• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Webcast2011
 

Webcast2011

on

  • 323 views

These are the slides for my webcast on December 2, 2011.

These are the slides for my webcast on December 2, 2011.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
323
Views on SlideShare
323
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • A complete glossary of acronyms and definitions for language learners, diverse learners, and special education may be found as a free download on my website www.crosscultured.com
  • Culture is what people know, what they do, and what they make and use. Culture shapes the way we think (cognition), the way we interact (behavior), the way we communicate (language), and the way we transmit knowledge to the next generation (education). Everything we do is influenced by our culture. Culture pervades our ways of thinking, behaving, and believing. How we spend our time, how we teach and treat, how we test and measure, and what we do for fun are all affected by culture.Culture is always both (1) explicit – that which people can describe, such as foods, festivals, dress and (2) implicit - that which people know and do unconsciously and would have trouble describing.All cultural groups teach their children; however, how and what is taught (and why) varies considerably among cultures.
  • Yes or No?NO!
  • These questions will be covered in our presentation, however briefly. I have an online newsletter (free) and a page on our www.crosscultured.com website where I answer all questions submitted in an Ask Dr. Collier column. You may also write individually to me for answers or resources or links to materials.
  • How can IEP teachers support them? What we know is that most of the instructors in adult level IEP programs have little knowledge of learning disabilities, and even when they know they don't know, don't know what guidance or help is available. Most of what we have seen has been with what seemed to be dyslexia, and hearing and speech disorders.  The speech communication and disorders program at WWU has been very helpful and supportive.Most training is for k-12 teachers, we need more for teachers of adult IEP students trying to learn more about how to help the students.Even when I recognize the student has LD, I have difficulty getting DSS to assist him.Faculty in core courses are less accommodating.Many IEP students don’t know or won’t tell you they have an LD problem. Many feel uncomfortable telling faculty that they need accommodations.
  • True
  • True
  • In Spanish it means "to be in the middle."  Actually estar is a Spanish word, but Nepantla is a Nahuatal word. Arturo Morales
  • Pragmatics:The rules governing social interactions (e.g. turn taking, maintaining topic of conversation).Difference: Social responses to language are based on cultural background (e.g., comfort level in asking or responding to questions) Pauses between turns or overlaps in conversation are similar to those of peers with the same linguistic and cultural background.Disability: Social use of language or lack thereof is inappropriate (e.g., topic of lesson is rocks and the student continues to discuss events that occurred at home without saying how they relate to rocks).  Syntax:The rules governing the order, grammar, and form of phrases or sentences Difference: Grammatical errors due to native language influences (e.g., student may omit initial verb in a question—You like cake? (omission of Do)). Word order in L1 may differ from that of English (e.g., in Arabic sentences are ordered verb-subject-object while Urdu sentences are ordered subject-object-verb).Disability: Grammatical structures continue to be inappropriate in both languages even after extensive instruction (e.g., student cannot produce the past tense in either Spanish or English indicating difficulty with grammatical tenses). Semantics:The rules pertaining to both the underlying and the surface meaning of phrases and sentencesDifference: A student whose native language is Korean may have difficulty using pronouns, as they do notexist in his/her native language. A student may use words from L1 in productions in L2 because of his inability or unfamiliarity of the vocabulary in L2 (e.g., “The car is muyrapido.” In this case, the student knows the concept as well as the needed structure but cannot remember the vocabulary).Disability: Student is demonstrating limited phrasing and vocabulary in both languages (e.g., his/her sentences in both languages demonstrate limited or no use of adjectives and adverbs and both languages are marked by a short length of utterance). Morphology:The rules concerning the construction of words from meaningful unitsDifference: Native speakers of Russian may not use articles as they do no exist in that language. A student whose native language is Spanish may omit the possessive (‘s’) when producing an utterance in English (e.g., “Joe crayon broke” or he will say “the crayon of Joe broke,” applying a structure that is influence by the rules of his/her L1. He/she still demonstrates understanding of the morphologic structure for possession but is demonstrating errors in structure that are directly influenced by his/her L1.)Disability: Student’s productions in both languages demonstrate a lack of the possessive form indicating that he/she has not acquired this morphologic structure by the appropriate age. Again, both languages may be marked by a short length of utterance 
  • 2) This advice, although popular, is incorrect for several reasons. As discussed above, students will best acquire a second language if their first language is well-established. Second, asking parents who may not be able to provide an adequate language model in English to restrict the use of their more proficient language is absurd. Parents will neither be able to stimulate their child’s language development nor will they be able to communicate easily for social purposes with their child. Wong Fillmore (1991b, p. 343) makes the following poignant observation:When parents are unable to talk to their children, they cannot easily convey to them their values, beliefs, understandings, or wisdom about how to cope with their experiences. They cannot teach them about the meaning of work, or about personal responsibility, or what it means to be a moral or ethical person in a world with too many choices and too few guideposts to follow. What is lost are the bits of advice, the consejos parents should be able to offer children in their everyday interactions with them. Talk is a crucial link between parents and children: It is how parents impart their cultures to their children and enable them to become the kind of men and women they want them to be. When parents lose the means for socializing and influencing their children, rifts develop and families lose the intimacy that comes from shared beliefs and understandings.
  • 1) The reality is that many CLD with disabilities must learn a second language. If a child with disabilities speaks a home language other than English, she must acquire a second language to participate in the school environment. Although research does suggest that some children may acquire a second language more slowly, especially if they exhibited language difficulties in their native language (Kessler, 1984), this should not dissuade educators from assisting their students’ second language acquisition as much as possible. Therefore, the real question becomes, should the language of instruction for CLD students with disabilities be the student’s first or second language. Studies suggest that, just as for students without disabilities, a second language is best acquired from a firm and well-developed first language foundation (Perozzi, 1985; Perozzi & Sanchez, 1992). This research suggests that grammatical forms are most quickly and accurately acquired in English when they have first been taught in the student’s native language. This supports a bilingual approach to special education with CLD students. 2)Educators may mistakenly identify students undergoing a “silent period” as demonstrating a lack of ability to communicate. Remember what a child has to know to be able to say even one word in his first language. Even those children who demonstrate little expressive language in the school environment bring with them a wealth of information about their native language.
  • 3) Much research in language acquisition is relevant to this topic, including: Cummins’ additive Bilingualism enrichment principle, and Research on the cognitive benefits of Bilingualism.This research clearly suggests that Bilingualism is not a burden for students, and can, in fact, be a strength. Cummins’ additive bilingualism enrichment principle and the research on the cognitive benefits of bilingualism clearly suggest that bilingualism is not a burden for students. In fact, in many parts of the world, it is a common part of daily life. When fluently bilingual parents are encouraged to raise their children monolingually, as in the case of a 1995 child custody case in which Texas State District Judge, Samuel C. Kaiser equated raising the child of a bilingual mother in a Spanish-speaking home as tantamount to child abuse, beliefs about bilingualism as a cognitive deficit are reinforced. Regardless of the cognitive benefits, bilingualism is of social benefit in our global village and can only have positive outcomes when students leave school and seek employment.
  • Excerpt from the book “Seven Steps for Separating Difference and Disability” 2010, Corwin Press
  • Sped referral is not justified 1. Learning and/or behavior problems are attributable to culture shock or language transition issues, such as silence, unresponsiveness, heightened anxiety, code switching, response fatigue, confusion in locus of control, etc.2. Below normal rate of acculturation when documentation that this delay is related to inadequate or inappropriate instruction or intervention.3. Leveling out or below normal rate of language acquisition when documentation that this sustained language ‘ceiling’ is related to inadequate or inappropriate levels of language instruction (e.g. less than 50 minutes a day in sheltered English or no content support in the primary language).4. Social responses to language are based on cultural background (e.g., comfort level in asking or responding to questions)5. Pauses between turns or overlaps in conversation are similar to those of peers with the same linguistic and cultural background.6. Grammatical errors due to native language influences (e.g., student may omit initial verb in a question—You like cake? (omission of Do)).7. Word order in L1 may differ from that of English (e.g., in Arabic, sentences are ordered verb-subject-object while Urdu sentences are ordered subject-object-verb).8. A student whose native language is Korean may have difficulty using pronouns, as they do not exist in her native language. A student may use words from L1 in productions in L2 because of his inability or unfamiliarity of the vocabulary in L2 (e.g., “The car is muyrapido.” In this case, the student knows the concept as well as the needed structure but cannot remember the vocabulary).9. Native speakers of Russian may not use articles as they do not exist in that language. A student whose native language is Spanish may omit the possessive (‘s’) when producing an utterance in English (e.g., “Joe crayon broke” or She will say “the crayon of Joe broke,” applying a structure that is influenced by the rules of her L1. She still demonstrates understanding of the morphologic structure for possession but is demonstrating errors in structure that are directly influenced by her L1.)10. Student’s response to specific structured interventions addressing his presenting problem is documented to be within 50% or closer to that of his ELL/CLD peers within individualized instructional intervention.11. Student’s response to specific structured interventions addressing her presenting problem is documented to be sustainable with continuing differentiated learning support with the instruction and instructional intervention program.12. Others as documented across at least 6 weeks of intensive instructional intervention when having reliable documentation that culture shock or language transition is the determining factor for the learning and behavior problems.Sped referral is justified 1. Poor communicative proficiency in the home as compared to siblings and age peers in bilingual environments, especially when this lack is noticed by the parents.2. English language development that appears to be significantly different than that of peers who are also learning English as a additional language.3. Documentation that student’s acquisition of English is within normal range for his peer group, age, culture/language population, length of time in ESL, etc. but there are specific learning and/or behavior problems unrelated to culture shock or language transition.4. Specific sensory, neurological, organic, motor, or other conditions that impact learning and behavior when having reliable documentation that culture shock or language transition contributes but is not the determining factor for the learning and behavior problems.5. Social use of language or lack thereof continues to be inappropriate (e.g., topic of lesson is rocks and the student continues to discuss events that occurred at home without saying how they relate to rocks).6. Grammatical structures continue to be inappropriate in both languages even after extensive instruction (e.g., student cannot produce the past tense in either Spanish or English indicating difficulty with grammatical tenses).7. Student is demonstrating limited phrasing and vocabulary in both languages (e.g., her sentences in both languages demonstrate limited or no use of adjectives and adverbs and both languages are marked by a short length of utterance).8. Student’s productions in both languages demonstrate a lack of the possessive form indicating that she has not acquired this morphologic structure by the appropriate age. Again, both languages may be marked by a short length of utterance9. Student’s response to specific structured interventions addressing his presenting problem is documented to be more than 40% below ELL/CLD peers within individualized instructional intervention.10. Student’s response to specific structured interventions addressing her presenting problem is documented to be unsustainable without substantial individualized specially designed instruction.11. Others as documented across at least 6 to 8 weeks of intensive instructional intervention when having reliable documentation that culture shock or language transition contributes but is not the determining factor for the learning and behavior problems.  

Webcast2011 Webcast2011 Presentation Transcript