Search for: All records

Research on TESOL materials development has focused primarily on instructional materials for contexts in which students are learning English separate from academic content (e.g., science, mathematics). This research could benefit from expansion given the increasing number of contexts in which students are learning content and English language simultaneously. In U.S. K–12 education specifically, a fast‐growing population of English learners (ELs) is expected to achieve academically rigorous content standards that reflect new ways of thinking about content, language, and their integration. Thus, developing instructional materials based on the standards has necessitated shifts from traditional to contemporary approaches. The purpose of this article is to illustrate how instructional materials for ELs in the content areas have evolved over time. After describing conceptual shifts in the fields of content area education and language education that underpin the evolution of instructional materials, the researchers present traditional and contemporary elementary science units. Then, they analyze the units in relation to key features of traditional and contemporary materials for ELs in the content areas. Finally, they discuss how materials development in content learning contexts could expand the scope of TESOL materials development by providing a fresh perspective on ongoing debates and tensions in this vibrant research area. 

The purpose of this study was to investigate how computational modeling promotes systems thinking for English Learners (ELs) in fifth-grade science instruction. Individual student interviews were conducted with nine ELs about computational models of landfill bottle systems they had developed as part of a physical science unit. We found evidence of student engagement in four systems thinking practices. Students used data produced by their models to investigate the landfill bottle system as a whole (Practice 1). Students identified agents and their relationships in the system (Practice 2). Students thought in levels, shuttling between the agent and aggregate levels (Practice 3). However, while students could think in levels to develop their models, they struggled to engage in this practice when presented with novel scenarios (e.g., open vs. closed system). Finally, students communicated information about the system using multiple modalities and less-than-perfect English (Practice 4). Overall, these findings suggest that integrating computational modeling into standards-aligned science instruction can provide a rich context for fostering systems thinking among linguistically diverse elementary students.