Cavendish Enano

The purpose of this study was to explore prekindergarten teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy regarding their instructional practices for developing the oral language and literacy of DLLs, as well as the contextual factors guiding their instructional practices with DLLs. The research questions guiding the study were:

1. How do early childhood teachers describe their self-efficacy (i.e., knowledge and skills) relative to implementing oral language and literacy instruction with DLLs?

2. What strategies do early childhood teachers report using to support DLLs’ oral language and early literacy development?

3. What contextual factors (e.g., child or setting characteristics) do early childhood teachers report as influencing their practices for promoting DLLs’ oral language and literacy development?

In this chapter, findings are presented thematically relative to the above three research questions. In the area of teachers’ perceived self-efficacy, one major theme emerged from the data: instructional successes. Within this theme, there were two subcategories: positive student feedback and prekindergarten teachers’ knowledge and skills of DLLs leading to confidence in their instructional practices. Participants described using the following strategies with DLLs to facilitate DLLs’ language and literacy development: (a) enhanced language practices, (b) home and school connections, and (c) supportive classroom environments.

Finally, the participants described the following contextual factors influencing their perceived self-efficacy: (a) consideration of the whole child, (b) collaboration with other professionals, and

(c) perceived barriers such as child-standardized assessments and nonmajority DLLs. In the following sections, detailed descriptions of each of the above themes, illustrated with excerpts from participants’ interviews, are presented. Figure 1 shows a visual outline of the themes and categories described by the participants. This figure illustrates the discussion in this chapter as it relates to each research question.

The use of pseudonyms are used when identifying prekindergarten teachers’ responses. Participants’ demographic information is available in Table 2.

Prekindergarten teachers articulated their confidence and their perceived self-efficacy during their interviews as they described successes they had while instructing DLLs in the areas of oral language and literacy. Their perceived instructional successes related to positive student

feedback, their knowledge and skills in working with DLLs, and overall confidence in their instructional practices.

Instructional Successes Through Positive Student Feedback Prekindergarten teachers described their perceived self-efficacy by discussing their instructional successes and how those successes made them feel effective. Firstly, these instructional successes were based on the positive student feedback they received as they delivered instruction. Prekindergarten teachers provided examples of their instructional successes by describing how they saw their children respond positively in the classroom. Prekindergarten teachers expressed their sense of self-efficacy by describing their successful teaching strategies and the students’ positive responses.

For example, Christine, whose second career is teaching, shared that she believes vocabulary is the key for DLLs to successfully participate. Their participation provided her with the feedback that the DLLs in her class were learning. Based on this belief, Christine front loaded the vocabulary. She described front loading in the following excerpt, and noted its effect:

I front load the vocabulary by introducing the vocabulary before they have read the book in whole group or before I do a lesson. Sometimes I do this by introducing the words during small group. I introduce the words either with hands-on objects),

movement, and pictures. Then when I read the story or do the lesson, and I start asking the students to repeat the vocabulary word, their faces just light up because they are able to respond and participate.

Similarly, Valarie, who has taught in private and public preschool settings, gained self- efficacy when she reread books to her students and used the strategy of choral response to stimulate the students’ interaction with language. She used this strategy because she wanted her students to hear the language and deepen their comprehension. Valarie also stated that she wanted the students to go deeper with the content and to hear the repetition of the language. She has found that DLLs do well with this strategy, which has increased her confidence as described below:

I have found that what works well is repeated practice, with the expectation of choral response from the students. This allows them to go deeper into either the content area. I can tell when I do this by the second or third reading that my quiet or shy DLLs are ready to join in.

Prekindergarten teachers shared that observing DLLs during play and center time also provided them with positive student responses. Several teachers described ways in which they facilitated DLLs’ language development through play. Sharing how she focused on the DLL students’ responses, Melissa, a teacher for over 18 years, explained:

I love to go over to the students during center time and listen to their conversation, and then, I just kind of channel it and support them in speaking in complete sentences. I love when they just talk to me with whatever they have—pointing, speaking their home language, using phrases. I just love to hear their responses.

Given the above examples, it appeared that as teachers saw their students’ progress, their own self-efficacy increased because the students’ positive feedback implied that the students were learning. Thus, the student feedback affirmed the instructional practice used. Interestingly, all prekindergarten teachers described examples of positive experiences that occurred because of the way DLLs in their class responded to an instructional practice they believed supported DLLs language and literacy. Prekindergarten teachers appeared motivated and effective by noting the participation of DLLs in their classrooms.

In addition to the prekindergarten teachers describing their successes based on student responses, they also discussed how their knowledge and skills in teaching DLLs guided their instructional decisions. This knowledge base and skill set affirmed their perception about their teaching practices related to DLLs, and thus contributed to their self-efficacy. Teachers

described the ways their knowledge of DLLs’ language skills provided them with understanding about how to plan and instruct their students.

Veronica, who had experience working in private schools with a few DLLs and public schools with over 50% of DLL students, noticed that DLLs were more overwhelmed than English

speaking peers when asked to use their language in the classroom. She became aware of this characteristic when she analyzed her anecdotal records. Veronica explained that she was able to reflect on the various strengths and needs of DLLs and felt more confident when planning and implementing lessons. She shared the following examples:

I know that DLLs come in with varied language strengths and needs. I have had several DLLs who I have observed talking with their parents and then will not say anything in the classroom even when I bring something that interests them into the classroom. I often just get is a smile. I like to take good anecdotal notes so I can know how to plan activities to help them communicate.

Valerie shared a similar observation about DLLs hesitating to use their language and that students vary in their needs. Valerie contended that it is vital to pay attention to their strengths to promote students’ language and literacy development when she said:

Although some DLLs are hesitant to use their language, be it Spanish or English, some DLLs do come in with their own personalities and some are risk takers. I know this because I had one student who knew no English but was always talking in Spanish. It did not seem to stop her that I did not understand, and she did not mind if the other students responded or not. She just had a bold personality. I felt comfortable to let her just bloom right where she was.

One prekindergarten teacher, however, shared that deciding whether DLLs’ language was due to limited English or personality was challenging, particularly at the beginning of the year.

Other teachers solved this dilemma by observing how DLLs used their language in different settings. For example, several teachers shared that an effective way to determine whether the student is still in the process of acquiring language or is shy is by observing how DLLs interact with peers using their own language. Prekindergarten teachers described how they worked to better understand the language of DLLs by observing students in different settings. Melissa provided the following example:

We often put out props or materials that we use during read aloud and extend it to our centers. For example, we may place the props for the Three Little Pigs in the block area. I have noticed several of my DLLs who do not use their language during read aloud but will go over to blocks and pretend to be the characters in the story. The above examples present the varied language needs that DLLs may present in the classroom and the knowledge and skills of prekindergarten teachers to make the best instructional decisions to address their students’ language needs. Taken together,

prekindergarten teachers expressed confidence that when they used their knowledge and skills to carefully observe children, they were able to support DLLs’ varied language needs.

Overall, prekindergarten teachers shared they felt confident about the successes they observed in DLLs’ language and literacy due to the knowledge and skills they used to support their

language and literacy. Interestingly, the confidence level varied between teachers with more experience. Prekindergarten teachers who were more experienced affirmatively expressed their confidence about the instructional decisions they made based on their knowledge and skills more than those prekindergarten teachers who were less experienced.

Instructional Strategies Used

Prekindergarten teachers reported on the particular instructional strategies they used for enhancing language and literacy for DLLs. Teachers described how they created rich language learning environments and established strong home and school connections. Prekindergarten

teachers also described how they enhanced their environment by facilitating play and providing small group instruction.

Enhanced Language Practices

Participants described the targeted language strategies they used to enhance the language and literacy of DLLs. Language enhancements described included providing developmentally appropriate language experiences based on responsive teacher–child relationships.

Prekindergarten teachers shared the varied language supports they provided to facilitate and enhance the language of DLLs, including: (a) modeling language, (b) employing questioning strategies, (c) using wait time, (d) reinforcing academic language, (e) building background knowledge, and (f) using various modalities.

Modeling language. Prekindergarten teachers described the strategy of language modeling to provide DLLs with more complex language opportunities to increase their language. Hillary, a veteran teacher of 30 years, had strong beliefs about providing multiple opportunities for DLLs to hear language modeled by repeating language consistently. She stated:

I believe strongly that a book needs to be read at least three times to a child. The children need to hear the language modeled several times. I will model a sentence and then they will repeat it. We will then ask the children to repeat the phrases with me. For example, “What did the troll say?” “Who’s that tramping over my bridge?” And then we repeat it together.

Veronica, who previously taught in a private school with very few DLLs but is now teaching in a classroom with over 50% DLL students, further explained the modeling language approach. She described how she is more intentional as she selects books and models the language from the books. She stressed the importance of being purposeful in her book reading. She described how when reading books such as The Little Red Hen, she provides DLLs with practice with

I am purposeful when I select books to read. I look for books with predictable language. I look for books that have questions as a repetitive phrase This is when I read a phrase that is a question and then the students join together in choral response to answer the question. They use the same phrase or similar phrase throughout the book. I try to make sure I model it and then we practice the phrase so all children can feel comfortable with participating.

Mary, who has taught for 13 years and works with DLLs through the lens of her own experiences related to learning English as a second language, provided another example of modeling language. She shared that she uses sentence frames to support DLLs who are not responding with complete sentences. She explained that sentence frames provide language support for DLLs who might struggle to produce complete sentences. She clarified that a sentence frame is a sentence in which some, but not all, words are used to help students practice specific grammar, vocabulary, or language concepts. Sentence fames are predictable and often includes visuals (e.g., pictures or writing). She described the following lesson:

I do have to give oral language support. For example, I may model a response but it may be too many words, so I may need to start the sentence for them by using sentence starters such as “I see the _____ or I will go to _____, or I might simply just model the language so they can hear the language; it just depends on their needs.

In addition to modeling language, several teachers expressed that they start modeling and facilitating language and literacy at the beginning of the day with breakfast routines or morning greetings. They shared that they set the expectations so their students knew they were expected to participate. Prekindergarten teachers explained that modeling language, DLLs’ responses through choral response, the use of sentence starters, and setting the expectation of reciprocal communication facilitated the language and literacy development of DLLs. Participants shared that these strategies varied based on the language support DLLs required.

Employing questioning strategies. In addition to modeling language, teachers reported using questioning strategies and provided examples of how they used questions to scaffold DLLs’ language. Several teachers mentioned that DLLs experienced difficulty asking and

answering questions. Grace, who has taught for over 30 years, described questioning as an ongoing strategy in her classroom. She believed that modeling questions for DLLs before providing an opportunity for them to ask a peer that same question supported language and literacy development. She provided this example:

I often ask my DLLs to answer and repeat the questions I model. I do this not only when I read a book but any part of our day. For example, I will ask “wh” questions about their art work or how they solved a math problem.

Barbara, who is a novice teacher, concurred that modeling questions was a key factor in facilitating DLLs’ language and literacy in her classroom. She described how asking questions like, “What was the story about?” using modeling and practice produced successful results by the end of the year, when many of her DLLs could respond to the “wh” questions. She observed that more abstract questions such as “What did you learn?” were more challenging for DLLs. She believed this was due to DLLs not having the vocabulary and background knowledge needed to respond.

Using wait time. Along with language strategies of modeling and questioning,

prekindergarten teachers described the important role of adopting wait time. Christine explained that she found DLLs benefited from wait time. She believed that wait time was necessary because of the students’ need to process and decode. One teacher noted this practice was “uncomfortable wait time” as described below:

For me I call it “uncomfortable wait time”. Not for the student responding, but for myself. So, if I ask a student a question, maybe the student doesn't know the answer, I may scaffold and I may help them out by prompting with a word or two, and then I'll give them time to really process that information and think about it.

Grace, who is a veteran teacher, also described how she used wait time to allow DLLs the space to think about the responses they would like to give. Grace, however, explained that while

she provided wait time for her students, she always provided options such as pointing, whispering in their ear, or responding in their home language.

Sandra, who is a special and general educator, expressed a similar perspective about wait time. She shared the following:

Giving adequate wait time is really important; it allows DLLs the time to process. I believe that during wait time they are taking a word, putting it in one language,

changing it in their head to another, and that takes practice. Adequate wait time reduces their frustration.

Reinforcing academic language. Several of the prekindergarten teachers grappled between the importance of promoting DLLs’ functional language versus their academic language. Interview responses indicated prekindergarten teachers saw the critical role they played in teaching academic language to DLLs. Christine, , who has her certification in ESOL, described this as follows:

There are similarities in languages, so I try whenever there is the opportunity to provide cognate examples. I also know there can be many different words for the same object within the English language, so I provide those examples as I introduce

academic language to my students. For example, when we are doing shapes in math, I will say circle paired with the word circulo. There are many cognates we can use to support academic language.

Grace, a teacher for over 30 years, described how she used academic language in multiple ways to demonstrate meaning:

I introduce, incorporate, and reinforce academic language for my DLLs. For

example, I would say while holding an object: “This is a diamond, but the math word is rhombus.” I would ask them where they may have seen this shape. I then reinforce it as we see shapes throughout the day.

All of the prekindergarten teachers consistently described how important it was to explicitly teach vocabulary. They described teaching vocabulary explicitly as providing DLLs with direct instruction about the targeted vocabulary word. Wendy, a veteran teacher of over 20 years, described explicit instruction this way:

When I teach vocabulary to DLLs, I not only have to provide it to them auditorily, I have to let them experience the word. What does it feel like? Or . . . What does X remind you of? Here is a picture.

Prekindergarten teachers believed that teaching vocabulary explicitly to DLLs was critical to their language and literacy development and believed this strategy was effective for DLLs because it provided DLLs with the knowledge necessary to understand the content of the curriculum being taught.

Building background knowledge. Teachers consistently reported that building background knowledge played a key role in supporting DLLs’ academic language. Several teachers shared