Literacy Development in L1 in Bilingual Education

This chapter explores literacy development in the mother tongue (L1) in bilingual education programs. To explore the impact of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on literacy development in L1, a large-scale study was conducted in a monolingual autonomous community (Castilla-La Mancha) located in central Spain. Scores obtained by CLIL and non-CLIL (n=4,231) learners aged 9-10 in a writing task and in a reading comprehension test were compared. Results showed CLIL was not detrimental for literacy development in L1, since no significant differences were detected between both groups in their overall proficiency in written production and reading comprehension. However, a differential achievement was observed depending on the type of instruction CLIL/non-CLIL in some areas. Significant differences were observed in favour of CLIL students in receptive vocabulary, expressive richness and spelling, whereas the non-CLIL group was ahead in critical reading, planning strategies, and use of text typologies.

Literacy Development in L1 in Bilingual Education

This chapter explores literacy development in the mother tongue (L1) in bilingual education programs. To explore the impact of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on literacy development in L1, a large-scale study was conducted in a monolingual autonomous community (Castilla-La Mancha) located in central Spain. Scores obtained by CLIL and non-CLIL (n=4,231) learners aged 9-10 in a writing task and in a reading comprehension test were compared. Results showed CLIL was not detrimental for literacy development in L1, since no significant differences were detected between both groups in their overall proficiency in written production and reading comprehension. However, a differential achievement was observed depending on the type of instruction CLIL/non-CLIL in some areas. Significant differences were observed in favour of CLIL students in receptive vocabulary, expressive richness and spelling, whereas the non-CLIL group was ahead in critical reading, planning strategies, and use of text typologies.

“In Real Life, You Have to Speak Up”: Civic Implications of No-Excuses Classroom Management Practices

Conceptualizing educational inequality as equivalent to the “achievement gap” has fueled the expansion of no-excuses charters, which purport to raise test scores and thereby equalize opportunities for low-income students of color. In contrast, I argue that the individual provision of opportunity is inadequate to address the structural inequalities that create differential achievement, and thus that no-excuses schools cannot be assessed using test scores alone. This ethnographic study examines how no-excuses classroom management shapes students’ development as citizens. My findings suggest that no-excuses classroom management is not a supportive structure that enables academic achievement, but a restrictive and often unfair system that reinforces compliance to institutional authority. I contend that the consequences of this system are more likely to perpetuate than to ameliorate inequality.

Interest Correlates to Differential Achievement of Gifted Students in Mathematics

Far fewer gifted women than gifted men pursue careers in mathematical and scientific areas. In this study gifted boys and girls who were matched on measures of verbal and mathematical aptitude and socio-economic status are compared on measures of values and career interests which contribute to differential achievement. Gifted girls are less likely than the boys to have values and clearly defined career interests associated with careers in mathematics and science as early as grade seven. Girls are more interested than boys in social and aesthetic areas. Gifted girls, however, appear to have more scientific interests than girls of average ability. The implications of these findings for increasing the participation and achievement of gifted girls in mathematics and science are discussed.

Brief Reports: Use and Recall of Advance Organizers in Mathematics Instruction

The two studies reported here were designed (a) to determine whether the generality and inclusiveness of advance organizers (AOs) demanded by the definition of Ausubel (1963) is the same as the mathematical generality or abstractness of concepts that might be used as AOs and (b) to measure the effects of programmed recall of AOs in enhancing the learning of a mathematics concept. In Study I, two AOs at different levels of abstraction, each in the presence of objectives, constituted the treatments given prior to common mathematics instruction. Such an approach is consistent with the defining characteristics of an AO (Ausubel, 1963, pp. 214–215) and exploits the perhaps critically important structural aspects of the mathematics content. In Study II, programmed recall of an AO during instruction was used to determine differential achievement resulting from several levels of reinforcement of the AO. This treatment was designed to exploit the fact that an AO operates because it provides stable anchorage for the concepts to be learned.