Educational Leadership and Administration Educational Leadership and Administration

537 Pages·2009·6.48 MB·English

FM-Vol-II-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:42 AM Page i
EEnnccyyccllooppeeddiiaa ooff
EEdduuccaattiioonnaall
LLeeaaddeerrsshhiipp
aanndd
AAddmmiinniissttrraattiioonn
FM-Vol-II-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:42 AM Page iii
Encyclopedia of
Educational
Leadership
and
Administration
2
Volume
L-Z
Fenwick W. English
Editor
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
FM-Vol-II-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:42 AM Page iv
Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications,Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,electronic or mechanical,including
photocopying,recording,or by any information storage and retrieval system,without permission in writing from the publisher.
For information:
Sage Publications,Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks,California 91320
E-mail:[email protected]
Sage Publications Ltd.
1 Oliver’s Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP
United Kingdom
Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B-42,Panchsheel Enclave
Post Box 4109
New Delhi 110 017 India
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Encyclopedia of educational leadership and administration / Fenwick W. English,[editor].
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-7619-3087-6 (cloth :set)
1. School management and organization—United States—Encyclopedias.
2. Educational leadership—United States—Encyclopedias.
3. Public schools—United States—Encyclopedias. I. English,Fenwick W.
LB2805.E527 2006
371.2′003—dc22 2005023061
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
06 07 08 09 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Publisher: Rolf A. Janke
Developmental Editor: Paul Reis
Production Editor: Laureen A. Shea
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
FM-Vol-II-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:42 AM Page v
Contents
List of Entries vii
Reader’s Guide xii
List of Figures and Tables xvii
Entries
Volume 1:A–K 1–548
Volume 2: L–Z 549–1086
Index I-1–I-59
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 549
L
(cid:1) Current theories of language acquisition posit that
LANGUAGE THEORIES
humans have a unique ability to test various hypothe-
AND PROCESSES
ses about the structure of language,to develop rules of
a particular language and remember them, and to use
All linguistic theories describe language as a learned
these rules to generate appropriate language in various
system of sounds having an arbitrary value that meets
circumstances. As a child develops, these hypotheses
a social need to communicate. This system is com-
about how language is structured are modified by par-
prised of units,or subsystems,that are embedded into
ticular language input. In other words,the set of rules
each other. Sounds are combined to produce words,
available to the child changes as the child develops
words are combined to produce utterances, and utter-
and recognizes what are and are not permissible struc-
ances are combined to produce discourse.
tures in his or her particular language. Furthermore,
More precisely, these subsystems can be classified
the evidence of developmental change is clear in the
as follows: phonology—the sounds of a language;
types of utterances and discourse understood and pro-
orthography—the ways in which language is organized in a
duced at various ages.
written text, including systems of punctuation, capitaliza-
This capacity for language acquisition follows a
tion,and paragraphing; graphophonics—the relationship
predictable pattern through different stages of acquisi-
between the sound systems of language and the written
tion. While the rate of acquisition may be different,
systems of language; syntax or grammar—the study of
the order is the same for all children and for languages
the systematic ways in which words are organized and
other than English. Constance Weaver outlined the
related to one another for meaning to occur; semantics—
following stages in 1998:
the study of vocabulary and how words and phrases relate
to objects and ideas; pragmatics—the study of the ways
in which language use changes depending on context, 1. Babbling is more a result of developing fine
time,place,and the social relationships between speakers motor skills than an attempt to communicate. These
and listeners,readers and writers. sounds seem to be required in order for infants to
Knowledge of a language is knowledge of a set of develop the musculature needed to produce coherent
subsystems that allows us to comprehend and produce speech later on.
an infinite number of utterances. People use language
2. Single-word utterances are usually nouns for
as a way of establishing contact,maintaining relation-
common objects and people in the child’s life. These
ships, and sharing and categorizing experiences and
utterances are the beginnings of the child’s purposeful
ideas. But what causes acquisition of this knowledge?
attempt to communicate. At this stage,overgeneraliza-
tion, when a child formulates a rule and applies it too
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
broadly,is common. For example,when a child learns
Most children complete the basic language acquisition that the four-legged friend in the house is a dog,or that
process by the age of 5 without any direct instruction. the dog’s name is Baxter, the child then generalizes
549
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 550
550———Language Theories and Processes
and refers to all four-legged animals (cats, cows, E. Rowan found that continued practice, in most
horses,etc.) as dogs or as Baxters. Near the end of this instances, does not promote adequate understanding.
stage,children begin to apply words to the behavior of Being able to identify sentence fragments in an exer-
others and not just their own. cise written specifically for that purpose does not
guarantee that the student knows the critical features
3. Word combining and syntax emerge when the
of fragments in contrast to grammatically complete
child begins to combine first two or three, then many
sentences, much less that the student can reliably dis-
words together. The ability to combine words signifies
tinguish between the two. Nor, as another example,
the ability to convey deeper meaning and use more
does memorizing the rule that it is ungrammatical to
complex grammar.
end a sentence with a preposition ensure that the
speaker who has memorized this rule will no longer
Noam Chomsky, the originator of transformational-
construct such sentences. Furthermore, the problem
generative linguistics, suggested that what a grammar
for prescriptivists is that most sentences that are not
should do is account for native speakers’ unconscious
grammatically correct sound perfectly acceptable to
but functional knowledge of grammar (i.e.,“deep struc-
nearly all speakers,and nearly all speakers regularly use
ture”),which enables comprehension and production of
ungrammatical sentences.
language. This internalized knowledge is one meaning
Rather than prescribing how people should speak,
of the word grammar.In this sense,grammar refers to a
contemporary linguistics and language theories and
capacity for language, a native ability to create and
theorists are interested in observing and describing how
comprehend utterances. His work represented a marked
people actually do speak. Descriptive grammar does
shift from the structuralist theorists who based their
not judge language production as correct or incorrect. A
grammars on an analysis of the structures of a language.
descriptivist works from the assumption that whenever
They focused on the surface structure of sentences and
native language speakers of a language speak,they are
analyzed them into increasingly smaller components.
following a set of grammar rules. However,not all native
Grammar may also refer to these formal systems that
speakers are following the exact same set of rules.
theorists have developed and studied to explain and ana-
Consider the following two sentences:
lyze language. It is important to point out that this type
of study has not produced a single body of knowledge
1. If I were you,I would choose a different teacher.
on which all linguists agree. Rather,it has produced dif-
2. If I was you,I would choose a different teacher.
ferent grammars that are each dependent on different
underlying assumptions and different methods of analy-
To some extent, there is certain to be disagreement
sis and,accordingly,have different results. We now turn
among native speakers regarding which of these state-
to the primary distinctions between prescriptive gram-
ments is grammatically correct and which is ungram-
mar and descriptive grammar.
matical. For some, sentence (1) is grammatical and
sentence (2) is ungrammatical; for others, the opposite
is true. However,because sentences like (1) and (2) are
PRESCRIPTIVISM
spoken regularly by native speakers of English, they
VERSUS DESCRIPTIVISM
are both grammatical for the people who speak them.
As the term suggests, someone who subscribes to a However,it is difficult to imagine any native speaker of
prescriptive approach to grammar believes that there English disagreeing that a sentence such as “Wish they
is a prescribed list of rules to which all speakers of a for a teacher new”is ungrammatical. Descriptivists use
language must conform. Those who do not comply are examples such as these to highlight that while all native
said to be speaking “incorrectly.”This is the approach English speakers share certain rules, we do not share
taken in most language instruction and is still widely all rules. In fact,there is a tremendous amount of linguis-
used in many language arts classrooms. A prescriptive tic diversity among the speakers of English, as well as
approach reflects a transmission model of education among the speakers of any language.
that considers learning to be best fostered through con- This is not to suggest that descriptivists do not acknowl-
tinuedpractice of the rules. edge grammar rules; they do. For prescriptivists, how-
However, in their 1989 article “Explaining ever,rules are constructed (rather than prescribed) from
Grammatical Concepts,” Muriel Harris and Katherine observations of real language data—from language in
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 551
Language Theories and Processes———551
use. Furthermore,the correct versus incorrect distinc- basis for other professional and governmental organi-
tion gives way to the appropriate versus inappropri- zations. Viewing language from this perspective posi-
ate distinction. That is, when speaking with people tions language acquisition and usage as more than
who prefer sentence (1) to (2),it would be appropriate acquiring autonomous, cognitive skills. Rather, it sit-
to use (1),and when speaking with people who prefer uates language within social contexts and immerses it
(2), it would be appropriate to use (2). within human relationships. Theories of language, as
In the language arts classroom,this concept becomes we move through the twenty-first century, construe
extremely important when considering instruction. language as social practices.
For people to be successful in American society,
knowing how to speak standard English (i.e.,the vari-
SOCIAL AND POLITICAL
ety of English accepted in formal contexts) is critical.
APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE
Descriptive linguists,while being careful not to judge
nonstandard English as incorrect, work to teach Sociolinguistics,a part of the new literacies,perceives
students the differences between the two and how to the function of language as more than to communicate
produce standard English in the appropriate contexts. information. Language is,in addition,also a device to
The focus of descriptive linguists on actual utterances think and feel with, as well as a device with which to
led quite naturally to the study of dialect. signal and negotiate social identity. In other words,
the new literacies of this century focus on language as
social practices. Through the work of Lev Vygotsky,
LANGUAGE VARIATIONS AND DIALECTS
theorists, researchers, and teachers came to realize
Working within the traditions of structural or prescrip- that what students can accomplish on their own was
tive linguists,dialecticians have shown that most differ- only a small part of what they could do with the help
ences in usage among speakers cannot be considered of others. Vygotsky’s “zone of proximal develop-
aberrations from standard preferred speech. Rather,most ment” referred to the spectrum of language activities
variations in usage derive from different language com- that individuals could accomplish with the assistance
munities that develop their own varying norms. of more able individuals in their social realm.
For example, William Labov showed in 1972 that Understanding that language is shaped by social
Black Vernacular English (BVE) is a distinct subsystem and cultural contexts contributed toward our enhanced
within the larger grammar of English with its own regu- understanding of the role of language in a democracy
lar conventions and rules. One such rule allows for what and its political implications. From such a perspec-
Labov calls a remote present perfect in the use of been, tive, issues of race, class, and gender are explicit
such as “I been know your name,”in which been know aspects of understanding language processes. Much
means “have known for a long time and still know.” current language theory centers on the social and
Shirley Heath described in 1983 instances when political implications of language.
teachers who do not know BVE usage often interpret Language theories, in large measure, constitute
it as incorrect standard English. Ethnographic studies and are constituted by shifts in culture. Movements within
such as Heath’s abundantly demonstrate how the dif- the field are blended and complex,suggesting the fluidity
ferent language conventions of people living and work- of language as a living cultural,social,and political entity.
ing in the same community can cause conflict and In a democratic society such as that in the United States,
misunderstandings on the parts of teachers and understanding language theories and processes as
students. As a result,these often lead to inappropriate dynamic and open systems provides a stronger sense of
judgments of students and failure to learn. the purpose and consequences of the role of language for
In an effort to address this and related issues, students,for communities,and for the nation.
in 1972 the National Council of Teachers of English
—Gina DeBlase
(NCTE) adopted a resolution on language and
students’ dialects titled “Resolution on the Students’
See also affective education; at-risk students; Black education;
Rights to Their Own Language.” For 30 years, this
cognition, theories of; computers, use and impact of; con-
position statement has served as a guidepost for
structivism,social; critical race theory; critical theory; cross-
NCTE’s continued focus on the issue of dialects and cultural studies; curriculum, theories of; differentiation of
language usage in the classroom and has been the stimuli; early childhood education; elementary education;
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 552
552———Latinos
high schools; individual differences,in children; instructional the tremendous within-group diversity. Moreover,
technology; Latinos; learning environments; literacy,theories each of the groups that together comprise U.S. Latinos
of; measurement, theories of; metacognition; minorities, in has its own particular history, often rooted in the
schools; multiculturalism; National Assessment of Educa-
regional or generational issues that likewise influence
tional Progress; reading, history of, use in schools; under-
their particular educational experiences. Such within-
achievers,in schools; writing,teaching of
group diversity notwithstanding,the available data on
Latinos in U.S. schools do indicate that several signif-
Further Readings and References icant issues exist and persist for this population.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague,
Netherlands:Mouton. LATINO DEMOGRAPHICS
Chomsky, N. (1968). Language and mind. NewYork:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Distribution of Latinos
Harris, M., & Rowan, K. E. (1989). Explaining grammatical Across the United States
concepts. Journal of Basic writing,8(2),21–41.
Latinos can be found all throughout the United
Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and
States. In total, Latinos comprised 12.5% (35.3 mil-
work in communities and classrooms.NewYork:Cambridge
University Press. lion) of the country’s total population in 2000, and
Joshi, R., & Aaron, P. (2005). Handbook of orthography and this figure represents an increase of 58% since the
literacy.Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum. 1990 census. The 2000 census indicates that this pop-
Kist,W. (2005). New literacies in action.NewYork:Teachers ulation is concentrated in the largest numbers in seven
College Press.
states: California, Texas, NewYork, Florida, Illinois,
Kucer, S., & Silva, C. (2005). Teaching the dimensions of
Arizona,and New Jersey,with half of all U.S. Latinos
literacy.Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.
concentrated in California and Texas alone. Latinos
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in
the black English vernacular. Philadelphia: University of were the highest proportion of the population in East
Pennsylvania Press. Los Angeles (California) and Puerto Rico,with 96.8%
Marsh,J.,& Millard,E. (2005). Popular literacies,childhood and 98.9% of the total population in these areas,
and schooling.NewYork:Routledge. respectively. Throughout the United States, 58.5% of
National Council of Teachers of English. (1974). Resolution on
all Latinos identified themselves as Mexican (origin)
the students’right to their own language. Urbana,IL:Author.
and 9.6% as Puerto Rican, thereby representing the
Soler,J.,& Openshaw,R. (2005). Literacy crises and reading
two largest Latino groups. Approximately 28% of all
policies: Why our children still can’t read. NewYork:
Latinos identified themselves as “Other Hispanic” in
Routledge.
Vygotsky,L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge,MA: the 2000 census,including those who identified them-
Harvard University Press. selves as Central American (4.8% of all Latinos),South
Weaver,C. (1996). Teaching grammar in context.Portsmouth, American (3.8%), and Cuban (3.5%).
NH:Boynton/Cook. Based on data derived from the Pew Hispanic
Center in Washington, D.C., Latino workers made
up 40% of the 2.5 million jobs created in 2004, even
(cid:1) though they made up only 15% of the U.S. workforce.
LATINOS
Of these,88% of the 1 million new jobs were filled by
Latinos from Mexico. According to Joel Millman in
The term Latinos is often used interchangeably with
2005, the Pew study bolsters the belief that immi-
the term Hispanic or with the various national origin
grants do not take jobs from American workers but
terms (e.g. Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban) found in
instead supplement the U.S. workforce.
formal educational sources. Indeed, the choice of
terms to describe this population has been the subject
Latinos in U.S. Public Schools
of considerable scholarly and political debate. The
impact of these debates on education is ongoing, The significance of the Latino population figures
given that available data on the educational status and is particularly apparent in the U.S. public schools.
representation of Latinos in the United States can be Among K–12 public schools,Latinos made up 17% of
misleading if one is not careful to identify such factors the total student population in 2000, according to the
as national origin, economic class, native language, U.S. Department of Education. The concentration of
ethnic identity, and so forth to more accurately depict Latino students in public schools varied by region,
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 553
Latinos———553
with most Latinos concen-
100%
trated in the South and West.
Latinos at least doubled their
presence as a percentage of
80%
total regional K–12 enroll-
ments in all four regions of
the United States between
60%
1975 and 2000. For example,
Latinos comprised 31.6%
of total public school enroll-
ments in the West in 2000, 40%
showing an increase of 16.8
percentage points since 1975,
or nearly a 114% increase. 20%
The distribution of Latino
students among school levels
reflects the relative youth of 0%
this population. As noted by
Richard Valencia in the book Total Latino Total White State Total
Chicano School Failure and Grades 9–12 756,860 675,426 1,854,509
Success (2nd ed.), although
Grades 7–8 444,761 340,642 1,000,558
in 2000 Latinos represented
17% of total K–12 enroll- Grades K–6 1,662,132 1,019,897 3,386,700
ments, they comprised 20%
of the kindergarten enrollments Figure 1 Total Latino,White,and Statewide Public School Enrollments by Grade
versus 15% of the total Level,California 2003–2004
enrollments in high school. SOURCE:Adapted from California Department of Education,Educational Demographics Unit.
Indeed,in California,Latinos, (2004). California public schools,statewide report:Enrollment by gender,grade,and ethnic
who made up about 45% of designation,2003–04[Datafile].
the state’s total enrollments
in 2003–2004, comprised 51% of the total kinder- ELL students numbered one in four students in
garten population versus 37% of all 12th graders. In California and one in seven students in Texas, where
Texas, Latinos, who made up 44% of the state’s total the vast majority of ELL students are Latinos and
enrollment in 2003–2004,comprised 48% of the total Spanish speakers. In California, for example, the
kindergarten population versus 43% of all 9th graders state’s department of education indicates that 85% of
and 35% of all 12th graders. Part of this distribution all ELL students were Spanish speakers and num-
pattern is attributable to significant dropout rates bered over 1.3 million in 2003–2004. Unfortunately
among Latinos (discussed below). Nevertheless, an for many of the ELL students, only 30% of public
optimistic view of these data indicates that the enroll- school teachers instructing these students have received
ments of Latinos will continue to grow and maintain a pertinent training, and a mere 3% have degrees in
significant presence overall,particularly in states such English as a Second Language (ESL) or bilingual edu-
as California and Texas, but also in states such as cation, as noted by the U.S. Department of Education
Illinois,Iowa,Georgia,and NewYork. (See Figure 1.) in 1993–1994. Indeed, 2003–2004 data from the
California Department of Education indicates that
only 38% of ELL students had met the state board of
Growing Presence of
education criterion for English proficiency.
English Language Learners
Two scholars who have documented the complexi-
It is important to note that among the K–12 Latino ties of serving Latino ELL students are Guadalupe
student population is quite a large and growing pro- Valdés and Eugene E. García. Valdés’s work attends
portion of English language learners (ELL). The U.S. to the role of school-parental/family interactions and
Department of Education reports that in 2001–2002, relationships in supporting Latino immigrant students’
L-English-4854.qxd 1/11/2006 10:45 AM Page 554
554———Latinos
participation in schools. It also illuminates the inter- group relative to their White, middle-class counter-
connectedness of race, class, national origin, cultural parts. While more recent research on Latino educa-
heritage,and educational status in understanding how tional experiences has focused on best practices for
immigrant students and their families navigate the ensuring Latino success (as discussed in more detail
educational system in their own behalf. In a similar below), the data indicate that challenges in educa-
vein,García argues for the incorporation of an under- tional access and attainment still persist.
standing of individual and shared cultural identity for-
mation and maintenance into discussions of bilingual
Dropouts
education policy. In doing so, he contends that bilin-
gual education policy can be better aimed at produc- Perhaps one of the most persistent challenges for
ing learning environments for Latino ELL students Latino students in the United States is the high rate of
that are more responsive to both their needs and their dropping out of school. Although it is clear that there
talents. have been improvements in dropouts when one follows
Despite such remarkable changes in the student more recent cohorts of students through their high
demographics at the K–12 levels, Latinos in postsec- school years,scholars have pointed to the persistence of
ondary institutions have not increased very rapidly the gap that results in dropout rates among Latinos that
over the past several decades. Affirmative action poli- are up to four times the rate of White students in simi-
cies had enabled some states to make inroads in the lar age groups (using U.S. census data). Even if one
recruitment of Latinos and other students of color into only examines the dropout data in comparisons of U.S.-
higher education institutions. However,recent changes born Latinos and White students, the gap is still 2:1 in
in policy, including the elimination of affirmative terms of dropout rates,and the gap has persisted for the
action in some states, have likewise had an impact on nearly three decades of data available through the cen-
the degree to which Latinos participate in college and sus. Nevertheless, the presence of immigrant students
graduate school. Over the past two and one half among the total Latino population,some of whom have
decades, Latinos have only increased their presence had very little or no formal schooling prior to their
among students enrolled in graduate/first-professional arrival in the United States,at times contributes to over-
programs by 3 percentage points, moving from 2% stated dropout rates relative to White students. In a
in 1976 to just 5% in 2000, according to the U.S. recent report sponsored by the Pew Hispanic Center in
Department of Education. Translated into numbers, Washington, D.C., among U.S.-born and immigrant
this means that of the 2.2 million students enrolled Latinos,ages 16 to 19,the dropout rates varied widely
in graduate/first-professional programs across the across Latino subgroups in 2000. For 16- to 19-year-old
country,only 110,000 were Latinos in 2000. Among 2 Mexican-origin immigrants, the dropout rate was 39%
million individuals holding doctorates in the United versus 15% for their U.S.-born Mexican-origin coun-
States in 2001,only 71,000 were Latinos. terparts. Among Puerto Rican students, the immi-
grant to U.S.-born difference was 22% versus 12%.
Regionally speaking, among 16- to 19-year-olds,
PERSISTENT CHALLENGES: HISTORICAL
California’s immigrant Latinos experienced a 34%
PATTERNS AND RECENT TRENDS IN
dropout rate compared to U.S.-born Latinos with a
LATINO EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
10% dropout rate. Likewise, in Florida, the dropout
Latinos have and continue to face tremendous chal- rate among immigrant Latinos was 26% for 16- to 19-
lenges to their success in schools. The lack of educa- year-olds, double the rate for U.S.-born Latinos in
tional success among Latinos has been attributed to that state.
what many researchers have deemed to be deficien-
cies in their genetics, home cultures and experiences,
High School Completion
parental education, and socioeconomic class origins.
Rather than rely on such “cultural deficit”explanatory Simply examining dropout rates will not provide a
models, other contemporary researchers instead sufficient picture of Latino graduation or completion
explain the relative lack of educational success among rates,particularly given that Latinos may take signifi-
Latinos as being tied to institutional and systemic cantly longer to graduate with a high school diploma
barriers that perpetuate the unequal status of this than other students. According to the National Center