Michelle Benegas & Suzanne McCurdy

We are pleased to share with you volume 38, issue 2 of the MinneTESOL Journal. This collection of articles offers practical content-based language instruction teaching strategies, a framework for administrator support, an opinion editorial, and a guide toward integrating translanguaging into poetry lessons. 

Bonnie Swierzbin provides a guide to help learners with demonstratives in What’s this all about? Helping students comprehend demonstratives in expository text. While demonstratives (this, that, these, those) typically refer to people and things in conversation, in expository text, they often point to ideas, events, and situations. Swierzbin brings this complex topic to life through actual classroom examples and imagery. 

Aliza Fones presents a framework for administrator support of English language learner teachers and programs called CRAFT: Collaboration, Responsiveness, Awareness, Framing, and Trust. CRAFT provides guidance for administrators to address the changing policies regarding English language education in her article, “Facing change: A framework for administrator support of English language learner programs.”

Lesly Gámez, Darren LaScotte, Peng Nelson, and Noelle Roubinek offer a perspective article on immersion education as a solution to Minnesota’s school integration efforts. In “Perspectives on immersion education and Minnesota’s school integration efforts,” the authors explain the goals and realities of two-way immersion and help the reader to understand the critical role that immersion programs play in reimagining school diversity. Closing with keys to implementation and next steps, they offer a roadmap toward a more inclusive and multilingual educational landscape. 

In “Frozen in the birdbath, a leaf: Translingual poetry for ESL learners” Croix Clayton considers pedagogic translingualism as a tool to put literary texts within the reach of language students. He then leads the reader through designing a content-integrated translingual ESL unit using haiku poetry.

Enjoy these articles, share them with your colleagues, and stay connected to our MinneTESOL Journal community by following the journal on Facebook and on Twitter (@MnTESOLjournal).



Bonnie Swierzbin

Demonstratives (this, that, these, those) are pointing words: In conversation they typically point to people and things but in written expository text, they often point to ideas, events, and situations. ESL teachers need to help their students gain familiarity with the functions of demonstrative reference beyond simple pointing and contrast.
Keywords: demonstratives, reference, elementary, middle school, secondary, teacher education

Figure 1. Demonstratives in 4th grade science (adapted from DiSpezio et al., 2017b, p. 79)

Imagine you are working with your fourth grade English Learners (EL) as they read a science unit on the engineering process. You’ve worked with them on figuring out what noun phrases with articles refer to (the answer, the lesson) in written texts, and they’ve mastered demonstratives (this, that, these, those) for pointing to people and objects, but as you preview their textbook science lesson (see Figure 1), you see a need to bring these two topics together: How do demonstratives in written expository texts refer to entities?

The text in Figure 1 provides some helpful examples to start us on our way to answering that question.

This robot is riding a bicycle, just like a human, and not falling over. How is this possible?   

In the first example, the demonstrative determiner this before the noun robot tells the reader to look nearby for a salient referent. Even if the word robot is not familiar to the reader, the white thing on the bicycle is a very obvious nearby choice for the referent since it is foregrounded in the image. In the second example, the demonstrative pronoun this also tells the reader to look nearby for a referent, but in this case its referent is less obvious. This refers to the whole previous sentence, the idea that a robot can ride a bicycle and not fall. Referring to ideas is a common function for demonstratives and one that they perform far more efficiently than noun phrases with articles. Imagine what the question How is this possible? would look like without the demonstrative (1).

(1) How is the robot riding a bicycle possible?
     How is it possible for the robot to ride a bicycle?
     How is the situation where the robot rides a bicycle possible?

Long phrases and complicated syntax can result from using a structure other than a demonstrative to refer to an idea. In contrast, demonstratives provide a concise and efficient way to refer to ideas, which is one reason they are important in the English system of reference. Clearly, ELs need to be able to figure out what demonstratives refer to as they read academic texts as well as being able to use them appropriately in their own writing. The purpose of this article is to provide English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers with information about how demonstratives are used in written academic texts in order to inform their teaching. Basic information about English demonstratives is presented first, followed by a review of typical ways that demonstratives are used in expository academic texts, drawing on examples from 4th and 5th grade science textbooks and a high school history textbook.

Basic info about demonstratives

The words that and this are considered part of a basic 2000-word English vocabulary, and they are, respectively, the tenth and thirty-fourth most frequent words in the Cambridge International Corpus of spoken and written English (O’Keefe et al., 2007). That occurs more frequently than this because it has additional functions such as introducing adjective clauses (the dog that ate a banana) and noun clauses (I think that Eric’s doughnut fell in the dishwasher). In this paper, only the demonstrative uses of this and that will be discussed. But the relative frequencies of that and this are not just due to the additional functions; in conversation, the pronoun that occurs far more frequently than this (more than 10,000 occurrences per million words while this is <2000; Conrad & Biber, 2009). Specifically, that is used to evaluate an idea or validate the correctness of a claim (that’s right, that sounds better). In academic writing, this has about double the use of that (more than 2,000 occurrences per million words for this compared to about 1,000 for that; Conrad & Biber, 2009). Similar to that in conversation, this in academic writing often refers to an idea that was just stated; the next section describes how this is done and the complications that arise.

The usage of demonstratives most commonly taught in ESL textbooks is the basic, common one of pointing to people and objects while speaking (Schiftner & Rankin, 2012). Typically, such textbooks focus on the near/far distinction of this and that (Cowan, 2008); some advanced textbooks (e.g., Larsen-Freeman, 2007) cover the reference usage of demonstratives in written text, but as the bicycle-riding robot text shows, ELs are likely to encounter demonstrative reference in writing well before they reach an advanced level, and teachers need to be prepared to teach this topic across a range of grade and proficiency levels.

What demonstratives do in written academic expository texts

Just as demonstratives and their accompanying gestures in conversation tell the listener where to search for the referent in terms of distance, so too do demonstratives in academic texts. However, in writing, the distance becomes more abstract and the referent harder to find with no physical gesture and only a demonstrative pointing the way. This section starts with examples where the referents are easier to find and moves on to more abstract ones.

Referring to current context

In the sample texts reviewed for this article, the demonstrative determiner this is often used to refer to the context in which its sentence is embedded (2) and to help students organize their learning.

(2) As you read these two pages, underline…
     Find the answer to the following questions in this lesson.
     As you read about the rise of democratic ideas in this prologue, think about…

Examples as in (2) are relatively easy to spot since they a) are quite similar to oral “pointing,” b) always show nearness (this, these), and c) include vocabulary that names parts of the text (pages, lesson, prologue) and directions to the reader (underline, find, think). In addition to referring to their written ‘container’ (these two pages, this chapter), such demonstratives may also refer to their time ‘container’ (this week), although the latter usage is more common in speaking (Maes et al., 2022).

Similarly, this and these are frequently used to refer to a nearby image or part of it, as shown in Figures 2 and 3. In Figure 2, several visual and verbal clues make the referent of these round disks relatively obvious: The left-pointing arrow, the nearness of demonstrative and image, the adjective round, and the plural disks all work together to identify the referent.

Figure 2. Demonstrative referring to an entire image1 (adapted from a high school history textbook; Beck et al., 2012, p. 9)

In contrast, the demonstrative this in Figure 3, which is adapted from a science textbook, has somewhat limited clues as to its referent. The proximity of the verbal and visual texts is again important, but the arrow points unhelpfully to the verbal text. Previous pages in the science textbook presented multiple examples of technology and the needs they meet, so the reader will need to recognize several types of technology in the image (helmet, watch, shoes, skateboard, etc.) and identify the one that is “a lot of fun.”

A teaching strategy for demonstratives referring to images could be implemented when teachers draw students’ attention to the visual features of a text as part of a during-reading activity. Specifically, teachers can help students identify the verbal and visual cues for referents, and connect this to a good reading strategy of using the surrounding context to make sure information is understood.

Figure 3. Demonstrative referring to part of an image2 (adapted from a 5th grade science textbook; DiSpezio et al., 2017a, p. 83)

Implying contrast

Most of the demonstrative examples in the sources for this study are this/these, showing nearness, and when that/those are used, it is often (but not always) for an implied contrast. In the fourth grade science text in (3), those is used to contrast failing design features with good ones, without any use of these to make the contrast explicit.

(3) Redesign takes advantage of all work done before. Good design features are kept, and those that fail are discarded.

Similarly, in the history text (4), those, referring to reformers, implies a contrast to a group of people who did not want reform, but without even mentioning them.

(4) The Reformation was a religious reform movement that began in the 16th century. Those who wanted to reform the Catholic Church were called Protestants, because they protested against the power and abuses of the Church.

It’s also important to note that in both of these cases, the full noun phrase that those modifies is implied (those design features, those people), potentially causing some difficulty.

Teachers can connect these implicit contrasts with explicit ones that students are familiar with from classroom talk. It would also be helpful to model how implicit contrasts are used in conversation, for example, how those are yours may imply the existence of some others that are not yours.

Tracking and labeling

Like the definite article the, in the sample texts demonstratives are used to track referents, which means that a noun phrase is introduced, then the head noun is repeated with the or a demonstrative. In the history text in (5), a brilliant cultural movement is tracked with the phrase this movement, using this instead of the to add focus to the referent.

(5) In the 1300s, a brilliant cultural movement arose in Italy. Over the next 300 years, it spread to the rest of Europe, helped by the development of the printing press. This movement was called the Renaissance.

Instances of tracking are relatively easy to follow, given the noun repetition. Slightly harder to follow are cases in which an author uses a synonym or general noun with a demonstrative to refer to objects or people just mentioned (6).

(6) When coal burns, harmful ash and gases are produced. The potential harm these substances can cause leads to negative feedback.

The use of the demonstrative determiner these signals to the reader that the referent is nearby; using the substances would not signal nearness and may cause readers to wonder what substances the author means. In addition to movement and substances, other general nouns that were used for tracking in the science and history sources for this article include ideas, things, practice, act, groups, knowledge, devices, process, items, and tasks.

The cases that are hardest to follow are where demonstratives are used to label stretches of preceding text in order to discuss them further. Labeling is common in academic texts because it gives names to ideas and events that are presented (Francis, 2002), thus stressing their importance. Such a discourse label (using Francis’ terminology) also creates a link between the description of an idea or event (likely long and complex) and the surrounding discussion of it. For example, in (7), the discourse label this event names the action in the second clause of the preceding sentence and links it to a timeline of Judaism that the history text is developing.

(7) The Bible states that God gave the code to the Israelite leader, Moses, in the form of the Ten Commandments and other laws. This event is believed to have occurred sometime between 1300 and 1200 BC.

Understanding text with discourse labels is complicated. First, the reader needs to understand that the referent is not just one object or person named by a concrete noun, rather it is an abstraction. Second, the reader needs to find the stretch of text describing the abstraction. That text may be a sentence or part of it as in (7), or it may be more than one sentence as in (8).

(8) Cell phone technology changes fast, and some people switch to new models after just a few months. More resources are used up, and the old phones sometimes end up in a landfill. This risk is environmental.

Another possible difficulty is that the referent is not clearly stated in the text but has to be inferred (Cornish, 2018). An example of this is shown in (9), an excerpt from a fourth grade science textbook unit where students are being introduced to the design process for engineering.

(9) It has been said that necessity is the mother of invention. But once you find a need, how do you build your invention? That’s the design process.

The demonstrative pronoun that refers to the as-yet-undescribed steps for building an invention to meet a need, as implied in the question.

In addition, a discourse label can also tell the reader how to interpret the referent, like (8) does, where this risk guides the reader to view the situation stated in the previous two sentences as a problem. Example (8) also illustrates another complication with discourse labels: They are often used in text where the author is building an argument (Francis, 2002), meaning that the reader has to determine how the event or situation fits into the bigger picture. 

The circumstances where teachers refer to facts, ideas, etc., with demonstratives in oral classroom language can be a jumping-off point for explicitly teaching how demonstratives in written academic language are used to track and label referents. Teachers should compare that in speaking with this in writing and explicitly point out that demonstratives often refer to ideas stated in clauses, sentences, or even more than one sentence rather than to something represented by a noun alone. They should also point out clues in demonstrative + general noun phrases (these substances, this process) that help identify the referent. In post-reading activities, when students are highlighting pronouns and then drawing chains of reference, as in Figure 4, they should be working with the visual and verbal texts together and including demonstratives to create a more complete picture of reference.

Figure 4. Drawing chains of reference3 (text adapted from DiSpezio et al., 2017b, p. 65)

Although demonstratives are not used nearly as often as articles for referring, they occupy a unique spot in the English reference system because they so frequently refer to ideas, events, and situations––a topic that is not covered by teaching demonstratives for contrast in oral language. Teachers should also recognize that while the pointing function of demonstratives is the same in oral and written texts, the choice of demonstrative is related to the text genre, such as expository or narrative (Maes et al., 2022), so that teaching demonstrative usage with a variety of text types, both oral and written, is vital for ELs’ understanding.


I thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and Steve Wicht for his thought-provoking questions.


  1. This image, which was originally posted to Flickr, was uploaded to Commons using Flickr upload bot on 27 August 2009, 12:42 by Dorieo. The image and licensing information are available at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Athenian_Secret_Ballot.jpg 
  2. Public domain image downloaded from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skateboard_facility_at_Guantanamo.jpg 
  3. Public domain image downloaded from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_CT_scanner_bolsters_medical_capabilities_in_theater_161121-F-NN480-0002.jpg 


Beck, R., Black, L., Krieger, L., Naylor, P., & Shabaka, D. (2012). Modern world history: Patterns of interaction. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Retrievable from https://my.hrw.com/SocialStudies/ss_2010/downloads/htmlfiles/content/Modern_World_History_Unit_1.pdf

Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2009). Real grammar: A corpus-based approach to English. Pearson Education.

Cornish, F. (2018). Anadeixis and the signalling of discourse structure. Qua-derns de Filologia: Estudis Lingüistics, XXIII, 33-57. https://doi.org/10.7203/qf.23.13519 

Cowan, R. (2008). The teacher’s grammar of English: A course book and reference guide. Cambridge University Press.

DiSpezio, M., Frank, M., Heithaus, M., & Ogle, D. (2017a). Science fusion: Fifth grade student edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

DiSpezio, M., Frank, M., Heithaus, M., & Ogle, D. (2017b). Science fusion: Fourth grade student edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Francis, G. (2002). Labelling discourse: An aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 83-101). Routledge.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). Grammar dimensions 4: Form, meaning and use (4th ed.). Thomson Heinle.

Maes, A., Krahmer, E., & Peeters, D. (2022). Explaining variance in writers’ use of demonstratives: A corpus study demonstrating the importance of discourse genre. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 7(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5826 

O’Keefe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: Language use and language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Schiftner, B. & Rankin, T. (2012). The use of demonstrative reference in English texts by Austrian school-age learners. In Y. Tono, Y. Kawaguchi, & M. Minegishi (Eds.), Developmental and crosslinguistic perspectives in learner corpus research (pp. 63-82). John Benjamins.



Aliza Fones

School administrators can effectively support English Language Learner programs and teachers through the CRAFT framework that emphasizes collaboration, responsiveness, advocacy, framing, and trust.
Keywords: secondary education, emergent bilinguals, ELL programs, administrators

The role of school leadership, specifically administrators, is critical in the effective education of students designated as English language learners (ELLs) (Reyes, 2006) or emergent bilinguals (EBs). Specifically, a building principal can have an impact on issues of equity, social justice, and the success of an ELL program over time (Scanlan & López, 2012; Theoharis & O’Toole, 2011). (The term “emergent bilingual” has emerged in scholarship as an asset-based description of the students and their abilities, rather than focusing solely on their status as learners of English (e.g., García, 2009). In this article, I use “EB” to refer to the students, and the term “ELL” to refer to teachers, programs, policy labels, and instruction as it is more widely used and familiar in public education policy and settings. However, districts are increasingly opting for more inclusive terminology, including “EB,” “multilingual,” or “multilingual language learner.”) It is now well understood that EB students have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the educational disparities between these students and their native English-speaking peers continue to grow (Lazarín, 2020). School administrators are in a position to address and remedy these disparities through their approach to ELL instruction. This article presents a framework for administrator support of ELL teachers and programs called CRAFT: Collaboration, Responsiveness, Awareness, Framing, and Trust. CRAFT provides guidance for administrators to address the changing policies regarding ELL education, and the needs of the ever-changing population of ELL students, in a way that promotes the integration, rather than isolation, of ELL students, teachers, and departments. Below is a brief description of these issues, followed by examples from two administrators who were exceptional in their leadership of ELL programs.

ELL education: Changing populations and changing policies

As noted often (e.g., Migration Policy Institute, 2019), this population of students in the United States is rapidly increasing and diversifying. At the same time, federal accountability policy is also changing, and the recent implementation of policies such as the Every Student Succeeds Act have presented both greater inclusion of ELL education in the policy and greater challenges vis-à-vis academic standards and measures of accountability (Hopkins et al., 2013). However, what these federal policies mean at the district and building level for EB students and teachers is open to interpretation and subject to local capacity and available resources. This is where building administrators come in: principals and assistant principals who work with ELL departments are important agents and advocates for their ELL teachers and EB students.

Improving the integration of ELL departments and opportunities for students

The integration of EB students into the mainstream school environment (including their placement in courses) is visible in the way that ELL departments and teachers are recognized and positioned in the building. ELL programs, teachers, and students tend to be marginalized within schools (Harklau, 1994; Olsen, 1997; Valdés, 2004), and segregated through enrollment practices, curricular tracks, access to extracurricular activities, and social and physical segregation (i.e., separate physical classrooms and spaces in the school). This isolation of EBs from monolingual, native-English speaking peers increases the potential that the segregation will lead to labeling, as well as disparate outcomes and opportunities (Callahan, 2005; Dabach & Callahan, 2011).

One proposed alternative framing of ELL programs and students within schools is the idea of a “new mainstream” (Enright, 2011; Thompson, 2013) that more adequately describes the presence of non-native English speaking and multilingual students in today’s schools. This vision of new mainstream classrooms is accurate, given the realities of the ethnic and linguistic composition of today’s schools, and the students that comprise the new mainstream bring with them a “wealth of unexpected talents, perspectives, and unique experiences” (Scanlan & López, 2014, p. 113). However, simply acknowledging the presence of different demographics in schools is not sufficient; Thompson (2013) notes that once we have acknowledged this new mainstream, it is incumbent upon educators to be responsive with their instructional practices.

The framework for addressing these issues emerged from the practices of two skilled secondary administrators and their work with ELL teachers and programs. This data came from a qualitative study that examined the roles and experiences of high school ELL teachers and the implementation of district ELL program policy at two large, urban, and linguistically diverse high schools within the same district (at the time of the study, there were around 30,000 students in the district, 20% of whom were identified as ELLs, who represented over 120 languages). One aspect of this study was to interview district and building administrators who worked closely with the ELL department in each building. I interviewed these administrators twice over the course of the school year, once in the fall and once in the spring. I also observed district, building, and department level meetings related to the ELL program throughout the school year. In this research, I asked, “How do school leaders support high school ELL departments and teachers, especially as related to the integration of ELL departments into the school building and the learning outcomes of ELL students?”

Collaboration, responsiveness, awareness, framing, and trust (CRAFT)

This framework identifies five aspects of school leaders’ interactions with ELL teachers in order to promote more meaningful and equitable education of high school EB students. Each aspect has its own merit, but there is potential for positive change when all aspects are integrated. Certainly, these are not the only components of effective leadership for ELL programs, but these stood out and were even more salient given the vast differences between the two schools and their administrators. (All names of people and places are pseudonyms.)


“[My] interaction with [the] ELL department has been constant . . . as needed, whenever needed. Earlier this year, it was many times a week.” (Ms. Harper)

At Fields High, the ELL department was supervised by Ms. Harper, an assistant principal and a former high school science teacher. During the study, Ms. Harper was in her first year as an assistant principal and her first year in the district. As a vice principal, Ms. Harper interacted frequently with the ELL department. Her work included supervising and observing the ELL teachers in addition to the placement and scheduling of the EB students, a task that involved an overhaul of the classes that were offered to EB students, which classes EB students were placed in, and who taught these classes. Ms. Harper and the ELL department head worked during the months prior to the school year to reevaluate the identification and placement of every single EB student and to create courses that would better meet their needs. In addition to supervision and organizational collaboration, Ms. Harper also sought resources for the ELL department and facilitated their interaction with other departments, creating opportunities for collaboration during professional development days and prioritizing communication between departments. In short, she provided support in a way that an administrator less familiar with the needs of an ELL program would potentially be able to do.

School leaders need to collaborate with ELL teachers in a meaningful, consistent, and timely manner. Collaboration is facilitated by a clear set of topics and issues to discuss, and clear designation of roles (i.e., who will facilitate the meeting, take notes, follow-up with action items). While unconventional, at both Fields and Metro high schools, the school leader frequently attended the department’s professional learning community (PLC) meeting, and met frequently with the ELL department heads. In some instances, the presence of an administrator could have a chilling or inhibiting effect, but in conversation and interviews with ELL teachers, as well as my observation at PLC meetings, the administrator’s presence was viewed as supportive and collaborative. The presence and participation of a school leader in these meetings demonstrated the importance of ELL instruction and the work of ELL teachers, and helped to promote the integration of the ELL department and teachers.


“One big point has been our older ELL students who are aging out. For instance, we sat down with one of the counselors and the ELL teachers and myself and we went through our list of any students that was 17 and older and looked at their credits, their state assessments, whether they are really on track for graduation… How close were these students to actually being able to graduate or whether they might time out. And so we organized a trip to [local community college] to look at the program.” (Ms. Harper)

Closely connected to collaboration is the importance of school leaders’ responsiveness to the needs of the ELL department. Given the frequent changes in policies and initiatives surrounding ELL instruction, as well as the frequent changes in EB student populations, responsiveness was imperative to the functioning of an ELL program. In the example above, Ms. Harper recognized a need for resources for older EB students, and she responded by coordinating with a local community college. Other ways that school leaders demonstrated responsiveness include working with the counselor to change course offerings based on needs and strengths of EB students, implementing a co-teaching model to assist beginner students in content area courses, and providing professional development opportunities tailored to the needs of teachers.


“You’ve got kids that are coming in from all over the world with a lot, or little to no formal education, and trying not only to teach them the English language, but just survival and life skills… and our program has grown immensely. I mean, my first year here we were probably 150 ELL kids, and now we’re at 350.” (Mr. Aaron)

At Metro High School, the administrator responsible for supervision of the ELL department was the principal, Mr. Aaron, an experienced administrator who had been at Metro for over a decade and had worked closely with the ELL department for that entire time. His responsibilities ranged from the formal observation and evaluation of the ELL teachers, to frequent attendance at the ELL departments’ PLC meetings, to advocacy at the district level on behalf of ELL students and teachers. He regularly collaborated with the ELL department head and was knowledgeable about the issues related to ELL education and the experiences of the students.  

Foundational to all aspects of this framework is the awareness of school leaders about the issues germane to ELL instruction, from knowledge about students’ backgrounds and skills to systems-level understanding of the experiences of high school EB students related to academic achievement. The educational experiences of high school EB students are vastly different from their younger EB peers: many are recently-arrived students with varying levels of English proficiency and educational experience; and given their age, there is less time for them to develop English proficiency, demonstrate competence in content areas, and obtain sufficient credits to graduate.


“The ELL teachers are constantly after school with their kids, not only working with kids, but also trying to communicate with parents. [The department head] delivers professional development every other staff meeting for us around… ELL best practices, and he is highly regarded amongst our entire staff, so when he talks, everyone listens.” (Mr. Aaron)

The framing of the ELL department, teachers, and EB students by the administrator is crucial for the integration of ELL in the building, as well as how ELL teachers and EB students are positioned. In both schools, the administrators positioned the ELL teachers as experts. One way they did this was to provide structured time where ELL teachers or the ELL department head could present information to staff at meetings and other professional development workshops. In terms of how students were positioned, both administrators were inclusive in the way they described EB students, referring to EB students as “our” students, and referencing individual students by name, demonstrating familiarity despite both schools being quite large. They also used the collective pronouns of “we” when talking about the work that they did in collaboration with ELL departments, communicating an alignment and shared responsibility with the work of the ELL teachers.


“I really trust my specialists, my teachers that are ELL teachers or special ed [sic] teachers… and so when they say, this is what they need, or this is what’s going on, then you know, I sit down and really go to bat for them… it’s important that I advocate for my teachers and my kids and my community.” (Mr. Aaron)

Finally, a theme that emerged during this research was the trust that school leaders placed in the ELL teachers, both at Metro where the ELL teachers were very experienced, and Fields where the ELL teachers were novices. These administrators trusted their ELL teachers with important decision-making and sought their input for decisions ranging from curriculum adoption to the responsibilities of the ELL paraprofessionals. English language learner teachers are ultimately responsible for so many aspects of EB students’ education that the trust of their administrator is necessary for them to not only feel supported, but also empowered to make decisions in the interest of their students (Fones, 2018).

Considerations and recommendations for ELL leadership

In this research, I was able to observe the ways that building administrators interacted with the ELL department and what their roles were in supporting the ELL program and teachers. These distinct and exceptional cases offered two approaches to the implementation of district ELL program policy through their program model and services, which demonstrated the importance of local decision-making in order to best work with existing resources to meet the needs of specific student populations.

How can administrators support high school ELL departments and teachers, and how can administrators support the integration of ELL departments, teachers, and students into the school? Calling attention to the CRAFT framework, administrators can (and should) intentionally structure their interactions with ELL teachers and departments, paying attention to the CRAFT framework (collaboration, responsiveness, advocacy, framing, and trust) and the way that these components are present in their leadership practices. School leaders can identify and facilitate opportunities for collaboration between ELL and content area/grade level departments. And when schools experience growth and changes of the ELL population, administrators can be proactive and set the tone for how the rest of the building can respond. In their role as decision-makers, administrators are also poised to advocate for their ELL teachers and EB students in matters related to policy and curriculum. In addition, school leaders are in a position to frame ELL departments, teachers, and EB students in a way that promotes their inclusion in the mainstream school setting via their messaging and opportunities for ELL teachers’ participation in the school community. Finally, trusting ELL teachers as the experts they are will model interactions for other staff in the building. All of these aspects of leadership can contribute to the opportunities and outcomes for EB students, and provide steps towards a more equitable education during a critical time.


Callahan, R. M. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunity to learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042002305 

Dabach, D. B., & Callahan, R. M. (2011). Rights versus reality: The gap between civil rights and English learners’ high school educational opportunities. Teachers College Record, 16558, 113.

Enright, K. A. (2011). Language and literacy for a new mainstream. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 80-118. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210368989 

Fones, A. (2018). Examining high school English language learner teacher agency: Opportunities and constraints. In H. Kayi-Aydar, G. Xuesong, E. Miller, M. Varghese & G. Vitanova (Eds.), Theorizing and analyzing teacher agency (pp. 24-43). Multilingual Matters.

García, O. (2009). Emergent bilinguals and TESOL: What’s in a name? TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 322-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00172.x 

Harklau, L. (1994). “Jumping tracks”: How language-minority students negotiate evaluations of ability. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 25(3), 347-363. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1994.25.3.04x0149s 

Hopkins, M., Thompson, K. D., Linquanti, R., Hakuta, K., & August, D. (2013). Fully accounting for English learner performance: A key issue in ESEA reauthorization. Educational Researcher, 42(2), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12471426 

Lazarín, M. (2020). COVID-19 spotlights the inequities facing English learner students, as nonprofit organizations seek to mitigate challenges. Migration Policy Institute.

Migration Policy Institute. (2019). ELL Information Center. Migration Policy Institute. Accessed 28 November 2022 at https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/ell-information-center  

Olsen, L. (1997). Made in America. The New Press.

Reyes, A. (2006). Reculturing principals as leaders for cultural and linguistic diversity. In K. Tellez, & H. C. Wasman (Eds.), Preparing quality educators for English language learners: Research, policies, and practices (pp. 145-165). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scanlan, M., & López, F. A. (2012). ¡Vamos! How school leaders promote equity and excellence for bilingual students. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 583-625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11436270 

Scanlan, M., & López, F. A. (2014). Leadership for culturally and linguistically responsive schools. Routledge.

Theoharis, G. & O’Toole, J. (2011). Leading inclusive ELL: Social justice leadership for English language learners. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(4), 646-688.

Thompson, K. D. (2013). Is separate always unequal? A philosophical examination of ideas of equality in key cases regarding racial and linguistic minorities in education. American Educational Research Journal, 50(6), 1249-1278. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213502519 

Valdés, G. (2004). Between support and marginalization: The development of academic language in linguistic minority children. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(2–3), 102-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050408667804 



Lesly Gámez, Darren LaScotte, Peng Nelson, & Noelle Roubinek

In this perspective article, we offer our opinion that immersion education is a promising solution to Minnesota’s school integration efforts. In light of this, we also consider the critiques that exist in this type of language programming, and the tensions that school districts and administrators must grapple with in consideration of the intended goals of immersion language education and both state- and nationwide educational aims.
Keywords: immersion education, educational policy, school integration, desegregation

Segregation, desegregation, and integration in Minnesota schools

School districts across the State of Minnesota – and the United States at large – are working to address racial, ethnic, and class segregation by better integrating their schools. Current integration efforts naturally draw on the Brown v. Board of Education case (1954), with its historical ruling to desegregate public schools in the United States. Leading up to and out of Brown, “[o]ne of the fundamental justifications used by desegregation proponents in the 1960s was the promise of improved academic performance for students of color” (Mattheis, 2009, p. 1), and it has been the consensus across many fields that segregation is inherently unequal (Anderson, 2005). At the same time, a tension exists as there is persistent evidence that “[desegregation] has fallen out of favor even among those who would count themselves committed to educational equity” (Mattheis, 2009, p. 2). In some cases, this is due to findings that students of color and economically disadvantaged students experience improved academic performance before their schools are integrated (Mayo, 2007); in other cases, when programs gain attention for the academic achievement of all of their students, they begin to be gentrified by White communities (Williams, 2017) whose families engage in “opportunity hoarding” (Uzzell & Ayscue, 2021, p. 23), which leads to fewer educational opportunities for students of color. In consideration of Minnesota’s own integration efforts, this tension between segregation, desegregation, and integration is an important consideration. 

Reframing the issue as one of “integration” rather than “desegregation,” Minnesota policymakers and educators have worked to advance the concept of integration as a means of promoting “meaningful interracial contact” and “cultural competency” within an educational policy arena made complicated by school choice legislation, declining public school enrollment, and the economic disparities that exist among Twin Cities metro area cities and towns (Mattheis, 2009, p. 2). Minnesota’s Achievement and Integration legislation (§124D.861, 2022) – and its established oversight responsibilities through the Minnesota Department of Education – submits all Minnesota schools to a revision of their enrollment through the lens of protected class status.1 Minnesota Administrative Rule 3535.0110, subpart 6 finds that a racially identifiable school “means a school where the enrollment of protected students at the school within a district is more than 20 percentage points above the enrollment of protected students in the entire district for the grade levels served by that school;” subpart 7 finds that a racially isolated school district means a district “where the districtwide enrollment of protected students exceeds the enrollment of protected students of any adjoining district by more than 20 percentage points.” The intention of the statute, by default, brings the consideration of programs that predominantly benefit students of color and economically disadvantaged students to the forefront. As school districts look for ways to integrate their schools, they turn to a variety of options that will attract students and families from a diverse range of race, ethnicity, and class with the hope of ultimately shifting enrollment to drop below the 20 percentage point discrepancy stated in the Minnesota Rule. Oftentimes, all manner of magnet programs are considered, such as STEM (science, technology engineering, and math), the arts, or International Baccalaureate (Mattheis, 2009); not least among these are language immersion programs. 

In this perspective article, we share our agreement that immersion education (particularly two-way immersion, described below) is a promising solution to Minnesota’s school integration efforts. We begin by defining key terms in immersion language programming and explaining the different types of immersion school contexts. In light of this, we also consider the critiques that exist in this type of language programming, and the tensions that school districts and administrators must grapple with in consideration of the intended goals of immersion language education and both state- and nationwide educational aims. 

What is immersion education? Defining key terms and school contexts 

According to a survey by the American Councils for International Education (2021), there are approximately 3,600 immersion schools currently operating in the U.S – a stark increase compared to the 79 programs in operation 25 years ago (Fortune & Jorstad, 1996); in Minnesota, there are over 100 of these programs. Lyster (2007, p. 8) defines immersion as:

a form of bilingual education that aims for additive bilingualism by providing students with a sheltered classroom environment in which they receive at least half of their subject-matter instruction through the medium of a language that they are learning as a second, foreign, heritage, or indigenous language. In addition, they receive some instruction through the medium of [the majority language] in the community.

According to Tedick and Lyster (2020), immersion programs are often categorized as either being strong, which leads to additive bilingualism, or as being weak, which leads to subtractive bilingualism. Additive bilingualism refers to when an additional language is acquired “at no expense to the first language” whereas subtractive bilingualism refers to the loss of one language in the process of learning another (Tedick & Lyster, 2020, p. 2). 

Tedick and Lyster (2020) propose that there are four types of strong, additive bilingual programs that fall under the umbrella term of dual language immersion (DLI) programming: one-way immersion, one-way developmental bilingual immersion, two-way immersion, and indigenous language revitalization immersion. One-way immersion programs – also commonly referred to as foreign or second language immersion programs – generally serve homogenous majority language students, where majority language is defined as “the language spoken by the majority of people in a given regional or national context” (Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, 2022). In the U.S. context, this refers to English. In contrast to the previous type of DLI program, one-way developmental bilingual immersion programs generally serve linguistically homogeneous minority language students, with the intent being to develop students’ academic English skills in addition to academic skills in their first language. In the U.S., students enrolled in these programs are mostly native speakers of Spanish and, increasingly, Spanish-English bilinguals who grew up speaking both languages from birth. Two-way immersion (TWI) programs – a third type of program – have student populations that combine majority and minority language students and are primarily a U.S. phenomenon (Tedick & Lyster, 2020); in TWI, “the two groups of students should be fairly well balanced, with each making up approximately half of the student population at each grade, and with neither group falling below one-third of the total at any grade level” (Howard et al., 2003, p. 5). Finally, as its name implies, indigenous language revitalization immersion programs – the last type – serve students with indigenous ancestry and aims to revitalize indigenous languages and cultures (e.g., Dakota, Ojibwe). These immersion programs are the rarest of the four types.

Variation in DLI programming: Models and aims

Whereas there are clear differences between these types of DLI programs, the reality of shifting demographics within school district lines results in student populations that can fluctuate from the normalized or even idealized population make-up. For instance, in TWI programs that serve both language majority and language minority students, it is often difficult for schools to follow the ideal 50/50 split as student population ratios fluctuate each year and, in public school systems, administrators cannot control the demographics of the school district population. In the early stages of TWI, however, a double lottery system and open enrollment were used to attract students from the target populations with that idealized 50/50 split in mind (Fortune & Jorstad, 1996).

There also exists some variation within each type of DLI program regarding how much class instruction is taught in the minority or “partner” language (PL) of the school – 90:10 and 50:50. The design of the 90:10 model means that all students start the program with 90% of the instructional time in the PL and 10% of the instructional time in the majority language (i.e., English). Around the 3rd year (i.e., 3rd grade), the proportion of instructional time in the PL begins to be gradually reduced, and instructional time in English is added. Usually by 5th grade, the instructional time is split evenly between the two languages. The design of the 50:50 model, on the other hand, means that from the very start of the program English and the PL are used half and half in the classroom (Gómez et al., 2005). Kim et al. (2015) reported that the “the 90:10 model is used in about 42% of schools that employ the TWI model, while 33% of the schools using the TWI model employ the 50:50 approach” (p. 242). In an earlier survey (Fortune & Jorstad, 1996), the two designs were referred to as partial immersion (50:50) and full-time immersion (90:10).

In spite of these differences between the amounts of instructional time in the PL (i.e., full or part-time immersion), the central goals of DLI programs remain the same. Howard et al. (2003) describe these goals as:

  1. all students will develop high levels of proficiency in their first language (L1);
  2. all students will develop high levels of proficiency in a second language (L2); and
  3. all students will demonstrate positive cross-cultural attitudes and behaviors.

In addition to developing high levels of proficiency in both languages, an additional goal of DLI programs and/or expectation of students is that the academic performance for all students (both language majority and language minority) will be at or above grade level by 5th grade. 

Krueger (2008), like many other researchers, has shown that DLI programs benefit all students. In a case study, African American, Hispanic, Asian, and students who qualified for free or reduced lunch all outperformed their peers across the district as a whole in reading, math, and English language arts as a result of their enrollment in the immersion program. Predictably, White students in the immersion program also outperformed students across the district, but what is more, “the reading performance gap between White and Non-White students was smaller for immersion students relative to district performance as a whole” (Krueger, 2008, para. 6). Such findings make it obvious why immersion would be a top choice for integration when schools are submitted to statutory regulation due to their shifting demographics and enrollments, which seem to indicate racial segregation, and regularly correlate with class segregation. 

Two-way immersion as a promising solution for school integration 

Researchers focusing on the added goal of high academic achievement (at or above grade level by 5th grade) have attempted to understand the best DLI models and designs to support academic achievement for all students, with particular attention on supporting minority language students commonly referred to as English language learners (ELLs). Large-scale, longitudinal, comparative studies (e.g.; Collier & Thomas, 2002, 2017; Lindholm-Leary, 2001; Thomas & Collier, 1997, 2002) have shown the TWI model to be the most successful for ELLs’ academic achievement in comparison to other DLI program types. In light of these findings, the TWI model has been characterized and described as a promising solution to reducing the achievement gap, especially in response to pressures from several state and federal political pushes and movements (Kim et al., 2015), such as: proposition 227 in California in 1998 (i.e., all students must be taught in English); proposition 203 in Arizona in 2000 (i.e., grades 2-12 must be tested yearly to monitor their progress in academic subjects and in learning English); No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001; and many other “English Only” movements in the 1990s. This promise to address the achievement gap has been especially persuasive to concerned parents and community stakeholders, and it has drawn their attention easily. However, it could be harmful to see TWI as the “golden ticket” to fix the achievement gap as DLI programs are often more accessible for White middle-class students who also gain to benefit from these bilingual programs, thereby (inadvertently) further widening the gap.

Bilingualism for all? Double standards and deficit ideologies of bilingualism

In spite of its purported benefits, it is important for us to note that DLI programs have also been criticized by scholars who maintain that a double standard exists between White bilingualism and racialized bilingualism (e.g., Flores & Rosa, 2015; Flores et al., 2021; García, 2009, 2020). African American students, for instance, have been shown to be systematically excluded or discouraged from such school programs because of deficit ideologies that suggest they are not capable of handling dual language education (Palmer, 2010). Other racially-minoritized students, such as Latinx children, have been commonly described as not fully proficient in either of their languages, thus leading to presumed cognitive deficiencies and an overall deficit model of bilingualism in DLI. 

García (2009, 2020) describes such deficit models of bilingualism as resulting from comparisons to monolingual ideologies, which position monolingualism as the norm and bilingualism as double monolingualism. As such, when monolingual White middle-class students learn another language in DLI programs, their additive bilingualism is validated. However, the dynamic bilingualism that is often characteristic of bilingual communities – whose language practices often involve a mixture of two languages – does not fall neatly within the boundaries of so-called “standard languages.” As such, the bilingualism of minoritized children is often depicted as being incomplete and full of errors, especially in school settings that promote the use of a single, standardized language in certain contexts and settings (e.g., content classes in schools).

In alignment with García, Flores and Rosa (2015) argue that in U.S. school settings and elsewhere this double standard is further exacerbated by racist and white supremacist ideologies that position the particular linguistic and cultural practices of the “white speaking and listening subject” (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 151) – that is, White children and their families, teachers, and communities – as normative and ideal, whereas other practices are often positioned as deviant and needing to be corrected. As Flores and Rosa show, the value of standardized language practices become anchored in what they term raciolinguistic ideologies, which “conflate certain racialized bodies with linguistic deficiency unrelated to any objective linguistic practices” (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 150). In other words, racially-minoritized students are often seen as deficient and linguistically deviant even when engaging in the same practices that would be seen as normative or even exemplary when produced by privileged White students (e.g., strategically using different languages for different social settings, purposes, and intended audiences). 

In addition to the double standard to bilingualism that exists between White and racially-minoritized students, DLI programs have also been criticized for their role in racial stratification in U.S. education and local community gentrification. Early on, Valdés (1997) cautioned that “educators need to carefully examine who the main beneficiaries of these language ‘resources’ [i.e., DLI programs] will be” (p. 419), as power imbalances between community members and stakeholders may lead programs to prioritize the needs of affluent White children over the needs of low-income, racially-minoritized children in terms of teaching, curriculum development, and student enrollment/recruitment. She also warned that such programs may disproportionately enrich the educational experiences and economic potential of affluent White children, while doing little to enrich or improve the lives of linguistic minority (e.g., Latinx) children. In light of current Minnesota Achievement and Integration plans, we believe it is extremely important to heed this warning as school districts attempt to address racial, ethnic, and class segregation by integrating schools.

Keys to maintaining integration in an immersion setting

Immersion continues to weather storms and celebrate victories as DLI programs navigate social and political tensions in the United States. While the 1998 California Proposition 227 “effectively eliminated bilingual education for English-learning students” (Williams, 2017, para. 15), integration law across many states find immersion to be fertile ground for the “integration of students from different racial and linguistic backgrounds” (Uzzell & Ayscue, 2021, p. 24), but at what cost? As Anderson (2005) describes, laws centered on desegregation and integration often serve to “[assert] definitional or constitutional equality, while sidestepping the institutional mechanisms of educational inequality, [destroying] the name (segregation) while leaving the game (racial subordination) intact” (p. 31). Immersion finds itself in a tricky predicament: it is a proven approach to education that reduces the impact of systemic racism and oppression by sustaining teaching and learning spaces where diverse students measurably overcome the achievement and opportunity gaps found in English-only programs. However, when demographics begin to show higher numbers of students of color demonstrating positive academic achievement, the programs become more and more appealing to White families who are able to easily displace students of color and/or economically disadvantaged students. 

These tensions around race and language in education are increasingly the focus of popular discourse on public education and show up frequently in news coverage and on social media. The previously mentioned Atlantic article by Williams (2017) describes how “[m]ultilingualism is hot, especially in gentrifying urban areas with shifting populations… [and] school districts are using dual-immersion programs to encourage new residents to send their children to schools in their own zip codes and to provide equitable educational opportunities for all kids” (para. 25). Williams goes on to uncover the problem, however, that “in some places, this ultimately results in a system in which English-dominant students get access to Spanish-English dual immersion programs, while native Spanish-speaking students are consigned to English-only programs” (Williams, 2017, para. 30). While at first immersion can serve to integrate, Scanlan and Palmer (2009) point out that more needs to be done: “without directly addressing issues of race and class and explicitly serving children along all lines of diversity preset in a community, [DLI programs] may end up serving the needs of those whose sense of entitlement most calls out to be served” (p. 412).

It is not to say that there is no way out of the segregation dilemma that immersion is facing: when reflecting on Brown, Anderson (2005) points to the work of Derrick Bell, noting that racially subordinate groups in pursuit of social educational equality should “rely less on judicial decisions and more on grassroots movements, political action, and ideological challenges to the continuing institutional arrangements and underlying cultural norms of racial and educational inequality” (p. 32). That is to say, while both state and federal law play their role in public education, so does local policy, procedure, leadership, and influence from stakeholders. Schools and districts have a plethora of options and interpretations available to them when making decisions about their integration programing, and they can approach their immersion enrollment and administration in a way that stays true to the approach that creates the educational equity inherent to the model. Williams (2017) recommends using a double lottery for enrolling balanced numbers of English- and target-language speakers in two-immersion programs. In St. Paul Public Schools, their 2020-2023 Achievement and Integration Plan pairs a racially identifiable immersion program with another immersion program that was not identified and plans for integrated activities and cultural exchange (ISD 625 St. Paul Public Schools, 2020). This will allow for the integrity of each program, while also establishing a partnership for the schools to learn from and interact with each other. In the 2020-2023 Minneapolis Public Schools Achievement and Integration Plan, the role of immersion programming in integrating schools is called out up front (Minneapolis Public Schools, 2020). Rather than pushing students in or out of specific programs, the district aims to expand the programming to more schools and, therefore, make immersion accessible to more students. 

A foremost internal challenge for immersion has long been tied to “one of the most valuable resources… teachers” (Uzzell & Ayscue, 2021, p. 24). Highly qualified immersion teachers are notoriously in short supply, and with the supply and demand challenges for teachers at the moment, immersion is no exception. As Williams (2017) states, “there simply aren’t enough bilingual teachers to simultaneously meet all ELs’ needs and satisfy growing demand from privileged families” (para. 39) and he goes on to describe a bilingual pre-k class roster of 22 with a waiting list of 675 students. Clearly, the idea of supply and demand is almost inadequate in describing the need for bilingual teachers. In response to the current tensions and needs in the world of immersion education, Uzzell and Ayscue (2021) call for changes to federal language policy to better support and encourage bilingual education, the development of grants that would allow local districts to implement immersion programs for integration purposes, and both funding and guidance for schools to implement equity-centered programs. At the state level, the authors identify the need for additional financial and technical support to implement DLI programs as a tool for integration, access to adequate materials in the PL, and additional compensation to offset the increased workload and better recruit and retain DLI teachers.

Interestingly, the call for immersion teachers has begun to intertwine with the growing field of research on teachers of color as both scholarship and, increasingly, legislation, are calling out the multitude of benefits that educators of color have on student achievement and school integration. This is just another example of the dialogue between the changes that Brown called for and our current pursuit of equitable learning environments for students. Furthermore, it serves as an opportunity to emphasize that it is the racial and linguistic diversity, rather than an imposition of Whiteness, that makes the teaching and learning in an integrated setting (in this case, immersion) a richer and more fruitful experience for all students.

Concluding thoughts and next steps for immersion

There is little doubt that, in spite of the cultural tug-of-war around race and language – whose children have access to which educational benefits, the urgency of global citizenship, and the shifting and settling of the education system after two years of a pandemic – immersion will continue to avail itself to the needs of an increasingly diverse American society. The United States is on a long road of ever-changing demographics and an increasingly multilingual populace, with many schools enrolling students who speak a language other than English at home on a daily basis. After sustaining a predictable demographic for decades or longer, many districts are now finding that their demographics have changed radically in the past few years and will continue to change for the foreseeable future. Immersion is poised as a potential resource for many schools and districts facing resegregation and devastating achievement and opportunity gaps based on race and class. For immersion educators and families who choose immersion, their beliefs about education are frequently in tandem with the idea that “the goal of teaching and learning with youth of color [is] not ultimately to see how closely students could perform White middle-class norms but to explore, honor, extend, and problematize their heritage and community practices” (Paris & Alim, 2014, p. 86). It is our belief that this task is one that immersion programs can (and should) readily take on through the successes and challenges to come. 


  1. Under Minnesota state law, school desegregation/integration programs are guided by Minnesota Administrative Rule 3535, parts 0100 to 0180 (hereafter “the Rule”), and Minnesota Statutes, section 124D.86 (hereafter “the Statute”). The Rule falls under Chapter 3535, Equal Opportunity in Schools, and has a stated purpose that addresses nine areas, the first of which is to “recognize the primary goal of public education is to enable all students to have opportunities to achieve academic success” (Minnesota Administrative Rules, 3535.0100). The purpose of the Rule further seeks to commit Minnesota’s public schools to support ideals of integration, prevent segregation, promote school choice, and provide equitable access to resources with the goal of addressing academic achievement (Minnesota Administrative Rules, 3535.0100). Section 3535.0120 of the Rule requires school districts to collect and submit to the state data regarding the racial composition of each school and grade level. (Mattheis, 2009, p. 19)


Achievement and Integration for Minnesota. Office of the Revisor of Statutes. §124D.861(2022). https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/124D.861 

American Councils for International Education. (2021). 2021 Canvass of dual language and immersion (DLI) programs in US public schools. American Councils Research Center. https://www.americancouncils.org/sites/default/files/documents/pages/2021-10/Canvass%20DLI%20-%20October%202021-2_ac.pdf 

Anderson, J. D. (2005). Still desegregated, still unequal: Lessons from up north. Educational Researcher, 35(1), 30–33. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035001030  

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. (2022). Bibliographies on language immersion education. Regents of the University of Minnesota. https://carla.umn.edu/immersion/bibs/search.php 

Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2002). Reforming education policies for English learners means better schools for all. The State Education Standard, 3(1), 30–36.

Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2017). Validating the power of bilingual schooling: Thirty-two years of large-scale, longitudinal research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190517000034 

Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 

Flores, N., Tseng, A., & Subtirelu, N. (2021). Bilingualism for all or just for the rich and white? Introducing a raciolinguistic perspective to dual language education. In N. Flores, A. Tseng, & N. Subtirelu (Eds.), Bilingualism for all? Raciolinguistic perspectives on dual language education in the United States (pp. 2–18). Multilingual Matters.

Fortune, T., & Jorstad, H. L. (1996). U.S. immersion programs: A national survey. Foreign Language Annals, 29(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb02325.x

García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Wiley-Blackwell.

García, O. (2020). The education of Latinx bilingual children in times of isolation: Unlearning and relearning. MinneTESOL Journal, 36(1). Retrievable from https://minnetesoljournal.org/ 

Gómez, L., Freeman, D., & Freeman, Y. (2005). Dual language education: A promising 50–50 model. Bilingual Research Journal, 29(1), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2005.10162828  

Howard E. R., Sugarman J., Christian D. (2003). Trends in two-way immersion education: A review of the research. Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.

ISD 625 St. Paul Public Schools. (2020, May 24). Achievement and integration plan: July 1, 2020 to June 20, 2023. St. Paul Public Schools. https://www.spps.org/page/29231 

Kim, Y. K., Hutchison, L. A., & Winsler, A. (2015). Bilingual education in the United States: An historical overview and examination of two-way immersion. Educational Review, 67(2), 236–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.865593 

Krueger, D. (2008). Immersion education, ethnicity, and income: Immersion students in urban districts. The ACIE Newsletter, 12(1). Accessed 5 October, 2022 at https://carla.umn.edu/immersion/acie/vol12/no1/nov_2008_research_report.html

Lindholm-Leary, K. J. (2001). Dual language education. Multilingual Matters.

Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Mattheis, A. H. (2009). School integration in Twin Cities metro area interdistrict collaboratives: Implementation and interpretation of the Minnesota State desegregation/integration rule [unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. https://hdl.handle.net/11299/60107 

Mayo, J. B. (2007). Quiet warriors: Black teachers’ memories of integration in two Virginia localities. Multicultural Perspectives, 9(2), 17–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15210960701386251

Minneapolis Public Schools. (2020). Achievement and integration plan: July 1, 2020 to June 20, 2023. Minneapolis Public Schools. https://equity.mpls.k12.mn.us/equity_and_integration

Palmer, D. (2010). Race, power, and equity in a multiethnic urban elementary school with a dual-language “strand” program. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41(1), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2010.01069.x 

Paris, D., & Alim, H. (2014) What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77 

Scanlan, M., & Palmer, D. (2009). Race, power, and (in)equality within two-way immersion settings. The Urban Review, 41(5), 391-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0111-0 

Tedick, D., & Lyster, R. (2020). Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge.

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition.

Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence, University of California-Santa Cruz.

Uzzell, E. M., & Ayscue, J. B. (2021). Racial integration through two-way dual language immersion: A case study. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29(48), 3-35. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5949

Valdés, G. (1997) Dual-language immersion programs: A cautionary note concerning the education of language-minority students. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 391–429. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.3.n5q175qp86120948 

Williams, C. (2017, December 28). The intrusion of White families into bilingual schools. The Atlantic. Accessed 12 October 12, 2022 at https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/12/the-middle-class-takeover-of-bilingual-schools/549278/ 



Croix Clayton

Translingual content-integrated literature curricula can provide ESL/EFL learners with acquisitional, metalinguistic, and affective benefits. Haiku, the compact Japanese verse form, may be an ideal choice of literary genre to integrate in this way, due to its clarity and simplicity.
Keywords: Literature, Translanguaging, Haiku, SLA, Literacy

Throughout history, scholars have argued for the educational value of literature. To the philosopher Kongzi (孔子), better known in the West as Confucius, poetry was morally edifying and taught a sense of social duty. Some 25 centuries later, Canadian literary theorist Northrup Frye proposed that literature’s subjectivity pushes learners to develop critical and creative habits of mind (Frye, 1964). English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) educators have valued literature as authentic source material and noted how its emotional themes inspire student participation and investment (Daskalovska & Dimova, 2012). However, in my experience, many instructors avoid using literature for fear of not being qualified, or of students not being advanced enough to handle the ‘literary’ register.

This paper will make a case for pedagogic translingualism—which is the limited introduction of  students’ first language (L1) into the second language (L2) classroom—as a tool to put literary texts within the reach of students at any level of English competence. Furthermore, I will argue that the use of haiku, the traditional Japanese verse form, amplifies this advantage because it delivers all the affective power of sophisticated literature, but with brevity and directness of expression that make it an ideal entry-point, not just for students with limited English vocabulary, but also for ESL teachers who are curious about literature and want to experiment with using it in their classrooms.

What is pedagogic translingualism?

Perhaps as a consequence of both rapid globalization and the demographic growth of multiethnic polities in the West (Duarte, 2020), language education in recent decades has become strongly concerned with multilingualism (May, 2014), a phenomenon which has been described under a multitude of names: bilingualism, multilingualism, translingualism, translanguaging, code-switching, code-mixing, etc. For our purposes, translingualism will do.

Translingual research has examined a variety of phenomena, from multilingual interlocutors’ apparently natural tendency to mix their codes freely during conversation, to policy-driven sociolinguistic questions about language rights in education, to issues of how L1 ability and use might influence L2 acquisition and learning (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009). It is the latter area which is relevant here. Building on Cummins’ (1979) interdependence hypothesis, which suggests that greater mastery of the L1 may facilitate subsequent mastery of the L2, especially in the realm of literacy, pedagogic translingualism proposes that space be set aside within the L2 classroom for the use of student L1 (Cook, 2010; MacSwan, 2020).

Benefits of pedagogic translingualism

Pedagogic translingualism is said to underwrite efficient vocabulary acquisition (Lee & Macaro, 2013), help develop metalinguistic awareness (de la Campa & Nassaji, 2009), and increase affective investment in the classroom (Ellwood, 2008). This final effect may originate in a sense of validation some learners report feeling when their ethnolinguistic identity is recognized (Huang, 2010). Furthermore, vocabulary acquisition and metalinguistic awareness are of great relevance to students with low literacy levels in their L1, who are more likely than their peers to face difficulty developing these features of L2 literacy (Bigelow & Tarone, 2004). As such, ESL programs interested in building English literacy among L1 pre-literate learners may have particular reason to explore pedagogic translingualism.

Literature for language teaching

The reasons for incorporating literature into an ESL syllabus are not always obvious. Scholars have argued that pragmatic pedagogic concerns have “marginalized” literature (Deng, 2006, p. 62), and that fashions in the humanities have elevated sociocultural commentary at the expense of artistic expression (Abbs, 1994). In the words of Yin Qiping and Chen Shubo of China’s storied Zhejiang University, literature is often dismissed as a “…soft option, an indulgence or mere trimming to decorate the hard center of the market-oriented syllabus,” a mistake they call “corrosive” to English teaching in China, the West, and beyond (Yin & Chen, 2002, p. 318).

Benefits of literature for language teaching

ESL learners may derive several advantages from the teaching of literature; it constitutes a valuable resource of authentic L2 material, provides an efficient tool for constructing linguistic competence, and fosters student participation through affective engagement.

First, literary texts are authentic, which is to say texts produced for communicative purposes within a given speech community are said to be preferable to texts merely produced for the purpose of language teaching, as they may provide a more accurate model for cultural and linguistic learning (Aladini & Farahbod, 2020). Next, evidence for literature’s utility in developing student linguistic competence has been attested to in domains of fluency and accuracy (Babaee & Yahya, 2014), in all four of the ‘macro’ skills of reading, writing, speaking, and listening (Shazu, 2014), and at various levels of linguistic awareness: lexical, syntactic, discoursal, and metalinguistic (Bibby & McIlroy, 2013). Third, literature can inspire student investment and participation. Simply put, many learners find poetry and storytelling more affectively engaging than exclusively linguistic instruction (Mason & Krashen, 2004; Vural, 2013). One study found the incorporation of English poetry in an ESL course led 72% of learners to report an increased sense of their own expressiveness in English, and 83% to report sensations of joy and freedom associated with the poetry activity (Liao, 2018).

Haiku for ESL classes

If literary texts generally have value for ESL classrooms, then haiku—the famous miniaturized Japanese verse form—has, I will argue, a particular use for teachers who are new to using literature in language teaching, and also for low/intermediate ESL students (especially those with reading struggles). In both cases, it is the clarity and brevity of haiku that makes it ideal. According to Atsushi Iida, haiku offers learners of all backgrounds “opportunities to develop their language proficiency while giving them chances for self-discovery” (2010, p. 61). The pedagogic utility of haiku stems in part from how its minimal form incentivizes direct expression. While many students (and, sadly, teachers) mistakenly believe that poetry requires a sophisticated command of obscure vocabulary (Liao, 2018), haiku’s simplicity makes it useful even for students with beginner-level English skills. A haiku can be read in a matter of seconds, and its pithy nature virtually guarantees that students will not get lost searching for the author’s meaning—a fear that may prevent English instructors from wading into the sometimes-cloudy waters of literature. In sum, haiku are so brief, so concentrated (often a mere seventeen syllables in Japanese) that they allow even very low proficiency learners to experience the advantages of literature in ESL.

From sandwiches to the stars: A curricular guide

The following is a rough guide to designing a content-integrated translingual ESL unit using haiku poetry. It takes advantage of literature’s capacity to inspire student affective investment, haiku’s potential to ease cognitive burdens on both low-literacy students and teachers who are new to literature, and the affective and vocabulary-building benefits of pedagogic translingualism. Furthermore, haiku also presents teachers with an opportunity to build multicultural learning into the ESL classroom. The unprecedented global popularity that Japanese animated films have achieved in recent years (Garcia, 2013) may increase student interest in haiku coursework even beyond the bonus translingualism and the arts already impart.

Finding the perfect haiku 

Curious ESL instructors are invited to begin designing their translingual literature lesson by searching for haiku at the library or on the internet. Good poetry produces kinesthetic reactions; you’ll know you’ve found gold when you smile, feel goosebumps, or choke up a little. One can hardly miss, however, with the following poets, all of whom can be found in Haiku: An Anthology of Japanese Poets (Addiss et al., 2009). Kobayashi Issa (1763–1828) describes human emotional and psychological states with pathos and humor.

All the time I pray to Buddha
I keep on
     killing mosquitoes

Masaoka Shiki (1867–1902) wrote in a modern style that is sharply observational and realistic.

Pruning a rose
sound of scissors
on a bright May day

Matsuo Basho (1644-1694) shows the natural world in sublime detail, as in the following verse, which is very famous in Japan:

A day of quiet gladness,—
     Mount Fuji is veiled
In misty rain

These are merely a few of the most famous haiku writers, as a cursory search will reveal.

Multilingual sandwiches

Once you’ve identified a few works of haiku, begin considering your assessment and activities. Celic and Seltzer’s (2011) Translanguaging: A CUNY-NSIEB Guide for Educators provides numerous suggestions for creating unit-level translingual assessments and activities. For example, the Multilingual Collaborative Work: Reading Groups heading (p. 68), advises the ‘Read in English & Discuss in Any Language’ strategy. In this approach, students are given an English text to examine and work in small groups to answer comprehension questions and discuss the meaning of the text using English, their L1, or mixed code. In short, give your learners English materials and questions to discuss, but allow the discussion itself to drift into multiple languages, if the students find it useful. After the students have checked their understanding with one another, and brainstormed in their language of choice, they must produce output in English. Starting with English input and ending with English output provides ample opportunity for target language practice, but the L1-friendly stage in the middle allows students to check comprehension, be certain everyone understands the goal of the activity, and take advantage of the more sophisticated vocabulary and syntax for abstract thought (especially relevant for arts curricula) which they likely possess in their home language (Butzkamm & Caldwell, 2009). This staple of translingual coursework has been called the ‘sandwich activity,’ because the L1, once strictly banned from ESL, has found a place in the center of the process, neatly pressed between L2 input and L2 output (Cook, 2010).

The star diagram

But what exactly about the haiku will students discuss? One useful device for answering this question is Collie and Slater’s ‘star diagram’ (1990, p. 101).

Draw a large five-pointed star on a sheet of blank paper, then label the points of the star with conceptual or sensory touchstones, such as “(what do you) see and hear,” “(what do you) smell, taste and feel,” “what motion/kinesthetics take place,” “what emotions do you feel,” and “what do you think poet is trying to say?” Students may fill the page by writing their impressions (again, in their L1, English, or mixed code), or simply use the ‘points of the star’ to trigger oral responses in their small groups. Other options, especially when reading authentic Japanese haiku, include categories like “the natural world,” “truths about the human experience,” and “references to the seasons,” all of which feature prominently in haiku poetics. You can, of course, choose your own concepts for the five points of the star.

Writing their own haiku

A writing or speaking class may even go further, asking students to compose their own haiku in response to the readings. Since Japanese haiku have strict formal rules that may be less relevant in English (17 syllables broken into lines of five, seven, and five, for example), teachers may instead choose to assign their students what the novelist and poet Jack Kerouac defined as ‘Western haiku’: short poems that “say a lot in three lines” (Weinreich, 2003, p. x).

Kerouac, perhaps best known as a popularizer of the ‘Beat Generation,’ elaborated on Western haiku, suggesting they ought to be “airy and graceful” and also “very simple and free of any poetic trickery” (Weinreich, 2003, p. x). Nearly a century earlier, Masaoka Shiki had also emphasized simplicity, offering this advice to young haiku poets: “Take your materials from what is around you—if you see a dandelion, write about it; if it’s misty, write about the mist. The materials for poetry are all around you in profusion” (Trumbull, 2016, p. 101). ESL instructors interested in helping students experiment with creative writing through the haiku form could do worse than to follow Shiki and Kerouac’s guidelines.


The title of this article is one of Kerouac’s poems; it demonstrates the attention to detail, simplicity, and instantaneity of haiku at its best, an art form which encourages us to look closely at the natural world and to find personal significance in it, as does Prince Otsu in his famous meditation on impermanence, written shortly before his death (Addiss et al., 2009):

Today, catching sight of the mallards
crying over Lake Iware;
must I, too, vanish from this world?

Personal significance is also a major reason for literature’s utility in ESL. Literary curricula utilize authentic materials to foster affective engagement and linguistic competence, while translingual activities like the ‘sandwich’ legitimize learners’ L1, create emotional significance, and provide opportunity for efficient building of vocabulary and metalinguistic awareness. Instructors may try a brief translingual content-integrated haiku activity to get their toes wet in Kerouac’s birdbath, while those with more experience using the arts in ESL may prefer to design a full unit, leaping fully, like summer swimmers, into Prince Otsu’s vast and mallard-flown Lake Iware, so to speak. Either way, students and instructors both have much to gain from diving deeply into the translingual uses of literature. 

More materials can be found at the following sites: 



Abbs, P. (1994). The educational imperative. Falmer Press.

Addiss, S., Yamamoto, F., & Yamamoto, A. (2009). Haiku: An anthology of Japanese poems. Shambhala.

Aladini, F., & Farahbod, F. (2020). Using a unique and long forgotten authentic material in the ESL classroom: Poetry. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(1), 83-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1001.12 

Babaee, R., & Yahya, W.R.B.W. (2014). Significance of literature in foreign language teaching. International Education Studies, 7(4), 80-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n4p80 

Bibby, S., & McIlroy, T. (2013). Literature in language teaching: What, why, and how. The Language Teacher, 37(5), 19-21. Retrievable from https://jalt-publications.org/ 

Bigelow, M., & Tarone, E. (2004). The role of literacy level in second language acquisition: Doesn’t who we study determine what we know? TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 689-700. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588285 

Butzkamm, W., & Caldwell, J. (2009). The bilingual reform: A paradigm shift in foreign language teaching. Narr Studienbucher.

Celic, C., & Seltzer, K. (2011). Translanguaging: A CUNY-NYSIEB guide for educators. City of New York University Press.

Collie, J., & Slater S. (1990). Literature in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Cook, G. (2010). Translation in language teaching. Oxford University Press.

Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the education of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222-251. https://doi.org/10.2307/1169960 

Daskalovska, N., & Dimova, V. (2012). Why should literature be used in the language classroom? Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1182-1186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.271   

de la Campa, J., & Nassaji, H. (2009). The amount, purpose, and reason for using L1 in L2 classrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 42(4), 742-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01052.x 

Deng, T.Z. (2006). Ecocritical approach to English literature in a Chinese context. CELEA Journal, 29(6), 62-68.

Duarte, J. (2020). Translanguaging in the context of mainstream multilingual education. International Journal of Multilingualism, 17(2), 232-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1512607 

Ellwood, C. (2008). Questions of classroom identity: What can be learned from codeswitching in classroom peer group talk? The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 538-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00786.x 

Frye, N. (1964). The educated imagination. Indiana University Press.

Garcia, J. (2013). The rise in popularity of Japanese culture with American youth: Causes of the “cool Japan” phenomenon. Japan Studies Review, 17, 121-140.

Iida, A. (2010). Implications for teaching haiku in ESL and EFL contexts. The Language Teacher, 34(3). Retrievable from https://jalt-publications.org/ 

Lee, J.H., & Macaro, E. (2013). Investigating age in the use of L1 or English-only instruction: Vocabulary acquisition by EFL learners. The Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 887-901. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12044.x 

Liao, F.Y. (2018). Prospective EFL teachers’ perceptions towards writing poetry in a second language: Difficulty, value, emotion, and attitude. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.460583 

MacSwan, J. (2020). Translanguage, language ontology, and civil rights. World Englishes, 39(2), 321-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12464 

Mason B., & Krashen, S. (2004). Is form-focused vocabulary instruction worthwhile? RELC Journal, 35(2), 179-185. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820403500206 

May, S. (Ed.). (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education. Routledge.

Shazu, R. I. (2014). Use of literature in language teaching and learning: A critical assessment. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(7), 29-35.

Trumbull, C. (2016). Masaoka Shiki and the origins of shasei. Juxtapositions, 2(1), 87-122.

Vural, H. (2013). Use of literature to enhance motivation in ELT classes. Melvana International Journal of Education, 3(4), 15-23.

Weinreich, R. (Ed.). (2003). Jack Kerouac: Book of haikus. Penguin.

Yin, Q., & Chen, S. (2002). Teaching English literature in China: Importance, problems, and countermeasures. World Englishes, 21(2), 317-324. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00251 



Michelle Benegas & Suzanne Gilchrist McCurdy

Welcome to MinneTESOL Journal volume 38, issue 1! We are happy to share a collection of articles that highlight the ingenuity of English language practitioner-scholars from a variety of contexts.

Jeanne Beck and Sebnem Kurt describe a teacher’s journey of creating and implementing a new unit for a middle school English learner and technology curriculum in “Project-Based Language Learning with 3D Printers: Integrating Technology, Language Form/Function, and Assessment into a Middle School CAD Unit.” Beck and Kurt share their perspectives and takeaways from the project as well as easily accessible materials for implementing such a project in readers’ own classroom.

In another report straight from the classroom, Ami Christensen and Kaishan Kong share an innovative project borne from COVID restrictions at their university in “Flipgrid Classroom Conversations: International Virtual Pen Pal Exchange.” The authors detail their process and their learners’ experiences using Flipgrid as a tool to gain and share cultural knowledge and experiences while engaging in authentic language tasks.

Crossing boundaries in “Does Translanguaging Work in Adult ESL?” Alayna Klco argues that pedagogical translation, a translanguaging approach developed for K-12 classrooms, can be adapted for use in adult education. Klco delineates pedagogical translation and the work of Project TRANSLATE and describes modifications that may be used in the adult education context.

Please read, enjoy, and share the research and practice ideas in this issue of MinneTESOL Journal! Stay connected to our MinneTESOL Journal community by following the journal on Facebook and on Twitter (@MnTESOLjournal).



Jeanne Beck & Sebnem Kurt

Meaningfully integrating project-based learning, language learning, and technology into the classroom provides 21st century skills for the real world. This article describes how one middle school teacher integrated project-based learning, technology, form/function instruction, and formative assessment into a 3D printing unit.
Keywords: 3D printing, Project-based learning, assessment, Project-based language learning, middle school, curriculum design, technology


Project-Based Learning (PBL) is a student-centered approach to teaching and learning that can seamlessly blend language learning and technology integration (Beckett & Slater, 2020). With foundations in Dewey’s experiential learning philosophy (1916) and Kilpatrick’s project method (1918), PBL has become a powerful movement in education, benefiting classrooms through student engagement, collaboration, critical thinking, and problem solving, among other positive effects (Buck Institute for Education, 2022). Infusing PBL with language learning, sometimes referred to as Project-Based Language Learning (PBLL), this approach has paved the way for meaningful second and foreign language learning, documented through research, in countries all around the world (Beckett et al., 2020). Combining relevant apps and web-based tools, PB(L)L projects can powerfully shape learning experiences to bring about authentic learning for students (Alharthi et al., 2021).

Beckett and Slater, well-known PBL/PBLL scholars, argue that projects can engage students in deeper learning with and through technology for learning language, content, and other relevant skills (Beckett & Slater, 2017). They have also correctly stated that PBL with intentional technology integration, language form/function instruction, and assessment has also been limited in the PBL research (Beckett & Slater, 2020; Beck et al., 2021). To help fill this gap, this paper describes a 3D printing PB(L)L unit designed for both native and non-native English speaking middle school students in a technology course at a rural school, which was implemented from 2017-2019. It is hoped that this paper not only highlights the potential that creative technology-infused projects can have on learning, but also inspires other teachers to write about the amazing work that they are doing or have done in their classrooms. 

Literature Review

3D Printing for Authentic Learning

3D printing has come onto the education scene within the last two decades as a high-tech tool for providing engaging STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) projects, real world skills, teamwork, experimentation, and problem-solving skills (Lacey, 2010). Intrinsically linked with PBL, multiple affordances of 3D printing in educational contexts have been documented through exciting projects including: a project where kindergarten and first graders designed new playground equipment using 3D printing in the USA (Wendt & Wendt, 2015), an interdisciplinary 3D printing program with middle school students in South Korea (Shim & Lee, 2019), and in facilitating a junior/senior high school service-learning project where students 3D printed hands and arms for amputees through E-NABLE (Enabling the Future, 2022; Suchow, 2016). These exemplary studies show that 3D printing PBL is possible at all grade levels and can integrate meaningful content for students.

In addition to 3D printing PBL research involving students, several 3D printing-related studies have involved pre- and in-service teachers. In a survey of teachers concerning their interest in learning about augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and 3D printing, Trust et al. (2021) found that most of the teachers, who were enrolled in a MOOC (Massive Open Online Course), described wanting to learn how to use and troubleshoot the devices and fit these tools within their teaching pedagogy. Less than one quarter of the teachers, however, indicated interest in how to integrate these devices within their curriculum (Trust et al., 2021). Mixed results concerning 3D printing curricular integration were similarly found with middle school history teachers (Maloy et al., 2017). Teachers found it difficult to integrate 3D printing into their curriculum, and both teachers and students initially found it difficult to use the Computer-Aided Design (CAD) program Tinkercad. After implementing 3D printing projects in their classes, however, their students found the projects fulfilling and some teachers found value in the projects and in altering the “teacher-as-expert/student-as-novice relationship” (Maloy et al., 2017, p. 244). 

In terms of pre-service studies, Novak and Wisdom (2018) highlight a 3D printing project for elementary pre-service teachers in science education where the projects significantly reduced the teachers’ anxiety about teaching science and improved their science interest and perceived competency in K-3 science standards. Moreover, Verner and Merksamer (2015) present a program in which they used the create-design-implement-operate (CDIO) approach to teach pre-service technology teachers and other science and engineering majors about teaching design and manufacturing. These studies with pre-service teachers suggest that future in-service teachers may enter schools with more 3D printing readiness.

3D Printing PBLL for Second and Foreign Language Learning

While less research has been done on 3D printing PBLL in second and foreign language contexts, researchers at the college level have demonstrated its effectiveness. 3D printing PBLL can be seen in a course for international second language graduate students in Japan (Roy, 2017), in an introductory college German class in the USA (Emm & Hawkins, 2020), and in a 3rd year college Russian course in the USA (Enkin et al., 2021). In a research study surrounding a 3D printing course at a 7th-12th grade summer STEM camp, some participants hailed from Italy and the American participants were of diverse ethnic backgrounds, suggesting that language learners might have been involved in the study (Kwon, 2017). Since L1s were not collected, however, second/foreign language learning implications for language learners were not explored. Similar to how the first author (Beck) had only presented on 3D printing in her middle school English language (EL) and technology classroom at conferences and within professional learning communities (i.e., Beck, 2018, 2019), it is very possible that innovative 3D printing work is being done in language classrooms, however, this information is not reaching research communities.

Integrating 3D Printing into the Middle School EL and Technology Curriculum

With the many benefits espoused by PBL research, the first author’s goal was to bring these learning experiences to her classroom. As a half time EL/half time technology teacher at a rural Missouri middle school from 2017-2019, she had the unique opportunity to design the school’s new technology curriculum and develop content for the EL classes. The middle school, a Title I school with approximately 10% ELs, had recently gone 1:1 with Chromebooks and was aiming to expand their students’ 21st century skills. Equipped with a new 3D printer, the teacher was encouraged by administrators to create 3D printing projects for the diverse student body. Designing a CAD and 3D printing unit with both nonnative ELs and native English speaking students in mind, the unit introduced activities that taught or reinforced language learning and were formatively assessed in creative ways.

3D Printing Unit Overview

The 3D printing unit was designed as a two-week unit for the middle school technology course. Created as a service-learning unit, the unit began with the goal of making 3D printed objects to help others. The first part of the unit introduced relevant vocabulary and the real world applications of 3D printers, as well as provided a refresher on the metric system. To aid in CAD design, TinkerCAD was used in the classroom, including its tutorials as well as guided CAD design practice activities structured by the teacher. At the same time, a survey was sent to teachers and school staff in the district to ask what classroom materials or objects they could use for their classrooms or workspaces that could be 3D printed. Through the Google Form, staff members would select an object they could use for their classroom (e.g., pencil holder, name plate, Post-It Note holder, magnet, keychain), it’s shape (e.g., rectangular, oval, hexagonal), color, and if they would like any specific text or images on their object. 

Constraining the project to include requests from teachers/staff members was born out of necessity. In the first iteration of this project no such restrictions were made, which resulted in a few projects that were not quite useful or were unprintable (at least, with the teacher’s level of 3D printing knowledge). Given the amount of time it takes to print a 3D object and how much students want to see their design printed, implementing a student-created Google form in the second iteration of the project onward that narrowed the scope of what students could design proved to be a win-win. While this may seem limiting, students still had many design choices to make as a team. For instance, a teacher might request a blue hexagonal-shaped pencil holder with their name and school logo on it; for this, students would need to decide what dimensions to make the pencil holder, how thick or thin to make the base or the walls of the pencil holder, which font to make the text, where to effectively place the text and school logo, which school logo to use, whether to embed the text/logo so that it looked etched into the surface or have it protrude out, and if there were any value-added design elements the group wanted to add (e.g., adding patterns or borders to the edges of the object).

During the second week, the survey results from the school staff were analyzed and teams of 2-3 were created and drew a conceptual design of what they would be making, spending several days working on the design together. At the end of the two weeks, the 3D designs were submitted to the teacher and the focus shifted to writing a short reflection paper about the project. The reflection writing activity was completed in Google Drawings, where a screenshot of the completed CAD design could be embedded. The reflections and completed 3D prints were placed on display in the middle school trophy cabinets before being given to the school staff members who requested them. In total, this unit was delivered 16 times by the teacher over the course of the two years at the middle school building.

Integrating Form/Function and Assessment

Integrating academic English and the language of technology was important in designing the PBL unit. Specific instruction on language form and function has been described as lacking in PBL research, which can be seen as a missed opportunity for learners (Beckett & Slater, 2020). While it might seem incompatible with a PBL activity at first glance, intentionally integrating form and function can be done in multiple parts of the unit in less intrusive ways through activities that introduce students to vocabulary and grammar (form) and what can be done with language (function), e.g., requesting information, describing processes, or drawing conclusions.

While designing the 3D printing unit, focus was placed on introducing and practicing the new vocabulary and concepts related to 3D printing in both speaking and writing. New words and phrases including filament, CAD program, and SVG image would need to be introduced, modeled and practiced. Moreover, EL students can particularly need additional support with prepositional phrases and direction-related words, for example, telling a classmate when designing a keychain to, “Put the text on top of the rectangular shape” or “Cut a hole out of the rectangle using a cylindrical shape.”

To practice CAD and 3D printer-related language, the teacher developed a 3D printing hyperdoc, an interactive worksheet with links to different websites and videos related to 3D printing. By reading the text, looking at images, and watching short videos online, new words and concepts were introduced and reinforced organically. The hyperdoc activity was modeled by the teacher and completed with a shoulder partner, in which ELs and non-ELs could be grouped together to support each other while completing the activity. As such, the hyperdoc was a simple yet useful formative assessment in the early stages of the unit.

New concepts were also reinforced with a short video on 3D printers that used the same new language and other worksheets. Before watching the video, students were asked to pay attention to specific parts of the video, and then had time to think-pair-share after the video before discussing the answers as a whole class. Additionally, a worksheet on measuring in centimeters and millimeters (Super Teacher Worksheets, 2022) was adopted for practicing the metric system, helping reinforce mathematical principles useful in CAD. The worksheet, the only physical paper used in the entire 9-week course, helped students review centimeter and millimeter measurement by using rulers and measuring objects in the classroom.

Within the 3D design process itself, language form and function were reinforced through focus on the designs that teams were tasked with making as well as the survey that they sent to the teachers. As survey responses were of varying degrees of specificity and clarity, they needed to be read, comprehended, and interpreted so that the staff member’s wishes were honored. Moreover, many of the staff members requested objects with text on them, such as the staff member’s name or famous teacher quotes. While English errors are a part of learning for both native and non-native speakers, it was important that any errors be corrected before printing as reprinting a 3D print would cost multiple hours and waste materials.

The 3D prints themselves were assessed by the teacher in terms of the object’s printability, feasibility of being printed in a timely and resource-friendly manner, and the extent to which students honored the requests of the teachers/staff who requested the print. The rubric categories were: theme (whether the students took the request seriously and created a purposeful object), color scheme (whether students used only 1-3 colors and only the filament colors that were currently available), size (limited to 8cm in height, 2-3mm thickness to reduce print time), detail (adding text, textures, images, etc.), and teamwork. Issues such as text floating in space were accounted for in the “theme” category as these errors, which were routinely checked for during the project-making process, would result in 3D printing errors.

Finally, reflective writing is an important aspect of project work, as the writer can be led to personal discovery and deeper meaning (Rocha, 2006). To integrate technology into the writing process and increase its accessibility, the teacher created a graphic organizer in Google Drawings with four quadrants with questions to answer, plus a space to add a screenshot of the 3D design. The rubric evaluated the amount of information shared, the quality of information shared, and minimal English errors. Displaying the reflection writing next to the 3D prints in the trophy case at school provided students, staff, and visitors a glimpse into the design process.

As a result, these reflections and 3D prints not only provided an assessment for technology-infused PB(L)L (Chen & Hirsch, 2020), but showed evidence of acquisition of technology-related vocabulary and concepts. The prints and write-ups also aided the teams in practicing how to discuss the design process with the 3D print recipients. As a teacher, seeing the students give the printed object to the recipient and explain how they designed it was the most rewarding part of the experience, and the staff and students seemed to enjoy it a lot too.


Authentic technology-infused PB(L)L units can meaningfully combine language, content, and 21st century skills, which can be measured consistently through formative assessment. After running the unit several times, by popular demand, the teacher expanded to create a specific 3D printing PBL unit for English learners who had taken the technology course and wanted to improve their skills further, as well as a before school mini-3D printing course for students who could not enroll in the technology course due to scheduling conflicts. Combined with community coverage from the local newspaper and school awards given for best in 3D design, these units had a great impact on the school, shining a light on the affordances of technology and exciting innovations and careers in STEM.


Alharthi, A., Beck, J., Bordbarjavidi, F., Gale, J., Garib, A., Guskaroska, A., Kurt, S., Lestari, F., & Zawadzki, Z. (2021). Effective applications and web-based tools for increasing student engagement in project-based language learning. MIDTESOL Journal, 4. https://midtesol.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/5-Effective-Apps-and-Web-based-Tools-for-PBLL-V2.pdf 

Beck, J. (2018, Sept.). 3D Printing and designing in the ESL classroom [conference presentation]. MIDTESOL 2018, Kansas City, MO, USA.

Beck, J. (2019, Mar.). Embedding STEM in the ESL classroom through 3D design and printing in Tinkercad [conference presentation]. TESOL International Convention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Beck, J., Beckett, G. H., Bordbarjavidi, F., Garib, A., Guskaroska, A., Sollier, N., Yang, J. & Zawadzki, Z. (2021, Aug.). Maximizing technology use in project based learning: Looking back and moving forward [conference presentation]. EUROCALL 2021. 

Beckett, G. H., & Slater, T. (2017, Mar.). A synthesis of project-based language learning: Research-based teaching ideas [conference presentation]. TESOL International Convention, Seattle, WA, USA.

Beckett, G. H., & Slater, T. (Eds.) (2020). Global perspectives on project-based language learning, teaching, and assessment: Key approaches, technology tools, and frameworks. Routledge.

Beckett, G. H., Beck, J., Chen, M., & Guhin, J. (2020, Oct.). Empowerment with project-based language teaching and research [conference presentation]. TESOL Arabia 2020, Online. 

Buck Institute for Education. (2022). PBL Works. https://www.pblworks.org/ 

Chen, M., & Hirsch, R. (2020). A research-based framework for assessing technology-infused PBLL. In G. H. Beckett & T. Slater (Eds.), Global perspectives on project-based language learning, teaching, and assessment: Key approaches, technology tools, and frameworks (pp. 224-243). Routledge. 

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/852/852-h/852-h.htm 

Emm, A., & Hawkins, D. (2020). From bauhaus to makerspace: Meaning design and computer-aided design in introductory German. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 53(2), 138-150. https://doi.org/10.1111/tger.12133 

Enabling the Future. (2022). E-NABLE. http://enablingthefuture.org/ 

Enkin, E., Tytarenko, O., & Kirschling, E. (2021). Integrating and assessing the use of “Makespace” in a Russian cultural studies course: Utilizing immersive virtual reality and 3D printing for Project-Based Learning. CALICO Journal, 38(1), 103-127. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.40926 

Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918) The project method: The use of the purposeful act in the education process. Teachers College Record, 19(4), 319-335.

Kwon, H. (2017). Effects of 3D printing and design software on students’ overall performance. Journal of STEM Education, 18(4), 37-42. 

Lacey, G. (2010). 3D printing brings designs to life. Tech Directions, 70(2), 17-19.

Maloy, R., Trust, T., Kommers, S., Malinowski, A., & LaRoche, I. (2017). 3D modeling and printing in history/social studies classrooms: Initial lessons and insights. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 229-249.

Novak, E., & Wisdom, S. (2018). Effects of 3D printing project-based learning on preservice elementary teachers’ science attitudes, science content knowledge, and anxiety about teaching science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 412-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9733-5 

Rocha, A. G. (2006). The reflective essay. In S. L. Pasqarelli (Ed.), Teaching writing genres across the curriculum (pp. 91-103). Information Age Publishing. 

Roy, D. (2017). Developing a Project-Based CALL environment with technical communication in an exploratory 3D printing context. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 75-101. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2017040105 

Shim, H. Y., & Lee, H. E. (2019). Multi-converging educational program for design with the usage of 3D printer: Targeted for middle school students. Archives of Design Research, 32(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.15187/adr.2019. 

Suchow, R. (2016). 3D printing & service learning: Social manufacturing as a vehicle for developing social awareness. Journal of Catholic Education, 20(1), 292-300.

Super teacher worksheets. (2022). Metric measurement worksheets: cm and mm. https://www.superteacherworksheets.com/measure-cm-mm.html 

Trust, T., Woodruff, N., Checrallah, M., & Whalen, J. (2021). Educators’ interests, prior knowledge and questions regarding augmented reality, virtual reality and 3D printing and modeling. TechTrends, 65(4), 548-561.

Verner, I., & Merksamer, A. (2015). Digital design and 3D printing in technology teacher education. Procedia CIRP, 36, 182-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.08.041 

Wendt, S., & Wendt, J. (2015) Printing the playground: Early childhood students design a piece of playground equipment using 3-D printing technology. Science and Children, 52(5), 43-47.



Ami Christensen & Kaishan Kong

Using Flipgrid to facilitate an international virtual pen pal exchange provides learners with opportunities to gain and share cultural knowledge and experiences while engaging in authentic language tasks.
Keywords: Virtual exchange, pen pal, COVID-19, Flipgrid, cross-cultural communication, ELL

How can we connect students outside of the classroom? Pen pal exchange is not a new concept to language teachers and learners. This communicative exchange between learners reflects the essential role of interaction (Long, 1987) and sociocultural aspects (Donato, 1989; Lantolf, 1994) in learning. The development of technology in the 21st century has transformed communication between pen pals from handwritten letters to virtual exchange. International virtual pen pal exchange (IVPPE) allows learners to practice a language with native speakers, share authentic cultural experiences, and explore diverse cultural perspectives (O’Dowd, 2020; O’Rourke, 2007). This paper shares a collaborative virtual pen pal exchange project that engaged two cohorts of university students in intercultural communication on 12 topics via Flipgrid. We describe the project design, share our experiences and student feedback, and offer guidance to language educators with similar pedagogical interests.

Due to the disruption of in-person learning caused by COVID-19, the need for digital tools, such as virtual exchange, became more salient (Guillén et al., 2020). An IVPPE creates a community of learning. Thoughtfully-designed community learning has potential contributions toward students’ increased success, retention, and satisfaction (Greenfield et al., 2013). Adopting intercultural partners enables students in different countries to communicate beyond borders and to develop a feeling of social connectedness in remote settings (Bolliger & Inan, 2012; Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007). IVPPE has been adopted and researched in a wide range of teaching contexts. For instance, Catalano and Barriga (2021) examined their own experiences as teacher educators in the United States and Colombia, respectively, as they planned and facilitated a WhatsApp pen pal exchange meant to develop their teacher candidates’ intercultural competence. In an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) setting, Torres Beltrán and Santana Alarcón (2021) investigated 16 elementary school students’ writing skills development through a pen pal telecollaboration exchange. In Klimova’s (2021) study, the author shared the practice of integrating an IVPPE into online delivery in the Russian language program at the University of Pittsburgh. These studies highlighted that effective virtual exchange between students and their native-speaker partners pushed the learners and teachers out of their comfort zones and nurtured engagement in linguistic, intercultural, and technological learning experiences. Further, the exchanges compelled students to challenge their assumptions and reflect on their own identity and culture. Informed and inspired by the existing scholarship, we were dedicated to creating an interactive, impactful, and intercultural pen pal exchange for our students.

In our context as a university language department, we serve international students who are normally immersed in English language learning on our campus in the Midwestern United States. However, as a result of COVID-19, with some students confined to their home countries and some limited to activity within their dormitories, we began to provide programming virtually. It became clear that our first-year international students were facing a more complex level of uncertainty related to a new culture and different learning styles than those in the past due to COVID restrictions. It was important to offer them high-impact yet low-risk activities to support their transition. We felt the need to identify tools and (re)design lesson plans to foster community and engage students across countries and cultures (TESOL International Organization, 2022, The 6 principles section, no. 4). We created an IVPPE using Flipgrid to encourage “students’ active learning and integrative learning” in both language and culture (Lomicka, 2020, p. 307).

What is Flipgrid?

Flipgrid is an online video discussion platform that allows teachers to create a “grid” to invite students to upload short video responses to “topics” (i.e., prompts in audio, video, or text form) and reply to other students’ responses. Green and Green (2018) argue that Flipgrid supports discussion-based pedagogy and contributes to students’ critical thinking, minority students’ engagement in class, and the classroom culture. Stoszkowski (2018) examined how Flipgrid supported students’ social learning by discussing seven strengths of this app, namely (1) easy access, (2) convenience to record beyond the classroom, (3) encouraging participation, (4) video-based appeal, (5) more efficient formative feedback, (6) tracking engagement, and (7) compatibility with other platforms. Flipgrid has been increasingly adopted by language instructors over the past five years. When in-person learning was disrupted by COVID-19, Flipgrid became even more instrumental in facilitating engagement in virtual settings (Lomicka, 2020).

How did we use Flipgrid to engage students in cross-cultural communication?

What is described here was a collaborative project between two courses at our university. The first course, taught by the first author (Christensen), was part of the Intensive English Program (IEP) and was composed entirely of international students from mainland China. The course focused on developing learning strategies and study skills as well as connecting to the campus and community. The second course, taught by the second author (Kong), was an introduction to Chinese culture called Foreign Culture and Civilization (FLG). While most of the students in FLG were from the United States, there were also a few international students enrolled. Since the IEP students were devoted to improving their English proficiency, and the instructional language in the FLG course was English, the IVPPE was conducted in English.

We intended this collaboration to create an opportunity for both cohorts to meet a peer from another culture and share intercultural experiences on given topics. In addition to cultivating intercultural understanding and empathy, the IEP students also received opportunities to practice the target language, English. Students from each course were randomly assigned several partners and kept the same partners throughout the semester. Students in the FLG course initiated weekly Flipgrid conversations by sharing what they learned from course materials and asking their peers questions. IEP students responded to FLG students’ posts and, as the course progressed, asked their own questions to their FLG partners (see Figure 1). There was no limit to how many responses or comment videos students could post. FLG students wrote weekly reflections and a final reflective paper on the exchange. While this practice was mainly formative, IEP students were required to write a reflection about their experiences twice during their course. Many students also opted to discuss it in other reflections when they could choose their topics. The criteria for this reflective writing focused on the depth of self-reflection, clarity of message, and staying on-topic. During the semester, both cohorts participated in 12 discussion topics (see Table 1).

Figure 1. Sample Weekly Activity Process
Table 1. Discussion Topics

What did the students say about virtual conversations?

At the beginning of the semester, IEP students confirmed that the pandemic was limiting their experiences: “because of the COVID, I can’t go outside to feel the American environment. So, I still know very little about America” (Jane, IEP student). Prior to the IVPPE, IEP students expressed an interest in learning more about U.S. culture: “I want to know more about the extracurricular life activities of American students and some traditional customs or habits. This will allow me to understand them better, have more common topics with them” (Harlan, IEP student). Some IEP students also saw an opportunity to improve their language abilities: “I want to improve my pronunciation and vocabulary from this experience. It is a good chance to improve my English and we can talk about different things each week. I can learn many new words” (Tony, IEP student). Students also mentioned wanting to know more about Americans’ impressions of Chinese culture: “I hope to learn about the differences between American and Chinese culture, and how young people in the United States view Chinese culture” (Kai, IEP student). The interaction with U.S. students that the IEP students hoped for in their initial comments came to be realized as the semester progressed.

Although many of the subjects that students wanted to know more about were covered over the 12 weeks of our project (see Table 1), the topic about the Chinese education system prompted the longest average response from IEP students (see Figure 2). Since education was a very immediate and relatable issue for university students, students in both courses were especially curious and engaged in conversations on this topic: “For me, college life is just studying and entertainment, but I know that many American students need to do part-time jobs to pay for their tuition. They seem to attach great importance to getting an education because of their hard work” (Jane, IEP student). The second most popular topic was about Chinese cultural values. While students discussed differences between cultural values, many also expressed surprise at similarities: “When talking about values, most of my partners, like me, put filial piety first. This surprised me. I originally thought that most Americans regarded independence as very important and did not pay much attention to family; the reality is the opposite” (Harlan, IEP student).

Figure 2. Average Length of IEP Students’ Responses

By the middle of the course, the IEP students expressed a desire to continue speaking with their partners: “After chatting with them, I wanted to learn more about Americans . . . I like to watch the videos from my American partners who takes Chinese culture class. They share with me what they learned in class and some of their cultures, and I enjoy answering their questions and sharing some of my cultures with them” (Irene, IEP student). They also recognized linguistic benefits to the conversations: “One thing going well is that my listening is better than before” (Tony, IEP student).

Reflecting on the semester of exchanges between their partners, all IEP students reported that it was a positive experience for them. They mentioned how the conversations improved their listening and speaking abilities in English. “Last semester, I could not communicate a lot with my American friends because my English listening is very poor. Now, although I often get stuck on some complex words, I can have simple conversations with my American friends” (Johnny, IEP student). Students also shared additional benefits of their semester-long video conversations with FLG partners. “[This] was an invaluable opportunity to interact directly with peers in the United States . . . I have learned a lot from the American students. I believe such communication can play a great role in eliminating the barriers between cultures” (Lee, IEP student). In addition, several IEP students commented on how they appreciated their partners’ growing understanding of Chinese culture. “They have expressed a lot of their understanding of Chinese culture to me, and they have also shown me their love for Chinese culture” (Harlan, IEP student). 

The IEP students valued the exchange a great deal, as evidenced by their comments above. However, their contribution to the success of the FLG students’ positive experience should not be overlooked. All the FLG students applauded their IEP partners’ support in not only broadening their cultural knowledge, but also in building a more ethnorelative view of other cultures. Some of the repeated themes in the FLG cohort’s reflections included: first-hand experiences and knowledge about China, building international friendships, challenging their stereotypes, and growing interest in visiting China. Many students also used specific examples to support their reflections. Mike (FLG student) wrote the following reflection after a unit on gaokao, China’s National College Entrance Examination:

Watching the videos [in class] on …[China’s] education system and learning about Gaokao was interesting but I was happy to hear about their personal experience from the exam for them to tell me how it was so I could understand better. Or the stereotype that all Chinese students do is just study constantly, where that may be the situation for some it isn’t for all of them. My pen pal partners opened my eyes about that as well explaining to me their own personal hobbies and what they like to do with their friends. 

Dana (FLG student) also appreciated the first-hand knowledge gained from her pen pals. She shared, “I enjoyed getting a better insight on current day China as well as how it relates to my own generation being that my partners are the same age. It was fun getting real life examples and stories on what has happened in their own life, and I cannot wait to visit China one day.”

What are the benefits of having an international virtual pen pal?

It was apparent that using Flipgrid for this IVPPE provided abundant opportunities for the IEP students to extend language practice beyond the classroom. With a total of 565 responses, 17,861 views of videos, 1,340 comments, and 967.2 hours of engagement, there is no doubt that this project provided all students with far more opportunities for interaction than traditional face-to-face classes could provide. The IEP students were devoted to authentic intercultural communication (O’Dowd, 2020) during which they comprehended, manipulated, and produced language (Zhang & Luo, 2018). In other words, this IVPPE was able to “create conditions for language learning” (TESOL International Organization, 2022, The 6 principles section, no. 2) and public speaking in a low-risk and less stressful environment. Although Stoszkowski (2018) mentioned that one of the potential barriers to using Flipgrid is students’ concern about saying the right thing or showing their best work, we noticed that the feature of Flipgrid that allows students to record unlimited times until they are satisfied counteracted that concern. IEP students were able to share their best practice in the uploaded video, and this gradually enhanced their confidence. For English language students enrolled in online courses or studying in a place with few opportunities to speak English, utilizing Flipgrid for an IVPPE provides students with authentic language tasks and exposes them to language diversity.

An additional benefit of Flipgrid is that it automatically tracks the total number of responses, views, comments, and engagement on a topic. Data can be easily downloaded, and instructors can invite students to join using links or QR codes. Instructors can easily add a co-lead (partner instructor) who can edit groups/topics and approve responses and comments. These “tracking engagement” and “more efficient formative feedback” (Stoszkowski, 2018) features of Flipgrid made it easy for us to “monitor and assess student language development” (TESOL International Organization, 2022, The 6 principles section, no. 5). The two instructors in this project communicated on a regular basis to exchange observations of students’ participation, which was a contributing factor to the effectiveness of this project.

Additionally, this project allowed the IEP students to gain cultural knowledge through their peers, who were also learning from them. The feeling that they were not only learners but also experts in some areas helped them feel engaged within a cross-cultural community. At the beginning of the project, many IEP students shared their desires to learn more about U.S. culture, such as holiday celebrations and extracurricular life activities. By the end of the project, they cited many specific examples in their reflective writing to show their learning. Some noted that their views of U.S. culture became more complex and nuanced, evidence of challenging their assumptions (Guillén et al., 2020). They also felt the pride and joy of knowing their cross-cultural partners’ appreciation of Chinese culture. Similar results were discovered in Jin’s (2018) study about reflection on one’s own identity and culture through cross-cultural virtual exchange. This mutual learning opportunity was impactful and valuable, especially during difficult times when the pandemic and tension in the U.S.-China relationship caused increased anxiety and uncertainty.

What should I think about before starting an IVPPE?

In this paper, we described a collaborative project to connect two cohorts in an IVPPE using Flipgrid. Throughout the semester, both cohorts initiated and replied to videos on 12 topics. The statistics recorded in Flipgrid and students’ reflections presented linguistic and cultural benefits of virtual exchange. We had a positive experience using IVPPE, and it is our hope that this research-informed project will be adopted by colleagues with similar interests.

For those considering starting an IVPPE with Flipgrid, we offer the following reminders. First, participating in a virtual pen pal project is an engaging way to connect students from diverse classrooms and let them learn from each other. Speaking in front of a class as an individual can be intimidating, especially for shy students or English language learners. Recording a video allows students to think through what they want to say and present their thoughts and ideas without the added pressure of a live audience. English language learners also benefit from viewing videos multiple times to practice listening skills.

Second, to make virtual pen pal exchange effective, it is important for instructors to be thoughtful in creating relatable topics for students and facilitating an online community that allows the students and the instructor “to bond, develop a sense of trust, feel comfortable sharing information,” and to maintain “a sense of connectedness” (Lomicka, 2020, p. 306). It is worth mentioning that one of the drawbacks to using Flipgrid is that it is set up for students to access using Microsoft or Google accounts. If students do not have these accounts, an instructor must generate individual usernames and share them with students. It is important for instructors to provide the students with clear instructions on how to access and respond to topics. Instructors may also want to suggest minimum lengths for videos, especially for the first few exchanges. An additional challenge associated with this virtual pen pal project was the need for instructors to check and make sure students completed their videos. This was relatively easy to do using the search feature in Flipgrid.

Finally, we encourage instructors from any course to utilize Flipgrid intentionally and thoughtfully as a tool to increase engagement and connect their students with a wider community. Using Flipgrid to facilitate an international pen pal exchange provides learners with opportunities to gain and share cultural knowledge and experiences while participating in authentic language tasks.


Bolliger, D. U., & Inan, F. A. (2012). Development and validation of the online student connectedness survey (OSCS). International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(3), 41-65. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i3.1171 

Catalano, T., & Muñoz Barriga, A. (2021). Shaping the teaching and learning of intercultural communication through virtual mobility. Intercultural Communication Education, 4(1), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.29140/ice.v4n1.443 

Donato, R. (1989). Beyond group: A psycholinguistic rationale for collective activity in second language learning. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(12), 3701-A. 

Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Learning, 10(3), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001 

Green, T., & Green, J. (2018). Flipgrid: Adding voice and video to online discussions. TechTrends, 62(1), 128-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0241-x 

Greenfield, G. M., Keup, J. R., & Gardner, J. N. (2013). New student orientation: Developing and sustaining successful first-year programs. Jossey-Bass.

Guillén, G., Sawin, T., & Avineri, N. (2020). Zooming out of the crisis: Language and human collaboration. Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 320-328. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12459  

Jin, L. (2018). Digital affordances on WeChat: Learning Chinese as a second language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(1-2), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1376687 

Klimova, O. (2021). From blended learning to emergency remote and online teaching: Successes, challenges, and prospects of a Russian language program before and during the pandemic. Russian Language Journal, 71(2), 73-85. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/rlj/vol71/iss2/5  

Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Sociocultural theory and second language learning: Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 418-420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02058.x 

Lomicka, L. (2020). Creating and sustaining virtual language communities. Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 306-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12456 

Long, M. H. (1987). The experimental classroom. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 490, 97-109. 

O’Dowd, R. (2020). A transnational model of virtual exchange for global citizenship education. Language Teaching, 53(4), 477-490. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000077 

O’Rourke, B. (2007). Models of telecollaboration 1: eTandem. In R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online intercultural exchange (pp. 41–61). Multilingual Matters.

Stoszkowski, J. (2018). Using Flipgrid to develop social learning. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v11i2.786 

TESOL International Organization. (2022). The 6 principles for exemplary teaching of English learners. https://www.tesol.org/the-6-principles 

Torres Beltrán, J. A., & Santana Alarcón, J. L. (2021). Developing young learners’ EFL writing skills through a pen pal telecollaboration exchange during the COVID-19 Pandemic in two rural institutions in Boyacá. Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Tunja. http://repositorio.uptc.edu.co/handle/001/3814 

Zhang, Y., & Luo, S. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs and practices of task-based language teaching in Chinese as a second language classrooms. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41(3). 264-287. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2018-0022 



Alayna Klco

Translanguaging pedagogy has largely focused on K-12 learners in content classrooms. However, collaborative translation is one translanguaging literacy practice that is well-suited for adult English as a Second Language (ESL) learners with thoughtful adaptations based on text choice, course objectives, and learner characteristics.
Keywords: Adult Education, Higher Education, SLIFE, Translanguaging, Language Teaching, Multilingualism

Translanguaging has emerged as an increasingly popular framework in English language learner education (García & Li Wei, 2014; Lin & He, 2017). At its strongest variation, translanguaging as an ideology describes a unitary languaging system and calls for learning environments that enable multilingual learners to use their entire linguistic repertoire (García & Li Wei, 2014). To achieve this, several pedagogical interventions such as collaborative dialogue, multilingual writing and word walls, translation, and multilingual listening/visual resources have been suggested for incorporating translanguaging into the classroom (García & Li Wei, 2014). Thus far, translanguaging has been studied most extensively in K-12 content classrooms. However, the benefits of translanguaging are not limited to this setting, and research suggests that adult learners can also benefit substantially from a translanguaging approach (Turnbull, 2019).

Translation is one of the suggested pedagogies for incorporating translanguaging in the classroom. In an effort to shed light on how this translanguaging strategy can be adapted for adult education contexts, this paper will focus specifically on pedagogical translation and the work of Project TRANSLATE (Teaching Reading And New Strategic Language Approaches to Emergent bilinguals, see Figure 1). All data from Project TRANSLATE described in the adaptations below is based on observations and findings from ongoing research conducted in a middle grade classroom in the Midwest. This work has been completed by a team of researchers that includes the author, who has also been an English as a Second Language (ESL) educator for adult language learners for five years.

Figure 1. Project TRANSLATE

Project TRANSLATE uses collaborative translation between the target language and students’ home languages as a literacy intervention. To date, this translanguaging pedagogy has been used only in K-12 content-based settings. However, with some adaptation, the TRANSLATE protocol is rich for use in adult English language learning classrooms.

Translanguaging – One Word, Two Meanings

As an ideology, translanguaging views language as a unitary meaning-making system (García & Li Wei, 2014). Translanguaging intentionally enables multilingual speakers to leverage their entire linguistic and multi-modal repertoires in communication with and about people, objects, places, and spaces (García & Kleifgen, 2019). The goals of translanguaging are to deepen students’ understanding of texts, generate more diverse texts, develop students’ confidence, and foster metalinguistic awareness. García et al. (2021) situate translanguaging as part of asset-based pedagogy and firmly reject the abyssal thinking that places mainstream white English at the top of the language hierarchy. Translanguaging in the classroom is therefore a matter of both educational efficacy and social justice equity (Shohamy, 2011).

As a pedagogy, translanguaging suggests that teachers should leverage students’ full linguistic repertoires when teaching a new language (David et al., 2019) and that multilingual practices should be regularly implemented in the classroom (García et al., 2021). Lin & He (2017) put it even more clearly: “Translanguaging can function as both pedagogical scaffolding strategies and opportunities to negotiate and affirm students’ identities and build teacher-student rapport” (p. 237). However, while many teachers may share a belief in the benefits of students using their full linguistic repertoires, the reality of how that is expressed in the classroom varies greatly.

Oaxaca, Mexico

Some teachers used translanguaging as a scaffold (for example, providing instructions in students’ first language [L1]) whereas others explicitly rewarded the use of translanguaging (for example, in narrative projects) when asked to integrate translanguaging into assessments. 

Studied by Schissel et al., 2021

Basque Country, Spain

University-level content teachers fell into one of three categories based on their use of the target language in the classroom:

  • virtual position (target language only)
  • maximal position (as much target language as possible with some flexibility)
  • optimal position (judicious use of students’ L1 to enhance learning). 

Teachers’ use of translanguaging was typically reflected in their materials, though not necessarily in their assessments. 

Studied by Doiz and Lasagbaster, 2017


Project TRANSLATE is a collaborative translation strategy for literacy development that uses pedagogical translation as a social practice in which multilingual students’ daily translanguaging practices are mirrored in a classroom setting (David et al. 2019). The TRANSLATE protocol is situated within a guided reading framework (Fountas & Pinnell, 1996), and pedagogical translations are designed to leverage multilingual students’ skills to improve strategic reading, translation, and engagement. This, in turn, develops their English language proficiency as well. The TRANSLATE protocol as detailed by David et al. (2019) is grounded in social practice theory and consists of seven primary steps (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Project TRANSLATE Protocol

Adapting Pedagogical Translation Across Contexts

What’s different between K-12 and adult ESL when it comes to pedagogical translation?

To date, the TRANSLATE protocol has been exclusively studied in K-12 classrooms. To bring this translanguaging practice to adult ESL education requires several adaptations. Adult ESL education and K-12 content classrooms use fundamentally different input texts in addition to having different course objectives and learner characteristics. 

Different Standards, Different Texts

K-12 objectives for English language learners are typically bound to WIDA standards or other federally or state-mandated standards (Gottlieb, 2016). While teachers may have considerable freedom in their lesson planning, there is some consistency in standards across schools, districts, and states. There may be more variation for adult English learners. English curriculum taught as part of an Adult Basic Education program may be connected to a variety of federal standards such as the National Reporting Service Educational Functioning Levels, English Language Proficiency Standards, College and Career Readiness Standards, or may follow state-specific standards (Gonzalves, 2021). On the other hand, adults learning in an intensive English program that is affiliated with a specific school or institution may adhere to standards established by that program. Finally, English language programs established through non-profit organizations or other community education settings may have little to no formal standards process (Entigar, 2017). Adults in each of these learning environments are likely to have different goals and reasons for learning English – job acquisition, preparing for higher education, or survival English for newcomers to name a few. Using TRANSLATE with adult learners starts with a text that is relevant and engaging for their unique needs.

Adaptations: A good text for collaborative translation is relevant to students, tied to learning objectives, and not directly translatable. In an adult education context, relevancy is driven by the goals of the students. For example, if learners are highly job-focused, consider using authentic materials from a work report or dialogue between colleagues. However, fact-based writing tends to be more directly translatable and leaves fewer opportunities for meaning negotiation, so materials with work-related vocabulary as well as some figurative language and complex structures are ideal. On the other hand, if you are working with adults who are learning English in anticipation of shortly entering an English-speaking college or university, a rich text could address a theme central to existing course materials (including anything from civics to signing a lease!), cultural adaptation, or students’ future studies.

Content Class vs. ESL

Many K-12 English language learners are acquiring English in tandem with grade-specific content matter. Translanguaging in the classroom fosters critical opportunities for multilingual students to express their full content knowledge, regardless of English proficiency. In contrast, adult learners are more likely to be in an ESL class where acquisition of the target language is the primary objective, though this language learning is still often embedded in thematic, content-driven units. In these classes, the structure of adult ESL classes in many ways more closely resembles a K-12 foreign language classroom. This raises the question of how much translanguaging should be used in the classroom. 

In a classroom where English learning is the primary objective, strong translanguaging is no less of an effective resource when applied strategically (Turnbull, 2019). In a study of Japanese young adults learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) at a national university, Turnbull found that strong translanguaging, with strategic boundaries, enabled the intentional acquisition of specific linguistic features. Students in the strong translanguaging group produced richer student discussions and consistently higher scores for academic and creative writing than those in the weak translanguaging group where students were required to conduct research only in the target language. Strong translanguaging environments also produced richer student discussions, even when the final writing was produced in English (Turnbull, 2019). This study suggests that translanguaging pedagogies such as collaborative translation have significant potential in ESL and EFL classrooms.

Adaptations: As in K-12 classrooms, enabling the use of students’ full linguistic repertoires is key in adult English classes, but ESL classes strongly prioritize language learning in addition to thematic content. To emphasize linguistic connections in the TRANSLATE protocol, teachers can prompt discussion about specific language features, such as negation syntax or object placement, when comparing students’ home languages and the target language in addition to negotiating meaning. If teaching in an online learning environment, collaborative translation could take place using editable documents where students can write and compare translations. Then, meaning negotiation could occur either synchronously through a video call or asynchronously by leaving comments. 

Similarly, instructors can ask students to highlight targeted language features in their home language (e.g., modal verbs) and English to identify and analyze notably similar or different structures between languages. In both in-person and online environments, classes with adults whose English course is also their primary source of target language input should place increased emphasis on reconnecting students with the text while using the target language.

Shifting from K-12 to Adult Education

The demographics of adult English learners may vary dramatically in a single program or even within a classroom. Some adult learners may come in with primarily oral proficiency, emergent literacy in their home language, or interrupted education (Pettitt et al., 2021). As a result, while K-12 schools frequently emphasize literacy-based instruction and learning, that is not necessarily effective for all adult English learners (Pettitt et al., 2021). Instead, adult learners with emergent literacy may perform better when instruction is based heavily on oral proficiency and gradually incorporates print literacy (Tammelin-Laine & Martin, 2014). Teaching that builds on learner strengths and the funds of knowledge that all students bring to the classroom also helps develop a learner-centered education environment (Parrish, 2019).

Adaptations: If working with adult learners with emergent literacy, additional modifications to the TRANSLATE protocol will be necessary. For example, the selected text and target sentences for translation must be available in an oral format. Written translations are valuable for meaning negotiation because they afford opportunities to visually compare translation syntax and consider orthographic patterns as part of meaning negotiation. However, an adapted process could rely on teacher collaboration or technology to create the translation record. For example, in our ongoing study, one teacher used a student dictation approach with Nepali-speaking students who were uncomfortable writing in their home language. To complete the translation and translanguage in oral and written modes, students read a text in English, created a translation based on Google Translate and their knowledge of Nepali, and their teacher wrote their verbal, Nepali, translations on paper phonetically using the English script. 

Video technology similarly creates a translation record that allows students to review and compare their recorded translations as many times as necessary while implicitly increasing students’ technology literacy in the process (Vega-Carrero et al., 2017). Going forward, speech-to-text technology may also provide a scaffold for language learners with emerging print literacy. Additional scaffolding could be used for students with emerging literacy in their home language by reading the text aloud and conducting the entire activity orally. These adaptations can be used as intermediary steps to written translation if print literacy is a core objective. 

The Takeaway

Facilitating translanguaging pedagogy is a key step to supporting equitable cultural and linguistic development for multilingual learners (García & Kleifgen, 2019; García & Li Wei, 2014; Shohamy, 2011). One strategy to try is pedagogical translation, which helps learners develop strong literacy practices and can be well suited for adult learners as well as K-12 contexts. You know your students best, so consider carefully what will be a meaningful text that meets their interests and your curricular objectives. Then, look for opportunities to negotiate meaning and highlight key language differences to spark metalinguistic conversations as students build multilingual connections in this dynamic classroom pedagogy. 

Additional Reading:


David, S., Pacheco, M., & Jiménez, M. (2019). Designing translingual pedagogies: Exploring pedagogical translation through a classroom teaching experiment. Cognition and Instruction, 37(2), 252-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2019.1580283 

Doiz, A., & Lasagbaster, D. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about translanguaging practices. In C. M. Mazak & K. S. Carroll (Eds.), Translanguaging in higher education: Beyond monolingual ideologies (pp. 157-176). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096657-011 

Entigar, K. E. (2017). The limits of pedagogy: Diaculturalist pedagogy as paradigm shift in the education of adult immigrants. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1263678 

Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children. Heinemann Press.

García, O., Flores, N., Seltzer, K., Li Wei, Otheguy, R., & Rosa, J. (2021). Rejecting abyssal thinking in the language and education of racialized bilinguals: A manifesto. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 18(3), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2021.1935957 

García, O., & Li Wei. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism, and education. Palgrave Macmillan.

García, O., & Kleifgen, J. A. (2019). Translanguaging and literacies. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(4), 553-571. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.286 

Gonzalves, L. (2021). A system of erasure: State and federal education policies surrounding adult L2 learners with emergent literacy in california. In D. S. Warriner (Ed.), Refugee education across the lifespan (pp. 271-288). Springer.

Gottlieb, M. (2016). Assessing English language learners: Bridges to educational equity (2nd ed.). Corwin.

Lin, A. M. Y., & He, P. (2017). Translanguaging as dynamic activity flows in CLIL classrooms. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 16(4), 228-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2017.1328283 

Parrish, B. (2019). Teaching adult English language learners: A practical introduction (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Pettitt, N., Gonzalves, L., Tarone, E., & Wall, T. (2021). Adult L2 writers with emergent literacy: Writing development and pedagogical considerations. Journal of Second Language Writing, 51 (Supplement 2021), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100800 

Schissel, J. L., De Korne, H., & López-Gopar, M. (2021). Grappling with translanguaging for teaching and assessment in culturally and linguistically diverse contexts: Teacher perspectives from Oaxaca, Mexico. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(3), 340-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1463965 

Shohamy, E. (2011). Assessing multilingual competencies: Adopting construct valid assessment policies. The Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 418-429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01210.x 

Tammelin-Laine, T. & Martin, M. (2014). The simultaneous development of receptive skills in an orthographically transparent second language. Writing Systems Research, 7(1), 39-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2014.943148 

Turnbull, B. (2019). Translanguaging in the planning of academic and creative writing: A case of adult Japanese EFL learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 42(2), 232-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2019.1589603 

Vega-Carrero, S., Pulido, M., & Ruiz-Gallego, N. E. (2017). Teaching English as a second language at a university in Colombia that uses virtual environments: A case study. Revista Electrónica Educare, 21(3), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.21-3.9 



We are thrilled to celebrate MinneTESOL Journal’s 40th anniversary with the publication of volume 37, issue 2. This excellent collection of articles highlights the latest innovation in the field of English language teaching and learning. 

We welcome our first youth author, Sumia Sabrie, senior at Mankato East High School and PSEO student at South Central College. In her article, “The Academic Struggles of Somali Families,” she addresses the public schools’ historical lack of cultural and linguistic responsiveness to Somali families and how hiring teachers of color and cultural mediators have helped bridge the divide. Also focused on areas for improvement in the K-12 context, Michelle Benegas, Trish Morita-Mullaney, Jenna Cushing-Leubner, Amy Stolpestad, and Michelle Greene share findings from a tri-state study that examined the experiences of ESL teachers at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. “Systemic Infrastructure for Multilingual Success: ESL Teacher Responses to Emergency Remote Teaching and Learning at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic” also shares recommendations for systemic infrastructure for multilingual success in K-12 schools. From the college sector, in “10 Years of a Lab School: Preparing MA-TESOL Students to Teach Adult Learners,” Susan Olmstead-Wang, Josephine Prado, and Susan Spezzini reflect on the impact of the Community English Program at the University of Alabama-Birmingham and offer strategies for ongoing improvement. 

In “Perceptions of Multilingualism in the Classroom,” Sophie Breen examines the perceptions that teachers, administrators and students have about multilingualism in the K-12 classroom. Also focusing on the linguistic assets that K-12 learners bring to the classroom, Dayna Hillcrest makes a compelling case to change the monoglossic ideology in schools where it is prevalent by encouraging multiple language use in the classroom in “The Academic Benefits of Translanguaging.” Also committed to excellence in English language (EL) education, WIDA’s content-driven language learning framework has provided needed structure for EL instruction. Lynn Shafer Willner, Fernanda Marinho Kray, and Margo Gottlieb provide a comprehensive overview of the WIDA standards in “What’s the Same and What’s Been Updated in the 2020 Edition of the WIDA English Language Development Standards Framework?

Please read, enjoy, and share the research and practice ideas in this issue of MinneTESOL Journal! We look forward to 40 more years of learning together. Stay connected to our MinneTESOL Journal community by following the journal on Facebook and on Twitter (@MnTESOLjournal).