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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.