Artifact 2.2
Standard 2
The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and
communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to
meet high standards.
Exhibit A: Excerpt from Paper written for Final Project of SPA 641, Fall ‘14
Problemas, Dificultades y Necesidades
El movimiento ELH ha encontrado mas éxito en unos lugares que otros. Y
mientras el numero total de cursos en el país ha aumentado, no todos los programas
existentes han disfrutado tanto éxito como los grandes, establecidos de tipos tales como
lo de la Universidad de Arizona o de la Universidad de Miami. Ni en todos casos han
podido proveer un currículo que realmente contesta a las necesidades de nuestros
estudiantes LH de hoy (Beaudrie 2011, Beaudrie 2012, ch. 10). Tampoco hay, como uno
esperaría, la cantidad de programas que debería haber para acomodar a la población
estudiantil que beneficiaría de ellos (Beaudrie 2012, ch. 10).
Beaudrie (2012, ch. 10) cita un estudio hecho en 2002 por Ingold y sus colegas
que demostró que solo un 17.8 porciento de las 146 instituciones entrevistados a través
del país proveían programas específicamente diseñados para estudiantes ELH. En 2010,
Beaudrie hizo un estudio de universidades por toda la nación que buscó información
acerca del numero de programas que existían y su composición (2012, ch. 10). Como
criterio, cada institución debió tener al menos una población hispana de 5% y cursos de
español. Lo que encontró, después de combinar el data con lo de otro estudio que había
hecho por la región suroeste, fue que hubo un aumento del numero total y que la
provisión de programas (aunque en muchos casos, no ofrecían mas que dos cursos,
entonces la palabra “programa” es problemática) coincide con el tamaño de la población
hispana de se ubica la institución. Entonces, nos dice este estudio que, como vimos
anteriormente, la creación de cursos ELH sigue siendo relacionado positivamente con el
numero de hispanos, pero ¿que pasa en lugares donde tradicionalmente no había muchos
hispanos, en lugares donde la población hispana es emergente pero aun no grande? ¿Es
necesario preocuparnos con el desarrollo de programas ELH en ese caso?
Si estudiamos la información demográfica de una región como el sureste del país,
donde (aparte de florida) tradicionalmente no ha habido poblaciones grandes ni
establecidas tal como hay en el suroeste, lo que encontramos es tal vez, sorprendente. El
Centro Pew publicó un reporte en 2005, que documentó el aumento rápido de
poblaciones hispanas a través de la región y especialmente concentrado en seis estados;
Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, y Tennessee (Pew 2005).
Viendo esto, debemos considerar que esta población llegará y ya está llegando a
participar en las instituciones de educación de la región. El sureste, en este sentido,
forma un mercado emergente para la educación ELH y por eso merece mucha
consideración de parte de universidades, especialmente en áreas de nuevas
concentraciones altas de hispanos, en cuanto la provisión de estos cursos y programas.
Un obstáculo que podría ser de mayor preocupación a la creación nuevos cursos,
especialmente hasta que se llegan a ocupar un porcentaje mas alto de matrícula en las
universidades de tal región, es la falta (o al menos la percepción) de una masa critica de
estudiantes hispanohablantes que participarían en cursos ELH. Junto con el problema de
baja matrícula que sería el caso por mientras en muchas instituciones donde hay hispanos
pero aun no hay altos números, el estudio de Ingold y sus colegas, ya mencionado,
identificó como obstáculos a la creación de nuevos programas, la falta de fondos y de
instructores con el entrenamiento apropiado. Entonces, es muy probable que haya el
deseo de crear cursos de tal tipo o estudiantes que son interesados y merecientes pero
aun, se pierde la oportunidad de proveer y de beneficiar de tal servicio. En este caso es
muy probable que el estudiante ELH se ubica dentro de cursos FL o sino decide no
estudiarlo.
En el caso del estudiante ELH que se matricula en un programa del español como
idioma extranjera, puede encontrarse en una situación mucho menos que ideal. Con un
poco de contemplación se da cuenta que el idea de un hablante LH en un curso FL tiene
poco sentido en la mayoría de los casos por lo mismo que ya habla (de cierto grado u
otro) el idioma. Si se imagina el inverso de esta situación en el caso hipotético de un hijo
de padres ingles hablantes que vive en un país donde hablan otro idioma encontrándose
en una clase de ingles como idioma extranjera escuchando al profesor explicando como
decir “Helo. How are you today?” o “Repeat after me: “My mother and I went to the
store.”, se puede imaginar cuan irrelevante le parecería. Pero por falta de cursos
diseñados específicamente para sus necesidades, esta situación peculiar y frustrante ha
sido una realidad para muchos estudiantes hispanos en E.E.U.U. aunque ha sido una
realización en el campo de idiomas que los cursos del español como idioma extranjera
fallan en acomodar las necesidades de estos estudiantes desde los años 70 (Valdés,
Lozano, and Garcia-Moya 1981, Beaudrie & Fairclough 2012). Hay una plétora de
problemas con esta practica que, cuando tomado en serio, justifiquen la creación de mas
programas ELH.
Beaudrie explica la frustración de estudiantes ELH con la hipercorrección de su
variedad de español a favor de una variedad estándar (la cual no dice al estudiante que es
una variedad, sino que su variación no es correcto), el sentido de ser inferior a los
estudiantes FL en cuanto su comprensión de la gramática (un elemento que puede
dominar la evaluación formal en una clase FL), mientras que sus instructores les tuvo
expectaciones demasiadas altas (2012, ch. 10). Ambos grupos experimentan anxiedad
cuando comparten cursos FL por lo mismo que los estudiantes FL se intimidan por las
destrezas orales de los estudiantes ELH mientras los estudiantes ELH se intimidan por el
conocimiento gramatical de los estudiantes FL (Beaudrie 2011). Beaudrie (2011) cuenta
que los cursos FL no proveen suficiente atención a las destrezas literarias y ortográficas
que, en muchos casos, carecen estudiantes ELH, mientras que se focalizan en destrezas
comunicativas que ya dominan. Tomando estos datos en consideración junto con la
realidad de las poblaciones hispanas emergentes en lugares como el sureste de E.E.U.U.,
debemos buscar la manera de crear cursos de ELH para las instituciones que están
recibiendo estudiantes hispanos pero que no tienen mas que cursos FL.
Aparte del caso de la falta de programas ELH en muchas instituciones, hay
también el problema de programas que no son adecuados. En su explicación de
dificultades enfrentadas en cursos ELH, Carreira (2012) menciona la “commodification”
del español como tema que ha producido una desconexión curricular entre el idioma y las
comunidades e identidades de los estudiantes ELH. Uno de los problemas mas serios en
cuanto los programas ya existentes es la falta de profundidad necesaria, en relación a los
objetivos de sus cursos y los niveles y temas representadas en su programación, para
acomodar a los estudiantes ELH. Beaudrie (2012, ch. 10) citó el estudio de Valdés y sus
colegas (2006) que incluyó instituciones a través del estado de California pero no
encontró ninguna evidencia que sus programas proveían apoyo a sus estudiantes ELH
respeto a la mantenencia de su variedad familiar ni su uso práctico. En ves de eso, se
focalizaron solamente en el aprendizaje de la variedad estándar. También demostró
Beaudrie (2012, ch. 10) que el aumento de programas ELH no aseguraba una capacidad
de ayudar a todos casos de estos estudiantes. Con respeto al numero de cursos que
ofrecen las universidades representados en el estudio, la mayoría (81 porciento) no
ofrecen mas que uno o dos cursos. Cuarenta y tres de ese 81% ofrecen un solo curso!
Una programación tan estrecha (usualmente dirigida hacia los niveles mas básicos o sino
los más avanzados) impide el numero de estudiantes que pueden matricular en cursos
ELH porque los cursos proveídos solo aplican a ciertos niveles de destrezas lingüísticas
(Beaudrie, 2011). Es claramente imposible que un programa que provee dos cursos, o
peor, un solo curso, puede realizar la provisión del tipo de variación de temas y destrezas
lingüísticas que necesitan nuestros estudiantes ELH. Por eso, estoy de acuerdo con
Beaudrie (2011 ) cuando exige la expansión y renovación de programas ELH ya
existentes:
“…current SHL programs should consider expanding their course
offerings to accommodate learners with proficiencies falling all along the
bilingual continuum. Doing so will also provide current students with
more extensive instructional time to achieve SHL educational goals.”
Exhibit B: List of Resources Related to SHL Pedagogy
Literature/Resources:
Beaudrie, S. &, Ducar, C. (2005). Beginning level university heritage programs: Creating
space for all heritage language learners. Heritage Language Journal, 3, 1, pp. 126.
Carreira, M. (2007). Teaching Spanish in the US: Beyond the one-size-fits-all paradigm.
In K. Potowski & R. Cameron (Eds.), Spanish in contact: Policy, social, and
linguistic inquiries. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carreira, M. (2012). Meeting the needs of heritage language learners. Approaches,
strategies, and research. In S. M. Beaudrie & M. Fairclough (Eds.) Spanish as a
heritage language in the United States. (pp. 223-240). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Colombi, M. C. (2009). A systemic functional approach to teaching Spanish for heritage
speakers in the United States. Linguistics and Education, 20, pp. 39-49.
Kondo-Brown, K. (2010). Curriculum development for advancing heritage language
competence: Recent research, current practices, and a future agenda. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 24-41.
Llombart-Huesca, A. (2012). A modular approach to Spanish for heritage language
learners courses. Hispania, 96, 3, pp. 509-522.
Martínez, G. A. (2003). Classroom based dialect awareness in heritage language
instruction: A critical applied linguistic approach. Heritage Language Journal, 1,
1, pp. 44-57.
Potowski, K. (2005). Fundamentos de la enseñanza del español a los hablantes nativos en
los Estados Unidos (Foundations in teaching Spanish to native speakers in the
United States). Madrid: Arco/Libros.
Roca, A. & Colombi, M. C. (Eds.). (2003). Mi lengua: Spanish as a heritage language in
the United States. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Trujillo, J. A. (2009). Con todos: Using learning communities to promote intellectual and
social engagement in the Spanish curriculum. In M. Lacorte & J. Leeman (Eds.).
Espanol en Estados Unidos y otros contextos de contacto: Sociolingüística,
ideología y pedagogía. Madrid: Vervuert.
Webb, J. &, Miller, B. (Eds.). (2000). Teaching heritage learners: Voices from the
classroom. New York: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Exhibit C: Literature Reviews Conducted on Topics Related to SHL
Curriculum/Pedagogy
Preston Byers
Literature Review 3: Beginning Level University Heritage Programs: Creating a
Space for All Heritage Language Learners
SPA 692: Special Problems
Spring 2015
In this article, the authors explain the unique situation of Spanish heritage
learners that possess limited speaking abilities in the language and they raise
awareness of the need for beginner level SHL courses that can accommodate these
students. The authors describe how the majority of SHL courses take place along an
intermediate to advanced platform, while calling attention to the needs of the
growing group of basic level SHL students and the particular niche that they occupy
in language education. Amidst the main goals of this study, the authors also
accomplish a broader definition of the heritage learner that encompasses students
like these in ways that previous definitions could not. This article makes a strong
case, not only for the need for basic level courses for SHLs, but also provides insight
into the perspectives of the learners themselves and the types of methodology and
curriculum that should be used in courses that are specifically designed to meet
their needs.
The article begins with a discussion of the history of SHL education in the
United States and outlines some of the asymmetries that exist between FL courses
and SHL courses in regard to the places held and support received by each in the
university setting. The authors note the disparity in the value awarded foreign
languages and ethnic ones. While calling for equality in these issues, the article also
indicates the unsuitability of FL courses as an option for SHL students and points to
the fundamental differences between both the theory behind each field and the
needs of both groups of students. The authors go on to cite previous research into
the study of Spanish as a heritage language and the perceptions, needs and attitudes
of SHL students. Of greatest note in regard to such studies are those conducted by
Beckstead and Toribio (2003) and Carreira (2003), the surveys used therein and the
their corresponding results. Having explained the place of such studies in gaining
an understanding of SHL students and the implications that such efforts have for
pedagogy, the authors discuss a study, which they have conducted with basic level
learners.
Being involved with and having access to one of the few basic level SHL
courses in the country, the authors made use both of experiential knowledge and
more notably, the incorporation of data gained through a study of 26 beginner level
SHL students enrolled at the university where they hold positions (the University of
Arizona) in order to gain understanding of the variables and needs affecting these
students and the efficacy of such a course. The study included the use of a survey
and an interview phase in which information about learner attitudes, perspectives,
linguistic abilities, and backgrounds were ascertained and analyzed.
The results of the study were conclusive in bringing to light the attitudinal
and linguistic variables of the basic level SHL students that participated in the study
and thus, helped explain affective/psychological situation of a sample of this
particular type of student. This article brings into focus important factors for a
discussion of what is essential and beneficial for beginner level SHL curriculum and
pedagogy and confirmed the need for beginner level SHL courses as well as their
value to the students and their benefits to the community.
REFLECTION:
My understanding of the SHL field is growing via the research that I’m doing
and through conversations that I’ve been able to have with experts on the themes
that permeate it. Yet I confess that I was at odds at where to begin in the case of
beginner level courses. Early on in my studies of SHL I began to see the need for a
multi-leveled program due to the clear depiction of the different factors at play in
the case of HL students versus FL students found in research and work on these
themes (such as the body of work published by leaders in the field such as Beaudrie,
Roca, Valdez, Potowski, Carreira and Lynch), but I needed to develop an
understanding of what different levels of SHL courses would look like in practice.
The basic level, which I believed important, was the hardest for me to grasp. While I
didn’t need to be convinced of the idea of making a place for beginner level SHL
courses within an SHL program (I not only agree with the authors on this subject
but I think, that if one looks at the factors at play with SHL students, these courses
are a logical response), this article provided a stronger base of understanding with
which to approach the needs of this type of HL student and showed me how to
gather information about them that can direct curriculum.
Preston Byers
Literature Review 2: Classroom Based Dialect Awareness in Heritage Language
Instruction: A Critical Applied Linguistic Approach
SPA 692: Special Problems
Spring 2015
In this article, the author looks at current discussions and applications of the
theme of dialect awareness in Spanish for Heritage Learners courses, considers their
value to SHL students and then argues for the addition of a “more robust” approach
that incorporates applied linguistics. The author sets the stage for his discussion by
touching on the history of teaching heritage learners of Spanish in the United States
and then begins to sheds light on the theme of dialectal variation and the questions
about its role in SHL education as they have surfaced throughout the development
of the field. Turning his attention toward current practice, the author discusses
several examples of how classroom based dialect awareness (CBDA) is being
explored and applied in SHL classrooms as evidenced by examples from textbooks
and ancillary materials.
He affirms the value and usefulness of most of these examples as they relate
to the study of linguistic code variation and how they are congruent with the themes
of Wolfram’s pedagogy (1999), which assumes that language naturally occurs in the
form of dialects, that dialects have a regular structure and that there are differences
in the levels at which variation occurs. The author shows how current practices
help to illuminate dialect as it occurs naturally, help the student to find value in it
and relate both to their heritage variety and the academic standard variety of the
language in question. Along with this affirmation of the usefulness of current
practices, the author notes some of their limitations when it comes to their inability
to confront and help the student work with some of the social elements related to
variation.
Along with a look at the place of dialect within the practices of current
pedagogy, the author also examines its place within the sequencing of SHL courses.
While CBDA often appears within the upper level courses, he makes a case for its
relevance and applicability with the lower levels of SHL education as well. The
author argues that the need for knowledge and experience with the themes
surrounding dialect does not just appear later on in the learner’s academic career.
Instead, he shows how it is directly pertinent and applicable to the incoming SHL
student’s experience as they begin their post-secondary language learning process.
In order to tackle deeper social questions related to dialectal variation, the
author also proposes three additional themes be added to the model set forth by
Wolfram and his associates. The first theme involves the study of the functions of
dialect; how dialect is used and for what purposes. The second involves the
distribution of dialects, the “arbitrary nature of the entire linguistic market” and
how dialects relate to questions of power in society. The third and final theme
involves the evaluation of dialects. It is during the exploration of this theme, that
the author advocates the confrontation and study of the attitudes and prejudices
that surround dialectal variations. He explains how this element of dialectal study
can be empowering for SHL students as they learn to use different variations
(including the standard variety) but are able to defend the value and validity of their
heritage variation. In addition, for each of these three themes, the author gives
examples of how to incorporate them into a SHL course at the basic level.
REFLECTION:
I found this article to be extremely insightful and useful in my pursuit of
knowledge about SHL curriculum. Dialectal variation is a theme that holds much
interest for me as a learner, teacher and researcher. I was already developing a
notion of the importance of the study of variation to SHL education and was
delighted to see that some of my thinking was right on track with current practice in
the field, but this article really helped me see the theme and its applications in a
deeper hue. While reading, I realized that I was definitely lacking as to knowledge of
how to help students relate to the underlying social issues involved with dialects. I
believe that the explanations of how to incorporate these concepts into SHL
curriculum and the ideas for activities that can be used to help students to discover
and explore them could prove valuable to any further efforts that I make to engage
in SHL education.
Preston Byers
Literature Review 4: The Effects of Computer-mediated Communication on Foreign
Language Anxiety in Heritage and Non-Heritage Students of Spanish: A Preliminary
Investigation
SPA 692: Special Problems
Spring 2015
This work consists of the author’s study of language anxiety for heritage and
non-heritage learners of Spanish and how Computer-mediated Communication
(CMC), used in the context of communicative activities during a Spanish FL course,
relates to student perceptions of that anxiety. The study, which was conducted with
students from two sections of a second semester Spanish FL course at a private
university in the southwestern region of the U.S. The participants were divided into
three groups(each containing both HLs and non-HLs). There was one control group,
which utilized in-class, face-to-face discussion and there were two experimental
groups that participated in computer-mediated discussion activities outside of class.
The two experimental groups differed with respect to the number of participants
placed in discussion with each other. One of these groups engaged in large group
discussion while the other was split into subgroups with fewer participants.
The author sought to answer three questions through this study; 1. Do
Spanish Heritage Learners experience language anxiety in Spanish FL courses and if
so, is there a difference in the level of anxiety experienced by Heritage and NonHeritage learners? 2. Do both types of students experience a reduction of language
anxiety through the use of CMC? 3. Does the size of the communication group effect
the level of anxiety? The method used to approach answering these questions
involved the use of both pre and post-experimental questionnaires in conjunction
with the communicative experiences provided to the different groups of
participants. These activities involved TL discussions of personally relevant topics,
which took place in a three phase format; First students posted answers to
questions about activities that they used to do during childhood. Second, student
posted reactions and responses to the answers of their classmates. Third, the
participants voted on their favorite response and gave their rationales for their
choices. The post-experimental questionnaire presented the same questions as the
one used before the experiment so that the change related to each participant’s
perception of anxiety could be measured in regard to the same questions.
Additional questions were added to the post-experimental questionnaire in order to
gather additional comments from students regarding the CMC experience.
The study resulted in findings that suggested the following answers to the
author in regard to his research questions: 1. Heritage Learners of Spanish do, in
fact, experience anxiety related to learning Spanish in an FL course, as well as do
Non-SHL learners, but the level of anxiety (according to the methods of the study) is
lower. 2. Both Heritage and Non-Heritage learners in an FL course experience a
reduction in anxiety due to the use of CMC. 3. The size of the groups in which
discussion happens does affect anxiety, with the smaller group size being an
indicator of lower levels of anxiety. While the author stated some of the limitations
of the study, he explained that the findings confirmed other studies that led to
similar conclusions and suggested the need for further research into this and related
topics.
REFLECTION:
Anxiety during the language learning process is an important factor that any student or
former student of language can relate to. It can have an effect on self-perception, motivation and
learning outcomes. The use of CBC as a means to lower the anxiety levels of language learners
makes the information in this work valuable for language teachers, but its attention to anxiety as it
applies to HL vs. non-HL students of Spanish particularly interested me as well. The finding that
the incorporation of CBC did lower anxiety levels, to some degree, for HL students is relevant and
helpful to me in my search for ways to understand, accommodate and improve the language
learning experience of this particular group. But, while I appreciate what I was able to learn from
this study, certain other factors came to mind while reading it that I think could have affected its
findings and could shed more light on the possible value of the use of CBC for SHLs.
The author stated that the results of this study “suggest that heritage students do not
seem to suffer much general foreign language anxiety in the foreign language classroom,” and he
goes on to say, “This is not surprising, as many of them come from a background in which they
hear and/or speak the language in the home.” I immediately found myself questioning this
statement along with the data related to the levels of stress experienced before and after the CBC
because of two main reasons; First, was that of the scope or type of anxiety or stressors
measured by the experiment. Second, was that of the generalizability of these findings due to
differences in the ratio of HL to non-HL students present in the sampling used in this study versus
that which is characteristic of other classroom situations in which HLs find themselves.
I think a key word in this experiment and its subsequent findings as they relate to
language anxiety is the word “general”. Taking into account the wording of the items used on the
questionnaire, it becomes clear that it did NOT address all of the specific stressors and types of
feelings/anxiety experienced by SHLs (for instance: pressure to live up to self perception of what
they should be able to do in the language as a Heritage Speaker or to the teacher's expectations
of them as “native speakers”, negative feelings/self-consciousness about their home dialect as it
compares with the academic Spanish used in the classroom, and especially, anxiety in regards to
WRITTEN language production and/or READING (which are often the areas in which SHL
students confront the most difficulty linguistically speaking). Interestingly, the author did make
mention of this last fact but questions related specifically with reading and writing did not seem to
be clearly indicated in the questionnaire. Instead, the pre and post questionnaires seemed to be
focused on oral communication (an area in which many HLs have a higher level of competence
than non-HLs). One might argue that since language anxiety isn't necessarily the same across
the board with regards to both groups and since the questionnaire, which served as the single
most important tool for gathering data, may not have aptly evaluated the specific causes of
anxiety that are most relevant to SHL learners, that the statement of SHLs having less anxiety
may lack validity. That being said, I think that, in light of this limitation to the study, the fact that
anxiety was noted and lessened through the incorporation of CBC is noteworthy as it displays,
even without focusing on these factors, the presence of anxiety in Heritage Learners as well as
providing ideas for reducing it.
The other question I had with the findings as they related to lower levels of HL anxiety
was in relation to the distribution of HLs within the classes that served as the samples of the
experiments and how well data drawn from these samples can be applied in situations at other
institutions. At some institutions, the ratio of HLs to Non-HLs may be consistent with that of the
university where this study took place, while it may be drastically different at other locations.
Unlike the case in the FL courses at many U.S. institutions, the HL component of the classes
described by the author did not constitute a minority in comparison with non-HLs. Instead, SHL
students comprised the majority of each group studied! One can reasonably expect anxiety to be
affected by the perception of a student who measures him or herself or his or her linguistic
performance against the standard of the average performance, linguistic ability and
linguistic/cultural background of the majority of the group. I wonder how the anxiety levels and
the data of the findings would have been different if the ratio of HLs to Non-HLs had been
different/lower as it is in other areas of the country.