esl

 

Discuss why classroom practice for language is seen different than classroom practice for perceived non-language content?  What are five takeaways from the chapter? 

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
esl
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

 

STATEBOARD OF EDUCATION

JOHN C. AUSTIN – PRESIDENT

• CASANDRA E. ULBRICH – VICE PRESIDENT
MICHELLE FECTEAU – SECRETARY • PAMELA PUG H – TREASURER

LUPE RAMO S-MONTIGNY – NASBE DELEG ATE • KATHLEEN N. STRAUS
EILEEN LAPPIN WEISER • RICHARD ZEILE

608 WEST ALLEGAN STREET • P.O. BOX 30008 • LANSING, MICHIGAN 4890

9

www.michigan.gov/mde • (517) 373-332

4

RICK SNYDER
GOVERNOR

STATE OF MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

LANSING

BRIAN J. WHISTON
STATE SUPERINTENDENT

  • MEMORANDUM
  • DATE: October 27, 201

    5

    TO: State Board of Education

  • FROM: Brian J. Whiston, Chairman
  • SUBJECT: Approval of the Michigan Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World

    Languages

    In pursuit of its goal to improve teacher quality, the State Board of Education (SBE) is being
    presented with the proposal for adoption of new Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of
    World Languages. These standards will replace Michigan’s current Standards for the
    Preparation of Teachers of Arabic (Modern Standard), Chinese (Mandarin), French, German,
    Greek, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Other World Languages, Polish, Russian and Spanish
    as the guiding set of standards for initial teacher preparation in world language instruction
    and will serve as the standards to support professional development of in-service teachers.
    These standards will also form the basis for revised standards in American Sign Language and
    Anishinaabemowin, which will require different guidance for assessing language proficiency
    than the other languages in which Michigan teachers may be endorsed.

    The World Language Advisory Committee (WLAC), composed of representatives from
    Michigan’s public and independent teacher preparation programs in world languages and the
    Michigan World Language Association (MIWLA), met over the past two years to update
    Michigan’s Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages. This action was
    motivated by the 2013 update of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
    (ACTFL) and the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Program
    Standards for the Preparation of Foreign Language Teachers, which were developed with
    significant leadership from Michigan higher education representatives. Attachment A provides
    details on the process of development of the proposed standards, including feedback received
    during a period of public comment. Attachment B is the proposed Michigan Standards for the
    Preparation of Teachers of World Languages.

    The standards were submitted for SBE review at its October 13, 2015, meeting and for
    approval at the November 10, 2015, meeting.

    It is recommended that the State Board of Education approve the Michigan Standards for the
    Preparation of Teachers of World Languages, as presented to the Board October 13, 2015,
    and as described in the Superintendent’s memorandum dated October 27, 2015.

    2

    Attachment A

    Introduction to Standards

    for the Preparation of
    Teachers of World

    Languages

    3

    Conceptual Framework for the Preparation of Teachers in Michigan

    A teacher preparation program is comprised of multiple interdependent components
    that prepare candidates for certification to demonstrate proficiencies defined in
    several aligned sets of standards.

    • The Michigan Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (MI-
    InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards, adopted by the State Board of
    Education (SBE) in 2013, define the theoretical and practical knowledge,
    skills, and dispositions that all entry level teachers should possess upon
    completion of an approved teacher preparation program.

    • The Michigan Certification Standards for the Preparation of All Elementary
    and Secondary Teachers in Reading Instruction specify the expected
    knowledge and skills in the areas of reading that all teachers at the
    elementary and secondary levels should possess upon entry to the
    profession, regardless of content area specialization.

    • Michigan-specific content standards define the central concepts, tools of
    inquiry, and structures of the specific discipline(s) in which teacher
    candidates seek endorsement, as well as pedagogical applications of that
    disciplinary knowledge.

    A recommendation for teacher certification is an assurance on the part of
    the teacher preparation program that a candidate demonstrates the
    appropriate proficiencies specified in each of these sets of standards.

    Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages

    Purpose
    The purpose of the Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages is
    to establish a shared vision for the knowledge and skills that entry level teachers of
    world languages in Michigan should possess and be able to demonstrate in their
    teaching, regardless of whether they follow a traditional or alternate route into the
    profession. This document provides standards across six domains of professional
    preparation to teach world languages, with indicators for acceptable levels of
    performance at the point of entry to the field in the core elements of each standard
    and substandard. These standards establish outcomes for graduates of teacher
    preparation programs in world languages, and should be used to inform program
    development and continuous improvement efforts at Michigan’s institutions of
    higher education and alternate route providers. To support program evaluation and
    continuous improvement, a rubric that includes the indicators of acceptable
    performance detailed within the standards as well as indicators of target levels of
    performance for new teachers to develop toward during the induction phase of their
    teaching career, and unacceptable levels of performance has been developed. The
    standards and rubric are based upon the American Council on the Teaching of
    Foreign Languages (ACTFL) and Council for the Accreditation of Educator
    Preparation (CAEP) Program Standards for the Preparation of Foreign Language
    Teachers, and because they incorporate the same standards and performance
    indicators used by national accrediting bodies and specialty program associations
    for recognition and accreditation decisions, Michigan programs’ alignment to these
    state standards will support their accreditation activities.

    4

    Development of the Proposal
    The World Language Advisory Committee (WLAC), composed of representatives
    from Michigan’s public and independent teacher preparation programs in world
    languages, began discussions about updating Michigan’s teacher preparation
    standards early in 2014. This action was motivated by the 2013 update of the
    American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) and Council for
    the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Program Standards for the
    Preparation of Foreign Language Teachers, which were developed with significant
    leadership from Michigan higher education representatives. As Michigan’s Standards
    for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages, adopted by the SBE in 2004,
    were based on ACTFL’s 2002 program standards, the WLAC considered the question
    of whether to reaffirm existing Michigan standards, compose new standards, or
    adopt the new ACTFL/CAEP Program Standards as Michigan’s standards. The WLAC
    met on September 18, 2014, at the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) and
    again on October 23, 2014, at the Michigan World Language Association Conference
    to review the 2013 ACTFL/CAEP Program Standards and consider their applicability
    for updating Michigan’s standards. The consensus was to recommend adoption of
    the ACTFL/CAEP Program Standards as Michigan Standards for the Preparation of
    Teachers in World Languages, with an additional substandard in the area of
    Cultures, Linguistics, Literatures, and Concepts from Other Disciplines to ensure
    Michigan teachers of world languages would be able to demonstrate a deeper
    “understanding of the complex and abstract nature of language and distinguish
    between language and communication” (Standard 2.d) than provided in the
    ACTFL/CAEP Program Standards.

    These standards have strong continuity with the previous Michigan standards with
    respect to the level of proficiency teachers of world languages are expected to
    demonstrate in target languages, as well as depth and breadth of knowledge of
    cultures and cultural texts, language acquisition theories and processes, standards
    for world language learning, lesson planning, curriculum standards and professional
    behaviors. As in the previous Michigan standards and consistent with current ACTFL
    guidelines, expected proficiency levels in oral interpersonal communication,
    interpretive reading, and interpersonal and interpretive writing vary based on the
    target language’s Foreign Service Institute (FSI) grouping, which takes into account
    the amount of time that it takes to develop oral proficiency in these languages
    when the native language is English: Advanced Low or higher for Groups I, II, III:
    French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish; Intermediate High
    for Group IV: Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Korean. … The languages are [also]
    described in terms of their writing system: (1) languages that use a Roman
    alphabet such as French, German, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish; (2) languages
    that use a non-Roman alphabet such as Arabic, Hebrew, Korean, and Russian; (3)
    languages that use characters such as Chinese and Japanese; and (4) classical
    languages (Latin and Greek) where emphasis is on interpreting original texts.
    Candidates who are native speakers of English and teach target languages that use
    the Roman alphabetic system are able to attain a higher level of reading and
    writing skill in those languages because they do not have to focus on learning a

    5

    new writing system.1

    The new standards provide a stronger emphasis on pedagogical skills that teachers
    of world languages are expected to demonstrate, particularly in the areas of
    assessment of student learning and language proficiencies across several
    dimensions of world language study, questioning strategies for eliciting student
    language use, and providing opportunities for students to participate in authentic
    interactions with native speakers of the target language. The standards require that
    teacher preparation programs assess world language teacher candidates’ oral
    proficiency skills via ACTFL’s Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), a rigorous,
    internationally recognized, valid and reliable assessment. Finally, as noted in the
    previous section, these standards provide learning progressions for teachers
    beyond their completion of an initial teacher preparation program to guide teacher
    professional development through the induction phase of their careers. These
    learning progressions take the form of a rubric that programs may use to assess
    the performance of their teacher candidates.

    Public comment on the proposed standards was solicited in May and June of 201

    5.

    An announcement of the public comment period was distributed in the MDE Weekly
    Official Communication email (Memo #052-15) on May 14, and the Michigan World
    Language Association (MIWLA) also sent two announcements to its membership
    soliciting comments on May 18 and June 5. The public comment period ended on
    June 14 at 5:00 PM, and five official comments were received by MDE. Three of the
    comments expressed strong support for the standards as written, with particular
    support offered for the proficiency levels specified in Standard 1.

    A fourth comment expressed disappointment that the standards did not require a
    study abroad experience to give candidates an immersive first-hand experience in
    another country’s language and culture. MDE notes that while the previous
    Standards for Preparation of Teachers of World Languages did not require a study
    abroad or cultural immersion experience, the new standards do recognize the value
    of teacher candidates having first-hand experiences living and studying in another
    culture for strengthening their understanding of culture and proficiency in the target
    language. Acceptable performance indicators for standard 2.a specify that
    “[c]andidates gain personal experience to support academic language study by
    spending planned time in a target culture or community.” While this could be
    accomplished in the context of a study abroad experience, MDE recognizes that not
    all educator preparation institutions have the capacity to facilitate international
    programming and not all teacher candidates have the resources to accommodate
    such an experience. Furthermore, MDE recognizes that increasing levels of linguistic
    and cultural diversity across Michigan afford the possibility of adequately satisfying
    this standard without leaving the state.

    A fifth comment expressed concern that the new standards do not ensure adequate
    preparation to enable World Language-certified teachers to teach subject matter
    content in their target language effectively. While Standard 2 establishes the

    1 American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2014, July). ACTFL/CAEP
    program standards for the preparation of foreign language teachers. Retrieved from
    http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/ACTFLStandardsJULY2014

    6

    expectation that “[c]andidates demonstrate understanding of the multiple content
    areas that comprise the field of world language studies” and “demonstrate
    understanding of texts on literary and cultural themes as well as interdisciplinary
    topics,” MDE emphasizes that the purpose of these standards is to establish the
    knowledge and skills necessary to increase children’s global competence by learning
    how to speak, read, write and listen in a world language, as well as by gaining an
    understanding of the world cultures associated with the target language. A world
    language endorsement by itself does not qualify a teacher to provide content area
    instruction (such as in mathematics or science) in the target language. In order to
    be qualified to provide content area instruction in a language other than English,
    teachers should possess an endorsement in the specific content area to be taught
    and either possess a Bilingual Education (Y_) endorsement in the target language
    or be able to demonstrate appropriate proficiency in the target language.

    Program Requirements
    Educator preparation institutions wishing to recommend candidates for
    endorsements in world languages must ensure that candidates have completed a
    program of study that includes:

    • elementary, secondary or K-12 major of at least 30 semester hours OR
    elementary or secondary minor of at least 20 semester hours for initial
    certification. For programs leading to an additional endorsement on an
    existing teacher certificate, at least 20 semester hours for an elementary
    or secondary endorsement or 30 hours for a K-12 endorsement;

    • language coursework beyond the first four semesters of language
    instruction in commonly taught languages (inclusive of Categories I and II
    of the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) scale). For commonly taught
    languages, coursework in the first four semesters of language instruction
    must be considered prerequisite to programs’ minimum credit
    requirements;

    • ongoing assessment of candidates’ oral proficiency, including terminal
    proficiency at the appropriate level noted in Standard 1 on ACTFL’s Oral
    Proficiency Interview regardless of grade level authorization sought or
    major/minor program status;

    • a minimum of one methods course dealing specifically with the teaching
    of world languages to the appropriate age group (elementary, secondary
    or K-12) for which the endorsement is sought;

    • field experiences prior to and inclusive of student teaching in world
    language classrooms, supervised by a qualified world language educator;
    and

    • a separate professional education program of at least 20 semester hours
    appropriate to grade level of the endorsement sought that prepares the
    candidate to the appropriate learning progression of the MI-InTASC Model
    Core Teaching Standards and the appropriate Michigan Certification
    Standards for the Preparation of All Elementary and Secondary Teachers
    in Reading Instruction.

    In addition, K-12 initial and additional endorsement programs must provide:

    • structured field experiences (inclusive of student teaching) in three areas:
    elementary, middle school, and high school;

    • course work in growth and development for early childhood and

    7

    adolescent learners; and
    • preparation in instructional methods with specific strategies of instruction

    for limited-English proficient students appropriate to all levels of
    certification.

    Endorsement Authorizations
    Teachers possessing a secondary certificate with a World Language (6-12)
    endorsement may teach the endorsed World Language in grades 6-12 only.

    Teachers possessing a secondary certificate with a World Language (K-12)
    endorsement may only teach the endorsed World Language in grades K-12. They
    are not authorized to teach any other subjects in grades K-5 without additional
    elementary certification or endorsements or any other subjects in grades 6-

    12

    without additional secondary endorsements.

    Teachers possessing an elementary certificate with a World Language (K-8)
    endorsement may teach all subjects K-5, including the endorsed World Language.
    They may also teach the endorsed World Language in departmentalized instruction
    in grades 6-8.

    Teachers possessing an elementary certificate with a World Language (K-12)
    endorsement may also teach all subjects K-5, including the endorsed World
    Language. They may also teach the endorsed World Language in departmentalized
    instruction in grades K-12

    The chart below illustrates the different authorizations available to teachers earning
    a World Language endorsement on an elementary or secondary teaching certificate.

    Type of certificate
    Endorsement Elementary Secondary
    grade levels
    K-8 • All subjects + World Language, • Not permitted

    K-5
    6-12 • Not permitted • World Language only,

    6-12
    K-12 • All subjects + World Language, • World Language only,

    K-5 K-12
    • World Language only, 6-12

    8

    Participants in Standards Development
    Michael Braun
    Master Faculty Specialist, Department
    of Spanish
    Western Michigan University

    Christina DeNicolo, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Bilingual and
    Bicultural Education
    Wayne State University

    Vickie De Vries, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of French
    Calvin College

    Julie A. Foss, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Modern Foreign
    Languages
    Saginaw Valley State University

    Paul R. Fossum, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of Education
    University of Michigan – Dearborn

    Wafa Hassan, Ed.D.
    Assistant Professor of Arabic
    Western Michigan University

    Susan Knight, Ph.D.
    Professor, Department of Foreign
    Languages, Literatures and Cultures
    Central Michigan University

    Sean Kottke, Ph.D.
    Education Consultant
    Michigan Department of Education

    Kathy López
    Certification Officer/College of
    Education
    Office of Admissions & Certification
    Saginaw Valley State University

    Thomas Lovik, Ph.D.
    Professor of German
    Michigan State University

    Margaret Mandl
    Student Teacher Supervisor
    Oakland University

    Fran Meuser, Ph.D.
    Professor of Spanish
    Oakland University

    Anne Nerenz, Ph.D.
    Professor, Department of World
    Languages
    Eastern Michigan University

    Janel Pettes Guikema, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of French
    Grand Valley State University

    Norma H. Richardson, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Spanish
    Central Michigan University

    Regina Smith, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of German
    Grand Valley State University

    Emily Spinelli, Ph.D.
    Executive Director, American
    Association of Teachers of Spanish
    and Portuguese
    Professor Emerita, University of
    Michigan-Dearborn

    Irma Torres
    Consultant, World Languages
    Oakland Schools

    Bill VanPatten, Ph.D.
    Professor of Spanish & Second
    Language Studies
    Michigan State University

    Anne Violin-Wigent, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of French
    Michigan State University

    Michael Vrooman, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of Spanish
    Grand Valley State University

    9

    Attachment B

    Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of

    World Languages (FA-FS)

    World Languages (FA-FS) Content Standards

    10

    Source of ACTFL/CAEP Program Standards for the Program/Subject World
    Guidelines/Standards: Preparation of Foreign Language Area: Languages

    Teachers, 20

    14

    No. Guideline/Standard

    1.

    Language proficiency: Interpersonal, Interpretive, and Presentational

    Candidates in world language teacher preparation programs possess a high level of proficiency
    in the target languages they will teach. They are able to communicate effectively in
    interpersonal, interpretive, and presentational contexts. Candidates speak in the interpersonal
    mode at a minimum level of “Advanced Low” (French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Portuguese,
    Russian, and Spanish) or “Intermediate High” (Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean) on the
    ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI). They comprehend and interpret oral, printed, and video
    texts by identifying the main idea(s) and supporting details, inferring and interpreting the
    author’s intent and cultural perspectives, and offering a personal interpretation of the text.
    Candidates present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners or readers with
    language proficiency characteristic of a minimum level of “Advanced Low” or “Intermediate
    High” according to the target language, as described above.

    1.a. Pre-service teachers will speak in the interpersonal mode of communication at a minimum level
    of “Advanced Low” or “Intermediate High” (for Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Korean) on the
    ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) according to the target language being taught.

    Acceptable Performance Indicators

    Candidates speak at the Advanced Low level on the ACTFL proficiency scale except for candidates in Arabic,
    Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, who speak at the Intermediate High level.

    Advanced Low speakers narrate and describe in the major time frames in paragraph-length discourse with
    some control of aspect. They handle appropriately the linguistic challenges presented by a complication or
    unexpected turn of events within the context of a situation.

    11

    Intermediate High speakers handle a number of tasks of the Advanced level, but may be unable to sustain
    performance of these tasks, resulting in one or more features of linguistic breakdown, such as the inability
    to narrate and describe fully in a time frame or to maintain paragraph-length discourse.

    1.b. Pre-service teachers will interpret oral, printed, and videotexts by demonstrating both literal
    and figurative or symbolic comprehension.

    Acceptable Performance Indicators

    As listeners, candidates at the Advanced Low level are able to understand short conventional narrative and
    descriptive texts with a clear underlying structure though their comprehension may be uneven. The listener
    understands the main facts and some supporting details.

    For readers of target languages that use a Roman alphabet, including classical languages, candidates read
    at the Advanced Low level; they understand conventional narrative and descriptive texts with a clear
    underlying structure though their comprehension may be uneven.

    For readers of target languages that use a non-Roman alphabet or characters, candidates read at the
    Intermediate High level; they understand fully and with ease short, non-complex texts that convey basic
    information and deal with personal and social topics to which the reader brings personal interest or
    knowledge.

    1.c. Pre-service teachers will present oral and written information to audiences of listeners or
    readers, using language at a minimum level of “Advanced Low” or “Intermediate High”
    according to the target language being taught.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    1.c.1. Presentational
    Communication:
    Speaking

    Candidates deliver oral presentations extemporaneously, without reading notes
    verbatim. Presentations consist of familiar literary and cultural topics and those
    of personal interest. They speak in connected discourse using a variety of time
    frames and vocabulary appropriate to the topic. They use extralinguistic support
    as needed to facilitate audience comprehension.

    12

    1.c.2. Interpersonal and
    Presentational
    Communication: Writing

    For target languages that use the Roman alphabet, candidates write at the
    Advanced Low level on the ACTFL proficiency scale: they narrate and describe in
    all major time frames with some control of aspect. They compose simple
    summaries on familiar topics.

    For target languages that use a non-Roman alphabet, candidates write at the
    Intermediate High level on the ACTFL proficiency scale: they narrate and
    describe in different time frames when writing about everyday events and
    situations. They write compositions and simple summaries related to work and/or
    school experiences.

    No. Guideline/Standard

    2.

    Cultures, Linguistics, Literatures, and Concepts from Other Disciplines

    Candidates demonstrate understanding of the multiple content areas that comprise the field of
    world language studies. They demonstrate understanding of the interrelatedness of
    perspectives, products, and practices in the target cultures. Candidates know the linguistic
    elements of the target language system, and they recognize the changing nature of language.
    Candidates identify distinctive viewpoints in the literary texts, films, art works, and documents
    from a range of disciplines accessible to them only through the target language.

    2.a. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate target cultural understandings and compare cultures
    through perspectives, products, and practices of those

    cultures.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    2.a.1. Cultural
    Knowledge

    Candidates cite key perspectives of the target culture and connect them to
    cultural products and practices. Candidates use the cultural framework of
    ACTFL’s World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages (2015)2, or another
    cross-cultural model, that connects perspectives to the products and practices
    as a way to compare the target culture to their own or to compare a series of

    2 Throughout this document, references to ACTFL’s World-Readiness Standards for Language Learning (2015) are intended to represent the
    most recent framework for K-12 language learning promoted by ACTFL.

    13

    cultures.

    2.a.2. Cultural
    Experience

    Candidates gain personal experience to support academic language study by
    spending planned time in a target culture or community.

    2.b. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate understanding of linguistics and the changing nature of
    language, and compare language systems.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    2.b.1. Language
    System: Phonology (P),
    Morphology (M), Syntax
    (SN), Semantics (SM)

    P: Candidates identify phonemes and allophones of the target language, cite
    rules of the sound system, and diagnose their own pronunciation difficulties.

    M: Candidates describe how morphemes in the target language are put together
    to form words, and they derive meaning from new words through morphological
    clues (e.g., word families).

    SN: Candidates identify syntactic patterns of the target language, such as
    simple, compound, and some complex sentences, and questions and contrast
    them with their native languages. They recognize key cohesive devices used in
    connected discourse such as adverbial expressions and conjunctions.

    SM: Candidates understand the inferred words and sentences as well as high-
    frequency idiomatic expressions, and they identify semantic differences between
    their native languages and the target language.

    2.b.2. Rules for
    Sentence Formation,
    Discourse, Sociolinguistic
    and Pragmatic
    Knowledge

    Candidates explain rules for word and sentence formation (e.g., verbal system,
    agreement, use of pronouns) and provide examples. They identify pragmatic
    and sociolinguistic features (e.g., politeness, formal/informal address) of the
    target discourse and identify features for creating coherence and discourse in
    extended spoken and written texts.

    2.b.3. Changing nature
    of language

    Candidates identify key changes in the target language over time (e.g., writing
    system, new words, spelling conventions, grammatical elements). They identify
    discrepancies between language in instructional materials and contemporary

    14

    usage.

    2.c. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate understanding of texts on literary and cultural themes as
    well as interdisciplinary topics.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    2.c.1. Knowledge of
    Literary and Cultural
    Texts

    Candidates interpret literary texts that represent defining works in the target
    cultures. They identify themes, authors, historical style, and text types in a
    variety of media that the cultures deem important to understanding their
    traditions.

    2.c.2. Content From
    Across the Disciplines

    Candidates derive general meaning and some details from materials with topics
    from a number of disciplines (e.g., ecology, health). They comprehend more
    from materials on topics with which they have some familiarity and can
    determine the meaning of words from context.

    2.d. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate understanding of the complex and abstract nature of
    language and distinguish between language and communication.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    2.d.1. Understanding the
    Nature of Language

    The candidate understands the difference between mental representation and
    pedagogical rules and is able to appropriately limit the testing of pedagogical
    rules.

    2.d.2. Language and
    Communication

    The candidate is able to explain the difference between activities that promote
    language acquisition and those that promote communication and is able to
    determine what kind of activity promotes acquisition and/or communication.

    2.d.3. Communication

    The candidate understands the purpose of communication, the role that context
    plays in communication, and can recognize tasks that are communicative in
    nature.

    15

    No. Guideline/Standard

    3.

    Language Acquisition Theories and Knowledge of Students and Their Needs

    Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the principles of language acquisition and use this
    knowledge to create linguistically and culturally rich learning environments. Candidates
    demonstrate an understanding of child and adolescent development, the context of instruction,
    and their students’ backgrounds, skills, and learning profiles in order to create a supportive
    learning environment that meets individual students’ needs.

    3.a. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate an understanding of key principles of language
    acquisition and create linguistically and culturally rich learning environments.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    3.a.1. Language
    Acquisition Theories

    Candidates exhibit an understanding of language acquisition theories, including
    the use of target language input, negotiation of meaning, interaction, and a
    supporting learning environment. They draw on their knowledge of theories, as
    they apply to K-12 learners at various developmental levels, in designing
    teaching strategies that facilitate language acquisition.

    3.a.2. Target Language
    Input

    Candidates use the target language to the maximum extent in classes at all
    levels of instruction. They designate certain times for spontaneous interaction
    with students in the target language. They tailor language use to students’
    developing proficiency levels. They use a variety of strategies to help students
    understand oral and written input. They use the target language to design
    content-based language lessons.

    3.a.3. Negotiation of
    Meaning

    Candidates negotiate meaning with students when spontaneous interaction
    occurs. They teach students a variety of ways to negotiate meaning with others
    and provide opportunities for them to do so in classroom activities.

    3.a.4. Meaningful
    Classroom Interaction

    Candidates design activities in which students will have opportunities to interact
    meaningfully with one another. The majority of activities and tasks is standards-
    based and has meaningful contexts that reflect curricular themes and students’

    16

    interests.

    3.b. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate an understanding of child and adolescent development to
    create a supportive learning environment for each student.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    3.b.1. Theories of
    Learner Development
    and Instruction

    Candidates describe the physical, cognitive, emotional, and social
    developmental characteristics of K-12 students. They implement a variety of
    instructional models and techniques to accommodate these differences.

    3.b.2. Understanding of
    Relationship of
    Articulated Program
    Models to Language
    Outcomes

    Candidates describe how world language program models (e.g., FLES, FLEX,
    immersion) lead to different language outcomes.

    3.b.3. Adapting
    Instruction to Address
    Students’ Language
    Levels, Language
    Backgrounds, Learning
    Styles

    Candidates seek out information regarding their students’ language levels,
    language backgrounds, and learning styles. They implement a variety of
    instructional models and techniques to address these student differences.

    3.b.4. Adapting
    Instruction to Address
    Students’ Multiple Ways
    of Learning

    Candidates identify multiple ways in which students learn when engaged in
    language classroom activities.

    3.b.5. Adapting
    Instruction to Meet
    Students’ Special Needs

    Candidates implement a variety of instructional models and techniques that
    address specific special needs of their students.

    3.b.6. Critical Thinking
    and Problem Solving

    Candidates implement activities that promote critical thinking and problem-
    solving skills.

    17

    3.b.7. Grouping

    Candidates differentiate instruction by conducting activities in which students
    work collaboratively in pairs and small groups. They define and model the task,
    give a time limit and expectations for follow-up, group students, assign students
    roles, monitor the task, and conduct a follow up activity, as appropriate.

    3.b.8. Use of
    Questioning and Tasks

    Candidates recognize that questioning strategies and task-based activities serve
    different instructional objectives. They use tasks as they appear in their
    instructional materials.

    No. Guideline/Standard

    4.

    Integration of Standards in Planning, Classroom Practice, and Use of Instructional Resources

    Candidates in world language teacher preparation programs understand and use the national
    World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages (2015) and their state standards to make
    instructional decisions. Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the standards and
    integrate them into their curricular planning. They design instructional practices and classroom
    experiences that address these standards. Candidates use the principles embedded in the
    standards to select and integrate authentic materials and technology, as well as to adapt and
    create materials, to support communication in their classrooms.

    4.a. Pre-service teachers will demonstrate an understanding of the World-Readiness Standards for
    Learning Languages and Michigan standards and use them as the basis for instructional
    planning.

    Acceptable Performance Indicators

    Candidates create activities and/or adapt existing instructional materials and activities to address specific
    World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages and Michigan standards.

    4.b. Pre-service teachers will integrate the goal areas of the World-Readiness Standards for Learning
    Languages and Michigan standards in their classroom practice.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    18

    4.b.1. Integration of
    Standards into
    instruction

    Candidates adapt activities as necessary to address World-Readiness Standards
    for Learning Languages and Michigan standards.

    4.b.2. Integration of
    Three Modes of
    Communication

    Candidates design opportunities for students to communicate by using the three
    modes of communication in an integrated manner.

    4.b.3. Integration of
    Cultural Products,
    Practices, Perspectives

    Candidates design opportunities for students to explore the target language
    culture(s) by making cultural comparisons by means of the 3Ps framework.

    4.b.4. Connections to
    Other Subject Areas

    Candidates design opportunities for students to learn about other subject areas
    in the target language. They obtain information about other subject areas from
    colleagues who teach those subjects.

    4.b.5. Connections to
    Target Language

    Communities

    Candidates provide opportunities for students to connect to target language
    communities through the Internet, email, social networking and other
    technologies.

    4.c. Pre-service teachers will use the World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages and
    Michigan standards to select and integrate authentic texts, use technology, and adapt and
    create instructional materials for use in communication.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    4.c.1. Selection and
    Integration of Authentic
    Materials and Technology

    Candidates identify and integrate authentic materials and technology to support
    standards-based classroom practice. They help students to acquire strategies
    for understanding and interpreting authentic texts available through various
    media.

    4.c.2. Adaptation and
    Creation of Materials

    Candidates adapt and/or create materials as necessary to reflect standards-
    based goals and instruction when materials fall short.

    19

    No. Guideline/Standard
    5.

    Assessment of Languages and Cultures

    Candidates in world language teacher preparation programs design ongoing assessments using
    a variety of assessment models to show evidence of K‐12 students’ ability to communicate in the
    instructed language in interpretive, interpersonal, and presentational modes, and to express
    understanding of cultural and literary products, practices, and perspectives of the instructed
    language. Candidates reflect on results of assessments, adjust instruction, and communicate
    results to stakeholders.

    5.a. Pre-service teachers will design and use ongoing authentic performance assessments using a
    variety of assessment models for all learners, including diverse students.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    5.a.1. Plan for
    Assessment

    Candidates design and use authentic performance assessments to demonstrate
    what students should know and be able to do following instruction.

    5.a.2. Formative and
    Summative Assessment
    Models

    Candidates design and use formative assessments to measure achievement
    within a unit of instruction and summative assessments to measure
    achievement at the end of a unit or chapter.

    5.a.3. Interpretive
    Communication

    Candidates design and use authentic performance assessments that measure
    students’ abilities to comprehend and interpret authentic oral and written texts
    from the target cultures. These assessments encompass a variety of response
    types from forced choice to open-ended.

    5.a.4. Interpersonal
    Communication

    Candidates design and use performance assessments that measure students’
    abilities to negotiate meaning as listeners/speakers and as readers/writers in an
    interactive mode. Assessments focus on tasks at students’ levels of comfort but
    pose some challenges.

    5.a.5. Presentational Candidates design and use assessments that capture how well students speak and write in planned contexts. The assessments focus on the final products

    20

    Communication created after a drafting process and look at how meaning is conveyed in
    culturally appropriate ways. They create and use effective holistic and/or
    analytical scoring methods.

    5.a.6. Cultural
    Perspectives

    Candidates devise assessments that allow students to apply the cultural
    framework to authentic documents. Student tasks include identifying the
    products, practices, and perspectives embedded in those documents.

    5.a.7. Integrated
    Communication
    Assessments

    Candidates use existing standards-based performance assessments (e.g.,
    integrated performance assessments) that allow students to work through a
    series of communicative tasks on a particular theme (e.g., wellness, travel).
    They evaluate performance in a global manner.

    5.a.8. Assessments
    Reflect a Variety of
    Models Designed to Meet
    Needs of Diverse
    Learners

    Candidates assess what students know and are able to do by using and
    designing assessments that capture successful communication and cultural
    understandings. They commit the effort necessary to measure end
    performances.

    5.b. Pre-service teachers will reflect on and analyze the results of student assessments, adjust
    instruction accordingly, and use data to inform and strengthen subsequent instruction.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    5.b.1. Reflect Candidates observe and analyze the results of student performances to discern global success and underlying inaccuracies.

    5.b.2. Adjust Instruction Candidates use insights gained from assessing student performances to conduct whole group review and then to adapt, change, and reinforce instruction.

    5.b.3. Incorporate
    Results and Reflect on
    Instruction

    Candidates incorporate what they have learned from assessments and show
    how they have adjusted instruction. The commitment to do this is evident in
    their planning.

    21

    5.c. Pre-service teachers will interpret and report the results of student performances to all
    stakeholders in the community, with particular emphasis on building student responsibility for
    their own learning.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    5.c.1. Interpret and
    Report Progress to
    Students

    Candidates interpret and report accurately the progress students are making in
    terms of language proficiency and cultural knowledge. They use performances
    to illustrate both what students can do and how they can advance.

    5.c.2. Communicate with
    Stakeholders

    Candidates report student progress to students and parents. They use
    appropriate terminology and share examples that illustrate student learning.
    Candidates report assessment results accurately and clearly.

    No. Guideline/Standard

    6.

    Professional Development, Advocacy, and Ethics

    Candidates engage in ongoing professional development opportunities that strengthen their own
    linguistic, cultural, and pedagogical competence and promote reflection on practice. Candidates
    articulate the role and value of languages and cultures in preparing all students to interact
    successful in the global community of the 21st century. They understand the importance of
    collaboration to advocate for the learning of languages and cultures. Candidates understand and
    explain the opportunities and responsibilities inherent in being a professional language educator
    and are committed to equitable and ethical interactions with all stakeholders.

    6.a. Pre-service teachers will engage in ongoing professional development opportunities that
    strengthen their own linguistic, cultural and pedagogical competence and promote reflection on
    practice.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    6.a.1. Awareness of
    Professional Learning

    Candidates identify and participate in at least one pertinent professional
    learning community.

    22

    Communities

    6.a.2. Lifelong
    Commitment to
    Professional Growth

    Candidates identify immediate professional development needs and pursue
    opportunities to meet them.

    6.a.3. Inquiry and
    Reflection as a Critical
    Tool for Professional
    Growth

    Candidates frame their own reflection and research questions and show
    evidence of engaging in a process of inquiry to improve teaching and learning.

    6.a.4. Seeking
    Professional Growth
    Opportunities

    Candidates seek counsel regarding opportunities for professional growth and
    establish a plan to pursue them.

    6.b. Pre-service teachers will articulate the role and value of languages and cultures in preparing all
    students to interact successfully in the global community of the 21st century. They also
    understand the importance of collaborating with all stakeholders, including students,
    colleagues, and community members to advocate for the learning of languages and cultures as a
    vital component in promoting innovation, diverse thinking, and creative problem solving, and
    they work collaboratively to increase K-12 student learning of languages and cultures.

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    6.b.1. Develop an
    Advocacy Rationale for
    Language Learning

    Candidates develop a rationale for advocating the importance of language
    learning.

    6.b.2. Access, Analyze
    and Use Data to Support
    Language Learning

    Candidates select appropriate data sources to develop products in support of
    language learning for designated audiences.

    6.b.3. Recognize the
    Importance of
    Collaboration and
    Building Alliances for

    Candidates provide evidence of participating in at least one professional and/or
    social network designed to advocate for the increase of K-12 student learning in
    languages and cultures.

    23

    Advocacy that Support
    Increased K-12 Student
    Learning

    6.c. Pre-service teachers will understand and explain the opportunities and responsibilities inherent
    in being a professional language educator and demonstrate a commitment to equitable and
    ethical interactions with all students, colleagues and other stakeholders

    Elements Acceptable Performance Indicators

    6.c.1. Become a Member
    of the Profession

    Candidates shadow officers and members in professional learning communities
    and avail themselves of programs sponsored by these organizations.

    6.c.2. Successful
    Interaction in
    Professional Settings

    Candidates demonstrate appropriate conduct when interacting in various and
    more challenging professional contexts.

      MEMORANDUM

    • DATE: October 27, 2015
    • FROM: Brian J. Whiston, Chairman

    • SUBJECT: Approval of the Michigan Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages
    • In pursuit of its goal to improve teacher quality, the State Board of Education (SBE) is being presented with the proposal for adoption of new Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages. These standards will replace Michigan’s curren…
    • The World Language Advisory Committee (WLAC), composed of representatives from Michigan’s public and independent teacher preparation programs in world languages and the Michigan World Language Association (MIWLA), met over the past two years to update…
    • The standards were submitted for SBE review at its October 13, 2015, meeting and for approval at the November 10, 2015, meeting.
    • UAttachment A
      Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages
      Purpose
      The purpose of the Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of World Languages is to establish a shared vision for the knowledge and skills that entry level teachers of world languages in Michigan should possess and be able to demonstrate in their te…
      Development of the Proposal
      Attachment B

    • Program/Subject Area:

    1

    Introduction to Standards

    for the Preparation of
    Teachers of English as a

    Second Language

    Approved by the Michigan State Board of Education

    February 14, 2017

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language

    2

    Conceptual Framework for the Preparation of Teachers in Michigan

    A teacher preparation program is comprised of multiple interdependent components
    that prepare candidates for certification to demonstrate proficiencies defined in

    several aligned sets of standards.

     The Michigan Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (MI-

    InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards, adopted by the SBE in 2013, define
    the theoretical and practical knowledge, skills, and dispositions that all entry
    level teachers should possess upon completion of an approved teacher

    preparation program.

     The Michigan Certification Standards for the Preparation of All Elementary

    and Secondary Teachers in Reading Instruction specify the expected
    knowledge and skills in the areas of reading that all teachers at the
    elementary and secondary levels should possess upon entry to the

    profession, regardless of content area specialization.

     Michigan-specific content standards define the central concepts, tools of

    inquiry, and structures of the specific discipline(s) in which teacher
    candidates seek endorsement, as well as pedagogical applications of that
    disciplinary knowledge.

    A recommendation for teacher certification is an assurance on the part of
    the teacher preparation program that a candidate demonstrates the

    appropriate proficiencies specified in each of these sets of standards.

    Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a Second Language

    Purpose

    The purpose of the Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a
    Second Language (ESL) is to establish a shared vision for the knowledge and skills

    that entry level teachers of ESL in Michigan should possess and be able to
    demonstrate in their teaching, regardless of whether they follow a traditional or
    alternate route into the profession. This document provides standards across six

    domains of professional preparation to provide instruction

    for English

    Learners.

    These standards establish outcomes for graduates of teacher preparation programs

    in ESL, and should be used to inform program development and continuous
    improvement efforts at Michigan’s institutions of higher education and alternate
    route providers. They exemplify the following “Beliefs for Supporting Linguistically

    and Culturally Diverse Learners in English/Multilingual Teaching,” developed and
    adopted by the MDE’s OFS’ English Learner Advisory Committee (ELAC) in its

    strategic planning process and revised in November 2016.

    We are committed to providing intensive, intentional, and appropriate

    instructional opportunities that meet the unique needs of English Learners,
    and ensuring their academic success by building on the prior knowledge,
    cultural and linguistic assets students bring to their learning communities.

    We are committed to teacher preparation and ongoing professional learning
    that leads to effective teaching so that all students are able to make

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language

    3

    contributions to economic, social, civic, technological and cultural
    advancements.

    We are committed to advocating for educational equity and excellence for

    linguistically and culturally diverse learners which includes fostering climates
    that welcome, honor and respect diversity, multilingualism, multiliteracy, and

    students’ cultural contributions in a global society.

    These standards are rooted in the belief that the primary role of an English as a
    Second Language (NS) endorsed teacher is to promote educational equity and the

    academic achievement of students whose home languages are not English by
    delivering instruction in how to speak, read, write, listen and communicate in

    English and by supporting their acquisition of content knowledge and academic
    language while they learn English. This role is distinct from that of the World
    Language (F_) endorsed teacher, whose primary role is to increase children’s global

    competence by delivering instruction in how to speak, read, write and listen in a
    target world language that is not their home language, as well as by supporting

    students’ understanding of the world cultures associated with the target language.
    It is also distinct from that of the Bilingual Education (Y_) endorsed teacher, whose
    primary role is to promote educational equity by making content curriculum

    accessible to students whose home languages are not English by delivering content
    area instruction in the students’ home language(s), supporting the maintenance

    and development of literacy in students’ home language(s), and simultaneously
    providing direct instruction in English language and literacy.

    These standards are aligned with the TESOL/CAEP Standards of the Recognition of

    Initial TESOL Programs in P-12 ESL Teacher Education (2010). Because they are
    aligned with the same standards used by national accrediting bodies and specialty

    program associations for recognition and accreditation decisions, Michigan
    programs’ alignment to the state standards will support their accreditation
    activities.

    Development of the Proposal
    The ELAC, led by the MDE’s OFS and composed of representatives from Michigan’s

    local education agencies, intermediate school districts, and public and independent
    teacher preparation programs in bilingual education and ESL, began discussions
    about updating Michigan’s teacher preparation standards in November 2014. This

    action was motivated by recognition of a critical shortage of appropriately prepared
    teachers to meet the needs of Michigan’s growing population of students eligible for

    ESL or bilingual education services. For example, in the 2015-2016 school year,
    90,121 students were identified as English Learners1 and eligible for ESL or bilingual

    education programs yet only 733 full-time equivalent instructional positions (FTEs)
    were devoted to serving this population by teachers holding NS or Y_
    endorsements, according to the Registry of Educational Personnel for End of Year

    2016. Further impetus for updating the standards came after the November 201

    5

    SBE adoption of updated standards for world language teacher preparation. At its

    March 17, 2016, meeting, the consensus of the ELAC was to review the
    TESOL/CAEP 2010 standards and Michigan’s Standards for the Preparation of

    1 Source: MI School Data, 2015-2016 Student Count

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language

    4

    Teachers of English as a Second Language (NS) adopted by the SBE at its July 7,
    2004, meeting to determine whether an adoption of the TESOL/CAEP standards or a
    targeted revision of the English as a Second Language (NS) standards would be the

    best approach to updating Michigan’s standards. Members of the ELAC were
    surveyed for their interest to serve on a workgroup engage in this work and bring

    an updated set of standards for ELAC approval before its fall 2016 meeting. The
    ESL Standards Workgroup met at the MDE on May 10, 2016, and determined that a
    targeted revision of the 2004 NS standards was the best approach for updating

    Michigan standards. It identified 19 standards for revision and drafted new
    language for the identified standards. The workgroup met again at the ELAC’s June

    2, 2016, meeting to review recommended revisions from the May meeting and
    reach consensus on draft language for standards that were not considered during
    the May meeting. The workgroup met for a third time at the MDE on August 3,

    2016, to review the standards holistically, discuss the purpose of the English as a
    Second Language (NS) endorsement, and consider both preparation program

    requirements and endorsement authorizations, discussed later in this document.

    These standards were submitted for the SBE review at its November 15, 2016,
    meeting. This presentation was followed by a period of public comment through

    January 17, 2017. Seven comments explicitly addressing the proposed NS
    standards were submitted, and all were strongly supportive of the standards. One

    commenter recommended that Program Requirements be amended to require non-
    native English speakers pursuing the NS endorsement to “prove that they had
    taken a certain number of college credits in English.” Because teacher preparation

    coursework for the NS endorsement is taught in English and teacher licensure
    assessments are administered in English, the demonstration of English proficiency

    represented by “successful completion of coursework in an approved program and
    required assessments for teacher licensure” in Standard 1.1 was considered
    sufficient by the ESL Standards Workgroup for addressing this concern, and no

    changes to the standards or program requirements were made as a result of this
    feedback.

    A second commenter on both the NS and Y_ standards recommended that
    references to “academic vocabulary” and “language acquisition” throughout both
    sets of standards and introductory remarks be changed to “academic language” (to

    acknowledge that achieving proficiency in academic disciplines involves more than
    the mastery of discrete words) and “language development” (to acknowledge that

    language is not a commodity to be acquired, but rather a social resource that
    develops in interaction with others), respectively, to be more in line with current

    research and teaching in the field. This same commenter also recommended the
    addition of a standard “to acknowledge current research on language in different
    disciplinary and content areas that is showing how teachers can benefit from

    understanding the different discourse expectations for language in different
    subjects.” A third commenter, representing the collective feedback of the faculty

    from a Michigan educator preparation institution, recommended slight rewordings of
    selected standards (specifically, 1.4, 1.5, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 in both NS and Y_
    standards) for clarity. The ESL Standards Workgroup reviewed these

    recommendations and endorsed updating the standards accordingly.

    These standards have strong continuity with the previous Michigan standards in

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language
    5

    terms of the core competencies that teachers in ESL programs should be able to
    demonstrate, with most of the targeted revisions consisting of subtle updates in
    language that increase the currency of the standards and provide stronger

    distinctions between expected competencies for ESL, bilingual and world language
    teachers. Standards related to teachers’ understanding of the role that culture plays

    in language development and ability to apply their understanding of different
    cultural perspectives in instruction with English Learners (Standards 2.1 – 2.4) are
    unchanged from the 2004 standards. Outdated language referring to “limited-

    English proficient” learners was updated throughout to reference English Learners
    to align with the language adopted in the Every Student Succeeds Act (e.g., 3.7,

    6.4). Standards relating to assessment (5.1 – 5.6) were updated to more clearly
    emphasize that teachers of ESL must be able to demonstrate assessment literacy
    not only in general, but also in the unique context of working with English Learners

    in an ESL setting. New standards (4.6 and 5.7) were added to further emphasize
    the need for teachers of ESL to be able to implement a variety of accommodations

    in both instruction and assessment that are appropriate to the needs of English
    Learners. Lastly, a new standard (1.5) was added to support bilingual teachers’
    ability to distinguish patterns of behavior and performance in the second language

    development process that may resemble patterns of behaviors exhibited by children
    with learning disabilities from manifestations of true learning disabilities.

    The most significant change in the updated standards is the expectation for
    language proficiency in English that teacher candidates are to demonstrate (1.1).
    The 2004 standards specified “At least a superior level of speaking, listening,

    reading, and writing proficiency in English using a variety of testing protocols.” The
    new Standard 1.1 specifies that candidates demonstrate “an ability to serve as

    effective models of spoken and written English as demonstrated by successful
    completion of coursework in an approved program and required assessments for
    teacher licensure.” The rewritten standard aligns with the performance indicator for

    exceeding TESOL/CAEP’s corresponding standard. As teacher preparation programs
    in ESL are delivered in English and multiple certification testing requirements for

    earning an NS endorsement (e.g. Professional Readiness Exam, Michigan Test for
    Teacher Certification #086) assess candidates’ reading and writing skills at a high
    level, the consensus view of the ESL Standards Workgroup is that reifying

    additional formal testing of candidates’ English proficiency within the standards was
    not warranted.

    Program Requirements
    Educator preparation institutions wishing to recommend candidates for

    endorsements in world languages must ensure that candidates have completed a
    program of study that includes:

     an elementary or secondary program of study of at least 20 semester

    hours, or K-12 program of study of at least 24 semester hours connected
    with a program of study of at least 30 semester hours in Elementary

    Education, Language Arts, Social Studies, Science or Mathematics for
    initial endorsement on an elementary or secondary teaching certificate.
    For programs leading to an additional endorsement on an existing teacher

    certificate, at least 20 semester hours for an elementary or secondary
    endorsement and 24 semester hours for a K-12 endorsement;

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language

    6

     Prerequisite/co-requisite: documented experience learning a second
    language equivalent to two semesters’ worth of college-level study in
    order to gain an understanding and appreciation of the processes of

    learning an additional language. Any semester hours earned in language
    coursework in fulfillment of this requirement may not count toward the 20

    semester hour minor or 24 semester hour group minor; and

     for initial certification, a separate professional education program of at
    least 20 semester hours appropriate to grade level of the endorsement

    sought that prepares the candidate to the appropriate learning
    progression of the Michigan Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support

    Consortium (MI-InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards and the
    appropriate Michigan Certification Standards for the Preparation of All
    Elementary and Secondary Teachers in Reading Instruction.

    In addition K-12 initial and additional endorsement programs must provide:

     structured field experiences with a gradual release of responsibility

    (inclusive of student teaching) in three areas: elementary, middle school,
    and high school;

     course work in growth and development for early childhood and

    adolescent learners; and

     preparation in instructional methods with specific strategies of instruction

    for English Learners and multilingual learners appropriate to all levels of
    certification.

    Endorsement Authorizations

    Teachers possessing an English as a Second Language (NS) endorsement may
    provide instruction in an ESL classroom in the grade levels indicated on their

    certificate for the NS endorsement. Teachers possessing an English as a Second
    Language (NS) endorsement and an endorsement in a core subject area may
    provide sheltered instruction2 in all subjects according to certificate grade level and

    Michigan Merit Curriculum (MMC) credit in core subject areas in which they are
    endorsed (e.g., a teacher with English as a Second Language (NS) and Social

    Studies (RX) endorsements with 6-12 grade level authorizations may serve as the
    instructor of record for a course granting MMC credit in social studies offered only
    to students in grades 6-12 who qualify for ESL services).

    Teachers possessing an English as a Second Language (NS) endorsement may also
    provide support for students who qualify for ESL services through co-teaching with

    teachers possessing appropriate certification in any subject area and in any grade
    level within the span of the NS endorsement. They may also provide instruction in a

    resource room setting for students who qualify for ESL services, and may serve as
    instructor of record for courses granting elective credit under the MMC without

    2 Sheltered instruction is defined as a classroom setting in which teachers use specific

    strategies to teach a specific content area (e.g., social studies or math) in ways

    comprehensible to students whose home language is not English while promoting their

    English language development.

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers English as a Second Language

    7

    possessing additional subject area endorsements.

    The NS endorsement is not authorization to teach in a bilingual classroom in
    Michigan.

    Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a Second Language

    8

    Participants in Standards Development

    Martha A. Adler, Ph.D.

    Associate Professor,
    Reading/Language Arts & ESL

    University of Michigan-Dearborn

    Elizabeth Corah-Hopkins, Ph.D.
    Program Coordinator,

    Bilingual/Bicultural Education

    Wayne State University

    Christina DeNicolo, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor of Bilingual and
    Bicultural Education

    Wayne State University

    Casey L. Gordon

    Special Populations Consultant
    Kent Intermediate School District

    Norma Hernandez

    Director, Office of English Language
    Learners

    Detroit Public Schools

    Sean Kottke, Ph.D.
    Education Consultant

    Michigan Department of Education

    Sarah-Kate LaVan, Ph.D.

    Manager, Professional Preparation and
    Learning Unit
    Michigan Department of Education

    Su McKeithen-Polish, Ph.D.
    Bilingual Education/Title III Consultant

    Macomb Intermediate School District

    Lena Montgomery
    Manager

    Wayne Regional Education Service
    Agency

    Rui Niu-Cooper, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor of Education

    Aquinas College

    Maria Selena Protacio, Ph.D.

    Assistant Professor of Literacy Studies
    Western Michigan University

    Marcie Pyper, Ph.D.
    Professor of Spanish
    Calvin College

    Sara Rainwater
    ESL Coordinator

    Genesee Intermediate School District

    Maura Sedgeman
    Language & Literacy/SIOP Trainer

    Dearborn Public Schools

    Kerry Segel, Ph.D.

    Professor of English
    Saginaw Valley State University

    Maria Elena Silva

    English Learner Consultant
    Michigan Department of Education

    Kay Smith
    ELL Coordinator
    Grand Rapids Public Schools

    Shereen Tabrizi, Ph.D.
    Manager, Special Populations Unit

    Michigan Department of Education

    Suzanne Toohey, M.Ed.
    ESL/Title III Consultant

    Oakland Schools

    Michelle Williams

    Migrant Education Consultant
    Michigan Department of Education

    9

    English as a Second Language (NS)

    Content Standards

    English as a Second Language (NS) Content Standards

    10

    No. Guideline/Standard

    1.0
    Language, Linguistics, Comparisons

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    1.1
    An ability to serve as effective models of spoken and written English as demonstrated by successful

    completion of coursework in an approved program and required assessments for teacher licensure.

    1.2
    Knowledge of the linguistic elements (such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and

    discourse) of English and their role in developing literacy.

    1.3 An understanding of the dynamic changing nature of language systems.

    1.4
    Knowledge of socio-linguistic elements such as language varieties, dialects, registers, and the value of

    bilingualism/multilingualism.

    1.5
    An ability to distinguish between learning challenges and behaviors associated with language development

    and those associated with learning disabilities.

    1.6
    An understanding of the ways language varies across subject areas and familiarity with the discursive and

    grammatical challenges of language use in different subjects.

    2.0
    Cultures, Literatures, Cross-Disciplinary Concepts

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    2.1

    Knowledge, understanding, and use of the major concepts, principles, theories, and research related to the

    nature and role of culture in language development and academic achievement that support students
    learning.

    2.2
    Application of knowledge and understanding of how valuing cultural groups and students’ cultural identities
    affect language learning and school achievement.

    English as a Second Language (NS) Content Standards

    11

    2.3

    An understanding of the value and role of literary and cultural texts that reflect students’ heritage and

    cultures and the ability to use them to interpret and reflect upon a variety of cultural perspectives over
    time.

    2.4
    An understanding of similarities and differences between English-speaking and heritage cultures, and
    knowledge of how to make thoughtful comparisons between them that indicate the valuing of learners’
    home cultures while enabling them to adapt to the new culture.

    3.0
    Second Language Development Theories and Instructional Practices

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    3.1
    An understanding of second language development theories and research, inclusive of error analysis,
    performance analysis, and interlanguage analysis.

    3.2
    An ability to use language development knowledge to create a supportive classroom-learning environment
    that includes opportunities for interaction and negotiation of meaning in English.

    3.3
    A variety of instructional practices that produce language outcomes through articulated program models
    that address the needs of linguistically and culturally diverse learners.

    3.4
    Knowledge and use of second language development theories and research in classroom organization,
    developing teaching strategies, and choosing and adapting classroom instructional resources.

    3.5
    Knowledge of individual learner variables (e.g., linguistic, cognitive, affective, social) in the second
    language development process.

    3.6
    Knowledge of second language teaching methodologies and their applicability in developing instructional
    practices and resources to meet the needs of individual English Learners.

    3.7
    Knowledge and use of a variety of strategies to promote full participation of English Learners in
    classrooms.

    English as a Second Language (NS) Content Standards

    12

    3.8
    Knowledge and use of a wide range of materials, resources, and technologies in effective content teaching

    for English Learners.

    3.9
    Competency in teaching English Learners to acquire and use English in listening, speaking, reading, and

    writing for social and academic purposes.

    4.0
    Integration of Standards Into Curriculum and Instruction

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    4.1
    An understanding of the standards and benchmarks currently approved in Michigan for K-12 content and

    English language proficiency in curricular planning.

    4.2
    An ability to integrate the standards and benchmarks currently approved in Michigan for K-12 content and
    English language proficiency into instruction with appropriate strategies and techniques that support

    students in accessing the core curriculum as they learn both language and academic content.

    4.3
    An ability to use standards and benchmarks to evaluate, select, design, and adapt instructional resources

    by connecting curriculum to students’ experiences and skills of home and community.

    4.4
    An ability to manage and implement standards-based content instruction to support English Learners

    in accessing the core curriculum as they learn language and academic content.

    4.5

    Knowledge, understanding, and use of standards-based practices and strategies related to planning,

    implementing, and managing content instruction including the use of critical thinking skills for English
    Learners.

    4.6
    Familiarity with and adaptive use of a wide range of standards-based materials, resources, and
    technologies in the delivery of effective content curriculum for English learners.

    4.7
    Knowledge and use of differentiated instruction and appropriate and timely accommodations based on the
    needs of the needs of English Learners.

    5.0 Assessment

    English as a Second Language (NS) Content Standards

    13

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    5.1
    Knowledge of the nature of assessment and multiple ways to assess that are age, level, and language

    appropriate.

    5.2

    Effective and timely assessment practices including: analysis of formative, interim and summative

    assessment results, and use of outcome data to inform instruction and to interpret and communicate
    student achievement results to all stakeholders.

    5.3
    Knowledge of various assessment issues affecting English Learners (e.g., cultural and linguistic bias,
    political, social, linguistic and psychological factors).

    5.4
    Knowledge and use of various standards-based language proficiency instruments to inform instruction and
    the value of data for identification, placement, and demonstration of language proficiency and academic
    achievement of English Learners.

    5.5
    Knowledge of the difference between language proficiency testing and other types of assessment (e.g.,
    standardized achievement tests of overall mastery) as they affect English Learners.

    5.6 Knowledge of the relationship between standards and assessment decisions.

    5.7
    Knowledge and use of a variety of assessment accommodations appropriate to the needs of English

    Learners.

    6.0
    Professionalism

    Candidates for endorsement in English as a Second Language will demonstrate:

    6.1 Knowledge of culturally responsive teaching practices.

    6.2

    Knowledge of the additive value that multilingualism brings to the overall success of all students and an

    understanding of the teacher’s role as an advocate with students, colleagues, and members of the
    community in promoting and developing multilingualism.

    English as a Second Language (NS) Content Standards

    14

    6.3
    An ability to identify, analyze, and reflect upon professional knowledge and language proficiency, and seek

    resources for improvement.

    6.4
    Knowledge of legislative impact on teaching in programs for world languages, English Learners, and

    bilingual education.

    6.5 Knowledge of the teacher’s role as a professional within a discipline.

    6.6
    Knowledge of the history and current state of teaching world languages, English Learners, and bilingual

    students as it affects public policy and advocacy issues.

    6.7
    An ability to serve as a professional resource, advocate for students, and build partnerships with students’

    families and communities.

    • Untitled
    • Introduction to Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a Second Language
      Standards for the Preparation of Teachers of English as a Second Language
      Development of the Proposal

    Calculator

    Calculate the price of your paper

    Total price:$26
    Our features

    We've got everything to become your favourite writing service

    Need a better grade?
    We've got you covered.

    Order your paper