Jeff Ellenbird

Professor, English Language Learning Department
Co-leader, AANAPISI ELL Design Team
Bunker Hill Community College

Aurora Bautista, PhD

Behavioral Science Department
Activity Coordinator, AANAPISI Grant
Bunker Hill Community College 

ABSTRACT

In this article, two community college faculty members (ELL and Behavioral Sciences) discuss their experience collaboratively developing a linked English language learner (ELL) and sociology learning community course. Their discussion begins with the factors that led to their teaming up as co-teachers and then to their collaborative process of developing a fully integrated curriculum that supports students in using sociological concepts to reflect on their immigrant experiences. Particular attention is given to a high-stakes essay assignment they developed and how they leveraged their different strengths in scaffolding student learning and writing through integrated assignments and collaborative feedback to support students in writing this challenging essay. To illustrate the connections between theory and practice, this discussion of their collaboration is framed against the findings of a faculty-led research review on best ELL practices that paved the way for a major ELL program reform at the community college where they teach.

I am a girl, grown up in a middle-class family in a small town of Nepal. I originally belong to the society where many people of my age are suffering from gender inequality, child marriage or “Bal Bibah”, untouchability or a cast-based discrimination system, dowry system, poverty and so on. Although I am from such social location, I feel myself lucky because my parents sent me school for my education. Due to lack of education, my parents did not find good opportunities at works and they decided to send me to school for my bright future that changed my way of living. I finally came to the USA a few months ago for the education and the good health facilities which has reshaped my life.

— Intro paragraph to an essay by Sabita, learning community cluster student

The power of centering student stories and experiences in the curriculum has been well documented (Weinstein, 1999; Tang et al, 2019).  Student stories and experiences are full of knowledge, assets, perspectives and aspirations that present rich material for deeper learning.  The challenge facing the college professor is how to support students in using those stories and experiences to engage with deeper learning in their discipline.  Both learning communities and community-based learning have been identified as two high impact practices that foster deep learning; however students from groups historically underrepresented in higher education, like English language learner (ELL) students, are least likely to be afforded access to these opportunities (Kuh 2008).

In this article, we – Jeff (ELL) and Aurora (Behavioral Sciences) – discuss our collaborative process in designing and teaching a place-based ELL/SOC learning community at Bunker Hill Community College (BHCC) that supports students in deep learning.  To illustrate the connections between theory and practice, we frame the discussion of our collaboration and teaching against the research findings of a BHCC research review of best ESL practices that paved the way for an ELL program reform and was just getting started at BHCC when we began our collaboration.  Our discussion is organized into five parts:

Section 1: Instructor matching and collaboration

Section 2: Collaborative and integrated curriculum design and implementation

Section 3: Scaffolding student learning

Section 4: Collaborative feedback and assessment

Section 5: From integrated assessments to further integration of curriculum

We began collaboratively developing our ELL/SOC learning community in the fall of 2016, just as the AANAPISI sponsored ELL Program reform at BHCC was beginning (see Ellenbird, Shute, Naggie, & Puente, this issue; Lambert, Lin, & Ismatul Oliva, this issue).  One of the first steps of this ELL Program reform was a faculty-led research review of best ELL practices.  Jeff was part of that team of six faculty and staff members at BHCC that carried out this review (see Ellenbird’s section in Ellenbird, Shute, Naggie, & Puente, this issue).  Over a period of four months, the team reviewed over 30 articles and books on best practices for teaching ESL and then synthesized and organized those findings into four key findings, each supported by an inventory of specific asset-based practices.  The first key finding - Institutional Support - addresses exactly the kind of collaboration that we were embarking on.

Four Key Findings from the BHCC Research Findings on Best Practices for Teaching ESL

1. Institutional Support: ELL students succeed when they are supported by all faculty and staff and there exists close collaboration between content faculty and ESL faculty.

2. Student Perceptions: ELL students succeed when they see their ESL teachers and the ESL Department as advocates, supporters and a resource.

3. Teacher Attitudes and Approaches to Learning: ELL students succeed when instruction is based on students communicating and negotiating meaning rather than on their demonstrating knowledge of the standard language.

4. Curriculum: ELL students succeed when the curriculum is driven by challenging academic content through linked content classes and other classes that support students in 1) making personal connections between academic content and their lived experiences and 2) entering into the academic life of the college.

Evidence points to the benefits of cross-disciplinary collaborative teaching for ELL students.  Studies have documented better academic outcomes and/or higher retention rates for college students enrolled in classes collaboratively taught by ESL faculty and content faculty than for those enrolled in stand-alone ESL classes (Boland et al, 2018; Song, 2006; Booth, 2009; and Fogarty et al, 2003).  In community colleges these collaborations and/or co-teaching partnerships have been identified as a best practice for ESL programs (Razfar & Simon, 2011; Fogarty et al, 2003; MacNeill, 2014; Kibler et al, 2012).  Research also documents the positive impact on student performance and engagement from the student perspective (Gladman, 2014).  Much of the research attributes the positive outcomes of faculty collaboration to increased student engagement with challenging academic content and gateways it provides students into the academic community and credit bearing courses.  Kibler et al (2012) write, “Rather than isolate students from college-level work by placing them in ESL language courses to “perfect” their English, this set of innovations (integrating language and academic content) finds imaginative ways to immerse students in authentic experiences with academic content while also supporting their linguistic development” (210-211).

Learning Communities at BHCC date back to the College’s origins in 1973 and were scaled through a 2007 Department of Education Title lll Strengthening Institutions Grant, a 2012 Gates Foundation/Achieving the Dream Catalyst Fund Grant, and a 2016 Department of Education Title III AANAPISI Grant. Learning communities are thematically organized around culturally relevant content that engages reflective, experiential and interdisciplinary learning. Each LC is grounded in core academic and student development outcomes that include reflection and self-assessment, critical thinking, integrative communication, intercultural knowledge and cohort learning.  The model includes LC Clusters that link two or more courses around a common academic theme, big idea, career pathway, and/or community-based project. Since 2007, many ELL courses have been linked to introductory courses in other departments such as behavioral science, English, and business. With the 2019 launch of the revised ELL Program at BHCC, most final-level ELL classes are now taught as 9-credit LC Clusters, with the ELL class (6 credits) meeting for 5 ½ hours a week and the discipline class (3 credits) meeting for 2 ½ hours a week. Student supports, including peer mentoring and success coach advising, are integrated into the ELL LCs.  Co-teachers are expected to integrate the content of their courses, though they co-determine how and to what extent to do this and how to determine the grades for their respective courses. There is extensive support for faculty who teach LCs, such as professional development and paid time for collaboration and mentoring.  Faculty are encouraged to develop co-teaching learning communities, but there is no formal process for assigning co-teachers.  Instead faculty are expected to seek out collaborations with their colleagues and then together submit a proposal for new learning communities to a Learning Community Think Tank that is comprised of faculty and success coach advisors.

Jeff

Co-teaching with Aurora was my first experience in collaborative teaching.  I had only just recently begun teaching at BHCC and was still trying to figure out my way, but the idea attracted me.  I had two reasons for wanting to collaborate and co-teach a LC cluster.  The first reason was for my students.  At that time, students in ELL classes did not receive any transferable credit, and many of my students saw my class as a gate-keeper that was preventing them from getting into the courses and credits they needed for the degrees they were seeking.  I believed that by linking my class to a content class, the students would not only get well-earned college credit, but they would also be more motivated.  My other reason was for my own personal interest.  For me, teaching is a way to engage with big questions and challenging content, and I have always taken a content-based approach in my teaching.  Working with a content teacher in a content course was a way to bring a deeper engagement with content and learning, both for my students and for myself.

Aurora

 After having taught anthropology and sociology courses for over 20 years, co-teaching a ELL and cultural anthropology learning community in the early 2010’s was a turning point for me.  The LC professional development (PD) provided by BHCC gave me a chance to learn about backward design, outcomes driven curriculum, deeper learning approaches and learning community pedagogies and practices.  This learning allowed me to rethink the way I delivered my lessons and reevaluate my assessment methods.  According to Saga Briggs (2015) “Deeper learning is the process of learning for transfer, meaning it allows a student to take what’s learned in one situation and apply it to another.”  Before, I had approached my 101 level courses with the goal of cramming 12-16 chapters of content, or roughly one chapter a week, and I grappled with the amount of lecture time necessary to cover the essential concepts I thought were necessary.  But the PD training and my ELL faculty partner pushed me to question that single-minded focus and helped clarify what I wanted to deliver in my lecture, as well as what I wanted as outcomes for my essay assignment or examination prompts.  I began creating assessments that focus on the application of sociological concepts to student’s personal experiences and that incorporate observations of their family and communities.  I received feedback from my ELL faculty partner on the kinds of essay prompts or instructions I had been providing and began to put into practice scaffolding the work to ensure better outcomes.   Co-teaching was my process of deeper learning in that it allowed me to apply the learning from my PD trainings to a new teaching context.