The part that resonated with me the most was #8, which emphasizes an awareness of how much language influences our perception of reality. With the constant access our students have to the internet via their smartphones, they spend so much time consuming images and texts online that speak to them about the world and its people. As teachers, we don’t have control over the media that they consume, but we can and must influence their ability to think critically about the messages they see and read to be able to unpack biases and ascertain the credibility of their sources. 

Teaching Adolescent EL’s to Write Academic-Style Persuasive Essays by Kathleen Ramos 

There was so much to take in from this reading that I can see myself returning to it in the future. I had never heard of the  “three meaning types”, and even though I was familiar with some of the concepts in the language resources she described, I would not have considered explicitly teaching them to students. Even though she speaks specifically about how much ELL students can benefit from the “reading to learn” approach, I think all students will benefit from 

 similar types of instruction. Even in honors classes, there are students who are incredibly knowledgeable about topics, yet they struggle to demonstrate this knowledge in the academic language that schools require.  

No Kinda Sense by Lisa Delpit

Delpit’s text contains a lot of the sentiments I’ve heard surrounding culturally sustaining and culturally relevant pedagogy. In short: listen to your students, validate their experiences by including them in the curriculum, and treat them with the same respect you expect from them. In an ideal world, we would not have to teach our students to code-switch, but we are not there yet, so it is our duty to make sure our students learn “professional” and “formal” English, so they can find success in professional, academically oriented careers if they so choose. The more doors we can open for them, the better off they will be. 

In “Teaching Adolescent ELs to Write Academic- Style Persuasive Essays” by Ramos, I really liked the idea of breaking down a short model text in a specific genre to help students improve their academic writing (656). While I use model texts in my classroom, we do not break them down at the level discussed in this article, and I think doing that for certain units would help my students better determine the type of language to use in each published piece they write. For example, we start with a memoir unit and read several short memoirs (4-6) as models. For next year, I may cut that number down so that we can spend longer on 1-2 model texts.

There was so much that stood out to me when reading “No Kinda Sense” by Delpit that it is hard to choose one thing. Though this article does not explicitly use the phrase “culturally responsive” or “culturally sustaining” I thought it made an incredibly strong argument for why CSP is imperative in our schools today. Delpit discusses the importance of making schools inviting to students by listening to them (6) and celebrating and centering the curriculum around their “cultural legacies” (5). Students have an innate desire to learn that is, unfortunately, often crushed by schooling. Through telling the story of how her daughter, Maya, learned a second language form, Delpit explains that affirming students’ identities is crucial to learning.  

After reading Stewart’s “Giving Voice to Valeria’s Story: Support, Value, and Agency for Immigrant Adolescents” she explains how “second-language acquisition occurs most effectively in meaningful ways that lower one’s anxiety level” (p. 43). This reminded me of what Delpit’s calls an affective filter—“less stress and the more fun connected to the process, the more easily it is accomplished.” Similarly, Stewart explains that ELL students must regularly engage in learning and reading for pleasure and not just for academic purposes. It is important that our classrooms and instruction sustain ELL students’ home-native language(s), their cultural backgrounds, and lived experiences in order for them to become more engaged and skilled readers and writers. We must really work on establishing authentic relationships and trust with our students—we need to show them that we truly care about them and their humanity more than their numeric grades, reading scores, or grade average (kids can tell when adults are fake). 

In the article, “Re-Seeing (Dis)Ability: Ten Suggestions” a major take-away for me was bringing in the principles of Universal Design into our planning and teaching. We need to create and present material “in more than just one way” (p. 21) students need to have many ways in which they can learn, interact, and be assessed. By offering text-to speech writing tools, audiobooks, storyboards, etc. from the start we can create a learning environment that normalizes and celebrates learning differences. If all of us do this we will be contributing and creating a more inclusive society. 

As I read through Giving Voice to Valeria’s Story, Mary Amanda Stewart mentions research that, in my opinion, involves one of the biggest issues we have in education today. She states, “Noddings (2003) believed that schools today are prioritizing the intellectual component of a student at the cost of the emotional and moral; yet, because schools are places of frequent teacher/student encounters, it is essential that teachers prioritize the development of caring relationships with every student” (Stewart, p. 43). I have been hearing this concern often in school, but not specifically in regards to Valeria’s situation as an immigrant student. Due to the “gaps'' in our students’ education from the pandemic and virtual learning, I feel there is an even greater emphasis on all business all the time from administration, but is this truly healthy? For anyone? I have the opportunity to hear voices and perspectives from various K-8 teachers who are consistently expressing their concerns of the overwhelming pressures of curriculum(s) as well as catching up on topics from when school was closed. In my head, I can’t help but think about these same stresses, but it concerns me when we imagine these children as learning machines rather than what they are… human beings!

In the reading, Evidence-Based Strategies for Reading Instruction of Older Students with Learning Disabilities, the authors discuss the different elements of effective instruction for middle school and high school students with learning disabilities in regards to reading. The five areas of focus that were discussed were word study, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, and motivation. On page 66, the authors state a relevance to vocabulary in a social studies setting which I agreed and typically try to practice. “Learning new and challenging vocabulary encountered in specific content-related texts, such as those used in science and social studies classes, may be best facilitated by providing direct instruction that focuses on simple definitions, examples and nonexamples, and the use of semantic maps (Kim, Vaughn, Wanzek, & Wei, 2004) that reflect the likely sources and possible uses of a new word” (Roberts, Torgesen, Boardman, & Scammacca, p. 66). I often incorporate and introduce visuals around the classroom (word walls, posters, word webs, etc.) and refer back to them as the vocabulary comes up throughout the unit. Do any of the other science or social studies teachers in this class have a creative and engaging way to introduce unit vocabulary!? 

This is a perfect segue into the next article, “Recognizing and Responding to Cultural Differences in the Education of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Learners.” In this piece, we learn about practices implemented in schools, including mine, that tend to be so alienating for students who happen to be language learners. Also, how often these practices feed the model that when a student continues to underperform on standardized tests in a foreign language or do not seem to pick up on a new language, they must have a learning disability. We fail to see students' individuality when we push for more standardized and normed teaching practices. Furthermore, it is painfully clear that education is a business and that a lot of school networks and administrators are pushed into placing linguistically diverse students into special education since this allows them to write these students off their testing data. It is a disgusting cycle, but the article did put a lot of emphasis on teachers who play into the system by failing to add in support for these students or have collected limited data on them, but still push for them to be referred to special education. Thus showing that we are the first line of defence for these students, we have the power to take the time to recognize their learning needs and differences so that our environment is optimal for their success. 

In the final article, “Writing Instruction for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities: Programs of Intervention Research” the conversation turns into what I can do as a teacher to, not only take into consideration some of the suggestions the other article provided, but also to take action in my classroom. Reading this piece was very comforting because some of the ideas that were presented I am already in the process of implementing. This gives me hope that if I continue to hone in my practice and put effort into these procedures my students will end up benefiting from them. In this article the conversation turns into how to best support students with learning disabilities. One of those ways is creating a space that is positive and that inspires confidence in students with labels in general. For a project in another class I am implementing the idea of writing groups, in these I will be using some of our formal writing strategies from this class; setting goals, teaching writing strategies, direct grammar instruction, peer to peer feedback, and teacher to student feedback. Therefore, one of my biggest takeaways is that again just as Delpit explained, when teachers look for beauty in spaces they have often seen as challenging, or scary there is always something to gain for our students. 

In “Building a Pathway of Optimal Support for English Language Learners in Special Education” by Andrea Zetlin, Dolores Beltran, Patricia Saicido, Teresa Gonzalez, and Teresa Reyes, the authors discuss the turbulent relationship between the labels ELL and SPED. Students who are not native English speakers can often be incorrectly diagnosed, and students who do have a disability might be misdiagnosed. Noted in the text, the benefits of primary language support and English and primary language instruction, should be recognized (62).

In “No Kinda Sense” by Lisa Delpit, the author emphasizes that schools must be welcoming of all different literacies that intersect with standardized English. The conversation about AAVE and it’s use in school, or rather the rejection of it in schools, highlights the prioritization of standard white middle class speech over other speech patterns. As stated on page 2, the quote from Maya Angelou stood out to me “…The very idea that African American language is a language separate and apart can be very threatening because it can encourage young men and women not to learn standard English.” It is important that schools recognize that the literacies students bring into the classroom shape the way they learn and express themselves. 

Both authors also emphasize the importance of making clear connections to the contributions of one’s culture to the content of school in order to support students in feeling affirmed and valued in their literacy learning. This emphasis on literacy and identity reminds me of Gholdy Muhammad’s research on historically responsive literacy as well as Django Paris and Samy Alim’s theory of culturally sustaining pedagogy. It made me question the extent to which I make explicit how the historical contributions of Black and Latinx and other scholars from marginalized communities contribute to English Language Arts.

The third article I read was “Teaching Composing to Students with Learning Disabilities,” which describes evidence-based studies for supporting students with learning disabilities to develop their literacy skills (Graham, Olinghouse, & Harris, 2009). The authors emphasize that explicit teaching on skills like writing, organization, and reading help all students to acquire literacy, but especially those who having learning disabilities. The authors promote research based on “scientific evidence” over research “based on experience and authority” which often presents strategies supported by select student work samples that fail to address the neurodiversity of students on their classroom. Yet I wish they had also discussed more how even “scientific evidence” based research studies also hold bias. As I was reading, I was thinking that teachers need to build strong relationships with their students before we can use any of these evidence based practices to support them. I wonder what work is already being done to make sure that quantitative, “scientific” research better accounts for qualitative factors like relationships between students and teachers and students’ feelings of value and self-efficacy.

Both authors also emphasize the importance of making clear connections to the contributions of one’s culture to the content of school in order to support students in feeling affirmed and valued in their literacy learning. This emphasis on literacy and identity reminds me of Gholdy Muhammad’s research on historically responsive literacy as well as Django Paris and Samy Alim’s theory of culturally sustaining pedagogy. It made me question the extent to which I make explicit how the historical contributions of Black and Latinx and other scholars from marginalized communities contribute to English Language Arts.

The third article I read was “Teaching Composing to Students with Learning Disabilities,” which describes evidence-based studies for supporting students with learning disabilities to develop their literacy skills (Graham, Olinghouse, & Harris, 2009). The authors emphasize that explicit teaching on skills like writing, organization, and reading help all students to acquire literacy, but especially those who having learning disabilities. The authors promote research based on “scientific evidence” over research “based on experience and authority” which often presents strategies supported by select student work samples that fail to address the neurodiversity of students on their classroom. Yet I wish they had also discussed more how even “scientific evidence” based research studies also hold bias. As I was reading, I was thinking that teachers need to build strong relationships with their students before we can use any of these evidence based practices to support them. I wonder what work is already being done to make sure that quantitative, “scientific” research better accounts for qualitative factors like relationships between students and teachers and students’ feelings of value and self-efficacy.