# data[].attributes.body
In this article, Martinez challenges the way schools view multilingual learners as “English learners” and uses a deficit lens approach, which lowers the expectations for ELLs. This deficit lens focuses on the limitations that ELLs have rather than the linguistic repertoires that these students bring into the classroom, which can be considered a strength. By recognizing students’ existing knowledge and language abilities, educators can shift to an asset-based perspective and encourage practices such as translanguaging to help build the bridge between the home language and the target language. Upon reflecting on this article, educators need to be intentional in how they can support and empower multilingual learners to create opportunities for success.

# data[].attributes.body
1. How we see Language Learners

-It depends who you ask! I think when people hear the word "language learners", it could be viewed as a deficit or obstacle. These students are lacking something. I have heard students refer to ELLs as "the Spanish kids". Nowadays, we're trying to show that being a language learner is a positive thing. These group of students are adding a new language to their toolbox.

2. Different perspectives on Multilingual learners

-Being a multilingual learner is a superpower! being able to codeswitch fluently is special and it combines two cultures. I think the perspective is changing because the United States has many people from different cultures. Knowing one language is starting to be not enough (my humble opinion). Something interesting that I have observed, it that when a Spanish speaker is learning English, it is seen as a deficit. Whereas, when an English speaker is learning Spanish, it is seen as something admirable. I hope this is changing as anyone can be a multilingual learner.

# data[].attributes.body
Usually, when we use the term language learner, we are often referring to students who are learning English. However, Martinez explained that this term focuses too much on what students lack, which was a new perspective for me. He didn’t just focus on the gaps but emphasized the rich language repertoires that multilingual learners bring to the classroom, something that cannot be ignored and is actually a valuable resource. I also noticed he mentioned translanguaging and code-switching, which are often banned in classrooms because language learners are only expected to practice English. This ignores the fact that students are already experts in another language. So, I think the language learner label may underestimate students’ abilities in acquiring a new language and the advantages they already have.

# data[].attributes.body
Martínez challenges the ways educators and schools view MLLs. Basically, pushing everyone to question not the terms we use but the way we use our mindset. He brings up a great point which is how students engage in code-switching or translanguaging. Not because they’re deficient in either language, but because they’re skillfully using all their linguistic tools to express themselves. As an educator it’s so important to keep this in mind, because it’s also a reminder that language practices are signs of intelligence and adaptability, not gaps.

Overall, Martínez calls for a deeper, more humanizing approach to how we see and support MLLs. I agree with him saying that as educators it's important to understand the students unique language histories, strengths, and potential. This means embracing linguistic diversity in the classroom and building on what students already bring with them, instead of trying to “fix” them to fit into a monolingual mold.

# data[].attributes.body
Martinez's article "Beyond the English Learner Label" breaks apart harmful views on ELLs and provides a different perspective to these societally negatively viewed ideologies on ELLs. I thought her paragraph on the how the words "bilingual" and "trilingual" was most intriguing. Martinez mention how labels such as "bilingual" limits students' language capabilities. She mentions a study in which students who came across as trilingual actually knew another language to some extent, whether it was a language they spoke with relatives or a language they picked up through their environment. This shows that labeling these students as "bilingual" negates their abilities to speak other languages. The word "bilingual" does not do justice for the student's language repertoire. Furthermore, in the context of bilingual education in the NYC from my experience, the two languages bilingual students "speak" are usually the students' primary home language and English. This primary home language is also usually the language that is most commonly spoken, such as Spanish, Russian, or Mandarin. If a child spoke another language with a less common dialect or language, it undermines the importance of that language. We should uplift students abilities to speak all the languages they use throughout their daily lives as all languages have equal importance to strengthen their English capabilities. Therefore, I agree with the idea of calling "bilingual" students, multilingual. To me, they are multilingual learners.

# data[].attributes.body
Martinez's article "Beyond the English Learner Label" focuses on how we should break apart from labeling students. It is mentioned in the article that we focus a lot on labels and forget what students are capable of. One interesting quote from the article is "Lumping all of these students together into a single category perpetuates stereotypes about who they are ". Instead of labeling students, we should focus on their learning growth and what they are capable of. We tend to forget that these students know another language already and are learning a new one. The English Learner Label hides students backgrounds and identities and just puts them in a branch in which students are seen based on stereotypes and not based on what they are capable of academically. Martinez wants us to shift from deficit labels and instead view students as emergent bilinguals. He also mentioned translanguaging and code switching.

# data[].attributes.body
In Martínez’s article, the term English Language Learner carries a negative representation because it frames bi/multilingual students as less competent and emphasizes what they lack rather than what they are capable of doing. While the label can be useful to identify students who are in the process of learning English, it should not be used in ways that reflect a narrow, monolingual perspective.

Martínez also mentioned how students classified as ELLs are not always identified correctly because the criteria are inconsistent. This misclassification further complicates how these students are perceived and supported in schools.

Martínez also critiques how monolingualism is normalized and how bi/multilingual students are stereotyped as deficient. I connected with this point and was reminded of a short video I recently saw on social media in which students at prestigious universities were surveyed about how many languages they spoke. As expected, most native English speakers were monolingual, while international students often spoke two or three languages. In my view, globalization and the dominance of English in education and job markets contribute to this imbalance. Still, that should never justify viewing those who classified as English learners as inferior.

# data[].attributes.body
How we "label" multilingual learners is important. Labels influence how we see, treat, and support students. When we refer to them only as English language learners, their identities are defined in terms of what they “lack,” most often proficiency in English, rather than acknowledging the full range of linguistic and cultural knowledge they bring to the classroom. This limiting label can unintentionally reinforce the idea that English is the only language of value in educational spaces, while students’ home languages are undervalued.

In the article, Martínez argues that labels like "ELL" promote a deficit perspective, concealing students’ strengths. This can cause students’ home languages to be overlooked while English is treated as the most important language. Shifting the language we use from deficit-based terms like “ELL” or “ESL” to asset-based ones like multilingual learners, encourages educators to see students as resourceful individuals who draw on a wide variety of languages to make meaning, communicate, and learn.

# data[].attributes.body
1. My initial thoughts after reading this article made me think about how creating labels and categorizing students into these labels can be harmful. As I am learning more about students and the funds of knowledge they bring into the classroom, I think about the assets they bring and how it can make classrooms inclusive. I catch myself viewing students from what they don't know to what they do know. As educators I think it is very important to be conscious and to stop ourselves from viewing students as only "English Language Learners" or "limited English proficency" to what they bring into the classroom and using it to teach but also create a culturally responsive classroom.

2. Other thoughts that came to mind as I was reading this text was that the U.S is pro English and therefore, see bilingualism as a deficit and that it needs to be "fixed". I have witnessed educators and school admin have these views. Therefore, allowing students to use their full linguistic repertoire will allow us to shift from having a monolingual perspective to embracing students' linguistic identities.

# data[].attributes.body
How we see Language Learners and different perspectives on MLLs:

In the article, it mentions how the label " English learners" often limits teachers in the way they view their students. A couple of months ago, my cousin and I were talking about what it was like being an ELL student. Our experiences were different since I got out of the ESL program in third grade, while my cousin was still an ELL student until he got into high school. We were both born in the United States, but we grew up speaking Spanish at home. He mentioned how the teachers often viewed him through a deficit lens. Our conversation centered on the article's point about the labeling of "English learners" and its impact on teachers' perceptions of their students, particularly the tendency to focus on the lack rather than the strengths students might possess. Instead of teachers having this mindset and view on their students, they should look at it as a strength-based lens and not just focus on the student as "English learners".

In the classroom, we will encounter multilingual learners who are U.S.-born and who speak English daily. The other half of the students are newcomers who are just starting to learn the language. That's what makes these students unique! Grouping these students under one label hides their individual skills and backgrounds. Each multilingual learner has a unique story about themselves. A practice that teachers should implement in their classrooms is translanguaging, which would value their students' home languages and cultural knowledge within the classroom community. The way teachers choose to see their MLLs can affect their overall confidence and success.

# data[].attributes.body
Martinez’s article critiques the “English learner label”, which can reduce a student’s linguistic abilities by framing them through a deficit lens. These labels can affect the way teachers perceive and treat students. They can also mask the diverse linguistic repertoires students bring, such as code-switching, trilingualism, and other language practices.

This article made me reflect on how schools often overlook the capabilities that multilingual students bring in, and view their multilingualism as a lack of English capabilities. Personally, as someone who navigated bilingualism and felt the limitations and insecurities around the way my bilingualism “hindered” my English acquisition, I resonated with Martinez’s proposal to honor students’ entire repertoires instead of reducing them with a label.

# data[].attributes.body
The Martinez piece tackles not only how we see and treat English language learners/multilingualism but also multilingualism as a whole. He discusses what one may call the monoglot standard, where, unlike the rest of the world, the anglophone world tends to view monolingualism as a preferred gold standard over multilingualism; In this view, multilingualism represents fragmented speech and competency, speaking some of one language and some of another. The way this impacts our students is evident in the way the system categorizes them and their services (and perhaps even us as educators). ELL/MLLs are—as Martinez says—labeled “at risk” and, at worst, even deemed incapable of educational growth because of a language barrier. While they do face roadblocks because of language, it is a matter of accommodation and opportunity—not potential.

The negative perception of ELLs speech as “broken” or indicative of failure is evident in reactions to code-switching, especially in academic environments. As Martinez says, code-switching is creative, “a reflection of bilingualism,” and, above all else, completely “normal”! It does not represent gaps in language or—as some cold teachers would say—a way to stay insular within school environments. Martinez attributes to this to viewing “code-switching from a monolingual lens,” connecting it back to this aforementioned standard. When multilingualism is inherently taboo, we pit the odds against our students for simply existing as multilinguals.

# data[].attributes.body
The last sentence in Ramon Antonio Martinez's resonates with me: "Recognizing the richness of bi/multilingual

students’ linguistic repertoires requires that wethink beyond the convenient labels that serve to mask their brilliance, their competence, and their

tremendous potential." I appreciated his explanation of the negatives assumptions that the "word gap" discourse can have on bi/multilingual students. The idea of assuming a lexical deficit before even looking at what the strength's are of any given student's seems illogical. I believe strongly in what he says about idendityfing what students' strengths are and then building on those strenghts. For example, a teacher can ascertain that a student knows the Spanish equivalents to a list of verbs in English and then place those Spanish and English verbs, accompanied with, say, images that show what the verb is, side-by-side so that the student can learn them. An approach, such as the one I just described, is data-driven given that research shows that students learn a new language more easily when they leverage the languages they already know. Doing so could counteract the monolithic assumptions that Martinez said run counter to the "current data-driven trend around assessment and instruction." I also agree with him strongly when he says, "Language is not reducible to words, and academic language is not reducible to

academic words," because not knowing a word in one language cans simply mean the student has not yet been exposed to it and says nothing about any supposed language deficit or gap. The persective that MLLs are lacking something or proceed with a language deficiency could limit, according to Martinez, "what kinds of educational opportunities we make available or withhold" from them, and that would fly in the face of what we aim to accomplish as educators.

# data[].attributes.body
Martinez discusses the ways in which the “English Learner” label is limiting for bi/multilingual children in the classroom. It promotes a monolingual perspective that views students through a deficit-based perspective. Perceiving students through this deficit lens is harmful and hinders their language development. Instead, focusing on the strengths their multilingualism brings to the classroom will lead to better outcomes and higher motivation. In order to adopt an asset-based perspective, educators must understand that practices such as code switching and translanguaging are a natural part of multilingualism and should not be discouraged. Allowing students to use their full linguistic repertoires in the classroom is a step in the right direction towards dismantling the norm of monolingualism. I believe practices such as free writing, culturally responsive texts, and a classroom environment that reflects multiculturalism are some ways that educators can appreciate the multilingual learners they are teaching.