transforming english language learners' work readiness ...€¦ · program content has been a...

Vol. 25 No. 2 ADULT LEARNING

Refereed Articles

Transforming English Language Learners' WorkReadiness: Case Studies in Explicit, Work-SpecificVocabulary Instruction

Diana L. Madrigal-Hopes, M B E \ Edna Viiiavicencio, MEd\ Martha M. Foote, EdD\ and ChrisGreen, ^

Abstract: This qualitative study examined the impactof a six-step framework for work-specific vocabularyinstruction in adult English language learners (ELLs).Guided by research in English as a second language(ESL) methodology and the transactional theory,the researchers sought to unveilhow these processes supportedthe acquisition and applicationof work-specific vocabularyin three adult ELLs. Data werecollected in two levels, beforeand after training. The first dataanalysis identified and usedtwo themes to develop trainingmodules' curriculum:(a) policies and proceduresrelated to state and federalregulations and (b) customerservice. After participantscompleted training, the second data analysisidentified two additional themes transcending acrossthe three cases: (a) employees' views in Englishlanguage proficiency skills and (b) growth in writingwithin their own continuum of English languagedevelopment. Data revealed how an explicit, work-

ADULT ESL

EDUCATION FIRST

ORIGINATED AS PART OF

THE SETTLEMENT HOUSE

MOVEMENT MADE

FAMOUS BY THE H u L L

HOUSE IN CHICAGO . . .

specific vocabulary instruction approach has thepotential to increase ELLs' varying levels of Englishlanguage proficiency, acquisition, and applicationof work-specific vocabulary, and, simultaneously,confidence in how they view and use English in the

workplace.

Keywords: adult ELLs, adultESL, work-specific vocabularyinstruction, work readiness,curriculum development

IN I

cross the nation, adultEnglish language learnersELLs) represent one of the

fastest growing segments of theworkforce population by a widemargin (Green, 2007). Research

estimates first and second generation immigrants willaccount for all labor force growth in the United Statesbetween 2010 and 2030 (Batalova & Fix, 2010; Lowell,Gelatt, & Batalova, 2006). In examining future workforcetrends, Hispanic, limited English proficient workers willbe the fastest growing segment of the workforce (Green,

D0i:10.1177/1045159514522432. From ^Texas A&M University-Commerce. Address correspondence to: Diana L. Madrigai-Hopes, MBE, TexasA&M University-Commerce, P.O. Box 3011, Commerce, TX 75429-3011, USA; email: [email protected] reprints and permissions queries, please visit SAGE's Web site at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav.Copyright © 2014 The Author(s)

47

ADULT LEARNING May 2014

2007). In addition, Spanish-speaking immigrantsdemonstrate lower levels of literacy in Fnglish and aremore likely to have experienced intermpted formalschooling making it more difficult to acquire literacyskills in their native or second language (Wrigley, Chen,White, & Soroui, 2009). Because such factors can impactthe rate of literacy skills development, the need forintensive adult literacy programs extending far beyondsocial, basic oral language skills is imperative.

Review of the Literature

According to Ullman (2010), adult English as asecond language (FSL) education first originated "aspart of the settlement house movement made famousby the Hull House in Chicago . . . in 1889" (p. 4). Oneof its major goals was to serve the needs of immigrantsthrough adult education classes, which includedEnglish language learning classes. By the early 1900s,Ullman (2010) further noted explicit instruction foradult ESL immigrants grew extensively. However,because adult English language teachers primarily usedchildren's literature to teach, many people felt insultedand dropped out of programs.

Current research has documented majortransformations and improvements in adult ESLprograms. However, the limited availability ofprograms, coupled with stretched personal schedules,work, family, and lack of child care support, have leftmany limited English-speaking adults without access tothese programs (Wrigley et al., 2009). In fact, Batalovaand Fix (2010) found "62% of immigrant adults withlow oral English proficiency had never taken an ESLclass" (p. 529). In addition to limited access andpersonal factors, Wrigley et al. (2009) found adult ESLprogram content has been a major factor for lack ofparticipation. They posited most individuals feel theyalready have enough social skills to cope within theirenvironments, but desire training focused on academicsor work-speciflc language skills. To this end, variousmodels and approaches in adult ESL education haveemerged in past decades, for example, workplace ESL.According to Isserlis (1991), this model focuses ondeveloping the speciflc language and literacy skillsessential for a specific job function within theworkplace.

Nonetheless, Chisman (2009) contended most adultbasic education programs provide basic literacy and

ESL skills to function in life and argued adult literacyand/or ESL skill development programs must alsoaddress work readiness skills to prepare a workforcefor the global 21st century economy. He further notedimproving only K-12 education would not solve theproblem because "the number of adults in theworkforce is far greater than the number of school-agechildren" (p. 6). The fallacy is that all adult ELLs areimmigrants; the fact is that a surprising number are U.S.born ELLs who continue to struggle with basic Englishliteracy well into their adult lives (Wrigley et al., 2009).Data from the Pew Research Center (2009) revealedU.S. born Hispanics, ages l6 to 25, reported their poorEnglish skills were a major factor for cutting theireducation short. These daunting findings clearly depictthe challenges that lie ahead in any educationalprogrammatic effort for adult English learners.Therefore, it is imperative that any new programmaticeffort to improve adult education programs demandrobust, targeted approaches.

Theoretical Framework

Highly effective teaching should align to educationalpractices based on pedagogical theories that take intoaccount the connections between everyday language,culture, and an individual's speciñc backgroundexperiences (Tracey & Morrow, 2006). The pedagogicalapproach used as this study's intervention relies heavilyon theories of Louise Rosenblatt (1978/1994) whoposited an individual's unique understanding of themeaning of a word or text was actually a transactionof his or her own background, mixing with theparticular text read within the situation's context.Rather than a simple interaction between the readerand text with each reader gaining the exact samemeaning, Rosenblatt's transactional theory informed ourbelief that each reader utilizes his or her own priorexperiences and knowledge. The text being decodedand context of the immediate situation to createmeaning are the result of a transaction of all of theseelements. The process of reading is, then, one ofcreating an individual schema, application, personalefferent, and aesthetic response to a particular text. Thetransactional theory used to support the language andliteracy learning of the participants in this study wasdesigned with the idea that each English Learner has atransaction with the text that could be uncovered and

48


supported through further reflections, explanations,and interactions with the instructor and peers.

Based on vocabulary development research,Marzano (2004) found a strong relationship betweenvocabulary and background knowledge andconsequently posited a direct, explicit process forteaching and building background of specific terms iscritical to acquisition and application. Other studies onvocabulary development suggest learners must beprovided with meaningful opportunities to (a) interactwith the new vocabulary word, (b) practice the word inmultiple contexts, (c) analyze word parts andmeaning(s), and (d) internalize the words within theirmultiple contexts and relevant application (Beck,McKeown, & Kucan, 2002; Larrotta, 2011; Marzano,2004; Nisbet, 2010). The researchers also found directvocabulary instruction works and contended explicitvocabulary instruction does not rely on definitions(Beck et al., 2002; Marzano, 2004). For these reasons,the research team used Marzano's (2004) six-stepframework to directly teach work-specific vocabulary.

Six-Step, Work-Specific Vocabulary TrainingModules

As most of the research on adult ESL has focused onbasic language and general literacy skills and only afew studies have focused on explicit, work-specificvocabulary instruction, the purpose of this study was toexamine the impact of a six-step framework for work-specific vocabulary instruction in adult ELLs. Theresearchers planned, designed, and developedcontextualized curriculum focused on work-specificvocabulary instruction. The following research questionguided the study: How does the use of explicit, work-specific vocabulary instruction in English impact theknowledge and application of these terms in adult ELLemployees?

Content for this intense, 5-week, work-specificvocabulary training was drawn from the context of theorganization's daily operations. Work-specificvocabulary was retrieved from interviews, observations,and document artifacts. The six-step process included,

• Step 1: The teacher provides a description,explanation, or example of the new term.

• Step 2: Students restate the explanation of the newterm in their own words.

• Step 3: Students create nonlinguistic representationof the terms.

• Step 4: Students periodically do activities that helpthem add to their knowledge of vocabulary terms.

• Step 5: Periodically, students are asked to discuss theterms with one another.

• Step 6: Periodically, students are involved in gamesthat allow them to play with the terms.

The first part of the training module included anintensive receptive (listening) and expressive(speaking) component designed to increase Englishproficiency, knowledge, and comprehension of thetarget vocabulary. The second part of the trainingmodule integrated the four language skills—listening,reading speaking, and writing—to increase linguisticand cognitive development of the vocabulary. Theinstructional procedures and examples for how theresearchers used the six-step vocabulary frameworkfollow.

During the first two steps, the researchers reviewedand explained the target words and affordedparticipants opportunities to discuss, describe, andexplain them in their own words within the context oftheir operational duties. As all participants were fromSpanish-speaking backgrounds, it was important tohave these resources in their native language.Therefore, one of the researchers, fluent in English andSpanish, used the collected digital pictures to developpicture-word glossaries in English and Spanish (seeFigure 1). Studies suggest using ELLs' native languageto build background knowledge about the targetedconcept and vocabulary is essential to increasingunderstanding and comprehension (Huerta-Macias &Kephart, 2009; Ovando, Combs, & Collier, 2006). As thegoal was to develop participants' listening andspeaking skills of the targeted terms, and, importantly,increase the time they spent on these activities, ratherthan have participants create a nonlinguisticrepresentation as directed in Step 3, the researchersprovided digital photos of key operational duties.These photos were used as the context for the practiceand application of the terms.

Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2008) suggested ELLsbenefit from activities that scaffold English languagedevelopment, such as providing substantial verbalsupport, modeling the application of terms, and having

49


fence post/poste de la cerca fence üebris/desechos (escombros) de una cérea

Figure 1. An excerpt from the study's bilingual glossary.

participants restate the terms. In this study, theresearchers provided participants with sentence startersto facilitate the application of the terms (see Figure 2).For example, one of the target terms was reflectors;therefore, the sentence starter provided was / inspectedthe . . . for those with intermediate English languageproficiency and / inspected the ... hefore . . . for moreadvanced ELLs. Unquestionably, the sentence starterswere essential for the activities conducted in Step 4. Ineffect, to further extend participants' level ofknowledge and application of the terms, theresearchers also highlighted high-frequency words andfull or partial cognates, which are often "useful inpromoting comprehension with students whose nativelanguage has a Latin base" (Echevarría et al, 2008,p. 81).

Furthermore, for Steps 5 and 6, the researchersimplemented small group and age-appropriatehands-on activities. For one of the activities, theresearchers wrote the practiced sentence starters withtargeted vocabulary on sentence strips and created aninteractive driver and customer dialogue in whichparticipants took turns playing each role. These typesof activities provided participants with severalopportunities to further practice the application of thework-specific terms. Such small group interactions were

essential to the researchers because they allowed fornumerous opportunities to observe and documentparticipants' level of comprehension of the targetedvocabulary.

Methodology

The case study structure included identifying themultiple sources of data available on employeeoperational duties and vocabulary and creating a thickdescription of each to analyze through a recursiveprocess of emergent themes related to each employee'sway of coming to know. This case saidy was boundedby place, specifically the participants' workplace, andtime, specifically the development and delivery of thevocabulary training modules (Creswell, 2007). Inaddition, consistent with a collective case studyapproach, the researchers sought to make visible eachparticipant's perspectives (Creswell, 2007) on theimpact of the six-step, work-specific vocabularytraining had on each participant's knowledge, languagedevelopment, and feelings of success at their job. Theresearchers focused each case within the context of thelearning environment and, simultaneously, drewgeneralizations among the three case studies.

Setting and ParticipantsThis study took place at a North Texas waste

collection company that had a significant number ofrecently employed limited English proficient workers.The facility manager had recently reported increasedtraffic violations and customer complaints anddecreased proper truck inspection procedures. Hestated this was a result of the workers' limited ability toread, write, communicate, and understand English.

Participants included a purposeful sample of ELLwaste collection drivers and their supervisor. Thesupervisor identified the waste collection drivers aslimited in English proficiency and, althoughhomogeneous in their job title as drivers, they differedin age, work experiences, and levels of Englishlanguage proficiency among other factors. The initialsample of ELL participants included seven wastecollection drivers; however, only four participantsreturned to the second part of training module one andonly three participants returned the second week andcompleted training. Pseudonyms were used to protectthe participants' identities.

50


Brake Adjustments

Dialogue Activity Sentence Starter

How did you check your brakes?

How did you know the brakes were not working?

What else did you check?

How did you know there were no other problems?

"i moved...."

"I checked...."

"I also checked..."

"I didn't feel...."

Light Devices and Reflectors

Dialogue Activity Sentence Starter

How did you check your light devices and refiectors?

What eise did you inspect?

Why did you inspect the light devices and reflectors?

What eise did you do?

"iwaiked...."

"i inspected the...."

"I wanted to...."

"I cleaned...and looked...."

Figure 2. Sample of dialogue activities with sentence starters.

Data Collection and AnalysisData collection included direct interview and

observations, pre- and post-assessment data, ademographic survey, and writing artifacts. First, theresearchers interviewed the supervisor to developcontextualized, instructional material and to ensurevocabulary was relevant to participant's daily work

experiences. An additional meeting was scheduled toobserve drivers performing their duties; however, dueto liability issues, the researchers were not permitted toride along with one of the drivers. Instead, thesupervisor volunteered to drive the researchers arounda typical residential waste collection route. Afterlocating one of the drivers, the researchers used a

51


digital camera to take photos of the driver performinghis daily operations. The supervisor explained the keyoperations and vocabulary terms drivers need to knowand understand to perform daily operations.

Next, data were collected before, during, and afterall vocabulary instruction training sessions. Formal,pre- and post-assessment data were collected usingthree instruments: the Comprehensive Adult StudentAssessment Systems (CASAS; 2008), CASAS Readingand Writing Screening (2005) in English, and CASASLife and Work Listening (2009). Informal assessmentdata were collected from writing artifacts, in the formof portfolios, used during the sessions as a pedagogicaltool for assessing work-specific vocabulary writing.Finally, demographic data and employees' backgroundexperiences were collected using a survey.

To analyze the data collected during the directinterview and observations, the researchers began withthe initial preparation and organization of the datacollected from the meetings with the supervisor.According to Creswell (2007), this practice is necessaryfor reducing data "into themes through a process ofcoding and condensing the codes" (p. 148). UsingCorbin and Strauss's (2008) detailed analysisprocedures, the researchers began with open coding,the process by which concepts are identifled anddeveloped by labeling and grouping similar findings orevents into categories. After identifying themes, theresearchers developed the training modules'curriculum.

For the data collected from the pre- and post-assessments, demographic survey, and writing artifacts,the researchers used a holistic analysis approach(Creswell, 2007). In holistic multi-case analysis, it isnecessary to first conduct a within-case analysis,providing a detailed description of each case, followedby a cross-case analysis, in which common themestranscend across the cases are identified. Specifically,for the formal, pre- and post-assessment instruments,ESL skill-level descriptors in the CASAS AppraisalAssessment range from Level A, Beginning Literacy/Pre-Beginning ESL to Level E, Proflcient Skills. For thewriting artifacts or portfolios, the researchers scoredeach writing piece using the content-/vocabulary-leveldescriptors in Mansoor and Grant's (2002) research-based Writing Rubric to Assess ESL StudentPerformance. The aibric's ratings ranged from 0,

representing no writing, to 6, referring to usingsubstantive amount of information.

Findings and Discussion

Based on data analysis of the direct interview andobservations, the researchers identified and used twothemes to develop the training modules' curriculum.The first theme was policies and procedures related tostate and federal regulations (e.g., reporting daily basictruck inspections, truck malfunctions, and minoraccidents to authority flgures or immediatesupervisors). The second theme was customer service(e.g., providing information about minor incidents toproperty, answering basic scheduling questions,providing information for how to contact office, etc.).

In addition, based on the holistic analysis of thepre- and post-assessments, demographic survey, andwriting artifacts across the three case studies, twoadditional themes were identified. The themes included(a) employees' views in English language proflciencyskills and (b) growth in writing within their owncontinuum of English language development. Boththemes are discussed in more detail.

Employees' Views in EnglishLanguage Proficiency Skills

All three participants agreed attaining Englishproficiency is very important, citing three majorreasons: (a) to communicate with native Englishspeakers, (b) to advance their careers, and (c) to helptheir children with schoolwork. Two participants hadchildren participating in bilingual education programsat their respective schools.

The participant's previous experiences in adult ESLprograms varied widely. Specifically, one participanthad never attended an ESL program. Although theother two participants had previously participated inadult ESL programs, they viewed their Englishproficiency as very limited. Eor example, Carlos statedhe can "somewhat understand and speak English";however, results of the reading and listening appraisalsrevealed he is at an Advanced level of English languageproficiency in both listening and reading. According tothe CASAS Appraisal Manual (2008), individuals whoscored at this level can read and interpret simplifiedand non-simplified materials, charts, graphs, and followmulti-step diagrams. Carlos' score was 230, within the

52


range of 220 to 235 for this level, indicating he is at thehigher end and only a few points away from reachingAdult Secondary and Proficient Skills Levels. Yet, hisconfidence in English was low, likely due, in part, tothe fact he never attended an ESL education programnor was formally assessed in his English languageproficiency skills.

Similar to Carlos' views in English proficiency,Miguel saw himself as a "very limited English speaker";however, results from the reading and listeningappraisals also placed him at the Advanced level inreading. Fernando, on other hand, scored at theBeginning level of English language proficiency.Perhaps due to his very limited ability to speak andunderstand English, Eernando viewed the work-specifictraining with skepticism. Nonetheless, after a fewweeks of training, he shared his personal views andfeelings about the training:

Cuando primero escuché sobre esteentrenamiento pensé entre m i . . . no pienso quevoy a poder aprender mucho en solo unascuantas semanas... tenia mis sospechas. . . perodespués pensé bueno ¿por qué no intentarlo? Nopierdo nada con atender. ¡Pero la semana pasadacuando repasamos las palabras de alta frecuenciame sorprendió el saber que estas palabras estánpor todas partes! Me sentí muy bien cuando vivarias de estas palabras y sabia lo quesignificaban (August, 2012). [When I first heardabout this training, I thought to myself... I don'tthink I will be able to learn too much in a fewweeks . . . I was skeptical about i t . . . but then Ithought, why not try it? What do I have to lose?But last week, when we reviewed the highfrequency words, I was so surprised to see howall of these words are everywhere! I felt goodwhen I would see one of these words and I knewwhat it meant.]

Growth in Writing Within Their OwnContinuum of English Language Development

Participants' growth in the target language wasmostly observed during the practice dialogues and inthe writing artifacts. For instance, Carlos not onlyappropriately used work-specific vocabulary in thesepractice dialogues but also tried making substitutions

for some non-work-speciflc words to make thedialogue sound more personal and authentic to hisstyle.

In addition, the researchers evaluated theparticipants' written artifacts using the writing rubric.Not surprisingly, Carlos showed some growth in termsof length, details, and expanded vocabulary whencompared with the writing sample collected at thebeginning of the training modules. Eor example, in oneof the first writing pieces, Carlos' writing score was a 2because he was only able to address part of the taskand had frequent vocabulary errors, as evidenced in hiswriting excerpt: "I want to make sure the are not tomuch or to litte pressur I look for craks on week. I makesure the lugs are not loos" (July 2012).

Toward the end of the training, after working onvarious activities using the key vocabulary and high-frequency words, Carlos wrote a piece about followingup with a customer. His writing piece received a scoreof 4 because he was able to address the task at somelength and began to vary vocabulary choices, as thefollowing excerpt demonstrates:

You need to call the offise so they can bring youa new trash bin. The number is [XXX-XXXX] andits going to take 3 to 5 working days . . . No Idon't know that. . . went you call they let youknow . . . you welcome and have a good day(August 2012).

Although Carlos' writing sample displays spellingand vocabulary errors, he was able to address thiswriting task at some length despite not using these keyvocabulary words (call the office, working days) on adaily basis, as he does those related to the daily tmckinspections.

In Eernando's case, his initial writing screeningreceived a score of 0 due to his inability to write mostof the sentence in English. The researchers observedhow much Fernando beneflted from the sentencestarters and high-frequency words. For example, afterseveral weeks of participating in the training modules,he composed simple, short sentences in English withmost words written correctly and received a score of 2.In addition, he incorporated some work-speciñcvocabulary associated with the functions of the job,such as "branches need to be tied" and ''company

53


policy": "The tree branchs need to be tid. It is thecompany polks" (August 2012).

As discussed, Fernando was initially skeptical butmade significant progress by the end of the trainingand was enjoying learning work-speciñc vocabulary.He wished the other limited English proficientemployees had completed the training: "Realmente mehubiera gustado que más de nosotros hubieran tomadola aventaja de esta oportunidad." (August, 2012). [Ireally wish more of us would bave taken advantage ofthis opportunity.]

At the end of the study, Miguel's biggestimprovement was in the writing domain as evidencedby the collected written texts. In one of his initialwriting pieces, Miguel scored a 3 because he was ableto address part of the task with some substance butwith limited vocabulary choice. I check for the pressure.I also check for cracks. I observe not have nail or rust(July 2012).

By third week, Miguel was able to address thewriting task at some length by providing details andshowing some control of simple present and pasttenses. Even though he still struggled with high-frequency words and vocabulary errors, he wasbeginning to make use of simple past tense words suchas looked znd found:

I receive the report for a driver. The truck did notstop becose the pedals are to low. I looked at thebrakes an I found a spring broke, also the shoeswere broke. Also the seals are damaged to. In the2nd report, I found the two batteries are damagedand the v-belt to loose, need to be tight (August,2012).

In summary, although Carlos and Miguel's Englishlevels remained Advanced, data revealed participationin the training sharpened their receptive andproductive language skills. Perhaps more importantly,their views of their ability to use English may haveshifted their confldence levels, resulting in feeling moreself-assured in the way they speak, read, and writeEnglish in the workplace.

Challenges and Implications

Two of the most signiflcant challenges theresearchers faced in this study were (a) retention of

participants and (b) learners' varying levels of Englishlanguage proficiency. Work schedule and personalreasons (e.g., previously scheduled vacations, visits ofrelatives from out of town, family illness) contributedto the reduction of the original sample size. Toovercome these challenges, adjustments were made tothe schedule. For example, the weekday session waseliminated and Saturday sessions increased by iy2 hr tototal the originally planned 171/2 instructional hours.

The varying levels of English proficiency among theparticipants posed a challenge as well. The trainingmodules were developed with built-in differentiation.However, the low turnout affected how differentiationwas delivered. To address specific language skills,grouping was mostly done in pairs. Often, one of theresearchers had to be a part of the group to proceedwith the practice dialogues. Although the researcherswere successful in delivering the ESL work-specificvocabulary curriculum and adjusting the schedule tomeet the needs of the participants, these flndingssuggest greater efforts still need to be made to increaseparticipant retention.

There is much evidence that the acquisition ofvocabulary, particularly advanced levels of academicvocabulary, may take ELLs years to develop (Karshen &Terrell, 2000; Marzano, 2004). Nonetheless, thesestudies also suggest effective and comprehensiblevocabulary instruction has the potential to increaseELLs' vocabulary development. Importantly, however,teachers must know how to use linguisticallydifferentiated strategies to reach students' varying levelsof English language proficiency. For example, studentsat the Beginning level of English language proficiencymay beneflt from activities on recognizing high-frequency words while students at the Advanced levelmay beneflt from activities focused on generating morecomplex sentences using a combination of high-frequency words and targeted specific terms.

In effect, Rosenblatt's (1978/1994) work suggestedit is important that teachers use a variety of activitiesto elicit individualized responses from the learnersand these approaches are intentional and purposeful.For these reasons, any teacher preparation andapproach used for the development of ESL workplacecurricula and training must consider the implicationsof cultural and linguistic factors on teaching andlearning.

54


In conclusion, although participants' Englishlanguage proficiency skills ranged fi"om Beginner toAdvanced levels, the data revealed each participant'slevel of application of work-specific vocabulary grewwithin their own continuum of English languagedevelopment. The case studies showed how an explicit,work-specific vocabulary instruction approach workedin this context. The targeted approach has the potentialto increase adult ELL's acquisition and application ofwork-specific vocabulary, within varying degrees ofEnglish language proficiency and, more importantly,increase the level of confidence in all English languageskills of adult ELL workers.

Conflict of Interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interestwith respect to the authorship and/or publication ofthis article.

FundingThe author(s) received no financial support for theresearch, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ReferencesBatalova, J., & Fix, M. (2010). A profile of limited English

proficient adult immigrants. Peabody Journal of Education,85, 511-534.

Beck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words tolife: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York, NY: Gilford.

Chisman, E (2009). Background paper for One Step Forwardinitiative: Background and supporting evidence for adulteducation for work. Retrieved from http://www.ncee.org/publications/archived-publications/workforce-development-program-publications-2/

Comprehensive Adult Saident Assessment Systems. (2008). Lifeand work reading (Appraisal Assessment). Available fromhttps://www.casas.org/

Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) Lifeand Work Listening. (2009). Available from https://www.casas.org/

Comprehensive Adult Suident Assessment Systems (CASAS)Reading and Writing Screening. (2005). Available fromhttps://www.casas.org/

Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitativeresearch: Techniques and procedures for developinggrounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA; SAGE.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design:Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA: SAGE.

Echevarría, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2008). Making contentcomprehensible for English learners: Tbe SIOP model (3rded.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Green, A. (Ed.). (2007). LEP guide for workforce professionals.Texas Workforce Commission. Available from http://www.texasworkforce.org

Huerta-Macias, A., & Kephart, K. (2009). Reflections of nativelanguage use in adult ESL classrooms. Adult Basic andLiteracy Journal, 3(2), 87-96.

Isserlis, J. (1991). Workplace literacy programs for nonnativeEnglish speakers. Washington, DC: National Clearínghouseon Literacy Education. Retríeved from ERIC database.(ED334874)

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (2000). The natural approach:Language acquisition in the classroom. Second Print.Pearson.

Larrotta, C. (2011). Second language vocabulary learning andteaching: Still a hot iopic. Journal of Adult Education, 40,1-11.

Lowell, B., Gelatt, J., & Batalova, J. (2006). Immigrants andlabor force trends: The future, past, and present (MPI InsightNO. 17). Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

Mansoor, L, & Grant, S. (2002). A writing mbric to assess ESLstudent performance. Adventures in Assessments, 14(1),33-38. Retdeved from http://www.sabes.org/resources/adventures/voll4/voll4.htm

Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building background knowledge foracademic achievement. Alexandría, VA: ASCD.

Nisbet, D. L. (2010). Vocabulary instmction for second languagexfiàexs. Journal of Adult Education, 3íKl), 10-15.

Ovando, C, Combs, M., & Collier, V (2006). Bilingual & ESLclassrooms: Teaching in multicultural contexts (4th ed.).New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Pew Research Center. (2009). Between two worlds: How youngLatinos come of age in America. Available from http://www.pewhispanic.org/

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1994). The transactional theory of readingand writing. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell & H. Singer(Eds.), Theoretical models and processes in reading(4th ed., pp. 1057-1092). Newark, DE: International ReadingAssociation. (Oríginal work published 1978)

Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, M. L. (2006). Lenses on reading:An introduction to theories and models. New York, NY:Guilford.

55


Ullman, C. (2010). The connections among immigration, nationbuilding, and adult education English as a second languageinstruction in the United States. Adult Learning, 21(1-2),4-8.

Wrigley, H. S., Chen, J., White, S., & Soroui, J. (2009).Assessing the literacy skills of adult immigrants and adultEnglish language learners. New Directions for Adults andContinuing Education, 2009(121), 5-24.

Author Biographies

Diana L. Madrigal-Hopes, MBE, is a doctoral candidateat Texas A&M University-Commerce in the Departmentof Curriculum & Instruction. Her research interestsinclude increasing English language learners' equityand access to curriculum and instruction in PK-16settings as well as formal and informal education ofadult ELLs in social, cultural, and linguistic contexts inthe U.S. and abroad. Presently, as a Eulbright Scholar,she is working with the Ministry of Education inGuatemala in the implementation and evaluation oftheir English language (L3) curriculum.

Edna Villavicencio, MEd, has been an ESL teacher inthe elementary grades for the past 20 years. She is also adoctoral candidate in the Curriculum & InstructionDepartment at Texas A&M University-Commerce, Herdissertation topic focuses on Hispanic parental

involvement resulting from participation in adult ESLclasses.

Martha M. Foote, EdD, is a professor and head of thedepartment of curriculum and instruction at TexasA&M University-Commerce. Her work as a departmenthead has included leadership of a 5-year effort, theListo project, funded by the U.S. Office of EnglishLanguage Acquisition, to provide professionaldevelopment to the higher education faculty forworking with pre-service and in-service teachers toteach English Learners. The project included aresearch component studying the faculty professionallearning teams' use of reflective protocols to guidedisciplined discussions. Other research interestsinclude teacher education, mentoring, and learningthrough inquiry-based projects.

Chris Green, PhD, is an associate professor at TexasA&M University-Commerce. She directs the bilingual/ESL teacher education program and is principalinvestigator of the 5-year ¡Profes! grant. She is fluent inSpanish and French, and she has advocated forbilingual education in her roles as bilingual teacher,elementary principal, staff developer, professor, andeducational reformer for over 30 years.

56

Copyright of Adult Learning is the property of American Association for Adult & ContinuingEducation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listservwithout the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,download, or email articles for individual use.

transforming english language learners' work readiness ...€¦ · program content has been a...

Documents