A Educational Observation At New Jersey

General education classroom teachers are responsible for providing the primary instruction for English Language Learners (ELLs) development in English literacy skills (Thompson, 2004). Supplying ample resources to accommodate ELLs inside and outside of the classroom are essential as the number of ELL students has grown steadily. According to research, “one out of four of all children in the United States are from immigrant families, and in most cases these children speak a language other than English at home” (Samson & Collins, 2012 p. 4). Further research suggests, “students from a non-English speaking home and background account for the fastest growing population of children in the kindergarten through twelfth grade setting (Short &

One-point teachers should be aware of language acquisition is that the child ability to participate in a classroom may be affect because of the lack of communication, must of the time students that are second language learners tend to stay quite and demonstrate lack of understanding. It is important to identify these students to be able to approach and teach them adequately.

The purpose of the Comprehensive Curriculum Project (CCP) is to analyze the myriad of issues that have arisen over the last few years revolving around curricula and its use in the classroom, school, and district. With the 2010 state adoption of the Common Core, educators experienced many different transitional issues and developmental issues revolving around the curricula. In order to develop a deeper understanding of these issues it is important to conduct interviews, look at the Teacher Working Conditions survey, and to analyze local organizational models that might affect the transition to the new standards.

When an educator walks into her classroom for the first time, she needs to be prepared to encounter students that come from a variety of backgrounds. The children will be in different stages of language development, and the educator must accommodate for each of these students. Magruder, Hayslip, Espinosa, and Matera (2013) state, “The US Census Bureau projects that by the 2030s, children whose home language is other than English will increase from roughly 22 percent to 40 percent of the school-age population” (p. 9). This increase in second language learners will cause the educator to accommodate for those needs. Second language learners “need teachers who welcome them and recognize their unique abilities, what they know, and what they need to learn” (Magruder, Hayslip, Espinosa, and Matera, 2013, p. 10).

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) was first implemented in 2010, nine years after I graduated from high school. Although I wasn’t personally affected by the new academic standards, it has a direct impact on the current and future generation of leaders, innovators, and world changers including my future children. The initial purpose of the Common Core Standards is to set high-quality learning goals designed to prepare students to be college and career ready. Given the current controversies surrounding CCSS, studies have shown that although the intent was to benefit students in the long-run it may actually be hindering their mathematical and reading skills. To further explore the arguments behind the Common Core initiative, I will

Institutions of higher education often struggle to find strategies that successfully engage students in learning. In the article “Faculty Work, Student Success,” Colleen Flaherty attempts to address this problem by analyzing the benefits that undergraduate research has on students and faculty. However, she points out that faculty have a hard time balancing the demands of focusing on teaching students while keeping up with research, without sacrificing the quality of one or both pursuits. Flaherty uses the College of New Jersey, as an example of an institution that took a risk and did a complete reformation of their curriculum focusing on the teacher-scholar model and undergraduate research (Flaherty, 2014). Since the implementation of the program in 2004, it had benefited both students and faculty alike such as increased retention and recruitment rates and increased student-faculty interactions (Flaherty, 2014). The new curriculum lightened the faculty teaching requirement to three courses a semester than were focused on undergraduate research and scheduled time to pursue their own research while encouraged to include students in that as well (Flaherty, 2014). While this new model has worked well for this university to engage students in learning through an emphasis on undergraduate research and balancing the faculty’s workload by changing their curriculum, this model may just not be feasible for some institutions since they vary greatly in size, focus, and resources, etc.

The educational system in the United States was originally developed using concepts from around the world, created using ingenuitive ideas from countries such as China, Japan, and Korea. However, as the United States quickly moved into position as the leading country for state-directed educational standards, America looked less and less to the systems of other nations and more into how we could improve what was locally and currently being applied in education. Consequently, an improved type of education instruction was officially launched in 2010. These new state standards, practically titled Common Core, were declared to focus on developing a child’s skills in reasoning, problem solving, communication, and competition (Conrad, et al. 52). While the standards are professed to be an extremely practical and beneficial method of teaching today, there are issues which have recently surfaced and raised some concerns. The Common Core State Standards are emerging as the subjects of a provocative controversy in society today as they prompt discussion on global economic efficiency, nationwide academic standards, and the ultimate well-being of school-age children.

The Common Core has been developed as a nationwide measurement for student progress. Officially launched in 2009 as a federal funding bill, the standards identify skills that every student residing in the United States should master in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics from kindergarten through 12th grade (Gewertz, 2015). The Common Core itself is not a curriculum, however, it identifies rigorous objectives that must be met by a school’s curriculum. The purpose is to initiate a deeper focus on developmental learning by using interdisciplinary instruction. This redefines the way that students learn because their progress is no longer assessed on the outcome of their performance, but by the process that has allowed them to reach the

Today, many states and schools systems are adopting a standards based education system. In fact, according to Common Core Standards Initiative (2014), forty-three states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted the Common Core State Standards. The premise is that if all critical subject areas follow a standard from state to state, that all students will receive the same and fair education. The Vermont State Board of Education saw a need and a value in implementing such a system. As such, the Board created a strategic plan to implement a framework of standards that would eventually adopt the common core standards. This paper will discuss the strategic plan created by the Vermont Board of Education and evaluate whether or not the goals of the plan were met through the Framework of Standards.

Education in the United States is in an abysmal state. It continues to spiral downward as students and educators fail to meet standards. The standards are then altered on a patchwork basis throughout the states. The goal is no longer to have a high standard educational system. The goal now is to maintain the status quo, allowing students and educators to strive for the minimum. There is no common approach to achieve success. Incipit Tragoedia, in comes the Common Core, agreed upon by educators, politicians, and

The new common core initiative that seems to be sweeping the nation is yet another attempt at reforming our nations crumbling education system. My assigned role in the simulation was that of Representative Todd Rokita, republican congressman from Indiana’s fourth district, for which I will be giving a short introduction. An explanation of the current federal education standards in America, how the common core is related to international education standards, and the states that have implemented the common core and why they have chose to do so will follow. We will also look at who is making these proposed reforms and who is most eager to implement common core on a federal level. Then examine where Representative Rokita stands on the issues

Common Core State Standards is being heard throughout the education world. Many cringe when the words are spoken and many fight to support what the words stand for. Common Core was introduced in 2009 by state leaders. Common Core State Standards were developed to prepare children for the business world or the reality after grade school. “The Common Core is a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy, also known as ELA” (About the Standards, n.d.). The goals for the standards outline what students should know before leaving his or her current grade level. “The standards were created to ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in college, career, and life, regardless of where they live” (About the Standards, n.d.). This is an ambitious goal, but with much support can be accomplished. According to Common Core State Standards Initiative (n.d.) The Common Core has been adopted by forty-two states already and is accompanied by District of Columbia and Department of Defense Education Activity. Common Core was developed to improve the academics in society’s schools. Academics in the past years have not been successful and the United States has fallen behind international education. “One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each

The second language learner that I have chosen to assess in my case study is an international student from Korea who is now attending year 11 and does the ESL course at my school, the Hills Grammar School. I will refer to my student with the name ‘John’ for confidentiality reasons.

According to the text,Reading, Writing and Learning in ESL: A Resource Book for Teaching K-12 English Learners (2017), “behaviorist, innatist, and interactionist views of second language development have influenced teaching methods” for many years and continue to do so (p. 69). This paper will describe the different types of classrooms suggested by the following three views of language acquisition: behaviorist, innatist, and interactionist. This paper will also discuss the teacher’s role, treatment of errors, and grouping patterns in the classroom.

Ms. Sullivan is a third grade teacher at an elementary school where English language learners (ELLs) make up approximately 85 percent of the student population. The majority of the third graders she teaches are of Asian, African American, and Hispanic ethnicities and seem to be within the intermediate stages of English language proficiency. In the video lesson, Ms. Sullivan presents a whole group math lesson measuring temperature using a thermometer. In this lesson, Ms. Sullivan utilizes a wide variety of sheltered instructional strategies to improve her ELLs’ language development.