Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Immigration and secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction : The expressed concerns… Hebb, Lisa Marguerite 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1995-0044.pdf [ 8.85MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0064540.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0064540-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0064540-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0064540-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0064540-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0064540-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0064540-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0064540-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0064540.ris

Full Text

IMMIGRATION AND SECONDARY MAINSTREAM ACADEMIC COMMUNICATION AND INSTRUCTION: THE EXPRESSED CONCERNS OF RICHMOND SCHOOL DISTRICT (RSD) EDUCATORS by LISA MARGUERITE HEBB B. Ed., The University of V i c t o r i a , 1984 TESL Diploma, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1994 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Educational Studies) We accept this thesis as conforming to the recruired standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA December 1994 © Lisa Marguerite Hebb, 1994 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) 11 A B S T R A C T The purpose of t h i s study was to determine the expressed immigrant student academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School District (RSD) secondary mainstream educators. A participant-observation (Bruyn, 1 9 6 6 ; Denzin, 1 9 7 0 , 1 9 7 8 ) research design, including a secondary mainstream educator Likert-type Scale survey ( N = 3 6 ) , 1 3 secondary mainstream educators standardized open-ended interviews, and 2 0 secondary English as a Second Language (ESL) and 4 0 secondary mainstream content area one hour classroom observations, was used. The findings of this study can be summarized as follows: 1 . Although RSD secondary mainstream educators are aware of the number of immigrant students in their classrooms, th e i r knowledge of the educational and cu l t u r a l backgrounds of these students i s limited. 2 . Differences exist between the academic communication and instruction needs of immigrant and mainstream students. 3 . Immigrant student language-related d i f f i c u l t i e s are affecting secondary mainstream communication and instruction in the RSD. 4 . The c u l t u r a l backgrounds of immigrant students are an issue in the secondary mainstream classroom. 5. Eighty-three percent of the RSD secondary mainstream educators surveyed reported making instructional methods adjustments in the i r teaching to accommodate the immigrant students in their classrooms. 6. Although two-thirds of the survey sample group f e l t t h e i r current teaching practices were adequate to accommodate a l l learners, two-thirds also f e l t they had to make additional instructional methods adjustments to accommodate the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. 7. Although the presence of immigrant students in the classroom does not make RSD secondary mainstream educators uncomfortable, two-thirds are experiencing academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s with immigrant students because they are unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in their classrooms. 8. The three major immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns expressed by the RSD secondary mainstream educators were: (a) immigrant students are being integrated into the secondary mainstream classroom before th e i r English language l e v e l i s equal to content demands, (b) a lack of communication, or coordination of efforts, or both, between ESL and mainstream teachers, and (c) a district-wide need to acknowledge and respond to the changes immigration i s making in the RSD. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i Tab le o f Contents i v L i s t o f T a b l e s v i Acknowledgements v i i Chapter I : INTRODUCTION 1 Background to the Problem 1 S i g n i f i c a n c e of the Study 4 Overview of the Study 9 Chapter I I : REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND THEORY .10 ESL H i s t o r i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e 10 ESL A c q u i s i t i o n Theory 14 Mainstream Educator Pre and I n - S e r v i c e E d u c a t i o n 16 Chapter I I I : THE PROBLEM 21 Statement of the Problem 21 Research Quest ions to be Answered 21 D e f i n i t i o n of Terms 22 Assumptions 22 D e l i m i t a t i o n s 23 L i m i t a t i o n s 24 Chapter IV: DESIGN OF THE STUDY 2 6 The Research Design 2 6 The Research Procedure 2 9 The P o p u l a t i o n 30 Instrument 1 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey 32 Instrument 2 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator In terv iew 33 Instrument 3 - The Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observa t ions 36 V a l i d i t y of the Instruments 37 S t a b i l i t y of the. Instruments 39 C o l l e c t i n g the Data 40 Instrument 1 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey 40 Instrument 2 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Interv iew 42 Instrument 3 - The Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observa t ions 44 T a b u l a t i o n of the Data 4 6 V Chapter V: RESULTS OF THE S T U D Y . . . . 48 S e c t i o n l a - Secondary Mainstream Survey R e s u l t s (Questions 1-16) 49 Research Quest ions 1-5 Survey R e s u l t s D i s c u s s i o n 59 S e c t i o n l b - Secondary Mainstream Survey R e s u l t s (Quest ion 17) 69 S e c t i o n 2 - Secondary Mainstream Interv iew R e s u l t s 79 Research Quest ions 1-5 In terv iew R e s u l t s D i s c u s s i o n 104 S e c t i o n 3 - Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom O b s e r v a t i o n R e s u l t s 113 Research Quest ions 1-5 O b s e r v a t i o n R e s u l t s D i s c u s s i o n 132 I n t e g r a t i o n o f the T r i a n g u l a t e d Methodology Data R e s u l t s 142 Chapter V I : SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH 148 Summary 148 Preamble to the Study I m p l i c a t i o n s 159 I m p l i c a t i o n s 160 For F u r t h e r Research. 165 References 168 Appendix A : P a r t i c i p a n t Consent Forms 174 Appendix B: Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey 181 Appendix C: Secondary Mainstream Educator Interv iew 187 Appendix D: Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom O b s e r v a t i o n Notes Sheet 192 Appendix E : A d d i t i o n a l Study Instrument(s) Comments and R e v i s i o n Suggest ions 196 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (ques t ions 1 - 1 6 ) . . . . 6 3 responses T a b l e 2 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (ques t ions 1-16) mode (Mode), median (Mdn), mean (M) s cores f o r ( a f f i r m a t i v e ) survey responses .66 T a b l e 3 A four s choo l per q u e s t i o n ( a f f i r m a t i v e ) survey responses mean (M) scores comparison f o r the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (quest ions 1-16) 67 Tab le 4 E n g l i s h , L i f e S k i l l s , Math, S c i e n c e , S o c i a l S t u d i e s per q u e s t i o n ( a f f i r m a t i v e ) survey responses mean (M) scores comparison f o r the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (quest ions 1 - 1 6 ) . . . . 6 8 Table 5 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator interview r e s u l t s 107 Tab le 6 A comparison of the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream and ESL c lassroom observation r e s u l t s 138 Tab le 7 Integrated survey , i n t e r v i e w , and o b s e r v a t i o n r e s u l t s f o r the f i v e r e s e a r c h ques t ions 145 V l l ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The investigator wishes to gratefully acknowledge the assistance and encouragement given by Doctors Richard Berwick, Stephen Carey, and Bernard Mohan of the UBC Department of Modern Languages. Special thanks are extended to Dr. John (Jack) Kehoe of the UBC Department of Social Studies Curriculum, for his patience, humour, support, and guidance throughout t h i s project. The l i s t of persons who deserve special mention for th i s project i s much too lengthy to be included in th i s acknowledgment. However, the investigator wishes to thank the Richmond School Board, a l l of the pa r t i c i p a t i n g school pr i n c i p a l s , and the teachers involved in this study. A special debt of gratitude i s owed to the investigator's family, for t h e i r patience, encouragement and assistance during the last two years. 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background to the Problem In 19 91 the government of Canada implemented a f i v e year Immigrat ion L e v e l s P l a n (1991-1995) to s u s t a i n c u r r e n t Canadian p o p u l a t i o n l e v e l s . In t o t a l , i t i s expected 1,220,000 immigrants (around one percent o f the p o p u l a t i o n per annum) w i l l a r r i v e i n Canada between 1991 and 1995 (F leras & E l l i o t , 1992; R i v e r s & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991). T r a d i t i o n a l l y , B r i t i s h Columbia (BC) has a t t r a c t e d 14% to 15% of Canada's new immigrants , and immigrants under 18 years of age have r e p r e s e n t e d 24% of a l l immigrants coming to BC. In the f i v e years between 1991 to 1995, i t i s e s t imated approx imate ly 32,000 school -age immigrant s tudents w i l l a r r i v e i n BC. S i x t y - s e v e n percent of these c h i l d r e n w i l l be unable to speak E n g l i s h (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991) . A c c o r d i n g t o a B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers F e d e r a t i o n (BCTF) s tudy, e igh t Vancouver lower mainland schoo l d i s t r i c t s are p r o v i d i n g almost 90% o f the E n g l i s h as a Second Language (ESL) and E n g l i s h as a Second D i a l e c t (ESD) programming and i n s t r u c t i o n i n BC; A b b o t s f o r d , Burnaby, C o q u i t l a m , North Vancouver, Richmond, Surrey , Vancouver, and V i c t o r i a (BCTF, 1994). The Vancouver School D i s t r i c t (VSD) remains by f a r the l a r g e s t s i n g l e p r o v i d e r of ESL/ESD s e r v i c e s w i th approx imate ly 47% of the d i s t r i c t ' s 55,000 p l u s s tudents r e c e i v i n g v a r y i n g degrees of ESL and ESD a s s i s t a n c e (BCTF, 1994). However, there 2 appears to be some s lowing of the r a t e o f growth i n Vancouver , as compared t o most of the remaining seven lower mainland schoo l d i s t r i c t s noted i n the BCTF s tudy . The Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) tops the l i s t f o r ESL/ESD growth s i n c e 1987-88. At the s t a r t of the 1993-94 schoo l year , 39% of the d i s t r i c t ' s approx imate ly 22,500 s tudents were r e c e i v i n g E n g l i s h language a s s i s t a n c e or i n s t r u c t i o n . T h i s f i g u r e marks a 2,581% i n c r e a s e i n ESL/ESD s e r v i c e s enro l lment i n j u s t s i x years (BCTF, 1994). In the RSD, 95% of new immigrant c h i l d r e n r e q u i r e some E n g l i s h language a s s i s t a n c e (Richmond School D i s t r i c t No. 38, 1994). In accordance wi th d i s t r i c t p o l i c y , ESL/ESD support s t a f f are a s s igned to a l l d i s t r i c t schools on the b a s i s o f s tudent need. I t i s expected the ESL/ESD p e r s o n n e l at each s c h o o l w i l l work with c lassroom teachers to ensure immigrant s tudents develop the E n g l i s h language s k i l l s , c u l t u r a l awareness, and l e a r n i n g s t r a t e g i e s necessary to master the r e g u l a r s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m (Richmond School D i s t r i c t No. 38, 1994). The d i s t r i c t advocates the language through content (Chamot & O ' M a l l e y , 1986; E a r l y , Thew & W a k e f i e l d , 1986; Mohan, 1986) ESL/ESD t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g paradigm, and uses a 5 -po int E n g l i s h language a b i l i t y s c a l e ; 1 = beg inner , 2 = lower i n t e r m e d i a t e , 3 = upper i n t e r m e d i a t e , 4 = advanced, 5 = f l u e n c y , to a s ses s , moni tor , and guide the i n t e g r a t i o n o f ESL and ESD students i n t o mainstream content c lassrooms (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991; Richmond School D i s t r i c t , No. 38, 1994; BCTF, 1994) . 3 The h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f immigrant s tudents i n the RSD, and d i s t r i c t p o l i c y : "neighbourhood s c h o o l s , i n c l u s i v e as much as p o s s i b l e ; i n t e g r a t i o n wi th p u l l - o u t ; no r e c e p t i o n c l a s s e s ; ESL/ESD a c q u i s i t i o n through content" (BCTF, 1994, p . 34) , make almost every t eacher r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o v i d i n g ESL and ESD a s s i s t a n c e . Some ESL r e p o r t s and resources suggest , however, mainstream educators are e x p e r i e n c i n g degrees o f p r o f e s s i o n a l f r u s t r a t i o n , d i f f i c u l t y , and ineptness i n the c la s sroom as a r e s u l t o f cop ing wi th ESL and ESD students i n t e g r a t i n g i n t o t h e i r c lassrooms (Ashworth, 1978; Ashworth & W a k e f i e l d , 1978; Board of E d u c a t i o n f o r the C i t y of Toronto , 1989; E a r l y , 1990; Law & Eckes , 1990; P e n f i e l d , 1987)-. For some mainstream h i g h s c h o o l e d u c a t o r s , d e a l i n g wi th and a d d r e s s i n g the d i v e r s e l i n g u a l , c u l t u r a l , f a m i l i a l , and e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f immigrant youths i s a new exper ience (Law & Eckes , 1990). Accustomed to a t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p founded i n a shared c u l t u r e , h i s t o r y , language, and formal educat ion background, h i g h s choo l educators i n the Vancouver lower mainland are now working wi th s tudents from over 80 d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s (Ashworth, Cummins, & Handscombe, 1989; S u l l i v a n , 1988) . In a VSD. survey (Reid, 1988), o n e - t h i r d o f the secondary ESL p u p i l s i n the VSD were many grade l e v e l s beh ind t h e i r age-peers i n unders tand ing and speaking E n g l i s h . Two f i f t h s were beh ind i n E n g l i s h r e a d i n g a b i l i t y , and about h a l f i n E n g l i s h w r i t i n g a b i l i t y . L i k e the VSD, the RSD immigrant student p o p u l a t i o n i s most ly A s i a n . A s i a has been the source o f a 4 r e l a t i v e l y h i g h percentage o f school -age immigrants . Dur ing the p e r i o d from 1988 to 1990, A s i a was the source o f 71% of a l l s choo l -age immigrants i n BC, and the source of 81% of a l l s choo l -age immigrants i n BC who were unable to speak E n g l i s h (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991). Immigration and secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction i s the focus of t h i s s tudy . To unders tand what e f f e c t i n c r e a s e d immigrat ion i s hav ing on the secondary mainstream c lassroom, t h i s study w i l l convey the expressed immigrant student i n t e g r a t i o n and i n s t r u c t i o n concerns of RSD educators v i a three data c o l l e c t i o n methods: (a) a secondary mainstream educator survey , (b) a secondary mainstream educator s t a n d a r d i z e d open-ended i n t e r v i e w , and (c) secondary mainstream and ESL c las sroom o b s e r v a t i o n s . I t i s the i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s hope t h a t the f i n d i n g s of t h i s s tudy: (a) a c c u r a t e l y represent the expressed immigrant student i n t e g r a t i o n and e d u c a t i o n concerns of the RSD sample group educators , and (b) may be used to b e n e f i t f u t u r e t eacher pre and i n - s e r v i c e immigrant student academic communication and instruction programs. Significance of the Study The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s study i s based on three o b s e r v a t i o n s : 1. Canadian immigrat ion p a t t e r n s are l i k e l y to i n c r e a s e the number of ESL students i n RSD secondary mainstream c lassrooms; 5 2. C u r r e n t RSD ESL l e a r n e r i n t e g r a t i o n p r a c t i c e s are l i k e l y to cont inue because o f the p r o v i n c i a l educat ion budget and because the BC M i n i s t r y of E d u c a t i o n has approved language a c q u i s i t i o n t h e o r i e s and p r a c t i c e s ( C o l l i e r , 1987; Cummins, 1979, 1980; E a r l y et a l . , 1986; Mohan, 1986) tha t promote i n t e g r a t i o n ; and, 3. I f RSD h i g h schoo l mainstream educators are encounter ing academic communication and i n s t r u c t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s i n t h e i r c lassrooms , i n f o r m a t i o n f o r e d u c a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g ( i . e . supply u s e f u l sources) must be p r o v i d e d . A b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n of each p o i n t f o l l o w s . 1. P r i o r to 1967, Canada's immigrat ion laws d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a i n s t A s i a n s and those from t h i r d world c o u n t r i e s (Ashworth et a l . , 1989). A change i n the Immigration Act opened the door to those who had been denied e n t r y due to race or n a t i o n a l i t y . I t a l s o a l lowed people i n Canada to sponsor r e l a t i v e s who had been l e f t b e h i n d , and i t e s t a b l i s h e d a generous p o l i c y towards refugees (Ashworth et a l . , 1989) . The r a t i o n a l e behind t h i s measure was t h r e e f o l d : economics, demographics , and p o l i t i c s . In 1967, Canada, a r e l a t i v e l y young and n a t u r a l resource r i c h country , faced an a l a r m i n g r e a l i t y . The p o p u l a t i o n growth f i g u r e s f o r the country had slowed c o n s i d e r a b l y . ( F l e r a s & E l l i o t , 1992). Canada's t h r i v i n g economic growth and d e v e l o p i n g world-wide r e p u t a t i o n as a F i r s t 6 World l e a d e r was i n j eopardy . The d e c i s i o n was made to i n c r e a s e i m m i g r a t i o n . S ince 1967, Canadian immigrat ion f i g u r e s have recorded an annual average o f about 90,000 newcomers to Canada per year ( F l e r a s & E l l i o t , 1992). Recent ly however, a f e d e r a l government f i v e year (1991 to 1995) immigrat ion p l a n has i n c r e a s e d the annual immigrat ion f i g u r e to a q u a r t e r m i l l i o n people per year e n t e r i n g Canada. The expected t o t a l number o f newcomers to a r r i v e d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d i s around 1,220,000 persons (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991). I t i s e s t imated tha t o f the 1,220,000 immigrants , approx imate ly 14%, or 166,200 persons , w i l l be d e s t i n e d f o r BC. It i s a n t i c i p a t e d at l e a s t 21,300 of the immigrants w i l l be schoo l -aged c h i l d r e n without the a b i l i t y to speak E n g l i s h . About 80% of these immigrant c h i l d r e n w i l l be e n r o l l e d i n Vancouver lower mainland s c h o o l s . E x p e r t s f e e l a l l o f these f i g u r e s are c o n s e r v a t i v e (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991). Immigration i s important to Canada. I t he lps m a i n t a i n the s tandard o f l i v i n g , i t keeps the tax base f i r m , and i t keeps the number o f young and o l d i n Canada somewhat ba lanced ( F l e r a s & E l l i o t , 1992). The demographic f o r e c a s t i s Canada w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce i t s immigrat ion flow around the year 2010 ( F l e r a s & E l l i o t , 1992). But u n t i l then , immigrat ion i s a Canadian r e a l i t y . 2. In a recent BC p r o v i n c i a l government p u b l i c t e l e v i s i o n broadcas t (Harcourt , 1993), the premier announced e d u c a t i o n ' 7 would r e c e i v e a 3% i n c r e a s e i n government funding f o r the 1993-94 f i s c a l y e a r . With t h i s funding w e l l below the BC annual i n f l a t i o n r a t e , wi th t eacher c o n t r a c t s f o r e v e r o u t s t a n d i n g , wi th two budgetary submiss ion dead l ines per year (Ashworth et a l . , 1989), and wi th the r e a l i t y o f an ESL s t u d e n t ' s e d u c a t i o n c o s t i n g an a d d i t i o n a l $800.00 per year (Rivers & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991), the f i n a n c i a l s i t u a t i o n o f e d u c a t i o n i n BC looks tenuous at b e s t . Ashworth et ' a l . (1989, p.23) p o i n t out the l i n k between an i n c r e a s i n g immigrant student p o p u l a t i o n and e d u c a t i o n a l f i n a n c i n g : " f a i l u r e to acknowledge t h i s f a c t [ l i n k ] c r e a t e s an a r t i f i c i a l d i v i s i o n tha t u l t i m a t e l y serves the i n t e r e s t s n e i t h e r of s t a f f nor s tudents and r e s u l t s i n a p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f expens ive 'add-on ' programs". Consequent ly , as the immigrant s tudent p o p u l a t i o n i n the Richmond School D i s t r i c t becomes the mainstream, the RSD has attempted t o i n t e g r a t e ESL s tudents i n t o the s c h o o l mainstream as e a r l y as p o s s i b l e . The RSD p r a c t i c e s integrating the teaching of language and content w i t h i n the i n s t r u c t i o n a l program of the r e g u l a r c lassroom whenever p o s s i b l e (BC M i n i s t r y of E d u c a t i o n , 1986). Beyond the r e a l i t y of an ESL mainstream l i e s the need f o r t eachers t o understand the time needed f o r ESL s tudents to a c q u i r e c o g n i t i v e academic s k i l l s equa l to those o f t h e i r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o u n t e r p a r t s . A c c o r d i n g to the BC M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n (1986, p . 3) " i t now must be acknowledged t h a t the second language a c q u i s i t i o n process takes t ime: e x p e c t i n g q u i c k 8 and f u l l - f l e d g e d competence i s u n r e a l i s t i c . " Language acquisition theorists, (Collier, 1987; Cummins, 1979, 1980), now feel i t takes six to seven years for an ESL student to master academic English. The integration time and cost-per-student implications of this view of second language learning in schools, underscore the importance of quality mainstream high school classroom instruction. 3. The l i t e r a t u r e seems to suggest that the teacher i s the key to program implementation, and ultimately to the success of students i n academic programs (Eisner, 1983; M i l l e r & Seller, 1990; Parish & Arends, 1983; Penfield, 1987; Tiedt & Tiedt, 1990). Programs are l i k e l y to f a l t e r i f teachers are encountering academic communication and instruction problems in thei r classrooms. Do RSD secondary mainstream educators have s u f f i c i e n t teaching s k i l l s , teaching resources, teaching time, or teacher aides to f a c i l i t a t e immigrant students in their classrooms? If the cu l t u r a l p l u r a l i s t assumption that ethnic minorities have unique learning styles i s true (Banks, 1981), teachers may need to know how to revise their teaching strategies so that they are "more consistent with the cognitive and l i f e s t y l e s of ethnic group students" (Banks, 1981, p. 63). If teachers are struggling s o c i a l l y in their classrooms (feeling out of place), they may need more cross-cultural background knowledge. And i f teachers are feeling uneasy or reluctant to address the challenges heterogeneous classes pose, they may need to be 9 h e l p e d to see the s i t u a t i o n as c h a l l e n g i n g i n s t e a d of t h r e a t e n i n g (Ashworth, 1978; R i v e r s & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1 9 9 1 ) . With a 1989 p r o v i n c i a l h igh s c h o o l drop-out r a t e o f 34.9% (Maclean's Magazine, 1993) , r e spons ive h i g h s c h o o l e d u c a t i o n i n BC i s c r i t i c a l i n the f o l l o w i n g way: i f our schoo l s are the chosen agents o f r e g u l a t i o n and s o c i a l change (Rodrigues , 1992) , and our t e a c h e r s the experts, t o ensure re spons ive e d u c a t i o n , i t makes sense to i n v o l v e t eachers i n educat ion i n n o v a t i o n and change. ESL educat ion i s no e x c e p t i o n . The expressed concerns of t e a c h e r s thus p r o v i d e an important source of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r change and i n n o v a t i o n i n immigrant student e d u c a t i o n . Overview of the Study The f i r s t chapter has p r o v i d e d an i n t r o d u c t i o n , some background, and a r a t i o n a l e f o r the s tudy . The second chapter i s a review of the r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e . Chapter I I I w i l l i n c l u d e a statement o f the' problem, the five research questions to be answered, a d e f i n i t i o n of terms, and the study assumptions , d e l i m i t a t i o n s and l i m i t a t i o n s . Chapter IV w i l l present d e t a i l s r e g a r d i n g the r e s e a r c h des ign and procedure , the p o p u l a t i o n , the development o f the data c o l l e c t i o n ins truments , and the s t a t i s t i c a l methods used to analyze the d a t a . The r e s u l t s o f the study w i l l be presented i n Chapter V . The f i n a l chapter w i l l i n c l u d e a summary of the f i n d i n g s , t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r d e c i s i o n makers, program deve lopers and t e a c h e r s , as w e l l as sugges t ions f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h . 10 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND THEORY Today's heterogeneous mainstream h i g h schoo l c la s sroom i s complex environment . Hence, t h i s r e s e a r c h and theory review w i l l be l i m i t e d to three areas : (a) a h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e of ESL e d u c a t i o n i n Canada, (b) a d e s c r i p t i o n o f a key concept i n second language a c q u i s i t i o n of academic language (Cummins, 1981 1983; Mohan, 1979, 1982, 1986) adopted by the BC M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n (1986), and, (c) a look at the scope and c a l l f o r educator pre and i n - s e r v i c e educat ion r e l a t e d t o t e a c h i n g immigrant s tudents i n the mainstream c las sroom. ESL H i s t o r i c a l Perspective The e a r l i e s t o f f i c i a l l a r g e - s c a l e government p r o v i s i o n f o r immigrants to Canada who wished to l e a r n E n g l i s h , s u r f a c e d a f t e the Second World War. A post -war i n f l u x of immigrants , p r i m a r i l y o f European descent , t r i g g e r e d a need f o r a more c o o r d i n a t e d and p r o f e s s i o n a l approach to ESL e d u c a t i o n . " P r o v i n c i a l governments began to p r o v i d e language and c i t i z e n s h i p programs f o r a d u l t newcomers, s c h o o l boards set up s p e c i a l language c l a s s e s f o r immigrant c h i l d r e n , and the growth of community c o l l e g e s l e d to the development of ESL programs at the p o s t - s e c o n d a r y l e v e l " ( A l l e n & Swain, 1984, p . 7) . E a r l y ESL programs were r e l a t i v e l y u n c o m p l i c a t e d . In most s c h o o l s , immigrant c h i l d r e n were s imply mainstreamed i n the 11 sink or swim f a s h i o n ( E s l i n g , 1989). S p e c i a l i z e d language c l a s s e s were a r a r e f i n d i n these e a r l y days o f a s s i m i l a t i o n . Then, most second language (L2) t h e o r i s t s "assumed t h a t knowing a language i n v o l v e d knowing a number of items and t h e i r p o t e n t i a l arrangement; t h i s i tem and arrangement grammar was j u s t s t a r t i n g to be c h a l l e n g e d by a n o t i o n o f items and p r o c e s s e s ( r u l e s ) " (Spolsky, 1989, p . 31) . The n o t i o n tha t L2 a c q u i s i t i o n and p r o f i c i e n c y was i n f l u e n c e d by f i r s t language (LI) l e a r n i n g and c u l t u r a l background was g iven l i t t l e thought . The direct approach ( C e l c e - M u r c i a , 1983), no use o f mother tongue o n l y the t a r g e t language, was c o n s i d e r e d the way to l e a r n a second language. Thus, i n these e a r l y days, an immigrant s t u d e n t ' s f i r s t language was b a s i c a l l y i g n o r e d and r e p l a c e d by E n g l i s h . T h i s English-only model p r e v a i l e d u n t i l the l a t e s i x t i e s . The l a t e 1960s and e a r l y 1970s were some of the most i n t e r e s t i n g years i n Canadian e d u c a t i o n , and i n the w o r l d . Canada became p a r t of a much b i g g e r world community. I t was a t ime of he ightened awareness and compassion. F o r example, a change i n the Canadian Immigration Act (1967), opened the door to A s i a n s and those from t h i r d wor ld c o u n t r i e s who had been den ied e n t r y to Canada due to race or n a t i o n a l i t y (Ashworth et a l . , 1989). As a measure of cont inued g o o d w i l l , 1971 marked Canada's f i r s t o f f i c i a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l s tance (Royal Commission on B i l i n g u a l i s m and B i c u l t u r a l i s m ) . T h i s document r e c o g n i z e d the m i n o r i t y members o f Canada's f a s t growing m u l t i c u l t u r a l 12 s o c i e t y , and encouraged m i n o r i t y group p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h i n the b i l i n g u a l framework of Canada (Shapson & D ' O y l e y , 1984). As a r e s u l t , soon a f t e r these announcements, a second, much more s u b s t a n t i a l , i n f l u x o f immigrants , t h i s t ime p r i m a r i l y made up of A f r i c a n s , A s i a n s , South and L a t i n Americans and Car ibbean immigrants a r r i v e d i n Canada ( U n g e r l e i d e r , 1986). In t h e i r midst was a s i z a b l e number o f n o n - E n g l i s h speaking s c h o o l - a g e d c h i l d r e n . As the number o f ESL students i n Canadian schoo l s grew, a need f o r a more respons ive and m u l t i c u l t u r a l approach to ESL e d u c a t i o n a r o s e . Faced with s tudents from an assortment of c u l t u r a l backgrounds, most f a r removed from the European c o n t i n e n t , the sink or swim method of the 50s and 60s was out o f the q u e s t i o n . More s p e c i a l i z e d language c l a s s e s appeared i n s c h o o l s . New ESL program aims came to i n c l u d e not o n l y e f f e c t i v e t e a c h i n g of the m a j o r i t y language, but a l s o he lp wi th unders tand ing o f the Canadian c u l t u r e . Towards the end of the 1970s ESL educat ion i n Canada was s t i l l s t r u g g l i n g because of a shortage of ESL s p e c i a l i s t s , a l a c k o f ESL m a t e r i a l s , space, or f u n d i n g . To compensate, immigrant s tudents were mainstreamed a g a i n , t h i s t ime , on ly p a r t - t i m e , and u s u a l l y on ly i n t o e l e c t i v e s u b j e c t s l i k e P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n , A r t , or Home Economics . S u r p r i s i n g l y enough, t h i s cost-effective i n t e g r a t i o n move was supported by a number o f prominent L2 a c q u i s i t i o n t h e o r i s t s . Second language r e s e a r c h e r s were now conv inced of a p o s i t i v e l i n k between L I and L2 l e a r n i n g 13 ( C o l l i e r , 1987; Cummins, 1979; Spo l sky , 1989). No longer was i t b e l i e v e d t h a t LI i n t e r f e r e d wi th L2 a c q u i s i t i o n . Terms l i k e five axioms (Labov, 1969), interlanguage, observable output ( S e l i n k e r , 1969, 1971), approximate systems (Nemser, 1971), performance vs competence (D ickerson , 1974), study of errors (Corder , 1967), and Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) vs Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) (Cummins, 1982) h i n t at the way a l e a r n e r ' s f i r s t and second language were l i n k e d i n the minds o f r e s e a r c h e r s d u r i n g the 60s and 70s. C o n t i n u e d immigrat ion growth through the 1980s and i n t o the 90s t r i g g e r e d a need f o r a more i n t e g r a t e d and c u l t u r a l l y i n c l u s i v e approach to ESL e d u c a t i o n . Today's ESL programs, more s e n s i t i v e o f the needs o f the c u l t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t ESL l e a r n e r , are more s o p h i s t i c a t e d and thorough . S i x programs of v a r y i n g degrees of i n t e g r a t i o n are used e x t e n s i v e l y f o r h e l p i n g ESL s tudents l e a r n E n g l i s h and f e e l at home i n Canada: (a) d i s t r i c t r e c e p t i o n c l a s s e s , (b) s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s e s ( f u l l and h a l f -day) , (c) p u l l - o u t c l a s s e s ( school -based and i t i n e r a n t t e a c h e r s , (d) i n - c l a s s ESL support (e lementary) , (e) t r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s , and (f) ESL and l e a r n i n g a s s i s t a n c e (BC M i n i s t r y o f E d . , 1981; 1993). To f a c i l i t a t e ESL students i n the mainstream c lassroom, the use o f content -based second language i n s t r u c t i o n models ( B r i n t o n , Snow & Wesche, 1989; Chamot & O ' M a l l e y , 1986; Mohan, 1986) tha t promote language l e a r n i n g through content are b e i n g used . A move to preserve and promote the union of L1-L2 14 language in the home and in school i s also occurring. In the VSD, some heritage language elementary school classes do exist. The preferred L2 acquisition model of the 80s and 90s i s the communicative approach which grew out of the work of anthropological lin g u i s t s l i k e Hymes (1972) and Fi r t h i a n l i n g u i s t s l i k e Halliday (1973) . The communicative approach to L2 acquisition 1 i s communication grounded; "[t]he purpose of language (and thus the goal of language teaching) i s communication" (Celce-Murcia, 1983, p. 8 ) . Using real language for real purposes in a more integrated and c u l t u r a l l y inclusive classroom i s the focus of L2 acquisition today. ESL Acquisition Theory The language through content ESL approach u t i l i z e d by the BC Ministry of Education i s oriented to the ideas of Dr. Jim Cummins and Dr. Bernard Mohan. Adopted for use in ESL curriculum planning, and for use in the classroom, Cummins' (1981, 1983) depiction of cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP), and Mohan's (1979, 1982, 1986) knowledge structures and use of key visuals in instruction make up the bulk of a BC Ministry of Education ESL K-12 Resource Book (1986), designed for use in both the ESL and the mainstream classroom. Cummins (1979) argues that "cognitive/academic language proficiency i s a key to academic success and a major factor in effective second-language education. If ESL students are to reach th e i r potential for academic achievement, positive steps 15 must be taken to coordinate their development of cognitive s k i l l s and academic language" (Esling, 1989, p. 1 0 7 ) . Cummins (1982) developed a two-tier L2 acquisition model: (a) so c i a l communicative proficiency (the f i r s t one to two years), and (b) academic communicative proficiency (years three to seven). The gap between interpersonal and soc i a l proficiency, and academic proficiency (that i s i f the L2 learner wishes to reach a l e v e l of proficiency in English comparable to that of native speakers of the same age) in the Cummins model i s quite sizable — as indicated by the greater amount of time learners need in order to achieve proficiency in academic subjects. "What i s needed then to help students bridge the gap between s o c i a l acquisition and f u l l s o c i a l and academic l i n g u i s t i c competency in the mainstream classroom i s a care f u l l y articulated approach and program which integrates the teaching of language and the teaching of subject-area knowledge" (Esling, 1989, p. 1 0 8 ) . In 1986, Professor Bernard Mohan developed a language and content integration model based on general a c t i v i t i e s and the i r r e l a t i o n to discourse. The model, called the knowledge framework, i s comprised of six types of knowledge structures and thinking s k i l l s commonly found in general a c t i v i t i e s ; (a) description, (b) sequence, (c) choice, (d) c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , (e) prin c i p l e s , and (f) evaluation. Mohan asserts that topics or content can be broken down into at least these six major structures of knowledge. He also asserts that each of these d i s t i n c t knowledge structures has i t ' s own brand of discourse, 16 and can be r e p r e s e n t e d g r a p h i c a l l y by key visuals. Key v i s u a l s ( for example graphs , t a b l e s , diagrams) have no or lowered l i n g u i s t i c demands and can he lp both ESL and n a t i v e E n g l i s h -speaking l e a r n e r s to unders tand conten t . The v i s u a l s have three major a p p l i c a t i o n s : (a) g e n e r a t i v e , t o promote language g e n e r a t i o n ( r e l a t e d to c o n t e n t ) , (b) r e p r e s e n t a t i v e or e x p l a n a t o r y , t o i n c r e a s e content u n d e r s t a n d i n g , and (c) e v a l u a t i v e , t o e v a l u a t e content and language unders tand ing (BC M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n , 1990; E s l i n g , 1989). Mohan's knowledge framework and key visuals render content or subjec t matter knowledge i n t o manageable "student tasks which i n t e g r a t e the development o f academic d i s c o u r s e and the comprehension of content" ( E s l i n g , 1989, p . 110). The foundat ion o f the ESL t h e o r e t i c a l framework adopted by the BC M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n i s the s imultaneous development of language and content knowledge. Whether r e g u l a r h i g h s c h o o l c las sroom teachers are aware o f t h i s theory of ESL p l a n n i n g i s one q u e s t i o n t h i s study hopes to answer. Mainstream Educator Pre and In-Service Education Immigrant e d u c a t i o n i s h a r d l y a new i s s u e : e s p e c i a l l y i n Canada. However, the idea o f mainstream teachers hav ing to s i g n i f i c a n t l y a d j u s t t h e i r t e a c h i n g s t y l e s to accommodate a growing immigrant student p o p u l a t i o n i s new. In the p a s t , . i t was the immigrant l e a r n e r who had t o a s s i m i l a t e (Ashworth, 1978). But the changing c u l t u r e of t o d a y ' s c lassrooms has initiated a need f o r the mainstream c lassroom teacher to r e f l e c t 17 and perhaps change. The word " i n i t i a t e d " i s i t a l i c i z e d because "training in multicultural education i s a r e l a t i v e l y recent phenomenon in teacher preparation" (Villegas, 1991, p. 44), pre-service or otherwise. "In a preliminary report on what i s to date the only attempt to survey nationally the work of Canadian f a c u l t i e s of education in the area of multicultural' teacher education, Masemann and Mock (198 6) could ident i f y only two fa c u l t i e s (at the Universities of Ottawa and Alberta) that included in t h e i r pre-service programs compulsory courses in the area of multicultural education" (Henley, 1991, p. 24). At the school service l e v e l , a similar situation seems to exist. Educators in eight BC lower mainland school d i s t r i c t s s i g n i f i c a n t l y affected by immigration were asked to rate the in-servicing provided by th e i r d i s t r i c t s on multicultural issues. "The 108 responses provided to this question indicate that few educators are enthusiastic about th e i r d i s t r i c t s ' efforts at in-servicing on multicultural education issues" (Rivers & Associates Consultants, 1991, p. 70) . A need for more and improved teacher training i s not re s t r i c t e d to Canada. A 1980-81 Teachers of Language S k i l l s Survey (NABE News, 1984; O'Malley & Waggoner, 1984; Waggoner & O'Malley, 1985) of public school teachers in the United States revealed that "although half of a l l public school teachers had current or previous experience with LEP [limited English proficiency] students in the i r classes, only 6% had taken one or 1 8 more academic or nonacademic courses to l e a r n how to t each such s tudents" ( P e n f i e l d , 1987, p . 21) . The f o l l o w i n g c i t a t i o n s from r e l a t e d e d u c a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e l i k e w i s e ev idence the need f o r more and improved mainstream teacher e d u c a t i o n : S t a f f development should ensure t h a t a l l i n - s e r v i c e i n c l u d e as an o b j e c t i v e the development o f s t a f f s k i l l s i n working e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h a m u l t i l i n g u a l / m u l t i c u l t u r a l / m u l t i r a c i a l p o p u l a t i o n . (Ashworth et a l . , 1989, p . 37) S p e c i a l courses f o r t eachers p l a n n i n g to work i n i n t e r c u l t u r a l s i t u a t i o n s g i v i n g some knowledge o f the c u l t u r e and some i n s t r u c t i o n i n methodologies t h a t might prove to be more e f f e c t i v e than c o n v e n t i o n a l ones. ( F r i e s e n , 1985, p . 80) Many t eachers l a c k c lassroom management s k i l l s v i t a l t o s u c c e s s f u l t e a c h i n g o f m i n o r i t y s t u d e n t s . ( H i l l , 1989, p . v i ) [D]emographic changes i n c r e a s e demand f o r t eachers t r a i n i n g i n m u l t i c u l t u r a l e d u c a t i o n . ( O l i v e r a s & Lopez , 1991, p . 6) More t r a i n i n g i n h a n d l i n g the LEP student must be p r o v i d e d f o r r e g u l a r c lassroom teachers and a d m i n i -s t r a t o r s . ( P e n f i e l d , 1987, p . 35) Mandatory i n t e r c u l t u r a l / c r o s s - c u l t u r a l t r a i n i n g i s recommended f o r p r e - s e r v i c e and i n - s e r v i c e p u b l i c s c h o o l t e a c h e r s ; as schools become s i t e s f o r c o n c e n t r a t e d r a c i a l d i v e r s i t y , the t eachers r o l e i s v i t a l . (Simms, 1991, p . 26) Teachers s k i l l e d i n m u l t i c u l t u r a l e d u c a t i o n are u r g e n t l y needed now, and they w i l l be even more necessary as m i n o r i t y c h i l d r e n become the m a j o r i t y of the s choo l -aged p o p u l a t i o n i n the near f u t u r e . ( V i l l e g a s , 1991, p . 44) Teachers themselves have s t a t e d a need and d e s i r e f o r more and improved m i n o r i t y educat ion teacher t r a i n i n g : 1 9 A l l c lassroom teachers need i n f o r m a t i o n on m u l t i -c u l t u r a l i s sues and s t r a t e g i e s f o r meeting the needs o f ESL students i n the "regu lar" c l a s s r o o m , ( teacher unknown — R i v e r s & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991, p . 73) Main i s sues and a t t r i b u t e s o f the c u l t u r e . Teaching s t r a t e g i e s f o r g e n e r a l use i n r e g u l a r c l a s s e s t h a t would b e n e f i t ESL students whi le not d e p r i v i n g the o t h e r s , ( teacher unknown — R i v e r s & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s , 1991, p . 73) These c i t a t i o n s argue f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t need f o r f u r t h e r t eacher pre and i n - s e r v i c e educat ion to meet the c h a l l e n g e s o f t o d a y ' s mainstream c la s sroom. But what of the c u r r e n t methods or at tempts , t h e i r focus , and t h e i r l e v e l ( s ) of e f f e c t i v e n e s s ? '* In a study conducted i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , S l a v i n and Madden (1979) found t h a t changing e d u c a t o r s ' a t t i t u d e s through workshops and r e v i s i n g the c u r r i c u l u m had almost no impact on measures o f s tudent b e h a v i o r and a t t i t u d e s . S i m i l a r l y , Kehoe (1984, 1990) has s t a t e d : There are two problems a s s o c i a t e d wi th c r o s s - c u l t u r a l programs des igned to enhance the e f f e c t i v e n e s s and a d a p t a b i l i t y of educators working i n m u l t i c u l t u r a l c l a s srooms . Programs des igned to improve c e r t a i n a t t r i b u t e s among teachers t y p i c a l l y t each about empathy, p r e j u d i c e , and e t h n o c e n t r i s m . The assumption i s tha t when you know what empathy i s , you w i l l become more empathet ic . Second, t eachers may be ab le to demonstrate knowledge o f a p p r o p r i a t e behav iour , but they may not be ab le to behave i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t wi th tha t knowledge, (p. 34) 20 On the o ther hand, there i s l i t e r a t u r e to support the argument tha t "teachers can have a p o s i t i v e impact on the academic growth of m i n o r i t y s tudents" ( V i l l e g a s , 1991, p . 3 ) . Rosenshine and F u r s t ' s (1971) a n a l y s i s o f some 42 (mostly c o - r e l a t i o n a l ) s t u d i e s conc luded tha t there were e leven t eacher processes s t r o n g l y and c o n s i s t e n t l y r e l a t e d to student achievement or a t t i t u d e s ; one o f the top f i v e b e i n g p r o v i d i n g s tudents wi th the o p p o r t u n i t y to l e a r n which conveys a need f o r s p e c i a l i z e d immigrant student t eacher t r a i n i n g . L i t e r a t u r e a l s o suggests tha t t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t e x p e c t a t i o n l e v e l s and r o l e - m o d e l i n g have an e f f e c t on student a t t i t u d e s and achievement ( G a r c i a , 1978; H i l l , 1989; P e n f i e l d , 1987; V i l l e g a s , 1991). I f t h i s i s the case , t e a c h e r pre and i n - s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n w i l l complement t o d a y ' s changing secondary mainstream c la s sroom. The purpose o f t h i s study i s t o generate the expressed immigrant student educat ion concerns of a group of RSD secondary mainstream e d u c a t o r s . In the next c h a p t e r , the focus , assumptions , and parameters of t h i s study w i l l be d e f i n e d . 21 CHAPTER III THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem The problem to be studied i s based on four questions: (a) Is increased immigrant student integration in the RSD having an effect on secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction?; (b) If "Yes", what kind of an effect i s being f e l t ? ; (c) How are RSD secondary mainstream educators handling increased immigrant student integration?; and, (d) What are the expressed immigrant student concerns of RSD secondary mainstream educators? Research Questions to be Answered This study w i l l attempt to provide answers to the following questions: 1. Do RSD secondary mainstream educators know the quantity of immigrant students in their classrooms, and the academic, l i n g u i s t i c , and cu l t u r a l backgrounds of these students? 2. Do immigrant students have different academic communication and instruction needs than English-speaking students? 3. Do RSD secondary mainstream educators f e e l t h e i r current teaching practices and levels of expertise are adequate to reach a l l learners? 4. Are RSD secondary mainstream educators comfortable 22 dealing with growing immigrant student integration? 5. What needs to be done for, or what additional support needs to be offered to, (or both), RSD secondary mainstream educators currently dealing with increased immigrant student integration? Definition of Terms 1. IMMIGRANT STUDENT - Within this study, the term immigrant student refers to youths who: a) are 13 to 19 years of age, b) have been in Canada three years or less, and c) arrived in Canada with l i t t l e or no English language speaking a b i l i t y . 2. ACADEMIC COMMUNICATION - Refers to the oral and written academic discourse between teachers and students (i.e., language used in academic contexts, learner's background knowledge applied to academic contexts). 3. ACADEMIC INSTRUCTION - Refers to the oral and written academic content instruction employed by teachers (i.e. , direct one-way lecture, small learning groups, v i s u a l / graphic presentation). Assumptions For the purpose of this study, i t i s assumed that: 1. Secondary mainstream educator expressed concerns can be measured by means of the survey choice made of a position on a Likert-type 5-point scale. 2 . The w o r d i n g o f the s u r v e y and i n t e r v i e w i t ems i s such t h a t t h e secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r s w i l l u n d e r s t a n d t h e meaning o f t he i t e m s . 3 . Secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r s w i l l u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h i s s t udy i s not an e v a l u a t i o n o f t he e x i s t i n g immigran t s t uden t i n t e g r a t i o n p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s i n t he RSD bu t r a t h e r an a t tempt t o uncove r t h e i r expressed immigrant student academic communication and instruction concerns. 4. Secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r s w i l l answer a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f what ought t o be r a t h e r t han what t h e y f e e l the m a j o r i t y o f e d u c a t i o n s t a k e h o l d e r s would e x p e c t . Delimitations The p r e s e n t s tudy i s d e l i m i t e d i n the f o l l o w i n g ways: 1. S i n c e the secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r s were from f o u r o f n i n e secondary s c h o o l i n the RSD, t h e i r e x p r e s s e d conce rns and the o b s e r v a t i o n d a t a c o l l e c t e d may r e f l e c t c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c s o c i a l , economic , and e d u c a t i o n a l v a l u e s not common t o o t h e r secondary s c h o o l s i n t h e RSD o r t he Vancouver l o w e r m a i n l a n d . T h e r e f o r e , t he r e s u l t s o f t h i s s tudy cannot be g e n e r a l i z e d beyond the p o p u l a t i o n i n v o l v e d i n the s t u d y . 2 . The r e s u l t s o f the s tudy might have been d i f f e r e n t i f d a t a from t e a c h e r s who d e c l i n e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the s tudy was i n c l u d e d . 24 L i m i t a t i o n s The i n v e s t i g a t o r r e a l i z e s tha t the f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s l i m i t the s tudy: 1. The c o l l e c t i o n of most of the data w i l l be completed by r e c r u i t i n g , by meeting w i t h , and by o b s e r v i n g the v o l u n t e e r s . The f a c t t h a t the t e a c h e r - v o l u n t e e r s meet the i n v e s t i g a t o r might a f f e c t the way they respond. A l though the respondents are a s sured of anonymity, a c e r t a i n apprehens ion might d i r e c t them to answer or conduct themselves d i f f e r e n t l y than they would i f the i n v e s t i g a t o r was more d i s t a n t . 2. The wording and s e l e c t i o n of the survey , i n t e r v i e w , and o b s e r v a t i o n items may r e f l e c t the i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s secondary mainstream educator b i a s e s . 3. ,The survey ques t ions ask t eachers to look at t h e i r t e a c h i n g assignment as a whole to determine t h e i r responses . An assessment based on t e a c h e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n may not a c c u r a t e l y on the whole represent the i n d i v i d u a l c lassroom s i t u a t i o n s . 4. The i n t e r v i e w r e s u l t s are subjec t ed to the b e n e f i t s and l i m i t a t i o n s of a s t a n d a r d i z e d open-ended i n t e r v i e w format . 5. Only 13 members of the secondary mainstream educators sample group w i l l be i n t e r v i e w e d . I f the whole group was i n t e r v i e w e d , the r e s u l t s might be d i f f e r e n t . 6. The c lassroom o b s e r v a t i o n s are o b t a i n e d by a foreign 25 i n v e s t i g a t o r and may be b i a s e d by t h a t p r e s e n c e . 7. ESL secondary c l a s s r o o m o b s e r v a t i o n s a re h a l f t he number o f t he secondary ma ins t r eam o b s e r v a t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , t he ESL c l a s s r o o m o b s e r v a t i o n d a t a may be l e s s r e l i a b l e . The r e s e a r c h d e s i g n s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s s t udy i s o u t l i n e d and d i s c u s s e d i n c h a p t e r f o u r . As w e l l , t he r e s e a r c h p r o c e d u r e , t he s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , t he t h r e e r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t s , and the d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and t a b u l a t i o n a re a l s o p r e s e n t e d i n c h a p t e r f o u r . 26 CHAPTER IV DESIGN OF THE STUDY T h i s s e c t i o n i s d i v i d e d i n t o three p a r t s : (a) the r e s e a r c h des ign and procedure , (b) an overview of the study p o p u l a t i o n and data c o l l e c t i o n ins truments , and (c) a review of the data t a b u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s . The Research Design U n t i l the l a t t e r h a l f of t h i s c e n t u r y , the p r i n c i p l e s and c r i t e r i a o f r e s e a r c h (seen fundamental ly as scientific method) were s o l i d l y r o o t e d i n the e m p i r i c a l test of exacting exper iences o f the p h y s i c a l and b i o l o g i c a l s c i ences (Blumer, 1966). However, i n the 1960s, the s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c i ences p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y c h a l l e n g e d the t e s t e d p r i n c i p l e s o f s c i e n t i f i c study (as) developed i n the p h y s i c a l and b i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c e s : Such " p r i n c i p l e s " have not been c l e a r l y and f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d . They cannot be wrapped up i n a neat , packaged scheme, ready to g ive u n i v e r s a l l y a c c e p t a b l e guidance to s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s and p s y c h o l o g i s t s . Ins tead , i t i s c l e a r t h a t s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s and p s y c h o l o g i s t s s e l e c t , c o n s t r u c t , and work wi th d i v e r g e n t and f r e q u e n t l y i n c o n s i s t e n t concept ions o f the essence of s c i e n t i f i c procedure (Blumer, 1966, p . v ) . Since' the 1960s, e thnographic r e s e a r c h (a long e s t a b l i s h e d a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h method) has been g a i n i n g p o p u l a r i t y and acceptance , e s p e c i a l l y i n s o c i a l s c i ence r e s e a r c h (McMil lan & Schumacher, 1989). An interactive approach, which r e q u i r e s ex t ens ive time i n the f i e l d to observe , i n t e r v i e w , and to r e c o r d 27 processes as they occur naturally in the selected s i t e , ethno-graphic research complements the naturalistic-phenomenological perspective of human behaviour in the so c i a l sciences. Ethnographic research has been called educational anthropology, participant-observation, field research, and naturalistic inquiry. The second term, participant-observation (Bruyn, 1966) , i s the preferred design t i t l e for this study. In t h i s study, the term, participant-observation, " s i g n i f i e s the relationship which the human observer of human beings cannot escape - having to participate in some fashion in the experience and action of those he observes" (Blumer, 1966, p. v i ) . The investigator i s both a participant in and an observer of the society studied. There can be no separation of participant and observer i f "what makes people human", and "the nature of man in society" are to be f u l l y understood (Bruyn, 1966, xv). This phenomenological approach w i l l provide an understanding of the effect increased immigration in the RSD i s having on secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction from the teacher participants' views of th e i r s o c i a l r e a l i t i e s (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989) . In order to examine and understand the perspectives of the teacher volunteers, the observer w i l l learn to view and report the world of his/her subjects from their perspective. Preconceptions and stereotypes are forsaken; a f l e x i b l e and r e l a t i v i s t i c stance w i l l be adopted (Denzin, 1970 ) . To ensure the r e l i a b i l i t y of the research findings, the participant-28 observer w i l l employ a m u l t i p l e method p r o c e d u r a l approach; document a n a l y s i s ( survey) , i n t e r v i e w s , and c las sroom p a r t i c i p a n t - o b s e r v a t i o n s — a triangulated methodology (Denzin, 1970, 1978) . T h i s t r i a n g u l a t e d methodology w i l l a l l o w a c r o s s -v a l i d a t i o n among data sources , data c o l l e c t i o n s t r a t e g i e s , t ime p e r i o d s , and t h e o r e t i c a l schemes. It g ive s the p a r t i c i p a n t -observer the a b i l i t y to weigh, compare, code, and s e l e c t t r u s t w o r t h y ev idence . Some l i m i t a t i o n s of p a r t i c i p a n t - o b s e r v a t i o n r e s e a r c h a r e : (a) g a i n i n g e n t r y t o , and acceptance by, the group to be s t u d i e d , (b) m a i n t a i n i n g o b j e c t i v i t y i n the face o f new e x p e r i e n c e s , (c) r e c o r d i n g and a n a l y z i n g the d a t a — which are l a r g e l y q u a l i t a t i v e , and, (d) overcoming the e t h i c a l aspects of o b s e r v a t i o n (Denzin, 1970). By the same token , those be ing observed may f e e l uncomfortable , t h r e a t e n e d , or encouraged, and may act u n n a t u r a l l y . T h e i r i n t e r v i e w responses may be guarded or exaggerated . A r e a l i t y o f t h i s study i s t h a t the m a j o r i t y o f the data gathered i s p e r s o n a l o p i n i o n . However, as mentioned above, the r e s e a r c h e r w i l l t r y t o : (a) ma in ta in a f l e x i b l e and r e l a t i v i s t i c s tance , (b) r e p o r t the f a c t s from the p a r t i c i p a n t s views of t h e i r own s o c i a l r e a l i t i e s , and, (c) use a t r i a n g u l a t e d m e t h o d o l o g i c a l approach, to i n c r e a s e the v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y o f the s tudy . 29 The Research Procedure The triangulated methodology (Denzin, 1970, 1978) of this study included: (a) a secondary mainstream educators survey (N=36), (b) 13 secondary mainstream educator interviews, and (c) 40 secondary mainstream and 20 ESL one hour classroom observations. Data was gathered at four sites in the RSD over a period of ten weeks (February 10 - A p r i l 30, excluding one week of school vacation during Spring break). The survey, the interview, and the observation instruments used to triangulate the findings of this participant-observation study were designed to r e f l e c t the five Research Questions to be Answered l i s t e d e a r l i e r . Four RSD secondary schools (three Junior High Schools and one Senior High School) where immigrant student mainstream integration i s occurring were selected as study s i t e s . A random group of teacher volunteers at each school participated in this study. However, the sampling was done opportunistically to r e f l e c t the variety of teaching specializations at the secondary le v e l , the variety of teacher ages/experience at the secondary le v e l , and a gender balance. Therefore, the random selection of volunteers for t h i s study was not done in the t r a d i t i o n a l random sampling fashion. The sample (N=50) consisted of 36 secondary mainstream educators, nine secondary English as a Second Language educators, and five mainstream/ESL educators. Because of the f a i r l y small sample group, generalizations to populations beyond the sample group i t s e l f are tentative. 30 Before conduct ing the survey , the i n t e r v i e w s , and the c la s sroom o b s e r v a t i o n s , the i n v e s t i g a t o r b r i e f e d the v o l u n t e e r s on the purpose o f the study and the r e s e a r c h des ign and had each educator s i g n a p a r t i c i p a n t consent form (see Appendix A -P a r t i c i p a n t Consent Forms) . The i n v e s t i g a t o r hand d e l i v e r e d a l l of the surveys and conducted a l l o f the i n t e r v i e w s and o b s e r v a t i o n s . The survey respondents were asked to m a i l (postage prepa id ) t h e i r completed surveys to the i n v e s t i g a t o r at t h e i r l e i s u r e . Interv iew p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n t e r v i e w e d at t h e i r convenience . A l l c lassroom o b s e r v a t i o n s were s chedu led . The Population Although the i n v e s t i g a t o r r e a l i z e d t h a t a study sample group i s governed by p e o p l e ' s w i l l i n g n e s s to p a r t i c i p a t e , one o f the i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s goa l s was to i n v o l v e a c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f t e a c h e r s . With some a s s i s t a n c e from the o f f i c e p e r s o n n e l and the t e a c h i n g s t a f f s at the four s choo l s i t e s , the i n v e s t i g a t o r r e c r u i t e d both male (N=19) and female (N=31) t eacher v o l u n t e e r s , wi th v a r i o u s t e a c h i n g assignments (Art to W r i t i n g Composit ion) and a range o f 0.5 to 30 years of t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e . S ince the purpose of t h i s study was to i n v e s t i g a t e and to r e p o r t the expressed immigrant student academic communication and i n s t r u c t i o n concerns of RSD secondary mainstream educa tors , the m a j o r i t y (36 o f 50) of the v o l u n t e e r p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h i s s tudy were RSD secondary mainstream educators c u r r e n t l y i n s t r u c t i n g immigrant s tudent s . Nine of the remain ing 14 study p a r t i c i p a n t s taught ESL e x c l u s i v e l y , and the f i n a l f i v e taught 3 1 both mainstream and ESL c l a s s e s . Two of the three ins truments (the L i k e r t - t y p e Sca le survey and the study in t erv i ew) used i n t h i s study were used e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h , and focused e x c l u s i v e l y on, the concerns of secondary mainstream e d u c a t o r s . Only secondary mainstream educators took p a r t i n the L i k e r t - t y p e S c a l e survey (see Appendix B - Secondary Mainstream Educator S u r v e y ) . The i n v e s t i g a t o r hand d i s t r i b u t e d ten secondary mainstream surveys at each of the four s c h o o l s i t e s (N=40). T h i r t y - s i x secondary mainstream educators completed and r e t u r n e d (by mai l ) the survey . The 36 surveys p r o v i d e the data f o r the RSD secondary mainstream educators survey r e s u l t s . The s t u d y " i n t e r v i e w (see Appendix C - Secondary Mainstream Educator Interview) i n v o l v e d on ly secondary mainstream e d u c a t o r s . The 13 t eachers who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the secondary mainstream educator i n t e r v i e w s were r e c r u i t e d from the o r i g i n a l 40 member secondary mainstream educators survey sample group. Twelve o f the 13 in terv iewees r e t u r n e d a completed survey . Fourteen RSD secondary mainstream, n ine E n g l i s h as a Second Language, and f i v e mainstream/ESL educators were i n v o l v e d i n the 60 hours (40 mainstream and 20 ESL) o f secondary c las sroom o b s e r v a t i o n (see Appendix D - Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom O b s e r v a t i o n Notes Shee t ) . E l e v e n of the 14 secondary mainstream educators observed completed the s tudy survey and i n t e r v i e w . One of the mainstream/ESL educators completed the s tudy survey and i n t e r v i e w . Thus, 12 members o f the study sample group p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a l l three study i n s t r u m e n t s . 32 Instrument 1 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey The investigator's main concerns in designing the survey were: (a) length and ease of completion, (b) targeting the five research questions mentioned e a r l i e r , and (c) providing those with more to say with an opportunity to respond in writing. The purpose of the f i r s t part of the survey was to obtain pertinent information regarding the following: (a) participants' current teaching assignment, (b) participants' BC public school teaching experience, and (c) the gender of the participant. This information was used to provide information about the population and to divide teachers into various subgroups for the analysis of the data. The school s i t e , although not required on the survey, was also recorded for data sub grouping. Survey items 1,3,4 and 6 are questions related to research question 1: Do RSD secondary mainstream educators know the quantity of immigrant students in th e i r classrooms, and the academic, l i n g u i s t i c , and cul t u r a l backgrounds of these students? Items 13, 14 and 15 deal with research question 2: Do immigrant students have different academic communication and instruction needs than English-speaking students? The middle section of the survey, items 7 through 12 investigate research question 3: Do RSD secondary mainstream educators f e e l t h e i r current teaching practices and levels of expertise are adequate to reach a l l learners? Items .2, 5, and 16 address research question 4: Are RSD secondary mainstream educators comfortable dealing with growing immigrant student integration? The f i n a l 33 i t em, 17, g ives the survey p a r t i c i p a n t s an o p p o r t u n i t y to express i n w r i t i n g what needs to be done f o r , or what a d d i t i o n a l support needs to be o f f e r e d t o , (or b o t h ) , RSD secondary mainstream educators c u r r e n t l y d e a l i n g wi th i n c r e a s e d immigrant s tudent i n t e g r a t i o n (research q u e s t i o n f i v e ) . By u s i n g "Yes" and "No" answers, three L i k e r t - t y p e 5 -po in t s c a l e s : one n u m e r i c a l s c a l e , and two d e s c r i p t i v e s c a l e s , r a n g i n g from a minimal t o a maximal number or degree o f e x p r e s s i o n , and a w r i t t e n summary q u e s t i o n , i t was hoped tha t a f a i r l y a c c u r a t e p i c t u r e of the academic and i n s t r u c t i o n a l and i n t e g r a t e d c la s sroom p e r c e p t i o n s o f RSD secondary mainstream educators would be o b t a i n e d . Instrument 2 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Interview The i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s main concerns when d e s i g n i n g the i n t e r v i e w were: (a) t ime verses i n f o r m a t i o n e f f i c a c y , (b) c o n s i s t e n c y with, the survey q u e s t i o n s , (c) g a t h e r i n g a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the f i v e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n mentioned e a r l i e r , (d) u n c o v e r i n g a . s e l e c t group of RSD secondary mainstream educators p e r c e p t i o n s o f the r e a l i t y o f t h e i r c la s srooms , (e) p o t e n t i a l l y uncover ing p r o m i s i n g i d e a s , p r a c t i c e s and s o l u t i o n s to immigrant student i n t e g r a t i o n and e d u c a t i o n , and (f) promoting the teacher voice in this research. The purpose o f SECTION 1 of the i n t e r v i e w was to o b t a i n p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the f o l l o w i n g : (a) p a r t i c i p a n t s ' c u r r e n t t e a c h i n g assignment, (b) p a r t i c i p a n t s ' BC p u b l i c s c h o o l 34 teaching experience, and (c) the gender of the participants. This information was used to provide information about the population and to divide teachers into various subgroups for the analysis of the data. The school s i t e , although not required on the survey, was also recorded for data sub grouping. Interview items SECTION 2 - a. through f., SECTION 3 - a., b., e., and f., and SECTION 4 - b. and g. are questions related to research question 1: Do RSD secondary mainstream educators know the quantity of immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms, and the academic, l i n g u i s t i c , and cult u r a l backgrounds of these students? Items SECTION 3 - d., SECTION 4 - c , and SECTION 5 - a. deal with research question 2: Do immigrant students have different academic communication and instruction needs than English-speaking students? Three interview questions; SECTION 4 - d., and SECTION 5 - e. and f. investigate research question 3: Do RSD secondary mainstream educators f e e l t h e i r current teaching practices and levels of expertise are adequate to reach a l l learners? Item c. - SECTION 3, items a., e., f., h., and i - SECTION 4 , and item d. - SECTION 5 address research question 4: Are RSD secondary mainstream educators comfortable dealing with growing immigrant student integration? The f i n a l items a l l found in SECTION 5 - b., c., g., and h. probe what needs to be done for, or what additional support needs to be offered to, (or both), RSD secondary mainstream educators currently dealing with increased immigrant student integration (research question five) . 35 In the interest of time and the interest of ensuring the information gleaned via the interviews was study pertinent and free of investigator bias a standardized open-ended interview format was u t i l i z e d . At the time of each interview, the interviewee was supplied with a copy of the interview question sheet to save time and to avoid confusion. Again to save time and to stay focused, the interview questions were arranged in a theme or section sequence; although items pertaining to each of the five research questions did appear in more than one section. A "Yes" or "No" answer format was used to eliminate wasting time. The misuse of time was a major consideration during the design of this study because the majority of the questions included in the interview required comments, descriptions, rationales, and l i s t s of information. The interview items were designed to uncover the sources of the participants' perceptions and opinions. To support the study's presupposed lin e of thinking (see Statement of the Problem), the investigator f e l t i t important to reconstruct the impact increased immigrant student integration in the RSD i s having on secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction by having secondary mainstream educators share t h e i r experiences. The data gathered herein i s the what, how, why, and why not of increased immigrant integration in the RSD as described and reasoned out by the secondary mainstream educators d i r e c t l y effected. 3 6 Instrument 3 - The Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observations The investigator's main concerns when designing the classroom observations were: (a) observing first-hand secondary mainstream and ESL academic communication and instruction at the four. RSD study si t e s , (b) ensuring consistency and uniformity with what the classroom observation items and behaviours noted, and (c) compiling an observation data base for comparisons. The 20 items and behaviours noted during the 40 hours of secondary mainstream classroom observations and the 20 hours of secondary ESL classroom observations f a l l under three headings: (a) working and learning conditions, (b) educational b e l i e f s and practices, and, (c) curriculum. The working and learning conditions items observed were: 1. class size 2. teacher-student roles and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 3 . student involvement/participation 4. student (s)-student(s) relationship 5. teacher assistance 6. tone/environment 7. pace or rate of content delivery 8. teacher/student successes.and f a i l u r e s . The educational b e l i e f s and practices items monitored were: 1. teaching paradigm(s) 2. teacher expectation levels 3 . teacher concerns 37 4. teaching strategy(ies) 5. cooperative learning methods 6. teacher-student(s) relationships 7. use of visuals 8. accommodation of ESL/culturally different students The curriculum items reported were:. 1 . subject matter 2. academic discourse 3 . use of prescribed texts 4. multicultural c u r r i c u l a . The investigator f e l t the observation of these 20 items would provide a broad base for reporting the classroom dynamics of immigration and secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction. As a participant-observer, the investigator's presence was known to those being observed. The investigator moved freely around the classrooms l i k e a normal and .acceptable person within the group's a c t i v i t i e s . The investigator took f i e l d and summary notes, and later synthesized the observation findings in a descriptive-analytical interpretation. V a l i d i t y of the Instruments The v a l i d i t y of the instruments was established by consulting four professional educators who are involved in soc i a l and educational studies and b i l i n g u a l education. These professionals were: Dr. John (Jack) Kehoe, Professor of Social Studies Curriculum, University of B r i t i s h Columbia (UBC) 3 8 Department of Education, Dr. Frank Echols, Associate Professor in Sociology of Education, UBC Department of Education, Dr. Richard Berwick, Associate Professor in Language Education, UBC Department of Education, and Dr. Stephen Carey, Director for the Center of Asia P a c i f i c Languages, UBC Department of Education. The professors were provided with a copy of one, two, or a l l three of the instruments for review and comment. The following suggestions are the main revisions that were incorporated into the f i n a l drafts of the data c o l l e c t i o n instruments: 1. Limit the number of survey questions and the number of possible responses. 2. A d e f i n i t i o n of an immigrant student should be provided to assist the teachers in completing the survey. 3. Whenever possible, the survey and interview items should be worded so that i t be clear that the issues pertain to the immigrant student. 4. Avoid "Yes" and "No" interview questions that permit the interviewee to simply respond. Your questions need to make the respondents look introspectively, r e f l e c t and moreover, help you! 5. Use neutral language when constructing your interview questions. 6. Ensure the number of items you plan to observe i s manageable. 3 9 7. Be consistent in your observation procedures i f you hope to make comparisons. Also, see Appendix E - Additional Study Instrument(s) Comments and Revision Suggestions. S t a b i l i t y of the Instruments In March of 1993, the investigator p i l o t e d a preliminary draft of the secondary mainstream educator survey (instrument 1) and the secondary mainstream educator interview (instruments) in a Vancouver lower mainland secondary school which, similar to Richmond, i s undergoing rapid immigrant student growth and unprecedented immigrant student mainstream integration. A co-ed sample group (three males and four females) of cross-curricular secondary mainstream educators (Business Education, Communi-cations, English, Food and Nutrition, Keyboarding, Math, Physical Education, Science, and Social Studies) with a combined BC public school service record of 9.14 years participated in the p i l o t study. Although the p i l o t study volunteers had few problems with the preliminary survey draft format, some survey question wordings, and the survey response format were altered to r e f l e c t the suggestions above. The p i l o t study interview draft received few changes before being used in the RSD study. In addition, very few procedural changes were made between the p i l o t study and the RSD study. However, a t h i r d data c o l l e c t i o n instrument (secondary mainstream and secondary ESL classroom observations) was used in the RSD study. 40 It i s d i f f i c u l t to compare the findings of the p i l o t study with those of the RSD study because of the alterations made to the survey and interview instruments. However, both study groups reported encountering language related immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s because they were unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms. Both study groups ranked l i s t e n i n g comprehension, writing, speaking, reading a b i l i t y as the greatest immigrant student challenges they face in their classrooms. The summary statements in each study pointed out the need for more teaching st a f f , for more teacher education, and for more BC Ministry of Education resources and leadership. On the basis of the assumption that the RSD secondary mainstream educators expressed immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns could be investigated via a survey and an interview, the investigator found i t f i t to proceed with a f i n a l study survey and interview. A t h i r d RSD data c o l l e c t i o n instrument' (secondary mainstream and secondary ESL classroom observations) was deemed necessary to comply with the study's triangulated methodology research design. Collecting the Data Instrument 1 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey For the c o l l e c t i o n of the survey data, the investigator had .two alternatives from which to choose. F i r s t , the survey package (the informed consent l e t t e r s , the survey cover l e t t e r , and the survey i t s e l f ) could have been sent to the p r i n c i p a l at 41 each RSD study s i t e . The principals could have recruited the ten teacher volunteers, ensured each received a survey package, and then had the volunteers mail th e i r completed forms back to the investigator. In this case, the return of the surveys would have depended en t i r e l y on the s i t e volunteers. Second, the investigator could act as the Prime Administrator (PA) of the survey with the support of each s i t e p r i n c i p a l . In t h i s second case, the PA would be responsible for re c r u i t i n g the ten teachers per s i t e and for d i s t r i b u t i n g and monitoring the return of the mail-in surveys. The second alternative was adopted because the investigator f e l t that: 1. The type of s i t e p r i n c i p a l involvement Alternative 1 required was too demanding. 2 . Alternative 2 r e f l e c t s the interactive phenomenological approach of this ten week on-site study. 3. The number of surveys returned would be greater because, by meeting the teachers face-to-face, a certain researcher-respondent relationship would be established and teachers would be more inclined to f i l l out and mail the surveys. 4. Explanations regarding certain items or words could be given by the investigator while on s i t e . 5. The investigator could simultaneously recruit teacher volunteers for a l l three study data c o l l e c t i o n instruments. 42 The investigator therefore administered the teacher recruitment, the survey di s t r i b u t i o n , and the survey return. The p r i n c i p a l and st a f f at each school s i t e were informed i n writing and verbally about the investigator's research plans. Shortly thereafter, the investigator v i s i t e d each of the four research sites and obtained a volunteer s t r a t i f i e d random sampling at each school. A s t r a t i f i e d random sampling technique was used to r e f l e c t the cross-section of RSD d i s t r i c t s t a f f currently working with immigrant students at the secondary l e v e l . The purpose of the research and the extent to which each volunteer could be involved in the study was explained. The volunteers were given survey completion instructions and then asked i f they would be w i l l i n g to s i t through the one hour interview and allow the investigator to observe th e i r classrooms. The teacher volunteers were given ten weeks to return t h e i r completed surveys (February 10 - A p r i l 30 , excluding one week of school vacation during Spring break). Thirty-seven of 40 or 92.5% of the surveys were returned. Of th i s number, one was returned incomplete. Therefore, 36 of 40 or 90% of the t o t a l survey sample participated in- the survey. Instrument 2 - The Secondary Mainstream Educator Interview For the c o l l e c t i o n of the interview data, the investigator had three alternatives from which to choose. F i r s t , the investigator could have used an informal conversational interview wherein the questions emerge from the immediate 43 context and are asked in the natural course of events; there i s no predetermination of question topics or phrasing. In t h i s case, the interview may have taken off in i t s own dire c t i o n . Second, the investigator could have used the more regulated interview guide approach where topics are selected in advance but the investigator decides the sequence and wording of the questions during the interview. Both the informal conversational and the interview guide approach are r e l a t i v e l y conversational and s i t u a t i o n a l . Thus, the study research questions may or may not have be addressed. Third, the investigator could have used a standardized open-ended interview where participants are asked the same questions in the same order, thus reducing interviewer effects and bias. However, standardized wording of questions may constrain and l i m i t the naturalness and relevancy of the response (McMillan & Schumacher, 198 9). The t h i r d alternative was selected because the investigator f e l t that: 1. This type of interview was the most time e f f i c i e n t and pertinent information evoking interview procedure. 2. This interview format would keep the participants on topic, and keep the already quite broad scope of t h i s study in check. 3. A standardized li n e of questioning would reduce interviewer effects and bias. 4 4 The investigator conducted a l l of the interviews. The volunteers were interviewed at t h e i r convenience and an audio-tape of each interview was made. The interviews ranged from 25 to 55 minutes in length. Three educators at each of the three Junior High s i t e s , and four at the one Senior High s i t e took part in the interviews. Thirteen teachers in t o t a l sat through the interview and there were no participant d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . Instrument 3 - Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observations For the c o l l e c t i o n of classroom observation data, the investigator had four research role alternatives from which to choose: observer, participant, observer-participant, and participant-observer. F i r s t , the investigator could have acted as an observer. The role of pure observer i s that of one who i s e s s e n t i a l l y a non-participant in the normal observation s i t e routine. An example i s that of an observer looking through a one-way window. Second, the role of pure participant i s similar to that of l i v i n g through an experience, r e c a l l i n g the experience and writing personal insights. Third, the observer-participant role i s for the sole purpose of data c o l l e c t i o n . The researcher makes every ef f o r t not to impinge on the classroom's s o c i a l system and r e s i s t s any involvement outside of data c o l l e c t i o n (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989). Fourth, the participant-observer involves one who participates in some way in the observed environment. "It i s the participant-observer's 45 intention to understand and participate in some fashion in the experience and action of those he observes" (Blumer, 1966, p . vi) . The fourth alternative was used in t h i s study because i t enabled the investigator to provide an understanding of the effect increased immigration in the RSD i s having on secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction from the teacher participants' views of the i r s o c i a l r e a l i t i e s . In essence, the investigator acted as a sounding-board, a confidant, and a consultant for the teacher participants which allowed the investigator to gain a s o l i d understanding of the teachers concerns. As well,, the investigator circulated around the teachers' classrooms, observing and asking both the teachers and the students questions. The investigator was encouraged by some of the classroom teachers to participate i n the classroom a c t i v i t i e s . Observing the teachers in action and par t i c i p a t i n g in various classroom a c t i v i t i e s provided further insight into the s o c i a l r e a l i t i e s of immigration and the secondary mainstream classroom in the RSD. The investigator conducted a t o t a l of 60 hours of classroom observations. Forty of those hours were spent in the secondary mainstream classroom, and 20 in the secondary ESL classroom. Twenty items were observed. During each lesson, both vague and descriptive notes (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989; p. 401) were recorded for each item. The f i e l d notes were la t e r expanded 46 into an descriptive-analytical interpretation of the observed environments. Tabulation of the Data The Survey Upon completion of the data co l l e c t i o n , the secondary mainstream educator surveys were arranged into t h e i r four respective school s i t e subgroups. The survey data underwent an item-by-item mode, median, and mean tabulation to determine the overall results for each subgroup. The surveys were then arranged under five curriculum content area headings and again an item-by-item mode, median, and mean tabulation was completed. A f i n a l item-by-item whole-group or four-school finding (mode, median, and mean) was determined as well. The Interview The audio-taped interviews were transcribed and the data was reviewed. Then interview-by-interview the investigator transferred the interviewees question responses onto a sample group interview data master l i s t . Common responses were then grouped. The Observations The completed observation data was transferred onto two (one mainstream and one ESL) observation data master l i s t s . The data for each observation item was reviewed and common responses 4 7 were grouped. The data from each master l i s t was then merged and presented in a comparative fashion. Chapter fiv e presents the results of the data c o l l e c t i o n . The findings for each research instrument are f i r s t described and then summarized via data summary and comparison tables. The expressed immigrant student education concerns of the RSD secondary mainstream educators sample group are presented i n the following chapter. 48 CHAPTER V RESULTS OF THE STUDY The aim of the study i s to determine the expressed immigrant student academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educators. This study investigates how teachers are perceiving and reacting to increased immigrant student integration in the secondary mainstream classroom and how increased immigrant student integration i s effecting classroom oral and written academic discourse and academic content instructional methods. The results of the study w i l l be presented in three sections. The f i r s t w i l l include a question-by-question (1-16) report of the survey results, a summary of the survey results for research questions 1-4, four tables that summarize the four school and five subject area data gathered, and a l i s t of 17 RSD educator immigration and mainstream education concerns. The second w i l l include a question-by-question synopsis of the secondary mainstream educator interview findings, an interview summary/research questions statement, plus a table that highlights the interview results. The t h i r d w i l l include an examination of the 20 secondary mainstream/secondary ESL classroom observation items, a summary of the observation findings, and a data comparison table. A f i n a l table that integrates the findings of the three research methods and a summary discussion w i l l conclude t h i s chapter. 49 Section l a - Secondary Mainstream Survey Results (Questions 1-16) Question 1 . 1. On average, what percentage of your students are immigrants? less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Eighteen, 50% of the survey sample group, f e l t 21-40% of the students in their classroom(s) were immigrants. The immigrant student percentages in one of the four selected study s i t e schools (School 3 - the senior secondary), was a l i t t l e higher with six of ten teachers reporting percentages of 41-60% (three teachers), 61-80% (one teacher), and 81-100% (two teachers). In the five content areas, Science recorded the highest percentage of immigrant students; then English, Math, Social Studies, and L i f e S k i l l s . Question 2 2. Do you f e e l an increased number of immigrant students i n your classroom(s) has caused some d i f f i c u l t y in the delivery of your da i l y lessons? YES NO If "yes 1, to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely Thirty-one of 36 teachers reported "Yes" the i r lesson delivery has become more d i f f i c u l t . Fourteen teachers f e l t t h e i r d a i l y lesson delivery had grown "somewhat" more d i f f i c u l t . Nine teachers f e l t an increased number of immigrant students in th e i r classroom(s) had "measureably" affected the d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l of daily lesson delivery. Six teachers f e l t t h e i r d a i l y lesson delivery had become "considerably" more d i f f i c u l t . Two 50 of the 31 teachers reported more immigrants in their classroom only "marginally" affected and made more d i f f i c u l t the delivery of t h e i r d a i l y lessons. The teachers at the secondary school study s i t e (School 3) reported having the greatest d i f f i c u l t y . The English group was the only group that unanimously agreed they were having d i f f i c u l t y delivering t h e i r d a i l y lessons because of increased immigrant student integration. The English group, along with the Social Studies group, reported the highest overal l levels of immigrant student related content delivery d i f f i c u l t y . Question 3 3. Have you encountered immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? Y E S N O If 'yes 1, to what degree? seldom occasionally often daily continually A l l 36 of the teacher respondents answered "Yes", they had encountered immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in th e i r classroom(s). When asked to what degree, 12 teachers reported that language related d i f f i c u l t i e s occur "daily" i n thei r classroom(s). Nine teachers reported they "often" encounter immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s i n th e i r classroom. Another nine said they "occasionally" had language d i f f i c u l t i e s , and two reported "seldom" encountering immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in t h e i r classrooms. Four teachers, however, an Art teacher, a senior l e v e l Science teacher, and two Social Studies teachers reported they "continually" encountered immigrant student language 5 1 related d i f f i c u l t i e s in t h e i r classrooms. Teachers i n School 4 reported having the most language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in t h e i r classrooms. Of the fiv e content area teacher groups Math recorded the lowest score for this question. Question 4 4. Have you encountered immigrant student c u l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? seldom occasionally often daily continually Thirty-one teachers answered "Yes"; the majority (17 of 36) reporting "occasionally". Seven teachers did answer they "often" encounter cul t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in t h e i r classroom(s). One teacher, senior level Science, reported "continually" encountering such problems. Six teachers replied they "seldom" encounter immigrant student c u l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in their respective classroom(s). School 4 reported the highest l e v e l of cul t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s . The English teachers expressed the greatest l e v e l of immigrant student c u l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s concern. Question 5 5. Have you encountered immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s because you are unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? seldom occasionally often daily continually Twenty-three of the 3 6 teachers answered "Yes", they had encountered immigrant student academic communication and 52 instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s in their classroom(s) because they were unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students. Eleven teachers reported this d i f f i c u l t y as occurring "occasionally" and seven said i t occurred "often". One Math teacher indicated t h i s d i f f i c u l t y occurred on a "daily" basis. A Life Skills and a Science teacher i d e n t i f i e d this d i f f i c u l t y as occurring "continually". Three teachers who answered "Yes" to question 5 added a written comment beside this question: Even though I had ESL students for a number of years. You are unaccustomed. I have much experience but s t i l l . I've encountered the d i f f i c u l t y but not because I'm unaccustomed to dealing with i t . School 4 educators reported the highest level of immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s due to being unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms. Math and Science recorded the highest score for this question. Question 6 6. To what degree are you aware of the educational backgrounds of your immigrant students? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely Twelve of the respondents replied they were "marginally" aware of t h e i r immigrant students educational backgrounds. Sixteen answered they were "somewhat" aware. Five said they were "measureably" aware, and three reported they were "considerably" aware of the educational backgrounds of t h e i r 53 immigran t s t u d e n t s . The Math t e a c h e r s r e p o r t e d b e i n g the most aware o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s e d u c a t i o n b a c k g r o u n d s . Q u e s t i o n 7 7. To what degree do you f e e l your c l a s s r o o m approach/methods complement t h e e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f immigran t s t u d e n t s ? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely N i n e f e l t t h e i r c l a s s r o o m p r a c t i c e s "somewhat" compl imen ted t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s . F i f t e e n t e a c h e r s f e l t t h e i r c l a s s r o o m approach/methods "measureab ly" complemented the e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s . Seven t e a c h e r s f e l t t h e i r c l a s s r o o m approach/methods and the e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s were " c o n s i d e r a b l y " c o m p l i m e n t a r y . One pe r son f e l t t h e i r c l a s s r o o m approach/methods were " immensely" i n tune w i t h the e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s . On ly two t e a c h e r s f e l t t h e i r c l a s s r o o m p r a c t i c e s were " m a r g i n a l l y " c o m p l i m e n t a r y t o the e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s . Two r e sponden t s answered t h e y " d i d not know" i f t h e i r c l a s s r o o m approach/methods compl imented the e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e i r immigran t s t u d e n t s . L i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e was n o t e d between the f o u r s t udy s i t e s s c o r e s . The Math and Social Studies t e a c h e r s r e p o r t e d the h i g h e s t degrees o f compl iment between t e a c h e r c l a s s r o o m approach/methods and immigran t s t u d e n t e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s . 54 Q u e s t i o n s fir I P . 12 8. How much instructional time do you spend in direct one-way lecture? less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 10. On average, what portion of an hour of instructional time do your students spend in small learning groups? less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 12. When introducing new material, what percentage of the new information do you present v i s u a l l y (using graphic aids)? less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Thirty-one members of the sample group responded they spent no more than 40% of the i r instructional time in direct one-way lecture. Twenty-seven educators indicated they spent no more than 40% of the i r instructional time in small learning groups. As for what percentage of the time the sample group introduced new material using graphic aids, the responses varied; less than 20% (four teachers), 21-40% (seven teachers), 41-60% (eight teachers), 61-80% (ten teachers), and 81-100% (seven teachers). School 4 recorded the lowest direct one-way lecture score and the lowest small learning groups score. It was School 2 however, that recorded the lowest use of visual aids when introducing new material. The English teachers reported the least use of direct one-way lecture. The Math group used small learning groups the least. Social Studies indicated the lowest use of visu a l aids when introducing new material. 5 5 Questions 9, H 9. Indicate what percentage' of the immigrant students you f e e l are able to comprehend at least 80% of your lecture content. less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 1 1 . Indicate what percentage of immigrant students you f e e l are able to function at at least 80% comprehension l e v e l while working in small groups. less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Eight teachers f e l t the immigrant students in t h e i r classroom(s) were able to comprehend 21-4 0% of the lecture content. Twelve f e l t the percentage was as high as 41-60%. Thirteen teachers f e l t t heir immigrant students comprehended 61-80% of the lecture content. Three teachers f e l t t h e i r immigrant students understood 81-100% of the lecture content. School 4 recorded the highest direct one-way lecture comprehension scores. The teachers who indicated the higher levels of immigrant student lecture content comprehension were mostly from Math and Science. The lower immigrant student lecture content comprehension percentages came from the English, Life Skills, and S o c i a l Studies teachers. However, overall, the sample group f e l t immigrant students fare quite well in lectures. The small learning groups overall sentiment was not much dif f e r e n t . Three teachers did indicate less than 20% of th e i r immigrant students were able to function at at least an 80% comprehension- le v e l while working in small groups. Eight others reported only 21—40% of the i r students were functioning at at least an 80% comprehension. Eight teachers f e l t 41-60% of th e i r immigrant students were able to function at at least an 5 6 80% comprehension le v e l while working in small groups. The remaining 17 educators indicated they f e l t at least 61% — 6 1 -80% (twelve teachers) and 81-100% (five teachers) — of the immigrant students in their classroom(s) were able to comprehend at least 80% of the small group learning. No p a r t i c u l a r school seemed to indicate a strength or a weakness in the small learning group performance of their immigrant students. No one content area group seemed more troubled with t h i s either. Question 13 13 . Do you f e e l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has slowed the pace of your lesson delivery? YES NO If 'yes 1, to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely Four teachers reported their pace of lesson delivery was only "marginally" affected by having immigrant students in their classroom(s). Ten teachers f e l t t h e i r pace of lesson delivery was "somewhat" affected. Four members of the sample group f e l t they had been "measureably" affected, three "considerably", and two "immensely". Thirteen educators answered "No", having immigrant students in their classroom(s) did not slow the pace of t h e i r lesson delivery. In t o t a l , 64% of the sample group did fe e l the pace of their lesson delivery was slowed because of the immigrant students in their classroom(s). School 2 teachers scores indicated their pace of lesson delivery was more affected than teachers in the other three schools and the Life S k i l l s and Social Studies groups indicated more pace of lesson delivery difference than English, Math, and Science. 5 7 Question 14 14. Do you fe e l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has increased your preparation time? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely Twenty of the 36 teachers surveyed f e l t having immigrant students i n t h e i r classroom(s) had increased t h e i r preparation time. Four teachers said the impact was marginal. Ten said having immigrant students in the i r classroom(s) had increased t h e i r preparation time "somewhat". Three educators indicated a measureable increase in preparation time, two a considerable increase, and one an immense increase. School 4 educators reported the least preparation time increase. Five out of the six English•teachers involved in th i s study f e l t t h e i r preparation time had been increased. Conversely, four of the five Math instructors who completed surveys said "No", they had not experienced increased preparation time. Likewise, three of the five Science teachers involved in th i s study said "No", they had not experienced increased preparation time. More Life S k i l l s and Social Studies teachers than not f e l t they were putting in more preparation time, but not a marked increase. Question 15, 16 15. Do you fe e l you have had to make instructional methods adjustments i n order to accommodate the immigrant students in your classroom (s) ? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 58 16. Do you fe e l you have to make additional adjustments to your ins t r u c t i o n a l methods in order to accommodate the immigrant students in your classroom (s) ? Y E S N O If 'yes', indicate how much more of an adjustment you f e e l you must make. less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Thirty out of 3 6 teachers f e l t they have had to make inst r u c t i o n a l methods adjustments i n order to accommodate the immigrant students in their classroom(s). The majority, 16 teachers, f e l t they had had to make "somewhat" of an adjustment. Eight f e l t they had made a measureable adjustment i n t h e i r i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods in order to accommodate immigrant students. Three educators f e l t they had made a marginal adjustment, while three others f e l t they had made a considerable adjustment in the i r instructional methods. School 3 educators reported having had to make the biggest adjustment, while School 2 reported the smallest. The English and Science groups recorded the greatest level of adjustments to date. Looking to the future, 23 out of 36 teachers f e l t there were more instructional methods adjustments to be made in order to accommodate the immigrant students in their secondary mainstream classroom(s). Seven teachers f e l t they needed to make a "less than 20%" adjustment in their instructional methods. Thirteen educators f e l t they needed to make a "21%-40%" adjustment to the i r instructional methods to accommodate immigrant students in their classroom(s). Two teachers (one with 28 years and one with 30 years of teaching experience), f e l t they had to make a "61%-80%" adjustments in the i r 5 9 instructional methods i f they are to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with the immigrant students in their classroom(s). One teacher f e l t an entire overhaul was needed to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students and indicated an 81%-100% instructional methods adjustment need. School 3 educators recorded the lowest future adjustments scores. The Social Studies group f e l t they had few further adjustments to make in th e i r instructional methods to accommodate the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. The Science group reported the greatest need for further adjustments (see Tables 1 and 2) . Research Questions 1-5 Survey Results Discussion The RSD secondary mainstream educator survey results presented above suggest teachers are aware of the quantity of immigrant students in their classrooms, but have limited knowledge of the educational and cu l t u r a l backgrounds of these students. One hundred percent of the sample group reported encountering English language related immigrant student d i f f i c u l t i e s in their classrooms, and eighty-nine percent reported encountering immigrant student c u l t u r a l background related classroom d i f f i c u l t i e s . The fact that teachers have limited knowledge of the cultu r a l and educational backgrounds of the immigrant students in the i r classroom may be a source of the d i f f i c u l t i e s teachers are encountering in the i r secondary mainstream classrooms. The sample group f e l t having immigrant students in the i r secondary mainstream classrooms: (a) slowed the pace of lesson 60 delivery, (b) required them to make changes in their i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods, and (c) "somewhat" increased t h e i r lesson preparation time. These findings may suggest students are being integrated into the mainstream classroom before they are able to handle the language and content demands of the mainstream content area classroom. The results also suggest immigrant students learn at a different rate than English-speaking students for various reasons; for example, the English language barrier, past educational experiences, and learning styles. However, the majority of the sample group reported making changes in their teaching methods to accommodate immigrant students i n the secondary mainstream classroom which i s encouraging. The sample group indicated they f e l t their classroom approach/methods complemented the educational experiences of the immigrant students in their classrooms, and that most immigrant students were able to function at at least an 80% comprehension le v e l in lecture and small group learning. The teachers reported using a mixture of lecture and small group learning. However, the wide range of answers question 12 (the use of visual aids to introduce new materials) gleaned may indicate three possible-policy to practice shortcomings: (a) some teachers are s t i l l choosing not to acknowledge the immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms, (b) teachers may not know the value of, or how to use visuals to accommodate ESL students in the i r classrooms, and (c) teachers may be unaware of the second 6 1 language methods and theories (Cummins, 1981, 1983; Mohan, .1979, 1982, 1986) the BC Ministry of Education and the RSD have adopted. The results of t h i s question may indicate a need for better communication between the Richmond School Board and i t s ' secondary mainstream teaching s t a f f , as well as more immigrant student academic communication and instruction teacher education programs. The survey results suggest the secondary mainstream educators 1 growing immigrant student integration comfort levels are being taxed. Eighty-nine percent of the sample group f e l t the increased number of immigrant students in th e i r classrooms had caused some d i f f i c u l t y in the delivery of da i l y lessons. Two-thirds of the teachers reported encountering immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s because they were unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in th e i r classrooms. Two-thirds of the sample group anticipated having to make further adjustments to t h e i r i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods to accommodate the ESL learners. The responses to survey question 17 provide further insight into the five research questions. Tables 3 and 4 i l l u s t r a t e the between school and between subject area findings for survey questions 1-16. The mode, median, and mean has been tabulated for each individual question and for each school and subject area. Overall, School 3, the lone secondary school study s i t e , reported the greatest immigrant student integration instruction impact. Science and 62 English, two subjects with heavy language (vocabulary) demands, emerged as the content areas most affected by increased immigrant student integration. 6 3 Table 1 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (questions 1-16) responses Sample Group P r o f i l e : *Teachers of: Art, Biology, Business Education, Career Prep, Chemistry, Clothing and Textiles, Computer Science/Studies, Consumer Education, Drafting, Electronics, English, English as a Second Language, Family Studies, Foods and Nutrition, Geography, Guidance, History, Home Economics, Humanities, Industrial Education, Japanese, Keyboarding, Law, Math, Physical Education, Power Mechanics, Science, Science & Tech, Social Studies, Writing Comp. *Average BC. Public School Teaching Experience: 10.8 years. *Gender: 17 males, 19 females. Survey Questions and Responses: 1. On average, what percentage of your students are immigrants? Mode: 21-40% (18) *less than 20% (7), 41-60% (7), 61-80% (2), 81-100% (2) 2. Do you fee l an increased number of immigrant students in your classroom(s) has caused some d i f f i c u l t y in the delivery of your daily lessons? YES NO If 'yes 1, to what degree? Yes: 31 No: 5 Mode: somewhat(14) *marginally(2), measureably(9), considerably(6) 3. Have you encountered immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? Yes: 36 Mode: daily(12) *seldom(2), occasionally(9) , often(9), continually(4) 4. Have you encountered immigrant student c u l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? Yes: 31 No: 5 Mode: occasionally(17) *seldom(6), often (7), continually(1) 64 5. Have y o u e n c o u n t e r e d i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t a c a d e m i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d i n s t r u c t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s b e c a u s e y o u a r e u n a c c u s t o m e d t o d e a l i n g w i t h i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t s i n y o u r c l a s s r o o m ( s ) ? YES NO I f ' y e s ' , t o what d e g r e e ? Yes: 23 No: 13 Mode: occasionally(11) * s e l d o m ( 2 ) , o f t e n ( 7 ) , d a i l y ( 1 ) , c o n t i n u a l l y ( 2 ) 6. T o what d e g r e e a r e y o u aware o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d s o f y o u r i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t s ? Mode: somewhat (16) ^ m a r g i n a l l y ( 1 2 ) , m e a s u r e a b l y ( 5 ) , c o n s i d e r a b l y ( 3 ) 7. To what d e g r e e do y o u f e e l y o u r c l a s s r o o m a p p r o a c h / m e t h o d s c o m p l i m e n t t h e e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s o f i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t s ? Mode: measureably(15) * m a r g i n a l l y ( 2 ) , s o m e w h a t ( 9 ) , c o n s i d e r a b l y ( 7 ) , i m m e n s e l y ( 1 ) , don't know(2) 8. How much i n s t r u c t i o n a l t i m e do y o u s p e n d i n d i r e c t one -way l e c t u r e ? Mode: 21-40% (16) * l e s s t h a n 20% ( 1 5 ) , 41-60% ( 4 ) , 61-80%(1) 9. I n d i c a t e what p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t s y o u f e e l a r e a b l e t o c o m p r e h e n d a t l e a s t 80% o f y o u r l e c t u r e c o n t e n t . Mode: 61-80% (13) *21-40% ( 8 ) , 41 -60%(12) , 81-100%(3) 10 . On a v e r a g e , what p o r t i o n o f an h o u r o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l t i m e do y o u r s t u d e n t s s p e n d i n s m a l l l e a r n i n g g r o u p s ? Mode: 21-40% (22) * l e s s t h a n 20% ( 5 ) , 41-60% ( 4 ) , 61-80% ( 3 ) , 81-100%(2) 1 1 . I n d i c a t e what p e r c e n t a g e o f i m m i g r a n t s t u d e n t s y o u f e e l a r e a b l e t o f u n c t i o n a t a t l e a s t 80% c o m p r e h e n s i o n l e v e l w h i l e w o r k i n g i n s m a l l g r o u p s . Mode: 61-80% (12) * l e s s t h a n 20% ( 3 ) , 21-40% ( 7 ) , 41-60% (9 ) , 81-100% (5) 12 . When i n t r o d u c i n g new m a t e r i a l , what p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e new i n f o r m a t i o n do y o u p r e s e n t v i s u a l l y ( u s i n g g r a p h i c a i d s ) ? Mode: 61-80% (10) * l e s s t h a n 20% ( 4 ) , 21-40% ( 7 ) , 41-60% ( 8 ) , 81-100%(7) 6 5 13. Do you fee l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has slowed the pace of your lesson delivery? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? Yes: 23 No: 13 Mode: somewhat(10) *marginally(4), measureably(4) , considerably(3), immensely(2) 14. Do you fee l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has increased your preparation time? YES NO If 'yes 1, to what degree? Yes: 20 No: 16 Mode: somewhat(lO) ^marginally(4) , measureably(3) , considerably(2), immensely(1) 15. Do you fee l you have had to make instructional methods adjustments in order to accommodate the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? Yes: 30 No: 6 Mode: somewhat(16) *marginally(3), measureably(8) , considerably(3) 16. Do you fee l you have to make additional adjustments to your instructional methods in order to accommodate the immigrant students i n your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', indicate how much more of an adjustment you f e e l you must make . Yes: 23 No: 13 Mode: 21-40%(13) *less than 20% (7), 61-80%(2), 81-100%(1) 6 6 T a b l e 2 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator s u r v e y (questions 1-16) mode (Mode) •. median (Mdn) , mean LML scores for (affirmative) survey responses 1 2 3 4 5 < than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely seldom occasionally often d a i l y continually Q - M o d e Mdn M 1. 7 18 7 2 2 2 2 .28 2 . 2 1 4 9 6 - 2 2 . 61 3. 2 9 9 12 4 3 3 .19 4 . 6 1 7 7 - 1 2 2 . 13 5 . 2 11 7 1 2 2 2 . 57 6. 12 1 6 5 3 - 2 1 . 97 7 . * 2 9 15 7 1 3 2 .88 8. 15 1 6 4 1 - 2 1 . 75 9. - 8 12 13 •3 3 3 .31 10 5 2 2 4 3 2 2 2 .39 11 . 3 7 9 12 5 3 3 .25 12 4 7 8 10 7 3 3 .25 13 4 1 0 •4 3 2 2 2 . 52 14 4 1 0 3 2 1 2 2 .30 15 . 3 1 6 8 3 - 2 2 . 37 16 7 13 - 2 1 2 2 . 00 * Indicates the two "don't know" answers received for t h i s question (same for Tables 3 and 4). 6 7 Table 3 A f o u r s choo l per q u e s t i o n ( a f f i r m a t i v e ) survey responses mean (M) scores comparison f o r the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator survey (quest ions 1-16) SCHOOL 1 SCHOOL 2 SCHOOL 3 SCHOOL 4 4 SCHOOLS Q . M M M M M 1. 1 .88 2 .13 2 . 90 2 .10 2 .28 2 . 2 .71 2 .20 3.00 2 .30 2 • 6 1 3. 3 .00 2 .88 3.00 3 .80 3 . 19 4 . 1 .75 1 .80 2 .33 2 .78 2 .13 5 . 2 .40 2 .33 2.22 3 .83 2 .57 6. 2 . 13 2 . 13 1 .80 1 . 90 1 . 97 7 . 3 . 13 3 .13 2 .88* 3 .10 2 .88 8. 2 .0.0 1 .75 2.10 . 1 .40 1 .75 9. 3 .13 2 .63 3.10 3 .40 3 .31 10. 2 .25 2 .38 2 . 60 2 .00 2 .39 11. 3 .25 2 .88 3.50 3 .30 3 .25 12 . 3 .00 2 .38 3.90 3 .80 3 .25 13 . 2 . 17 2 .00 2.38 3 .00 2 .52 14 . 2 .50 2 .50 2 .43 .1 .80 2 .30 15 . 2 .50 1 .80 2 . 67 2 .25 2 .37 16. 3 .00 1 .50 2.13 2 .00 2 .00 40 .8 36 .42 42.94 42 .76 40 .77 N= 16 N= 16 N=16 N= 16 N= 16 M= 2 .55 M= 2 .28 M=2.68 M= 2 . 67 M= 2.5 68 Table 4 English, L i f e S k i l l s , Math, Science, Social Studies per question (affirmative) survey responses mean (M) scores comparison for the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator s u r v e y (questions 1-16) ENGLISH LIFE SKL. MATH SCIENCE SOCIAL ST. 4 SCHOOL 0 . M M M M M M 1. 2 .67 1 .73 2 .60 3 .00 2 .11 2 .28 2 . 3 .00 2 .56 2 .25 2 .50 2 . 63 2 . 61 3 . 3 .33 3 .36 2 . 60 3 .20 3 .22 3 .19 4 . 2 .50 1 .89 1 . 60 2 .75 2 .14 2 .13 5 . 2 .40 2 . 60 3 .00 3 .00 2 .17 2 .57 6. 1 .33 • 1 .82 2 .80 2 .00 2 .11 1. 97 7 . 2 .50 2 .73 3 .40 2 .50* 3 . 2 5 * 2 .88 8 . 1 .33 1 . 64 2 .40 2 .00 1 . 67 1.75 9. 2 .83 3 .18 4 .00 3 .80 2 .89 3 .31 10 2 • 67 . 2 .36 2 .00 2 .20 2 .22 2 .39 11 3 .00 3 . 18 2 . 60 3 .80 3 .56 3 .25 12 3 . 17 3 . 18 3 .40 4 .20 2 .78 3 .25 13 3 .33 2 .44 3 .00 3 .00 2 .00 2 .52 14 3 .00 1 .86 1 .00 4 .00 1.80 2 .30 15 2 . 67 2 .25 2 .00 3 .00 2 .14 2 .37 16 2 .00 2 .29 2 .00 3 .00 1. 67 2 .00 41 .73 39 .07 40 . 65 47 . 95 38 .36 40.77 N= 16 N= 16 N= 16 N= 16 N=16 N=16 X= 2 . 61 X= 2 .44 X= 2 .54 X= 3 .00 X=2 .40 X=2 .5 6 9 Section lb - Secondary Mainstream Survey Results (Question 17) Question 17 17. Summary statement: What additional support do you f e e l secondary educators need to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the mainstream classroom? Where can thi s support come from? The f i n a l survey question gleaned 17 RSD educator immigration and mainstream education concerns. The concerns are presented below in order of frequency expressed. The f i r s t and greatest concern expressed by one-third of the sample group was (1) a c a l l for specially trained ESL classroom aides/assistants. 1. Classroom assistants would make my job as a teacher much more eff e c t i v e . Having another adult i n the classroom who i s trained s p e c i f i c a l l y to deal with ESL students would be a great' benefit. Many immigrant students require one-on-one instruction and mainstream teachers do not have enough time for this on a daily basis. Perhaps some classroom assistants could help out. A l l teachers should have a classroom assistant to help ESL students. Now only high and low incident students have an aide of some sort. Classroom assistants who have specialized in ESL should be available for teachers with a certain percent of ESL level 3 students and below. Assistance i s needed for one-to-one counseling to explain to students how to change t h e i r sentences and answers during a lab write-up session so that the answers make sense. Otherwise students f a i l that component. In my H.E. [Home Economics] eight classes I have nine out of 24 level 1 or 2 ESL. Right now I have no support s t a f f . An aide, that was consistent in my class, could help the students by explaining further what was to be done. 70 Low l e v e l ESL should not be in shop classes as often times they do not understand the safety implications. Classroom assistants could help t h i s problem. Assistance i s needed during instruction delivery — more teachers in the classroom — especially during a Chemistry lab i s important. A second and t h i r d concern expressed by the sample group, and both relate to the f i r s t concern, were (2) immigrant students' English language a b i l i t i e s and the language levels guidelines ESL Departments use to i n i t i a t e mainstream classroom integration, and (3) a c a l l for a reduced number of immigrant students in one classroom. 2. ESL students should only be placed in a classroom when they have achieved Level 4 or 5. I f e e l ESL l ' s and 2's may be moving into the regular classroom too early. Students repeating a course to upgrade i s a serious concern. Perhaps students should not be allowed to take academic course u n t i l t h e i r English i s better. 3. There i s a very immense difference between having three or four immigrant students in your class and having 20-25 students. When the academic courses require so much material to be covered for a provincial exam, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to adjust the pace for the ESL students. With one or two, you can give extra help at lunch. However, the problem accelerates with numbers. Since the main impact of these [immigrant] students i s in the amount of time they require for individual assistance, in class and after school, to have fewer per class would be desirable as a way of being able to deal with them as well as regular students. The number of ESL students in a given class should be limited to a few. When you get a situation with 40% to 60% ESL students in one class i t greatly limits teaching strategies. 7 1 Funding to reduce class size when a high number of immigrant students are placed in regular, non-ESL classes. Four more interrelated concerns the RSD secondary mainstream educators expressed were (4) the extra marking time immigrant students' work requires, (5) a need for ESL grading standards, (6) the price regular mainstream students are paying, and (7) the increased preparation time having a growing number of immigrant students in one's class seems to generate. 4. Marking help! It's very hard to correct second language student work — requires a great deal of attention and time because when correcting, the teacher wants to teach — show the student errors that may be avoided in future. In my subject area they [immigrant students] also take up more time with evaluation/editing/guiding their written work. Again, simply having fewer per class would already lighten the work load; no more than four per class. Marking — How to mark, for example, a Social Studies paragraph or essay for content when grammar, spelling, etc. i s so poor. 5. There should be uniform standards across the d i s t r i c t and through a l l d i s t r i c t s with a high ESL population. There needs to be some discussion of standards of acceptance of student achievement — i n ESL and in regular English. A l l teachers must be instructed in proper evaluation methods. 6. Regular students sometimes fe e l held back, exploited, frustrated because they are being asked to tutor they have to hold back and wait for ESL students to arrive at the advanced level of understanding; they cannot help with written work to the extent that teachers or aides can; they are increasingly feeling themselves to be the objects (victims) of reverse discrimination. 72 I no longer make special lessons or use techniques aimed at only these [immigrant] students. The rest of the class deserves a regular lesson with varying strategies. A l l too often because of eagerness, they [immigrant students] monopolize editing and proof-reading time provided in class. A way and means to f i e l d t r i p experiences for a l l students. 7. More release time i s needed for PRO-D and in-service. Our cultural plates are already overflowing. Students and teachers need to be educated about cu l t u r a l differences to promote tolerance in the class. I need PRO-D to help with methodology, I need time to prepare the simplified version of Canadian Law, and sources of information which are suitable for that reading l e v e l . Nine members of the sample group stated the need for (8) more teacher in-servicing. The types of information and professional development these individuals f e l t was needed ranged from (9) more knowledge about the cu l t u r a l and educational backgrounds of the d i s t r i c t ' s immigrant students, to (10) instruction methods, (11) specialized immigrant student resources, and (12) support for the mainstream educator. As well, members of the sample group f e l t there was (13) a need for improved communications and a greater p a r a l l e l in curriculum between the ESL and the mainstream classrooms. 8. C a l l for immigrant student teacher in-servicing: In-service for teachers of ESL students ( a l l subjects). I w i l l go out on a limb and state that this in-service should be mandatory. Training - f i n a n c i a l support and time to do so. 7 3 Professional development in multiculturalism and ESL would help (or similar courses). Multicultural workshops. I could use some creative ideas (help) in delivering my program (in-service). 2-. Immigrant student background information: School Board records should provide more information about c u l t u r a l background and nature of previous instruction. Identification of special needs of d i f f e r i n g immigrant students. Information on cult u r a l idiosyncrasies which might affect student/teacher interactions. S e n s i t i v i t y to cu l t u r a l differences — courses/ workshops for teachers to increase awareness of the differences. i.e. symbols In China, red i s a symbol of prosperity and luck and white i s a symbol for death. 10. Help with immigrant student teaching strategies: I am also trying to do more cooperative learning, but some immigrant students do not seem comfortable . working with other students. We could probably use some more cooperative learning strategies that are intended for immigrant students. Vocabulary i s a major problem for these students. They should have available a set of new language for the course plus translations. Could the d i s t r i c t have someone available for developing ESL related materials? Thanks. In Math classes, immigrant students in this d i s t r i c t excel. Their s k i l l l e v e l and understanding of Mathematics far surpasses that of other Canadian students. It i s d i f f i c u l t to find resource materials that can be used to.enhance lessons for these students. Some support could be used in finding these materials for these students. 74 11. Specialized resources: Simplified reading material/resources as additional aids. Resource package for s p e c i f i c language d i f f i c u l t i e s related to mother tongue language. i.e. Mandarin - tenses, pronouns, a r t i c l e s . Learning center teachers. Peer tutors. Visual aids with d i s t r i c t resource materials/kits. Close-captioned videos. Free language classes provided through the school d i s t r i c t for school teachers. 12. Teachers at a loss: Need more help and support in just dealing with frustrations. i . e . What do you do when you can't understand a student's heavy accent or when they absolutely refuse to participate or when they are in your regular academic course but the i r cognitive and academic language s k i l l s are five years behind where they need to be to succeed in your course. Everyone always says we need to appreciate the div e r s i t y that ESL students bring and to empathize with the d i f f i c u l t y they face in coming to a new country but no one ever asks what i t ' s l i k e for us teachers when 15 of our 30 students don't r e a l l y speak English. Often [immigrant] students are reluctant to ask for c l a r i f i c a t i o n or participate in discussion that may lead to further understanding of the material. This may be because they [immigrant students] are more accustomed to direct teaching — teacher talks, students l i s t e n — or because they are self-conscious about th e i r language l e v e l or a b i l i t y . Consequently I don't know how support could be offered for this problem. 7 5 The School Board should provide school based i n -service to promote closer communication between ESL teachers and mainstream teachers; there seems to be a lot of animosity over funding for ESL students. Many teachers f e e l they [ESL students] are receiving more help ( r e l a t i v e l y speaking) then mainstream students; resentment leads to lack of e f f o r t . Parents of ESL students must also become Canadianized. Some parents have t o t a l l y u n r e a l i s t i c expectations and they, too, pressure th e i r students and the teacher. I am increasingly frustrated even though I have adapted my teaching to meet t h e i r needs. I hope your research w i l l make an enormous change. I have t r i e d to welcome ESL students and treat them as people. However, they do not do the same in return! This i s a dream l i s t on which I expect HQ action or f i n a n c i a l support. 13. Better ESL Programs: Coordination between ESL and other departments. I would l i k e to see a change in the ESL program. There i s a need for some support by way of ensuring that immigrant students have been given adequate s k i l l s prior to entering the Arts related subjects, such as Social Studies. Lack of oral experience d e f i n i t e l y affects t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the classroom. More time in the ESL classroom needs to be devoted to curriculum background. I do not f e e l the current ESL situation addresses' student needs. One problem I have i s lack of background knowledge. i.e . ESL Level 4 students come into Socials 10 with l i t t l e or no background of previous courses. ESL teachers should be t o t a l l y fluent themselves i n grammar- and l i t e r a t u r e . 7 6 Concerns number 14 and 15 express the positive and negative sides of educating immigrant students the secondary mainstream survey sample group gave in their summary statements. 14. The up-side to educating immigrant students: At t h i s time, I can say that I find the work ethic of most immigrant students to be commendable and that, with time and patience they achieve quite well. I must say that in Math instruction I spend far more time, phoning parents, homework detentions, after school tutoring with Canadian student (Caucasians) that I spend with the t o t a l of a l l immigrant student problems. As the vast majority of immigrant students are from Hong Kong, their Math s k i l l s are considerably above average. I have a very large immigrant population in grade 12 Math (about 80%) and a small one in Science and Tech (almost 0%). I f i n d that I have to explain things a b i t more cl e a r l y and sometimes a b i t more simply but this to me seems l i k e a benefit for everyone. If I am forced to consider the words and language I use more caref u l l y then a l l of my students w i l l benefit from; (a) more than one explanation, and (b) a car e f u l l y chosen explanation (s) . Generally I f i n d immigrant students to be very hard-working and motivated; i f they are having problems understanding they usually talk to me after class. They also take re s p o n s i b i l i t y for th e i r own learning by using dictionaries and other supplementary materials. In P.E. I have a l l levels. Participation i s good. Other kids help out. Most students I get in Socials/Typing are l e v e l 3/4 — quite capable. 15. Additional frustrations: Too many ESL students expect A's, B's, C+'s, even C's for regular course work, even though they are not working at grade l e v e l . 7 7 I don't know how an ESL student can receive an A for a course when they are unable to participate orally in discussions or express themselves c l e a r l y on an individual basis! Teachers need to come together and be united and share common expectations. Cheating i s an immense concern. More supervision during testing periods i s needed. There are usually two incidents of copying per test. ESL students should not be using their f i r s t language or dependent on translators whether personal or mechanical. For the f i r s t time we are beginning to see Asians who are weak in many subjects. It should be noted that students [immigrant] are immediately integrated into our Math class. Because of the use of at-home tutors new problems are emerging; especially the huge discrepancy between homework and classwork. Less emphasis i s needed on Union rules and more of peoples' needs! For the most part, 19 members of the sample group f e l t the source of the support they were seeking must come from the Richmond School Board (16), and 12 teachers f e l t the school they were working in must be the source of support (17). The School Board should open lines of communication about available resources, ideas for instruction, etc. between teachers and the Learning Services Team (i.e. in-service/professional development, etc.). The School Board should provide more school based time to observe other teachers (share ideas). I believe the support must come from administrators, teacher on staff, classmates and from the individual mainstream learner. Administrators must provide the materials needed to adapt lessons so that these students are able to learn more e f f e c t i v e l y , i.e. overhead projectors, classroom space. 7 8 This support could come from just talking, to other teachers — r e a l l y needs to come from counsellors who use courses l i k e Keyboarding as ESL dumping grounds when the student speaks no English. Teachers on staff must be aware of teaching strategies and more importantly implement them consistently. Moreover, classmates must be used as buddies or even given re s p o n s i b i l i t y (i.e. peer teaching/buddy system) over s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s . Overall, i t i s the mainstreamed individual who has the power to change, adapt and excel in school; they must support themselves and be self-motivated. In order to do so, the support must come from themselves and the school. The citations above indeed suggest this group of secondary mainstream educators f e e l the onus of dealing with increased immigration in the RSD l i e s with the d i s t r i c t , not with the federal, provincial, or both governments. The responses generated by survey question 17 provide an understanding of the effect increased immigration in the RSD i s having on secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction from the teacher participants' views of the i r s o c i a l r e a l i t i e s . The number of responses and the quality of the responses indicate the sample group educators are excited about and f e e l they have something to contribute to the immigration and academic communication and instruction p o l i c i e s and practices in the RSD. The top three integration and education concerns survey question 17 gleaned were: (a) a c a l l for specially trained ESL aides/assistants in the mainstream classroom, (b) a more stringent immigrant student English language a b i l i t y mainstream classroom integration standard (and year-to-year consistency), and (c) a reduced number of immigrant 7 9 students i n one class. These three top concerns suggest teachers are feeling overwhelmed by the increased immigration in the RSD and that they need structure and support to be effective in t h e i r classrooms. The results of a follow-up interview with 13 of the survey participants are presented in the next section. Section 2 - Secondary Mainstream Interview Results SECTION 1: Biographical Information The results of SECTION 1: Biographical Information report the secondary mainstream interview sample group i s made up of five males and eight females. The groups' BC public school teaching experience average i s ten years. The group of 13 are teachers of: Biology, Chemistry, English, English as a Second Language, Geography, History, Humanities, Japanese, Law, Math, Physical Education, Science, Social Studies, Writing Comp.. SECTION 2: Language Questions a., b. a. Are you aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Y N How? Why not? b. Do you fee l a need to be? Y N Why? Why not? Nine interviewees said "Yes" they were aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. The remaining four indicated some le v e l of awareness. Most named a notation on the general registry as th e i r information 80 source, while others stated they either gathered an oral or written sample of students work early in the term to discover the language levels of the students in the i r classrooms. One c r i t i c i s m the sample group brought up time and again was the fact that the ESL student language level l i s t s they receive at the on-set of the year are seldom up-dated. A second c r i t i c i s m was the teachers didn't exactly know what a Level 1 student should be able to do as opposed to a Level 3 student. A f i n a l c r i t i c i s m that emerged from this question was the actual integration formula/process. Some teachers f e l t , because of the pressure of increasing numbers, ESL students were entering the mainstream prematurely. When asked, "Do you fee l a need to be aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)?", 10 out of 13 teachers interviewed said "Yes", one said "Yes" and "No", and two said "No" because i f the integration formula i s followed, language should not be an issue in t h e i r classrooms. However, the majority of the sample f e l t i t was necessary to know the language levels of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms so that they could anticipate language and concepts d i f f i c u l t i e s , adapt their lessons to ensure everyone was understanding, and ultimately so they could do a good job. Question c. c. Are you experiencing English as a Second (or Additional) Language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom? Y N Describe. 81 Twelve teachers gave an affirmative response to this question. The thirteenth teacher admitted "Yes" written test scores were weak, but had nothing but praise for the immigrant students' par t i c i p a t i o n l e v e l . Those who answered "Yes" offered a number of reasons why they were experiencing ESL related d i f f i c u l t i e s in the i r classrooms. The i n a b i l i t y of immigrant students' to understand simple instructions, to communicate, and to think c r i t i c a l l y were the chief ESL related problems reported. Question d. d. Rank order the following from 1 to 7, starting with the item (1) that seems to pose the greatest challenge in your classroom. l i s t e n i n g comprehension speaking a b i l i t y reading a b i l i t y writing a b i l i t y classroom behavior lack of common cul t u r a l background lack of common academic background The group i d e n t i f i e d " l i s t e n i n g comprehension" as the greatest immigrant student secondary mainstream classroom challenge. "Speaking a b i l i t y " was number two, then "writing a b i l i t y " , and number four "reading a b i l i t y " . A "lack of common academic background" was ranked number five, followed by a "lack of common cul t u r a l background", and f i n a l l y "classroom behaviour". Three of the four schools represented in this interview data exhibited similar rankings. However, the School 2 ranked "classroom behaviour" as the number two immigrant student classroom challenge. School 2 ranked "speaking a b i l i t y " 82 as number fi v e , followed by a "lack of common academic background" and a "lack of common cu l t u r a l background". A content area to content area comparison revealed l i t t l e difference in rankings across the curriculum. Question e. e. Are you having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of the i r English as a Second (or Additional) language a b i l i t i e s ? Y N Why? Why not? Eight teachers answered "Yes" to thi s question c i t i n g reasons such as immigrant student i n a b i l i t y to understand, reluctance to participate, and the i r not being able to function well in a cooperative learning environment. The five teachers who responded "No" explained their responses with: (a) a feeling that immigrant students mixed well with the English speaking students, (b) the point that a large proportion of immigrant students i s a fact of l i f e so a c t i v i t i e s must f i t the r e a l i t y of the classroom, and (c) the position that they do not give t h e i r immigrant students a choice, but instead simply integrate them into the classroom exercises and expect to perform l i k e any other student. Question f. f. Give a b r i e f l i s t of some t a c t i c s you have used to address the English as a Second (or Additional) language related issues in your classroom? 8 3 Assessing Immigrant Students: - pre-test or assess students' language l e v e l v i a oral or written work - have a l l students f i l l - o u t a goal setting sheet which includes what s k i l l s the students f e e l they have, and those they wish to acquire/improve during your course - assess and f i l l - i n the c u l t u r a l and educational gaps — teach s o c i a l skills/behaviour and develop c r i t i c a l thinking s k i l l s Teacher Adjustments: - speak slower - use gestures - simplify and repeat instructions - write instructions on board - model language - give examples of assigned tasks - use visuals/graphics/mnemonics — teach students to develop th e i r own - p u l l immigrant students into oral discussions - get immigrants comfortable with raising t h e i r hand for help or to respond to a question - c a l l on everyone when questioning - more comprehension checks - give lots of quizzes to check for understanding - consider test questions and format - test o r a l l y or via observation 84 - do a thorough job of marking grammar/spelling - set assignment expectation guidelines and rules for copying - allow students to s i t where they wish Content and Instruction Strategies: - preview lesson vocabulary to anticipate and adapt for possible language/knowledge shortcomings - reduce content to common elements - modify seat and homework - more written then oral assignments — gives immigrant students more time to work through the language barrier - cooperative group work (or pair s ) ; sometimes same-language; other times deliberately multilingual to encourage the use of English only - oral presentations - games - encourage immigrant students to watch English t e l e v i s i o n to l i s t e n to English radio, and to read the English newspaper - read a r t i c l e s , novels, etc., aloud and discuss the content as a group - seat a new immigrant student beside an immigrant student with a higher level of English language proficiency - t r y to reduce abstract language/concepts to something concrete - have same language students interpret when problems aris 85 - v i e f o r a teaching a s s i s t a n t who speaks Cantonese or Mandarin - l e a r n and use students' names and greet them ou t s i d e of c l a s s . SECTION 3: Cul t u r e Question a . , b. a. Are you aware of the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n your classroom(s)? Y N How? Why not? b. Do you f e e l a need t o be? Y . N Why? Why not? F i v e interviewees answered "Yes", three "No", and f i v e "Yes" and "No" t o question a.. Those who s a i d they were aware of the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n t h e i r classrooms a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r awareness to conversing with these students, t o information gained v i a w r i t t e n assignments, and through t h e i r own personal e f f o r t s such as reading, f i l m s , and t r a v e l . Those teachers who answered "Yes" and "No" agreed "Yes" they knew the s t e r e o t y p i c c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n t h e i r classrooms, but beyond that, that they needed to know much more. Three teachers j u s t simply were not aware of the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n t h e i r classrooms. When asked, "Do you f e e l a need t o be aware" of the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n your classrooms, a l l 13 teachers answered "Yes". The sample group 86 o f f e r e d a number o f v e r y i m p o r t a n t r easons why t h i s need e x i s t s ; such a s , c u l t u r a l knowledge would i n c r e a s e u n d e r s t a n d i n g and reduce awkwardness i n the c l a s s r o o m ( s ) t o the p o i n t o f v a l u i n g immigran t s t u d e n t s as p e o p l e and making them f e e l welcome. Q u e s t i o n c . c . A r e the c u l t u r a l backgrounds o f t he immigran t s t u d e n t s i n your c l a s s r o o m ( s ) an i s s u e ? Y N D e s c r i b e . N i n e o f 13 t e a c h e r s responded " Y e s " , one " Y e s " and " N o " , and t h r e e " N o " . The sample group q u a l i f i e d t h e i r answers w i t h a v a r i e t y o f v i e w p o i n t s . Some s a i d whether o r no t t he c u l t u r a l backgrounds o f t he immigran t s t u d e n t s i n t h e i r c l a s s r o o m s was an i s s u e depended on the i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t . Some s t u d e n t s do have s o c i a l p rob lems and t h i s can become an i s s u e f o r t h a t i n d i v i d u a l , o t h e r s t u d e n t s , and the t e a c h e r . The e x i s t e n c e o f r a c i s m and d i s c r i m i n a t i o n among s t u d e n t s was men t ioned by two t e a c h e r s . One t e a c h e r e x p l a i n e d how C a n a d i a n - b o r n C h i n e s e s t u d e n t s were t r y i n g t o d i s t a n c e and d i s a s s o c i a t e t h e m s e l v e s from the new C h i n e s e i m m i g r a n t s . The d i f f i c u l t y o f g e t t i n g E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g and immigran t s t u d e n t s t o work t o g e t h e r was c i t e d as a s p i n - o f f o f t h i s r a c i s m . From the t e a c h e r s ' p e r s p e c t i v e s , t h e c u l t u r a l backgrounds o f immigran t s t u d e n t s were b o t h a p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e i s s u e , p o s i t i v e i n the sense t h a t the A s i a n immigran t s t u d e n t s ' work l e v e l s e t s a g r e a t example f o r o t h e r s t u d e n t s , and t h a t h a v i n g immigran t s t u d e n t s i n t h e ma ins t r eam c l a s s r o o m seems t o p u l l t he c l a s s t o g e t h e r and make i t more g l o b a l , n e g a t i v e i n t h e sense t h a t c u l t u r a l 8 7 background i s just one of the many issues or factors mainstream teachers have to contend with when dealing with immigrant students i n t h e i r classrooms; in addition to getting students to understand, getting them to do th e i r own work and not copy verbatim out of reference books or from one another. Question d. d. Rank order the following from 1 to 7, starting with the item (1) that seems to pose the greatest challenge in your classroom. view on value of education _self-esteem mannerisms behaviour sense of belonging communication methods/skills motivation l e v e l As a group, the 13 teachers f e l t "communication methods/ s k i l l s " were the greatest immigrant student secondary mainstream challenge. A "sense of belonging" was number two. "Self-esteem", as i t relates to both the f i r s t and second responses above was number three. "Mannerisms", because of the differences in c u l t u r a l behaviours and actions and continued misunderstanding or lack of awareness was number four. "View on value of education" was number f i v e . Most teachers f e l t that immigrant students and their families had a positive view and placed considerable value on education. Number six, "motivation l e v e l " , was not a big classroom challenge. Teachers said most immigrant students are quite motivated to achieve. And number seven, "behaviour" was i d e n t i f i e d as least challenging item; although some teachers hinted this was changing. School 2 once 8 8 again offered quite a different ranking than schools 1, 3, and 4. "Self-esteem" and "view on the value of education" were ranked two and three respectively by the School 2 educators. "Mannerisms" were number seven on the School 2 l i s t . The Life S k i l l s group ranked "mannerisms" as number two. Math and Science ranked "behaviour" as the t h i r d greatest immigrant student challenge. The Math group also indicated immigrant student "self-esteem" was not a top concern. The English teachers were the only group that had a b i t of a problem with the "motivation l e v e l " of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. They ranked i t number f i v e . Question e. e. Are you having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of the i r c u l t u r a l backgrounds? Y N . Why? Why not? When asked this question, 10 of 13 teachers answered "No". Reasons why not ranged from leaving classroom work open-ended enough to accommodate a l l learners, to making classroom pa r t i c i p a t i o n mandatory. Three teachers f e l t they were having a d i f f i c u l t time mostly because they were uncertain about how to be most effe c t i v e in an integrated classroom (teaching styles), and because of the immigrant students reluctance to jump in and get involved (learning s t y l e s ) . 8 9 Question f. f. Give a b r i e f l i s t of some t a c t i c s you have used to address the c u l t u r a l background related issues in your classroom(s)? Environment: - have students complete a multicultural people search icebreaker at start of term - recognize own personal biases - bring in cultu r a l objects, music, films from variety of countries - give a l l cultures equal time and consideration Equality: - promote a global perspective - model global thinking - discuss the contributions immigrants have made to Canada throughout history - talk about multiculturalism today Strategies: - consider and bui l d on students' prior knowledge/ experience. - use w i l l i n g students as resident experts - make cul t u r a l comparisons — stressing s i m i l a r i t i e s / acceptance - use world l i t e r a t u r e - use news items from many countries - use multicultural names/places on tests, when giving examples, etc. 90 SF.CTTQN 4 : The Classroom Question a. a. Do you think the presence of immigrant students in your classroom(s) makes you f e e l uncomfortable? Y N Describe. Two teachers answered "Yes", one had mixed feelings, and 10 answered "No". The f i r s t teacher who answered "Yes" f e l t uncomfortable because the presence of immigrant students in her mainstream classroom had slowed the learning rate and limited the types of a c t i v i t i e s this teacher would normally do in class. This teacher f e l t her classes are now b o r i n g , a second source of th i s educator's discomfort. The second teacher who answered "Yes", she did f e e l uncomfortable, cited immigrant students questioning and challenging the way content material was delivered and how students were evaluated as the source of her discomfort. The teacher took the immigrant students' challenges as a professional affront. The source of discomfort for the lone teacher with mixed feelings was immigrant student reluctance to get involved. The remaining ten teachers f e l t a multicultural classroom i s today's r e a l i t y and teachers must adjust, that every Canadian (excluding F i r s t Nations people) i s an immigrant, and that immigrant students were no different than other kids. Question b. • b. Can you describe what or how immigrant students in your classroom(s) may be feeling? Y N Describe. 9 1 The responses to this question were more-or-less polarized. One group of subjects f e l t the immigrant students in their classrooms f e l t good, safe, happy, comfortable, able to achieve, supported, and recognized as having a different c u l t u r a l voice. On the other hand, the remaining teachers f e l t the immigrant students i n t h e i r classrooms were frustrated, overwhelmed, lost in a big way, shocked, bewildered, and intimidated. Question c. c. Please comment on the learning styles of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Comments. Some teachers mentioned they f e l t the immigrant students in the i r classrooms had excellent l i s t e n i n g s k i l l s , good study habits, always handed work in and on time, and were ready to learn. However, four major immigrant learning styles were i d e n t i f i e d by the majority of the sample group: (a) teacher-centered learning; (b) rote memorization; (c) low l e v e l regurgitation, copying, or both; and (d) an emphasis on product not process. Also, the majority f e l t immigrant students lacked the a b i l i t y to think for themselves, and to think c r i t i c a l l y . One teacher did mention however, the super rate of learning growth most immigrant students exhibit. Question d. d. Do you f e e l you have enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate a l l of the students in your classroom(s)? Y N Describe. 92 Three teachers answered "Yes", eight answered "No", and two were undecided about whether or not they had enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate a l l of the students in t h e i r classrooms. Two of the three teachers who f e l t they had enough learning style knowledge said so because they had taken learning styles courses at university. The t h i r d teacher said "Yes" because s/he had dealt with immigrant students for a number of years and f e l t s/he was delivering a good program. The eight teachers who f e l t they needed to know more about learning styles f e l t they could use more general learning styles knowledge plus s p e c i f i c ESL strategies. Two teachers mentioned they were trying to accommodate individual student differences, but t h e i r time had been stretched because of the variety of learners they had in their classrooms. Overall, this group of eight teachers who thought they needed more learning styles knowledge, as expressed by one member, thought "[a]ny teacher who says they have enough knowledge i s not a very good teacher.... There i s always something more to learn." The two teachers who had no d e f i n i t i v e answer for this question f e l t "Yes" they had enough learning styles knowledge to accommodate the immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms, but not enough to enhance learning. They thought there was room for growth. Q u e s t i o n e . e. Do you see the different learning styles of the immigrant students in your classroom(s) as a plus or a minus? + Describe. 9 3 Four members of the sample group answered the different learning styles of the immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms were a plus, and nine saw the differences as half plus and half minus. Reasons teachers offered for the different learning styles being a plus were the immigrant students 1 behaviour and work habits were a good model for other students, the more learning styles in a classroom the better, and having immigrant students i n the classroom makes content delivery more focused and comprehensive. The remaining plus/minus comments were of Asian students only wanting to learn via the direct lecture method, immigrant students being good with facts but not with interpretive or an a l y t i c a l types of assignments, too much focus on the teacher to give the message, too much copying, and the fact that these different learning styles compound classroom problems to almost an insurmountable l e v e l . Question f. f. Do you see the different c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in your classroom(s) as a plus or a minus? + Describe. Twelve of the 13 sample group members saw the different c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in t h e i r classes as a plus. The common themes that ran through the responses to th i s question were: (a) we l i v e in a multicultural, global world, (b) we can learn from others and become better people, and (c) the presence of immigrant students brings the world into the mainstream classroom. The thirteenth teacher had mixed 94 f e e l i n g s about the d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l backgrounds of immigrant students. This teacher thought the d i f f e r e n c e s were a p l u s , but that too many of one people can be a minus. Questions a. g. Do you make a conscious e f f o r t t o i n c l u d e immigrant students i n classroom a c t i v i t i e s ? Y N How? Why? Eight teachers f e l t they d i d make a conscious e f f o r t t o in c l u d e immigrant students i n classroom a c t i v i t i e s because immigrant students q u i t e o f t e n do not understand, and are o f t e n shy or r e l u c t a n t to speak, t o p a r t i c i p a t e , or both. The f i v e teachers who responded "No" they do not make a conscious e f f o r t to i n c l u d e immigrant students s a i d so because they g e n e r a l l y make a conscious e f f o r t to in c l u d e a l l students and because they do not want to s i n g l e students out and make them appear d i f f e r e n t or favoured i n the eyes of t h e i r peers. Questions h. , h. Do you f e e l you t r e a t the immigrant students i n your classroom(s) d i f f e r e n t l y ? Y N How? Why not? i . Do you f e e l a need to? Y N Why? Why not? Eig h t teachers s a i d they t r e a t e d immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y . Some s a i d they were more l e n i e n t with immigrant students because they have s p e c i a l needs. Some s a i d they 95 treated them d i f f e r e n t l y i n i t i a l l y but not for long. Others said they gave the immigrant students more time to do th e i r work, to answer questions, and that they offered them more assistance. The five teachers who answered "No", they do not treat immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y , f e l t immigrant students should be treated l i k e everyone else, and that one student (English speakers) should not lose out at the expense of others (immigrant students). Eight teachers also responded "Yes" to question i . . The group of eight f e l t a need, mostly i n i t i a l l y , because often immigrant students do not understand. They also f e l t that immigrant students needed time to adjust and that the mainstream teacher can aid in this adjustment. The remaining fiv e sample group members, however, f e l t i t was important not to treat immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y because to do so may appear unfair to the rest of the students. One teacher who answered "No" to t h i s question f e l t there was room for as s i s t i n g immigrant students but not to the extent of revamping one's teaching. SECTION 5: Addressing Classroom Instruction Question a. a. Please describe the types of d i f f i c u l t i e s you have experienced while teaching immigrant students. A large part of the immigrant student teaching d i f f i c u l t i e s the sample group i d e n t i f i e d were related to English language, communication, and understanding. "Language acquisition", 96 "language b a r r i e r " , "low E n g l i s h l e v e l " , and " t r y i n g to get them t o understand" were d i f f e r e n t ways the sample group expressed t h e i r immigrant student E n g l i s h language r e l a t e d d i f f i c u l t i e s . R e l a t e d to t h i s area o f d i f f i c u l t i e s are the responses o f another group o f t eachers who t a l k e d about the "extra t ime" i t takes to cover content and how d i f f i c u l t or almost i m p o s s i b l e i t i s "to make l a s t minute v e r b a l changes to c las sroom content ( i . e . a r e a d i n g , a worksheet , a l a b ) " because o f the l i m i t e d language a b i l i t i e s of the immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c l a s s r o o m s . One t eacher d e s c r i b e d h e r / h i s d i f f i c u l t y of t r y i n g to d e a l w i th "a sea of uncomprehending [immigrant s tudent] faces" , whi l e another t eacher t o l d of the d i f f i c u l t y o f cop ing with the f r u s t r a t i o n s immigrant s tudents i n h e r / h i s c l a s s e s were e x p e r i e n c i n g . L e a r n i n g s t y l e s and c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s were the l a s t type of immigrant student d i f f i c u l t i e s the sample group i d e n t i f i e d . Members o f the sample group l i s t e d " teacher -c e n t e r e d l e a r n i n g " , "copying (cheat ing)" , "a product r a t h e r than process o r i e n t a t i o n " , " t r y i n g to get s tudents t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n c las sroom a c t i v i t i e s " , "ge t t ing s tudents to share", "strong compet i t i venes s" , "sometimes poor attendance", and "the trauma s u f f e r e d by refugee s tudents" as the types o f immigrant student e d u c a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s they had exper i enced i n t h e i r c la s srooms . Ques t ion b . b . P lease d e s c r i b e the type(s ) o f t r a i n i n g you f e e l you need to meet the i n s t r u c t i o n a l needs o f the immigrant s tudents your c l a s s r o o m ( s ) . 97 Most of the 13 interview volunteers f e l t they needed to know more about the educational and cu l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in their classrooms. They also f e l t they needed strategies to: (a) bridge the language barrier, (b) move immigrant students away from the one-way lecture mode, (c) encourage immigrant students to use more English, and (d) access existing resources. A number of teachers said they would l i k e to take an English as a Second Language education course (or two) to learn the special ESL techniques needed to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students. Instructional strategies, the use of visuals, observation techniques, culture and customs, and assessment tools were mentioned in pa r t i c u l a r . One teacher added knowing what i s happening in the ESL classroom, perhaps having the opportunity to observe an ESL classroom, as a type of trai n i n g that would be helpful. One teacher f e l t no additional training was needed to meet the instructional needs of the immigrant students in her/his classroom. Question c. c. Please describe the types of resources you f e e l you need to meet the instructional needs of the immigrant students your classroom(s). The teacher above who f e l t no need for additional training to meet the instructional needs of immigrant students in the secondary mainstream classroom also f e l t additional or different resources were not necessary because of the implications of these resources for changing the curriculum. This teacher f e l t the use of additional or different resources would hurt a l l 98 students' chances of passing provincial exams. However, the remaining 12 members of the sample group did identi f y the types of resources they would l i k e to have to meet the instructional needs of the immigrant students in their classrooms. Cross-c u l t u r a l units, modified d i s t r i c t resources/kits, language-reduced textbooks, supplementary resources, and more visuals were the most mentioned resources. A number of teachers also mentioned a classroom assistant/interpreter and smaller class sizes as essential resources. Special workbooks, multilingual and picture dictionaries, computer programs, and high-interest low-vocabulary books for pleasure reading were mentioned as secondary English language development resources. One or two teachers mentioned VCRs, videos, and tape recorders for t h e i r classrooms. Question d. d. R e a l i s t i c a l l y , what do you f e e l needs to be done to ensure every c h i l d in the B r i t i s h Columbia Education System has an equal opportunity to learn? Question d. was a d i f f i c u l t question for the interview survey group to answer. As one teacher put i t , "Oh my God. That's a hard question. That's a r e a l l y hard question." As a whole, the sample group embraced th i s egalitarian sentiment implied in the question. However, one teacher, being r e a l i s t i c , f e l t that the size and d i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia and a lack of funds for education made the assurance of equality impossible. Another teacher immediately focused in on how unequal the current BC education system i s , focusing on the 99 existence of have and have not d i s t r i c t s . Yet, a l l 13 teachers had ideas about how to work towards an egalitarian education system in BC. Money and access seemed to emerge as the best avenues to ensuring every c h i l d in the B r i t i s h Columbia Education System has an equal opportunity to learn. A number of teachers f e l t better money allocation by School Boards was key to ensuring equal educational opportunity. In particular, teachers mentioned getting a l l o t t e d monies to mainstream classrooms rather than spending large sums of money on special programs that serve only a few individuals. The idea of "regular" students losing out to special programs was voiced more than once. The sample group f e l t money and access was needed for teacher training, resources, teacher aides, smaller class sizes, and for a support system for ESL students and teachers. One teacher f e l t i t was time for the BC government and the Richmond School Board to declare the Richmond School D i s t r i c t a special case and to funnel more ESL funds into the d i s t r i c t to provide for the unprecedented immigrant student growth the d i s t r i c t i s experiencing. Another teacher presented the idea of having many schools within a school for better communication and to give students more personal attention. This idea involved dividing a school teaching staff and student population into smaller units. For example, a group of five teachers would be responsible for a group of approximately 140 students. The five teachers would teach the 140 students more-or-less exclusively, thus increasing 100 educator communication and hopefully providing more personal student attention. Similarly, one teacher f e l t i n order to provide the equal opportunity to learn, timetables and student scheduling must become less uniform, and teachers must be given smaller classes and "time": time for individual development programs, time for conferencing and classroom observation, and time for marking and preparation must be supplied as keys to equal opportunity education. A f i n a l teacher f e l t that there needed to be less segregation of special programs and more overlap with mainstream programs so that resources and expertise could be shared, even enhanced, and so that loads of energy and money would not being spent reinventing the wheel. This teacher f e l t that i f the ultimate goal of special programs i s integration, why not work as a whole to benefit the whole. The sample group strongly agreed that the government has to come through with more money for education in BC and the Richmond School D i s t r i c t . They also suggested a l o t of improvements can be made at the school level to ensure a l l students have an equal opportunity to learn. Question e. e. Can th i s ' r e a l i s t i c ' outlook be f a c i l i t a t e d via teacher i n -service sessions ? Y N How? Why not? Twelve teachers said "Yes", part of their BC education outlook could be f a c i l i t a t e d via teacher in-service sessions. Most f e l t teacher in-servicing was possibly the only way to 101 f a c i l i t a t e quality and equal education in these changing times. However, there was some in-service skepticism as well. Members of the sample group f e l t they had been to too many teacher i n -service sessions they deem "a waste of time and money". They f e l t that unless the teacher in-service session addressed t h e i r r e a l i t i e s , was "made to order", and "ready to go on Monday", the in-service would not serve t h e i r needs. The notion of enticing reluctant teachers to in-service sessions with special perks l i k e offering teacher in-servicing on PRO-D days instead of on a teacher's time was brought up as well. "Teacher resistance" towards ESL and "poor teacher attitudes towards ESL kids" were additional teacher in-servicing hurdles mentioned by the sample group. "Expense", the cost of teacher in-servicing, was also mentioned. The sample group did however express a need for (a) professional and emotional support, (b) ESL instructional techniques upgrading, (c) ESL assessment and evaluation methods, and (d) ESL/mainstream resources, to be met via teacher i n -service sessions. Question f. f. Have you attended any teacher in-service sessions that s p e c i f i c a l l y addressed mainstream immigrant student classroom instruction? Y N Five teachers said they had attended an immigrant student mainstream classroom instruction in-service session. One of the five said s/he had attended an immigrant student in-service session in the Richmond School D i s t r i c t a while back. However, the topic was more culture than classroom instruction. Another 102 teacher said s/he had actually given a school-based immigrant student instructional methods in-service to her/his s t a f f some years ago. The t h i r d teacher who answered "Yes" had quite recently gone out of the RSD to attend an in-service which dealt s p e c i f i c a l l y with the education of immigrant students. The last two teachers who indicated they had attended an immigrant student in-service, had also done so quite recently. One of the two said the session s/he had attended was culture-based not instr u c t i o n a l methods-based, but added i t was refreshing and a good reminder about the variety of learners and the s p e c i f i c needs that exist i n today's diverse classrooms. The other teacher said s/he had attended an in-service session offered in her/his school (which made attending so much easier); this session did indeed address immigrant student instructional methods by i l l u s t r a t i n g how an ide n t i c a l lesson using mind-mapping would be delivered and received by a group of mainstream students and by a group of ESL students. This teacher f e l t the session was "bold" and "eye-opening" and "a decent start to getting teachers to recognize a need for special ESL traini n g " . Question g. g. Do you fe e l t h i s type of in-servicing i s valuable? Y N Why? Why not? A l l 13 teachers f e l t immigrant student classroom instruction teacher in-servicing i s valuable. Valuable i f i t i s s p e c i f i c and allows for more teacher input, i f the focus i s 103 instruction and sharing ideas and not multiculturalism, i f i t i s long-term and relevant (not prescriptive), and i f i t offers teachers strategies for being more sensitive to immigrant students and more effective without k i l l i n g themselves. The "Why?" comments offered by the sample group for thi s question included the following: immigrant student classroom instruction in-services could "remind and refocus teachers", establish a support network for information and resources sharing, allow teachers to better understand where the students in the i r classrooms are coming from, and indicate how teacher and student can function most e f f e c t i v e l y . Question h. h. Summary statement: What additional support do you f e e l secondary educators need to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the mainstream classroom? Where can this support come from? Three major themes ran through the interviewees summary statement responses: (a) more money for smaller class sizes, teacher aides, in-servicing, and resources, (b) better communication and coordination between ESL programs and the mainstream, and (c) a need for mainstream teachers to recognize the need for change, to improve th e i r discriminatory attitudes, and to play an active role in the change the d i s t r i c t i s undergoing, and w i l l undergo. The sample group f e l t the four sources of support (and i n i t i a t i v e ) for dealing e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the mainstream classroom were: (a) the BC government, (b) the Richmond School Board, (c) RSD schools 104 themselves, and (d) RSD teachers. A summary of the interview results i s presented in Table 5. Research Questions 1-5 Interview Results Discussion The interview results indicate the 13 member secondary mainstream sample group are aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in their classrooms, but only somewhat aware of the students cul t u r a l backgrounds. The teachers reported experiencing both immigrant student language and c u l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in t h e i r classrooms. Listening, speaking, writing, reading, and the lack of a common educational background ranked one to fiv e respectively as the greatest immigrant student language related academic communication and instruction challenges in the mainstream classroom. The sample group reported having d i f f i c u l t i e s including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of English language problems, but not because of c u l t u r a l background differences. The l i s t s of t a c t i c s teachers use to address the language and c u l t u r a l background related issues in th e i r classes indicate immigrant students do have different academic communication and instruction needs than their English-speaking peers. The immigrant student language, cul t u r a l , and classroom pa r t i c i p a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s the teacher volunteers reported encountering in their classrooms, plus the need, most teachers f e l t to treat immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y , as well as the s p e c i f i c immigrant student learning styles differences described 105 by the teachers, i l l u s t r a t e immigrant students have different educational needs. Two-thirds of the sample group f e l t they did not have enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate .all of the students in the i r classrooms. The two l i s t s of immigrant student language and cu l t u r a l background t a c t i c s teachers provided, although commendable, r e f l e c t l i t t l e immigrant student s p e c i f i c academic instruction know-how. The fact that most teachers agreed that more teacher in-service education was needed to deal with r i s i n g immigration, the point that few of the interviewees had ever attended an immigrant student instruction in-service, and the fact that a l l 13 teachers f e l t immigrant student classroom instruction teacher in-servicing i s valuable, support the idea that RSD secondary mainstream educators are not adequately trained to reach a l l learners. Seventy-seven percent of the interview sample group were comfortable with the presence of immigrant students i n th e i r classrooms. The group generally viewed the learning styles and cul t u r a l background differences of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms as a plus. Two-thirds of the group indicated they treated immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y , and that they needed to because of the language and cul t u r a l differences the students faced. However, the polarized descriptions teachers gave of how the immigrant students in the i r classrooms might be feeling project a degree of teacher discomfort. Some teachers f e l t the immigrant students in the i r classrooms were struggling 106 and t h i s concerned them. As well, the diverse responses teachers gave with regards to the question of ensuring every c h i l d in the BC education system has an equal opportunity to learn, i l l u s t r a t e a degree of pessimism, of lost control, and a need to have some input into decisions that d i r e c t l y affect the working and learning conditions of the secondary mainstream classroom. Are RSD educators comfortable dealing with growing immigrant student integration? The results of the interviews suggest teachers are coping. However, the i r comfort level i s being taxed. So what needs to be done for, or what additional support needs to be offered to, (or both), RSD secondary mainstream educators currently dealing with increased immigrant student integration? The interview respondents f e l t they needed more knowledge of the educational and c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in their classrooms. Strategies to bridge the English language barrier and to move students away from the one-way lecture mode were also needed. The teachers made mention of needing: (a) better access to ESL resources (curriculum materials and specialized personnel), (b) better communication with the ESL classroom, and (c) more immigrant instruction s p e c i f i c teacher in-servicing. In closing, the group f e l t the major onus for managing increased immigrant student integration in the RSD l i e s with the d i s t r i c t i t s e l f . 107 Table 5 Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educator interview r e s u l t s SECTION 2: Language Question a. 69% of the interviewees responded they were aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in their classroom(s). Question b. 77% of the interviewees f e l t a need to be aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. Question c. 92% of the interviewees were experiencing English as a Second (or Additional) Language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in their classrooms. Question d. The interviewees ranked the l i s t of language related classroom challenges as follows: ITEMS SCHOOL 1 SCHOOL 2 SCHOOL 3 SCHOOL 4 GRP. M Listening Comp. 1 1 3 1 1 Speaking A b i l i t y 3 5 1 3 2 Reading A b i l i t y 2 4 4 2 4 Writing A b i l i t y 4 3 2 4 3 Classrm. Behaviour 7 2 7 7 7 Lk. Cult. Bkgrd. 5 7 6 5 6 Lk. Acad. Bkgrd. 6 6 5 6 5 108 ITEMS ENG. LIFE SKL. MATH SCIENCE SOCIALS GRP. M Listening Comp. 1 Speaking A b i l i t y 3 Reading A b i l i t y 4 Writing A b i l i t y 2 Classrm.Behaviour 7 Lk. Cult. Bkgrd. 6 Lk. Acad. Bkgrd. 5 4 3 2 1 7 2 4 1 3 7 1 2 3 4 7 4 2 1 3 7 Question e. Question f 1 2 4 3 7 63% of the interviewees were having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students i n classroom exercises because of the i r English as a Second (or Additional) Language a b i l i t i e s . 50% of the interviewees shared comments about the adjustments they had made in the i r teaching to address English as a Second (or Additional) language related issues in the i r classrooms. 41% of the interviewees offered s p e c i f i c strategies. SECTION 3: Culture Question a. 39% of the interviewees were aware of the cul t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. 39% of the interviewees answered "Yes" and "No" to this question. Question b. 100% of the interviewees f e l t a need to be aware of the cultu r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in their classrooms. Question c. 69% of the interviewees responded the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms was an issue. Question d. The interviewees ranked the l i s t of culture related classroom challenges as follows: 109 I T E M S SCHOOL 1 SCHOOL 2 SCHOOL 3 SCHOOL 4 GRP. M View on Value Educ.6 3 6 5 5 Self-esteem 4 2 4 4 3 Mannerisms 3 7 3 3 4 Behaviour 5 5 7 7 7 Sense of Belonging 2 4 2 2 2 Com. Methods/Sk. 1 1 1 1 1 Motivation Level 7 6 5 6 6 I T E M S ENG. LIFE SKL. MATH SCIENCE SOCIALS GRP. M View on Value Educ.6 5 7 7 5 5 Self-esteem 3 3 6 3 3 3 Mannerisms 4 2 4 5 4 4 Behaviour 7 7 3 4 6 7 Sense of Belong 2 4 2 2 2 2 Com. Methods/Sk. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Motivation Level 5 6 6 6 7 6 Question e. 77% of the interviewees were having time including immigrant students in exercises because of their c u l t u r a l a d i f f i c u l t classroom backgrounds. Question f The strategies for addressing the c u l t u r a l background related issues the interviewees shared dealt mostly with equal treatment and providing a safe classroom environment. 110 SECTTON 4: The Classroom Question a. 77% of the interviewees thought the presence of immigrant students in their classrooms did not affect t h e i r comfort l e v e l . Question b. 50% of the interviewees described the immigrant students in the i r classrooms as feeling safe and relaxed. 50% of the interviewees described the immigrant students in the i r classrooms as feeling overwhelmed and frightened. Question c. Comments the interviewees made about the learning styles of the immigrant students in th e i r classrooms were: 1. they are good listene r s ; 2. they are more at home with teacher-centered learning; 3. they have great rote memory s k i l l s ; 4. they seem to regurgitate and copy class examples or texts rather than produce t h e i r own work; and, 5. they are end product rather than learning process-oriented. Question d. 62% of the interviewees f e l t they did not have enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate a l l of the students in th e i r classrooms. 15% said they had some learning styles knowledge, but not enough. Question e. 69% of the interviewees saw the different learning styles of the immigrant students in th e i r classrooms as both a plus and a minus. 31% saw the differences as a plus. Question f. 92% of the interviewees saw the different c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in the i r classrooms as a plus. Question g. 62% of the interviewees make a conscious e f f o r t to include immigrant students in classroom a c t i v i t i e s . Question h. 62% of the interviewees treat the immigrant students in the i r classrooms d i f f e r e n t l y . Question i . 62% of the interviewees f e l t a need to treat the immigrant students in their classrooms d i f f e r e n t l y . 111 SECTION 5: Addressing Classroom Instruction Question a. The types of immigrant student teaching d i f f i c u l t i e s the interviewees described they had experienced were mainly English language s k i l l s related (i.e. communication problems, students not being able to understand). However, a shortage of time and curriculum f l e x i b i l i t y was also mentioned, along with different learning styles, c u l t u r a l differences, and copying. Question b. The interviewees f e l t they needed more immigrant student educational and cu l t u r a l background training. They also f e l t a need for strategies to: 1. bridge the second language gap; 2. a l t e r the immigrant students' one-way lecture preference; 3 . help develop the immigrant students' English s k i l l s ; and, 4. access available ESL resources. The interviewees also f e l t they needed more instruction in teaching immigrant students and to see what i s happening in the ESL classroom. Question c. The types of resources the interviewees f e l t they needed were modified and supplementary materials, more teacher aides, and more audio-visual resources. Question d. The interviewees f e l t that in order for every c h i l d in the B r i t i s h Columbia Education System to have an equal opportunity to learn there must be better money allocation (less money spent of just a few spent on the majority), better teacher training, more resources, teacher aides, smaller classes, and more overall support for education. Question e. 92% of the interviewees f e l t some of the changes they suggested for an improved BC Education System could be f a c i l i t a t e d by teacher in-service sessions. Question f. 39% of the interviewees had attended some sort of a multicultural teacher in-service session. Question g. 100% of the interviewees f e l t a teacher in-service session s p e c i f i c a l l y designed to address the instruction of immigrant students in the mainstream 112 classroom would be valuable. Question h. In summary, the interviewees f e l t the type of additional support secondary educators need to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the mainstream classroom are more money for smaller classes, teacher aides, in-service training, and specialized resources. The group also f e e l there was a need for better communication between mainstream and ESL teachers, and a district-wide need to acknowledge a need for change in a changing d i s t r i c t . The interviewees f e l t the support they were seeking should come f i r s t from BC government, second from the Richmond School Board, t h i r d from the schools in the RSD themselves, and fourth from the teachers. 1 1 3 Section 3 - Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observation Results Both secondary mainstream and secondary ESL classroom observations were conducted in this study. The ESL observations were conducted to enable a mainstream/ESL academic expectations and l e v e l of content, and so c i a l climate comparison. The following observation results present the s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences observed between 60 mainstream and 30 ESL classes. A point-form observation results comparison table can be found at the end of th i s section (see Table 6). Class size: The average number of students in the 40 cross-curricular secondary mainstream classrooms observed was 23.7 students. The number of students in the ESL classes observed was 18.7. Teaching Paradigm(s): In the 40 cross-curricular secondary mainstream classroom lessons observed, information processing models (Joyce & Weil, 1980) were used 58% of the time (23 of 40 lessons) . Information processing models are models of instruction that influence how students process information from th e i r environment. The major information processing model used was concept attainment. Designed primarily to develop inductive reasoning, but also for concept development and analysis, concept attainment involves presenting an array of instances or examples that are alike in some ways and different in others. At each encounter with an 114 ins-tance or example, the person formulates and reformulates a hypothesis about the concept (Joyce & Weil, 1980). Lecture and independent learning (Saylor, Alexander & Lewis, 1981) were the primary tools of information processing and concept attainment. In 11 of the 20 observed ESL lessons, information processing models (Joyce & Weil, 1980) were used 55% of the time. Concept attainment was once again the most used information processing model. F i r s t group investigation and then lecture (Saylor et a l . , 1981) were the primary tools of information processing and concept attainment. Teaching S t r a t e g y ( i e s ) : The researcher noted the use of 35 different teaching strategies/tools in the 60 lessons observed. In order of use, the five chief strategies/tools used in the 40 cross-curricular mainstream classrooms were: (a) cooperative learning — group and pair work, (b) quizzes, (c) content worksheets, (d) content note taking, and (e) content review. In order of use, the five chief strategies/tools used in the 20 cross-curricular ESL classrooms were: (a) cooperative learning — group or pair work, (b) vocabulary development, (c) content worksheets, (d) comprehension question/answer, and (e) oral presentations, building l i s t e n i n g s k i l l s , content note taking, and content review (four-way t i e ) . Four teaching strategies/tools used in the cross-curricular mainstream classes that were not observed in ESL classes were: (a) USSW (Undisturbed Sustained Silent Writing), (b) role play, (c) jig-saw, and (d) idea and writing 1 1 5 s t r u c t u r e o u t l i n e s . L e a r n i n g w i t h / f r o m p r e s c r i b e d t e x t s , s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r c o n f e r e n c i n g , and c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g were h a r d l y e v i d e n t i n the 20 ESL c l a s s e s o b s e r v e d . The ESL l e s s o n s d i d however i n c l u d e more t e a c h e r language m o d e l i n g , more l i s t e n i n g s k i l l s deve lopment , and more language p r o c e s s i n g s t r a t e g i e s . C o o p e r a t i v e L e a r n i n g Methods : The use o f f o u r c o o p e r a t i v e l e a r n i n g f o r m a t i o n s was n o t e d i n b o t h t h e mains t ream and ESL c l a s s r o o m s : (a) s t u d e n t - t o - w h o l e c l a s s , (b) p a i r work, (c) t h r e e t o s i x pe r sons group work, and (d) whole c l a s s work . In b o t h c l a s s r o o m s e t t i n g s s t u d e n t s were i n v o l v e d i n b r a i n s t o r m i n g e x e r c i s e s i n a l l f o u r o f t h e above men t ioned f o r m a t i o n s . In the mains t ream c l a s s e s , many group d i s c u s s i o n s o f a c o n t e n t and s o c i a l i n q u i r y n a t u r e were o b s e r v e d . The d i s c u s s i o n s a l l o w e d s t u d e n t s t o r e v i e w and check t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g , t o share and e x p r e s s ( w i t h suppor t ) t h e i r o p i n i o n s , and t o i n t e r a c t w i t h the t e a c h e r , t he whole g roup , and the t o p i c o f d i s c u s s i o n i n a l e s s f o r m a l , more n a t u r a l f a s h i o n . Such i n f o r m a l , y e t i n f o r m a t i v e d i s c u s s i o n s were not as common i n the ESL c l a s s r o o m . There were d i s c u s s i o n s i n t h e ESL c l a s s r o o m s , but t h e y were u s u a l l y t e a c h e r - c e n t e r e d , t hus l e s s i n t e r a c t i v e and more t r a n s m i s s i v e i n n a t u r e . The i n v e s t i g a t o r d i d , however , from a whole group c o o p e r a t i v e l e a r n i n g p e r s p e c t i v e , obse rve c h o r a l s i n g i n g and c h o r a l language development i n some t h e ESL c l a s s e s . M a i n s t r e a m s t u d e n t s were i n v o l v e d i n group p r o j e c t s and a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d i n g , group r o l e p l a y , l a b o r a t o r y a s s i g n m e n t s , 1 1 6 jig-saw learning, and a t h l e t i c teams. Group a c t i v i t i e s for ESL students involved only group projects. As for pair work, mainstream students did some peer editing, worked on assigned tasks, marked each others' quizzes and worksheets, and conducted interviews. Pair a c t i v i t i e s for the ESL students involved some peer editing, work on assigned tasks, cooperative tutoring and translating, and conducting interviews. In the mainstream classes observed, students took a variety of student-to-whole class roles. In Math class, one student was selected each day to give the warm-up quiz. In Physical Education, one or two students led the warm-up exercises. In English classes, individual students read materials being studied aloud to the whole group. These students also read aloud t h e i r stories and poetry. In Social Studies, students did mini Current Events presentations. In Science class, a group representative reported group findings to the whole class. In the ESL classes, individual students gave oral presentations and answered questions when called upon. Teacher-Student Roles and Responsibilities: The chief roles and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the mainstream teachers observed were: - to structure, prepare, and moderate each lesson - to set classroom expectations, rules, tone, and guidelines - to teach content 1 1 7 - to impart, explain, give examples, and demonstrate content - to review, test, and evaluate. The chief roles and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the mainstream students observed were: - to actively participate in the educative process - to be mature - to be able to work independently - to complete a l l work - to mark, edit others work - to think c r i t i c a l l y and to be able to question and argue a point. The chief roles and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the ESL teachers observed were: - to structure, prepare, and lead most lessons - to model the English language - to encourage and develop English language s k i l l s - to modify content - to impart, explain, give examples, and demonstrate content - to set classroom expectations, rules, tone, and guidelines - to do the majority of the speaking and questioning. The chief roles and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the ESL (immigrant)-students observed were: - to l i s t e n and develop their language 118 - to complete assigned work - to mark, edit others work - to answer when called upon. Teacher Expectation Levels: The mainstream teachers' teacher expectation levels for students observed during t h i s study were to: - stay on task — use their time wisely - complete a l l work - maintain a b i l i t y appropriate grades - be w i l l i n g to share their ideas and work with the whole class - be able to think c r i t i c a l l y and discriminatively - be able to r e c a l l information taught - be able to ask for help - work well with others - exhibit independence - be creative, innovative, f l e x i b l e - be risk-takers. The ESL teachers involved in this study expected students to: - stay on task — use their time wisely - complete a l l work - l i s t e n c a r e f u l l y and learn through l i s t e n i n g - take notes to enhance the i r comprehension - understand main ideas - be able to r e c a l l information taught - learn with and from others 1 1 9 - speak English - memorize content to enhance learning/understanding. Student Involvement/Participation: To measure how well mainstream and ESL teacher expectation levels matched perceived student behavior, involvement, and performance, Student Involvement/Participation was observed and noted. In the mainstream classes, students: - actively participated in discussions, debates, role plays - contributed ideas/information/opinions - led a c t i v i t i e s — Current Events, Math warm-up quiz, etc. - contributed to classroom organization -- parent/student conferencing, Egypt Unit contents l i s t , etc. - monitored each others behaviour - asked and answered questions - presented materials in front of the class - worked well in groups - assisted one another via peer editing, quiz marking, etc. - move on said tasks without teacher assistance - worked well in jig-saw exercises, group projects, etc.. In the ESL classes, students: - took notes d i l i g e n t l y - listened intently - gave a number of oral presentations - sang boisterously - contributed to discussions 120 - took turns reading aloud - asked questions - assisted one another via peer editing, tutoring, translating, quiz marking, etc.. Teacher Assistance: Teacher assistance whether one-on-one, small group, or whole group i s pivotal in some students' education. During the 60 lessons observed the following notes about teacher assistance were made: 1. mainstream classes - the teachers circ u l a t e and assist students i n d i v i d u a l l y and in small groups; when whole group c l a r i f i c a t i o n i s needed, i t i s given - the teachers provide lots of examples, analogies, and personal anecdotes to make understanding/task clear - the teachers simplify, highlight, demonstrate, model, review and summarize content - the teachers use probing and ana l y t i c a l questions to get students to think and to find answers - the teachers share th e i r thought processes v i a diagrams, calculations, etc. done on the overhead or front board - the teachers give hints and point out common errors - the teachers re-teach a concept i f students did not understand - the teachers act as partners in education with th e i r students 121 - t h e t e a c h e r s use body l anguage , g e s t u r e s , d iagrams t o get m e s s a g e / i n f o r m a t i o n a c r o s s t o s t u d e n t s no t f o l l o w i n g - t h e t e a c h e r s encourage and suppor t t h e i r s t u d e n t s 2 . ESL c l a s s e s - t h e t e a c h e r s c i r c u l a t e and a s s i s t s t u d e n t s i n d i v i d u a l l y and i n s m a l l g r o u p s ; when whole group c l a r i f i c a t i o n i s needed, i t i s g i v e n - t h e t e a c h e r s h e l p s t u d e n t s w i t h t h e i r v o c a b u l a r y and E n g l i s h p r o n u n c i a t i o n - t he t e a c h e r s h e l p s t u d e n t s r e a d and w i l l o f t e n r e a d a l o n g w i t h a s t u d e n t / g r o u p o f s t u d e n t s - t h e t e a c h e r s f a c i l i t a t e and moderate d i s c u s s i o n s t o ensure everyone i s b e i n g u n d e r s t o o d - t h e t e a c h e r s model E n g l i s h c o n s t a n t l y and c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y - t h e t e a c h e r s o f f e r a l o t o f per formance feedback - t h e t e a c h e r s use body l anguage , g e s t u r e s , d iagrams t o get m e s s a g e / i n f o r m a t i o n a c r o s s t o s t u d e n t s not f o l l o w i n g - t h e t e a c h e r s encourage and suppor t t h e i r s t u d e n t s . T o n e / E n v i r o n m e n t : In most c a s e s , t h e t e a c h e r s o b s e r v e d d u r i n g t h i s s t udy se t t he tone o f t h e i r c l a s s r o o m s . Most ma ins t ream c l a s s r o o m s were r e l a x e d , open, c a l m , l i g h t - h e a r t e d and humourous, but a t t h e same t ime b u s i n e s s - l i k e , f r i e n d l y , p o s i t i v e , c o l l a b o r a t i v e , w e l l - s t r u c t u r e d , and s t i m u l a t i n g . As w e l l , t h e s e c l a s s r o o m s were s e r i o u s , s t u d i o u s , h a r d - w o r k i n g , and c o n t e n t - o r i e n t e d , w i t h 122 high teacher expectations. Very few of the 40 mainstream classes observed were unproductive or unruly. In most instance, ESL students did not play a very active role in the mainstream classroom environment. Therefore, i t was d i f f i c u l t to v e r i f y the immigrant student communication and instruction problems teachers had i d e n t i f i e d during the survey and interview portions of th i s study. Three possible reasons why the problems teachers had i d e n t i f i e d were d i f f i c u l t to detect are: (a) in some cases teachers did not address the needs of the immigrant students in their classrooms and simply taught around these students, (b) either the language levels of the immigrant students were s u f f i c i e n t to meet the academic demands of the mainstream content area classrooms or students received language and content help from other same native language speakers i n the classes, and (c) the adjustments some teachers reported making to the i r teaching approaches to accommodate the immigrant students in their classrooms were meeting the needs of the immigrant students in these classrooms. Very l i t t l e disruptive behaviour was observed in the 20 ESL classes involved in this study. The tone of the ESL classes was calm, positive, safe, playful, light-hearted, fun, and supportive. The classes were also business-like, studious, cooperative, disci p l i n e d , and at times for some students, apprehensive. The four research sites for th i s study were schools of various ages. Some classrooms were a great teaching/learning 123 space while in others the l i g h t i n g was poor, i t was impossible to control the room temperature, and outdoor sounds made teaching/learning d i f f i c u l t . A l l of the classrooms observed had some wall-coverings (posters, maps, students work, and pictures of students). In the mainstream classes, 17 of the teachers arranged t h e i r desks in pairs, ten in rows, nine in groups of three or more, and in the four Physical Education classes observed, the students were arranged as a group. In the ESL classes, 13 of the teachers arranged th e i r desks in groups of three or more and seven in rows. For the most part, teachers used the overhead projector a l i t t l e more than the blackboard. Fifty-two percent of the classrooms entered during t h i s study were portable classrooms; 4 of 16 mainstream and 7 of 14 ESL. Teacher-Student(s) Relationship: In the mainstream classrooms, the three major teacher-student (s) relationship characteristics that emerged were: (a) a mature and academically ambitious union of teacher and student, (b) a positive, pleasant more socially-oriented relationship, and (c) in some instances, a distant and unpleasant struggle for both the teacher and the student. The ESL students in the mainstream classrooms were more teacher and same cul t u r a l group dependent than the mainstream students. They demonstrated a more passive, transmissive learning style. However, these students were never observed to be d i s c i p l i n e problems. The characteristics of the teacher-student relationship(s) in the ESL classroom were somewhat different. The ESL teachers 124 and th e i r students shared a more passive relationship. For the most part, the teacher appeared the dominant figure i n the relationship and the exchanges between the teachers and the students were quiet and restrained. Students and teachers worked well together, respected one another, and were courteous and supportive. These ESL classroom relationship(s) however, on the whole, did not seem very vibrant or mature and the students did not seem to contribute much to the learning process. Student(s)-Student(s) Relat ionship: Three major student-student relationship t r a i t s that emerged in the mainstream classroom were; (a) a mature, i n t e l l e c t u a l union, (b) an open, positive friendship, and (c) in a few instances, an immature, impatient, divided classroom. The immigrant students in the mainstream classrooms tended to associate more with th e i r same cultu r a l group peers and had only limited contact with the mainstream students. In the ESL classes observed, the students seemed happy, f u l l of energy, and productive, although at times they did seemed quiet, close, and quite private. The classes were more r a c i a l l y integrated because of teacher intervention. More than once, the investigator noted students giggled at other students giving oral presentations. There seemed to be three types of seating arrangements in the 60 classes observed: (a) f u l l y integrated, (b) language segregated, and (c) gender segregated. In 21 of the 40 mainstream classes observed, students, immigrant and mainstream 125 a l i k e , sat wi th t h e i r same language p e e r s . In seven c l a s s e s , the s tudents seemed to segregate themselves by gender. In 12 o f the observed mainstream c l a s s e s , s tudents were comple te ly i n t e g r a t e d . In 12 of the 20 ESL c l a s s e s observed s tudents were i n t e g r a t e d , most ly because ESL teachers i n t e r v e n e and separate same language s tudents so t h a t the on ly common language i s E n g l i s h . Gender s e g r e g a t i o n was noted i n s i x c l a s s e s . Own-language s e g r e g a t i o n was noted i n two c l a s s e s . It shou ld be noted tha t more than one o f the three above mentioned s e a t i n g arrangements may have been present i n a c l a s s at one t ime . However, o n l y the most p r e v a l e n t s e a t i n g arrangements i n each of the 60 c l a s s e s observed was r e p o r t e d h e r e . Subject Matter: The subjec t matter covered i n the c r o s s - c u r r i c u l a r mainstream c l a s s e s observed was most ly government p r e s c r i b e d . The content covered i n these c l a s s e s i n c l u d e d : 10th t o 15 th-century European h i s t o r y , e x p l o r e r s , the I n d u s t r i a l R e v o l u t i o n , Canadian h i s t o r y (the Canadian P a c i f i c Rai lway , C o n f e d e r a t i o n , L o u i s R i e l ' s T r i a l ) , Communism, Fasc i sm, the I s l a m i c R e l i g i o n , geography, meteorology, moles, the r e s p i r a t o r y c h a i n , F a c t o r s , E q u a t i o n s , T o r t s , Shakespeare, n o v e l s , short s t o r i e s , p o e t r y , the Japanese language, and s o c i a l i s sues based on the Sue Rodrigues case , Women's Day, and an i n c i d e n t t h a t happened on a s tudy s i t e s c h o o l ground. The content covered i n the ESL c l a s s e s observed i n c l u d e d ; Canadian h i s t o r y and geography, short s t o r i e s , p o e t i c d e v i c e s , and the Isopod. Grammar, v o c a b u l a r y , 126 oral language, and more rudimentary, even elementary, content seemed to be the subject matter focus in most of these classes. Most of the ESL classes observed during t h i s study were English-oriented courses. Academic Discourse: The l e v e l and expected level of academic discourse in the mainstream classes was observed to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than that of the ESL classes observed. Two apparent reasons for this difference were: (a) English language a b i l i t y , and (b) content taught. In the mainstream classrooms students had to have some knowledge of law and human rights terms, anatomical terms, mathematical language, the periodic table, the processes of analysis and interpretation, c r e a t i v i t y , oration, computers/video recorders, idioms, colloquialisms, and the language of sequence and description. In the ESL classes observed, the level of academic discourse was lower. Students were expected to have a strong knowledge of grammatical principles and to be able to memorize fact-oriented content. Students in the ESL classes were observed having to use the language of comparison and contrast and formal and informal l e t t e r writing. However, because language was d i f f i c u l t for these students and because the focus of most of the ESL classes observed was English language development, most subject matter was language and content-reduced, dissected for vocabulary, concrete as opposed to abstract, and deduced using the 5+Ws (Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?). 127 Use of Visuals: Visuals were not the chosen teaching tool in either the mainstream or the ESL classrooms observed. Text seemed the favourite medium of content delivery, whether on the blackboard, the overhead, in a text, or on a worksheet. In the mainstream classes some use of computers, wall maps, charts, films, cartoons, objects, pictures in the text, and samples of project and assignment work from e a r l i e r years were observed. As well, some mainstream educators used mind maps, webs, outlines, and super diagrams to generate ideas and promote understanding. In the ESL classes observed, the teachers used newspapers, wall maps, charts, flashcards, videos, pictures in the text, the Oxford Picture Dictionary, lots of gestures, and brainstorming webs . Use of Prescribed Texts: In the 40 mainstream classes observed, the use of 27 different prescribed texts was noted. In addition, encyclopedias, reference texts and documents, National Film Board films, dictionaries, and thesauri were present and used in some classes. In the 20 ESL classes observed, the use of six texts was noted. Three of the six were mainstream prescribed texts. The remaining three were ESL texts. A National Film Board f i l m was used in one ESL class. The type(s) of text(s) used in the mainstream classrooms were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more challenging than the materials used in the ESL classrooms. 128 M u l t i c u l t u r a l Curricula: Given the multicultural student mix that exists in the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (39% of RSD student population receives ESL assistance - BCTF, 1994), the lack of multicultural curricula used in the 60 classes observed was somewhat surprising. In the mainstream classes, most of the content was centered on European themes with the exception of a unit on Egypt, one on the Islamic Religion, and the mention of Communism in China and Cuba. A news a r t i c l e about the drug rings in Singapore was used, and some mention of the carnival in B r a z i l was made. In one English class the teacher did a cross-cultural look at symbols. But for the most part, even when i t came to something as c u l t u r a l l y sensitive as euthanasia, the topic was discussed from a Eurocentric perspective. In the ESL classes observed, one teacher did have a discussion with the class about multicultural holidays and cultu r a l practices. One teacher used a video that contained some French. Another used a folk t a l e from Laos. Students in one class chose th e i r own oral presentation topics and ended up talking about what they knew best — Asia. However, the majority of the materials used in the observed ESL classes were Eurocentric in nature. Pace or Rate of Content Delivery: For the most part the pace or rate of content delivery in both the mainstream and ESL classes observed seemed appropriate for the demands i t made on the students and expectations i t 129 created. At times, the pace in the mainstream classes was extremely quick, but t h i s was mostly in enriched and senior l e v e l courses. Only twice i n 40 mainstream lessons was the pace noted as slow. In the ESL classes the pace was appropriate because the content was often language and content-reduced, there was frequent review, and the students were keen to stay on task and learn. On the investigator's scale of 1 to 10, the pace in the majority of the mainstream classes observed was 7.5. Using the same scale, and from a mainstream students' perspective, the pace in the majority of the ESL classes observed would be about 4. Accommodation of ESL/Culturally Different Students: The usual practice in most of the mainstream classes observed was to allow students to pair or partner up to complete assigned work. Students were also often divided into small groups so that they could divide up the work and so that they could help one another to understand and complete the assigned task(s). Sometimes the students were allowed to pick their own groups. Other times the teachers assigned the groups. This cooperative, collaborative approach worked well to accommodate ESL students in the mainstream classroom. It was also observed that students were encouraged to translate for one another or to pass along (translate) information from the teacher to a new ESL student. Some teachers did, however, frown upon students using t h e i r own language in class and said "English only". It was observed that in some mainstream classrooms teachers spoke 130 slower, explained more thoroughly, used step-by-step formulas, took the time to teach the more d i f f i c u l t vocabulary, and were w i l l i n g to re-teach material one-on-one i f any student needed such help. For the most part, the mainstream teachers circulated around the classrooms offering t h e i r help and checking over shoulders; in some cases, the f i r s t persons the teachers v i s i t e d were the immigrant students. However, some teachers did wait for the students to approach them for help. The mainstream teachers pulled the immigrant students into class discussions by giving them easy questions to answer (lots of comprehension checks), having them read aloud, asking them their opinions, and asking them the i r resident expert points of view. ESL students for the most part were expected to do the same work as the mainstream students, but they appeared to receive more assistance from their teachers. In the ESL classroom, cooperative learning pairs, small groups, and whole class, were prevalent. Sometimes students selected t h e i r mates, but for the most part the teachers intervened to ensure some English was being used. In one ESL class the students were organized into tutor/tutee pairs. In another class, during oral presentations, the teacher lowered the ligh t s to make the presenters more comfortable. A different teacher stood close to the presenters during th e i r oral presentations to offer support. In the majority of the ESL classes observed English language development was the focus. Therefore, the ESL teachers spoke slowly, explained and repeated 131 unfamiliar vocabulary, wrote lots of board notes, used a l o t of gestures and often read text aloud to the students. The smaller ESL class size plus the occasional presence of teacher aides allowed for lots of individual assistance. A l l of the effor t s to accommodate ESL/culturally different students l i s t e d above appear to make sense and to work. However, at times ESL and mainstream students and ESL and ESL students did seem reluctant to work with one another. The noted effo r t s to accommodate ESL/culturally different students l i s t e d above enhanced the academic accommodation of immigrant students, but l i t t l e was noted in regard to cu l t u r a l accommodation of ESL students. Teacher-Student(s) Successes and Failures: The teacher-student(s) successes observed in the mainstream classes v i s i t e d during this study were: (a) students pa r t i c i p a t i n g in and contributing to the learning process, (b) students completing their work and producing some notable finished products, and (c) students were working independently thus allowing the teacher time to observe the learning environment and to confer with individuals or groups of students. Noted f a i l u r e s in the mainstream classes included students being overwhelmed by the pace of some lessons, wasting time because they were not held accountable, being unable to get to work because they did not understand the lesson, and showing occasional moments of disrespect towards teachers, fellow students, and s e l f . In the ESL classes observed the diligence and cooperation of the students allowed things to run smoothly. 132 The classroom f e l t safe and close-knit. However, English was d e f i n i t e l y the ESL students second language of choice in the ESL classes observed. Also, the students were extremely dependent on t h e i r teachers. The ESL classrooms were more teacher-centered, while the mainstream classes were more teacher-student interactive. Teacher concerns: The main concerns the observed mainstream teachers exhibited were: (a) understanding and i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of content, (b) analysis and application of content, (c) developing independent and collaborative work s k i l l s , and (d) owning one's education. The main concerns the ESL teachers observed seemed to exhibit were: (a) providing lots of English language development opportunities — especially oral language, (b) getting students to understand main ideas and concepts, (c) building students' vocabularies, and (d) encouraging and nurturing students in their new academic l i f e . Research Questions 1-5 Observation Results Discussion The secondary mainstream and ESL classroom observations, the f i n a l component in this study's triangulated methodology, were an opportunity for the investigator to observe the teacher volunteers in th e i r classrooms; to monitor how the educators are reacting and responding to increased immigration in the RSD. For the most part, there appeared to be few immigrant student disruptions in the mainstream and ESL classrooms. From time-to-133 time, the pace of the lessons in the mainstream classrooms was slowed because the teacher had to stop and explain (a second time) something to an ESL student. However, t h i s occurrence was not noticeably frequent. In both streams, immigrant students with a better command of English voluntarily, or at the teachers' request, worked with the newer immigrant students. The mainstream teachers (and of course the ESL teachers) appeared aware of the immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms, and offered these students the time and consideration they demanded. However, more mention and inclusion of the students native languages and cultures was evident in the ESL classrooms. The pace or rate of content delivery, the chosen teaching paradigms, strategies, subject matter, and le v e l of discourse observed in the mainstream classrooms were considerably different then those observed in the ESL classrooms. The pace of the lessons i n the mainstream classrooms was twice as fast as that of the ESL classrooms. Although information processing models (Joyce & Weil, 1980) were the chief teaching paradigm in both the mainstream and the ESL classrooms, concept attainment in the ESL classroom was more group oriented and teacher-centered. The teaching strategies used in the mainstream classrooms promoted more individual thought, c r i t i c a l analysis, and more student knowledge assessment then the group and language oriented a c t i v i t i e s in the ESL classroom. The subject matter observed in the mainstream classrooms was mostly 134 government prescribed, while the content observed in the ESL classrooms was generally more language acquisition focused. The difference i n the level of academic discourse between the mainstream and the ESL classrooms was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . Students in the regular classrooms were expected to know a wide variety of vocabulary sets (i.e. law and human rights terms, anatomy), while students in the ESL classrooms were taught the new vocabulary. The vast differences in the teaching styles and the learning experiences and expectations observed between the mainstream and the ESL classrooms suggest ESL students do have different academic communication and instruction needs than t h e i r English-speaking peers. The mainstream observations demonstrated the content area educators observed used a variety of teaching strategies and cooperative learning methods. However, very l i t t l e m ulticultural curriculum was evidenced, and l i t t l e , besides pairing, seemed to be done to accommodate the ESL/culturally different student in the mainstream classroom. Most of the immigrant students required some teacher and peer assistance. The teachers' main concerns in the regular classrooms were content acquisition and achievement. At times, ESL students were unable to perform to this standard. There appeared to be come shortcomings in the secondary mainstream educators' levels of expertise to adequately reach a l l learners (i.e. l i t t l e use of v i s u a l aids, few modified materials, English-only p o l i c i e s ) . 1 3 5 The focus was quite different in the ESL classrooms. Although a variety of teaching strategies and cooperative learning methods were used i n the ESL classrooms as well, the ESL teachers 1 main concerns were language development and main idea acquisition. Lesson content was most often within the students' a b i l i t y range and the tone of the classrooms was more relaxed and p l a y f u l . The smaller ESL class size, the luxury of specialized materials, and the occasional ESL aide enabled the ESL teachers to reach more learners. The ESL students in the mainstream classrooms were treated much l i k e their English-speaking peers. The mainstream teachers prepared the lessons, set the classroom tone and student performance expectations levels, and encouraged student p a r t i c i p a t i o n . One standard of behaviour and classroom involvement pertaining to a l l students was usually evident. Everyone was expected to actively participate in the educative process, to be mature, and to be able to work independently. At times, because of English language d i f f i c u l t i e s , the immigrant students were unable to act accordingly and t h i s was a source of frustration for both the students and the teachers. The fact that most immigrant students prefer to work together was also trying for both the students and the teachers. And, f i n a l l y , the teacher-centered learning environment immigrant students prefer also wore on some students and teachers. Consequently, two noted f a i l u r e s in the mainstream classes were students being 1 3 6 overwhelmed by the pace o f some l e s sons and s tudents not b e i n g ab le to get to work because they d i d not unders tand the l e s s o n . The ESL c lassroom teachers seemed much more comfortab le d e a l i n g wi th the academic demands o f the growing immigrant s tudent p o p u l a t i o n i n the RSD. Because o f a s m a l l e r language a b i l i t y gap and l e s s c u l t u r a l background d i v e r s i t y i n the ESL c lassrooms (plus the s m a l l e r student numbers, more a s s i s t a n c e , more m o d i f i e d m a t e r i a l s , and d i f f e r e n t performance and c l a s s involvement e x p e c t a t i o n s ) , the ESL teachers d i d not seem to be e x p e r i e n c i n g the same l e v e l of d i scomfor t some of the mainstream teachers were e x h i b i t i n g . However, the t eacher was the c e n t e r of most l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s that o c c u r r e d i n the ESL classrooms and t h i s at t imes p l a c e d very heavy demands on the t e a c h e r s . While v i ewing the mainstream and the ESL c las srooms , i t became apparent to the i n v e s t i g a t o r that the two streams were more d i f f e r e n t than s i m i l a r . In BC, the ESL c u r r i c u l u m i s supposed t o p a r a l l e l the mainstream c u r r i c u l u m as much as the E n g l i s h language b a r r i e r w i l l a l l o w . However, few c o r r e s p o n d i n g f e a t u r e s were ev ident to the o b s e r v e r . In the mainstream c las sroom, most t eachers seemed unaware o f the language through content (Chamot & O ' M a l l e y , 1986; E a r l y , Thew & W a k e f i e l d , 1986; Mohan, 1986) ESL t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g paradigm the RSD advocates . In the ESL c lassroom, some educators were unaware o f the f a c t t h a t the mainstream c u r r i c u l u m i s the ESL c u r r i c u l u m . The programs d i d not seem to support one another , p o s s i b l y making i n t e g r a t i o n more d i f f i c u l t f o r immigrant s t u d e n t s . 1 3 7 In closing, the investigator feels what needs to be done for, or what additional support needs to be offered to, (or both), RSD secondary mainstream educators currently dealing with increased immigrant student integration i s more information about ESL policy and programming in the RSD, more classroom and curriculum support, and more communication and coordination of eff o r t s with ESL classroom teachers. 138 Table 6 A comparison of the Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream and ESL classroom observation results ITEMS MAINSTREAM ESL Class size Teaching Paradigm Teaching Strategies Cooperative Learning Methods Teacher-Student Roles/Responsi-b i l i t e s 23.7 persons information process model concept attainment lecture/independent learning 1 cooperative learning 2 quizzes 3 worksheets 4 notetaking 5 review 1 student-to-whole-class 2 pairs 3 three to six in a group 4 whole class variety of a c t i v i t i e s , roles, and approaches Teachers' R/R structure/prep lesson moderate lesson set expectations/rules set tone/guidelines teach content impart/demo, knowledge review/test/evaluate 18.7 persons information process model concept attainment group investigation/ lecture 1 coop, learning 2 vocabulary 3 worksheets 4 question/answer 5 oral presentation, l i s t e n i n g s k i l l s , notetaking & review 1 student-to-whole-class 2 pairs 3 three to six in a group 4 whole class oral presentations, question/answer, and group approach only Teachers' R/R struct./prep lesson moderate lesson set expectat./rules set tone/guidelines modify content model English encourage English use 1 3 9 Students' R/R participate in the educative process complete a l l work mark, edit others' work work independently think c r i t i c a l l y and argue one's point be mature Teacher Expecta- stay on task ti o n Levels complete a l l work maintain grades share ideas with class think c r i t i c a l l y r e c a l l knowledge ask for help be independent be cr e a t i v e / f l e x i b l e take risks active p a r t i c i p a t i o n in discussion/debates oral presentations ask/answer questions assisted one another via tutoring, marking contributed content and content planning led a c t i v i t i e s worked without teacher worked well in groups Teacher Assistance individual, small and whole group assistance lots of examples, analogies, anecdotes simplify, highlight, model & review content probing questions for understanding shares own thought processes gives hints and points out errors partners i n education with students lots of body language gestures, diagrams teacher encourages Student Involve-ment/Participation Students' R/R l i s t e n and develop th e i r English complete a l l work mark, edit others' work answer when ca l l e d upon stay on task complete a l l work l i s t e n and learn learn from others understand big ideas r e c a l l knowledge ask for help take notes to learn memorize to learn speak English w i l l contribute to discussions oral presentations ask/answer questions assisted others via tutoring, marking took turns reading aloud to class sang with teacher listened intently d i l i g e n t notetaking in d i v i d . , small and whole group as s i s t , with vocabulary and English s k i l l s teacher reads along with or to students teacher encourages the learner models English offers a l o t of English language performance feedback teacher f a c i l i t a t e s and moderates talk lots of body lang. gestures, diagrams 140 Tone /Env i ronmen t t e a c h e r s e t s t h i s r e l a x e d , open, c a l m and humourous s e r i o u s , b u s i n e s s - l i k e , c o n t e n t - o r i e n t e d few d i s c i p l i n e p rob lems w a l l - c o v e r i n g s p a i r s , rows , 3s overhead p r o j e c t o r 1/4 i n p o r t a b l e c l a s s t e a c h e r s e t s t h i s c a l m , p o s i t i v e , s a fe and p l a y f u l s t u d i o u s , b u s i n e s s -l i k e , c o o p e r a t i v e fewer d i s c i p l i n e p rob lems w a l l - c o v e r i n g s 3s , rows ove rhead p r o j e c t o r 1/2 i n p o r t , c l a s s T e a c h e r - S t u d e n t ( s ) R e l a t i o n s h i p p a r t n e r s i n e d u c a t i o n r e s p e c t - f i l l e d c a r i n g t r y i n g , d i s t a n t and u n p l e a s a n t e x i s t e n c e p a s s i v e c o e x i s t e n c e T-S c o u r t e s y / r e s p e c t l e s s v i b r a n t a n d / o r mature S t u d e n t s ' R e l a t i o n -s h i p s open and p o s i t i v e mature and demanding immature and e x c l u s i v e language pee r groups some s e g r e g a t i o n -( l anguage / sex ) happy and c l o s e e m p a t h e t i c (nervous g i g g l e s f o r o r a l s ) language p e e r groups l i t t l e s e g r e g a t i o n t e a c h e r mixes s t u d e n t s S u b j e c t M a t t e r Academic D i s c o u r s e m o s t l y government p r e s c r i b e d d i v e r s e v o c a b u l a r y / knowledge r e q u i r e d a b s t r a c t / i n f e r e n t i a l i d i o m s / c o l l o q u i a l i s m s language and b a s i c s k i l l s - o r i e n t e d grammar-based f a c t - o r i e n t e d v o c a b u l a r y b u i l d i n g c o n c r e t e Use o f V i s u a l s few - t e x t m o s t l y some use o f compute rs , w a l l maps, c h a r t s , f i l m s , o b j e c t s and p i c t u r e s few - t e x t m o s t l y used some n e w s c l i p s , w a l l maps, c h a r t s , f l a s h c a r d s , v i d e o s and p i c t u r e s Use o f P r e s c r i b e d y e s , p l u s r e f e r e n c e books , e n c y c l o p e d i a s no, m o s t l y ESL t y p e m a t e r i a l s M u l t i c u l t u r a l C u r r i c u l a m o s t l y European some t a l k o f t he d i f f e r e n t r e l i g i o n s and t ypes o f g o v e r n -ment i n t h e w o r l d m o s t l y European some t a l k o f t he d i f f e r e n t h o l i d a y s a round the w o r l d Laos f o l k t a l e used Ra te o r Pace o f Con ten t D e l i v e r y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r the demands o f the c l a s s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e demands o f t he c l a s s on a pace s c a l e o f 1 t o on the same s c a l e 141 10 ( i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s own) o f 1 t o 10, t h e s e t h e s e c l a s s e s ave raged c l a s s e s ave raged a a 7 .5 4 .0 Accommodation o f E S L / C u l t u r a l l y D i f f e r e n t S tuden t s a l l o w e d t o work i n p a i r s t o comple te a s s ignments l o t s o f s m a l l group work so can share t a s k s t u d e n t s t r a n s l a t e f o r one ano the r t e a c h e r s spoke s l o w l y t e a c h e r s o f f e r e d h e l p t e a c h e r s p u l l e d i m m i -g r an t s t u d e n t s i n t o d i s c u s s i o n s e x p e c t e d t o p e r f o r m l i k e o t h e r s t u d e n t s a l l o w e d t o work i n p a i r s t o comple te a s s ignmen t s l o t s o f s m a l l group work t o sha re t a s k s t u d e n t s t r a n s l a t e f o r one a n o t h e r t e a c h e r spoke s l o w l y l i g h t s l o w e r e d f o r o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n s t e a c h e r s t o o d c l o s e t o o r a l p r e s e n t e r t u t o r / t u t e e p a i r i n g l o t s o f b o a r d no te s t e a c h e r r eads m a t e r i a l s a l o u d t o s t u d e n t s s m a l l e r c l a s s s i z e s T e a c h e r - S t u d e n t ( s ) Successes and F a i l u r e s Teacher Concerns s t u d e n t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g and c o n t r i b u t i n g c o m p l e t i n g work and p r o d u c i n g n o t a b l e f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t s w o r k i n g i n d e p e n d e n t l y pace t oo q u i c k a t t i m e s s t u d e n t s not h e l d a c c o u n t a b l e a t t i m e s s t u d e n t s sometimes l o s t because t h e y a r e not u n d e r s t a n d i n g some d i s r e s p e c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g and i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f c o n t e n t a n a l y s i s and a p p l i c a -t i o n o f c o n t e n t d e v e l o p i n g independent & c o l l a b o r a t i v e s k i l l s owning o n e ' s e d u c a t i o n and d o i n g o n e ' s b e s t d i l i g e n c e and c o -o p e r a t i o n sa fe and c l o s e - k n i t env i ronment l o t s o f n a t i v e language h e a r d s t u d e n t s dependent on t e a c h e r l e a r n i n g t e a c h e r -c e n t e r e d l i t t l e d i s r u p t i v e b e h a v i o u r p r o d u c t i v e p r o v i d i n g l o t s o f E n g l i s h language development moments g e t t i n g s t u d e n t s t o u n d e r s t a n d main i d e a s b u i l d i n g s t u d e n t s ' v o c a b u l a r i e s e n c o u r a g i n g and n u r t u r i n g s t u d e n t s i n t h e i r new academic l i f e 142 Integration of the Triangulated Methodology Data Results The main purpose of the research question table that follows i s to integrate the multiple method findings of thi s research and to generalize some main findings to the study population. However, given the nature of the data — raw percentages and summaries of opinions — very tentative conclusions from the data about policy direction for the RSD should be made. A cross-validation of the three study instruments confirms secondary mainstream teachers do know the quantity of the immigrant students in their classrooms, but have limited knowledge of the educational and cultu r a l backgrounds of these students. The greatest immigrant student academic communication and instruction challenge confirmed by the three study instruments was English language a b i l i t y (see Table 7 - Research Question 1). The sample group reported and i t was observed that immigrant students do have different education and instruction needs than their English-speaking peers. A preference for teacher-centered instruction and rote memorization tasks were two differences noted (see Table 7 - Research Question 2). The mainstream educators gave quite an accurate assessment of t h e i r immigrant student teaching a b i l i t i e s . They reported in both the survey and the interviews that they needed to make further adjustments to their teaching approach/methods to accommodate the immigrant students in the i r classrooms. The mainstream classroom observations confirmed t h i s need by 143 evidencing limited use of language teaching through content and use of key visuals. Content acquisition was primarily the focus in the mainstream classroom. L i t t l e expertise to adequately reach immigrant students was evidenced (see Table 7 - Research Question 3 ) . The secondary mainstream educators reported being comfortable in the presence of a growing immigrant student population. However, they did report, and i t was observed, some teachers are unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in the secondary mainstream classroom. English language d i f f i c u l t i e s and cult u r a l differences were an issue for the mainstream educator. One could interpret the expressed need for more immigrant student s p e c i f i c teacher tr a i n i n g as a sign of a diminishing comfort l e v e l (see Table 7 - Research Question 4 ) . The document analysis (survey), the interviews, and the classroom observations that comprise the data results of t h i s study confirm the following needs and required support for RSD secondary mainstream educators currently dealing with increased immigrant student integration: (a) more ESL training, (b) more resources (smaller class sizes and more specialized personnel), (c) access to ESL aids (curriculum and resources/resource people), (d) more recognition of the role mainstream teachers plays in the education of immigrant students and of the possible ESL program development/implementation contributions teachers could make, (e) more support from the board and the ESL s t a f f in 144 the s c h o o l s , and (f) b e t t e r communica t ion a t a l l d i s t r i c t l e v e l s (see T a b l e 7 - R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 5 ) . 145 Table 7 Integrated survey, interview, and Observation r e s u l t s for the f i v e research questions RESEARCH QUESTION 1: Do RSD secondary mainstream educators know the quantity of immigrant students in their classrooms, and the academic, l i n g u i s t i c , and cu l t u r a l backgrounds of these students? Results Survey Interview Observation quantity yes academic background somewhat l i n g u i s t i c background yes cul t u r a l background yes greatest challenge language yes somewhat yes somewhat language yes somewhat yes somewhat language RESEARCH QUESTION 2 : Do immigrant students have different academic communication and instruction needs? Interview Observation yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Results Survey language d i f f i c u l t i e s yes poor understanding yes teacher-dependent yes product-oriented yes group-oriented yes slow lesson delivery yes prompt method changes yes 146 RESEARCH QUESTION 3: Do RSD seconda ry mains t ream e d u c a t o r s f e e l t h e i r c u r r e n t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s and l e v e l s o f e x p e r t i s e a re adequate t o r e a c h a l l l e a r n e r s ? Results Survey I n t e r v i e w O b s e r v a t i o n t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s somewhat l e v e l s o f e x p e r t i s e no h a v i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s yes use o f key v i s u a l s some need f o r ESL t r a i n i n g yes somewhat no yes some yes somewhat no yes some yes RESEARCH QUESTION 4: Are RSD seconda ry mains t ream e d u c a t o r s c o m f o r t a b l e d e a l i n g w i t h g r o w i n g immigran t s tuden t i n t e g r a t i o n ? R e s u l t s Survey I n t e r v i e w O b s e r v a t i o n c o m f o r t a b l e yes unaccustomed t o no h a v i n g d i f f i c u l t i e s yes cope w i t h language somewhat cope w i t h c u l t u r e somewhat w i l l i n g n e s s t o change yes need more ESL t r a i n i n g yes yes no. yes somewhat somewhat yes yes yes no yes somewhat somewhat yes yes RESEARCH QUESTION 5: What needs t o be done f o r , o r what a d d i t i o n a l suppor t needs t o be o f f e r e d t o , (or b o t h ) , RSD secondary ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r s c u r r e n t l y d e a l i n g w i t h i n c r e a s e d immigran t s t uden t i n t e g r a t i o n ? I n t e r v i e w O b s e r v a t i o n yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes R e s u l t s Survey more ESL t r a i n i n g yes more r e s o u r c e s yes a c c e s s t o ESL a i d s yes more r e c o g n i t i o n yes more suppor t yes b e t t e r communica t ion yes 147 The results of t h i s study present a wealth of immigrant student instruction and secondary mainstream educator profession development concerns. The following, f i n a l chapter, w i l l : (a) summarize the protocol and results of t h i s study, (b) reiterate the main immigrant student education concerns expressed by the sample group, and (c) discuss the implications of the study's findings. Notes on further research w i l l also be presented. 148 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH Summary Procedure The problem in this study was to determine the expressed immigration and secondary mainstream academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School District educators. A multiple method participant-observation phenomenological (Bruyn, 1966) research design was implemented to record and to cross-validate the collected data. Also of interest to t h i s study was what secondary mainstream educators need to e f f e c t i v e l y deal with the immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns they expressed. Four RSD secondary school study sites were established. A s t r a t i f i e d random sample group of ten secondary mainstream educators (one educator was mainstream/ESL) per study s i t e was recruited. The 40 educators received the f i r s t study data collection instrument, the secondary mainstream educator survey. Thirty-six of the 40 surveys were completed and returned by mail. Thirteen of the o r i g i n a l 40 secondary mainstream educator recruits completed study data collection instrument 2, the secondary mainstream educator interview. The 13 teachers also completed study data collection instrument 3, the secondary mainstream and ESL classroom observations. The classrooms of two additional mainstream teachers, four mainstream/ESL 149 teachers, and nine ESL educators were also observed. A minimum of one and a maximum of three observations were made in each class. In t o t a l , 50 RSD educators combined to complete the study's multiple method data c o l l e c t i o n . Data collection instrument 1 was designed by the investigator to permit RSD secondary mainstream educators to determine whether or not increased immigrant student integration in the RSD i s having an effect on th e i r education regime. The survey questions were designed to expose immigrant student integration obstacles, l i k e language, culture, learning styles, teacher attitudes, that may be affecting daily instruction. The survey asked teachers to respond to 16 5-point L i k e r t -type Scale items and one long-hand summary statement item. The mean scores computed for the items and the categories were assumed to represent the expressed immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns of the sample group. Data collection instrument 2 also permits RSD secondary mainstream educators to define the relationship between immigration and secondary mainstream instruction. However, the main thrust of the interview i s to relate the secondary mainstream educators' integration and academic communication and instruction r e a l i t y and the concerns RSD educators have about being able to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the secondary mainstream classroom. The interview asked teachers to respond to 32 standardized open-ended questions. The interviews were audio-taped and later 150 transcribed. Then the combined responses for each question were compiled i n paragraph or in point form notes and presented under the corresponding question heading. Data collection instrument 3 permitted the investigator to record first-hand the immigration and academic communication and instruction r e a l i t y of both the secondary mainstream and the ESL classroom. The observations also allowed the investigator to examine the RSD immigrant student mainstream integration process and the expressed immigrant student concerns of RSD secondary mainstream educators. F i e l d and some summary notes were made during each observation. The raw data from both the secondary mainstream and the ESL classroom observations was later compiled in paragraph or in point form notes and presented under the corresponding item heading. An observation data comparison table was also prepared. Survey and Interview Results The results of the survey and interview disclose certain interesting facts regarding the expressed immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns of RSD secondary mainstream educators. F i r s t , the results establish that immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s are affecting classroom communication and instruction. One hundred percent of the survey and interview sample group members reported encountering immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s . Eighty-six percent of the survey sample group reported an 151 i n c r e a s e d number o f immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c lassrooms has caused some l e s s o n d e l i v e r y d i f f i c u l t i e s . S i x t y - f o u r percent of the survey respondents f e l t hav ing immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c lassrooms has slowed the pace o f t h e i r l e s s o n d e l i v e r y . E i g h t y - t h r e e percent o f the survey sample group r e p o r t e d making i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods adjustments i n t h e i r t e a c h i n g i n o r d e r to accommodate the immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c la s srooms . S i x t y -four percent of the survey respondents and 92% of i n t e r v i e w e e s f e l t they had a d d i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n a l methods adjustments to make. These r e s u l t s c o n f i r m tha t immigrat ion i s e f f e c t i n g RSD secondary mainstream academic communication and i n s t r u c t i o n . Second, the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e the sample group i s a c u t e l y aware o f the percent o f immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r secondary mainstream c las srooms . H a l f of the survey p a r t i c i p a n t s i n d i c a t e d tha t the percent o f immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c lassrooms i s between 21-40%; i n 1993-1994, 39% of the s tudents i n the RSD were des ignated E S L . However, on ly 38% of the in t erv i ewees responded they were aware of the c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c la s srooms . Only 22% of the survey respondents were measureably aware o f the e d u c a t i o n a l backgrounds of t h e i r immigrant s t u d e n t s . E i g h t y - s i x percent o f the survey respondents r e p o r t e d encounter ing d i f f i c u l t i e s r e l a t e d t o immigrant student c u l t u r a l background i n t h e i r c la s srooms . S i x t y - n i n e percent of the in t erv i ewees f e l t the c u l t u r a l backgrounds o f the immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c lassrooms were an i s s u e . These r e s u l t s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e t h a t 152 the sample group has limited knowledge of their immigrant students' c u l t u r a l and educational backgrounds. Third, the results imply immigrant students have different academic communication and instruction needs than t h e i r English-speaking peers. The interview participants described the learning styles of the immigrant students in th e i r classrooms as: (a) teacher-dependent, (b) based on rote memorization, and (c) low l e v e l regurgitation, copying, or both, and (d) emphasizing product not process. The majority f e l t immigrant students lack the a b i l i t y to think for themselves, and to think c r i t i c a l l y . Only 31% of the interviewees saw the different learning styles of the immigrant students in t h e i r classrooms as a plus. Sixty-two percent of the interviewees f e l t they had to make a conscious ef f o r t to include immigrant students in classroom a c t i v i t i e s . F i f t y - s i x percent of the survey group indicated having immigrant students in th e i r classrooms had increased their preparation time. These findings confirm that the subjects have found differences between ESL and mainstream groups in term of academic communication and instruction. Fourth, the survey results reveal that RSD secondary mainstream educators u t i l i z e a variety of communication and instruction strategies in th e i r classrooms to reach a l l learners. Eighty-six percent of the survey sample group members use the direct one-way lecture method less than 40% of the time. Seventy-five percent use the small learning group approach less than 40% of the time. Sixty-nine percent of reported using 1 5 3 visuals when introducing new material. Seventy-two percent of the survey participants responded 41-60% (or greater) of the immigrant students in their classrooms were able to comprehend at least 80% of the lecture content and able to function at an 80% comprehension le v e l while working in small learning groups. Sixty-four percent of the RSD secondary educator survey sample group f e l t t h e i r classroom approach/methods complimented the educational experiences of the immigrant students in th e i r classrooms. However, the interview results indicate 62% of the interviewees are having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of the immigrant students ESL a b i l i t i e s . Sixty-two percent of the interviewees also f e l t they did not have enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate a l l of the students in their classrooms. These results confirm that current teaching practices and levels of expertise are adequate to accommodate a l l learners. F i f t h , the study results demonstrate that the sample group members are comfortable dealing with growing immigrant student integration in t h e i r classrooms. In fact, 77% of the interviewees reported the presence of immigrant students in t h e i r classroom did not make them f e e l uncomfortable. However, the survey results show 64% of the survey respondents encountered immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s because they were unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in their classrooms. Sixty-two percent of the interview sample group reported feeling a need to 1 5 4 treat (and actually treating) immigrant students d i f f e r e n t l y . These results confirm most of the sample group educators are comfortable in the presence of immigrant students. However, the results also signal a sample group.classroom instruction uneasiness as a result of growing immigrant student integration. Sixth, the survey and interview results contain the expressed immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns and needs of the secondary mainstream educator sample group. The f i r s t major concern i s language. English language related d i f f i c u l t i e s were the chief contributor to the d i f f i c u l t i e s the sample group expressed. The educators f e l t one of two things needed to be done to reduce this concern: either the immigrant students English language mastery must equal the language demands of the class s/he i s to be integrated into, or class sizes must be reduced (or a l i m i t set on the number of immigrant students per class), teachers must have more preparation time, there must be more teacher aides, and educators must have access to special ESL training and resources. A second concern i s communication. The sample group reported immigrant students are often i d e n t i f i e d on class r e g i s t r i e s and that immigrant student English language mastery guidelines for integration do exist in th e i r schools. However, the sample group implied there was l i t t l e communication or coordination of effo r t s between the ESL programs and the mainstream classrooms in th e i r respective schools. A need for 155 more immigrant student background information, a need for a more exact explanation of what language s k i l l s and mastery level constitute a Level 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 immigrant student in the RSD, a need for ESL grading standards, a need to know what i s happening in the ESL classroom before or while an immigrant student i s being mainstreamed, and a need for a clearer d i v i s i o n of immigrant student academic development onus of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y between the ESL and mainstream educators were expressed. A t h i r d concern i s acknowledgment. Presently 3 9% of the Richmond School D i s t r i c t student population i s receiving ESL assistance (BCTF, 1994) . However, the sample group repeatedly mentioned teachers and d i s t r i c t administration f a i l to acknowledge or respond to the changes immigration i s making in the RSD at large and p a r t i c u l a r l y in the secondary mainstream classroom. Consequently, some professional frustration, some feelings of professional inadequacy, or both (because of lagging support) was apparent in the study results. Observation Results The 4 0 hours of secondary mainstream observation confirmed the survey and interview results. F i r s t , the observations confirmed that immigrant student language related s k i l l s (listening, speaking, writing, and reading) pose the greatest challenges for secondary mainstream educators of English, L i f e S k i l l s , Math, Science and Social Studies. Mainstream teachers were observed making a conscious ef f o r t to teach content vocabulary and to conduct an ample number of comprehension 156 checks t o ensure a l l s t u d e n t s were u n d e r s t a n d i n g . T h i s p r a c t i c e and the use o f s t uden t t r a n s l a t o r s d i d s p o r a d i c a l l y s l o w t h e l e s s o n d e l i v e r y p a c e . Second, the o b s e r v a t i o n s c o n f i r m e d the t e a c h e r s u r v e y and i n t e r v i e w responden t s were c o r r e c t i n s t a t i n g t h e l e a r n i n g s t y l e o r language gap o f immigran t s t u d e n t s i s d i f f e r e n t . I t was o b s e r v e d t h a t immigran t s t u d e n t s do p r e f e r t e a c h e r - c e n t e r e d l e a r n i n g . The immigran t s t u d e n t s i n the secondary c l a s s r o o m s o b s e r v e d were p a s s i v e and few c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s , o r a l l y o r o t h e r w i s e u n l e s s c a l l e d upon by t h e t e a c h e r . A p r o d u c t - o v e r - p r o c e s s o r i e n t a t i o n among immigran t s t u d e n t s was n o t e d t o e f f e c t t he academic env i ronment o f t he s econda ry mains t ream c l a s s r o o m . The r e s u l t s o f t he 20 hours o f ESL secondary ma ins t r eam o b s e r v a t i o n p r o v i d e i n s i g h t i n t o the t y p e ( s ) o f academic communica t ion and i n s t r u c t i o n immigran t s t u d e n t s r e c e i v e p r i o r t o , w h i l e b e i n g i n t e g r a t e d , o r b o t h , i n t o the secondary ma ins t r eam c o n t e n t a r e a c l a s s r o o m . Information processing i s t he focus o f b o t h the ESL and the ma ins t r eam c l a s s r o o m . However, i n the ESL c l a s s r o o m , group investigation and lecture ( the f i r s t b e i n g g r o u p - o r i e n t e d and the second t e a c h e r -cen te red ) , were the most p r e v a l e n t t e a c h i n g t o o l s . The ESL c l a s s r o o m c o n t e n t o b s e r v e d was u s u a l l y no t BC M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n p r e s c r i b e d and the amount o f c o n t e n t c o v e r e d i n an ESL l e s s o n was l e s s than the amount o b s e r v e d i n the ma ins t r eam c l a s s r o o m s . In the ma ins t r eam, lecture and t h e n independent learning ( the f i r s t b e i n g t e a c h e r - c e n t e r e d and the second 157 student-centered), were the most prevalent teaching tools. Ninety percent of the mainstream classroom content observed was BC Ministry of Education prescribed and the pace of the content delivery was brisk. In the mainstream classroom, the students were expected to be active participants i n the learning process. The development of c r i t i c a l and an a l y t i c a l thinking s k i l l s were encouraged. In the ESL classrooms, a more transmissive education approach was noted. The development of language s k i l l s was the chief focus. The academic discourse used in the majority of the ESL classes observed was language and content-reduced. On the other hand, mainstream students had to have a good subject area and personal vocabulary to grasp the lesson content. Third, while the mainstream educators appeared confident and competent, th e i r current teaching practices and levels of expertise did not appear adequate to reach a_LL learners. The amount of extra teacher and peer help the immigrants required attests to the fact that teachers need more immigrant student s p e c i f i c academic communication and instruction training to accommodate a l l learners. Fourth, the teaching practices used by the observed group of secondary mainstream educators imply teachers are copying with the growing student integration in the RSD. However, a limited use of the language through content teaching paradigm, a limited use of key visuals, the fact that l i t t l e was done to accommodate ESL/culturally different students and that l i t t l e 1 5 8 m u l t i c u l t u r a l c u r r i c u l u m was used, p l u s the f a c t t h a t the pace or r a t e o f content d e l i v e r y i n the mainstream c lassrooms was r a p i d , and tha t a c t i v e and a s s e r t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the e d u c a t i v e process tha t was expected , imply mainstream educators are not s e n s i t i v e to the growing c u l t u r a l d i v e r s i t y t h e i r c la s srooms . As a r e s u l t , some immigrant s tudents were unable to f o l l o w the l e s sons and were not on t a s k . T h i s caused some student and t eacher f r u s t r a t i o n . At the p r e s e n t , i t appears not a l l of the t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s e x h i b i t e d by the mainstream educators complement the l e a r n i n g s t y l e s , background knowledge, and language a b i l i t i e s o f the immigrant s tudents i n t h e i r c la s srooms . The t eachers c a l l e d f o r more t r a i n i n g i n the survey and i n t e r v i e w p o r t i o n s o f t h i s s tudy, and to some degree t h e i r c la s sroom performances c o n f i r m t h i s group of educators i s not comple te ly comfortable d e a l i n g wi th growing immigrant student i n t e g r a t i o n i n the RSD. Fifth, the o b s e r v a t i o n s above convey some of what needs to be done f o r the RSD secondary mainstream educator i f q u a l i t y e d u c a t i o n p r a c t i c e s and s tandards are to be ma in ta ined i n the d i s t r i c t . Needed are more t eacher t r a i n i n g se s s ions ( i . e . language through content i n s t r u c t i o n , use of key v i s u a l s , c u l t u r a l s e n s i t i v i t y / a w a r e n e s s ) , more ESL m o d i f i e d and m u l t i c u l t u r a l m a t e r i a l s , and ESL t r a i n e d a ides to o f f e r e x t r a he lp to s tudents and t e a c h e r s . 1 5 9 Preamble to the Study Implications The investigator has included the following preamble to lend some perspective to the implications presented below. The vi s i o n and the shortcomings of the VSD example may be of some help to RSD decision makers, program developers and teachers. Five years ago (Ashworth et. a l , 1989), an external review team of language s p e c i a l i s t s examined and then made recommendations to the VSD about the d i s t r i c t ' s existing ESL programs. The team recommended the VSB recognize that ESL should assume a central position in a l l aspects of the d i s t r i c t ' s planning and operation (p. 5). Shortly thereafter, the VSD implemented a four year ESL P i l o t Project to accommodate ESL students in their home schools rather than in the d i s t r i c t classes that existed in 1988. The desired outcome of the VSD p i l o t project (Hooper & Hurren, 1992) was a gradual t r a n s i t i o n from a d i s t r i c t ESL class orientation to a revised home school model of delivery for ESL students. The d i s t r i c t aspired to implement language through content instruction, t r a n s i t i o n classes, long term ESL support, s t a f f development, parent participation, and the sharing of ESL resource materials. As a p i l o t , the program worked well. However, due to a lack of money and specialized (ESL) personnel, the revised model of delivery for ESL students throughout the d i s t r i c t was never f u l l y implemented. The VSD does, however, have one of the most comprehensive ESL program in the province. 160 Implications One of the reasons offered for the need for t h i s study was the necessity of obtaining expressed concerns from RSD secondary mainstream educators with respect to s p e c i f i c issues and areas regarding immigration and academic communication and instruction. The investigator hopes to show that the results of the present study have far reaching implications for decision makers, program developers and teachers involved in immigrant student integration. The implications of the findings w i l l be presented in three sections in terms of the persons affected, namely the decision makers, the program developers and the teachers. Decision Makers and RSD Educator Expressed Concerns For the purpose of this discussion, principals, assistant pri n c i p a l s , central o f f i c e personnel and school board members w i l l be referred to as decision makers. The finding that increased immigrant student integration at the secondary l e v e l i s affecting classroom instruction should encourage RSD decision makers at a l l levels to review the d i s t r i c t ' s ESL p o l i c i e s , ESL program design(s), and the alloc a t i o n of ESL funds. If the integration of immigrant students i s detracting from the quality of education being offered to RSD secondary mainstream students, steps must be taken to r e c t i f y this situation. One trend related to t h i s issue i s an emerging segregation of immigrant students in the RSD. In the schools v i s i t e d , there 161 are two groups of teachers: those who are sympathetic towards the immigrant student and w i l l i n g to work with integration, and those who refused to relinquish the high academic standards they have set i n t h e i r classes to accommodate the immigrant student. It was observed that few immigrant students enrolled in the l a t t e r teachers classes. Conversely, the percent of immigrant students i n some of the more sympathetic teachers classes exceeded 50%. An important finding of the study i s that the secondary mainstream educators involved in this study f e e l they need more staffin g , or reduced class sizes, or both, to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with the immigrant student growth the d i s t r i c t i s currently experiencing. Teachers are beginning to fe e l overwhelmed. They hinted that rapid immigrant student growth i s rushing the integration process, that the d i s t r i c t ' s Level 1 through 5 immigrant student English a b i l i t y integration guidelines had been relaxed by increased immigration, and that the mainstream classroom i s being annexed to allow for more space in the ESL classrooms. The educators f e e l the decision makers could be doing more to ensure ESL s t a f f i n g r e f l e c t s the number of immigrant students in the d i s t r i c t . A t h i r d finding of interest to decision makers i s that the secondary mainstream educators involved i n this study f e e l there i s l i t t l e RSD acknowledgment of or support for the role content area educators play in the education of immigrant students. The findings show teacher frustrations.which r e f l e c t a perceived , 162 lack of d i s t r i c t leadership. The teachers are feeling the effects of immigration in the i r classrooms, but know l i t t l e about the d i s t r i c t ' s immigrant student administrative decisions or e f f o r t s . It appears more public relations communication between the RSD and i t s secondary mainstream educators i s necessary. The finding that 92% of the teachers interviewed in thi s study f e e l they need specialized professional training, or instr u c t i o n a l resources, or both, to e f f e c t i v e l y deal with immigration and academic communication and instruction in the i r classrooms should urge decision makers to make some ESL training for mainstream teachers a d i s t r i c t goal. Access to and a v a i l a b i l i t y of training sessions, access to instructional resources and to immigrant education resource people, and the establishment of a teachers for quality (integrated) mainstream education panel were expressed by the secondary mainstream educator sample group. In view of this study's 90% survey return rate, i t s ' 100% interview completion rate, and the 60 hours of classroom observations at the four school sites, decision makers should recognize that secondary educators in the RSD have many serious immigrant student education concerns that need to be addressed. At the moment, a strong tide of secondary mainstream teacher willingness to make instructional methods adjustments and to professionally up-grade in order to accommodate the immigrant student in the mainstream classroom exists in the RSD. The time 163 to respond to the expressed concerns and needs reported in this study i s now. Program Developers and RSD Educator Expressed Concerns For the purpose of this discussion, the term program developer w i l l include a l l the persons such as teachers, administrators, consultants and supervisors who are ac t i v e l y involved in the development of programs. The finding that secondary mainstream teachers are second guessing the d i s t r i c t ' s immigrant student English a b i l i t y integration guidelines (Levels 1 through 5) should be a cause of concern for RSD program developers. Program developers must ensure teachers do not lose confidence in these guidelines. If the guidelines are made clear to the mainstream educators and followed without fault, immigrant student integration in the RSD w i l l continue to serve the best interests of a l l . An important finding of this study i s that the secondary mainstream and secondary ESL programs appeared segregated even though d i s t r i c t ESL/ESD policy: "neighbourhood schools, inclusive as much as possible; integration with pull-out; no reception classes; ESL/ESD acquisition through content" (BCTF, 1994, p. 34) promotes integration. Program developers should know that both mainstream and ESL educators were curious about what was happening in the others' classrooms. Most of the educators f e e l they would benefit from observing a class or two in the other stream. The sample group f e l t there needed to be more communication and coordination between the two streams to 1 6 4 make the system whole. At the present, however, the study p a r t i c i p a n t s f e e l t h e i r busy work day does not allow f o r time t o v i s i t other classrooms and t o t a l k with the teachers. Perhaps a s e r i e s of ESL teacher l e d workshops devoted t o immigrant student academic communication and i n s t r u c t i o n would b r i n g the two sides c l o s e r together. The study observations r e v e a l e d a notable ESL.curriculum discrepancy. The content taught i n the m a j o r i t y of the ESL c l a s s e s observed d i d not mi r r o r the mainstream curr i c u l u m . In f a c t , some teachers asked the i n v e s t i g a t o r i f there was a BC M i n i s t r y of Education ESL curriculum. The program developers need t o r e i t e r a t e to the d i s t r i c t ' s ESL s t a f f t h a t the mainstream c u r r i c u l u m i s the curriculum. This c l a r i f i c a t i o n i n tu r n should strengthen cross-stream communication and enhance the immigrant student i n t e g r a t i o n process. Teachers and RSD Educator Expressed Concerns The f i n d i n g that immigration had a f f e c t e d the academic communication and i n s t r u c t i o n p r a c t i c e s of a l l of the secondary mainstream educators who took part i n t h i s study should reassure the teacher sample group that the concerns they expressed are v a l i d . The r e s u l t s c o n s o l i d a t e the expressed concerns of the RSD sample group and provide a p l a t f o r m f o r secondary mainstream educators t o press f o r d i s t r i c t support and a s s i s t a n c e . I t should be remembered the secondary mainstream educators p l a y an important r o l e i n the education of immigrant students. It should a l s o be remembered that the educators can c o n t r i b u t e 1 6 5 u s e f u l a d v i c e t o a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n the d i s t r i c t s i n c e t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e c l a s s r o o m p r o v i d e s a r e c o r d o f t he e d u c a t i o n a l changes , c o n c e r n s , and needs i n c r e a s i n g i m m i g r a t i o n i n the RSD i s c r e a t i n g . The main tenance o f q u a l i t y academic communica t ion and i n s t r u c t i o n a t the secondary l e v e l i s a s h a r e d d i s t r i c t c o n c e r n . The s o l u t i o n s put f o r t h i n t h i s s t udy add res s t h i s c o n c e r n . For Further Research As a consequence o f the f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y , t he f o l l o w i n g a reas would appear t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e as the focus o f f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h : 1. S i m i l a r s t u d i e s c o u l d be conduc ted i n o t h e r s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s i n BC where immigran t s t uden t i n t e g r a t i o n e x i s t s . The l e n g t h o f t i m e a d i s t r i c t has been d e a l i n g w i t h i n t e g r a t i o n and the p e r c e n t o f immigran t s t u d e n t s i n a d i s t r i c t might y i e l d d i f f e r e n t s econda ry ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r immigran t s t uden t i n s t r u c t i o n c o n c e r n s . 2 . S i n c e t h e p r e s e n t s tudy i n c l u d e d o n l y secondary ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r s ' i m m i g r a t i o n and academic communica t ion and i n s t r u c t i o n c o n c e r n s , a s i m i l a r r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t c o u l d i n c l u d e and compare t he conce rns o f b o t h mains t ream and ESL e d u c a t o r s . 3 . In v i e w o f t he f a c t t h a t no d a t a was a v a i l a b l e t o do a secondary ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r mainstream student/immigrant s t u d e n t e d u c a t i o n a l conce rns 1 6 6 compar i son (Are the m a j o r i t y o f t he conce rns s i m i l a r o r d i f f e r e n t ? ) , ano the r s t udy t h a t i n c l u d e s the e d u c a t o r s ' conce rns f o r b o t h s t uden t groups might be c o n d u c t e d . 4 . S i n c e t h e p i c t u r e o f secondary ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r s e x p r e s s e d i m m i g r a t i o n and academic communica t ion and i n s t r u c t i o n conce rns can be e x p e c t e d t o change as a r e s u l t s o f such f a c t o r s as p o p u l a t i o n m o b i l i t y , changes i n d i s t r i c t and s c h o o l p o l i c y and programming, o r changes i n the dynamics o f t he secondary ma ins t r eam e d u c a t o r community i t s e l f , t he i n s t r u m e n t s u sed i n t h i s s t udy o r a more r e f i n e d v e r s i o n o f them s h o u l d be implemented a t r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s . The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from such s t u d i e s would make i t p o s s i b l e f o r d e c i s i o n makers , program d e v e l o p e r s and t e a c h e r s t o s a t i s f y the needs o f the secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r community . 5 . A n o t h e r s tudy c o u l d i n v e s t i g a t e , compare, and c o n t r a s t t he e x p r e s s e d immigran t s tuden t i n s t r u c t i o n conce rns o f secondary mains t ream e d u c a t o r s t e a c h i n g i n s c h o o l s b o t h t o u c h e d and un touched by i m m i g r a t i o n . The f i n d i n g s o f such a s t udy might de t e rmine w h i c h t e a c h e r conce rns a re s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e d t o i m m i g r a t i o n and w h i c h a r e u n i v e r s a l c o n c e r n s . 6. S i n c e t h e d a t a c o l l e c t i o n i n s t r u m e n t s i n c l u d e d a s u r v e y based on L i k e r t - t y p e q u e s t i o n s , a s t a n d a r d i z e d o p e n -ended i n t e r v i e w , and a s p e c i f i e d i t e m ( s ) o b s e r v a t i o n fo rmat , open-ended t ypes o f i n s t r u m e n t s might be 1 6 7 developed to determine i f secondary mainstream educators expressed immigration and academic communication and instruction concerns involve more areas than those included in the instruments. R E F E R E N C E S 168 A l l e n , P . , & Swain, M. (1984). Language i s s u e s and e d u c a t i o n p o l i c i e s . T o r o n t o , Canada: Pergamon P r e s s . Ashworth, Mary (1978). Immigrant c h i l d r e n and Canadian s c h o o l s . T o r o n t o , Canada: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart . Ashworth, M . , Cummins, J . , & Handscombe, J . (1989) . Report o f the e x t e r n a l review team on the Vancouver School B o a r d ' s ESL programs. Vancouver, Canada: Vancouver Schoo l B o a r d . Ashworth, M . , & W a k e f i e l d , P . (1978). G u i d e l i n e s f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e notes and suggest ions f o r the i n s t r u c t i o n of E n g l i s h as -a -Second-Language . V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . Banks, J . (1981). M u l t i c u l t u r a l educat ion t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e . T o r o n t o , Canada: A l l y n and Bacon, I n c . . Blumer, H . (1966). Foreward i n S. T . Bryun , The human p e r s p e c t i v e i n S o c i o l o g y : The methodology o f p a r t i c i p a n t o b s e r v a t i o n . Englewood C l i f f s , N J : P r e n t i c e - H a l l I n c . . Board of E d u c a t i o n f o r the C i t y of Toronto (1989). H e r e ' s how: ESL across the c u r r i c u l u m . Toronto , Canada: Language Study C e n t r e . B r i n t o n , D. M . , Snow, M. A . , & Wesche, M. B. (1989). C o n t e n t -based second language i n s t r u c t i o n . New York: Newbury House P u b l i s h e r s . B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n (1981). E n g l i s h as a Second L a n g u a g e / D i a l e c t resource book f o r K-12 . V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n (1986). E n g l i s h as a Second Language K-12 resource book volume I : I n t e g r a t i n g language and content i n s t r u c t i o n . V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y of E d u c a t i o n (1990). E n g l i s h as a Second L a n g u a g e / D i a l e c t resource book f o r K-12 (rev , e d . ) . V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n (1993). E n g l i s h as a Second Language K-12 resource book volume I: I n t e g r a t i n g language and content i n s t r u c t i o n (rev . e d . ) . V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n . 1 6 9 B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers Federation (1994). The provision of English as a Second Language in 16 school d i s t r i c t s . Vancouver, Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers Federation. Bruyn, S. T. (1966). The human perspective in Sociology: The methodology of participant observation. Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.. Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1983). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher's course. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1986). A cognitive academic language learning approach: An ESL content-based curriculum. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearing House for Bil i n g u a l Education. C o l l i e r , V. P. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. Tesol Quarterly, 21, 617-641. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners' errors. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics. 5_, 161-170. Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic proficiency, l i n g u i s t i c interdependence, the optimal age question and some other matters. Working Paper on Bilingualism, 19_, 197-205. Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of a language proficiency: Implication for Bil i n g u a l Education and the optimal age issue. Tesol Quarterly, 14.(2), 175-187. Cummins, J. (1981) . Bilingualism and minority language children. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Institute of Studies in Education Press. Cummins, J. (1982). Psychological tests and ESL students. Teal '81/Tesl Canada Conference Proceedings 1981, 1, 63-66. Cummins, J. (1983) . Heritage language education: A l i t e r a t u r e review. Toronto, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Education. Denzin, N. K. (1970). Sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine Publishing. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to Sociological methods (2nd ed.). Chicago: Aldine Publishing. 170 Dickerson, L. J. (1974) . The learner's interlanguage as a system of variable rules. Tesol Quarterly, % 401-408 . Early, M. (1990). Enabling f i r s t and second language learners classroom. Language Arts, £2(October), 567 -575 . Early, M., Thew, C , & Wakefield, P. (1986) . ESL Instruction via the Regular Curriculum: A Framework and Resource Book. Vi c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia Ministry of Education. Eisner, E. W. (1983) . The kinds of schools we need. Educa-t i o n a l Leadership(October), 4 8 - 5 5 . Esling, J. (Ed.). (1989) . Multicultural education and policy: ESL in the 1990s . Ontario, Canada: The Ontario Institute of Studies in Education Press. Fleras, A., & E l l i o t , J. (1992) . Multiculturalism in Canada: The challenge of dive r s i t y . Scarborough, Canada: Nelson Canada. Friesen, J. W. (1985) . When cultures clash: Case studies in multiculturalism. Calgary, Canada: Detselig Enterprises Limited. Garcia, R. L. (1978). Fostering a p l u r a l i s t i c society through multi-ethnic education. Bloomington, IN: The Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Arnold. Harcourt, M. (1993) . B r i t i s h Columbia pro v i n c i a l budget 1993 t e l e v i s i o n broadcast. Vancouver, Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia Television. Henley, R. (1991) . Multicultural teacher education: Part 3 curriculum content and curriculum structure. Mult iculturalism, 14.(1) , 2 4 - 2 7 . H i l l , H. D. (1989). Effective strategies for teaching minority students. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. Hooper, H. R., & Hurren, P. (1992) . The ESL p i l o t project. Vancouver, Canada: Vancouver School Board. Hymes, D. (1972) . Towards communicative competence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 171 Joyce, B. R., & Weil, M. (1980). Models of teaching. Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kehoe, J. (1984). A handbook for enhancing the multicultural climate of the school. Vancouver, Canada: P a c i f i c Educational Press. Kehoe, J. (1990). Realizing the goals of multicultural education. Guidelines, 211(1), 32-34. Labov, W. (1969). The study of language in i t s s o c i a l context. Studium Generale. 23_, 30-87. Law, B., & Eckes, M. (1990). The more than just surviving handbook: ESL for every classroom teacher. Winnipeg, Canada: Peguis Publishers. Maclean's Magazine, (1993). How experimental should education be? Maclean's Magazine(January 11), pp. 34-35. McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in education: A conceptual introduction (2nd ed.). United States of America: HarperCollins. Masemann, V., & Mock, K. (1986). Multicultural teacher education. Paper presented at the CSSE Conference in Winnipeg, Canada. M i l l e r , J. P., & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum perspectives and practice. Toronto, Canada: Copp Clark Pitman Ltd.. Mohan, B. (1979) . Language teaching and content teaching. Tesol Quarterly, 12(2), 171-182. Mohan, B. (1982). Language, content and the interactive p r i n c i p l e . Teal '81/Tesl Canada Conference Proceedings 1981, 11-16. Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Don M i l l s , Canada: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. NABE News staff , (1984). Special report on research findings: Summary abstract of the "1980-81 teachers of language s k i l l s survey". NABE News, 2(5), 16-19. Nemser, W. (1971). Approximative systems of foreign language learners, IRAL - I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review Qf Applied Linguistics, 1, 115-123. 172 O l i v e r e s , R . , & Lopez, A . (1991). T r a i n i n g t eachers i n m u l t i c u l t u r a l educat ion through c o o p e r a t i v e l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . M u l t i c u l t u r a l E d u c a t i o n J o u r n a l , .9.(1), 6-11. O ' M a l l e y , J . M . , & Waggoner, D. (1984). R e s u l t s o f a U . S . survey: P u b l i c s c h o o l t eacher p r e p a r a t i o n and the t e a c h i n g of E S L . T e s o l N e w s l e t t e r , 1&(1) , 18-22. O r n s t e i n , A . C . (1983) . Do t eachers make a d i f f e r e n c e ? C h i l d h o o d E d u c a t i o n J o u r n a l , 5_9_(5), 342-350. P a r i s h , R . , & Arends , R. (1983) . Why i n n o v a t i v e programs are " d i s c o n t i n u e d " . E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p ( J a n u a r y ) r 62-65. P e n f i e l d , J . (1987). ESL: The r e g u l a r c las sroom t e a c h e r ' s p e r s p e c t i v e . T e s o l Q u a r t e r l y , 21 ( 1 ) , 21-39. R e i d , S. (1988). The 1988 survey o f p u p i l s f o r whom E n g l i s h i s a second language i n Vancouver s c h o o l s . Vancouver , Canada Vancouver School Board . Richmond School D i s t r i c t No. 38 (1994). E n g l i s h as a Second Language ( l e a f l e t ) . Richmond ( B r i t i s h Columbia) School D i s t r i c t : 1994. R i v e r s & A s s o c i a t e s C o n s u l t a n t s (1991). Sett lement s e r v i c e s f o r immigrant c h i l d r e n : A needs assessment. V i c t o r i a , Canada: B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y o f P r o v i n c i a l S e c r e t a r y and M i n i s t r y Respons ib le f o r M u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m and Immigrat ion . Rosenshine , B . , & F u r s t , N. (1971). Research i n t eacher performance c r i t e r i a . In B . 0. Smith ( e d . ) , Research on t eacher e d u c a t i o n . Englewood C l i f f s , N J : P r e n t i c e -H a l l . R o d r i g u e z , A . J . (1992). E d u c a t i o n as a t r a n s f o r m a t i v e event . Perspectives i n Education ( F a l l ) , 81-84. S a y l o r , J . G . , A lexander , W., & Lewis , A . (1981). C u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g f o r b e t t e r t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g (4th e d . ) . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston. S e l i n k e r , L . (1969). Language t r a n s f e r . Genera l L i n g u i s t i c s , % 67-92. S e l i n k e r , L . (1971). In ter language . IRAL - I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review of A p p l i e d L i n g u i s t i c s , 10_, 209-231. 1 7 3 Shapson, S . , & D ' O y l e y , V . (1984). B i l i n g u a l m u l t i c u l t u r a l e d u c a t i o n : Canadian p e r s p e c t i v e s . E n g l a n d : M u l t i l i n g u a l Mat ter s L t d . . Simms, G. (1991). Address and p a n e l d i s c u s s i o n : E d u c a t i o n a l responses t o m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m i n Canada. M u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m , 14.(1), 23-26. S l a v i n , R. E . , & Madden, N . A . (1979). Schoo l p r a c t i c e s t o improve race r e l a t i o n s . American E d u c a t i o n a l Research J o u r n a l . 16.(20), 169-180. S p o l s k y , B . (1989). C o n d i t i o n s f o r second language l e a r n i n g : An i n t r o d u c t i o n to a g e n e r a l t h e o r y . O x f o r d : Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . S u l l i v a n , B. M. (1988) . B r i t i s h Columbia r o y a l commission on e d u c a t i o n : A legacy f o r l e a r n e r s : Summary f i n d i n g s . V i c t o r i a , Canada: Queen's P r i n t e r . T i e d t , P . , & T i e d t , I . (1990). M u l t i c u l t u r a l r e a c h i n g : A handbook of a c t i v i t i e s , i n f o r m a t i o n , and resources (3rd e d . ) . Toronto , Canada: A l l y n and Bacon. U n g e r l e i d e r , C . S. (1986). P r e p a r i n g f o r a more p l u r a l i s t i c f u t u r e . M u l t i c u l t u r a l E d u c a t i o n J o u r n a l , 4 .(2), 14-19. V i l l e g a s , A . M. (1991). C u l t u r a l l y re spons ive pedagogy f o r the 1990s and beyond. N J : E d u c a t i o n T e s t i n g S e r v i c e . Waggoner, D . , & O ' M a l l e y , J . M. (1985). Teachers o f l i m i t e d E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n t c h i l d r e n i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s . NABE J o u r n a l . 1 ( 3 ) , 25-42. 174 APPENDIX A Participant Consent Forms T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A 1 7 5 Department of Social and Educational Studies 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6T 1Z4 Tel: (604) 822-6647 (604) 822-5374 Fax: (604) 822-4244 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROJECT Note: The University and those conducting t h i s M.A. Thesis project subscribe to the e t h i c a l conduct of research and to the protection at a l l times of the interests, comfort, and safety of subjects. This form and the information i t contains are given to you for your own protection and f u l l understanding of the procedures, risks and benefits involved. Your signature on this form w i l l signify that you have received the document described below regarding this project, that you have received adequate opportunity to consider the information i n the document, and that you voluntarily agree to participate in the project. Having been asked by Graduate student Ms. Lisa Hebb of the Faculty of Education at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia to participate in a research project, I have read the description of the project and the procedures specified below: Immigration and Secondary Mainstream Academic Communication and Ins t ruc t ion : The Expressed Concerns of Richmond School District (RSD) Educators The purpose of t h i s study i s to determine the expressed 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educators. It i s the researcher(s) hope that the findings of this study w i l l benefit future teacher pre and in-service 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction education programs. In this portion of the study I w i l l survey 90 RSD secondary mainstream educators about th e i r l e v e l of 'immigrant student' awareness, about th e i r academic communication and instruction practices, and about their expressed concerns of working with 'immigrant students'. It i s estimated that the survey w i l l take approximately 10 to 15 minutes to complete. A l l data collected w i l l be kept confidential. The names of the individuals w i l l not be used in any reports, nor w i l l any reporting be done in a way that any subjects in the study can be i d e n t i f i e d . The results of this study w i l l be made available to any interested parties and may be submitted for publication. T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A 1 7 7 Department of Social and Educational Studies 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B . C . Canada V6T 1Z4 Tel: (604) 822-6647 (604) 822-5374 Fax: (604) 822-4244 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROJECT Note: The University and those conducting t h i s M.A. Thesis project subscribe to the et h i c a l conduct of research and to the protection at a l l times of the interests, comfort, and safety of subjects. This form and the information i t contains are given to you for your own protection and f u l l understanding of the procedures, risks and benefits involved. Your signature on this form w i l l s i g n i f y that you have received the document described below regarding this project, that you have received adequate opportunity to consider the information in the document, and that you voluntarily agree to participate in the project. Having been asked by Graduate student Ms. Lisa Hebb of the Faculty of Education at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia to participate in a research project, I have read the description of the project and the procedures specified below: Immigration and Secondary Mainstream Academic Communication and Ins t ruc t ion: The Expressed Concerns of Richmond School District (RSD) Educators The purpose of this study i s to determine the expressed 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educators. It i s the researcher(s) hope that the findings of this study w i l l benefit future teacher pre and in-service 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction education programs. In this portion of the study I w i l l examine the views of 30 RSD secondary mainstream educators about the cul t u r a l and instructional backgrounds of the 'immigrant students' in th e i r classrooms, and about what help mainstream teachers need in accommodating 'immigrant students' in th e i r classrooms. The estimated length of each interview i s 45 to 60 minutes. A l l interviews w i l l be audio taped. The audio tapes w i l l be transcribed and the information analyzed at a later date. A l l data collected w i l l be kept confidential. The names of the individuals w i l l not be used in any reports, nor w i l l any reporting be done in a way that any subjects in the study can be id e n t i f i e d . The results of this study w i l l be made available to any interested parties and may be submitted for publication. T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A 1 7 9 Department of Social and Educational Studies 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6T 1Z4 Tel: (604) 822-6647 (604) 822-5374 Fax: (604) 822-4244 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROJECT Note: The University and those conducting t h i s M.A. Thesis project subscribe to the e t h i c a l conduct of research and to the protection at a l l times of the interests, comfort, and safety of subjects. This form and the information i t contains are given to you for your own protection and f u l l understanding of the procedures, risks and benefits involved. Your signature on this form w i l l s i g n i f y that you have received the document described below regarding this project, that you have received adequate opportunity to consider the information in the document, and that you voluntarily agree to participate in the project. Having been asked by Graduate student Ms. Lisa Hebb of the Faculty of Education at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia to participate in a research project, I have read the description of the project and the procedures specified below: Immigration and Secondary Mainstream Academic Communication and Ins t ruc t ion: The Expressed Concerns of Richmond School District (RSD) Educators The purpose of thi s study i s to determine the expressed 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction concerns of Richmond School D i s t r i c t (RSD) secondary mainstream educators. It i s the researcher(s) hope that the findings of this study w i l l benefit future teacher pre and in-service 'immigrant student' academic communication and instruction education programs. In this portion of the study I w i l l log 25 hours of RSD secondary English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom observations and 50 hours of RSD secondary mainstream content area classroom observations. It i s estimated that the each observation w i l l be approximately 60 minutes in length. A l l observations w i l l be documented and w i l l be transcribed and the information analyzed at a later date. A l l data collected w i l l be kept confidential. The names of the individuals w i l l not be used in any reports, nor w i l l any reporting be done in a way that any subjects in the study can be i d e n t i f i e d . The results of this study w i l l be made available to any interested parties and may be submitted for publication. 181 APPENDIX B Secondary Mainstream Educator Survey 184 Immigration and Secondary Mainstream Classroom Instruction Survey Thank you for volunteering to complete the following survey. Please answer a l l questions. Section 1 - Biographical Information 1. Current Teaching Assignment: Subject(s) Grade Level (s) 2. B.C. Public School Teaching Experience: years 3. C i r c l e one: Male Female ********************************************** IN THIS SURVEY, THE TERM 'IMMIGRANT STUDENT' MEANS A STUDENT WHO: 1. Is between 13 to 19 years of age; 2. Has been in Canada 3 years or less; 3. Arrived in Canada with l i t t l e or no English language speaking a b i l i t y . **************************************************************** Section 2 - Descriptive Likert Scale Questions Complete a l l questions by c i r c l i n g the answer that best describes a) your own situation; or b) your feelings about your immigrant students. 1. On average, what percentage of your students are immigrants? less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 2. Do you fee l an increased number of immigrant students in your classroom(s) has caused some d i f f i c u l t y in the delivery of your da i l y lessons? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 3. Have you encountered immigrant student language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? seldom occasionally often daily continually 185 4. Have you encountered immigrant student cu l t u r a l background related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom(s)? Y E S N O If 'yes', to what degree? seldom occasionally often d a i l y c o n t i n u a l l y 5. Have you encountered immigrant student academic communication and instruction d i f f i c u l t i e s because you are unaccustomed to dealing with immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Y E S N O If 'yes 1, to what degree? seldom occasionally often d a i l y c ontinually 6. To what degree are you aware of the educational backgrounds of your immigrant students? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 7. To what degree do you fe e l your classroom approach/methods complement the educational experiences of immigrant students? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 8. How much instructional time do you spend in direct one-way lecture? l e s s than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 9. Indicate what percentage of the immigrant students you f e e l are able to comprehend at least 80% of your lecture content. les s than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 10. On average, what portion of an hour of instructional time do your students spend in small learning groups? les s than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 11. Indicate what percentage of immigrant students you fe e l are able to function at at least 80% comprehension l e v e l while working i n small groups. les s than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 12. When introducing new material, what percentage of the new information do you present v i s u a l l y (using graphic aids)? l e s s than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 186 13. Do you fee l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has slowed the pace of your lesson delivery? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 14. Do you fe e l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has increased your preparation time? YES NO If 'yes', to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 15. Do you fe e l you have had to make instructional methods adjustments in order to accommodate the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes 1, to what degree? marginally somewhat measureably considerably immensely 16. Do you fee l you have to make additional adjustments to your instructional methods in order to accommodate the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? YES NO If 'yes', indicate how much more of an adjustment you f e e l you must make. less than 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% 17. Summary statement: What additional support do you f e e l secondary educators need to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students i n the mainstream classroom? Where can this support come from? Thank you very much for your help and cooperation! If you have any questions regarding t h i s study, or any comments, please contact me at: Researcher: Miss Lisa Hebb T E L : 224-3054 187 APPENDIX C Secondary Mainstream Educator Interview 1 8 8 IMMIGRATION AND SECONDARY MAINSTREAM CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION Framework for Teacher Interviews: SECTION 1: BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 1. Current Teaching Assignment : Subject(s) Grade Level(s) 2. B.C.- Public School Teaching Experience: years 3. C i r c l e one: Male Female SECTION 2: LANGUAGE a. Are you aware of the English language levels of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Y N How? Why not? b. Do you f e e l a need to be? Y N Why? Why not? c. Are you experiencing English as a Second (or Additional) Language related d i f f i c u l t i e s in your classroom? Y N Describe. d. Rank order the following from 1 to 7, starting with the item (1) that seems to pose the greatest challenge i n your classroom. l i s t e n i n g comprehension speaking a b i l i t y reading a b i l i t y writing a b i l i t y classroom behavior lack of common cul t u r a l background lack of common academic background e. Are you having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of th e i r English as a Second (or Additional) language a b i l i t i e s ? Y N Why? Why not? 189 f. Give a b r i e f l i s t of some t a c t i c s you have used to address the English as a Second (or Additional) language related issues in your classroom? SECTION 3 : CULTURE a. Are you aware of the cu l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Y N How? Why not? b. Do you f e e l a need to be? Y N Why? Why not? c. Are the cu l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students i n your classroom(s) an issue? Y N Describe. d. Rank order the following from 1 to 1, starting with the item ( 1 ) that seems to pose the greatest challenge in your classroom. view on value of education self-esteem mannerisms behaviour sense of belonging communication methods/skills motivation l e v e l e. Are you having a d i f f i c u l t time including immigrant students in classroom exercises because of th e i r c u l t u r a l backgrounds? Y N Why? Why not? f. Give a b r i e f l i s t of some t a c t i c s you have used to address the c u l t u r a l background related issues in your classroom(s)? SECTION 4: THE CLASSROOM a. Do you think the presence of immigrant students in your classroom(s) makes you f e e l uncomfortable? Y N Describe. 190 b. Can you describe what or how immigrant students in your classroom(s) may be feeling? Y N Describe. c. Please comment on the learning styles of the immigrant students in your classroom(s)? Comments. d. Do you f e e l you have enough knowledge about learning styles to accommodate a l l of the students in your classroom(s)? Y N Describe. e. Do you see the different learning styles of the immigrant students in your classroom(s) as a plus or a minus? + Describe. f. Do you see the different c u l t u r a l backgrounds of the immigrant students in your classroom(s) as a plus or a minus? + Describe. g. Do you make a conscious e f f o r t to include immigrant students in classroom a c t i v i t i e s ? Y N How? Why? h. Do you f e e l you treat the immigrant students in your classroom(s) di f f e r e n t l y ? Y N How? Why not? i . Do you f e e l a need to? Y N Why? Why not? SECTION 5: ADDRESSING CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION a. Please describe the types of d i f f i c u l t i e s you have experienced while teaching immigrant students. b. Please describe the type(s) of training you f e e l you need to meet the instructional needs of the immigrant students your classroom(s). c. Please describe the types of resources you f e e l you need to meet the instructional needs of the immigrant students your classroom(s). 191 d. R e a l i s t i c a l l y , what do you fee l needs to be done to ensure every c h i l d in the B r i t i s h Columbia Education System has an equal opportunity to learn? e. Can thi s ' r e a l i s t i c 1 outlook be f a c i l i t a t e d via teacher i n -service sessions ? Y N How? Why not? f. Have you attended any teacher in-service sessions that s p e c i f i c a l l y addressed mainstream immigrant student classroom instruction? Y N g. Do you fee l t h i s type of in-servicing i s valuable? Y N Why? Why not? h. Summary statement: What additional support do you fee l secondary educators need to deal e f f e c t i v e l y with immigrant students in the mainstream classroom? Where can thi s support come from? APPENDIX D Secondary Mainstream and ESL Classroom Observation Sheet 1 9 3 In-Class Observations - / - Subject - School Class Size: Teaching Paradigm(s): Teaching Strategy(ies) : Cooperative Learning Methods: Teacher-Student Roles and Responsibilities: Teacher Expectation Levels: Student Involvement/Participation: Teacher Assistance: 194 Tone/Environment; Teacher-Student(s) Relationship: Student(s)-Student(s) Relationship: Subject Matter; Academic Discourse: Use of Visuals: Use of Prescribed Texts: Multicultural Curricula: 1 9 5 Pace or Rate of Content Delivery: Accommodation of ESL/Culturally Different Students: Teacher-Student(s) Successes and Failures: Teacher Concerns: COMMENTS: 1 9 6 APPENDIX E Additional Study Instrument(s) Revision Comments and Suggestions 197 Additional Instrument Revision Suggestions 1. Exercise caution when using descriptive words that are open to interpretation on a Likert-type Scale survey. 2. Ensure the survey cover l e t t e r details the scope of the participants r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . 3. Is the ethnic heritage of the teacher volunteers involved in this study important? 4. Survey item 8 should be changed to read, "How much instructional time do you spend in direct one-way lecture?". 5. Survey items 10 and 11 should consistently read, "small learning groups". 6. Survey item 12 should be worded, "When introducing new material, what percentage of the new information do you present v i s u a l l y (using graphic aids)?". 7. Survey item 13 and 14 should begin, "Do you f e e l having immigrant students in your classroom(s) has....". 8. Items b. and c. of Section 2 and 3, and items i . and j . of Section 4 are either redundant or need to be c l a r i f i e d . 9. The use of "language d e f i c i t related d i f f i c u l t i e s " in Section 2 may cause d i f f i c u l t i e s for the interviewees. 10. In item d. Section 2, you may have two q u a l i t a t i v e l y different categories there. 11. Avoid linking descriptive words l i k e " t a c t i c s / a l t e r -198 ations". You may think they are the same (or help to i l l u s t r a t e what you mean) but the net result may be to produce ambivalent data. 12. Section 3 item a., the word "why" i s best replaced with "how". 13. Some interview questions appear vague. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0064540/manifest

Comment

Related Items