SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION
Imagine that one day you are suddenly forced to leave your homeland. There is no time to put
your things in order and say good-bye to all your family and friends. You find yourself fleeing
to a strange land where people communicate in a language you don't understand or speak.
Instead of returning every day to your family and home to eat and sleep, you are now
temporarily staying in a transit camp awaiting permission to enter a new country. You know
that you may never return permanently to your country.
What might you be thinking and feeling? How would you survive? Who would be there to
help you? How long would it take to learn to speak, read and write this new language? Would
you be able to go to college if you wanted to? How would you feel if people's values, beliefs,
attitudes and nonverbal communication in this new culture were totally different from your
own? How long would it take you to adjust? How would you feel if the holidays you know
are not celebrated? How would you feel about adapting or assimilating to this new culture?
Obviously, people come to the U.S. for a multitude of different reasons. For some the move
may be a desirable event, but for almost everyone it will also involve painful, lonely and
difficult moments. Many things that one has taken for granted until now are gone. This is just
as true for children and young people as it is for adults.
In order to create quality educational opportunities for students, teachers and other school
personnel need to honestly assess their perceptions and attitudes about the experiences of
learning another language and adapting to a new culture: How much of what I "know" about
second language acquisition and culture is based on myth or misconception? How much have I
learned from personal experience? Am I open to becoming a learner instead of assuming that I
already know enough about this subject?
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Second language acquisition is a topic where a lot of us tend to rely more on "common sense
notions" than on actual experience or knowledge. There is, however, considerable research by
linguists and language specialists which contradicts many commonly-held assumptions about
how people learn a second language.
Skilled educators working with second language learners from diverse cultures pay attention to
the research and writings of prominent scholars in the field of second language education,
linguistics and multicultural education. Accurate information from reliable sources combined
with classroom-based research should form the basis for intelligent educational programs that
are responsive to the unique needs of ESL learners.

17

One of the most essential concepts in understanding second language learners is that there are
different aspects of language proficiency. These two aspects were formally defined as Basic
Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
(CALP) for the sake of simplicity by Canadian second language researcher Jim Cummins (1981).
BICS are often referred to as conversational English, i.e., the surface language we use to
communicate in everyday real-life situations which are not cognitively demanding. Native
speakers use conversational English to talk informally with teachers, other adults, and
classmates in the school setting. Although there are individual differences, research shows that
second language learners frequently develop native-like conversational skills within two years.
This kind of language proficiency is not to be confused with Cognitive Academic Language
Proficiency (CALP).
CALP is also referred to as academic English. Academic English is the proficiency required by
students to read, write and learn in the content ares (e.g., science, social studies, etc.) at an
appropriate grade level. This aspect of language proficiency is much more critical to a student's
academic success and takes as long as five to seven years to develop (Cummins, 1981; Collier,
1988). Educators sometimes mistakenly assume that students with fluent conversational English
no longer require language instruction.
Of course, it is difficult to know exactly how long the process of acquiring academic English will
take for an individual student. Numerous variables affect the length of time required to acquire
a second language and the approaches and methods most effective in teaching the student.
Some of the variables are: social and cultural factors, previous educational background, age,
oral and literacy skills in the primary/home language, and parental attitudes and experiences.
For many schools/districts, the primary concern is to teach ESL students to communicate in
English as quickly as possible. While this may be a matter of necessity, it is important to
consider the research and have realistic expectations about how long it will take to acquire
academic English. Second language learning is a complicated process which takes time. Because it
can take more than five years to reach a level of academic proficiency in English comparable to
their native-English-speaking peers, schools must therefore be prepared to make a long-term
commitment to supporting the academic development of ESL students (Cummins, 1994).
For more information on the second language acquisition process, see the ERIC Digest article,
"Myths and Misconceptions About Second Language Learning", Appendix B, p. 22.
A list of materials and resources for learning more about the second language acquisition is also
provided in Appendix B, p. 27.

18

INTERRELATIONSHIP OF LANGUAGE & CULTURE

In our efforts to teach students English, we also cannot ignore the value of their primary/home
language and culture. A few paragraphs in the New Mexico State Department of Education's
technical assistance manual, "Recommended Procedures for Language Assessment" (1989), express
this relationship between language and culture very eloquently. New Mexico has a large
multilingual/multicultural population and much can be learned from their experience in this
area of education.
"The schools in the state are always searching for ways and means to incorporate
methods and materials which can facilitate the acquisition of English for speakers of
other languages.
As educators, however, we must recognize that language and culture are inseparable.
They both contribute not just to the development of personality, but also to the manner
in which the individual, and indeed a given society, interprets reality.
Language is the most overt expression of culture, and most of the learning process, both in
school and in the home, is carried out through language. The child must relate and
accommodate what has been learned in the home to the language and culture of the
school. For the child whose language and culture matches that of the school, this can
be, in itself, a challenge. For students whose linguistic and cultural fabric are different from
that represented in the school, the task is monumental. When we recognize that our success
in life depends to a high degree on our educational experiences, we realize that we
must use the home language and culture of the child as tools for cognitive development
in the curriculum so as not to deprive these populations of full participation in the
educational process."
Whether or not we, as individuals or institutions in the state of Vermont, personally believe in
or support bilingualism or cultural diversity, we cannot deny the reality that language and
culture are intertwined. Effective educational programs recognize the language(s) and
culture(s) of all students in their schools and incorporate them into the curriculum. Validating
students' backgrounds supports their linguistic and cultural identity and heritage. In our
increasingly diverse schools, educators need to prepare students to participate in a society that
represents all multicultural groups fairly.
VERMONT'S LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
The state of Vermont has never been as culturally homogeneous or monolingual
English-speaking a place as it has been portrayed. Before Europeans began moving into the
area that is now Vermont, the land was inhabited by the Abenaki people, who had their own
flourishing language and culture. Elise Guyette's book, "Vermont: A Cultural Patchwork" (1986)
and the Vermont Folklife Center's "Many Cultures, One People: A Multicultural Handbook about
Vermont for Teachers" (1992), edited by Gregory Sharrow, provide interesting history and
biographical stories of the lives of the Abenakis and the various linguistic and cultural groups
that have migrated to Vermont and formed communities over the last few hundred

19

years. In recent years, the state has experienced immigration of peoples from other parts of the
world including Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Russia and Tibet.
Results from home language surveys show that there are more than 50 languages and dialects
spoken in Vermont homes today. The French-Canadians have been the largest linguistic
minority in recent history. The population of Vietnamese speakers has grown large enough in
the Burlington area in recent years that the city now has a public access television program
broadcast in their language.
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
Even districts with small populations of linguistically or culturally diverse students can support
multiculturalism in education. If Vermont students are to meet National Education Goals,
schools need to emphasize the importance of becoming competent in more than one language
and learning about the diverse cultural heritage of this nation.
In February 1993, the Northeast Consortium for Multicultural Education sponsored a regional
conference for educators. Participants at the conference met to develop a working definition of
multicultural education. The following definition emerged:
"Education that is multicultural is a dynamic and life-long process of teaching and
learning that fosters critical thinking, cultural awareness, language proficiency,
cooperation, self-esteem, community concern, and transformative social action.
Advocates for multicultural education work to promote social justice, educational
equity, and excellence."
This means more than organizing an annual ethnic festival or an isolated multicultural
education course. Multicultural education involves staff development, improving overall
school climate and classroom learning environment, curriculum reform, promoting unbiased
assessment practices, purchasing culturally appropriate instructional materials, and involving
parents and community members from diverse backgrounds in school programs.
Learning specifically about the language and cultural background of your student(s) is a good
way to get started in making your teaching more multicultural. You must become something of
an amateur linguist and cultural ethnographer. Even without bilingual programs, teachers can
learn strategies to promote students' development in their primary languages. By incorporating
the students' language and cultural backgrounds, the learning environment becomes more real
to them. Teachers can more effectively tap into ESL students' prior knowledge and experiences.
A list of resources for those who want to learn more about their students' language and cultural
backgrounds and multicultural education can be found in Appendix B, p. 29. In addition,
Appendix H, p. 168, lists resources for understanding stages of cultural adjustment, cultural
awareness and counseling concerns for ESL students.

20

FAMILY & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

One of the best ways for schools to become familiar with their students' language, cultural and
experiential backgrounds is through family and community involvement in the educational
process. However, language and cross-cultural barriers must be overcome if this is to happen.
Schools should begin involving parents in their child's education upon enrollment. A formal
interview with the family provides an opportune time to provide them with a general
orientation. Learning a new language and living in an unfamiliar culture can be very
demanding and stressful for people. A school's efforts to ease this transition ultimately benefits
the student. Often the school is a vital link to the community for refugee and immigrant
families.
Information which is especially important to share with parent/guardian(s) of ESL students
during the formal interview includes:

legal rights of ESL children and parents, i.e., the right to equal educational opportunities
and an alternative instructional program, including English language development and
academic instruction;

names and phone numbers of relevant school staff;

district or school ESL policy and procedures;

alternative language, content and social/cultural support services available;

general district and school policies, rules & regulations, curriculum, academic
requirements, teachers and principal, grievance procedures articulated in written materials,
translated versions preferably;
ESL and Adult Education Opportunities for parents.

For additional suggestions on how to involve parents and the communities of ESL students, see
Robert Parker's Parental and Home Language Community Involvement Plan Appendix B, p. 26.
There are many resources in and outside Vermont which can help schools to learn about the
language, cultural and experiential backgrounds families and communities, as well as ways to
work effectively with them. For a list of resources for family and community involvement, see
Appendix B, p. 32.

21

Appendix B
Myths and Misconceptions About
Second Language Learning
ERIC CLEARINGHOUSE ON LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS
CENTER FOR APPLIED LINGUISTICS DIGEST December 1992
Myths and Misconceptions About Second Language Learning
National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning
This digest is based on a report published by the National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second
Language Learning, University of California, Santa Cruz; Myths and Misconceptions About Second Language
Learning: What Every Teacher Needs to Unlearn, by Barry McLaughlin. Copies of the full report are available for $4.00
from Center for Applied Linguistics, NCRCDSLL, 1118 22nd St. NW, Washington, DC 20037.
As the school-aged population changes, teachers all
over the country are challenged with instructing more
children with limited English skills. Thus, all teachers
need to know something about how children learn a
second language (L2). Intuitive assumptions are often
mistaken, and children can be harmed if teachers have
unrealistic expectations of the process of L2 learning
and its relationship to the acquisition of other academic
skills and knowledge.
As any adult who has tried to learn another language
can verify, second language learning can be a
frustrating experience. This is no less the case for
children, although there is a widespread belief that
children are facile second language learners. This
digest discusses commonly held myths and
misconceptions about children and second language
learning and the implications for classroom teachers.
Myth 1: Children learn second languages quickly
and easily.
Typically, people who assert the superiority of child
learners claim that children's brains are more flexible
(e.g., Lenneberg, 1967). Current research challenges
this biological imperative, arguing that different rates
of L2 acquisition may reflect psychological and social
factors that favor child learners (Newport, 1990).
Research comparing children to adults has consistently
demonstrated that adolescents and adults perform better
than young children under controlled conditions (e.g.,
Snow & Hoefnagel-Hoehle, 1978). One exception is
pronunciation, although even here some studies show
better results for older learners.
Nonetheless, people continue to believe that children
learn languages faster than adults. Is this superiority
illusory? Let us consider the criteria of language
proficiency for a child and an adult. A child does not
have to learn as much as an adult to achieve
communicative competence. A child's constructions
are shorter and simpler, and vocabulary is smaller.
Hence, although it appears that the child learns more

quickly than the adult, research results typically

indicate that adult and adolescent learners perform
better.
Teachers should not expect miraculous results from
children learning English as a second language (ESL)
in the classroom. At the very least, they should
anticipate that learning a second language is as difficult
for a child as it is for an adult. It may be even more
difficult, since young children do not have access to the
memory techniques and other strategies that more
experienced learners use in acquiring vocabulary and in
learning grammatical rules.
Nor should it be assumed that children have fewer
inhibitions than adults when they make mistakes in an
L2.
Children are more likely to be shy and
embarrassed around peers than are adults. Children
from some cultural backgrounds are extremely anxious
when singled out to perform in a language they are in
the process of learning. Teachers should not assume
that, because children supposedly learn second
languages quickly, such discomfort will readily pass.
Myth 2: The younger the child, the more skilled in
acquiring an L2.
Some researchers argue that the earlier children begin
to learn a second language, the better (e.g., Krashen,
Long, & Scarcella, 1979). However, research does not
support this conclusion in school settings. For example,
a study of British children learning French in a school
context concluded that, after 5 years of exposure, older
children were better L2 learners (Stern, Burstall, &
Harley, 1975). Similar results have been found in other
European studies (e.g., Florander & Jansen, 1968).
These findings may reflect the mode of language
instruction used in Europe, where emphasis has
traditionally been placed on formal grammatical
analysis. Older children are more skilled in dealing
with this approach and hence might do better.
However, this argument does not explain findings from
studies of French immersion programs in Canada,
22

where little emphasis is placed on the formal aspects of

grammar. On tests of French language proficiency,
Canadian English-speaking children in late immersion
programs (where the L2 is introduced in Grade 7 or 8)
have performed as well or better than children who
began immersion in kindergarten or Grade 1 (Genesee,
1987).
Pronunciation is one area where the younger-is-better
assumption may have validity. Research (e.g., Oyama,
1976) has found that the earlier a learner begins a
second language, the more native-like the accent he or
she develops.
The research cited above does not suggest, however,
that early exposure to an L2 is detrimental. An early
start for foreign language learners, for example, makes
a long sequence of instruction leading to potential
communicative proficiency possible and enables
children to view second language learning and related
cultural insights as normal and integral. Nonetheless,
ESL instruction in the United States is different from
foreign language instruction. Language minority
children in U.S. schools need to master English as
quickly as possible while learning subject-matter
content. This suggests that early exposure to English is
called for. However, because L2 acquisition takes time,
children continue to need the support of their first
language, where this is possible, to avoid falling behind
in content area learning.
Teachers should have
realistic expectations of their ESL learners. Research
suggests that older students will show quicker gains,
though younger children may have an advantage in
pronunciation.
Certainly,
beginning
language
instruction in Grade 1 gives children more exposure to
the language than beginning in Grade 6, but exposure
in itself does not predict language acquisition.
Myth 3: the more time students spend in a second
language context, the quicker they learn the
language.
Many educators believe children from non-Englishspeaking backgrounds will learn English best through
structured immersion, where they have ESL classes and
content-based instruction in English. These programs
provide more time on task in English than bilingual
classes.
Research, however, indicates that this increased
exposure to English does not necessarily speed the
acquisition of English. Over the length of the program,
children in bilingual classes, with exposure to the home
language and to English, acquire English language
skills equivalent to those acquired by children who
have been in English-only programs (Cummins, 1981;
Ramirez, Yuen, & Ramey, 1991). This would not be
expected if time on task were the most important factor
in language learning.

Researchers also caution against withdrawing home

language support too soon and suggest that although
oral communication skills in a second language may be
acquired within 2 or 3 years, it may take 4 to 6 years to
acquire the level of proficiency needed for
understanding the language in its academic uses
(Collier, 1989; Cummins, 1981).
Teachers should be aware that giving language
minority children support in the home language is
beneficial. The use of the home language in bilingual
classrooms enables children to maintain grade-level
school work, reinforces the bond between the home and
the school, and allows them to participate more
effectively in school activities. Furthermore, if the
children acquire literacy skills in the first language, as
adults they may be functionally bilingual, with an
advantage in technical or professional careers.
Myth 4: Children have acquired an L2 once they
can speak it.
Some teachers assume that children who can converse
comfortably in English are in full control of the
language. Yet for school-aged children, proficiency in
face-to-face communication does not imply proficiency
in the more complex academic language needed to
engage in many classroom activities. Cummins (1980)
cites evidence from a study of 1,210 immigrant
children in Canada who required much longer
(approximately 5 to 7 years) to master the disembedded
cognitive language required for the regular English
curriculum than to master oral communicative skills.
Educators need to be cautious in exiting children from
programs where they have the support of their home
language. If children who are not ready for the allEnglish classroom are mainstreamed, their academic
success may be hindered. Teachers should realize that
mainstreaming children on the basis of oral language
assessment is inappropriate.
All teachers need to be aware that children who are
learning in a second language may have language
problems in reading and writing that are not apparent if
their oral abilities are used to gauge their English
proficiency. These problems in academic reading and
writing at the middle and high school levels may stem
from limitations in vocabulary and syntactic
knowledge. Even children who are skilled orally can
have such gaps.
Myth 5: All children learn an L2 in the same way.
Most teachers would probably not admit that they
think all children learn an L2 in the same way or at the
same rate. Yet, this assumption seems to underlie a
great deal of practice. Cultural anthropologists have
shown that mainstream U.S. families and families from
23

minority cultural backgrounds have different ways of

talking (Heath, 1983). Mainstream children are
accustomed to a deductive, analytic style of talking,
whereas many culturally diverse children are
accustomed to an inductive style.
U.S. schools
emphasize language functions and styles that
predominate in mainstream families. Language is used
to communicate meaning, convey information, control
social behavior, and solve problems, and children are
regarded for clear and logical thinking. Children who
use language in a different manner often experience
frustration.
Social class also influences learning styles. In urban,
literate, and technologically advanced societies, middleclass parents teach their children through language.
Traditionally, most teaching in less technologically
advanced, non-urbanized cultures is carried out
nonverbally,
through
observation,
supervised
participation, and self-initiated repetition (Rogoff,
1990). There is none of the information testing
through questions that characterized the teachinglearning process in urban and suburban middle-class
homes.
In addition, some children are more accustomed to
learning from peers than from adults. Cared for and
taught by older siblings or cousins, they learn to be
quiet in the presence of adults and have little
interaction with them. In school, they are likely to pay
more attention to what their peers are doing than to
what the teacher is saying.
Individual children also react to school and learn
differently within groups. Some children are outgoing
and sociable and learn the second language quickly.
They do not worry about mistakes, but use limited
resources to generate input from native speakers. Other
children are shy and quiet. They learn by listening and
watching. They say little, for fear of making a mistake.
Nonetheless, research shows that both types of learners
can be successful second language learners.
In a school environment, behaviors such as paying
attention and persisting at tasks are valued. Because of
cultural differences, some children may find the
interpersonal setting of the school culture difficult. If
the teacher is unaware of such cultural differences,
their expectations and interactions with these children
may be influenced.
Effective instruction for children from culturally
diverse backgrounds requires varied instructional
activities that consider the backgrounds requires varied
instructional activities that consider the children's
diversity of experience. Many important educational
innovations in current practice have resulted from
teachers adapting instruction for children from
culturally diverse backgrounds. Teachers need to
recognize that experiences in the home and home
culture affect children's values, patterns of language

use, and interpersonal style. Children are likely to be

more responsive to a teacher who affirms the values of
the home culture.
Conclusion
Research on second language learning has shown that
many misconceptions exist about how children learn
languages. Teachers need to be aware of these
misconceptions and realize that quick and easy
solutions are not appropriate for complex problems.
Second language learning by school-aged children
takes longer, is harder,and involves more effort than
many teachers realize.
We should focus on the opportunity that cultural and
linguistic diversity provides. Diverse children enrich
our schools and our understanding of education in
general. In fact, although the research of the National
Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second
Language Learning has been directed at children from
culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, much
of it applies equally well to mainstream students.

24

References
Collier, V. (1989). How long: A synthesis of
research on academic achievement in a second
language. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 509-531.
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of
language proficiency: Implications for bilingual
education and the optimal age issue. TESOL
Quarterly, 14, 175-187.
Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language
development in promoting educational success for
language minority students. In Schooling and
language minority students: A theoretical
framework. Los Angeles: California State University;
Evaluation, Dissemination, and
Assessment
Center.
Florander, J. & Jansen, M. (1968).
Skoleforsogiengelsk 1959-1965. Copenhagen:
Danish Institute of Education.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two
languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual
education. New York: Newbury House.
Heath, S.B. (1983). Ways with words: Language,
life, and work in communities and classrooms.
New
York: Cambridge.
Krashen, S., Long, M., & Scarcella, R. (1979). Age,
rate, and eventual attainment in second language
acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 13,573-582.
Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). The biological foundations
of language, New York: Wiley.
Newport, E. (1990). Maturational constraints on
language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11-28.
Oyama, S. (1976). A sensitive period for the
acquisition of nonnative phonological system.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 261-284.
Ramirez, J.D., Yuen, S.D., & Ramey, D.R. (1991).
Longitudinal study of structured English
immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit
transitional, bilingual education programs for
language minority children. Final Report.
Volumes 1 & 2. San Mateo, CA: Aguirre
International.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking:
Cognitive development in social context, New
York: Oxford.
Snow, C.E., & Hoefnage-Hoehle, M. (1978). The
critical period for language acquisition: Evidence
from second language learning. Child
Development, 49, 1114-1118.
Stern, H.H., Burstall, C., & Harley, B. (1975).
French from age eight or eleven? Toronto: Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education.
Reprinted with permission from the ERIC
Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.

25

Appendix B
PARENTAL AND HOME LANGUAGE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLAN
The following suggestions can be articulated to create a plan for involving parents of ESL students in the education of their
children.
1.

Use the home language with parents whenever possible. (Community resources will have to be accessed if there
are no adults in the district who speak the parents' home language.)

2.

Conduct a formal interview with each family at registration. Prepare a list of relevant questions about the
student's learning styles and achievement. Also, include information about how the parent can assist their child
in adjusting to the complexities of adjusting to his new school and language. You may need a translator to assist
you.

3.
4.

Notices, reports about student progress and recommendations need to be in the home language.
It is very helpful when districts, in collaboration with community organizations, provide training and support for
parents in how to access American schools, as well as what is taught in ESL and the contents. You might want
to provide information on how to assist students at home during such activities.

5.

Many districts support home language mentoring and tutoring programs for students and families in
collaboration with community organizations serving the ESL population.

6.

Establishing a working relationship with local health and service agencies helps schools help parents in
accessing the services of these organizations. These organizations are often an excellent resource for better
understanding the needs of ESL families.

7.

Establishing a working relationship with home language community organizations makes many of these
activities function more smoothly.

8. Many districts appoint a community/family liaison who knows the language and
culture of the target language group(s).

Adapted from "Designing An Educational Program for Low-Incidence Numbers of Limited English Proficient
Students" (p. 59) Robert C. Parker (1993).

26

Appendix B
RESOURCES ON SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Anderson, E.S., Krashen, S.D. & Scarcella, R.C. (1990). Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language.
Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Barton, A. (Ed.). (1992). Young Lives: Many Languages, Many Cultures. Division of School Programs: Massachusetts
Department of Education.
Baca, L., Collier, C., Hill, R., Jacobs, C. & Zelazo, J. (Eds.). (1991). Module 2: Second Language Acquisition,
Communication, and Learning. Bueno Modules for Bilingual Special Education. Boulder, CO: Bueno Center
for Multicultural Education.
Brown, H.D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Regents.
Chamot, A.U. (1981). Applications of Second Language Acquisition Research to the Bilingual Classroom. Focus, 8.
Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Collier, V.P. (1988). The Effect of Age on Acquisition of a Second Language for School. New Focus, 2. Wheaton, MD:
National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Collier, V.P. (1988). How Quickly Can Immigrants Become Proficient in School English? The Journal of Educational
Issues of Language Minority Students, 5, 26-38.
Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering Minority Students. Sacramento: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Cummins, J. (1981). The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language
Minority Students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and Language Minority
Students: A Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center,
California State University.
Cummins, J. (1994). In Spangenberg-Urbschat, K. & Pritchard, R. (Eds.), Kids Come In All Languages: Reading
Instruction for ESL Students (p. 54). Newark, DE: International Reading Association, Inc.
Hakuta, K. (1990). Bilingualism and Bilingual Education: A Research Perspective. Focus, 1. Washington, DC: National
Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Hakuta, K. (1986). Mirror of Language. New York: Basic Books.
Interface Network, Inc. (1987). ESL Language Acquisition and the Natural Approach. Classrooms Without Borders. [Video
& Teacher Training Module]. Portland, OR: Author.
Johns, K.M. (1988). How Children Learn a Second Language. Fastback Series. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa
Educational Foundation.
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Bilingual Education and Second Language Acquisition Theory. Schooling and Language Minority
Students: A Theoretical Framework. Los Angeles: California State University-Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment
Center.
Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (1993). How Languages are Learned. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
McKeon, D. (1994). Language, Culture, and Schooling. In F. Genesee (Ed.). Educating Second Language Children (pp.
15-32). New York: Cambridge University Press.

27

Sakash, K. (1991). Second Language Acquisition [Video-Program Two]. English as a Second Language: Addressing the
Needs of Language Minority Students. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana Public Broadcasting.
Smith, B. and Swan, M. (Eds.). (1987). Learner English: A Teacher's Guide to Interference and other Problems. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Tough, J. (1985). Talk Two: Children Using English as a Second Language. London: Onyx Press.
Trueba, H.T. (Ed.). (1987). Success or Failure? Learning and the Language Minority Student. Cambridge, MA: Newbury
House Publishers.
Ventriglia,L. (1982). Conversations of Miguel and Maria: How Children Learn a Second Language. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.

28

Appendix B
RESOURCES FOR MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
ORGANIZATIONS
CENTER FOR WORLD EDUCATION
University of Vermont
229 Waterman Building
Burlington, VT 05405-0160

Contact: David Conrad

Contact: David Shiman
TEL: (802) 656-2030

CULTURAL DIVERSITY & CURRICULUM PROGRAM

College of Education
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA 01003

Contact: Sonia Nieto

TEL: (413) 545-1551

GREEN MOUNTAIN RETURNED PEACE CORPS VOLUNTEERS

Speakers Bureau
RD #1, Box 660
Bristol, VT 05443

Contact: Mary Gemignani

TEL: (802) 453-3992

INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR INTERCULTURAL

EDUCATION, TRAINING & RESEARCH
International Secretariat (Professional Membership Association)
Suite 200
808 Seventeenth St., NW
Washington, DC 20006

Contact: David Fantini

TEL: (202) 466-7883

NEW ENGLAND DESEGREGATION ASSISTANCE CENTER

144 Wayland Avenue
Providence, RI 02906

TEL: (401) 351-7577

PEACE & JUSTICE CENTER

Racial Justice & Equity Project
21 Church St.
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: John Tucker

TEL: (802) 864-0659

REACH CENTER FOR MULTICULTURAL AND GLOBAL EDUCATION

180 Nickerson St., Suite 212
Seattle, WA 98109

TEL: (206) 284-8584

SOUTHEAST ASIAN REFUGEE STUDIES PROJECT (SARS)

CURA
University of Minnesota
330 Hubert Humphrey Center
301 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455

TEL: (612) 625-5535

SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER

Teaching Tolerance Magazine
400 Washington Ave.
Montgomery, AL 36104

29

THE NORTHEAST CONSORTIUM FOR MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION (NECME)

Equity Assistance Center, Region B
New York University
32 Washington Place
Suite 72
Contact: Donna Elam
New York, New York 10003
TEL: (212) 998-5100
THE VERMONT FOLKLIFE CENTER
The Gamaliel Painter House
P.O. Box 442
Middlebury, VT 05753

TEL: (802) 388-4964

WORLD OF DIFFERENCE INSTITUTE

Anti-Defamation League
823 United Nations Plaza
New York, New York 10017

TEL: (212) 490-2525

REFERENCE MATERIALS
Allen, J., McNeil, E., & Schmidt, V. (1992). Cultural Awareness for Children. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Baker, G.C. (1983). Planning and Organizing for Multicultural Instruction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Banks, J.A. (1988). Approaches to Multicultural Curriculum Reform. Multicultural Leader. Vol. 1, No. 2.
Barnett-Misrahi, C. & Trueba, H.T. (Eds.). (1979). Bilingual Multicultural Education and the Professional: From
Theory to Practice. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
Cargill, C. (Ed.). (1992). A TESOL Professional Anthology: Culture. Chicago, IL: National Textbook Company.
Cech, M. (1991). Globalchild: Multicultural Resources for Young Children. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Conru, P., Lewelling, V. & Stewart, W. (1993). Speaking of Language: An International Guide to Language
Service Organizations. McHenry, IL: Delta Systems and Center for Applied Linguistics.
Damen, L. (1987). Culture Learning: The Fifth Dimension in the Language Classroom. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Daniels, H.A. (Ed.). (1990). Not Only English: Affirming America's Multilingual Heritage. Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.
De Gaetano, Y. & Williams, L.R. (1985). Alerta: A Multicultural, Bilingual Approach to Teaching Young
Children. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Derman-Sparks, L. & A.B.C. Task Force (1989). Anti-Bias Curriculum: Tools for Empowering Young Children.
Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Ferguson, H. (1987). Manual for Multicultural Education. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press Inc.
Freeman, D.E. & Freeman, Y.S. (1993). Strategies for Promoting the Primary Languages of All Students. The
Reading Teacher, 46, 7, 552-558.

30

Gonzales, F. (1991). Validating the Student's Culture in the Classroom [Video-Program Seven]. English as a
Second Language: Addressing the Needs of Language Minority Students. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana
Public Broadcasting.
Hooper, S., Linse, C. & McCloskey, M.L. (1991). Teaching Language, Literature, and Culture: A Multicultural
Early Childhood Program. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Interface Network, Inc. (1987). Multicultural Education [Video]. Classrooms Without Borders Series. Portland,
OR: Author.
Kehoe, J.W. (1984). A Handbook for Enhancing the Multicultural Climate of the School. British Colombia:
Pacific Educational Press.
Kendall, F.E. (1983). Diversity in the Classroom: A Multicultural Approach to the Education of Young Children.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Lee, N. & Oldham, L. (1978). Hands on Heritage: An Experiential Approach to Multicultural Education. Long
Beach, CA: Hands On Publications.
Menkart, D. (1993). Multicultural Education: Strategies for Linguistically Diverse Schools and Classrooms.
Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Murray, D.E. (Ed.). (1992). Diversity as Resource: Redefining Cultural Literacy. Alexandria, VA: TESOL, Inc.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (1991). The American Tapestry: Educating a Nation. A Guide
to Infusing Multiculturalism into American Education. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Nieto, S. (1992). Affirming Diversity: The Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education. Whiteplains, NY:
Longman.
Saville-Troike, M. (1978). A Guide to Culture in the Classroom. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for
Bilingual Education.
Scarcella, R. (1990). Teaching Language Minority Students in the Multicultural Classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall Regents.
Sleeter, C.E. (Ed.). (1991). Empowerment Through Multicultural Education. Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Smallwood, B.A., (1991). The Literature Connection: A Read-Aloud Guide for Multicultural Classrooms.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Southwest Center for Educational Television. (1985) Somebody Else's Place. [Video-12 part television series].
Lincoln, Nebraska: GPN.
TVOntario. (1991) Many Voices. [Video Series]. Ontario, Canada.
Valdes, J.M. (Ed.). (1986). Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

31

Appendix B
RESOURCES FOR FAMILY/COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
ORGANIZATIONS
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ASIAN AND
PACIFIC AMERICAN EDUCATION (NAAPAE)
c/o ARC Associates
1212 Broadway, Suite 400
Oakland, CA 94612

TEL: (510) 834-9455

NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH ON CULTURAL

DIVERSITY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING (NCRCDSLL)
University of California at Santa Cruz
141 Kerr Hall
Santa Cruz, CA 95064

TEL: (408) 459-3500

NATIONAL COALITION OF ADVOCATES FOR STUDENTS

Clearinghouse for Immigrant Education (CHIME)
100 Boylston St., Suite 737
Boston, MA 02116

TEL: 1-800-441-7192

NATIONAL MULTICULTURAL INSTITUTE (NMCI)

3000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 438
Washington, D.C. 20008-2556

TEL: (202) 483-5233

REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT AGENCIES

BURLINGTON SOVIET RESETTLEMENT COMMITTEE
Ohavi Zedek Synagogue
11 North Prospect Street
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Rabbi Joshua Chasan

TEL: (802) 864-0218

TIBETAN RESETTLEMENT PROJECT

200 Main Street, Suite 14
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Jim Kelley

TEL: (802) 864-5505

VERMONT REFUGEE ASSISTANCE

RD 1, Box 2262
Plainfield, VT 05667

Contact: Jean Lathrop

TEL: (802) 479-2931

VERMONT REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM

1193 North Avenue
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Charles Shipman

TEL: (802) 863-7202

COMMUNITY CULTURAL ASSOCIATIONS

GREEN MOUNTAIN LAO ASSOCIATION
37 S. Summit Street
Essex Junction, VT 05452

Contact: Khampanh Luangrath

TEL: (802) 878-8939

JAPAN/AMERICAN SOCIETY OF VERMONT

Fort Ethan Allen
29 Ethan Allen Avenue Colchester, VT 05446

TEL: (802) 655-4197

32

LATINOS UNIDOS
P.O. Box 8035
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Angel Cases

TEL: (802) 879-1012

TIBETAN ASSOCIATION OF VERMONT

10 Henry Street
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Thupten Sangpo

TEL: (802) 658-3698

VIETNAMESE ASSOCIATION
9 Aspen Drive
Essex Junction, VT 05452

Contact: Loc Nguyen

TEL: (802) 878-0614

OTHER COMMUNITY RESOURCES

COMMUNITY ACTION
191 North St.
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Christine Eldrid

TEL: (802) 863-6248

FLETCHER FREE LIBRARY

235 College Street
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Amber Collins

TEL: (802) 863-3403

OFFICE OF MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS (OMA)

Center for Cultural Pluralism
Blundell House
University of Vermont
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Tony Chavez

TEL: (802) 656-3819

PEACE & JUSTICE CENTER

21 Church Street
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Ellen Kahler

TEL: (802) 863-2345

SARA M. HOLBROOK COMMUNITY CENTER

66 North Avenue
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Susan Janco

TEL: (802) 862-0080

THE COUNCIL ON REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS (CRI)

Community and Economic Development Office
Burlington City Hall
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Anne Weiss

TEL: (802) 865-7184

VERMONT PARENT INFORMATION CENTER (VPIC)

Chase Mill
1 Mill St./A7
Burlington, VT 05401

Contact: Connie Curtin

TEL: (802) 658-5315
TEL: 1-800-639-7170

33

REFERENCE MATERIALS (Family/Community Involvement)

Andersson, T. (1977). A Guide to Family Reading in Two Languages: The Preschool Years. Los Angeles, CA:
EDAC.
Baron, N. (1990). Pigeon-Birds and Rhyming Words: The Role of Parents in Language Learning. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents and Center for Applied Linguistics.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (1993). Beyond Culture: Communicating with Asian American
Children and Families. ERIC Digest. New York: Institute for Urban and Minority Education.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (1992). Increasing the School Involvement of Hispanic Parents. ERIC
Digest. New York: Institute for Urban and Minority Education.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. (1994). Funds of Knowledge: Learning from Language
Minority Households. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. (1986). Parent Involvement and The Education of LimitedEnglish-Proficient students. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Germer, L. (n.d.) Families of Students in English as a Second Language Programs in New Hampshire Schools.
Concord, NH: New Hampshire Education Department.
Harding, E. & Riley, P. (1986). The Bilingual Family: A Handbook for Parents. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Holt, G.D. (1988). Parenting Curriculum for Language Minority Parents. Sacramento, CA: Cross Cultural
Resource Center, California State University.
Louisiana Public Broadcasting. (1991) Working with Culturally Diverse Parents. [Video-Program No. Nine].
English as a Second Language Series. Lincoln, Nebraska: GPN.
Multicultural Education Training and Advocacy, Inc. (1990). A Handbook for Immigrant Parents: Protect the
Educational Rights of Your Children. San Francisco: Author.
Nash, A. (1987). English Family Literacy: An Annotated Bibliography. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts.
National Coalition of Advocates for Students. (1993). Achieving the Dream: How Communities and Schools Can
Improve Education for Immigrant Students. Boston, MA: Author.
National Coalition of Advocates for Students. (1991). New Voices: Immigrant Students in U.S. Public Schools.
Boston, MA: Author.
National Committee for Citizens in Education. (1991). Information for Parents: Parent Involvement. Washington,
DC: Author.
School of Education. (1990). Creating Parental Involvement: A Manual for School Personnel. Miami, FL: Florida
International University.
Portland Public Schools. (1990). Parental Involvement Handbook. Portland, ME: Author.

34

Robledo-Montecel, M. et al. (1993). Hispanic Families as Valued Partners: An Educator's Guide. San Antonio,
TX: IDRA.
Violand-Sanchez, E. (1991). Fostering Home-School Cooperation: Involving Language Minority Families as
Partners in Education. Program Information Guide No. 6. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for
Bilingual Education.
Yao, E.L. (1988). Working Effectively with Asian Immigrant Parents. Phi Delta Kappan, November, 223-225.

35