Second language acquisition.

In order to explain the development of English and Spanish skills in children from Spanish-speaking homes in the United States, it is necessary to identify their sources of language exposure. Most research to date has focused on home language use. The aim of this study is to identify sources of English and Spanish exposure outside the home that bilingual children experience between the ages of 2 and 5 years. The present study focuses on 3 potential sources: grandparents, extracurricular activities, and early childcare and education settings. We ask how much English and Spanish exposure children receive, how that changes from 2.5 to 5 years, and whether family variables influence those changes. Participants were 149 children from Spanish-speaking homes in southeastern Florida, with at least one parent an immigrant from a Spanish-speaking country. Measured out-of-home sources of input included hours per of week of English and Spanish from a Grandparent, during Extracurricular Activities, and during Preschool at 30, 36, 42, 48, and 60 months. Parents’ Native Language Background groups were either both native Spanish-speaking or one native, Spanish-speaking and one native, English-speaking. Maternal Education was treated as a dichotomous variable: mothers whose highest level of education in English is less than a four-year college degree and mothers whose highest level of education in English is equivalent to or greater than a four-year college degree. Child Birth Order was also treated as a dichotomous variable: only children and first-born children or later born children. Results revealed that for these children from Spanish-speaking homes, Grandparents are primarily a source of heritage-language (Spanish) input and Extracurricular Activities and Preschool are primarily a source of societal-language (English) input. Findings suggest English exposure from out-of-home sources increases over time possibly at the expense of Spanish exposure. Parents’ Native Language Backgrounds and Maternal Education influenced children’s exposure to both languages from these outside sources of input; Child Birth Order did not. Implications for future research and practical application are discussed.

Drawing on the principles of critical multicultural teacher education, Teaching
English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and bilingual education, this study
examined how pre-service teachers were prepared to educate Emerging Bilinguals (EBs)
in ESOL-infused teacher education programs in Florida universities. The textual analysis
of a purposeful sample of five elementary-level English Language Arts (ELA) methods
textbooks, utilizing a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, revealed that
authors overwhelmingly referred to EBs as English learners or English language learners,
rather than bilinguals or dual language learners, and devoted less than 5% of the total
content of four textbooks to topics about teaching methods, curriculum, and assessment
for EBs. Evidence of five forms of curriculum bias was found, including invisibility,
linguistic bias, fragmentation and isolation, stereotyping, and imbalance and selectivity. The findings suggest that textbook authors value knowledge about teaching EBs
less than knowledge about teaching native English-speakers. EBs were stereotyped as a
homogenous group of struggling readers and essentialized in terms of their limited
English proficiency. One author conflated students’ language differences with physical
limitations and learning disabilities, a troubling mischaracterization in the context of the
overrepresentation of EBs in special education. Meanwhile, a preference shown for ESL
methods over bilingual methods, based upon misconceptions about how EBs learn,
suggests that textbook authors undervalue the cultures and linguistic skills that students
bring from home.
The hidden curriculum in ELA methods textbooks may influence a majority of
pre-service teachers, who are typically monolingual and raised in the English-dominant
mainstream culture, to develop a deficit view of EBs and utilize a one-size-fits-all
approach towards ELA instruction. In order to prepare pre-service teachers to educate
EBs for academic success, the teacher education curriculum must include material that
explains linguistically responsive instruction and describes effective bilingual education
models, within a critical pedagogical framework. Without this knowledge, pre-service
teachers may continue instructional practices that contribute to a persistent “achievement
gap” experienced by EBs. A transformation of the ELA methods curriculum is required
so that pre-service teachers are prepared to implement a humanizing pedagogy that
facilitates positive identity formation as it develops bilingual and biliterate students.