I would also want to continue researching on how to support my Heritage students in their L1 so that it impacts their English learning process. I would love to have access to some research on this topic in order to implement this in my room.

What systems or structures need to be in place to enable teachers to do the work discussed during the session with and for ML’s?

Integration of supports and not just an “ML block.” It would be crucial to be sure that teachers are able to co-plan with fellow colleagues. This would give classroom/content teachers the ability to work closely with an educational partner and for the ML specialist to not feel as a separate entity. Another component would be to find a way to integrate the data being collected within the classroom and how it compares to the student’s language proficiency scores. A final component to consider is that ML support is embedded within a school’s UDL model. 

Which tools would you recommend to colleagues and why?

I am not sure of tools that I would recommend to colleagues.

Systemically, we don't have protocols in place. I need to make a recommendation for her, ML or sped, but I have no idea what happens in High school ML classes. I know my student doesn't want to go.

Question: Where will she make the most progress. In a core level English class or an ML class?

I discovered that because I work 1:1 or with small groups I can see the strengths and skills my ML students have way more easily than what their mainstream teachers have the opportunity to see.

I learned that many of our mainstream teachers are leaning heavily on google translate, and it's going to take some thoughtful finessing to help them become more comfortable with other ways to scaffold, modify and support what's going on in their classes.

I'm newer to ACCESS testing, and for our students who are newcomers this year, I didn't realize that we would not have scores for them until this summer.

I appreciate the encouragement to get to know my MLs non-academic backgrounds. I already made a virtual spinner wheel of random questions, and have used that to help get to know one another in the downtimes we have at the end of class or between activities.

          I am a Chinese teacher. The majority of my Chinese learning students are American students whose first language is English. I have one or two students from Asian countries who are learning Chinese as their third language. I often do some research about my students at the beginning of the semester through a survey, which includes questions such as " Why did you (continue to) choose Chinese?” “ What are your goals in Chinese learning this semester?”, and “What are your hobbies?” Which helps me get to know every student and learn what they know and what they can do. For example, based on the survey and data analysis, I knew that most of my students chose Chinese because they thought it was cool and wanted to speak it. They also like to learn more about Chinese culture. Based on their needs and interests, as well as the ACTFL standards, I begin planning instruction, find interesting Chinese content, and create more opportunities for them to listen and speak Chinese in the classroom.

        To support my students in growing their Chinese and content knowledge, I help them set goals, provide immediate feedback, and individualize their improvement plans based on formative assessments. I think differentiated education for every student is vital in the language-learning process, allowing each student to study at their own pace with assistant of AI technology. I have no specific ideas about how to use AI to differentiate students or to assist teachers and students in language teaching and learning, but I believe we can collaborate with teachers, scholars, students, parents, and administrators to explore more effective methods in the AI era.

Although a parent says the student speaks English, the parent translated everything into the student's heritage language during the intake meeting. In addition, the student did not communicate in English but would engage if attempts were made to speak in the heritage language. Unfortunately the responses were in the heritage language. Google Translate does not have this language, and other AI translators do not work both ways. Also of note, the alphabet and number symbols are the same in English and the heritage language. The student could only identify the names of about 9 letter symbols and does not know any numbers after 9, either by counting out loud or by looking at the symbols.

My priority was to get them comfortable in our relatively large school environment so they could navigate independently and to expose them to peers and oral social language in non-demanding ways. We put them into PE and, after spending time with them and discovering they drew and liked music, we also put them into art and chorus.

Obviously they couldn't do the WIDA Screener at all. They cannot read words.

As the student has relaxed into the environment, they have started speaking a little more in English, but it is still very limited. Mostly through observations and some conversation, I have concluded that they need to have an eye exam, and that poor eyesight may be related to their lack of letter and number symbol knowledge, in addition to lack of access to school. There may be other things impacting their ability to distinguish symbols, but it is too soon to tell. In addition, based on observations in chorus, they should have a hearing exam as well. Observation during PE on the student's skill at shooting a basketball but inability to catch or pass a basketball not only makes me wonder about their eyesight, but about whether they ever played with anyone.

The student is beginning to spontaneously start conversations about weekend activities and their prior life in a combination of some English and a lot of their heritage language. Their skills are at a first semester kindergarten level at best.

I feel fortunate that I have the time to build these relationships with all of my students. This supports their learning as we use prior knowledge to learn new concepts and make connections.

I would like to support one particular student to work with peers in the classroom . She is seeking these connections, but she often asks to work one-on-one out of the classroom.

Even though I know my students current ELD levels (mostly in the Levels 1-2 range), it was interesting to put that information in a chart. This gave me a visual for grouping and scaffolding. Some specific insights are below:

J. has strong listening skills and I can use this as a scaffold to support reading skills. For example, after reading an academic text on a new topic we can have a follow-up conversation to check comprehension and he can gather more information from listening to other students talk about the text. 

Likewise, I can use H.’s stronger reading and writing skills to support the development of her speaking skills. She might benefit from writing her answer first, and then sharing it with the class during follow-up discussion.

I can see the area where they scored a 4 lines up with where I see their strength. There 1 and 2 scores are a big contrast and deficit in a content class like science. Eager to have more knowledge to better support them.

When looking at ACCESS scores, Writing seems to be the most challenging domain for most students, which makes sense as they are being asked to produce English and to use academic language. Speaking can also be a lower score, but I think that this is not always an accurate reflection of students skills as many are shy or self-conscious speaking into their computer or with someone else in the room during testing.

SLIFE ( Students with Limited or Formal Education). So for them - much of the academic content is new to them so I find it extremely important to support them academically with their L1. Moreover, because they usually have limited literacy in reading and writing in L1, I have to consistently embed phonology - phonics and phonemic awareness activities into both the language and content instruction. I try to have a continuum of scaffolds so that students with more academics are still challenged while at the same time, the SLIFE students are not feeling overwhelmed or out of their depth content wise. Both profiles of students need to have consistent practice communicating in English and I try to make sure that every class incorporates the 4 domains of language. Visuals are essential for students at this level as well as L1 supports - visually as well as auditorily.

I think knowing about students outside of the classroom is critical for my instruction as I can use a "non- academic topic" to entice students to participate and practice activities which support language acquisition but aren't always the most exciting things to do. Also, acknowledging the social emotional needs of students especially now with the current climate is critical as it definitely can negatively impact learning.

I have been struggling to understand how to proceed with her academic expectations in math and this information about how she is feeling makes me want to provide opportunities for her to meet grade level expectations, but finding materials that do so with her level of english proficiency has proven difficult as well. I'm not sure if I should be utilizing translated materials or seek instructional materials in her own language. I'm also not sure what to prioritize in terms of math learning and english language learning with math concepts.

• Hello/welcome

• Please

• Bathroom

• Help

• stop

The thought was that the words could be listed in English on one side and then have the other language(s). That way there would be a way for communication between the teacher and students with even the most basic of english skills. 

My other thought on this was that the students might enjoy being able to teach the teacher as well - to teach the teacher some important words or phrases. That interconnection might make the student feel more connected with the teacher and the school, as well as giving them a shot of confidence. 

I have high respect for MLL’s, I am not sure that I could survive in a new environment as beautifully as so many of them do! Their resilience should be recognized and celebrated, and including them in a non-condiscending way is a great start. After all, I feel like it has now been established that speaking louder and slower doesn’t really improve communication. Instead, we should be finding ways to bridge the gap between us and our MLL students. 

To that end, and going back to the original idea, classroom teachers can go beyond basic scaffolding by having their MLL students help them build their own classroom reference page - individualized to the student, the class, etc. To me, the most basic yet necessary form of scaffolding is to learn enough of the language that we could survive walking through a city of that language.

I made my content focus based on science. Although I am not an ML teacher, I applied what I have learned, along with my own assumptions, to create this hypothetical plan. I chose the Quiz, Quiz, Trade peer activity because it is one I’ve seen used regularly in science classes and one I quite enjoy. I also believe it will translate well for MLs. This activity is used as a method of practice when it comes to vocabulary terms and new concepts.

Partners will be grouped at random across all levels and languages to encourage group work and collaboration at creative levels. The intent is to push students forward while building language and understanding. Scaffolds for beginning MLs could include sentence frames and visual vocabulary. Intermediate MLs could use word banks with expanded sentence frames and visual vocabulary. Advanced MLs would have less support and more challenging prompts and sentence frames.

The overall goal is for MLs to use language containing key vocabulary and descriptive words and phrases. This activity will impact MLs by increasing engagement, social skills, and language and vocabulary expansion. The scaffolds that will be most effective are sentence structures, visual vocabulary, and word banks. My overall implied goal is structured peer learning and engagement, leading to confidence in language expansion.

1

The lesson activities consisted of reviewing notes, writing a one-page summary, and taking a test. The ML is a 10th-grade student with Intermediate English Language Proficiency (ELP) levels (e.g., Reading 2.5, Writing 3.2) who is enrolled in a core English class and plans to attend college. Instruction is focused on preparing for college, developing study skills, practicing decoding, and managing time. Scaffolds were specifically planned for Intermediate MLs (Level 3-4).Part Two: Observations

1

The student was highly engaged and persistent, though initially overwhelmed by the task before refocusing.

1

• Use of Scaffolds: The student heavily relied on the teacher reading the information aloud and used the extra time and small setting to their benefit, allowing them to reread or ask for help. They also attempted to decode words on their own and benefited from repeated instruction. The student struggled with vocabulary and reading in general but felt more comfortable having an adult read the test.

  1

• Outcome: Evidence of scaffold success included the student becoming more independent, asking questions, and reading difficult vocabulary multiple times. The student achieved a grade of C, which was deemed an "excellent" outcome.

  1

Part Three: Reflection

• Most Effective Scaffolds: The most beneficial strategies were the teacher reading, reviewing vocabulary, teaching study skills for tests, providing extra time (to alleviate anxiety), and using a small setting (to prevent embarrassment).

  1

• Challenges and Adjustments: The biggest challenge noted was the student's tendency to cram the material at the end. Future adjustments will include encouraging the student to start studying earlier and incorporating more visuals and timelines in the instruction.

• Credit: I completed the form and then asked Gemini to create a summary for me.

• Activity: A modified "Barometer: Take a Stand" activity, adapted into a "would you rather" format, with students writing the questions.

• Class Composition: The class included approximately 20 sophomores, with four MLs: two from China, one from Germany, and one from Brazil. All MLs were part of the dorm program.

• Objectives: The content objective was an icebreaker/get to know you activity, and the language objective was to have all students understand conversational language.

• Design Assumption: The teacher assumed all MLs were at the advanced English proficiency level, allowing them to move around and freely "pick their own group" during the activity.

Implementation Observations

• Participation: The two Chinese MLs tended to speak amongst themselves but could respond in conversational English when prompted. The German and Brazilian MLs interacted more with each other and with the local students.

• Language Needs: All MLs required help with specific vocabulary, especially local and Maine-specific language, such as "Mt. Katahdin" and "shepherds pie," and names of American famous personalities.

• General Interaction: The teacher noted a persistent issue with students using phones (though not for translation) and observed that despite the activity, cliques remained intact as the year progressed.

• Surprise: Students, including MLs, showed familiarity with most music celebrities, and the MLs successfully shared information about their own traditions, with town students listening.

Reflection and Next Steps

• Impact: The activity encouraged more interaction than a typical advisory, but the teacher had to ask follow-up questions to elicit responses.

• Key Insight: The teacher realized an assumption was made about the ML students' language ability and concluded that more research into their English learning background is necessary for future lessons.

• Future Scaffolding: For the next lesson, the teacher plans to split the large group into two or three smaller, curated groups instead of allowing students to self-select, in order to encourage more risk-taking in interacting with different peers.

Note: this summary was written by Gemini AI using completed form.

Use this template to observe a classroom with MLs.

What is the context in which you applied your learning from the session? 

Peer learning activity observed or discussed

• Classroom observation yes

• Coaching conversation

• PLC/Team meeting

• Lesson planning support

• Curriculum review

• Walkthrough

• Other:

• Background Knowledge

  • Image Discussion

  • Home Language Resources

  • Teacher-Developed Text

  • Other   Review of literary terms and imagary and used paint color chips

                 Academic Language Instruction

Word/phrase level instruction 

• Teach: __________

• Practice: to create their own imagery by using the color to describe their feelings

• Support independent Word Learning:

• Sentence-Level instruction

  • Because, But, So

  • Sentence Kernels 

  • Other:

• Discourse-level instruction

  • Text Sequencing

  • Analyze Mentor Texts 

  • Other: use of a group share to hear other students responses and unique vocabulary

Noticing Impact of Instructional Practices  for MLs

1. What instructional practices scaffolds did you notice (e.g., building background knowledge, modeling, academic language supports)? What did the teacher do?

The teacher reviewed previously learned academic vocab (what is imagery?) and how it is used in literature.) Then the students were given a colored paint chip and were asked to describe their mood based on the color they received.  The students were able to talk independently at their table with their peers, and then participated in a group discussion.

2. How did MLs respond to these instructional practices? Consider participation, use of language, and engagement with the task. Most of the students were very engaged.  This activity used tangible materials that they could hold in their hands.  The class is high energy, so teacher used that to her benefit, getting appropriate responses. The students could participate at their own level of vocabulary while being exposed to their peers' vocabulary which might be more expansive.

3. What language were MLs using (words, phrases, or sentences)? How did instructional practices scaffolds support this? The language used was oral sentences. The teacher modeled. This was a low stakes task, not an assessment.  It was fun (what color did you get?) and gave the students practice on creating imagery

Scaffolding for MLs  

1. What instructional practices supported MLs’ use of academic language (e.g., modeling, sentence frames, guided practice)? The teacher modeled and the students were able to discuss with the peers before giving a group  response

2. What instructional practices scaffolds supported MLs’ understanding of and access to content?  The students were able to discuss with their peers.  It was a simple assignment  which required creativity as opposed to learning content

3. Which instructional practices scaffolds seemed most impactful for MLs? What evidence supports this?

The opportunity to  discuss with their peers.  There was a high level of engagement 

Reflection and Leadership Moves

1. What patterns are you noticing about instructional practices scaffolds in your context? 

A.  keep the activities and directions simple.  

B. Provide opportunities for different levels of abilities/engagement  

 C. Provide opportunities for peer engagement

2. What might be a leadership or coaching move you would take to strengthen effective use of instructional practices scaffolds for MLs? I work on the high school level, and some of the content is very teacher driven. I would encourage more opportunities for students to discuss their learning in various ways: pairs small groups and classroom discussions.

3. One key insight I am taking into my next discussion or professional learning session about instructional practices scaffolds for MLs is…. Scaffolding for ML students helps all students and peer interactions create safe environments for practice.