in real time (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Linguists and neuroscientists use these imaging techniques to view the brains of people while they process language. The researcher instructs the human subjects to do a language task while these technological advances borrowed from the field of are imaging their brains medicine (Christison, 1999a; Romig, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Neuroscientists long ago mapped the brain, and sophisticated imaging has increased knowledge of how each section of brain operates. The brain is composed of four areas, called lobes, and each has specific functions (Christison, 1999a; Romig, 1997). Neuroscientists agree that the frontal lobe, located behind the forehead, is involved in the most sophisticated, integrated brain functions (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe 2001). According to Davies (1996), the primary responsibilities of the frontal lobe include the following: thinking, judgment, creativity, conceptualizing, and problem solving, and planning skills. The parietal lobe is in the top back of the brain; sensory and language functions are found there. The occipital lobe is located in the middle back of the brain and is responsible for vision. The temporal lobes are located on the left and right sides of the brain; these areas are responsible for hearing, memory, meaning, and language (Christison, 1999a; Romig, 1997). Experts, D’Arcangelo (1998), Davies (1996), and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 22 Jensen, 1998b), believe that there is some functional overlap in the lobes. Usually, several different areas of the brain are simultaneously engaged in an activity. For example, thirty areas of the outer surface of the brain are involved in vision alone (Romig, 1997; D’Arcangelo, 1998; Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). The brain has two nearly identical halves: the left and the right hemispheres. Neuroscientists have discovered that there are small differences in the sizes of some regions in the two hemispheres. “The hemispheres connect via nerve fibers in a structure called the corpus callosum. The hemisphercity theory attributes particular preferences and learning styles to one side of the brain” (Davies, 1996, p. 1). Davies (1996) indicated that this information comes from adults and children that suffered brain injuries due to catastrophic events. Language is typically a left hemisphere activity whereas art and music are typically located in the right hemisphere. The left hemisphere appears to be responsible for both sign language and spoken language. The leftbrain is involved with processing words, numerals, lists, and providing logic, analyses and order; the right brain is involved with rhythm, color, daydreaming, imagination, space, and the ability to move objects through dimensions (Davies, 1996). By studying the different times and areas of brain activity, language teachers can have a better understanding of how language is developed. They can then tailor the academic content, and develop their students’ skills to enhance the curriculum. Finally, by using this information, they can provide an enriched, “brain-friendly classroom environment” (Christison, 1999d, p. 1).This researcher postulates that thematic instruction is effective because it incorporates activities from each side of the brain. The Brain and Language Acquisition The brain plays the primary role in learning a language. “Learning is a process that establishes new connections among networks and the new skills or knowledge that are learned"

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 23 (Genesee, 2000, p. 3). How the brain works has a significant impact on what kinds of learning activities are most effective. Neuroscientists have long believed the regions of the brain developed according to genetic codes that were predetermined at birth (D’Arcangelo, 1998; Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Some neuroscientists believe the brain begins to form its learning patterns, such as learning a language at birth. Today, scientists believe the brain is much more malleable than ever thought before (Jensen, 1998b). They now believe that the regions of the brain are not fixed at birth, but are shaped by experiences and learning (Genesee, 2000; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). As the individual responds and adapts to their environment, the brain also adapts itself to the learning environment (Jensen, 1998b). Scientific research indicates that early in a child's life, neural connections form as he/she learns. At what age these circuits are completed is uncertain (Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Neurosurgeons discovered that language processing is not located solely in the left hemisphere of the human brain. In the normal brain, in fact, the two hemispheres work together during speech (Christison, 1999a; Romig, 1997; Genesee, 2000). When people had their brain midline severed, through the corpus callosum, they stopped communicating. The language system connects intellectual and motor systems, as well as mechanisms required for speech; these areas of the brain require motivation to become aroused and activated. Neurological imaging studies provide strong evidence that the frontal lobes and structures deep in the brain become active during many language tasks (Romig, 1997). Written language connects to the areas of the brain that are part of the visual cortex, and sign language may recruit the areas of the brain that are related to spatial ability; spatial ability allows the brain to locate objects in space (Christison, 1999d; Romig, 1997; Genesee, 2000; Wolfe, 2001).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 24 Language acquisition and learning are two separate processes (Krashen, 1981). Language acquisition is a developmental type of learning processed in the auditory-temporal cortex located in the left hemisphere. Language acquisition is the unconscious process that occurs when the infant or novice hears real conversation; learning is the act of acquiring formal knowledge about the language (Krashen, 1981). According to linguist Stephen Krashen (1981): Language acquisition is very similar to the process children use in acquiring first and second languages. It requires meaningful interactions in the target language -natural communication -- in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages, they are conveying and understanding. It has been hypothesized that there is a fairly stable order of acquisition of structures in language acquisition, that is, one can see clear similarities across acquirers as to which structures tend to be acquired early and which tend to be acquired late. (pp. 1-2) Language acquisition, Krashen (1981) indicated, “is a complex process that consists of a special kind of code (or a set of symbols) that are connected to words and phrases and is a natural phenomenon that occurs without any interventions” (p. 2). The language pattern formed in an infant's brain will continue to remain for a lifetime unless something intervenes to change that pattern (Jensen, 1998b). Experts believe that children discover the system of language from a small, unsystematic amount of data and do not require instruction in how to acquire language (Krashen, 1981, 1985). Linguistic research is divisible into first and second language learning (Krashen, 1981, 1985). A student’s primary language (L1) is the language one has developed from birth and the language that was intertwined closely with the development of cognition. Learning a second language (L2) is a lengthy, highly idiosyncratic, and difficult process which language acquisition theorists suggest can take up to seven or more years for a student to develop proficiency, depending on his/her age at onset (Collier & Thomas 2002; Hakuta, 2001; Krashen, 1981,1985).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 25 The best time to master a new language is when one is younger; their neural connections are strong and not completely filled. If a person waited until they are 18 or 30, learning a new language is possible, but it becomes more difficult because the system governing this have been used for something else. (D’Arcangelo, 1998, p. 4) A child has twice as many neurons as adults; therefore, the ideal time for learning a second language is during the first eight to ten years of development because it is during that period that neural growth is so high (D’Arcangelo, 1998; Krashen, 1981, 1985; Sousa, 1998). After that, neural branches (dendrites) that have not connected will eventually die off. A newborn's neural cortex grows at a rapid rate, then reaches a peak during adolescence, and then slowly declines D’Arcangelo, 1998; Sousa, 1998). These so-called "windows of opportunity" represent critical periods when the brain demands certain types of input to create or consolidate neural networks, especially for acquiring language, emotional control, and learning to play music. Certainly, one can learn new information and skills at any age. But what the child learned during that window period will strongly influence what is learned after the window closes. (Sousa, 1998, p. 1) When a person is learning, the neurons in the brain communicate using chemicals called neurotransmitters. These connections occur when children are stimulated through meaningful experiences such as learning a new language; thus, a solid educational experience during this period of life is more critical than ever thought before. “It is believed the brain interacts together as a whole brain, and that learning begins when connections are made within the brain and between the brain and the outside world” (Romig, 1997, p. 1). As we age, the development of neural connections can modify our capacity to learn new information, such as a new language (Romig, 1997). “Once, researchers believed that only young brains were plastic” (Romig, 1997, p. 1). They thought that the dendrites developed in the first few years of childhood and were fixed and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 26 difficult to change (D’Arcangelo, 1998; Sousa, 1998). An enormous amount of animal and human research in the past two decades, however, confirms that the brain retains some of its plasticity throughout life. Neuroscientist Marian Diamond stated in an interview, “If we continue to learn and enrich our minds, we continue to grow dendrites, and if we stop we lose them with age" (D’Arcangelo, 1998, p. 4). Evidence has shown that older brains can adapt in order to overcome a number of barriers, such as suffering a stroke. Language processing and motor function can return after this type of event (D’Arcangelo, 1998). By examining research data from the field of neuroscience and linguistics, language teachers can have a better understanding of how language is developed. The longer continuous meaningful learning occurs in life, the longer the brain will make the neural connections necessary for growth (Genesee, 2000). Therefore, research on the brain and language indicates that during the early years it is critical for teachers to help establish meaningful associations between their students and learning opportunities. The ESL teacher may tailor the academic content to help develop their student's skills most efficiently. Through curriculum enhancement, they may provide an enriched, brain-friendly classroom environment. Classroom Instruction and Second Language Acquisition Instructional models have transitioned from the authoritative teacher-centered environment of the first half of the twentieth century to the “humanistic” classroom and learnercentered mode of instruction that predominated the 1960s (Bueno, 1999, p. 1). In the 1970s and 1980s, language classrooms transformed again with the implementation of new approaches and techniques to assist with learning English as a Second Language (Bueno, 1999; Garvin, 1996; Hancock, 1994; McLaughlin, 1992). In the 1990s, classroom instruction transformed again with

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 27 the findings of Dr. Howard Gardner, a cognitive psychologist who developed a theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI) (1983, 1993, & 1995). Gardner theorized that human cognitive competence was pluralistic, rather than unitary, in design. Human beings, according to Gardner, possess multiple intelligences in varying amounts and each individual has a unique intellectual composition. These intelligences are located in different areas of the brain and can work either independently or together. Gardner proposed a schema of eight types of intelligence. A summary of Gardner's eight types of intelligence follows: 1. Linguistic intelligence is the ability to use language effectively and includes both oral and written components. 2. Logical/mathematical intelligence is the ability to use numbers effectively and reason well. 3. Visual/spatial intelligence is the ability to recognize form, space, color, lines, and shapes to represent graphically, visually and/or spatially. 4. Bodily/kinesthetic intelligence is the ability to use the body to express ideas, feelings, and to solve problems. 5. Musical intelligence is the ability to recognize rhythm, pitch, and melody. 6. Naturalist intelligence is the ability to recognize and classify. 7. Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to understand another person's feelings, motivations, and intentions and to respond effectively. 8. Intrapersonal intelligence is the ability to know and understand oneself and recognize one's similarities and differences when compared to others. (Gardner, 1983, 1993, 1995) To succeed academically in traditional classrooms, students must have strong linguistic and mathematical skills. Students of teachers who implement Gardner’s principles of MI into their classrooms may experience more success; this is because other intelligences are tapped. In other

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 28 words, LEP students who come from cultures where other intelligences, such as interpersonal or musical, are highly valued, may find the MI classroom a productive learning environment (Christison, 1998). Today, the theory of Multiple Intelligences continues to be widely accepted by educators, and it is affecting instructional delivery throughout the world (Christison, 1998; Tomlinson, 1991). Since the inception of Gardner’s MI theory, teachers have become more receptive of differentiated learning. “In a differentiated classroom, teachers begin where students are, not the front of a curriculum guide. They accept and build upon the premise that learners differ in important ways” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 1). In addition, teachers are better equipped to work with their students, for they bring with them an appreciation for individual strengths, unique learning styles, and different learning potentials (Christison, 1998, 1999b, 1999c; Tomlinson, 1999). Caine and Caine (1994, 1997) have also studied the brain-based research and arrived at twelve principles of brain-based learning that are based on the notion that all people are driven to search for meaning in life. These principles were derived from an exploration of many disciplines and are viewed as a pedagogical framework for teaching (ESL students). The 12 principles are: 1. The brain is a complex adaptive system. 2. The brain is a social brain. 3. The search for meaning is innate. 4. The search for meaning occurs through patterning. 5. Emotions are critical to patterning. 6. Every brain simultaneously perceives and creates parts and wholes. 7. Learning involves both focused attention and peripheral attention.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 29

8. Learning always involves conscious and unconscious processes. 9. We have at least two ways of organizing memory. 10. Learning is developmental. 11. Complex learning is enhanced by challenge and inhibited by threat. 12. Every brain is uniquely organized. (Caine & Caine, 1997, p. 28) Caine and Caine (1997) believed that each of the aforementioned principles represent an aspect of learning based upon brain-based research. Teachers who have used their principles in instruction no longer see their students as a “blank slate, and have a new appreciation of the fact that the body, brain, and mind are a dynamic unity” (p. 27). These 12 principles were designed to enhance the educational environment. According to Caine and Caine (1997), teachers tend to fall into one of three categories. The first is the traditional, old school, teacher-centered, or “stand and deliver” approach (p. 27). The second approach is the middle ground, where the teacher is in charge but creates a rich learning environment, with more complex learning experiences, for their students. The third approach involves a complex, interactive, student-centered classroom environment. It is in this student-centered environment that second language learners tend to flourish and to develop and retain their new language most readily. In an interactive student-centered classroom, the teacher has removed classroom threats and allowed the student's mind to be calm yet attentive (Caine & Caine, 1997; Krashen 1981, 1985). Social interaction appears key for LEP students. Caine and Caine (1997) identified three conditions for complex learning to occur: 1. An optimal state of mind that is called relaxed alertness, consisting of a low threat and high challenge.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 30 2. The orchestrated immersion of the learner in multiple, complex, authentic experience. 3. The regular active processing experience as the basis for the making meaning. (p. 32)

These three conditions are applicable for all students regardless of age and linguistic abilities (Caine & Caine, 1997). Emotions and Second Language Acquisition Limited English proficient students must have a brain-compatible environment, free from threat, in which they learn. Negative emotions may impede students’ learning whereas positive emotions may enhance learning (Caine & Caine, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Knowledge of the role of both positive and negative emotions is vital for teachers of LEP students. Neuroscientists believe emotions are mediated through a complex mix of thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and reasoning; these aspects are interwoven and may affect how a student learns (Caine & Caine, 1997; Jensen, 1998b; Krashen, 1981, 1985; Wolfe, 2001). When people are exposed to constant threat or early trauma, high levels of the neurotransmitters serotonin and noradrenalin are released (Jensen, 1998b). If fear or stress is constant, the brain’s normal circuits may be altered. Therefore, a person’s physical and emotional well-being is linked closely to the ability to think and to learn effectively (Jensen, 1998b; Krashen, 1981, 1985; Wolfe, 2001). According to Krashen (1985), the affective filter is a screen of emotion that blocks language acquisition or learning as it causes the users to be too self-conscious or too embarrassed to take risks. He further stressed that optimal input or learning occurs when the affective filter is low. When the classroom atmosphere exhibits threatening or high tones, students will shut down and not be

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 31 willing to take risks (Jensen, 1998b; Krashen 1985). It is only when the atmosphere is “threat” free or (at least) low in threat that students begin to take risks (Bueno, 1999; Jensen, 1998b; Krashen, 1981, 1985). Teachers may use the understanding how students’ emotions play a critical role in their learning to drive the curriculum. According to Christison (1999d), it is most important to realize that emotions can be a hindrance or can be an aide to learning, depending on how the teacher uses them. If students experience a negative emotion when under threat, the research indicates that the brain will downshift or (at least) slow down. “When threatened, the second language learner becomes less flexible and will revert back to a more routine behavior and will have difficulty processing new information” (Christison, 1999c, p. 1). When teachers’ instruction captivates students’ positive emotions, such as love, excitement, enthusiasm, and joy, it enhances the ability of the cerebral cortex to process information and create meaningful connections (Jensen, 1998b). Their emotions interact with reason to support or inhibit learning. Students, for example, must feel physically safe and emotionally secure in their schools and classrooms before they can focus on the curriculum. Eric Jensen (1998b) emphasized the importance of teachers building an emotionally secure environment. “Teachers must provide outlets for their students' emotions through discussions, singing, sharing, writing, music, or even drawing” (Jensen, 1998b, p. 1). Teachers should do whatever it takes to get their students' emotions out in the open so they do not suppress them (Jensen, 1998b). Depending upon how students "feel" about a learning situation determines the amount of attention they will devote to it. When teachers promote emotional security in their classroom, they are establishing a positive climate that encourages students to take appropriate risks that enhance the learning experience (Jensen, 1998b). Social Interaction and Second Language Acquisition

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 32 Students’ learning is influenced not only by their emotions but also through social interactions because the brain is social by nature. There is a human need to build realistic, intimate relationships with others in the environment (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997). This need has evolved over thousands of years (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Krashen 1981, 1985). Social interaction is also emotionally stimulating and supports the learning process. According to Caine and Caine (1997), teachers must immerse learners in complex, interactive experiences that are both rich and real. An excellent example is illustrated when the students are immersed in a foreign language (English) and culture (American) in order to help them learn. Through research, teachers are discovering how the brain makes new neural connections when it gets actively involved in interesting and challenging situations. Classrooms should be busy, interactive environments where students and their teachers are learning from one another (Edelman, 1992). In an interactive classroom, teachers do not hesitate to have their students physically stand up, move around, and have peer interactions. An interactive, task-centered classroom is critical to students’ learning process because it helps maintain students’ focus while enhancing their sense of meaning (Caine & Caine, 1997; Edelman, 1992). This effective model of instruction can be often found in most elementary classrooms; however, in many secondary and college classrooms, students sit passively for long periods with little sensory stimulation, listening primarily to their teachers lecture (Caine & Caine, 1997; Edelman, 1992). One of the least effective forms of instructional delivery for students, especially for LEP students, is traditional lecturing (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998). When teachers lecture, most often their students left-brains begin to send sabotaging messages such as “How is this relevant to my life?” “How will I ever use this information?” and/or “Does this teacher know what he/she is doing?” For many LEP students, their critical left-brains may be

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 33 telling them to ignore their teacher because their brains have not been coded for the new language. In other words, their brains may be telling them that there is no such language as the one the teacher is using (Davies, 1996). Often, to LEP students, it sounds like their teacher is speaking like the teacher from Charlie Brown, “Blah, blah, blah.” After all, the teacher is the only person in the room who is trying to challenge what the student knows to be true. Therefore, in the students’ brains, whatever data the teacher is presenting is irrelevant to the learner; as a result, students' brains fail to store the information in their long-term memories and will be unable to retrieve the data for later use. “Our marvelous brain remembers everything; the problem we have is ineffective recall" (Davies, 1996, p. 5). That is why after extended periods of instruction and practice, students later return to their class and act as if they have never heard the material before (Davies, 1996). Patterns and Second Language Acquisition Caine and Caine (1994; 1997) connected neuro-psychological and educational methodologies and found that the search for meaning and patterns is a basic process in the human brain. In fact, the brain may resist learning fragmented facts presented in isolation (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997). Learning is believed to occur faster and more thoroughly when it is presented in meaningful contexts, with an experiential component; hence, the notion that every brain, or every student, is unique (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997). While the search for patterns and context may be universal, every learner has his/her own learning style (Gardner, 1983, 1993; Tomlinson, 1999). To meet these diverse needs means providing choices for students (Edelman, 1992; Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.). Researchers, such as the Caines, recommend a relaxed learning environment that offers numerous options for individual learning. In the student-centered classroom, the teacher is the

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 34 facilitator of learning, who guides their students learning by design. Teachers create thematic lessons and then engage their students through an array of student-centered, versatile activities. These activities speak to their students’ interests, thus creating an interest in learning (Caine & Caine, 1994; Jensen, 1998; Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.; Wolfe, 2001). According to Gerald Edelman (1992), chairperson of the Department of Neurobiology at Scripps Research Institute, students learn best when they interact continuously in an environment that provides many sensory, cultural, and problem layers. His ideas suggest that students have a natural inclination to learn, understand, and grow. Surround the students with a variety of instructional opportunities and they will make the connections required for learning. Culture and Second Language Acquisition Both the Caines and Edelman’s learning theories follow the model of Vygotsky’s social cognition learning model. Lev Semenovich Vygotsky, an educational theorist and behaviorist (1896-1934) suggested that culture is the primary determinant of individual development. Through culture, children learn language and acquire much of the content of their thinking. The familial culture of LEP students dictated what and how they thought within their native homeland, but now they must learn to adjust to their new surroundings and culture (Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.). Through communication with their peers, students learn a rich body of knowledge that exists in the culture (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; D’Arcangelo, 2000). The social cognition-learning model has heavily influenced education today. The teacher becomes a facilitator of their students’ learning. The teacher sets up scenarios that students perform with others. The students accomplish and perform complex tasks they may never have completed on their own (Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 35 Research indicates that the best way to help LEP students’ transition from one culture to another (e.g. the mainstreamed classroom) is through peer interaction in cooperative student learning centers (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; ELLKBase, 2004). These cooperative centers involve LEP students in a variety of activities involving groups of students creating and solving specific tasks together. Activities may include role-playing, cooperative learning, and/or story telling (Edelman, 1992). The lessons require students to be focused for short periods allowing them to input the information, reflect upon it, and then process the new information learned. These centers need to be hands-on and allow the students to investigate new concepts and dialogue with each other; the LEP students will gain new knowledge and have immediate feedback from their peers (Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.). The students are provided options and must learn to take responsibility and prioritize (Edelman, 1992). By using cooperative learning and center-based activities, teachers can address the various learning styles and the English language development of their LEP students (Caine & Caine, 1994, 1997; D’Arcangelo, 2000; Edelman, 1992). Limited English proficient students can learn to excel in a variety of ways when the classroom teacher offers an ample number of learning opportunities. Meaningfulness and Second Language Acquisition Students must have a personal and meaningful challenge to gain new knowledge. Such challenges stimulate a student's mind to the desired state of alertness. In order for a student to gain insight into a problem, there must be intensive analysis of the different ways to approach it. This is what is known as the “active processing of experience” (Jensen, 1998b, p. 14). Student learning can be enhanced when teachers realize that how they deliver instruction can impede or improve their students’ learning (Edelman, 1992). It is imperative that teachers examine how they deliver instruction because LEP students process and retain information differently. They

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 36 must determine whether they will require students to memorize facts and listen to lectures or engage their students in exercises that are more meaningful (Christison, 1999c; Jacobs, 1989; 1997). Teachers must also question whether the information being presented is meaningful to the student (Caine &Caine, 1994, 1997; Christison, 1999c; Edelman, 1992). When LEP students are asked to merely memorize facts, it will not lead to constructive learning. They will just be regurgitating information and not make a meaningful connection. Evidence from neuroscience has shown that when students are asked to learn facts and skills in isolation, the brain cannot make the necessary connections (Edelman, 1992). “If lessons are meaningful, students will learn more rapidly and retain information longer” (Christison, 1999c, p. 1). Meaning has a tremendous impact on what information and/or skills will be learned and stored. If students do not develop a profound connection by the end of a learning episode, there is little likelihood that much information will be recalled (Edelman, 1992). To help students find meaning, today's curriculum must contain connections to their experiences, not just their teachers. Memory and Second Language Acquisition The research has indicated that students’ memory and experiences may influence new learning (Jensen, 1998b). Memory acts like a filter that helps students to focus on those things that have relevant meaning and discard irrelevant thoughts. An example of how memory functions is evident when LEP students learn their new language. The sounds (phonemes) are unfamiliar to their brains and therefore their brains are not able to register the connections to words. If the brain hears an unfamiliar sound or word, it will search other avenues such as auditory, visual, spatial, or motor sources to aid in the detection for meaning. It registers as “an undifferentiated neural activity” and the learner must “retrain” their brain to recognize these

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 37 sounds (Genesee, 2000, p. 2). If not all sources recognize the sound or the word, the input will not be comprehensible and the sounds or words to be deciphered become useless noise or jargon, and therefore meaningless (Krashen, 1981, 1985; Talukder, 2000). Only through continual exposure over time does the brain begin to make sense of the sounds and words (Talukder, 2000). Language teachers successfully aid in this process by extending phonemes and exaggerating them until their students are able to make the neural connections and learn the new sounds (Talukder, 2000). By doing so, the teacher is naturally exercising their students’ neural activity. After this continual exposure to the new sounds, the brain will be able to decipher among the new sounds. By working together to form connections, the neurons form a type of network, which will allow one to comprehend the sounds, the words, and the phrases (Talukder, 2000). An analogy for this process is one of a Polaroid photo: when the film first comes out of the camera, it is rather fuzzy and unclear; when it is fully developed, it has greater definition and clarity. Eric Jensen (1998b) indicated that knowledge of the manner, in which the brain processes and stores memory may assist teachers with their lesson planning and their presentations. There are four types of memory: procedural, episodic, semantic, and sensory. Procedural memory occurs after repeated action; it typically deals with routine activities, such as brushing teeth. Episodic memory is charged emotionally either positively or negatively. Teachers may use positive episodic memory to aid their students in recalling important information, building on their prior knowledge, and acting upon it (Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b; Wolfe, 2001). Semantic memory, or rote memory, is used often in the classroom to recall facts. The right side of the brain is thought to be virtually non-verbal or mute, and non-critical; however, it is pattern seeking. Although this side of the brain is mute, and does not allow for spoken

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 38 language, it will try to communicate by whispering softly and using body language such as gestures. When the pattern-seeking part of the brain finds cause-and-effect relationships, they are likely to be stored in the long-term memory. The implication for teaching is that assertions by the instructor are not enough; the student's brain will insist that each assertion must be proved through repeated patterning which taps in to the long-term memory (Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b). Sensory memory, which is in the right part of the brain, is automatic. This allows one to process short-term and long-term memory. Because every person has a neural history, teachers draw from past experiences to grab students’ attention and build understanding. If a personal connection is made to the learning experience, it will stimulate a response, which can generate a new real life experience. According to Davies (1996), “We often remember information when it is characterized by: sensory associations, emotional context, intense associations, and necessities for survival, personal importance, or repetition” (p. 5). Bringing two sources of stimuli together, such as using of pictures and music, increases the overall amount of brain activity and creates more neural connections; this ultimately assists with learning and language acquisition. When these neural connections are formed, memories are created. If a teacher increases the number, and the variety of the connections, there is an increased chance of retention and later recall (Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b; Sprenger, 1999; Wolfe, 2001). Recall is also greater for information that is presented first or last in a succession; this is known as the “primacy effect” and the “recency effect” (Sprenger, 1999, p. 1). In order to retain the information necessary, the brain needs to rehearse the information using a variety of repetitive actions such as learning through rhyming, poetry, music, and movement. A teacher can also use word chunking to convey the information. This process allows students to make

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 39 connections to concepts of which they are already familiar (Christison, 1999c; Davies, 1996; Jensen, 1998b; Sprenger, 1999). Schemas and Second Language Acquisition Schemas are interpretive “memory” frames that teachers use to help their students make sense of information by relating it to previous experiences (Sprenger, 1999). By providing students with a simple graphic organizer or a visual aid that displays the chunks of information to be learned, the students will have a framework, which they can use to approach the information. They also help to clarify instructional goals and to clear up any misconceptions. A story map is one example of a graphic organizer that breaks down the elements of a narrative into chunks of texts, so that the students can organize and comprehend the events therein. It also illustrates what the students are responsible for learning. Using a story map for the study of literature helps to make the learning interesting and increases later recall (Sprenger, 1999). Music and Second Language Acquisition To inspire effective learning, a teacher should also include music. Music is linked often to emotions in the brain, and playing it in the classroom can trigger pleasurable memories. “The reason music is so important to the learning environment is that is actually corresponds to and affects our physiological conditions” (Davies, 1996, p. 3). With music, students develop spatial reasoning which they can use for mathematical skills (Christison, 1999c; Davies, 1996). It is probably the most inexpensive adaptation that can be easily applied in the classroom environment. Teachers can use classical music, which is universal and has no lyrics to confuse LEP students. Music may be employed during “quiet time,” in which students quietly read a book or relax without talking to each other. This quiet period allows time for neural connections that were made during learning to be processed (Davies, 1996; Edelman, 1992; Jensen, 1998b).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 40 Thematic Instruction and Second Language Acquisition Thematic instruction incorporates emotional content, social interaction, patterns, cultural recognition, meaningfulness, and information about memory into its curriculum (Jacobs, 1989). This is why it is called “Integration of the Curriculum.” James Beane (1997) has traced the roots of curriculum integration back to 1895. As early as 1918, Kilpatrick discussed the "project method" of instruction that shifted the focus to the interests of students (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997). Lipson (1993) and Beane (1997) traced the idea of curriculum integration to reforms of the 1930s, specifically to John Dewey's 1933 discussion of meaningful learning. Today, integration of the curriculum is considered a synthesis of the following modalities: brain research (e.g., how students learn), teaching/instructional strategies, and curriculum development, and/or enhancement (Kovalik, 1994). The three approaches explored in this research project are (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) crosscurricular integration. A review of the literature supports the view that these types of instruction are educational approaches that prepare students for lifelong learning (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Vogt, 1997). There is a strong belief among those who support curriculum integration that education is a process for developing abilities required by life in the twenty-first century, rather than discrete, departmentalized subject matter (Beane, 1997). In general, all three approaches combine subjects, emphasize projects, require additional sources that go beyond textbooks, and build upon student and teacher relationships and the relationship among and between concepts (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Vars, 2001; Vogt, 1997). Brain-based research confirms the fact that the learning environment needs to provide a setting that incorporates stability and familiarity. It should be able to satisfy the mind’s enormous curiosity and hunger for learning for discovery, challenge, and novelty (Beane, 1989; Jacobs,

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 41 1989; Shoemaker, 1989). Creating an opportunity to challenge LEP students to call on their collective experiences, or prior knowledge, is essential. Through this process, teachers transition their LEP students from memorizing unconnected factual information to more meaningful and lasting learning. The students begin the journey of connecting learning events rather than remembering bits and pieces. Prior knowledge is an essential element in this quest for making learning relevant to students’ lives (Shoemaker, 1989). The brain organizes new knowledge on the basis of previous experiences and the meaning that has developed from those experiences. The brain processes many things at the same time, and holistic experiences are recalled more quickly and easily. "The human brain," writes Shoemaker (1989), "actively seeks patterns and searches for meaning through these patterns" (p. 13). Put to use in the classroom, brain research points toward integration of the curriculum (also termed thematic teaching). Thematic teaching is an integration of the disciplines, which focuses on building concepts, topics, or categories (Jacobs, 1989). It provides a narrow focus of an area over a short timeframe. Often subjects taught are subordinate to the theme, allowing for the typical separation between disciplines or subjects to be eliminated. Thematic instruction provides LEP students opportunities to learn through more contextualized learning experiences. In return, thematic instruction allows teachers the opportunity to reach a broader range of students. Students make connections within themselves, with the content, and with the new language. These connections help build language and academic development alike (Bower, 1998). When learning is orchestrated throughout the curriculum, students become fully engaged, and in return, they enjoy and take ownership of learning (Beane, 1997; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Shoemaker, 1989; Vars, 2001; Vogt, 1997). Implementing thematic learning is also an effective way to engage students (Jacobs, 1989). Students are taught to link content and language learning

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 42 in a meaningful way, which helps them to develop critical thinking skills. By working cooperatively in small heterogeneous groups on a specific task, LEP students can negotiate the means to construct an outcome. This activity allows students to exchange information, knowledge, and experience.

Interdisciplinary Curriculum In the traditional mode of teaching, content subjects are taught separately as the curriculum has been divided into separate disciplines such as language arts, math, science, social studies, and the arts. Each subject is taught in isolation from the others; this isolation of teaching facts and skills artificially compartmentalizes subjects into separate schemata files (Jacobs, 1989, 1997). Connections between the curriculum areas have not been provided, and will often leave students without the skills needed to integrate the information they have learned or to understand how the subject areas relate to each other and to real life. Interdisciplinary curriculum is used often synonymously with integrated curriculum; it addresses some of the recurring problems in education, fragmentation, and isolated skill instruction, by supporting goals such as transferring knowledge to learning. This occurs when students are taught to think and reason, and are provided a relevant curriculum. Interdisciplinary curriculum was defined by Jacobs (1989) as "a knowledge view and curricular approach that consciously applies methodology and language from more than one discipline to examine a central theme, issue, problem, topic, or experience" (p. 8). According to Jacobs (1989, 1997), the interdisciplinary units are designed by the teacher, but shaped by the students’ quest for more or less knowledge about a subject. The units are aligned with the school districts’ grade-levels’

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 43 scope and sequence, incorporate a cognitive taxonomy that encourages higher-order critical thinking skills, have behavioral indicators of attitudinal changes, and have a solid evaluation scheme. Through interdisciplinary curriculum, boundaries may, or may not, be eliminated between the subjects. These units must also incorporate the core discipline subjects and interdisciplinary experiences for students into the curriculum (Jacobs, 1989, 1997). Lake (1994) described interdisciplinary curriculum as a combination of several school subjects into one theme where knowledge gained is demonstrated in a final project. In real life, multiple subjects are combined often into one activity, so this prepares students for the real world (Lake, 1994). According to Jacobs (1989, 1997), teachers who use interdisciplinary curriculum refocus the students’ learning. Teachers introduce the core subjects in a relevant context by presenting information to students in a thematic, holistic manner. Interdisciplinary curriculum incorporates Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, which is that level that is just above the students’ language abilities, into classroom instruction. Teachers introduce the unit of study, then weave and align the core disciplines into the theme. The teachers guide and “scaffold” their students’ learning during the early portion of the unit (Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d., p. 1). At a predetermined point, the teacher’s role shifts and becomes the primary facilitator of their students’ learning, as the teacher sets up scenarios that students perform together. By cooperating, the students perform complex tasks they may never have completed on their own (Vygotsky and Social Cognition, n.d.). Teachers using interdisciplinary curriculum are “active curriculum designers” (Jacobs, 1989, p. 9).Teachers are “empowered to work as a designer to shape and to edit the curriculum according to the students’ needs” (p. 10). It empowers students to see connections, generalize, and transfer knowledge to a variety of situations in their lives (Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lake, 1994).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 44 Implementing interdisciplinary learning (thematic) is an effective way to engage students. These students are taught to link content and language learning in a meaningful way, which helps to develop their critical thinking skills (Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lake, 1994). By working cooperatively on a specific task, LEP students negotiate the means to construct an outcome. This activity allows students to exchange information, knowledge, and experience. In return, they will make connections themselves with the content and the language. Educators need to help students have appropriate experiences and capitalize on those experiences. These activities will help to build oral language development as well as increase the vocabulary needed to build comprehension (Bower, 1998).

Curriculum Integration According to James Beane (1997), curriculum integration radically differs fundamentally from interdisciplinary and cross-curricular approaches. When teachers place curriculum integration within a collection of interdisciplinary approaches, they are implying there is a continuum. When teachers depart from instruction in separate subject areas, they move toward connecting integration across disciplines. According to Beane (1997), disciplinary boundaries should be downplayed. Beane designed a method of integration (termed curriculum integration) that closely weaves students’ personal and social concerns into the curriculum without regard for the traditional content areas. In Beane's model, there are no boundaries between the subjects; the barriers are eliminated. Students’ knowledge is gained through the context of their problemsolving questions. The scope and sequence for learning is formulated by students’ questions. Beane’s methodology was originally termed “core curriculum” by educators who developed it

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 45 early in the twentieth century; Beane revived it and termed it “curriculum integration” (Vars, 2001, p. 2). In curriculum integration, themes are drawn from life as it is being lived and/or experienced by the students and driven by the standards and/or the scope and sequence of the district. Teachers using these types of themes open avenues of inquiry and action through a democratic process (Jacobs, 1989). Students and teachers collaborate as they plan the curriculum (Beane, 1997). Beane (1997) stated, “Curriculum units are formed by asking students two simple questions: “What questions or concerns do you have about yourself? What questions or concerns do you have about the world?” (p. 51). Themes are then identified from students’ questions. This focus on the curriculum compels teachers to work with students in ways that empowers them as they provide a powerful voice in curriculum planning. According to Beane (1997), “Bringing democracy into the classroom assures that students have a genuine say in their curriculum and that their opinions count for something” (p. 49). This approach to learning is vastly different when compared to the “traditional” mode of planning instruction, which is subject specific, and much less democratic (Jacobs, 1989). Beane’s type of instruction provides a framework for learning that is knowledge-rich. “Knowledge and skills are derived out of the abstract subject categories and in the context of thematic units. Curriculum integration presents an authentic integration of affect and cognition” (Beane, 1992, p. 3). Beane’s concept has constructivist roots and follows the philosophy that meanings are created by students rather than imposed by adults. Students use their knowledge, skills, and prior experience to search for answers to their questions rather than concentrating on passing exams (Beane, 1992, 1997).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 46 Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Cross-curricular thematic instruction is a combination of the aforementioned methodologies of instruction that integrate themes around content subjects. Cross-curricular thematic instruction adapts components of interdisciplinary instruction as the organizational structure, which is called a theme, thematic unit, or unit (Jacobs, 1989; Vogt, 1997). However, this methodology is linked to a framework (standards) that have specific goals and/or outcomes that specify what students are expected to learn as a result of the experiences and lessons in each part of the unit. Cross-curricular thematic units use a component of curriculum integration because students contemplate problems and situations that reflect the world, as they know it; this allows students to interrelate pieces of information that are connected (Jacobs, 1989; Vogt, 1997). When permitted to study topics in which they have an interest and genuine curiosity, students are more personally invested in gaining the knowledge and skills involved. The primary difference that sets this approach apart is that information is obtained and primarily linked through literature and other subject matter contents that students use to learn about the world (Beane, 1997; Meinbach, Rothlein, & Fredericks, 1995; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Vogt, 1997). Within its framework, there are varied levels of integration, where teachers develop cross-curricular sub-objectives provided by a curriculum guide or the standards (Meinbach, Rothlein, & Fredericks, 1995; Vogt, 1997). For teachers and students alike, exploration and discovery become paramount; the teacher as the dispenser of knowledge is secondary. Lessons developed include cross-curricular activities and assessments. The activities are primarily ones of enrichment and/or or enhancement with a cross-curricular focus. Motivation, organization, and assessments become the driving force and natural extensions of the students' interest and are not imposed externally by the teacher (Erickson, 2002; Meinbach et al., 1995; Vogt, 1997).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 47 This instructional methodology attempts to address some of the recurring problems in education, such as fragmentation and isolated skill instruction by supporting goals such as transferring knowledge to learning (Vogt, 1997). This occurs when students are taught to think and reason, and are provided a relevant curriculum. Teachers using cross-curricular thematic instruction make a conscious effort to apply knowledge, principles, and/or values of more than one content area or academic discipline simultaneously (Vogt, 1997). Subject matter content is taught by intertwining a central theme, issue, problem, process, topic, or experience (Jacobs, 1989). With cross-curricular thematic instruction, students are encouraged to explore core subject matter topics, problems, and questions (Jacobs, 1989). Students become engaged through various reading and writing activities. It presents opportunities for teachers to build upon themes that students want to know more about. These themes will increase students’ confidence, improve their reading and writing, expand their content knowledge, build upon their background knowledge, and increase their motivation and attitudes about academics (Erickson, 2002; Meinbach et al., 1995; Jacobs, 1989; Vogt, 1997). Focusing on integrating content knowledge through language arts helps to foster students in developing their reading, writing, and thinking skills (Jacobs, 1989; Vogt, 1989). Many of the important concepts, strategies, and skills taught in the language arts transfer readily to other content areas. Various learning strategies can be related to reading material in any content area (Vogt, 1997). “Teachers can readily locate cause-andeffect relationships that exist in content areas such as in literature, science, and social studies; cross-curricular thematic teaching supports and promotes this transfer of knowledge” (Meinbach et al., 1995, p. 1). Teachers are easily able to apply principles of critical thinking across any content subject or area of discipline (Meinbach et al., 1995).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 48 According to Mary Ellen Vogt (1997), “Teachers who use cross-curricular themes create active readers and writers by engaging students in authentic literacy tasks that emerge naturally from interesting and worthwhile topics and ideas” (p. 1). Vogt suggests teachers use authentic tasks that are defined as "ones in which reading and writing serve a function for children" and which "involve children in the immediate use of literacy for enjoyment and communication" (p. 1). Vogt also indicated that teachers should focus on students’ choice and ownership, which will extend students knowledge-based beyond their classroom walls. Vogt’s research (1997) on cross-curricular thematic instruction and reading indicated: Good readers connect and utilize ideas and information from a variety of previous life and literacy experiences (Anderson et al., 1985). Sustained reading of interesting texts improves reading comprehension and enhances enjoyment (Fielding & Pearson, 1994; Reutzel & Cooter, 1991). Over time, the effect is that comprehension improves as students read more (Hartman & Hartman, 1993). Therefore, to increase understanding, students should have experience reading a variety of texts, including narrative and expository literature, as well as "real world" materials such as brochures, magazine articles, maps, and informational signs. (p. 1) Through a variety of learning experiences, students will build a strong foundation that prepares them for "real world" tasks. “Because our lives require us to integrate what we have learned in an interdisciplinary manner, teaching children through merged disciplines better prepares them for applying new knowledge and understandings” (Vogt, 1997, p. 1). In the end, students will have a more personal connection to learning; one that is relevant to their lives and in return they will be more motivated to learn and have a greater chance to succeed (Vogt, 1997). Positive Results Data obtained through various studies have found that students who were enrolled in integrated programs do as well as, and most often do better, than students in traditional programs. Lawton (1994) discussed the “Eight-Year Study” conducted during the 1930s, in

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 49 which students who received the “fused” curricular design displayed more intellectual curiosity, a better attitude toward learning, and higher achievement in college than students in a traditional college-prep program (p. 1). Lawton (1994) surveyed core curricula in middle schools from the 1950s to the present. In his study of 15,000 Maine eighth-graders, Lawton found that students in interdisciplinary courses outscored their peers in single-discipline subjects by 58 points on standardized tests (Meinbach et al., 1995; Lake, 1994; Lawton, 1994; Vars, 2001; Weilbacher, 2001). A report by Weilbacher (2001) discussed how teachers from Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Florida, Virginia, and Texas used curriculum integration in their classrooms. This study demonstrated quantitatively that Beane’s instruction method increased students’ standardized tests scores. Weilbacher’s research also reported that at Auburn High and Middle School in Riner, Virginia students increased their Iowa test of Basic Skills. Data gathered in 1999 at Doe Creek Middle School in New Palestine, Indiana demonstrated that 82% of its eighth graders met the state standards in math and that 90% of its same students met the state’s standards in Language Arts (p. 26). Lake’s research (1994) indicated that students were not the only ones who responded favorably to the learning experiences of an integrated curriculum. In a study of an integrated mathematics curriculum, Edgerton (1990) found that after one year 83 percent of the teachers involved preferred to continue with the integrated program rather than return to the traditional curriculum. MacIver (1990) found that teachers appreciate the social support of working together and feel that they are able to teach more effectively when they integrate across subjects and courses. They discover new interests and teaching techniques that revitalize their teaching. (Lake, 1994, p. 1)

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 50 There have been more than 200 studies conducted over the years that assess the effectiveness of the various forms of integrative curriculum and instruction (Vars, 2001). The overall findings of this body of research were overwhelmingly supportive on the positive effects of interdisciplinary integration, curriculum integration, and cross-curricular thematic instruction. The studies cited the following explanation for the success of these approaches: (a) integrated curriculum helps students obtain and apply learned skills; (b) it leads to faster retrieval of information; (c) it encourages depth and breadth in learning; and (d) it increases motivation and promotes positive attitudes in students (Beane, 1997; Meinbach et al., 1995; Jacobs, 1989, 1997; Lake, 1994; Vars, 2001; Vogt, 1997; Weilbacher, 2001). According to Jacobs (1989), “there is no right or wrong choice for integration, only a range of options with distinct advantages and disadvantages” (p. 24). Most importantly, teachers who implement thematics instruction do a better job of teaching their LEP students English. Jacobs advocated action research as a way for teachers to “diagnose the needs and possibilities of your school and prescribe the combination that will best serve your students” (p. 24). To be successful, Jacobs (1989) identified four steps that play an integral role. Teachers should “conduct action research to learn about current resources and best practices, develop a proposal for integration, implement and monitor the pilot program, and conduct and adopt continual assessments of their students and program” (p. 27). In Vars (2001) study, integration of the curriculum was defined as a complex approach to learning that involves both curriculum and instruction modifications. Educators must hold fast to the ideal of developmentally-appropriate middle level education even if they have to make some accommodations to the realities of their situation. Above all, they must not retreat to long-discredited drill-and-test practices in the mistaken notion that helping students cram in order to raise their

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 51 test scores is the way to better quality education. Indeed, the opposite is true. (Vars, 2001, p. 14) Although students’ scores may increase, it is important to bear in mind that there are more important benefits of this type of learning such as increasing students’ love of learning, concerns for other people, as well as fostering students’ critical thinking and self-confidence (Meinbach et al., 1995; Vars, 2001).

Conclusion The literature continues to mount supporting thematic instruction as a favorable alternative to traditional instructional approaches. Based upon research of the brain and how students learn, these approaches are gaining popularity among ESL teachers as effective ways to reach LEP learners. The first method, interdisciplinary curriculum incorporates a process in which the teacher introduces the subject matter and then weaves the core disciplines into the unit (Jacobs, 1989). During curriculum integration, the teacher queries the students for topics that interest them the most; then these aspects are included in the unit instruction to raise student interest and participation (Beane, 1997). Finally, cross-curricular thematic instruction used the aforementioned methodologies but also incorporate specific goals and/or outcomes that are predetermined (Vogt, 1997). Combined, these approaches represent an exciting development in the field of ESL education. New English learners face many challenges, not the least of which is learning about a language and culture from someone who may be unfamiliar with their native language and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 52 culture. These methodologies include the use of neuroscience, music, social interaction, recognizable patterns, culture, meaningful challenges, schemas, and techniques that complement knowledge about short and long-term memory in humans. These thematic approaches promise to reach LEP students, who face greater challenges and the looming threat of failure, and set them on a path of lifelong learning. It is due to the great promise, demonstrated by a thorough review of the relevant literature that thematic instructional approaches were chosen for this research project. The next chapter reviews the methodology of this research project.

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies Qualitative research incorporates a variety of methodologies that are often combined and/or overlapped, such as in action research. Qualitative research is contrasted often with quantitative research. The focus of qualitative research is not on numbers but on words and may include observations, stories, visual portrayals, meaningful characterizations, interpretations, interviews, and other expressive descriptions (Zikmund, 2000). Qualitative analysis is a process that is often the precursor to quantitative, statistical work; a process to make the tacit underpinnings of an issue explicit; a process you can use to deepen your understanding of complex social and human factors that cannot be understood with numbers; a process that helps you figure out what to count and what to measure. (Kerlin, 1999, p. 1) Alternately, the purpose of quantitative research is to determine the quantity or extent of some phenomenon in the form of numbers (Burnaford et al., 2001; Gall, Borg, Walter, & Gall, 1996; Kerlin, 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Qualitative research uses a combination of strategies to collect data: field observations, focus groups, intensive interviews, and case studies. In a qualitative study, “the researcher conducts studies in the field, in natural surroundings, and tries to capture the normal flow of events without trying to control extraneous variables” (Zikmund, 2000, p. 1). Theories emerge as part of the research process, evolving from the data as they are collected (Burnaford et al., 2001; Gall et al., 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994). The design of a study evolves during the research and can often be adjusted or changed as it progresses such as in action research, which is not a

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 54 characteristic of quantitative research (Burnaford et al., 2001). It may be an exploratory research study or a quantitative descriptive study. A descriptive study seeks to answer those “what is?” or “what are?” questions, and data are collected through numbers, words or both (Zikmund, 2000). In quantitative research, researchers conduct experiments, classify data, and construct more complex statistical analysis in an attempt to explain what was discovered; although, a researcher may conduct non-controlled quantitative studies such as descriptive, correlational, ex post facto, and evaluation (Burnaford et al., 2001). Findings are generalized to a larger population, and direct comparisons are made. This is one of the main disadvantages of using qualitative research; the results are not often extended to wider populations with the same degree of certainty as in quantitative analyses. The results of the research are not usually tested to determine if they are statistically significant or due to chance (Burnaford et al., 2001; Gall et al., 1996; Kerlin, 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1994). It could be argued that the quantitative researcher is more precise, but the response would be that with people, it is not possible to be so precise, people change and the social situation is too complex for numerical description… Quantitative research has a tendency to clarify where clarification is not appropriate. (McBride & Schostak, 2000, pp. 1-2) Hence, quantitative data can determine when students have achieved or failed a task, and they can provide national ranking, percentiles, and allow researchers to conduct comparison analyses; but they cannot provide the “total” picture of why a particular student has either succeeded or failed. Alternatively, qualitative research has a phenomenological focus, which can provide an enriched and detailed description of the participants’ actions and viewpoints (Veronesi, 1997). Qualitative research tends to incorporate a more humanistic approach. When conducting qualitative research, one is often interested in determining the ‘whole’ picture; he/she is in search

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 55 of answering the “why” questions (Burnaford et al., 2001; Gall et al., 1996; Kerlin, 1999; McBride & Schostak, 2000; Meloy, 2002). The role of the researcher is also different when comparing qualitative and quantitative research. In quantitative research, the researcher neither participates in nor influences what is being studied; thus, he/she examines the circumstances objectively. In qualitative research, the researcher seeks to minimize the impact of his/her study and/or interventions. Most often qualitative researchers endeavor to “build theory” from the ground of experience or practice (McBride & Schostak, 2000, p. 1). In some qualitative research, the researcher may play a more subjective role and participate by being immersed in his/her research. That is, the observer may be the teacher or the facilitator. This role is often the case when action research is used in educational research. Therefore, both qualitative and quantitative research studies are valuable in the field of education. Both may be utilized to understand the effectiveness of the various programs in place. In education, researchers may select a multi-method or mixed methods methodology by collecting quantitative and qualitative data to be better able to identify the “total” picture of the research problem (McBride & Schostak, 2000, p. 1). In most research cases involving action research, multiple assessment measures are needed. The type of data (quantitative, qualitative, or both) to be gathered will often depend upon the problem. In an action research study, the researcher may use qualitative observational tools as he/she observes teachers in action as they implement changes such as current teaching practices, assessment practices, altering existing school and classroom policies, and creating new mechanisms for studying problems or issues within a school. On the other hand, a quantitative survey may be used to survey teachers and their students to gather their thoughts on the effectiveness of implemented changes. When data

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 56 are obtained and used by the state and/or central school districts, they are more likely to be quantitative. Most often, data collection can be as simplistic as counting students or as complex as a multiple year case study (Burnaford et al., 2001; McBride & Schostak, 2000). For the purpose of this research study, action research will be the preferred type of methodology and will be furthered examined.

Action Research Action research is a powerful qualitative research tool most often utilized in education (Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003). Action “implies the need for change and research implies a need to clarify or increase understanding. “Action research is simply a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own practices, their understanding of these practices, and the situations in which the practices are carried out” (Carr & Kremmis, 1986, p. 162). Researchers often conducting action research will use various qualitative and quantitative data to determine the 'success', “usefulness,” or “value” of the innovation (Smith, 2002, p. 1). Researchers who use this method of research observe carefully and reflect systematically. Most often, the researcher will generate potential solutions to original problems, implement a chosen intervention, assess the outcomes, and/or modify the solution(s). Many researchers are drawn to action research because it is firmly located in the realm of the practitioner -- it is tied to self-reflection. The practitioner is typically actively involved in the cause for which the research is conducted (Burnaford et al., 2001; Carr & Kremmis 1986; Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003; Smith, 2002). Action research, in general, can be generally credited to Kurt Lewin dating back to the 1940s. His approach involved a spiral of steps, “each of which is composed of a circle of

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 57 planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action” (Smith, 2002, p. 1). The first step of the cycle is to examine the idea carefully, finding as much data regarding the situation as possible. “If this first period of planning is successful, two items emerge: namely, ‘an overall plan’ of how to reach the objective and secondly, a decision in regard to the first step of action” (Smith, 2002, p. 1). The next step is “composed of a circle of planning, executing, and reconnaissance or fact finding for the purpose of evaluating the results of the second step, and preparing the rational basis for planning the third step, and for perhaps modifying again the overall plan” (Smith, 2002, p. 1). Action research is a problem-solving approach in social settings, and one that parallels Dewey’s 1920s conception of learning from experience (Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003; Smith, 2002). Not until 1949, was action research widely accepted as a form of educational research, when Stephen Corey and others from the Teachers College of Columbia University introduced the term “action research” (Johnson, 1993, p. 1). Corey later defined action research as “the process through which practitioners study their own practice to solve their personal practical problems” (Johnson, 1993, p. 1). In education, teachers conducting action research will design, conduct, and implement the research themselves to improve teaching in their own classrooms in which they often establish expertise in the area of curriculum development and reflective teaching (Johnson, 1993). The teacher’s primary role is an inquirer. In an educational setting, “the approach is naturalistic, using participant-observation techniques of ethnographic research, is generally collaborative, and includes characteristics of case study methodology” (Johnson, 1993, p. 1). It is often used as an evaluative tool that assists teachers and districts in a selfevaluation and modification (Johnson, 1993; Knezevik, 2003). “Engaging in collaborative action research [also] helps eliminate the isolation that has long characterized teaching, as it promotes

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 58 professional dialogue and thus, creates a more professional culture in schools” (Johnson, 1993, p. 1). By collaborating, the team members provide each other support by sharing questions, concerns, results and advising each other and commenting on each other’s progress (Knezevik, 2003). According to Jacobs (1989), teachers should conduct action research in their school when considering implementing new instructional approaches in order to “diagnose the needs and possibilities of your school and prescribe the combination that will best serve your students” (p. 24). To be successful, Jacobs identified four steps that play an integral role. Teachers should “conduct action research to learn about current resources and best practices, develop a proposal for integration, implement and monitor the pilot program, and conduct and adopt continual assessments of their students and program” (p. 27). In 1999, Ernie Stringer introduced action research in education as a process that encompassed three stages: looking, thinking, and acting. By looking, one is building a case and collecting information. Through this process, the researcher is evaluating, defining, and describing the problem being investigated, the context in which it is set, and the participants. During the thinking stage, the researcher is interpreting and explaining. Through evaluations, the researcher is forced to analyze and interpret situations. The researcher will then reflect on what participants have been doing as well as look at areas of success and any deficiencies, issues, and/ or problems. The final stage is the act phase. The researcher actively is trying to resolve issues and problems. Through this stage, the researcher is evaluating the worth, effectiveness, appropriateness, and outcomes of those activities and formulating solutions to any problems (Stringer, 1999).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 59 Smith (2002) stated, “Today, action research has gained a significant foothold both within the realm of community-based, and participatory action research; and as a form of practice oriented to the improvement of educative encounters” (p. 1). Action research continues to play a vital role in the restructuring and accountability movement in schools. Schools today have sitebased management and shared decision-making. With all the acquired autonomy, all parties involved have new responsibilities. States, school districts, administrators, and teachers are now held accountable to all stakeholders for the policies, programs, and practices they implement (Johnson, 1993; Smith, 2002). Teachers can no longer afford to make merely unfounded decisions; they are now called upon to make informed decisions that are data and research driven (Johnson, 1993).

Research Design This action research study used an iterative and collaborative research process; the researcher and participant teachers wished to experiment with new instructional methodologies in their SEI classrooms. The research study methodology was adapted with permission from the framework created by Richard Sagor, and described in his book entitled, How to Conduct Collaborative Action Research (1992). Sagor provided a step-by step guide to teachers on how to collaboratively conduct action research. The five steps used in the study were: (a) formulating the problem, (b) data collecting, (c) data analyzing, (d) reporting the results, and (e) “taking” action. In Chapter 1, formulating the problem was discussed. Chapter 2 presented the literature review. Data collecting and data analyzing are discussed in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 discusses and reports the results, and Chapter 5 discusses “taking” actions. The first three steps are discussed next.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 60

Problem Formulation In the initial stage, the problem formulation stage, the researcher identifies the research problem. The research problem, previously identified in Chapter 1, indicated that the District’s language assistance programs were not meeting the academic needs of all of their LEP students enrolled, including some of the LEP students enrolled in the District’s SEI K-5 program. To be successful, the research suggested that participants SEI teachers prescribe to a curriculum that would fully prepare their LEP students to transition into the mainstreamed English-only classrooms. Second, the participant teachers needed to foster their LEP students’ second language acquisition and critical reasoning skills, which involved adopting new pedagogical methods and developmental theories. This required the participant teachers to re-examine “what” and “how” they were teaching in their SEI classrooms. The participant teachers in this study kept in mind the diverse needs of their highly heterogeneous student population as they reexamined how their LEP students learned and acquired new language. Thus, participant teachers continually constructed and applied learning methodologies that were based on linguistic and cognitive best practices, which were built upon their LEP students’ language abilities, reasoning, and problem-solving skills. Finally, they presented information that was meaningful and relevant to the context of their students’ lives. Through this action research study, the researcher aimed to discover the implications of thematic instruction on developing LEP students’ language and academic skills. The researcher discovered particular obstacles these teachers and their students encountered as they implement

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 61 these instructional strategies into their classrooms. Finally, the study examined themes and identified patterns that hindered some LEP students’ learning process. This action research provided the researcher as well as the participant teachers an avenue to reflect upon what was working within the SEI classrooms; they used this data to implement immediate changes in order to meet the needs of their LEP students.

Data Collection In Sagor’s second stage, the data collection, the researcher determines the following: (a) site location, (b) sample population(s), (c) the scope and length of the data collection, (d) the various types of data that will be needed to complete the study successfully, and (e) address issues of validity and reliability. Site Background The study was conducted within the parameters of five Sheltered English Immersion classrooms. The SEI program serviced grades K-5. It was a language assistance program in which LEP students acquired English language skills so that they could succeed in mainstream English-only classrooms. All instruction was aligned with standard immersion strategies and classes were conducted only in English. The SEI program functioned as a school within a school. The school was built in 1962 and was a neighborhood school located in a middle class community. On site, there were a variety of educational resources and programs including the following: special education, occupation and physical therapy (OT/PT), and speech therapy. There were also early childhood (EC) and EC special education programs. The site also housed a school nurse, social worker, school psychologist, and a guidance counselor. There was a strong parent education component and an Adult ESL program for LEP parents.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 62 Study Participants The participants for this research study included five elementary ESL teachers (which included the researcher) at “the School.” All participating teachers had some specialized training in meeting the needs their LEP students, possessed an ESL teaching credential, and/or were working towards their certification. All five of the participating teachers were attending graduate school, either at the master’s or at doctoral level. In the research study, participant teachers gathered information from their LEP students from five of the designated elementary classrooms (K-2, 4-5) at the School. Each participant teacher was responsible for an average of 6-23 LEP students for a total of approximately 60-80 LEP students. The actual number of students who participated in the study was 69. All LEP students were placed into the program based upon the District’s predetermined qualifications. All students were identified as a limited English proficient student according to district, state, and Federal mandates; they all participated in SEI program and the study with parental permission. The identities of the individual students were kept confidential for the purpose of this study; students were identified by a number or pseudonym assigned to them. Only the student's teacher knew their identity. The assessment used to identify LEP students for placement in the SEI program was: IDEA-Tests section IPT, Oral, Reading and Writing. All students enrolled in the SEI program were identified as having a language proficiency level of 1-3. There were three students who were identified as a level 4. The scale ranged from 1 to 6, with 6 being designated as full fluency. For further information regarding student language levels, refer to LEP Students’ Language Levels Defined in Appendix D. Scope and Length of Data Collection Effort

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 63 The study was conducted for a period of 12 weeks. The timeframe solely depended upon the unique situations and/or changes that arose during the study. To accomplish these tasks, the participant teachers met weekly to strategically discuss, analyze, select, and adapt integrated instructional approaches and materials to use their classrooms. Participants met a total of 20 times throughout the duration of 12 weeks. They also reflected on a daily basis. Together with the researcher, they met to devise a general plan of action needed to implement, collect, and analyze data. The researcher continued to monitor the steps throughout the process. By collaborating, teachers were able to identify the critical areas that needed addressing; this allowed them to create, implement, and monitor a plan of action. Because the research design was cyclical in nature, the researcher modified parts of the research design or process as needed. The research design presented in this body of research was flexible enough to change directions. The researcher also planned to predict future research that would more fully addressed the needs of the teachers and their LEP student population in the SEI program. Various Types of Data The most reliable and valid results were obtained when the researcher gathered a minimum of three sets of data for each research question posed to triangulate the findings. Sagor (1992) referred to this stage as "the guiding principle" (p. 28). The researcher collected sufficient evidence that was “compelling enough to convince any skeptic” (p. 28). Data collected in this action research study was flexible and was generated from a variety of methods that included: a) existing sources from students’ work, b) archival evidence, c) tools that capture everyday life of participants (journals, logs, videotapes of lessons, photographs, and shadowing of research subjects), and d) tools that might be used for questioning subjects (interviews, written surveys, tests and quizzes, and focus groups). In this research study, the participant teachers maintained

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 64 their own anecdotal records of success, educational journals, as well as observed each other and provided students’ work samples. Through the action research collaborative process, the researcher and participant teachers determined the data collection techniques that best demonstrated students’ learning. Some archival data collected was obtained by the District’s LAP database and its students’ records and portfolios. Reflective journaling played a critical role in the data collection process because this process allowed teachers time to reflect upon what was or was not working and allowed them to look at themselves more objectively. It provided teachers the “necessary means to take a fresh look at the world they are immersed in” (Sagor, 1992, p. 34). Journaling was used by participant teachers on a daily basis for a minimum of ten minutes and was termed “personal reflection time” (Sagor, 1992, p. 34). Additional evidence was gathered from videotaping and photography; although they were considered to be rather subjective, they provided the researcher a way to capture the reality of the situation and/or daily life. “Well-chosen photos and videos can portray the textures and realities of schools and classrooms in a vivid light” (Sagor, 1992, p. 34). Another method of data collection used in this study was shadowing. Shadowing was an effective evaluative tool that helped the researcher to portray people and circumstances as they were in reality. It provided the researcher and participants the opportunity to experience a situation in the most naturalistic way. With school-based action research, the shadowing process involved following selected students for a specified period of time to collect a picture of a typical day in their life (Sagor, 1992). The researcher and teacher participants chose to shadow a Level 1 LEP student in their classroom throughout the research project.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 65 The researcher and participant teachers chose to use checklists and rating scales, which provided rich data for analysis (Sagor, 1992). Some questions were ranked in order or degree using Likert scales; while others were simple “yes” or “no” responses. These questions generated quantitative and qualitative data. Although interviews were far more time consuming and labor intensive, they were used for gathering data when information was not be communicated through a questionnaire technique; this included body language, facial expressions, and gestures and verbal intonations. The interviews were used to probe for details and clarifications, and gain insights that rarely emerged from a questionnaire. The researcher utilized three thematic instructional approaches: interdisciplinary curriculum, curriculum integration, and cross-curricular thematic instruction. The study determined which approach was the most effective model to employ in SEI classrooms for maximum student involvement. The units of study were: (a) space, (b) dinosaurs, and (c) the farm. The participant teachers worked together to design the units themselves; student input also played a key role. Participant teachers were free to locate and use any sources of information that they felt were of value during the units. Teachers understood that the unit period could fluctuate depending upon their preferences and action team responses and/or concerns (Knezevik, 2003). During the implementation stage, the action research plan went into effect. Participants adhered to the intended timetable (as much as possible). The separate activities constituted the change or innovation implemented and data were collected. Through continual monitoring, the researcher and participants were able to collect pertinent data; this involved the collection of records of various activities. As teachers collaboratively planned all three units, discussions arose, and these discussions played a critical element in the action research. Ideas followed naturally in this phase. These ideas for action emerged at different stages, allowing the researcher

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 66 to modify the course of the research project. This was the flexible nature of action research. The researcher documented and analyzed each step and/or modification. The three units are outlined next. Unit One: Interdisciplinary Curriculum One week before the initial meeting, the researcher provided each participant with a binder and journal notebook paper that was used as his or her journal. All participants agreed to reflect for a minimum of ten minutes per day. These journals were delivered to the participant teachers’ classrooms and/or homes. In the first journal exercise, teachers were asked to state and reflect upon their teaching philosophies. The next exercise asked the participants to reflect on the following question: “What three things would you like to learn or gain from participating in this study?” After the participant teachers had adequate time to reflect in their journals, an initial meeting was set; the meeting was set for four weeks prior to the implementation of the first unit, an interdisciplinary curriculum unit on space. The date and time for this meeting was determined by the participant teachers’ schedules. The participant teachers were asked to bring their notes and journals to the initial meeting. The Initial Meeting The planning meetings took place on various days, but mostly on Wednesdays during the school wide planning time or after school. The team determined the meeting place and times. During the initial meeting, the researcher reviewed and discussed brain-based theory, introduced the three methodologies, and the design of this project. The researcher addressed participants’ questions and concerns. The researcher and participant teachers sketched out the preliminary

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 67 schedule for the first unit of study, which utilized Jacobs’ (1989) interdisciplinary curriculum approach.

The Second Meeting During this planning meeting, the participant teachers collaboratively planned how they would enact the first interdisciplinary curriculum unit on space (See Appendix A). The researcher provided information and resources to the participant teachers to assist in the planning of their unit. Each unit was implemented across the grade-levels; the units were adjusted to meet the linguistic and academic levels of the participating LEP students. During this timeframe, the team decided on the best type of research data to be collected as evidence of the results of the instructional approach. The timeframe for this meeting was determined by the participant teachers’ schedules and was 12 weeks. After the meeting, the teachers provided the researcher with a copy of their lesson plans and a copy of the activities to be used in the classroom. The Follow-up Meeting Through these additional meetings, participant teachers collaborated, and identified the critical areas that needed to be addressed in order to create, implement, and monitor their next plan of action.

Unit Two: Curriculum Integration The First Meeting During this planning meeting, the participant teachers collaboratively planned the unit utilizing curriculum integration; the subject of this unit was dinosaurs (See Appendix B). The

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 68 researcher provided information and various resources to the participant teachers to further assist them with their planning of the second unit. Every unit was implemented across the grade-levels; they were adjusted to meet the linguistic and academic levels of the participating LEP students. During this timeframe, the team decided on the best type of research data needed to be collected as evidence of success of the unit. The date and time for this meeting was determined by the participant teachers’ schedules. Afterwards, teachers provided the researcher with a copy of their lesson plans and a copy of the activities to be used in the classroom. The Follow-up Meeting Through additional weekly meetings, the participant teachers collaborated and identified the critical areas that need to be addressed in order to create, implement, and monitor their next plan of action.

Unit Three: Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction The First Meeting During this planning meeting, the participant teachers collaboratively planned the unit using cross-curricular thematic instruction; the topic of this unit was the farm (See Appendix C). The researcher provided information and various resources to assist in the planning of the unit. Every unit was implemented across the grade-levels; they were adjusted to meet the linguistic and academic levels of the participating LEP students. During this timeframe, the team decided on the best type of research data needed to be collected as evidence of success of the unit. The date and time for this meeting was determined by the participant teachers’ schedules. After the meeting, teachers provided the researcher will a copy of their lesson plans and a copy of the activities to be used in the classroom.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 69 The Follow-up Meeting Through additional follow-up meetings, participant teachers collaborated and identified the critical areas that need to be addressed in order to create, implement, and monitor their next plan of action. Validity and Reliability Three issues the researcher needed to consider when designing her research were: generalizability, validity, and reliability (Sagor, 1992). Validity in this action research was assured when the researcher measured what she set out to investigate and related the reliability to whether the measuring was done accurately. Using multiple sources to gather data (triangulation) allowed for compensation for the imperfections of data-gathering instruments, and it might have increased the confidence in the results (Sagor, 1992). The researcher addressed issues of validity and reliability through an extensive data collection. The researcher checked for the validity of the information, and determined whether the information gathered was transferable to the general population, or if it was limited to the practices studied (its external reliability). In addition to external reliability, the researcher examined the internal consistency of the methodology to ensure that the research was free from bias and was ethical in nature. Data Analysis In Sagor’s third stage, the data analysis stage, the researcher compiled the data and analyzed the data by searching for patterns, trends, significance, and correlations. In this stage, conclusions were drawn, and suggestions were made based upon careful analysis. It was in this stage, according to Sagor (1992) that the process yielded meaningful information on how to improve practice, or resolve a problem that was uncovered.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 70 In this action research study, matrices were created to help the researcher identify themes that emerged. Each unit of study had a matrix created. Research questions were placed in the matrix. Data collected were charted and placed in one of the three independent windows. Once data were collected, they were analyzed and coded for themes to be identified. Sagor indicated that even if a theme did not come up frequently, the researcher might still feel that it was noteworthy. Because this was an action research study, the data matrices were adapted to meet the needs of the teachers and their LEP students (Sagor, 1992). Simple analysis procedures were sufficient for most of the responses to the questionnaire items. Analysis of closed-form items required a tally of the number of respondents selected each option for a given item, and then converted the frequencies into percentages that were reported in table form. For variables that were multiple choices but had no quantitative meaning, the analysis was limited to a simple frequency count. For multiple-choice responses with quantitative value, simple correlations were conducted to identify themes. For analyzing responses to open-form items, the goal was to find meaningful categories that most of the responses fell into, and assigned a value to the category levels that demonstrated some meaning in terms of response to the research question (Sagor, 1992). For interviews with open-form questions, the steps in preparing were the same as for the open-form items of the questionnaire. Categories were defined to accommodate the various categories; the categories were assigned values. The analysis itself employed the same statistical procedures used to analyze the questionnaire data. Due to the nature of action research, the researcher reserved the right to adapt, modify, conduct, and adopt continual assessments of the research if the need arose. All quantitative data analyses were carried out using SPSS (2004) for Windows. Both descriptive and inferential statistical methods were employed. All testing was based on

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 71 determining statistical significance at a two-sided alpha level of 0. 05. The study sample was described using measures of central tendency (mean and median) and dispersion (standard deviation and range) for continuous variables, frequency, and percentage for categorical variables. Mann-Whitney tests compared the distribution of ordinal-scaled variables between two categories of categorical variables such as gender, DPI levels, and teacher groupings. Spearman’s correlation statistic evaluated the linear association between continuous/ordinal scaled variables, such as gender, DPI levels, and teacher groupings, and the various observational behavior survey questions.

Summary This action research study involved documenting the process of ESL teachers as they strategically collaborated, discussed, selected, implemented, reflected, analyzed, and adapted thematic integration in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development. The use of existing sources such as student work samples were analyzed, as were new data taken from the following sources: direct observation, journals entries, videos, photographs, shadowing, logs, teacher-generated assessments, questionnaires, and student documentation. In this action research project, participant teachers met weekly in order to reflect upon these instructional approaches into their classrooms. This study examined the results to determine the impact of thematic instruction on developing LEP students’ language and academic skills. Furthermore, throughout this study, the researcher documented the particular obstacles the participant teachers and their students encountered as they implemented these

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 72 instructional strategies in their classrooms. Finally, the study identified confounding variables that may have affected the outcome of student learning and the research study.

CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Introduction This action research study followed Sagor’s (1992) iterative and collaborative action research model. There were several purposes of this action research study. The researcher helped SEI teachers strategically collaborate, discuss, select, implement, adapt, analyze, and reflect upon thematic integration in their SEI classrooms. The goal was to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development for successful participation and transition into the School’s English mainstreamed classrooms. To accomplish this task, participants implemented three thematic instructional approaches: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction. By thoroughly examining the results of the data, the researcher was able to determine which approach was the most effective model to employ in the School’s SEI classrooms, and affirm which approach (or approaches) would maximize student involvement and learning. More specifically, the researcher aimed to discover the implications of thematic instruction on developing LEP students’ language and academic skills by uncovering particular obstacles participants encountered during the implementation phase of the study that hindered the learning process of some LEP students. The questions that guided this investigation were: 1. How do ESL teachers strategically collaborate and discuss pertinent issues that arise when dealing with their LEP students and the SEI curriculum? 2. How do ESL teachers reflect, analyze, and select materials used in their SEI classrooms?

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 74 3. How do ESL teachers implement and adapt thematic instruction in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development? 4. Which thematic instructional approach: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction fosters LEP students’ language and academic success? The study sample is discussed next.

Participants' Demographics Five ESL teachers participated in this study. The number of years participants taught in an ESL setting ranged between 1- 14. Furthermore, 69 LEP students, from five SEI designated elementary classrooms at the School (grades K-2, 4-5), participated in the study. All LEP students were enrolled in the program based upon the District’s predetermined qualifications. The students were all limited English proficient according to district, state, and Federal mandates; they participated in SEI program and this research study with parental permission.

Data Analysis In this action research study, the researcher gathered both qualitative data and quantitative data. Primary data sources included participants’ reflective journals, transcriptions of collaborative meetings, end of unit rubrics, matrices, reflective question surveys, lesson plans, thematic planning sheets, teacher-teacher observations, and observational behavior surveys. Additional data were extracted from participant teachers’ shadowing of 5 LEP students, students’ work samples, emails, photographs, video-recordings, follow-up journals, and/or conversations

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 75 of participant teachers. The collected data were the placed into a matrix, analyzed, and coded for overriding themes/ trends.

Statistical Methods The researcher used SPSS (2004) for Windows to conduct both descriptive and inferential statistics on the quantitative data. The study sample was described using measures of central tendency (mean and median) and dispersion (standard deviation and range) for continuous variables and frequency; percentage was used for categorical variables. Mann-Whitney tests compared the distribution of ordinal-scaled variables between two types of categorical variables such as gender, DPI levels, and teacher groupings. The Spearman’s correlation statistic evaluated the linear association between continuous/ordinal scaled variables, such as gender, DPI levels, and teacher groupings, and the various observational behavior survey questions. Table 1 represents the general rules used for interpreting the strength of linear association measured by the Spearman’s rho statistic. Table 1

General Rules for Interpretation +- 0.01 to +- 0.30 = Weak +- 0.31 to +- 0.70 = Moderate +- 0.71 to +- 0.99 = Strong +- 1 = Perfect linear relationship 0 = No linear relationship

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 76 Reliability and Validity Trustworthiness of the Study The triangulation of various data sources in this action research study contributed to the overall trustworthiness and authenticity of this action research study. Triangulation of multiple data sources involved comparing the divergent perspectives, including the participant teachers, their students, and the researcher. Participants in the study were asked to review findings and give feedback during the course of the study in an effort to validate the accuracy of the information and determine whether it matched their “reality.” Numerous member checks were conducted throughout the study through face-to-face conversations, telephone conversations, and e-mail correspondences, in order to clarify any conflicting statements and/or confusing data. The researcher established an audit trail; each participant was responsible for maintaining his or her own records. In addition, the researcher created a checks and balance matrix for returning data. The researcher and participants conformed to the audit trail classifications and attempted to provide trustworthy data in a timely manner in order to enhance the study’s reliability. The participants collected raw data and delivered this information to the researcher. Participants provided the researcher with data sufficient for reduction and analysis. Data restoration and synthesis established hierarchies of concepts and categories. Process notes were maintained; intentions and outlooks were recorded. The audit trail included all the pertinent data previously discussed.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 77 Discussion of Data: Research Question 1 Question 1: How do ESL teachers strategically collaborate and discuss pertinent issues that arise when dealing with their LEP students and the SEI curriculum?

Findings Collaborative Meetings Participants met in person over the duration of 12 weeks, from December 2003 to February 2004. There were 20 meetings ranging from 30 minutes to five hours. Fifteen of the meetings were tape-recorded for referencing purpose. The average attendance rate of the collaborative meetings was 94%. During the collaborative meetings, questions and concerns were addressed regarding the processes of the study. These meetings allowed participants time to re-examine “what” and “how” they were teaching in their SEI classrooms. By collaborating, teachers were able to identify the critical areas that needed addressing. These areas were classified as follows: (a) environmental, (b) interpersonal, and (c) intrapersonal stressors. Environmental Stressors Data indicated that participants’ environmental stressors ranged in complexity. When participants experienced environmental stress, the cause for their stress was external; these environmental stressors were in relation to outside decisions or factors that affected participants’ SEI classrooms’ environments or the SEI program that were made from the District or the administrators. Furthermore, environmental stressors were not in the participants’ power to change. Some environmental stressors that affected participants and/or their classrooms were: increased attrition rates, increased class sizes, divergent linguistic and/or cultural barriers, threats of severe budget cuts, and top-down program restructuring.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 78 Interpersonal Stressors Interpersonal stressors were in relationship to participants’ concerns or their relationships established between “self” and other people (e.g. family members, colleagues, students, and parents). Some interpersonal stressors participants faced were in relation to participants seeking a balance between home and work. All participants were attending graduate school during the time of the study. Sixty percent had obtained provisional teaching licenses, and these participants often expressed their frustrations regarding the bureaucratic process of obtaining their credentials. Intrapersonal Stressors Intrapersonal stressors participants faced were in relation to internal or emotional pressures participants placed on themselves. This type of stress had a profound effect on the energy participants brought to the study, the curriculum, and/or their SEI classroom. All participants expressed their concerns regarding the District’s administration; they felt the District neglected to address environmental stressors or issues such as high truancy rates, attrition rates, increased class sizes, lack of adequate materials and resources, lack of training when dealing with divergent linguistic and/or cultural barriers, and inexperience of newly hired ESL teachers. All participants were besieged with feelings of isolation; they all experienced a “lack of motivation,” and were often “emotionally” and “physically” drained of their energy. These compounded stressors led participants to feel “inadequate” as a teacher. Some of the stressors experienced by participants were perceived as being “demoralizing.” Evidence indicated all participants experienced a sense of “powerlessness,” because of the identified intrapersonal stressors: internal and external, physical, emotional, and social pressures. All felt these intrapersonal stressors compounded daily would either “make” or “break” them as an ESL

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 79 teacher. Sixty percent of participants (3) indicated they were contemplating leaving the teaching profession, largely due to the intrapersonal pressures they faced. Outcomes of the reflection process led the researcher to segregate data to determine if there were a correlation between student performances/experiences and the teachers’ experience with ESL instruction. Two groups were determined: Teacher group 1 (Teacher 1 and the researcher) and teacher group 2 (Teacher 2, 3, and 4). Reflective Journals Descriptive data from participants’ narrative accounts yielded critical information pertaining to participants’ perceptions of the implementation phase(s) of the three instructional units. All participants recorded 60 or more entries in their journals, and/or journaled for a minimum of 600 minutes or more throughout the duration of the 12 weeks of the study. Reflective journals were used to contemplate the following: the collaborative discussions, the various aspects of the thematic process, the events, and/or circumstances that materialized with their LEP students, the SEI program, and/or their own self-perceptions. There was no specific directive given on the required length of each entry; therefore, the amount of time participants spent reflecting and length of their reflections varied. The researcher read the journals six times in order to get a holistic representation of how participants perceived each thematic unit. The researcher's intention through this process was not to use predetermined categories but to review participants' reflective journals until broad themes emerged. Table 2 is a frequency chart that shows the themes/trends identified from narrative accounts.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 80 Table 2

Identified Themes/Trends Obtained from Reflective Journals Valid

Frequenc y

Percent

Academic/Language Development Student Behavior Teacher Attitudes General Planning Time-lack of Language and Cultural Barriers Prep-periods Collaboration Traditional vs. Thematic Outside/ Familial Responsibilities Attrition Overwhelmed Organization-lack of Other School Related Materials and Resources-lack of *Other Total Maximum Minimum

193 104 82 82 59 58 42 41 41 32 22 21 19 19 18 10 N=843 193 10

23.0 13.0 9.7 9.7 6.9 6.8 4.9 4.8 4.8 3.7 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.2 100.0

Academic and/or Language Development Of the 193 times participants discussed academic performances, data revealed participants objectively (93 %) documented their LEP students’ academic and language progress. Seven percent of the 193 reflections were negative in nature; when participants reflected negatively, they would overwhelmingly search for meaning. Participants always reflected on why they felt a particular student was not achieving success or had a behavioral ‘outburst.’ Seldom, did participants’ students fail to meet their expectations; however, when they did, teachers overwhelmingly felt a personal connection and placed blame on themselves. Their comments were more of being disappointed not with their students, but with themselves. When this happened, most questioned their abilities as an effective teacher.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 81 Further analysis of the results indicated that 80% of participants (4 of 5 teachers) were concerned with their females’ students’ performances, particularly their Muslim female students. They indicated some of their female students were reluctant to participate when having to work in groups with the opposite gender and/or other ethnicities. Outcomes of the reflection process led the researcher to segregate data to determine if there was a correlation between student performances and gender. Students’ Behaviors Comments on students’ behaviors constituted 13% of reflections; of these 104 entries, 77% were reflections on students’ negative behaviors. These negative behaviors were the participants’ primary concerns and represented major obstacles to students’ learning opportunities. Table 3 contains the breakdown of the themes/trends identified by participants (T1, T2, T3, T4, and R1). As indicated in Table 3, participants’ reflections on students’ behavior varied by SEI classroom. They cited students’ age, maturation level, language and/or cultural barriers, the amount of time being in the United States as causes for their students’ behavioral concerns. Other documented concerns were in regards to the following: new arrivals, misidentification of students, and/or inappropriate placement of students in the SEI program. All participants experienced a “more than usual” increased frustration level when dealing with these multiple behavioral concerns.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 82 Table 3

Breakdown of Identified Themes/Trends by Participants

Valid

Frequenc y

Individual Response Rates

Academic/Language Development 193

T1 22.0

Student Behavior

104

30.0

Teacher Attitudes

82

28.0

General Planning

82

20.0

Time-lack of

59

44.0

Language and Culture

58

44.8

Prep-periods

42

17.0

Collaboration

41

37.0

Traditional vs. Thematic

41

37.0

Outside / Familial Responsibilities 32

0.0

Attrition

22

4.5

Overwhelmed

21

15.0

Organization-lack of

19

31.0

Other School Related

19

5.2

Materials and Resources-lack of

18

55.5

*Other

10

20.0

Total

N=843

100. 0

Language/Culture Barriers

Percent T3 T4 20.0 1 0.0 9.0 2 0.0 13.0 2 2.0 1 4.8 1 2.0 2.0 11.8 15.2 1 0.0 1 15.9 1 2.0 0.3 1 19.0 1 9.0 4.0 1 17.0 1 7.0 2.0 1 17.0 1 7.0 2.0 2 6.2 6 1.8 9.0 3 13.6 2 2.0 7.2 1 19.5 20 9.0 1 10.6 2 5.7 7.0 3 0.0 1 7.0 0.5 3 0.0 0.0 3.3 2 20.0 2 0.0 0.0 T2 1 4.0 1 6.0 11.0

R1 34.0 23.0 26.0 51.2 19.0 17.0 31.0 17.0 17.0 3.0 22.7 26.5 15.7 47.3 11.2 20.0

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 83 Documented barriers associated with students’ languages/cultures were noted in 7% of reflections or 58 times. New arrivals were from China, Macedonia, Jordan, Japan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. Barriers included new arrivals that experienced a difficult time adjusting, were from war torn countries, and/or displayed emotional trauma; some had flashbacks on more than one occasion. While other new arrivals had experienced interrupted education, and/or had little to no support at home. Participants indicated a large percent of their LEP students (90%) lived with non-English speaking family members, not necessarily their parent(s). Data indicated the new arrivals were finding a balance between their expected behaviors that served them well in their homelands and/or previous schools versus those behaviors that are more acceptable in the U.S. or within the SEI program. Most new arrivals had to confront the following: (a) acclimating to their new culture and school; (b) finding a balance between homeland educational and cultural ways; and (c) learning how to function within their new environments at home and at school. Some new arrivals from Muslim countries struggled with the concept of being a participant in an all-inclusive collaborative educational environment, particularly when having to work with the opposite gender, other ethnicities, and/or other faiths. Most of the new arrivals came from more “rigid” teacher centered learning environments; they demonstrated difficulty in adjusting to thematic instruction. They demonstrated their frustrations through refusal to work, inappropriate behavioral outbursts, and/or physical or verbal aggressions. Other documented behavioral concerns related to the 60% (3 of 5) of participants who had a high attrition rate, which was noted in 3% of reflections. The classrooms with the highest attrition rate experienced and recorded the most minor behavioral issues (69 %).Teacher 1 (30%),

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 84 Teacher 2 (16%), and the researcher (23%) experienced the most dramatic increase and/or decrease of LEP students within a short period. Teacher 3, who had a relatively low attrition rate, had the least number of recorded behavioral incidents (9%). Teacher 4 had absolutely no movement or intake of new arrivals prior to nor during the study. He had the most stable enrollment of all participants from the beginning of the year; yet, he had the most severe documented behavioral cases (20%) in the study. Therefore, those classrooms that had a high attrition rate experienced an increase of student behavior due to a lack of consistency or disruptive routines in their SEI classrooms. Once routines returned, students’ behavior decreased. Of the 104 times participants recorded reflections on students’ behaviors, 27 reflections indicated positive changes in their student behaviors towards the end of the study. Eighty percent of participants (4 of the 5) indicated improvement of students’ behavior as students transitioned through the units. In addition, 80% of participants (4 of 5) indicated students’ behavior improved once they established and reinforced rules, routines, and limited the amount of classroom disruptions. Only one participant (20%) documented negative behaviors at the end of the study. Outcomes of the reflection process led the researcher to segregate data to determine if there was a correlation between student performances and their DPI language levels.

Discussion of Data: Research Question 2 Question 2: How do ESL teachers reflect, analyze, and select materials to be used in their SEI classrooms?

Findings Collaborative Meetings

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 85 During the 20 collaborative meetings, participants reflected, analyzed, and selected materials and resources implemented in the thematic processes. Participants selected materials and resources for their SEI classroom that would enable their LEP students to interact in English using meaningful materials that were relevant to the subject matter content. In order to make the English language more comprehensible, all participants selected the necessary materials and resources by adapting or modifying the subject matter contents. Participants selected a beginning point of learning based on their LEP students’ prior knowledge, experience, and linguistic and cultural needs which were derived from studentgenerated questions, aligned with the students’ grade-level standards and benchmarks, and their language levels. In addition, participants further identified specific problems their LEP students may have with the material in advance in order to eliminate educational barriers related to language or culture. These barriers do not result solely from the complexity of the context passages in readings, but from other factors such as basic skills needed to complete accompanying activities. They identified key concepts and the necessary language needed which encoded those concepts. Participants also chose alternate versions of textbooks or modified texts to present subject matter content more clearly to their LEP students and adapted materials and resources to suit the language proficiency level of their students. For example, participants made or modified materials to be more comprehensible to their LEP students by creating visuals, lists and charts, and/or paraphrase salient points when appropriate. Reflective Journals Data from participants’ reflective journals indicated participants were not able to use their general textbooks (like their mainstream colleagues) because their students could not read nor comprehend the texts due to their English language abilities. Therefore, participants became

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 86 subject matter experts. All had to conduct additional research on the unit’s topic. “I was forced to become the expert in the topic, and I could not simply fake it,” stated Teacher 1. Sixty percent of participants (3 of the 5) were able to use their prep-periods to plan or locate materials and resources. The other 40% of participants would have liked to use their prep-periods to prepare, but often were called away during their prep-periods to handle other school and/or student related issues. Emails As previously indicated, all participants had access to a computer at work and/or at home; therefore, all participants used email as a tool to share additional materials and resources. Forty percent (2 of 5) of participants incorporated the use of emails as a cross curricular learning tool. Teacher 1 and students wrote emails to an Army soldier (SGT) in Iraq. Teacher 1 indicated that SGT responded by providing valuable websites and researchable information. Student Work Samples With parental permission, participants collected students’ assignments and/or assessments from representative samples of students work (e.g., some below average, some average, and some above average). Their teachers graded all students individually according to their developmental age, grade level, linguistic, and academic abilities. Because of evaluating students’ work, participants were able to select appropriate materials and resources to meet their students’ individual needs. Student Interviews The participants in the study reflected upon, analyzed, and selected materials and resources based upon information obtained from students interviews. Data were collected from this measurement were both quantitative and/or qualitative in nature. In the quantitative section,

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 87 the researcher coded the frequency of students’ survey responses; qualitative information came from the recorded responses of student interviews. Data came from approximately 200 interviews, which took place at the end of each instructional unit. Results from the following interview questions were tallied and coded: a) Tell me about your favorite activity for this theme; b) Which piece of literature did you enjoy most; c) What was the most important thing you learned; and d) What piece of work was your best work (See Appendix A-C, Figures A6, B5, and C5). Students’ comments were relatively easy to code. There were 28 themes/trends identified as preferred instructional strategies from student interviews (See Table 4). Participants were immediately able to use the information obtained from their students’ interviews as a starting point for future planning of activities and selection of appropriate materials for the remaining thematical units. Table 4

LEP Students’ Preferred Instructional Activities Valid

Freq (f) Authentic Projects 127 Informational (Non-Fiction) Texts 72 Writing 66 Homework with Parents/Home Projects 42 Collaborative Space Event (K-5)* 41 Authentic Activites 41 Literary (Fiction) Texts 30 Authentic Math 25 Student Made-Book 24 Movies 17 Ready-made Worksheets 13 Undecided Activities 7 Reading 7 Reading Self-Selected Books 6 Class Discussions 6 Research on Internet 5 Field Trips 5 Undecided Stories Read 4 Lectures 4

Percent 23.0 13.0 12.0 8.0 7.3 7.3 5.3 4.4 4.2 3.0 2.4 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 88 Clay/Play dough Models Documentation with Photography Read Student Made Books Movie Book Combination Spelling, Vocabulary, Dictionary Skills Playing Poetry Note taking Teamwork Total N=560 Maximum=127 Minimum= 1

4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 560 127 1

0.7 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 100.0

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 89

Discussion of Data: Research Question 3 Question 3: How do ESL teachers implement and adapt thematic instruction in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development?

Findings Thematic Curriculum Units Requirements Data collected revealed all participants created, implemented, and conducted the three thematic units that were required and outlined in the study: a) interdisciplinary curriculum, b) curriculum intergration, and c) cross-curricular units. Each unit had a theme: a) space, b) dinosaurs, and c) farms. Units were aligned to meet specific unit requirements outlined in Chapter 3. During the planning and implementation stages, participants were instructed to adhere strictly to the detailed systematic procedures outlined. The researcher created a check off matrix; as each participant submitted the units’ requirements, the researcher checked off the data in the unit matrix. Collaborative Meetings Data revealed participants held discussions on implementation, adaptation, and modification practices based on various Sheltered English (SE) techniques as a viable means to foster their LEP student’ English language and academic development. These SE techniques were created and aligned with Sheltered English models of instruction and were grounded in second language acquisitioning and enhanced through meaningful use and interaction of authentic learning activities throughout the units of study. To accomplish this, participants

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 90 selected appropriate learning activites and aligned them to the subject matter themes that were implemented in their SEI classrooms. Some SE instructional strategies used to make subject matter comprehensible involved creating and implementing the following components as visuals links to key concepts and vocabulary: (a) use of manipulatives, (b) models, (c) illustrations, (d) realia, (e) graphs, and (f) demonstrations. Participants selected a beginning point of learning based on their LEP students’ prior knowledge, experience, and linguistic and cultural needs which were derived from student-generated questions, and aligned with the students’ grade-level standards and benchmarks, and their language levels. In addition, participants further identified specific problems their LEP students may have with the lesson in advance in order to eliminate educational barriers related to language or culture. These barriers do not result solely from the complexity of the context passages in readings, but from other factors such as basic skills needed to complete accompanying activities. They identified key concepts and the necessary language needed which was encoded in the three unit concepts. Participants also modified, aligned, and created alternate versions of lessons or activites in order to present subject matter content more clearly and to meet their linguistic proficiency levels of their students. For example, if a lesson objective was to present new subject matter content information to their LEP students, participants created and modified lessons or activites to make the contents more comprehensible to their LEP students. To do so, participants selected linguistically and academically appropriate sequential activities that were aligned to their LEP students' academic and linguistic abilities. Furthermore, participants discussed and/or offered each other helpful ways on the following SE learning strategies: (a) communicating content objectives clearly; (b) using students' background knowledge; (c) using visuals, realia, manipulatives, graphic organizers,

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 91 media and other sources to explain subject matter concepts; (d) using gestures, mime and/or acting as a means to enhance understanding; (e) negotiating and clarify meaning of lessons; and (f) questioning techniques such as using wait-time and comprehension checks. All discussed, created, and utilized a variety of materials and resources that contextualizes subject matter concepts and enhanced their students’ comprehension. Additionally, participants created and incorporated a variety of assessments to monitor and verify students' comprehension and demonstration of completion of content area objectives. Students’ Open-ended Interviews To explore further additional findings pertaining to how ESL teacher implemented and adapted thematic instruction in their SEI classroom as a viable means to foster their LEP students’ English and academic development, data was obtained from open-ended student interviews. Student comments were immediately useful to participants in planning activities for the remaining thematic units. The data obtained in student surveys aided participants as they created and implemented students preferred instructional activities. The students’ desired pursuits ranged from progressive-constructivist stylistic activities (space walk) to those that are more traditional (note taking). In addition, based on the outcomes of the student interviews, participants significantly varied their instructional activities presented in their SEI classrooms in order to increase and/or maintain their students’ interest. Creating a Curriculum Unit: Participants’ Thematic Unit Rubrics Once each participant completed their unit, they were instructed to complete the end of unit thematic rubric. This rubric was an evaluative tool designed to help participants design high quality instructional units that thoroughly integrated learning. All participants found these unit rubrics useful when identifying one’s own strengths and weaknesses in planning and

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 92 implementing a thematic instruction. All 15 end of unit rubrics were completed and returned to the researcher. The rubrics were quantitative and were based a scale of 1-4 for beginner (1), developing (2), accomplished (3), and exemplary performance (4), respectively. Participants were instructed to rate themselves on the following 6 categories: a) theme, b) concept questions, c) instructional objectives, d) materials and resources, e) activites, and f) evaluation. The researcher summarized the quantified scores. The results provided the researcher with insight to the participants’ perceptions of the thematic unit. All participants ranked themselves being as accomplished and/or exemplary in being able to create and implement the three themes- space, dinosaurs, and farms. Additionally, all ranked themselves as accomplished or exemplary in the following instructional design areas: 1) able to create and implement instructional objectives; 2) able to use a variety of materials and resources; 3) able to create and implement a variety of activities that included using Bloom’s taxonomy, multiple intelligences, and/or were authentic in nature. However, in the farm unit, 60% of participants (3) ranked themselves as accomplished and/or exemplary in being able to create and implement the theme instructional objectives. Across the units, these same 60% of participants (3) ranked themselves as accomplished or exemplary in creating assessments. Those participants who did not rank themselves as accomplished or exemplary, ranked themselves as developing in those areas; these participants were the most experienced ESL teachers and have had previous experience in thematics. Instructional Reflection Questions for Teacher Participants completed a self-evaluation rubric at the end of every thematic unit as instructed. The rubric used was an evaluative tool designed to help participants identify their strengths and weaknesses in thematic instruction, implementation, and practice. The five

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 93 participants completed the end of unit ‘Reflective Questions’ at the completion of each unit, for a total of 15 rubrics. The reflection questions required a “yes” or “no” response (See Appendix AC, Figures A5, B4, and C5). The researcher summarized the quantified scores. The results provided the researcher with insight to the participants’ perceptions of the thematic unit and of “how” they felt they “best” implemented and adapted thematic instruction in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development. All participants reported in all three units, their lessons were congruent with students’ interests, level of development, and learning styles. In addition, all reported creating lessons that addressed the following: (a) students’ comprehension of key concepts; (b) critical and high order skills across content areas; (c) school objectives; (d) the facilitation role of the teacher; (e) opportunities for authentic assessments and evaluations; and (f) activities were justified in the context of standards and outcomes. Additionally, participants created lessons that: (a) were congruent with students’ interests and level of development; (b) included key concepts related to topics across content areas; (c) addressed school curriculum; (d) provided opportunities for authentic assessments and evaluations; (e) were aligned with the context of standards and outcomes of the school; and (f) promoted discovery, exploration, and integration of technology. Sixty percent (3) stated their lessons were congruent with their students’ needs and cultural backgrounds. The two participants that indicated their lessons were not congruent to their students’ needs and cultural background were both inexperienced ESL teachers. Observations The primary purpose of the classroom observations was for participants to focus upon various ways colleagues were implementing the three units into their SEI classrooms. This type

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 94 of analysis was the most informal data collection used in this study, and the most inconsistent data collection source used by participants. Participants were to observe their colleagues during their scheduled prep periods or lunch breaks and record any notes or insights. There were no predetermined observational requirements. Only 40% (2 of the 5) of participants recorded their field notes on collegial observations. Sixty percent of the participants mentioned in their reflective journals concerns for not being able to observe other colleagues. These participants overwhelmingly implied this was a critical aspect missing from the study. All indicated that classroom issues often took precedence when they had scheduled or planned to observe a colleague’s classroom. All stated that time was the most significant factor in not being able to observe officially their colleagues. Observational data were obtained from the researcher’s field notes on 3 teacher observations. The other participant’s field notes only reflected upon when the researcher observed his/her classroom and did not reflect upon when he/she observed other participants. Therefore, this section reflects upon the additional strategies the researcher obtained through observations as a viable way to improve upon her own implementation practices. The Researcher’s Field Notes The researcher was able to observe three of the four remaining participants in their classrooms as they implemented the thematic curricular units. Overwhelmingly, these three participants focused on their students’ learning through a variety of projects and/or centers. The instructional activities observed primarily focused on building students’ language, literacy, and/or academic skills. The researcher noted that Teachers 1 and 3 incorporated the use of research centers, while Teacher 2 used cross-curricular centers to encourage students to explore further thematic topics. Data revealed that engaged students completed authentic tasks and/or continuous assessment tasks, such as making the space uniforms.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 95 After observing Teacher 1 over the course of the study, the researcher observed that her students did not demonstrate much enthusiasm during the first unit. This lack of enthusiasm was evident when the researcher cross-referenced the participant’s reflective journal. Teacher 1’s students were diligently working, but seemed to lack enthusiasm for their work. As the researcher walked around Teacher 1’s classroom, the researcher further assessed the situation from an affective standpoint; the energy levels among the students were low. All of the students were engaged and working individually in centers and/or on independent work. After a few minutes, the researcher noticed a student smiled, and then happened to hear some other students in a nearby group discussing stars. In a short while, two boys began discussing satellites in the solar system and contemplating how to build one. Her students were beginning to work interdependently. Later when the researcher reflected upon her observations of Teacher 1’s classroom, she decided that her own students needed to begin to transition to work more independently and implemented more independent center work. Successes were immediately noted. The researcher’s students began to take more ownership of their work; they also demonstrated more enthusiasm for their activities. The researcher’s students began to rely on each other for help, and the energy level in the groups became much more alive and/or ‘perkier.’ The quietness in Teacher 1’s classroom caused the researcher to reflect upon the shyness and reticence of some of her students. After further reflection and observations, it was noted the shyness of some of the researcher’s students did not occur when the class came together as a group, conducted discussions (peer-to-peer or with their cooperative groups), or during outside play. Therefore, the interdependent nature/group interaction involved with thematic instruction led previously shy students to vocalize and connect with their peers. This interaction enriched the learning environment and fostered greater language development and academic success.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 96 Discussion of Data: Research Question 4 Question 4: Which thematic instructional approach: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction fosters LEP students’ language and academic success? Findings Observational Behavior Surveys Participants conducted their students’ observational behavioral surveys in conjunction with their student surveys. There were 68 observational behavioral questionnaires returned from the five participants at the end of each unit a total of 200 (+/- 5) questionnaires. Participants responded to the questionnaires after they completed each thematic unit. Participants answered 10 questions regarding each of their students’ progress; they rated their students and measured their students’ overall academic success in each unit of study. Students were rated on a Likert scale of 1-5. Students received a score of 1, if their performances were considered to be developing throughout the unit. Other students received a score of 3, if they performed at a satisfactory level, and a score of 5 if their performance was exceptional throughout the unit. The 10 questions were based on students’: (a) attitude toward theme; (b) understanding of thematic concepts; (c) attainment of learning objectives; (d) strategy development and application, d) independence in learning; (e) participation in activities; (f) participation in discussions; (g) readings completed by student; (h) writing completed by student; and (i) activities completed by student. The researcher summarized the quantified scores. These observational behavior surveys helped to determine which thematic instructional approach: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction generated LEP students’ language and academic success. The Null

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 97 Hypothesis is that there is no difference between the three instructional units. Additionally, these questionnaires determined if students’ met their teacher’s expectations for the unit of study. Based on data generated, the researcher investigated any correlations between students’ academic performance and gender, DPI language level and number of years teachers had taught ESL. Furthermore, participants wanted to have some degree of certainty to determine if their students: (a) performed at or above grade-level using the standards; ( b) understood the thematic process; (c) attained knowledge; and (d) participated in discussions. They wanted to be able to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses in order to plan accordingly. Some were curious to know if there were any discrepancies in the core subject matter areas such as in reading and writing. Table 5 illustrates a side-by side unit comparison of the LEP students’ overall performances. LEP students’ total average scores for units 1 and 3 performed satisfactory or higher at the 89 percentile, whereas in unit 2, 87% of students performed satisfactory or higher. Table 5

Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of LEP Students Overall Performances Satisfactory or Higher Percenta Questions ges Unit 1 Space Q1 97.0 Q2 92.0 Q3 94.0 Q4. 92.0 Q5 82.0 Q6 94.0 Q7. 89.0 Q8 88.0 Q9 80.0 Q10 88.0 Average 89.0 %

Unit 2

Unit 3

Dinosaurs 97.0 94.0 85.0 90.0 81.0 85.0 84.0 81.0 78.0 90.0 87.0

Farms 94.0 97.0 94.0 90.0 79.0 95.0 90.0 90.0 75.0 85.0 89.0

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 98

In units 1-3, similar percentages of students were performing at the developing stage. In units 1 and 2, 97% of LEP students demonstrated a positive attitude towards the themes, whereas in unit 3, scores declined slightly to 94%, but this difference is not statistically significant. Although the scores fluctuated slightly for each variable across the units, the differences were not found to be statistically significant. On average, LEP students’ at least satisfactorily completed their reading assignments, writing assignments, and unit activities. There was certainly sufficient information obtained to accept the Null Hypothesis and to declare that there is no difference between the three units averages and students overall performances. In addition, the plethora of satisfactory or higher scores indicates that each instructional unit was very effective. Mann-Whitney Tests between Females and Males During the course of the action research, the participants noted a sex difference in the active participation of female students. Therefore, Mann-Whitney tests were conducted to compare the distribution of scores of LEP students on the 10 questions from Observational Behavior Surveys between females and males. The Null Hypothesis is that there is no difference in females and males’ scores in all units (P< .05). Table 6 illustrates a side-by side unit comparison of gender differences by question and by unit (P = correlation coefficient).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 99 Table 6

Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of Gender Differences and Overall Performances Questions Q1 P= Q2 P= Q3 P= Q4 P= Q5 P= Q6 P= Q7 P= Q8 P= Q9 P= Q10 P=

Unit 1 Space No .39 No .83 No .82 No .43 No .196 No .56 No .45 No .22 No .61 No .80

Unit 2 Dinosaurs No .38 No .35 No .72 No .55 No .116 No .35 No .96 No .41 No .26 No .14

Unit 3 Farms No .46 No .55 No .21 No .40 No .207 No .44 No .27 No .22 No .23 No .10

The results were obtained from participant reported results from Observational Behavior Surveys and were based on their observations of each of their LEP student’s performance. These results indicated there were no significant differences between female and male performances. The Null Hypothesis was accepted meaning there was no significant difference found between females and males in the following areas: 1) attitude towards the themes; 2) understanding of thematic concepts; 3) attainment of learning objectives; 4) strategy development and application; 5) independence in learning; 6) participation in activities; 7) participation in discussions on theme; 8) reading assignments completed; 9) writing assignments completed; and 10) activites completed.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 100 Spearman’s Correlation Statistics (rho) Data obtained from various sources indicated participants wanted information segregated to determine if there were differences between LEP students’ DPI language levels and their performances across the units. The results were obtained from participant reported results from Observational Behavior Surveys and were based on their observations of each of their LEP student’s performance. Therefore, Spearman’s correlation statistics (rho) were used to evaluate the linear association between LEP students’ DPI language levels and their scores obtained from Student’s Observational Behavior Surveys. Table 1 illustrates the general rules for Spearman’s rho interpretation. Table 7 shows a side-by side comparison of LEP students’ DPI levels and their distribution of scores on the 10 questions from ‘Observational Behavior Surveys.’ Correlation was determined to be significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed t test).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 101 Table 7

Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of DPI Language Levels and Overall Performances Questions Unit 1 Space Q1 Co.C -0.028 Sig.(2) 0.08 Q2 Co.C 0.18 Sig.(2) 0.15 Q3 Co.C 0.098 Sig.(2) 0.44 Q4 Co.C 0.171 9 Sig.(2) 0.17 Q5 Co.C 0.058 Sig.(2) 0.64 Q6 Co.C -0.017 Sig.(2) 0.90 Q7 Co.C 0.28 Sig.(2) 0.82 Q8 Co.C 0.145 Sig.(2) 0.25 Q9 Co.C 0.063 Sig.(2) 0.61 Q10 Co.C 0.132 Sig.(2) 0.29

Unit 2 Unit 3 Dinosaurs Farms -0.189 .134

-.203 0.11

0.031 0.81

0.171 0.18

-0.008 0.95

-0.225 0.08

-0.227

-0.038

0.08

0.77

-0.082 0.52

-0.141 0.27

-0.056 0.66

-0.184 0.15

-0.008 0.95

-0.147 0.25

-0.089 0.48

-0.058 0.65

- 0.104 0.42

-0.058 0.65

0.08 0.53

-0.11 0.39

Results by Questions Question 1. The evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their attitudes toward the themes in all three units was weak in all three units.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 102 Question 2. In unit 2, the evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their understanding of the thematic unit’s concepts on dinosaurs was strong; however, in the other 2 units, the evidence was weak. Question 3. In unit 1, there was moderate evidence. In unit 2, there was strong evidence of a linear association; yet, in unit 3, there was weak evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their attainment of the learning objectives. Question 4. In unit 2 there was strong evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their strategic development and application of skills, whereas, the other 2 units it was weak. Question 5. In unit 1 and unit 2 there was moderate evidence, whereas, in unit 3, there was weak evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their independence in learning. Question 6. In unit 1, there was strong evidence. In unit 2, there was moderate evidence of a linear association; however, in unit 3, the evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their participation in activities was weak. Question 7. In unit 1 and 2, the evidence was strong; however, in unit 3, the evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their participation in discussions on farms was weak. Question 8. In unit 2 and 3, the evidence was moderate; however, in unit 1, the evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their reading assignments completed was weak.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 103 Question 9. In unit 1 and 3, the evidence of a linear association was moderate; yet, in unit 2, the evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their writing assignments completed was strong. Question 10. In unit 2 and 3, the evidence was moderate evidence of a linear association between LEP students’ DPI levels and their activities completed; yet in unit 1, it was weak. Mann-Whitney Tests between Teacher Groups (T1+R1) versus (T2, T3, and T4) Data was segregated to determine if there were associations between the level of teachers’ ESL experience and the LEP students’ performance. The results were obtained from participant reported results from Observational Behavior Surveys and were based on their observations of each of their LEP student’s performance. Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare the distribution of overall performance between students in two teacher groups: (T1 + R1) versus (T2, T3, T4). T1 and R1 averaged 14 years of ESL teaching experience, whereas T2, T3, and T4 averaged 5 of ESL experience. Table 8 illustrates a side-by side unit comparison of the correlation between LEP students’ scores from the 10 questions on the ‘Observational Behavior Surveys’ and the teacher groups; each Question is broken down by instructional unit. The Null Hypothesis is that there is no difference between the student scores for each unit between the two teacher groups (P<.05).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 104 Table 8

Side-by-Side Unit Comparison of Teacher Groups and Overall Performances Questions

Q1 P= Q2 P= Q3 P= Q4 P= Q5 P= Q6 P= Q7 P= Q8 P= Q9 P= Q10 P=

Unit 1 Space Yes .006 Yes .001 Yes .003 Yes .001 Yes .004 No .072 Yes .02 No .95 No .11 No .47

Unit 2 Dinosaurs Yes .002 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .004 No .072 Yes .02 No .95 No .11 No .47

Unit 3 Farms Yes .006 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000 Yes .000

Results by Questions Question 1. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ attitude towards the themes. Question 2. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ understanding of thematic concepts taught. Question 3. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ attainment of learning objectives. Question 4. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 105 students’ strategy development and application. Question 5. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ independence in learning. Question 6. There was no difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ participation in activities in units 1 and 2. However, in unit 3, there was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ participation in activities. Question 7. There was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ participation in discussions. Question 8. There was no difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ readings completed in unit 1 and 2. However, in unit 3, there was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ completion of reading assignments in unit 3. Question 9. There was no difference between the two teacher groups and their students’ writings completed in units 1 and 2. Yet, in unit 3, there was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ completion of their writing assignments. Question 10. There was no difference found between the two teacher groups and students’ activities completed in units 1 and 2. However, in unit 3, there was a difference found between the two teacher groups and their students’ activities completed.

Summary Findings In this action research study, both qualitative and quantitative data were obtained from various sources. The researcher followed Sagor’s (1992) suggested methodology including data analysis that includes searching for patterns, trends, significance, and/or correlations. Throughout the study, the researcher examined participants’ perceptions of their LEP students as they

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 106 implemented the three thematic units in their SEI classrooms. In addition, participants completed student observations and observational behavior surveys that promoted further understanding of their students’ skills and attitudes towards the thematic learning process. Further assessment included thoroughly examining the following: transcriptions from collaborative meetings, reflective journals, students’ work samples, photographs, video recordings, participant’s reflection questions, and end of unit rubrics, lesson plans, thematic planning sheets, teacherteacher and teacher-student observations, emails, and open-ended parental surveys. Recurring themes and patterns clearly emerged from the various data gathered which related to the research questions that guided this study. The effect of using of thematic instruction approaches in SEI classrooms to foster LEP students’ language and academic development in English was examined throughout this chapter. Special emphasis was placed on self-reflection and selfassessment within the framework of thematic instruction. These findings provided data to support the discussion that follows in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary and Discussion The School utilized in this action research study resembled most public schools within the United States that have a multitude of languages spoken by the students enrolled. With its ever-increasing LEP student population immigrating from non-English speaking nations, and the proliferation of non-English speaking households, the School and its 5 ESL teachers faced unprecedented challenges when dealing with the decision on how to “best educate” their increasingly large linguistically diverse student body. For many of its LEP students, both equality and excellence in education remain out of reach. There were several purposes of this action research study. The researcher helped the SEI program’s ESL teachers to strategically collaborate, discuss, select, implement, adapt, analyze, and reflect upon thematic integration in their SEI classrooms. The goal was to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development so that they were ready to be able to participate successfully and transition into English mainstreamed classrooms. To accomplish this task, teachers utilized three thematic instructional approaches: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, and (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction. The results of this study determined which approaches were the most effective models to employ in the School’s SEI classrooms in order to maximize student involvement and learning. By uncovering various particular obstacles teachers and LEP students encountered, as the instructional strategies were implemented, these ESL teachers will be better able to address those barriers and further enhance LEP students’ learning opportunities in the future. The information obtained from this action

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 108 research was meant to serve as a catalyst for change that not only addresses the SEI’s LEP students’ linguistic and academic needs, but the concerns of its ESL teachers. In order to gain a thorough understanding of how LEP students’ best learn and acquire English, information was obtained from a review of literature that focused on top performing language assistance programs who adopted linguistic research as well as cognitive research as the basis of their programs. The review uncovered linguistic research by Garcia (1991), Collier and Thomas (1997a, 1997b), and the Freemans (1992, 2002), who have all documented effective instructional strategies for ESL teachers to adopt in their classrooms when working with LEP students. Their research coincides with cognitive educational researchers, also presented in the literature review, including the Caines (1994, 1997), Jensen (1998b), and Wolfe (2001). One of the purposes of this study was to achieve a synthesis or a consensus when possible, of pertinent issues being faced by the SEI program teachers and students, to expose these concerns, and to create an agenda for these participants to take some type of action to eliminate those concerns. There were two additional purposes underlying the fundamental framework behind this study, including: (a) requiring these five participant classrooms to work together by helping them build a united purpose (implementing three instructional approaches to foster their LEP students’ academic and linguistic success), and (b) providing them with an opportunity to demonstrate the integrity needed to resolve their problems. This research study used both qualitative and quantitative methods to obtain and analyze the data gathered. An audit trail was established and maintained to establish levels of dependability and confirm ability of this study. Hierarchical code structures contributed to further understanding of participants’ perceptions and were used to determine the effectiveness of each instructional approach implemented.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 109 There were four key questions, for which greater understanding was sought in this collaborative action research; they were: 1) How do ESL teachers strategically collaborate and discuss pertinent issues that arise when dealing with their LEP students and the SEI curriculum? 2) How do ESL teachers reflect, analyze, and select materials to be used in their SEI classrooms? 3) How do ESL teachers implement and adapt thematic instruction in their SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster their LEPs students’ English language and academic development?; and 4) which thematic instructional approach: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction generates LEP students’ language and academic success? The research approach used in this study was the action research methodology design and data analysis presented by Richard Sagor (1992).

Question 1 Common themes extracted within the study represented the essence of how ESL teachers strategically collaborate and discuss pertinent issues that arise when dealing with their LEP students and the SEI curriculum. Through collaboration, observation, and reflection, participants were inspired not only to reflect upon their own professional and personal needs, but most importantly their students’ academic, cultural, and linguistic needs. These processes allowed participants teachers to: a) further enhance their pedagogical skills by carefully examining their students' language and academic progress, b) put forth a concerted effort to understand their students’ learning and behavioral difficulties, and c) provide a degree of feedback on their progress in relation to “self” and their students. Sub-categorical themes were identified; however, for the sake of brevity, they were reclassified and placed under the following three domains: (a) environmental, (b) interpersonal, and (c) intrapersonal stressors.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 110 In relation to the first theme, some environmental stressors participants encountered were: (a) the behavioral ‘outbursts’ of some LEP students; (b) the heavy demands placed on participants’ already busy schedules; (c) the lack of previous experience with some teachers teaching LEP students; (d) the lack of time to prepare within the school day; (e) overcrowded classrooms due to unforeseen increased enrollment; (f) lack of adequate materials and resources; (g) linguistic, cultural, morals, and/or values of a diversified LEP student population; (h) threats of severe budget cuts; and (i) top-down program reforms. The causes of behavioral ‘outbursts’ cited were: students’ age, maturation level, language and/or cultural barriers, the amount of time living in the United States (with new arrivals being the most susceptible), and the misidentification and/or inappropriate placement of LEP students in the SEI program. With respect to the second theme, interpersonal stressors, all participants were concerned with finding a balance between work and familial responsibilities. All indicated the need to balance their lives, and finding time to implement fully thematics instruction into their classroom was a difficult process. In regard to the third theme, intrapersonal stressors profoundly affected the amount of energy participants brought into their SEI classrooms. All of these stressors were perceived as demoralizing to participants, as they felt these added stresses could either ‘make’ or ‘break’ them as an educator. All participants’ morale tended to take precedence and was of the utmost concern to the researcher. As a result of the issues identified, the researcher decided to segregate data to determine if participants’ experiences affected students’ performance. There was evidence obtained of a difference in how participants were able to handle these factors of change; they were between the two teacher groups: (T1+R1) and (T2, T3, + T4). The first group, considered the most experienced group of the five ESL teachers, tended to struggle

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 111 with increased class sizes, maintaining classroom discipline, and obtaining adequate materials. While the second group, the inexperienced teachers, struggled with implementing the three integrative instructional approaches, putting in long hours preparing and modifying materials, difficulty with increased or decreased class sizes, classroom discipline, interpreting curriculum and trying to balance their linguistically and culturally diversified students’ needs.

Question 2 Through collaboration, ESL teachers strategically adapted, analyzed, planned, developed, critiqued, reflected, and selected the materials and resources to be used in their SEI classrooms. Participants worked together to select, create and/or modify appropriate materials and resources based on the following: (a) students’ linguistic and academic needs, (b) alignment of the unit theme’s content with grade-level standards and benchmarks, and (c) identified, created and/or modified linguistic and instructional strategies, authentic activities, and assessments. In relation to the first theme, participants selected materials and resources that related to their students’ experiences. The complexity of cultures represented in the study made it difficult for participants to select materials and resources. When appropriate, participants needed to adjust materials selected to be commensurate with their students’ needs and/or abilities. Most tried out different materials and/or modifications strategies until they were satisfied with their students’ effort and success. In regard to the second theme, materials and resources were reviewed and aligned with grade-level standards and benchmarks to establish and build cohesiveness within the SEI program. This process determined which attributes, knowledge, and skills students needed to acquire.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 112 In the third theme, participants adapted, created, planned, and/or selected materials and resources by thoroughly analyzing the 28 preferred instructional/learning activites identified by LEP students’ student surveys and information generated from KWLH charts. Students’ preferred activities varied and ranged from progressive-constructivist stylistic activities to traditional activities. Some preferred instructional/learning activities identified were: creating authentic projects, reading informational text, self-selection of reading materials, writing, creating projectbased homework, working on school-wide projects, completing authentic math activities, making student-made books, watching ‘research’ movies, watching a movie after reading the book, researching on the Internet, taking field trips, working and creating objects with clay/play dough, playing, and working within teams. More ‘traditional’ instructional types of activities were: completing ready-made or teacher generated-worksheets, spelling, vocabulary and dictionary work, listening to their teachers’ lectures, reading and writing poetry, and note-taking. In addition, KWLH charts provided participants with background information concerning their LEP students’ knowledge. These charts offered participants a plethora of educational opportunities for selecting appropriate material to be implemented which captured their students’ interests for learning. Furthermore, participants selected and modified materials, resources, and text by conducting ongoing formal and non-formal assessments of student learning through their planned interactions between students. Whether students worked independently and/or in groups, they assisted each other and/or held discussions; but most often, they shared their mutual excitement of acquired knowledge of the subject matter content and/or activites.

Question 3

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 113 Evidence gleaned from the study provided a framework on how to implement and adapt thematic instruction in SEI classrooms as a viable means to foster LEP students’ English language and academic development. Participants implemented and adapted a multitude of learning opportunities and choices for their LEP students to foster their English language and academic skills. The evidence obtained from this study support the Caines’ (1991) assertion that, every brain - every student - is unique, and each has his or her own learning preference or style. Data gleaned provided participants with an opportunity to (a) further understand their students’ linguistic and academic needs; (b) examine students’ attitudes towards particular activities, materials and resources implemented in a unit, and (c) examine how their students’ perceived the lessons. Based on this information, participants modified their teaching practices; for example, it was found that traditional-style activites were only effective for those LEP students who already had a good understanding of basic concepts and perform well, regardless of the circumstances. In relationship to the first theme, participants readily modified and aligned thematic instruction content to meet their students’ linguistic and academic needs. DPI level 1 students produced very little written work of any kind due to language difficulties usually associated with their level of English. When participants failed to modify individually instructional activities, materials and resources to meet the immediate linguistic and academic needs of their students, their students habitually failed. With respect to the second theme, when participants examined students’ attitudes towards particular activities, materials and resources implemented in a unit, they noticed students doing the following: (a) actively participating; (b) becoming more engaged; (c) increasing their motivation; and (d) taking ownership of learning.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 114 In regard to the third theme, when participants provided activities or instructional strategies that assisted in building upon their LEP students’ prior knowledge in a variety of realms, their LEP students were able to learn from texts and materials; this allowed students to have access to information and make meaningful connections. When participants presented text with graphic organizers, it helped employ hierarchical conceptual mapping of the context presented, and they noted their students were more apt to learn new information because it was presented and integrated in a familiar format. Additional strategies employed by participants were: peer models, completing first draft with students, using hand signals, using various material levels, repeating instructions, standing close to student, speaking clearly and facing students, modifying tone of voice and pace, writing instructions on board or on post-it paper, asking students to repeat instructions, demonstrating/modeling, acting out instructions, simplifying instructions, using pictures, using concrete materials and videos, using colored pens/highlighters for key points, chunking information into 5-7 steps, giving a structured overview, using closing activites, providing additional time to preview materials, completing tasks, taking tests, providing additional copies of activites and/or information, involving students in presentation, team-teaching, and using webbing techniques and multi-sensory information.

Question 4 Data revealed there to be no significant difference between the three instructional approaches: (a) interdisciplinary curriculum, (b) curriculum integration, or (c) cross-curricular thematic instruction when used to generate LEP students’ language and academic success. In units 1 and 3, LEP students performed on average at the 89 percentile, and in unit 2, they performed at the 87 percentile. There were no differences determined between students’ overall

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 115 performance and their gender. This finding suggests that each of these methods is a valuable tool for improving students’ rate of success, when properly implemented and monitored. In addition, males and females perform equally when thematic instructional methods are employed. However, when data were separated by DPI language levels, there were discrepancies noted in students’ performances. Correlations were weak between DPI language levels and students’ attitudes and/or motivation across the units. Yet, in all other areas, students’ overall performances were affected by their DPI language levels. At the end of the units, there was only a weak to moderate correlation. Students’ language level affected their understanding of thematic concepts, attainment of learning objectives, strategy development and application, participation in discussions, and completion of writing activites in unit 2; this was to be expected due to the level of difficulty in context and the transitional role of the participant from teacher to facilitator. Data results illustrated correlations between levels of students’ performance and teacher experience. They were divided into two groups by experience in ESL and time in classroom; these teacher groups were: teacher group (T1 and R1) and teacher group (T2, T3, and T4). When teacher groups were segregated, discrepancies were noted in student performances. There was a significant amount of evidence that suggested students’ attitudes and motivational levels, understanding of unit concepts (space, dinosaurs and farms), attainment of unit objectives, strategies developed and applied, independence in learning, and participation in discussions were affected by the amount of ESL training, and teaching experience a participant brought to the study. However, participants’ experience did not affect students’ performance in the following: participation of activites, and completion of reading, writing, and other academic activities in the first two units.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 116 Conclusion The research results support integration, which is a universal approach to teaching LEP students in which ESL educators can readily avoid teaching fragmented, isolated facts by orchestrating the curriculum into constructive learning strategies; this study demonstrates that integration is useful for all students, regardless of their linguistic ability (Lipson et al., 1993). Participants in this study displayed what Jacobs (1989) described as synergistic teaching. They were able to weave the curriculum in such a manner that divisions of core subjects were almost nonexistent. They were able to witness their LEP students making a learning connection and/or a lasting memory, as they were able to perceive relationships between what they were learning and the curriculum subject matter presented. For the LEP student, the learning experience became relevant to their life; they no longer saw skill based work as a chore; therefore, their skill definition and recognition increased markedly. The identified trends represented a more holistic approach to learning and integrated curriculum. Support for these types of instructional approaches has been documented since the 1930s (Vars, 2001). After experiencing the various instructional approaches, participants indicated that teaching this way made the curriculum more manageable and relevant for themselves and their students. Participants stated they experienced joyfulness as they witnessed their students searching for meaning or making connections as they compared new information to their prior real life experiences. As a result of this action research study, these ESL educators became united, empowered, and more knowledgeable about their LEP students’ learning. They investigated the “how’s” and “why’s” of effectively implementing researched-based instructional models that were firmly grounded in theory (brain research and multiple intelligences). Through this study, participants

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 117 were better able to understand how their LEP students learned, constructed, and applied meaning. By incorporating a variety of data collection techniques into the study, participants learned to recognize, appreciate, and comprehend the following: (a) their colleagues’ and students’ individual differences and learning styles; (b) how to modify and/or make adjustments; (c) establish effective learning environments; and (d) incorporate assessment strategies for instructional and/or educational issues. In addition, participants learned how to face and embrace the various challenges of working in a diversified environment and to address LEP student and/or teacher effectiveness. Overall, data indicated participants in this study provided their LEP students with a high quality, complex curriculum with ample amounts of learning opportunities. Their LEP students made connections between the disciplines; they were provided with authentic, hands-on, real world experiences that intensified their understanding and which were built upon their individual strengths. These three approaches were grounded in the District’s grade level standards and benchmarks and used student achievement statistics in order to improve the SEI curriculum, instruction, and professional development; this improvement was accomplished by incorporating research-supported instructional approaches into daily ELD instructional practices within the SEI program. These teachers encouraged and fostered students’ independence levels, responsibility, and increased their confidence. Grade-level standards and benchmarks were incorporated within the three units to provide a broader description of what LEP students should know and be able to do within their grade levels; in addition, they provided specific performance indicators. Participants utilized the researcher’s planning guide to illustrate the various steps for continuous SEI program improvement based on promoting and increasing student achievement levels.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 118 Limitations of the Study There were “natural” linguistic and educational limitations of this study. They were: (a) the group being studied consists of ESL teachers and LEP students within a specific SEI program, and the experiences and meanings obtained from this study cannot be generalized to other programs; (b) the number of participants used in this study tended to be low; (c) the participants used in this study were not representative of the entire ESL/SEI teaching and LEP student population; and (d) the attrition rate of the LEP student population was relatively high and represented a problem for the continuity of this study. This study is a collaborative action research study in which the researchers and participants carefully identified, observed, and reflected systematically in order to generate potential solutions to their pertinent issues that arose during the study. They implemented interventions, assessed the outcomes, and modified the solution(s). The researcher was actively involved in the cause for which the research was conducted. In addition, it was difficult to determine all of the variables that came into play when examining the students’ attainment and achievement in English; perhaps, it may be more of an intrinsic reward, which tends to be difficult to measure. The emergent findings should be regarded as only provisional findings, rather than unambiguous conclusions. This provision is due to the multitude of issues that came into play, particularly related to the unique dynamics of LEP students and the SEI program in this study. This study does set a foundation for future interested researchers to build upon. The researcher leaves this study fully acknowledging the unique of limitations of any study, and that researchers can learn from another’s errors and/or omissions to further strengthen the foundation of future study.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 119 Challenges The researcher faced several challenges while conducting this study. The first challenge was to develop a collaborative working environment in which five individuals with five very divergent backgrounds, perceptions, and interpretations would come together as a united team to reflect and formulate various solutions to their unique problems. The second challenge was to provide a nurturing environment for participants as they discussed and described their perceptions as they worked develop effective practices, and to establish policies for the future of the SEI program for years to come. Another challenge presented in this study was the enormous amounts of data collected which were overwhelming for one person to sort and analyze. The researcher literally sorted and analyzed hundreds of pieces of evidence. This challenge made developing narratives and selecting themes a difficult task; furthermore, it became a complex process when deciding what should be excluded. It seemed that all of the participants and their students’ experiences were important. After several readings, discussions with the team, and rewrites, the researcher was able to illustrate a synopsis of what it was like to be an ESL teacher and a LEP student within the SEI program during the study. The methodology provided a great deal of detailed analysis and information for ESL educators everywhere who aspired to obtain a greater understanding about planning integrative thematic instructional units into their SEI classrooms.

Recommendations This action research study offers suggestions and possibilities for awareness, insight, and action that are inherent in this type of research. With this learning in mind, implications for both further research and education have been made.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 120 Implications for Future Research With the high turnover rates and increased stress levels of ESL teachers, a follow-up study would be beneficial to monitor how ESL teachers overcome challenges they face as they become more experienced in the field of ESL. Stressful working conditions and their coping behaviors should be documented. The study should examine the relationship between ESL teachers’ chronic job related stresses to ESL teacher burnout. Future studies could investigate the affects of ESL work related pressures and working conditions to determine if there are a set of coping mechanisms that will allow them to take more control and balance their professional and personal lives. In addition, it would be necessary to document any personal transformations that lead to renewal of opportunities and new ingenuities; the alternative is simply coping or leaving the profession. There is a need to conduct future research on evaluating the type of resiliency skills and/or leadership skills LEP students need to overcome a multitude of educational, linguistic, and cultural barriers to be successful in life. Other suggestions include conducting a longitudinal study of LEP students in order to gauge their progress. If participants, administrators, and LEP parents express an interest in the results of this study, the researcher will provide them with a copy of the report. The researcher will also take appropriate action to disseminate the results and findings of this research at appropriate professional seminars, workshops, and conferences. Implications for Education Pedagogical change is the outgrowth of the implementation of thematics into the curriculum through collaboration, observation, and reflection. This integration provided active participation in the learning process that encompassed participants and their LEP students in the

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 121 process of change. By collaborating, implementing, and modeling, the participants of this study affected pedagogical changes and set precedence for the future of LEP students. This will affect “what” and “how” LEP students acquire the necessary integration skills, which were identified as critical to their success. As a result of this research model, participants’ enthusiasm infected the entire school; collaborations were witnessed in other content areas such as art, physical education, music, and media specialists. Changes may be slow and/or difficult; however, this study provided the catalyst for change. The statistical and anecdotal framework required to set the stage for change was created through the enthusiastic participation of the teachers and students in this study. The teachers and administrators should be more consistent in establishing and enforcing expectations, routines, and rules. Furthermore, ESL teachers should clearly articulate their expectations to their LEP students early on so their students understand what is expected of them. This study has shown that LEP students are fully capable of achieving expectations as long as they are communicated early in the educational process. The logic for these expectations is clear: anything that imposes changes on LEP students' lives demands additional time and energy from the ESL teachers, administrators, and LEP students themselves. Nevertheless, along with the extra energy expended come huge rewards, in the form of teacher/student enthusiasm and academic success. In addition, all the ESL teachers should receive continual training in recognizing the academic, cultural, and linguistic needs of their current LEP student population. Implicit in this recommendation is the perception that distinguishes between an accomplished ESL teacher and a mediocre ESL teacher. An accomplished ESL teacher knows their LEP students, inside and out. This means not only learning their names, but also knowing their backgrounds, and using this

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 122 information to tailor and/or create individualized instruction. A mediocre ESL teacher will fail to take this extra step; this omission produces and perpetuates increased environmental, inter/intrapersonal stressors faced by ESL teachers and their students. These stressors contribute to the students’ behavioral ‘outbursts’ and further alienation from the curriculum. The study’s findings overwhelmingly support the right of every ESL teacher to determine the best instructional approach to implement in their classroom to meet the needs of their LEP student population. However, it is imperative that these ESL educators realize there may be times when implementing thematic instructional approaches might not be the most appropriate instructional approach to learning. Only through a careful examination of the research and various SEI programs will ESL educators be able to determine to what extent of integration should be implemented in their SEI programs. Participants in this study indicated they no longer felt obligated to use traditional instructional approaches, but were comfortable using developmentally and linguistically appropriate ELD instructional approaches that allowed them to teach in such a way that embraced their LEP students holistically, developmentally, intellectually, culturally, linguistically, and socially. As a result, their rewards were viewed as intrinsically intertwined. In other words, each participant sees the educational world differently; this difference determined what each participant would do next. Each anticipates being able to select and adopt the thematic approach that best suits the individual needs of their students. The participants related that they expected to continue to adapt what they have learned during the study as the SEI continued to enroll new students and restructure the framework of the program. All participants communicated their desire to continue thematic teaching, and they will continue to explore themes within their SEI classrooms. Most felt they made tremendous growth as independent

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 123 learners and agreed that participating within the collaborative process ignited their thinking and quest to learn more. Results of this study documented numerous instances where LEP students’ performances were affected by not having certified and experienced ESL teachers. The results further indicate that school districts should hire highly qualified ESL teachers who work well in a collaborative setting that focuses on data-driven accountability. The study results documented the need for the District to address its shortage of ESL educators as a result of teachers leaving the profession due to job related stressors. Therefore, to maintain their qualified ESL staff, the District and the School should refocus their attention on the retention and recruitment of ESL teachers. Due to the positive results of this study, it is recommended that the District administrators adopt a reform model and implement thematic integration in the SEI program. Furthermore, it is recommended that participants continue to be progressive in their thinking and adopt the vision of this action research study. In addition, it is recommended that the teachers continue to work collaboratively to end the negative rhetoric concerning their LEP student population. These students are as capable as their fluent English-speaking peers of accomplishing great things and succeeding socially and academically.

Final Thoughts and Comments Today, with the stringent requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, all schools and school districts are held accountable for students’ learning. In the future, ESL teachers should succumb and conform to these new standards and high stakes state testing. Their class sizes will not dwindle, but instead will increase. They will be expected to “do more with less” regardless of the environmental and interpersonal stressors that may influence their

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 124 professional and personal lives. To be successful, these ESL teachers should continue to adapt and modify their curriculum to continue to needs of their LEP students. They will need to implement integrative instructional approaches as universal remedies to having to teach in such a multifaceted spectrum. By teaching thematically, they will be able to bridge the educational and linguistic gap faced by their LEP students in the future. Future ESL teachers will need to understand what orchestrating the curriculum will mean to their LEP students’ learning. By implementing these instructional approaches, ESL teachers will open up a myriad of learning opportunities for their LEP students (Garcia, 1991; Freeman & Freeman, 1998). LEP students will see themselves as artists, readers, writers, speakers, mathematicians, scientists, musicians, geographers, and researchers, who are able to understand the purpose of their learning tasks. More importantly, these students will come to understand how more universal applications can be made from their applied efforts. LEP students will not only be taught the necessary skills and strategies for completing authentic tasks, but they will be able to: (a) develop an understanding of how they could apply their new knowledge and skills; (b) focus; (c) understand why they are doing and what they are doing; (d) demonstrate and rationalize meaningful connections made among disciplines that allow a transfer of learning from one context to another; (e) grasp the relationship of content to process; and (f) acquire an integrated knowledge base. As a result of this educational experience, they will develop confidence in their ability to manage these new skills and abilities in the future.

REFERENCES Akkari, A. (1998, Fall). Bilingual education: beyond linguistic instrumentalization. Bilingual Research Journal, 22(2-4). Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://brj.asu.edu/v22234/ articles/ar2.html American Policy Organization. (n.d.) The "Delphi technique" and how it robs parents of control over their child's education. Retrieved October 19, 2003, from http://www. americanpolicy.org/educ/thedelphi.htm Amrein, A. & Pena, R. (2000). Asymmetry in dual language practice: Assessing imbalance in a program promoting equality. Retrieved April 4, 2003, from http://epaa.asu.edu/ epaa/v8n8.html Amselle, J. & Chavez, L. (1997, February). Bilingual education theory: Its effectiveness and parental opinions. NASSP Bulletin, 81(586). Atwell, N. (1998). In the Middle. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. Barron, M. (n.d.). Surprising truths: The implications of brain research. Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www.nauticom.net/www/cokids/brain.html Beals, R., & Pedalino P. R. (2000, August). Bilingual students and the MCAS: Some bright spots in the gloom. Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://www.ceousa.org/html/mcas.html Beane, J. A. (1992). Integrated curriculum in the middle school. Retrieved July 1, 2003, from http://sarasota.k12.fl.us/integrcurrmiddlescheric.htm Beane, J. A. (1993). Problems and possibilities for an integrative curriculum. Middle School Journal, 25(1), 18-23. Beane, J. A. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 616-622. Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press. Biondo, S., Gavelek, J., & Raphael, T. (2000). Mapping the possibilities of integrated literacy instruction. Retrieved June 9, 2003, from http://www.readingonline.org/research/biondo/ biondo.html Bower, B. (1998). The brain is tuned to grammar as music is tuned to lyrics. Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www.brainconnection.com

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 126

Brain-Based Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www. funderstanding.com Brinton, D., Snow, M., & Wesche, M. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Brooks, J. G., & Martin G. B. (1993). The Case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Brown, K. (2000). Newcomers learn English: Education News for an Educated Public. Education Update Online. Retrieved November 1, 2002, from http://www.educationupdate.com/may00/Newcomers.html Bruer, J. (1999). In search of brain based learning. Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kappan.htm Bueno, K. (1999). Glossary. Retrieved April 28, 2003, from http://www.siue.edu/ ~kbueno/fl486/gloss.html Burkart, G., & Sheppard, K. (n.d.). A descriptive study of content -- ESL practices volume III: Training packet material. Retrieved April 14, 2003, from http://www.ncela. gwu.edu/miscpubs/cal/contentesl/index.htm#contents Burnaford, G., Fischer, J., & Hobson, D. (Eds.). (2001). Teachers doing research: A power of action through inquiry. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Mindshift. Tucson, AZ: Zephyr Press. Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1997). Unleashing the power of perceptual change. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Capella University (2002, July). Summer Sessions Handouts. July Colloquia Presentations. Available on CD. Falmer. Carr, W., & Kremmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Philadelphia, PA: Lewes Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P. B., & Robbins, J. (1999). The Learning Strategies Handbook. White Plains, NY: Longman. Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 127

Christison, M. A. (1996). Multiple intelligences in the second language classroom. TESOL Journal. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Christison, M. A. (1998, April-June). Applying multiple intelligences theory in preservice and inservice TEFL education programs (English Teaching Forum). TESOL Matters, 36(2). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.tesol.org Christison, M. A. (1999a, April/May). Applications of brain based research to second language teaching and learning: Part 1. TESOL Matters, 9(2). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.tesol.org Christison, M. A. (1999b, April/May). Applying mind-brain principles to L2 teaching. TESOL Matters, 9(2). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.tesol.org Christison, M. A. (1999c, June/July). Applications of brain based research to second language teaching and learning: Part 2. TESOL Matters, 9(3). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.tesol.org Christison, M. A. (1999d, Dec). Classroom compass: How can research on the brain inform education? Multiple Intelligences: Theory and practice in adult ESL. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.cal.org/ncle/digests/MI.htm Collier, V., & Thomas, W. (1989). How quickly can immigrants become proficient in school English? The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, (5)26-38. Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (1997a, Dec). School effectiveness for language minority students. NCBE Resource Collection Series, 9. Retrieved July 17, 2003, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/resource/effectiveness/ Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (1997b). Improving schooling for language minority children: A research agenda. The National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved July 5, 2003 from http://nap.edu/openbook/o309054974/html/74.html Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2001). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students' long-term academic achievement. Retrieved September 5, 2002, from http://www.crede.ucsc.edu/research Cornell, J. (1993, Oct). Factors contributing to Hispanic students' tendency to drop out of school. MIDTESOL Regional Conference, Lincoln, NE. Cotton, K. (1995). Effective schooling practices: A Research Synthesis. Retrieved on July 2, 2003, from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/esp/esp95toc.html

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 128 Crandall, J., Jaramillo, A., Olsen, L., & Kreeft Peyton, J. (2002, Oct). Using Cognitive Strategies to Develop English Language and Literacy. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/0205crandall.html Crawford, J. (1997). Best evidence: Research foundations of the Bilingual Education Act. Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://www.ncborgwu.edu Crawford, J. (1998, Winter). Rethinking schools-does bilingual education work? Rethinking Schools Online Journal, 13(2). Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://www. rethinkingschools.org/Archieves/13-02/biside.html Cummins, J. (1981). Age on arrival and immigrant second language learning in Canada: A reassessment. Applied Linguistics, 2, 132-149. Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard Education Review, 56. Cummins, J., & Genzuk, M. (1991, March). Analysis of final report longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy, early exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language-minority children. The California Association for Bilingual Education Newsletter. Cummins, J. (1999, February 22). Research, ethics and public discourse: The debate on bilingual education. Paper presented at the National Conference of the American Association of Higher Education. Cummins, J. (n.d.). Educational research in bilingual education: Educational research thoughts. Abstract retrieved October 25, 2002, from http:audiotap.addr.com/cummins/ educationalresearch.html. Curtain, H. (1995). Foreign Language and Content Instruction in Grades K-8. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.unccedu/~medomoto/4201/handouts/ tpr%20and%20other%20strategies/calla.html D’ Arcangelo, M. (1998, Nov). How the brain learns: The brains behind the brains. Educational Leadership, 56(3). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/ edlead/9811/darcangelo.html D’ Arcangelo, M. (2000, June). Wake-up call about brain research. Education Update, 42(4). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/edupdate/2000/ june00/02jun00.html Davies, C. (1996). Creatology: Brain science for the 21st century. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.nexus.edu.au/teachstud/gat/davies.htm Development & Dissemination Schools Initiative. (n.d.) Identifying effective practices for

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 129 English language learners (ELLs) in D&D schools. In Effective practices for ELLs. Retrieved October 23, 2002, from http:www. alliance. brown. edu/dnd/ep-for_ells. shtml. The District five-year long range committee (2003). Unpublished paper presented to the School District Board (name of city and state kept confidential). Dressel, P. (1958). The meaning and significance of integration. In N. B. Henry (Ed.), The Integration of Educational Experiences, 57th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 3-25). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Duignan, P. (2001) Hoover Essay. Bilingual Education: A Critique. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.hooverstandfordedu./publications/he/22/22d.html Edelman, G. M. (1992). Bright air, brilliant fire: On the matter of the mind. New York, NY: Basic. Effective instructional practices for language minority students MAEC. (n.d.). Retrieved July 29, 2002, from http://www.maec.org/instprac.htlm Ellis, R. (1999). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [ELLKBase] The English Language Learner Knowledgebase (2004). A framework for alternative language programs [Data file]. Region VII Comprehensive Center. Retrieved September 6, 2003, from http://www.helpforschools.com/ELLKBase/practitionerstips/ FrameworkALP.shtml Erickson, L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Escalante, J. (2003). The Jaime Escalante math program. Retrieved October 13, 2003, from http://www.thefutureschannel.com/escalante_math_program.htm#4curriculm ESL Mini Conference Building Inclusive Elementary School Communities for ELLs. (n.d.). New Jersey's HELP Program Wins "Best Practices" Award. Retrieved September 4, 2002 from http://www.eslminiconf.net/june/story24.html. Fogarty, R. (1991 a). Ten ways to integrate curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49(2). Fogarty, R. (1991b). The mindful school: How to integrate the curricula. Palatine: IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing. Freeman, D. & Freeman, Y. (1992). Whole language for second language learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 130 Freeman, D. & Freeman, Y. (1998). ESL/EFL teaching: Principles for success. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman, D., & Freeman, Y. (2002). Closing the achievement gap. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Freeman, D. & Freeman, Y. (n.d.). Sheltered English instruction. Retrieved June 29, 2002, from ERIC Digest: http://www. ed. gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed301070. html Freeman, R. D. (1996). Dual-language planning at Oyster Bilingual School: It’s much more than language. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 557-582. Friedlander, M. (1991, Fall). The newcomers program: Helping immigrant students succeed in U. S. schools. NCBE Program Information Guide Series, 8. Retrieved November 1, 2002, from http://ncbe.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/pigs/pig8.htm and http://www.helpforschools. com/ELLKBase/refernces/NEWCOMERPROGRAMTableCo Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed). White Plains, NY: Longman. Garcia, D. (2002). Family English Literacy Program. Department of Foundations and Professional Studies, Florida International University. Retrieved November 2, 2002, from http://www.cgcs.org/promise/whatworks/parental/part07.html Garcia, E. E. (1983). Early childhood bilingualism: With special reference to the Mexican American child. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press. Garcia, E. E. (1988a). Attributes of effective schools for language minority students. Education and Urban Society, (2). Garcia, E. E. (1988b). Effective schooling for language minority students: New Focus (No. 1). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Garcia, E. E. (1990). An analysis of literacy enhancement for middle school Hispanic students through curriculum integration. Working Papers of the Bilingual Research Group, 90-01. Santa Cruz: University of California. Garcia, E. E. (1991). The education of linguistically and culturally diverse students: Effective instructional practices (Educational Practice Report No. 1). Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Retrieved July 28, 2003, from http://www.ncela.gwu/miscpubs/ ncrcdsll/epr1/index.htm Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 131 Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1995). Are There Additional Intelligences? The Case for the Naturalist Intelligence. Howard Project Zero. Cambridge, MA: President and Fellows of Howard College. Garvin, I. (1996). Authentic-Alternative Assessment. Retrieved June 29, 2003, from http://iteachnet.org Genesee, F. (1999-2001). Bilingual Acquisition. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://earlychildhood.com/Articles/index Genesee, F. (2000). Brain research: Implications for second language learning. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from Eric Digest: http://cal.org./oricall/digest/ooo12brain.html Gersten, R., Taylor, R., Woodward, J., & Wite, W. (1997, Summer). Structured English immersion for Hispanic students in the U. S.: Findings from the fourteen-year evaluation of the Uvalde Texas program. Retrieved October 10, 2002, from http://www.adihome. org/esp/v16n3/struct_imm_tex.pdf Gonzalez, G., & Maez, L. F. (1995, Fall). Advances in research in bilingual education. Directions in language & education, 1(5). Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/directions/05.htm Hackett, R., Morrison, J. L., & Teddlie, C. E. (1982). Developing public education policy through policy impact analysis: The role of the educational planner. Retrieved October 24, 2002, from http://horizon.unc.edu/bios/morrison/papers/2.html Hardin, V. (2001, Fall). Transfer and variation in cognitive reading strategies of Latino fourthgrade students in a Late-Exit bilingual program. Bilingual research journal, 25(4). Retrieved September 25, 2002, from http://brj.asu/edu/v254/articles/art7.html Hakuta, K., & August, D. (1997). Improving education for all children: meeting the needs of language minority children. Retrieved August 6, 2002, from http:www.standford.edu /~hakuta/Aspen.html Hakuta, K. (2001, April 13). The education of language minority students. Paper presented at United States Commission on Civil Rights. Retrieved September 22, 2002, from http://www.standford.edu/~hakuta/Docs/CivilRightsCommision.htm Hakuta, K. (2002a, August 22). Points on SAT-9 performance and Proposition 227. Retrieved September 8, 2002, from http://www.stanford.edu/~hakuta/ Hakuta, K. (2002b, August 29). What can we learn about the impact of Proposition 227 from SAT-9 Scores. Retrieved September 8, 2002, from http://www.stanford.edu/~hakuta/

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 132

Hancock, C. R. (1994). Alternative assessment and second language study: What and why? Retrieved June 29, 2003, from Eric Digest: http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ Hart, L. (1995, January 25). Human brain and human learning: Your child’s mind. Time Magazine. Heacox, D. (2002). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing, Inc. Henderson, R., & Landesman, E. (1992). Mathematics and middle school students of Mexican descent: The effects of thematically integrated instruction. Retrieved June 3, 2003, from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/miscpubs/ncrcdsll/rr5.htm Hernandez, A. (2002, Spring). Stanford Educator. Retrieved June 29, 2003, from http://ed. stanford.edu/suse/educator/fall2002/pages/forum-fall02.html Hill, K. (2000). Beyond the numbers: A case study of the 1990 census promotion program and the implications for census 2000. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://www.asu.edu/ cronkite/thesis/kimhill/index.html How the brain learns: The key to student achievement. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.brainconnection.com How the brain “hears” language (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2002, from http:// www. brainconnection.com. Humphreys, A., Post, T., & Ellis, A. (1981). Interdisciplinary Methods: A Thematic Approach. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing Company. [IPT] Idea Proficiency Tests – IPT Testing (2000). Retrieved June 29, 2003, from http://www.ballard-tighe.com/catalog/ipt03.htm Jacobs, H. (2004). Curriculum designers. Retrieved June 23, 2004, from http://www. curriculumdesigners.com/index_bkgnd.htm Jacobs, H. (1997). Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Jacobs, H. (1989). Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD Jensen, E. (1998a, November). How the brain learns: How Julie’s brain learns. Educational Leadership, 56(2). Retrieved September 6, 2002, from http://www.ascd.org/ readingroom/edlead/9811/darcangelo.html

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 133

Jensen, E. (1998b). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Johnson, B. (1993). Teacher as a researcher. Retrieved on July 23, 2003, from http://www. ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed355205.html Johnston, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2002, March, 15). Unmet promise: Raising minority achievement. Education week, 19(27), 1-19. Katz, A., Genesee, F., Gottlieb, M., & Malone, M. (2001). Scenarios for ESL standards-based assessment. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Kerlin, B. (1999). Qualitative research: Analysis without numbers. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://kerlins.net/bobbi/research/myresearch/chifoo/ Knezevik, B. (2003). Teacher as classroom action researcher. TESOL Program Presentations. TESOL 37 Annual Convention and Exhibit. Baltimore, MD. Kovalik, S., & Olsen, K. (1994). ITI: The model. Integrated thematic instruction (3rd ed.). Kent, WA: Books for Educators. Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in American schools. New York, NY: Perennial. Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. First Internet edition December 2002. Retrieved January 3, 2003, from http://www.sdkrashen. com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/index.html Krashen, S. (1985). Insights and inquires. Hayward, CA: Alemany Press. Krashen, S. (1997). Why bilingual education? Retrieved August 6, 2002, from http://ourworld. compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/bil-new.html Krashen, S. (1999). Structured immersion falls short of expectations: An analysis of Clark [Special issue] NABE. Krashen, S. (2002, August 26). Focus on the library, not the playground [Letter to the editor]. Arizona Republic. Igoa, C. (1995). The inner world of the immigrant child. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA. ASCD. Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment K-12. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 134 Jacobs, H. H. (2004). Curriculum designers. Retrieved June 23, 2004, from http://www. curriculumdesigners.com/index_bkgnd.htm Lake, K. (1994). Integrated Curriculum: Close up # 16. School improvement series (SIRS). Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory [NWREL]. Retrieved September 2, 2002 from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/8/c016.html Lawton, E. (1994, November). Integrating curriculum: A slow but positive process. Schools in the Middle, 4(2). Lipson, M., Valencia, S., Wixson, K., & Peters, C. (1993). Integration and thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning. Language Arts, 70(4), 252-263. Littlejohn, J. (1998, November). Federal control out of control: The Office for Civil Rights' hidden policies on bilingual education. Retrieved October 12, 2002, from http://www. ceousa.org/READ/ocr3.html Marcos, K., & Rennie, J. (2001). The effectiveness of bilingual education. [CAL] Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved October 19, 2003, from http://www.cal.org /resources/ericreview.pdf McAllister, E., Hildebrand, J., & Ericson, J. (1998). Language arts theme units: Cross-curricular activities for primary grades. Bloomington, IN: The Family Learning Association. McBride, R., & Schostak, J. (2000). Action research. Retrieved June 15, 2002, from http://webserver1.uea.ac.uk/care/elu/Issues/Research/Res1Cont.html McLaughlin, B. (1992). Myths and misconceptions about second language learning: What every teacher needs to unlearn. Retrieved August 22, 2002, from http://cdrc4info.org/dl/myths. pdf. Meinbach, A. M., Rothlein, L., & Fredericks, A. D. (1995). The complete guide to thematic units: Creating the integrated curriculum. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishing. Meloy, J. M. (2002). Writing the qualitative dissertation: Understanding by doing. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Meyers, M. M., & Feinberg, S. E. (1992). The case for bilingual education strategies. Retrieved October, 2003, from http://www.ulib.org/webRoot/Books/ National_Academy_Press_Books/bilingual_education/bilingual.htm Midwest Equity Assistance Center. (1997). Variety of programs helps newcomers adjust to U.S. Schools. Retrieved November 1, 2002, from MEAC: http://mdac.educ.ksu.edu?MDAC /resource/horizons/AugSept97/articles/newcomers/html

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 135 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [NCLB] No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Title I sec. 1111(b)(3)(C)(x). Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory -- NWREL. (2001). Six traits + 1. Retrieved May 22, 2004, from http://www.nwrel.org/assessment/GettingStarted.asp?odelay=2&d=1 Nunan, D. (2001). English as a global language. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4). [OCR] Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (1999). Retrieved October 22, 2002 from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OCR/ELL/index.html Pabst, G. (2001, March 9). Hispanics find that state has a winning formula good economy, jobs, family ties help lure many Latinos here. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Retrieved November 26, 2002, from http://www.jsonline.com/news/census2000/mar01/ latino030901gx.asp#top. Pate, E., Homestead, E., & McGinnis, K. (1997). Making integrated curriculum work. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Pearson, P. D. (1994). Integrated language arts: Sources of controversy and seeds of consensus. In L. M. Morrow, J. K. Smith, & L. C. Wilkinson (Eds.), Integrated language arts: Controversy to consensus (pp. 11-31). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Peterson, B. (n.d.). The Evolution of Language. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www. brainconnection.com. Peterson, K. (n.d.). Authentic assessment and school wide projects. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ccvi/pubs/publication/archive/newsletter/ Winter1997_WeavingAuthenticAssessment/AuthAssessment_SchoolwideProj.htm The qualitative versus quantitative analysis (2003). Retrieved April 5, 2003, from http://www. ling.lancs.ac.uk/monkey/ihe/linguistics/corpus3/3qual.htm The qualitative versus quantitative debate (2003). Retrieved March 20, 2003, from http://writing.colostate.edu/references/research/gentrans/pop2f.cfm Reese, D. (1997, March). The controversy over bilingual education. Parent News. Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://npin.org/pnews/1997/pnew397/pnew397h.html Richard-Amato, P., & Snow, M. (1992). The multicultural classroom. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley Publishing. Ritter, N. (1999). Teaching interdisciplinary thematic units in language arts. ERIC Digests.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 136 ED436003. Retrieved April 3, 2003 from, http://www.ed.gov/databases/ ERIC_Digests/ed436003.html Robb, L. (2003). Teaching reading, in social studies, science and math. New York, NY: Scholastic Professional Books. Rohac, R. (2000, May). SDAIE -- Specially designed academic instruction in English. Retrieved January 3, 2003, from http://rohac.com/sdaieinfo.htm

Romig, J. (1997). COGITO: The cognitive paradigm. Des Moines, IA: Drake University. Retrieved: May 2002, from http://www.educ.drake.edu/romig/cogito/ cognitive_paradigm.html Rossell, C. H. (n.d.). Mystery on the bilingual express: A critique of the Thomas and Collier study. The READ Institute. Retrieved October 12, 2002, from http://lmri.ucsb. edu/resdiss/2/researchreports.htm Rossell, C. H. (2000, June). Different questions, different answers: A critique of the Hakuta, Butler, and Witt report, "How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency?" The READ Institute. Retrieved October 19, 2002, from http://lmri.ucsb.edu/resdiss/2/ researchreports.htm Sagor, R. (1992). How to conduct collaborative action research. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Schmidt, W. (1983). Curriculum Integration: Its Use in Language Arts Instruction. Research Series Number 140. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching, 1983. Schmoker, M. (2001). The results fieldbook. Practical strategies from dramatically improved schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Schubert, M., & Melnick, S. (1997). The arts in curriculum integration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association (Hilton Head, SC). Shoemaker, B. J. (1989, October). Integrative Education: A Curriculum for the Twenty-First Century. OSSC Bulletin, 33(2). Eugene, Oregon: Oregon School Study Council. Short, D. (1998). Secondary Newcomers programs: Helping recent immigrants prepare for school success. ERIC Digest (ED#411703). Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.cal.org/crede/ newcomer.htm Short, D. J. (2002). Newcomers programs: An educational alternative for secondary immigrant students. Education and Urban Society, 34(2), 173-198. Retrieved July 29, 2002, from

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 137 http://www.cal.org/crede/newcomer.htm Short, D., & Boyson, B. (2000). Center for research on education, diversity & excellence (CREDE). Summary of data in secondary newcomer directory. Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved July 29, 2002, from http://www.cal.org/crede/newsummary.htm Short, D., & Boyson, B. (2002) Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence (CREDE). Newcomers: Language and academic programs for recent immigrants. Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved July 29, 2002, from http://www.cal.org/crede/ newsummary.htm Slavin, R. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. (2002). Effects of success for all on the achievement of English language learners. Retrieved October 25, 2002, from http://www.successforall.net/ resource/research/englanlearn.htm Smith, M. (2002). Action research: A guide to reading. Retrieved August 2, 2003, from http://www.infed.org/research/b-actres.htm Snow, M., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A Conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23(2), 201-217. Sousa, D. (1998). Is the fuss about brain research justified? Retrieved May 12, 2003, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/vol-18/16sousa.h18 Sprenger, M. (1999). Learning and Memory: The Brain in Action. Retrieved February 24, 2003, from http://www.ascd.org/pubs/cl/2nov98.html SPSS 12.0. (2004). Software from SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL. Stringer, E. T. (1999). Action research: A handbook for practitioners, Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Sylwester, R. (1996). Celebrating neurons. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Talukder, G. (2000). How the brain makes way for a second language. Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www.brainconnection.com Tolerance Education (2004). One child at a time. Retrieved December 2, 2003, from http://scjven.puertasdebabel.org/ell/index.htm Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom. Responding to the needs of all learners. The

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 138 Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved March 15, 2003, from http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/books/tomlin99book.html#chap1 Tucker, G. (1999, August). A global perspective on bilingualism and bilingual education. ERIC Digest. Retrieved October 18, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERICDigests/ ed435168.html Vars, G. (2001, November). Can curriculum integration survive in an era of high-stake testing? Middle School Journal, 33(2). Viadero, D. (2000, May). Bridging the gap. Teacher Magazine, 11(8). Vogt, M. (1997). Cross-curricular thematic instruction. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html Vygotsky and Social Cognition. (n.d.). Retrieved February 23, 2003, from http://www. funderstanding.com Weilbacher, G. (2001, November). Is Curriculum integration an endangered species? Middle School Journal, 33(2). The Wisconsin [DPI] Department of Public Instruction (2002a): Legal responsibilities when serving limited-English-proficient (LEP) students in K-12 public schools. Retrieved September 5, 2002, from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us The Wisconsin [DPI] Department of Public Instruction (2002b): Best practices considerations when serving limited-English Proficient (LEP) students in K-12 public schools. Retrieved September 5, 2002, from http://www.dpi.state.wi.usl The Wisconsin [DPI] Department of Public Instruction (2002c): Alternative assessment. Retrieved September 5, 2002, from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/html The Wisconsin [DPI] Department of Public Instruction (2004). Retrieved October 12, 2004, from http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/ell/ Wolfe, P. (2001). Brain matters: Translating research into classroom practice. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Yorks, P., & Follo, E. (1993). Engagement rates during thematic and traditional instruction. ERIC Document Reproduction Service [ED 363 412]. Zikmund, W. G. (2000). Business Research Methods (6th ed). New York, NY: Harcourt.

APPENDIX A UNIT ONE: INTERDISCIPLINARY CURRICULUM Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission. Duration: Two Weeks Theme: Changes - Past, Present, Future Concept: Outer Space Grade Level: Language Proficiency Level: 1-3 Role of the Teacher: The teacher’s role will vary depending upon type of instruction. Teachers will be facilitators, provide explicit instruction, and act as a resource depending on the activity, skills, and concepts taught. Additional Notes: It is critical to remember that additional support maybe needed for LEP students who have a low English proficiency. It is imperative that teachers keep students’ linguistic levels in mind when planning this unit. Remember that LEP students may lack the background knowledge to understand a selection’s vocabulary and key concepts. Teachers must be able to provide this background information and pre-teach potentially troublesome words or concepts. Teachers should also use additional learning strategies such as idioms, multiplemeaning words, textual clues, realia, pictures, and various grouping, modeling, demonstrations, and scaffolding, and various reading materials for the different levels of reading. Steps: 1. Teachers select a main topic and/or theme. This concept should be broad enough to encompass various subject areas. It should apply as integrally as possible to the subject areas to be covered. 2. Teachers brainstorm ideas using a web/wheel matrix to assure associations and/or connections are made between the disciplines. This preliminary step will ensure that group effort is proactive. Then, present and document student ideas and information using the KWLH chart to your students. Once a few ideas are generated, the teacher’s role is to sift

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 140 through them and eliminate on some aspects. This is the purpose of an organizing wheel (See Figures A1 and A2). The best organizing themes are ones that promote a natural integration of disparate subject matter areas. 3. Make a list of student questions as a framework for lessons around the organizing center. Jacobs (1989) suggests grouping questions to and aligning them with the established scope and sequence for the entire unit. In this stage, it is decided what to include and what to exclude (See Figure A2). 4. Proceed to map out the order in which this material will be presented (See Figures A3 and A4). Design activities reflecting the questions listed in Step 3. It is critical that language teachers should pay attention to the linguistic needs of their students when creating and discussing these activities. The teachers need to pay particular attention to applying best practice second language learning strategies when planning lesson activities. Teachers should apply any learning strategy, which will make the content clearer without overwhelming LEP students, including, but not limited to the following: Small-large group dynamics, pair work, word lists, graphic organizers, and semantic webs. 5. Teachers will identify a range of appropriate resources to be utilized in the unit of study (See Figure A4). Teachers should list names of books, narrative and expository literature, real world texts, and poetry to assure they are added in order to give students diverse reading experiences. Real world texts such as magazines, brochures, and maps, are valuable resources. During this stage of planning, teachers should contact district or school specialists, public library resources, and expert guest speakers. In addition, the teacher should schedule appropriate field trips.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 141 6. During this phase, teachers develop a schedule that includes a selected timeframe for each activity. Schedule planning and time-line is also important at this point. In this study, the timeframe is a two-week period; however, a theme may take a day, week, or month. When the teacher selects a period, it is imperative they keep in mind several factors: students' interests, attention spans, the availability of resources and reading materials, and curriculum guidelines. They should be prepared to monitor students’ interests and modify accordingly (See Figures A4 and A5). 7. Develop activities. 8. Develop evaluation techniques. 9. Implement theme and activities. Monitor students’ progress and understanding. Schedule activities, teach lessons, and facilitate learning. Journals are kept; stories, articles, and poems are discussed; projects are created. Engaging students in reading and writing and by discussing and researching challenge minds. Help the students to create and generate their own ideas. 10. Check for understanding by completing KWLH chart (See Figure A2). 11. Evaluate appropriately (See Figure A6). 12. Reflect upon your unit (See Figures A5 and A7).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 142 Figure A1 Interdisciplinary Curriculum Concept Model

Mathematics

Language Arts

The Arts

Theme (Concepts)

Social Studies

Science

Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 143

Figure A2 Interdisciplinary Curriculum Brainstorming KWLH Chart K What We Know

W What We Want to Learn

L

H

What We Learned

How We Find the Information to Learn

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 144 Figure A3 Interdisciplinary Curriculum Suggested Activity Planning Sheet Unit Questions

Unit Questions

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluate

Define, duplicate, label, list, memorize, name, order, place, recognize, relate, recall, repeat, reproduce, state

Classify, describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, indicate, locate, recognize, report, restate, review, select, translate

Apply, choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, practice, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write

Analyze, appraise, calculate, categorize, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish examine, experiment, question, test

Arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, write

Appraise, argue, assess, attach, choose, compare, defend estimate, judge, predict, rate, core, select, support, value, evaluate

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluate

Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 145 Figure A4 Interdisciplinary Curriculum Unit Planning Sample Guide Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission. Name:

Date:

Theme:

Concept(s):

Rationale:

Why is the topic important? How does it relate to education? Does it promote lifelong learning?

Grade Level and English Levels Unit Goals:

Concept Maps: Resource List:

Evaluation:

Standards:

What are the broad goals for the unit? What do you expect, in general terms, to accomplish? What are the goals for content? What are the goals for skill development? What are the goals for affective learning? Which "web" will you use? Why? List of Books:

Support Materials: Types of assessments Anecdotal records Observations with written documentation Writing samples Art projects Drawings Cooperative learning records Digital pictures Video Journals Other The focus of the thematic unit should be a relevant topic. All content areas must be seamlessly worked into the topic. The activities should be in

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 146 accordance with state and local standards. 1. 2. Curriculum Objectives: Introducing Activity: Daily Plans:

Supporting Documents:

Culminating Activity:

1. 2.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 147 Figure A5 Name _________________________

Date ______________________________

Creating an Interdisciplinary Curriculum Unit Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission. Thematic Unit Sample Rubric Use this thematic unit rubric as you create an interdisciplinary thematic unit. This was designed to help you to produce quality instructional units designed to thoroughly integrate learning and meet the needs of your linguistically diverse students. Title of Unit

Theme

Beginning 1 • No theme evident • Purpose is unclear

•

•

Concept Questions

•

No focus question

• •

Instructional Objectives

• •

Materials & Resources

•

No goals or objectives listed Unit not age appropriate

•

Textbooks serve as sole resource

•

•

Developing 2 Some attempt at a theme is evident bust mostly unclear Various discipline connections are weak Focus question is too specific Focus question oriented to one discipline

Goals and objectives lack interdisciplinary approach Activities are age appropriate A variety of print sources are made

Accomplished 3 • Theme is evident • Most disciplines are included

Exemplary 4 • Theme is clear • Purpose of unit is clear

•

•

Focus question is broad but not necessarily real-world oriented

•

•

•

•

•

Goals and objectives based on standards Objectives written in measurable terms Inclusion of non-print resources is

• •

•

Focus question is broad, global Focus question encourages exploration Focus question applies to real-world issues Objectives integrate all disciplines Objectives encourage higher order thinking skills Students are encouraged to locate

Score

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 148 available to students

Activities

•

•

Activities are not clearly defined Students are required to simply restate facts

•

•

Activities focus on knowledge level of Bloom’s Taxonomy Students are not provided a choice in activities

encouraged Coordinatio n among team members • Allocates resources effectively • Activities are project oriented • Activities draw upon several disciplines •

•

•

•

•

Evaluation

•

No evidence of evaluation for students or for the unit

•

•

Assessment is conducted only at the culmination of the unit Assessment focuses on student performance

•

•

•

Additional Comments:

Assessment is a continuous processes throughout the unit Assessment criteria are developed with student input Assessment correlates with unit objectives

•

•

•

resources independently Use of web resources is appropriate and effective Activities provide for multiple intelligences Activities encourage creative expression and problem solving Activities can be student originated Students are encouraged to self-assess their participation and performance Peer assessment is utilized with group activities Team members share perceptions throughout the unit and modify as necessary

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 149 Figure A6 Student Interdisciplinary Curriculum Unit Sample Evaluation Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission. Name: ____________________________

Date: ________________________

Grade: ____________________________

Language Level: _______________

Theme: ____________________________

Concept(s): ___________________

Type of Thematic Approach: __________________________________________

Student-Teacher Conference 1. Tell me about your favorite activity for this theme? 2. Which piece of literature did you enjoy most? 3. What was the most important thing you learned? 4. What piece of work was your best work? Observation of Students Behaviors in Thematic Instructions (May be completed during or following theme) Rating Scale: 1 (Developing) 3 (Satisfactory) 5 (Exceptional) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Attitude toward theme Understanding of thematic concepts Attainment of learning objectives Strategy development and application Independence in learning Participation in activities Participation in discussions

Reading completed by student: Writing completed by student: Activities completed by student: Additional Comments:

12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 150 Figure A7 Interdisciplinary Instructional Reflection Sample Questions for Teachers

Reflection Questions

Yes

No

Comments

Is the activity congruent with the students’ needs? Is the activity congruent with the students' interests? Is the activity congruent with the students' levels of development? Is the activity congruent with the student's learning styles? Is the activity congruent with the students' cultural backgrounds? Does the activity promote an understanding of key concepts related to the topic? Does the activity promote critical thinking and higher order thinking skills? Does the activity include several content areas? Does the activity address objectives included in the school curriculum? Does the activity promote discovery, exploration, and integration of technology? Does the activity encourage the facilitation role of the teacher? Does the activity provide opportunities for authentic assessment and evaluation?

Throughout the action research process, reflection questions may change. Additional Questions Generated from Action Research Have the students before explored the topic before? When? Where? How? Was the activity justifiable, given the context of standards and outcomes?

.

Y

N

Comments

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 151 Figure A8 Data Collection Matrix Interdisciplinary Curriculum

Research Questions Did all teachers participate in the collaboration process? Does activity measure language development? Does activity measure academic development? Did teachers reflect on this methodology? What do you want to learn from this research? What did you like or not like? Was the activity practical? Did students actively participate in the activity? Did students participate in discussions? Did students’ motivation change? Were students absent? Did parents participate in activities? Did students complete assignments at school? Did students complete assignments at home?

Data

Data

Data

Source #1

Source #2

Source #3

Other

APPENDIX B UNIT TWO: CURRICULUM INTEGRATION Note. From Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education, by J. A. Beane, 1997, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Copyright 1997 by James A. Beane. Adapted with permission. Duration: Two Weeks Theme: Changes - Past, Present, and Future Concept: Dinosaurs Grade Level: Language Proficiency Level: 1-3 Role of the Teacher: The teacher’s role will vary depending upon type of instruction. Teachers will be facilitators, provide explicit instruction, and act as a resource depending on the activity, skills, and concepts being taught. Additional Notes: It is critical to remember that additional support maybe needed for LEP students who have a low English proficiency. It is imperative that teachers keep students’ linguistic levels in mind when planning this unit. Remember, LEP students may lack the background knowledge to understand a selection’s vocabulary and key concepts. Teachers must be able to provide this background information and pre-teach potentially troublesome words or concepts. Teachers should also use additional learning strategies such as idioms, multiplemeaning words, textual clues, realia, pictures, and various grouping, modeling, demonstrations, and scaffolding, and various reading materials for the different levels of reading. Steps: 1. Collaborate planning with students. Ask students these two questions: What questions or concerns do you have about yourself? What questions or concerns do you have about the world? Record on chart paper (See Figure B1). 2. Once students have generated their questions or concerns, group concerns into organized centers or themes for both self and world questions. Ask questions such as, "Why did the space shuttle explode?” "Are dinosaurs real?" and "Why don't dinosaurs live anymore?" (See Figure B2).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 153 3. Students vote on what activity is taught first. 4. Plan the unit by creating the lessons that address students’ questions and concerns that were generated in step 2. See Figures B3 and B4. 5. Teachers then develop a flexible schedule that includes a selected period. Schedule planning and time-lines are also important aspects. In this study, the time frame is a two week period. When the teacher selects a period, it is imperative they keep in mind the following factors: students' interests, attention spans, the availability of resources, and reading materials, and curriculum guidelines. They should be prepared to monitor students’ interest levels and modify accordingly. 6. Implement theme and activities. Monitor students' progress and understanding; schedule, teach lessons and facilitate. Journals are kept; stories, articles, poems, are discussed; projects are created. 7. Check for understanding; evaluate using authentic means (See Figure B5 and Figure B6). 8. Reflect upon your unit (See Figure B7).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 154 Figure B1 Curriculum Integration Student Generated Sample Planning Worksheet Self Questions

World Questions

Note. From Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education, by J. A. Beane, 1997, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Copyright 1997 by James A. Beane. Adapted with permission.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 155 Figure B2 Curriculum Integration Lesson Sample Organization Chart Note. From Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education, by J. A. Beane, 1997, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Copyright 1997 by James A. Beane. Adapted with permission. Student Questions

Materials Needed:

Comments:

Activities (Align with Standards and Benchmarks)

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 156 Figure B3 Curriculum Integration

2.

Knowledge

1.

Self

Theme

Social

3.

Democracy

4.

Note. From Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education, by J. A. Beane, 1997, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Copyright 1997 by James A. Beane. Adapted with permission. 1. Personal knowledge: addressing self-concerns and ways of knowing about self. 2. Social knowledge: addressing social and world issues, from peer to global relationships, and ways of critically examining them; 3. Explanatory knowledge- content that names, describes, explains, and interprets, including that involved in the disciplines of knowledge as well as commonsense or popular knowledge. 4. Technical knowledge- ways of investigating, communicating, analyzing and expressing, including many of the skills already promoted in schools. (Beane, 1997, 49-50)

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 157 Figure B4 Name _________________________

Date ______________________________

Creating an Curriculum Integration Unit Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission. Thematic Unit Sample Rubric Use this thematic unit rubric as you create a curriculum integration unit. This was designed to help you to produce quality instructional units designed to thoroughly integrate learning and meet the needs of your linguistically diverse students. Title of Unit

Theme

Beginning 1 • No theme evident • Purpose is unclear

•

•

Concept Questions

•

No focus question

• •

Instructional Objectives

• •

Materials & Resources

•

No goals or objectives listed Unit not age appropriate

•

Textbooks serve as sole resource

•

•

Developing 2 Some attempt at a theme is evident bust mostly unclear Various discipline connections are weak Focus question is too specific Focus question oriented to one discipline Goals and objectives lack interdisciplinary approach Activities are age appropriate A variety of print sources are made available to students

Accomplished 3 • Theme is evident • Most disciplines are included

•

•

•

•

•

• •

Focus question is broad but not necessarily real-world oriented

•

Goals and objectives based on standards Objectives written in measurable terms Inclusion of non-print resources is encouraged Coordinatio n among

•

• •

•

•

•

Exemplary 4 Theme is clear Purpose of unit is clear

Focus question is broad, global Focus question encourages exploration Focus question applies to realworld issues Objectives integrate all disciplines Objectives encourage higher order thinking skills Students are encouraged to locate resources independently Use of web

Score

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 158

Activities

•

•

Activities are not clearly defined Students are required to simply restate facts

•

•

Activities focus on knowledge level of Bloom’s Taxonomy Students are not provided a choice in activities

team members • Allocates resources effectively • Activities are project oriented • Activities draw upon several disciplines

resources is appropriate and effective

•

•

• Evaluation

•

No evidence of evaluation for students or for the unit

•

•

Assessment is conducted only at the culmination of the unit Assessment focuses on student performance

•

•

•

Additional Comments:

Assessment is a continuous processes throughout the unit Assessment criteria are developed with student input Assessment correlates with unit objectives

•

•

•

Activities provide for multiple intelligences Activities encourage creative expression and problem solving Activities can be student originated Students are encouraged to self-assess their participation and performance Peer assessment is utilized with group activities Team members share perceptions throughout the unit and modify as necessary

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 159 Figure B5 Student Curriculum Integration Unit Sample Evaluation Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission. Name: ____________________________

Date: ________________________

Grade: ____________________________

Language Level: _______________

Theme: ____________________________

Concept(s): ___________________

Type of Thematic Approach: __________________________________________

Student-Teacher Conference 1. Tell me about your favorite activity for this theme? 2. Which piece of literature did you enjoy most? 3. What was the most important thing you learned? 4. What piece of work was your best work? Observation of Students Behaviors in Thematic Instructions (May be completed during or following theme) Rating Scale: 1 (Developing) 3 (Satisfactory) 5 (Exceptional) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Attitude toward theme Understanding of thematic concepts Attainment of learning objectives Strategy development and application Independence in learning Participation in activities Participation in discussions

Reading completed by student: Writing completed by student: Activities completed by student: Additional Comments:

12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 160 Figure B6 Curriculum Integration Instruction Sample Reflection Questions for Teachers

Reflection Questions

Yes

No

Comments

Is the activity congruent with the students’ needs? Is the activity congruent with the students' interests? Is the activity congruent with the students' levels of development? Is the activity congruent with the student's learning styles? Is the activity congruent with the students' cultural backgrounds? Does the activity promote an understanding of key concepts related to the topic? Does the activity promote critical thinking and higher order thinking skills? Does the activity include several content areas? Does the activity address objectives included in the school curriculum? Does the activity promote discovery, exploration, and integration of technology? Does the activity encourage the facilitation role of the teacher? Does the activity provide opportunities for authentic assessment and evaluation?

Throughout the action research process, reflection questions may change. Additional Questions Generated from Action Research Have the students before explored the topic before? When? Where? How? Was the activity justifiable, given the context of standards and outcomes?

Y

N

Comments

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 161 Figure B7 Data Collection Sample Matrix Curriculum Integration Unit Note. From Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education, by J. A. Beane, 1997, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Copyright 1997 by James A. Beane. Adapted with permission. Research Questions Did all teachers participate in the collaboration process? Does activity measure language development? Does activity measure academic development? Did teachers reflect on this methodology? What do you want to learn from this research? What did you like or not like? Was the activity practical? Did students actively participate in the activity? Did students participate in discussions? Did students’ motivation change? Were students absent? Did parents participate in activities? Did students complete assignments at school? Did students complete assignments at home?

Data

Data

Data

Source #1

Source #2

Source #3

Other

APPENDIX C UNIT THREE: CROSS-CURRICULAR THEMATIC INSTRUCTION PLANNING PROCESS Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission. Duration: Two Weeks Theme: Changes- Past, Present, Future Concept: The Farm Grade Level: Language Proficiency Level: 1-3 Role of the Teacher: The teacher’s role will vary depending upon type of instruction. Teachers will be facilitators, provide explicit instruction, and act as a resource depending on the activity, skills, and concepts being taught. Additional Notes: It is critical to remember that additional support maybe needed for LEP students who have a low English proficiency. It is imperative that teachers keep students’ linguistic levels in mind when planning this unit. Remember, LEP students may lack the background knowledge to understand a selection’s vocabulary and key concepts. Teachers must be able to provide this background information and pre-teach potentially troublesome words or concepts. Teachers should also use additional learning strategies such as idioms, multiplemeaning words, textual clues, realia, pictures, various grouping, modeling, demonstrations, and scaffolding. All concepts should be considered for the various reading materils aimed at the different reading levels. Steps: 1. The teacher selects an overall theme relevant to their students’ interests. The theme may be selected from the District’s standards. This selection affirms the theme will be relevant to, interesting to students, while also being meaningful and substantial. The theme must be able to make connections with content areas and language arts (See Figure C1). 2. Teacher then chooses key concept(s) that will guide instruction around theme. These concept(s) can be found in grade-level specific standards. Once themes are determined, the goal is to select tasks that encourage students to investigate, speculate, and problem-

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 163 solve, asking questions that enable them to explore other topics more fully. Key concepts for a theme should provide a clear focus for all instruction and learning. The key concept will guide all activities and lessons, and the reading selections will emerge naturally from it. It is expected that by the end of the theme that all students will begin to internalize, build upon, and transfer this key concept to their own lives (See Figure C1). 3. Create a large KWLH chart, complete and post in classroom (See Figure C2). 4. From questions generated from the KWLH chart (See Figure C2). Teachers next identify skills and strategies to be taught (See Figure C1). This is a critical step within crosscurricular instruction in which the skills and strategies become the means for developing reading and writing abilities, rather than the end result of the thematic study. Specific skills, such as comparing and contrasting, can be taught through structured and carefully planned mini-lessons or through more interactive lessons for those students requiring indepth teaching. Skills will be taught within the context of a story and theme, not in isolation. 5. Teachers will identify a range of appropriate resources to be used in the unit of study (See Figure C3). This should be done by completing a web for planning the unit. During this time, cross-curricular connections will be determined and a variety of reading materials and contextually embedded activities are identified. Teachers should list names of books, narrative and expository literature, real world texts, and poetry to assure they are included in order to give students diverse reading experiences. Narrative and expository literature anchor the theme, both for student reading and teacher read-aloud. Real world texts such as magazines, brochures, and maps are valuable resources. During this stage of planning, teachers should contact district or school specialists, public library resources, expert --

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 164 guest speakers; they may also schedule relevant field trips. Other reading materials include thematic related books which are not textbooks, but from the popular press. 6. Teachers then develop a schedule that includes a selected timeframe. Schedule planning and time-line is also important. In this study, the timeframe is a two-week period. However, themes may take a day, week, or month in which all subjects of the curriculum revolve around the theme. When the teacher selects a period, it is imperative they keep in mind several factors: students' interests; attention spans; the availability of resources and reading materials; and curriculum guidelines. They should be prepared to monitor students’ interests and modify the instruction accordingly. 7. Develop activities. 8. Develop appropriate evaluation techniques. 9. Implement theme and activities. Monitor the following: students’ progress and understanding; the schedule. The teacher implements the lessons, and facilitates learning. Journals are kept; stories, articles, and poems are discussed; projects are created. Minds are challenged by engaging students in reading and writing, in discussing and researching, in creating and generating their own ideas. 10. Check for understanding by completing KWLH chart (See Figure C2). 11. Evaluate (See Figure C4 and Figure C5). 12. Reflect upon your unit (See Figure C6 and Figure C7).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 165 Figure C1 Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Planning

Writing ELD Activity: Activity:

Literature Activity:

Math

Theme: Change

Activity:

Past, Present, and Future Concept: Farm

Art, Music P.E.

Science Activity:

Activity: Social Studies: Activity:

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 166

Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997, Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission.

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 167 Figure C2 Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Brainstorming KWLH Chart

K What We Know

W

L

H

What We Want to Learn

What We Learned

How We Find the Information to Learn

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 168 Figure C3 Teacher Check List Planning for Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission. 1. Examine, Brainstorm, and Select Themes Make lists of possible themes, using: Curriculum guides Internet Sites Textbooks Interest inventories from students and community Other teachers Other sources 2. Identify the Most Important Content Area Concepts Brainstorm ideas for themes Discuss themes Elaborate on topics and subtopics Eliminate some topics as less useful, less important, less interesting Divide into subtopics Develop subtopics Evaluate subtopics 3. Identify the Skills to be Emphasized Write objectives According to grade/age level According to content area Language/literacy proficiency Technology use Other identified needs Incorporate content into thematic unit Examine State, Local, and National Standards & Curriculum Examine curriculum guides and textbooks Examine scope and sequence charts/lists Basic skills and language skills Other sources Develop a hierarchy of concepts and skills to be covered Prioritize objectives Examine review procedures for previous and subsequent units 4. Identify Teaching Strategies & Activities Select teaching strategies appropriate for Grade/age level

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 169 Content Language and cognitive development Cultural and ethnic background 5. Gather Materials Brainstorm/Determine materials which best exemplify concepts Select from a wide range of materials Textbooks Internet Resources Library books (at a variety of levels) Magazines and newspapers Audiovisual materials (Video Clips and Cassette Tapes) Guest speakers Field Trips Other sources Purchase thematic pre-made materials only as a last resort! Develop a system to share materials such as creating a web site 6. Write Lesson Plans/Unit Plan Develop plans that incorporate the: Concepts Skills Various materials Informal and formal assessment activities Apply taxonomy of instructional questions/structures (e. g. Bloom, Hunter) Develop lesson-cycle structures such as Theme Focus & Goal of Unit Day & Discipline Teaching Objective(s) Materials Other Sources Student Expectations/Goals Presentation Strategies & Activities Guided Practice Activities Independent Practice Activities Self-selected Activities Enrichment Activities Review/Pre-teach Activities Assessment/Evaluation Comments:

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 170 Figure C4 Creating a Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Unit Note. From Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation, by H. H. Jacobs, 1989, Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD. Copyright 1989 by Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Adapted with permission. Thematic Unit Sample Rubric Use this thematic unit rubric as you create a cross-curricular thematic unit. This was designed to help you to produce quality instructional units designed to thoroughly integrate learning and meet the needs of your linguistically diverse students Title of Unit

Theme

Concept Questions

Beginning 1 • No theme evident • Purpose is unclear

•

No focus question

•

•

• •

Developing 2 Some attempt at a theme is evident bust mostly unclear Various discipline connections are weak Focus question is too specific Focus question oriented to one discipline

• •

•

Accomplished 3 Theme is evident Most disciplines are included

Exemplary 4 • Theme is clear; • Purpose of unit is clear

Focus question is broad but not necessarily realworld oriented

•

•

•

Instructional Objectives

• •

Materials & Resources

•

No goals or objectives listed Unit not age appropriate

•

Textbooks serve as sole resource

•

•

Goals and objectives lack inter-discipline approach Activities are age appropriate

•

A variety of print sources are made available to

•

•

Goals and objectives based on standards Objectives written in measurable terms

•

Inclusion of nonprint resources is encouraged

•

•

Focus question is broad, global Focus question encourages exploration Focus question applies to real-world issues Objectives integrate all disciplines Objectives encourage higher order thinking skills Students are encouraged

Score

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 171

Activities

•

•

Evaluation

•

Activities are not clearly defined Students are required to simply restate facts

•

No evidence of evaluation for students or for the unit

•

Additional Comments:

•

•

students

•

Activities focus on knowledge level of Bloom’s Taxonomy Students are not provided a choice in activities

•

Assessment is conducted only at the culmination of the unit Assessment focuses on student performance

•

•

• •

to locate resources independen tly • Use of web resources is appropriate and effective Activities are • Activities project oriented provide for multiple Activities draw intelliupon several gences disciplines • Activities encourage creative expression and problem solving • Activities can be student originated Assessment is a • Students continuous are processes encouraged throughout the unit to selfassess their Assessment criteria participatio developed with n and student input performanc Assessment e in the correlates with unit unit objectives • Peer assessment is utilized with group activities • Team members share perceptions throughout the unit and modify as necessary Coordination among team members allocates resources effectively

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 172

Figure C5 Student Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Unit Sample Evaluation Note. From “Cross-curricular thematic instruction,” by M. E. Vogt, 1997. Retrieved May 5, 2003, from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/vogt.html. Copyright 1997 by Mary Ellen Vogt. Adapted with permission. Name: ____________________________

Date: ________________________

Grade: ____________________________

Language Level: _______________

Theme: ____________________________

Concept(s): ___________________

Type of Thematic Approach: __________________________________________

Student-Teacher Conference 1. Tell me about your favorite activity for this theme? 2. Which piece of literature did you enjoy most? 3. What was the most important thing you learned? 4. What piece of work was your best work? Observation of Students Behaviors in Thematic Instructions (May be completed during or following theme) Rating Scale: 1 (Developing) 3 (Satisfactory) 5 (Exceptional) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Attitude toward theme Understanding of thematic concepts Attainment of learning objectives Strategy development and application Independence in learning Participation in activities Participation in discussions

Reading completed by student: Writing completed by student: Activities completed by student: Additional Comments:

12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 173 Figure C6 Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Sample Reflection Questions for Teachers Reflection Questions

Yes

No

Comments

Is the activity congruent with the students’ needs? Is the activity congruent with the students' interests? Is the activity congruent with the students' levels of development? Is the activity congruent with the student's learning styles? Is the activity congruent with the students' cultural backgrounds? Does the activity promote an understanding of key concepts related to the topic? Does the activity promote critical thinking and higher order thinking skills? Does the activity include several content areas? Does the activity address objectives included in the school curriculum? Does the activity promote discovery, exploration, and integration of technology? Does the activity encourage the facilitation role of the teacher? Does the activity provide opportunities for authentic assessment and evaluation?

Throughout the action research process, reflection questions may change. Additional Questions Generated from Action Research Have the students before explored the topic before? When? Where? How? Was the activity justifiable, given the context of standards and outcomes?

Y

N

Comments

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 174 Figure C7 Data Collection Sample Matrix Cross-Curricular Thematic Instruction Unit

Research Questions Did all teachers participate in the collaboration process? Does activity measure language development? Does activity measure academic Development? Did teachers reflect on this methodology? What do you want to learn from this research? What did you like or not like? Was the activity practical? Did students actively participate in the activity? Did students participate in discussions? Did students’ motivation change? Were students absent? Did parents participate in activities? Did students complete assignments at school? Did students complete assignments at home?

Data

Data

Data

Source #1

Source #2

Source #3

Other

APPENDIX D LEP STUDENTS’ LANGUAGE LEVELS DEFINED

A Level 1 student, or DPI Level 1, is the pre-productive stage. The student will often use their home language to communicate. When people around these students speak a different language than the students, many respond by ceasing to speak entirely, due to frustration. Students go through this period of not talking, which may be brief or it can last up to a year. Though they are not speaking in English at this time, they are absorbing the language; they will attempt to communicate through non-verbal gestures or mimes. At some point, students quit speaking in their native language because no one will respond to them in their first language. These students should not be subjected to standardized assessments due to their limited English ability. If testing is required, these students should have accommodations and/or perhaps should use alternative (authentic) assessments to determine their academic progress (IPT, 2000; Wisconsin DPI, 2002a, 2002c). A Level 2 student, or DPI Level 2, is in the early-productive stage. In this stage, students are basically nonverbal. Their speech is still not fluent but telegraphic. Students in this stage use simple sentences in English, such as isolated words and expressions. They use short phrases like “Go bathroom!” and “Drink water!” This is the period in which students begin to “crack the code” of their second language. During this stage, LEP students are at an emergent level of reading and writing in English. During this stage, LEP students should not be administered standardized assessments without accommodations. The use of alternative assessments to determine their academic progress is appropriate (IPT, 2000; Wisconsin DPI, 2002a, 2002c).

Integration of the Curriculum for ESL 176 A Level 3 student, or DPI 3, is in the speech-emergence stage. The students have “playground” language (or speech). People will hear Level 3 students speaking English on the playground and think they are fluent English speakers, but they are not fluent. Non-ESL teachers will also question why students are placed in the SEI program when they are apparently speaking English well. This is the first form of English that LEP students learn, and it is classified as “survival” English. These students know enough language to get by with their peers, yet they may not have the full capabilities to understand academic language, which is formally tested. Students at this level are considered post-emergent as they develop reading comprehension and writing skills in English. Their English literacy skills allow them to demonstrate academic knowledge in content areas as long as they have the assistance to do so. It is in this stage of language development that the use of standardized assessment becomes controversial. Some States have declared students ready for standardized assessments with or without accommodations at Level 3. To increase students’ success, students at this stage should be allowed accommodations (IPT, 2000; Wisconsin DPI, 2002a, 2002c). At Level 4-5, students are transitioned out of the SEI classroom into the English mainstreamed classrooms. Therefore, there are no Level 4, 5, or 6 students in this research study.