Scribd
Upload
782 views2 pages

Katie Verhoeven The Equity Literacy Case Analysis Worksheet Case Study 10.2: English-Only

The document discusses a case study about an English-only policy instituted at a school. It outlines the steps of an equity literacy analysis of the policy. It finds that the policy disadvantages ELL students and some teachers are biased against students speaking other languages. It considers perspectives, challenges, equitable outcomes, and short and long-term solutions. It asks how a teacher should respond if they disagree with the policy and how to engage students in a discussion about the implications of such a policy.

Uploaded by

api-560920662
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
782 views2 pages

Katie Verhoeven The Equity Literacy Case Analysis Worksheet Case Study 10.2: English-Only

The document discusses a case study about an English-only policy instituted at a school. It outlines the steps of an equity literacy analysis of the policy. It finds that the policy disadvantages ELL students and some teachers are biased against students speaking other languages. It considers perspectives, challenges, equitable outcomes, and short and long-term solutions. It asks how a teacher should respond if they disagree with the policy and how to engage students in a discussion about the implications of such a policy.

Uploaded by

api-560920662
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Katie Verhoeven

The Equity Literacy Case Analysis Worksheet


Case Study 10.2: English-Only

Step 1: Identify biases or inequities.


ELL students are at a disadvantage because they cannot fully understand english, while some teachers are biased in thinking the
ELL students are off topic or saying inappropriate things in their language.

Step 2: Take stock of various perspectives.


ELL students are struggling to stay with the class even before the ban on non-english languages. Some teachers are concerned the
ELL students are speaking inappropriately in their own language. Ms. de Leon was an ELL student, and knows this is not the
case.

Step 3: Consider possible challenges and opportunities.


Satisfying the other teachers who want a non-english ban, since their bias may be difficult to overcome. A challenge may be
finding a way for the ELL students to still succeed that the other teachers will compromise on.

Step 4: Imagine equitable and just outcomes.


The ELL students, while learning english, are completely entitled to their right to speak their language, and the subject is never
debated again.

Step 5: Brainstorm immediate-term solutions.


Teachers must allow students to continue speaking their languages until the new policy is in place. Ms. de Leon and Ms. Mancini
must express their adversity to the new rule.

Step 6: Brainstorm long-term solutions.


Get rid of the new rule as a whole, and educate the community on why ELL students need access to their languages.

Step 7: Craft a plan of action.


Ms. de Leon and Ms. Mancini should protest the policy and express concerns to the principal, while also initiating conversations
about equity both in the classroom and with faculty. They should allow their ELL students to continue use of their languages to
prove that it is necessary for success. If the school does not support the ELL students, then they should bring the issue to the
public eye and force the school to accommodate ELL students.

● Should Ms. Mancini enforce the policy and support the administration’s decision, even though she believes it is bad for
her students, or should she attempt to change her colleagues’ minds?

Ms. Mancini should stand up for what she believes to be right and support the ELL students by attempting to convince her
colleagues’ minds. She could gather testimonials from former ELL students like Ms. de Leon that attest to the importance of
speaking your native language in the classroom when english is still difficult to grasp. They could also observe the ELL
students’ conversations as proof that speaking their language is helpful, not a hindrance. Additionally, Ms. Mancini should
point out that outlawing non-english languages in the classroom puts ELL students at a significant disadvantage. Personally, I
would suggest the teachers learn more about their students’ languages so there is no cause for concern as to what the students
are saying in the first place.

● Would you have reached out to Ms. de Leon following the faculty meeting? If so, how?

Yes, I would have reached out to Ms. de Leon to ask her perspective on the matter, and how she might suggest going about it. I
would express my support for her and ELL students and suggest we counter the principal’s new policy.
● If you were in a school in which an English-only policy was instituted, how might you engage students in a
conversation about the policy and its implications, recognizing that students from families who do not speak English at
home could feel alienated by the policy?

I would prepare a lesson of sorts that gives all students a voice, opening a discussion about how much their native language
means to them. I would ask english speakers how they would feel if they were told they could no longer speak english in school.
Additionally, I would try to give every non-english speaker an opportunity to talk about their language and why it’s important to
them. I would bridge the gap as best I could between english and non english speakers.

You might also like