Stress and Coping of English Learners

A Volume in Research on Stress and Coping in Education

Series Editors

Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Washington State University

Advances in Cultural Psychology: Constructing Human Development

Jaan Valsiner, Editor

Stress and Coping of English Learners (2018)

edited by Teresa Rishel and Paul Chamness Miller

Mindfulness for Educational Practice: A Path to Resilience for Challenging Work (2015)

edited by Gordon S. Gates

International Perspectives on Teacher Stress (2012)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Personality, Stress, and Coping: Implications for Education (2011)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Toward a Broader Understanding of Stress and Coping: Mixed Methods Approaches (2010)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Emerging Thought and Research on Student, Teacher, and Administrator Stress and Coping (2007)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Thriving, Surviving or Going Under: Coping with Everyday Lives (2006)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Understanding Teacher Stress in an Age of Accountability (2006)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Toward Wellness: Prevention, Coping, and Stress (2003)

edited by Gordon S. Gates and Shannon Calderone

Stress and Coping of English Learners

edited by

Teresa Rishel

Ball State University

Paul Chamness Miller

Akita International University

-

INFORMATION AGE PUBLISHING, INC.

Charlotte, NC • www.infoagepub.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

CIP record for this book is available from the Library of Congress http://www.loc.gov

ISBNs: 978-1-64113-149-0 (Paperback)

978-1-641131-50-6 (Hardcover)

978-1-64113-151-3 (ebook)

Copyright © 2018 Information Age Publishing Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America

Dedication

This book is dedicated to the English learners whose lives are affected by what we do in schools and the teachers who teach them.

“If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his own language, that goes to his heart.”

~Nelson Mandela

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments

1. Problematizing the Experiences of English Learners in U.S. Schools

Paul Chamness Miller and Teresa Rishel

2. Secure Attachments in Schools: Adults as Ambassadors Mediating Newcomer Students’ Social and Emotional Adaptation

Alaisa Grudzinski, Andrea Honigsfeld, Alma Rocha, and Amy Eckelmann

3. Language Brokering: Effects on Parent-Child Relationships, Bilingualism, and Cognitive and Emotional Development

Yolanda Salgado and María D. Avalos

4. The Role of School and Teachers in English Learners’ Socioemotional Well-Being

Victoria Christine Rodriguez, Shadab Fatima Hussain, and Amado Padilla

5. Coping as a Line of Flight in a Linguistically Diverse Kindergarten Classroom

Adrian D. Martin and Kathryn J. Strom

6. “He Needs Help”: Marking and Marginalizing English Learners Through Peer Interactions

Meghan Corella and Jane Younga Choi

7. Understanding English Learners From Socioemotional Perspectives

Bogum Yoon and Boukary Ouedraogo

8. Exploring the Collaborative Foundations of Trauma-Informed Service Provision for Refugee Students: A West Michigan Case Study

Michelle L. Solorio

9. Negative Emotion Discourses in School and Family Contexts: A Narrative Inquiry Approach to an English Learner’s Stories of Experience

Hayriye Kayi-Aydar

10. The Power of Relationships for English Learners: Friendships Cultivating Linguistic Agency

Jennifer Collett

11. Family Structures of Refugee Students in the U.S. and Their Effects on Schooling

Madhavi Tandon

12. Embracing Possibilities for English Learner Inclusion, Comfort, and Care

Teresa Rishel and Paul Chamness Miller

About the Authors

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to express our heartfelt thanks to the following individuals for sacrificing valuable time from their doctoral studies to assist in the reading, editing, and providing of comments and feedback for the chapters in this book: Amy Heath, Brandy James, Christina VanOsdol, Jared Totsch, Scott Nichols, and Tiffany Van Natta. Their service to the profession is very much appreciated!

To our wonderful chapter authors, we extend enormous thanks for the time and talents you extended for the completion of this book. Your expertise, insight, and wisdom are beyond reproach. It is our hope that because of you, ELs will be receive greater support, understanding, validation—and an education that enhances their cultural identities.

To our partners, Kazuto Kuriyama and Roger Yeoman, thank you for bearing with us throughout this journey. Your patience and support kept our spirits high and our hearts humbled.

Last, but certainly not least, we would like to thank the series editors of Research on Stress and Coping in Education, Gordon S. Gates, Walter H. Gmelch, Christine Schwarzer, and Mimi Wolverton, for providing us with the opportunity to bring about change for ELs as they navigate the murky waters of school.

CHAPTER 1

PROBLEMATIZING THE EXPERIENCES OF ENGLISH LEARNERS IN U.S. SCHOOLS

Paul Chamness Miller

Akita International University

Teresa Rishel

Ball State University

Although, in an ideal world, all schools are concerned about both the academic and affective aspects of their learners, a lot of the contemporary literature regarding English learners (ELs) primarily focuses on the difficulties of language acquisition and other academic concerns (e.g., Haager, 2007; Meyer, 2000; Short, Fidelman, & Louguit, 2012) such as content-specific instruction (e.g., Chval & Chávez, 2011/2012; Gaskins, 2015; Li, 2012; Nutta, Bautista, & Butler, 2011; Thornton & Crúz, 2013) as well as assessment (e.g., Hakuta, 2014; Lenski, Ehlers-Zalava, Daniel, & Sun-Irminger, 2006). Indeed, these issues are important and play a significant role in the overall well-being of ELs, but a very essential consideration that has commonly been overlooked is the relationship of the learner’s socioemotional needs to academic success due to the focus on the standardization of learning (Kayi-Aydar, 2015). The experiences and needs of ELs vary significantly and extend beyond academics.

Presently in the United States, there are about 4.5 million learners whose schools have officially labeled them as English learners (ELs) and who are enrolled in a support program for ELs. This number represents about 9.5% of the entire student population (NCES, 2015). It is important, however, to note that this only represents those who continue to receive some sort of service from the school, but it does not include students who no longer qualify for such services. Furthermore, there are a number of issues that may affect the quality of education that ELs receive. There is a lack of consistency in a number of a different areas: (a) how EL specialists are certified, or even if they must be certified to be an EL specialist, (b) what type of assistance is provided, (c) how long ELs may receive services, and (d) what curriculum should be used, just to name a few (“Quality Counts,” 2009). The fact that ELs make up nearly one tenth of the school population indicates the need for schools to be prepared to meet the needs of this population, whatever they may be, and for there to be a consistent set of standards to which schools and state boards of education are held accountable.

Another area of inconsistency is in how we refer to (i.e., label) ELs. As Dillon (2001/2014) points out, labeling has been used in the educational system for a long time to differentiate one group of learners from others, but not necessarily for the purpose of helping students succeed. Labeling can be hurtful and have an impact on the success of some learners. Despite these problems, “labeling does not need to be a dirty word; but labels do need to be grounded in thoughtful interactions” (Dillon, 2001/2014, p. 103). We have chosen to use the term English learner (EL) throughout this volume to discuss the stress and coping of this particularly vulnerable population because EL is inclusive of all types of students we discuss, whether refugees, immigrants, or children of immigrants. They share one commonality—they are trying to learn English in a system that disenfranchises them. It is true that learning English is not all that defines them, nor is it the only reason they may be struggling with school, as several of the chapters in this book reveal. Although we certainly support scholars’ choices to use terminology that they believe is most appropriate, we do not want terminology to distract us from the real goal of this volume: to raise awareness of how several groups of learners who may appear to be so different may share similar struggles so that we educators and researchers can take action and bring about change in how our schools function.

CHALLENGES THAT ELs FACE

The inconsistencies described in the previous section contribute to the challenges that ELs face on a daily basis, but it is also important to avoid generalizing their challenges because their experiences and needs are significantly varied due to a large number of variables. One such variable is the learner’s place of birth. Some learners were born outside the U.S., while others were born in the U.S. but their first language is not English (Batalova, Fix, & Murray, 2007); a common misconception is that all ELs are immigrants, but this is simply untrue.

Other individual characteristics have been observed to influence the experience that ELs have in educational settings. As with any group of learners, ELs’ personalities vary greatly. Some make friends easily and are not shy, while others are more introverted and find making friends to be difficult. Given the many attributes that make each EL a unique individual, the chapters in this volume reveal that there are many factors that may have an impact on the learner’s socioemotional well-being, as well as her or his academic success, because of the unique challenges this population of students may encounter.

Additionally, ELs who are also immigrants are often uprooted against their will (e.g., parents deciding to relocate or fleeing due to war), leaving behind their friends and extended family, their heritage language familiar schooling expectations and environment, and culture. Losing these securities and others illustrates an all-too-common situation where these children or youth no longer feel safe and may find themselves in an educational system that is not designed to meet their needs.

Whether the EL is an immigrant or an individual born in the U.S. he or she is likely to have struggles particular to his or her life and circumstances that differ from non-ELs. Those who find schooling difficult, regardless of their place of birth, may experience a sense of alienation, challenges with academic expectations, a loss of self-esteem, a lack of language support, and a sense of irrelevance to the curriculum. These experiences come at a high cost, as the pages of this volume reveal.

Sense of Alienation

Alienation is a common experience for many ELs as they attempt to navigate through the cultural, familial, academic, and social settings of their lives in and out of school (Lee, Butler, & Tippins, 2007). Some ELs associate blame with their heritage culture as the reason for not fitting in at school and reject their heritage culture in an attempt to fit in with peers (Fillmore, 2000). Another important struggle that commonly surfaces for ELs is the pressure from family and friends to speak the heritage language, while being told by society that the heritage language has no worth. ELs may find speaking the language of their homeland frustrating because of the alienation they experience at school. Caught between two worlds and having to choose between honoring the requests of family and fitting in with peers becomes a cyclical pattern that adds pressure that many other students do not face. Choosing to reject his or her heritage culture and language, as Fillmore (2000) notes, may create a barrier between the EL and his or her family, friends, and local community.

Alienation may also come because peers may view ELs as outsiders due to perceived linguistic and cultural differences. Furthermore, schools may be ill-prepared to help newcomers adjust to the way school functions in the new environment; this failure can further alienate them from teachers, administrators, and school itself (Curran, 2003; Fillmore, 2000).

Academic Challenges

Academic challenges are common for too many ELs. Differing pedagogical approaches used in U.S. schools and schools in the home country of ELs can come as a surprise and contribute to the academic challenges that an EL could face. For example, education in the U.S. has largely shifted from a teacher-centered to a more student-centered approach, where students are engaged in collaborative activities, encouraged to ask questions, and included in decisions about their learning. In contrast, many ELs come from settings where the teachers are the givers of knowledge and students are viewed as sponges meant to simply regurgitate what they are told. ELs may find it difficult to adapt to this significantly different pedagogical approach of learning, and teachers may not be equipped to help learners transition to this new learning environment (Delpit, 2006; Igoa, 1995; Lee et al., 2007; Peregoy & Boyle, 2005; Zhang & Peltarri, 2014).

In addition to discrepancies in pedagogical approach, ELs are also susceptible to “cognitive load” (Meyer, 2000). A high cognitive load occurs when classroom content, assignments, and activities may not be culturally salient to the student (Ortiz-Marrero & Sumaryono, 2010; Reeves, 2004). For example, an assignment asking the class to write about an unfamiliar experience, such as their first trip in an airplane, creates a high cognitive load on learners who have never been on an airplane. Failing to consider the learner’s background knowledge along with the lack of appropriate scaffolding makes schooling extremely taxing on the EL. Experiences such as these may challenge the EL’s sense of confidence, destroying their self-esteem (Chang, 2010; Rodriguez, Ringler, O’Neal, & Bunn, 2009).

Linguistic Challenges

One challenge that ELs face related to language is developing communicative competence (Canale, 1983), learning to communicate with peers, teachers, other school personnel, and even family and the community. However, before achieving communicative competence in the new language, the EL might experience anxiety related to language use, often called “language shock” (Meyer, 2000). Several of the authors throughout this volume describe the effects of language shock on ELs. In the classroom, the continual communication in an unfamiliar language, along with the challenges that may occur in acquiring academic English (e.g., content-specific knowledge), contributes to this anxiety. Linguistic anxiety is further exacerbated by the intolerance that others have towards nonnative-like linguistic skills (see Hanish & Guerra, 2000; Olsen, 2000). These negative experiences can hinder academic success and prevent academic and linguistic achievement by triggering the learner’s affective filter (see Krashen, 1982).

Attitude Towards ELs

Contemporary education has placed emphasis on standardization in the curriculum. ELs are, consequently, viewed as an afterthought at best, and completely excluded at worst (Cummins, 2000, 2001; Cummins et al., 2005). ELs are often viewed as a “problem” to teachers, requiring too much time or posing too big of a burden, regardless of the actual ability and skill set of the student (Walker, Shafer, & Iiams, 2004). Rather than valuing what ELs can contribute to the classroom, such as their first language and cultural heritage, which could enrich the learning environment for everyone, schools often take a subtractive view toward ELs, considering their heritage as a hindrance. Consequently, the expectation is for ELs to abandon their first language and culture and assimilate to the dominant culture of the school, exacerbating communication barriers between the school, the learner, and the learner’s family (Roxas, 2010).

Another significant point that is important to consider is how stereotypes influence the schooling experience of ELs. Walker et al. (2004) found that 70% of the teachers they surveyed admitted that they did not want ELs in their classroom and half of their participants expressed that they were not interested in EL education, even if such an opportunity presented itself. Chhuon and Hudley (2010), for example, found that teachers and school administrators had negative, and even hostile, attitudes towards Cambodian male students, lumping them in with their discriminatory beliefs about male students of color in general.

The negative attitude toward ELs is not only seen in the curriculum and in the classroom itself, but even in the “hidden” curriculum of the school district. For example, it is not uncommon to find the services provided to ELs to come from uncertified individuals, some of whom have had no particular education in working with ELs. Furthermore, as Chen (2010) found, the “ESL Room” is often not even a classroom, but a closet or storage space. It is also common for an EL teacher or tutor to be spread thinly over multiple schools and often helping many students to the point that the ELs do not get the individual help that they need or deserve (Chen, 2010; Roxas, 2010). We discuss the effects of the hidden curriculum in greater detail in the final chapter of this volume.

BEING AN ENGLISH LEARNER

Helplessness is likely to develop in situations or educational environments where students sense a lack of control (Hsu, 2011). ELs are required to learn a new language, attempt interactions with peers who do not share a language or culture, and endeavor to learn academic content in a milieu that is often completely unfamiliar and often hostile. They may also find their peers unwilling to make friends with them. Not only is this completely foreign experience scary in and of itself, but relationships with parents, teachers, administrators, peers, and even the community contribute to the potential breakdown in meeting the emotional and academic needs of immigrant ELs.

Research is beginning to reveal that ELs struggle not only with academics, but also with identity. Chen (2010) found that the way schools label individual students creates confusion. In her case study, the student was forced by the school to receive EL services that were neither wanted nor found to be useful. At the same time, the student was also placed in an advanced mathematics class. Consequently, this student struggled to find his place in a school that sent him conflicting messages. When educator expectations are low, there is the risk of ELs adopting such opinions and fulfilling such expectations (Chhuon & Hudley, 2010; Roxas, 2010). Roxas also found that teachers may adopt a belief that they need to “protect” ELs, rather than empowering the learners and helping them build their own confidence. Such actions also undermine ELs’ confidence.

Not only is confidence and self-esteem at issue, but alienation at school and/or at home can also influence the mental health of ELs. Cho and Haslam (2010) found that having a sense of connectedness to school and to family was a significant factor for the mental well-being of immigrant learners. They further found that having an intact family was also influential. For example, when a family is separated, either geography or by divorce, this separation contributes to higher levels of stress that can lead to suicide ideation and other mental health problems (Rishel & Miller, in press). In order to address the sense of alienation that ELs may be feeling, there is evidence that encouraging ELs to acculturate, where they hold onto their heritage culture and language while incorporating the local culture and language into their lives, may nurture greater mental health than the more typical subtractive approach of assimilation that is often expected of ELs (Chae & Foley, 2010).

All of these challenges, both academic and socioemotional, coupled with the lack of the school’s ability to adequately meet ELs’ needs, continue to perpetuate significant gaps between ELs and non-ELs. Perhaps most troubling are gaps in state and federally mandated standardized test scores between these two populations of students (Valdés & Castellón, 2011). The gap is further illustrated in graduation rates, with ELs at 62.6% as a national average, while the national average in 2014 for all students was at 82% (Mitchell, 2016).

Stress and Coping of English Learners addresses the many ways that ELs face academic and socioemotional stress in the K–12 school environment, the consequences of this stress at school, how they cope with this stress, and how school personnel and families can provide support and help. While enrollment in school programs offers assistance to many ELs, it often fails to provide the socioemotional support that ELs need as they navigate the rough waters of schooling. American schooling is often not prepared and/or unwilling to help ELs as they adapt to an unfamiliar language, culture, social norms, communication techniques, and teachers’ expectations. Given the proper foundation and emotional support, ELs will be positioned for greater academic success, comfort at school, and a decrease in their sense of alienation in both the school environment and at home as they try to negotiate between two cultural environments.

REFERENCES

Batalova, J., Fix, M., & Murray, J. (2007). Measures of change: The demography and literacy of adolescent English learners. New York, NY: Migration Policy Institute, Carnegie Corporation.

Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2–27). London, UK: Longman.

Chae, M. H., & Foley, P. F. (2010). Relationship of ethnic identity, acculturation, and psychology well-being among Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88, 466–476.

Chang, L. Y.-H. (2010). Group processes and EFL learners’ motivation: A study of group dynamics in EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 129–154. doi:10.5054/tq.2010.213780

Chen, X. (2010). Identity construction and negotiation within and across school communities: The case of one English-as-a-new-language (ENL) student. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 9, 163–179.

Chhuon, V., & Hudley, C. (2010). Asian American ethnic options: How Cambodian students negotiate ethnic identities in a U.S. urban school. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41(4), 341–359.

Cho, Y.-B., & Haslam, N. (2010). Suicidal ideation and distress among immigrant adolescents: The role of acculturation, life stress, and social support. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 39, 370–379.

Chval, K. B., & Chávez, Ó. (2011/2012). Designing math lessons for English language learners. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 17(5), 261–265. doi:10.5951/mathteacmiddscho.17.5.0261

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, J. (2001, February). Bilingual children’s mother tongue: Why is it important for education? Sprogforum, 7(19), 15–20. Retrieved from http://www15.gencat.net/pres_casa_llengues/uploads/articles/Bilingual%20Childrens%20Mother%20Tongue.pdf

Cummins, J., Bismilla, V., Chow, P., Cohen, S., Giampapa, F., Leoni, L., … Sastri, P. (2005). ELL students speak for themselves: Identity texts and literacy engagement in multilingual classrooms. Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.org/secretariat/files/ELLidentityTexts.pdf

Curran, M. E. (2003). Linguistic diversity and classroom management. Theory into Practice, 42(4), 334–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4204_11

Delpit, L. (2006). Lessons from teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 220–231. doi:10.1177/0022487105285966

Dillon, P. W. (2014). Labeling and English language learners: Hearing recent immigrants’ needs. In G. M. Hudak & P. Kihn (Eds.), Labeling: Pedagogy and politics (pp. 93–108). London, UK: Routledge. (Original work published 2001)

Fillmore, L. W. (2000). Loss of family languages: Should educators be concerned? Theory Into Practice, 39(4), 203–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3904_3

Gaskins, J. (2015). The literary essay and the ESL student: A case study. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 49(2), 99–106. Retrieved from http:// muse.jhu.edu/article/582501

Haager, D. (2007). Promises and cautions regarding using response to intervention with English language learners. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), 213–218. doi:10.2307/30035565

Hakuta, K. (2014). Assessment of content and language in light of the new standards: Challenges and opportunities for English language learners. Journal of Negro Education, 83(4), 433–441. doi:10.7709/jnegroeducation.83.4.0433

Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2000). The roles of ethnicity and school context in predicting children’s victimization by peers. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 201–223. doi:10.1023/A:1005187201519

Hsu, L. (2011). A qualitative analysis on the occurrence of learned helplessness among EFL students. Journal of Educational and Development Psychology, 1(1), 162–175. doi:10.5539/jedp.v1n1p162

Igoa, C. (1995). The inner world of the immigrant child. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kayi-Aydar, H. (2015). Teacher agency, positioning, and English language learners: Voices of pre-service classroom teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 94–103. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2014.09.009

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

Lee, S., Butler, M. B., & Tippins, D. J. (2007). A case study of an early childhood teacher’s perspective on working with English language learners. Multicultural Education, 15, 43–49.

Lenski, S. D., Ehlers-Zavala, F., Daniel, M. C., & Sun-Irminger, X. (2006). Assessing English-language learners in mainstream classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 60(1), 24–34. doi:10.1598/RT.60.1.3

Li, G. (2012). Literacy engagement through online and offline communities outside school: English language learners’ development as readers and writers. Theory into Practice, 51(4), 312–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.726061

Meyer, L. M. (2000). Barriers to meaningful instruction for English learners. Theory into Practice, 39(4), 228–236. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3904_6

Mitchell, C. (2016, January 4). English-language-learner graduation rates are all over the map. Education Week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/2016/01/english-language_learner_gradu.html

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2015). Table 204.20: Number and percentage of public school students participating in programs for English language learners (2013–2014). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_204.20.asp

Nutta, J. W., Bautista, N. U., & Butler, M. B. (2011). Teaching science to English language learners. New York, NY: Routledge.

Olsen, L. (2000). Learning English is learning America. Theory Into Practice, 39(4), 196–202. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3904_2

Ortiz-Marrero, F. W., & Sumaryono, K. (2010). Success with ELLs: ELLs at the center: Rethinking high-stakes testing. The English Journal, 99(6), 93–96. doi:10.2307/20787677

Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (2005). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A resource book for K–12 teachers (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Quality counts 2009: How English-language learners are putting schools to the test. (2009, Jan. 7). Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/qc/2009/17src.h28.html

Reeves, J. (2004). “Like everybody else”: Equalizing educational opportunities for English language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 38(1), 43–66. doi:10.2307/3588258

Rishel, T., & Miller, P. C. (in press). English learners and the risks of suicide. Journal of Thought.

Rodriguez, D., Ringler, M., O’Neal, D., & Bunn, K. (2009). English language learners’ perceptions of school environment. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 23(4), 513–526. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02568540909594678

Roxas, K. (2010). Who really wants “the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses” anyway?: Teachers’ use of cultural scripts with refugee students in public schools. Multicultural Perspectives, 12(2), 65–73.

Short, D. J., Fidelman, C. G., & Louguit, M. (2012). Developing academic language in English language learners through sheltered instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 334–361. doi:10.1002/tesq.20

Thornton, S. J., & Crúz, B. C. (2013). Teaching social studies to English language learners (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Valdés, G., & Castellón, M. (2011). English language learners in American schools: Characteristics and challenges. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A resource for teacher educators (pp. 18–34). New York, NY: Routledge.

Walker, A., Shafer, J., & Iiams, M. (2004). “Not in my classroom”: Teacher attitudes towards English language learners in the mainstream classroom. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 130–160.

Zhang, J., & Pelttari, C. (2014). Exploring the emotions and needs of English language learners: Facilitating pre-service and in-service teachers’ recognition of the tasks facing language learners. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 35(2), 179–194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2013.822505