Translingual Partners in Early Childhood Elementary-Education

| ix →

FIGURES

Figure 1.1. Combinations of symbols to exemplify meaning.

Figure 3.1. Talk to your partner activity.

Figure 4.1. Students using semiotic tools to represent an academic concept.

Figure 4.2. Interactive Spanish and English word wall visible from any point in the classroom.

Figure 4.3. Collaborative writing in translingual partners.

Figure 6.1. Generic sentence stems in Spanish.

Figure 6.2. Generic bilingual question and sentence stems.

Figure 6.3. Designated A/B partners for prekindergarten.

Figure 6.4. Use of colored pencils in prekindergarten.

Figure 6.5. Use of colored pencils in second grade.

Figure 6.6. Joint writing with colored pencils during math class.

Figure 7.1. Shaun’s representation of objects found in the sky.

Figure 7.2. Brad and Ariana working together.

Figure 7.3. Sample writing rubric.

Figure 7.4. Sample reflective writing.

Figure 7.5. Reflection over monetary denominations.

Figure 7.6. Reflection on math homework. ← ix | x →

Figure 7.7. Reflective journal.

Figure 7.8. What we know about objects that float or sink.

Figure 7.9. Sebastian’s writing sample about his home.

| xi →

TABLES

Table 1.1. Semiotic tools commonly used in informal and formal communication.

Table 2.1. Empirical studies based on dyads.

Table 2.2. Conceptual articles related to dyad learning.

Table 3.1. Language development in the early years.

Table 4.1. Language development in the primary years: What children can be expected to do.

Table 4.2. Language allocation: Daily schedule in Mrs. Martin’s second grade classroom.

Table 4.3. Distinction between content and language.

Table 4.4. Routine prosocial phrases for translingual partner interactions.

Table 5.1. Sample Language Inventory—Spanish.

Table 5.2. Sample Language Inventory—English.

Table 5.3. Pairings by linguistic strengths.

Table 5.4. Developing high/medium and medium/low partners.

Table 5.5. Social studies lesson: Kindergarten.

Table 5.6. Questions at various levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Table 6.1. Snapshot of children’s emotional tasks. ← xi | xii →

Table 7.1. Sample observation for dramatic play episode.

Table 7.2. Example of an observation form sample assessment.

Table 7.3. Sample of student language profile.

Table 7.4. Sample of student self-assessment.

Table 7.5. Sample of student self-assessment.

Table 7.6. Sample checklist for language use with peer collaboration.

Table 7.7. Sample group assessment.

| xiii →

APPENDICES

Chapter 5

Appendix A: 5P lesson template

Appendix B: Lesson design checklist

Chapter 6

Appendix A: Strategies to develop collaborative skills

Chapter 7

Appendix A: Sample assessments

| xv →

FOREWORD

Partnering Young Children and Opening Up Linguistic Freedom Spaces

Ofelia García
The Graduate Center, City University of New York

Arreguín-Anderson and Alanís weave in this book a bilingual instructional space for very young children that liberates them from the constraints of educational “models” and language allocation policies that have been designed without considering their language and cultural practices, as well as their histories and socio-emotional lives. Focused on Latinx children, but aware of the children’s complexities in the many shapes of dual language bilingual education classrooms in the U.S., this book looks at the ways in which translingual partnerships in dual language bilingual classrooms can leverage the children’s varied linguistic and cultural wealth.

Three aspects of this book make it vitally important. First, it blends sociocultural learning theories with translanguaging theory, opening up a space of possibility in dual language bilingual classrooms. Second, it focuses on early childhood, a most important age-group. Third, the book blends theory with practice in a strong holistic relationship that makes the book valuable for educators and scholars alike. I describe these three aspects and then discuss them in relationship to bilingual education history and the development of the dual language “model.” I take up the Brother Grimm’s story of “Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Wolf” to consider how the translingual partnerships of very young children that this book propose can uncover dual-language designs of monoglossic whiteness that are sometimes hidden. ← xv | xvi →