University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Arts integration for standard English learners: implications for learning academic language

(USC Thesis Other)

Arts integration for standard English learners: implications for learning academic language

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 1

ARTS INTEGRATION FOR STANDARD ENGLISH LEARNERS:
IMPLICATIONS FOR LEARNING ACADEMIC LANGUAGE

by

Daniel Fisher Ostermann

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2015

Copyright 2015 Daniel Fisher Ostermann
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 2
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank most of all, my beautiful and inspiring wife, Jennifer, who never
ceases to amaze me with her curiosity, wit, and charisma. Thank you for being there for me
every step of the way; your encouragement and reflective powers were my rock. Thank you also
for being an amazing mother to our darling Theodore, born just 8 months ago. Our little family is
my deepest inspiration!
I would also like to thank my parents, Rob and Robin, and my brother, John. Your
support and encouragement was crucial over the last three years as I plodded toward the finish
line. My devotion to the arts and education are testaments to the powerful values embedded in
my upbringing. Thank you for always believing in me!
To my dissertation group colleagues: This experience was so fully and deeply enriched
because of all of you. I am so grateful for the learning, laughs, and memories we made together.
To my dissertation committee members Dr. Maria Ott and Dr. Darline Robles—my
sincerest thanks for your time, insight, flexibility, and professionalism.
Last, but certainly not least, to my chair, Dr. Sylvia Rousseau—the rigor, devotion,
knowledge, and encouragement you wielded will always and forever be an education in itself. I
am truly honored and indebted to have had the opportunity to work with you. Thank you.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 3
Table of Contents
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 8
Introduction 8
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 14
Research Questions 15
Importance of the Study 15
Limitations 16
Delimitations 16
Definition of Terms 17
Organization of the Study 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review 20
Current Challenges Facing SELs 21
Socioeconomics, Demographics, and Achievement 24
Policies Governing Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students 26
Attention to Language Differences in Schooling 26
Has a Mixed History
Language and Learning 30
Learning Challenges Facing SELs 31
Language and Learning in the Classroom for SELs 32
Third Space 36
School Practices and Access to Academic Language 37
Promising Practices for Cultural and Linguistic Diversity 42
Arts Education, Literacy, Achievement, and Best Practices 43
Arts Integration 49
Conceptual Framework 53
Summary 54
Chapter Three: Research Methodology 56
Research Questions 56
Research Design 56
Sample and Population 57
Data Collection 57
Data Analysis 58
Approach to Coding 58
Approach to Analysis 58
Validity and Reliability 59
Ethics 59
Chapter Four: Findings 60
Research Questions 61
Research Site 61
Findings 65
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 4
Chicano English in the Classroom 65
Student Focus Group 66
Teacher Interviews 68
Classroom Observations 72
Identifying and Fostering Third Space 76
Summary 81
Healthy Socioemotional Ecology 83
Student Focus Group 83
Teacher Interviews 85
Classroom Observations 86
Cross-Curricular Approach 87
Student Focus Group 87
Teacher Interviews 88
Authentic Learning and Assessment 90
Student Focus Group 90
Teacher Interviews 92
Classroom Observations 96
Summary 97
Conclusions 98
Chapter Five: Discussion 102
Research Questions 102
Methodology 103
Summary of Findings 103
Research Question 1 103
Research Question 2 105
Delimitations 106
Conclusions 106
Recommendations 109
References 111
Appendix A: Teacher Interview Protocol 121
Appendix B: Classroom Observation Protocol 123
Appendix C: Focus Group Interview Protocol 125
Appendix D: MELD Diagnostic Tool 129

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 5
List of Tables
Table 1: Matrix of Data Sources to Research Questions 62
Table 2: Description of Teacher Participants and Subject Area Observed 63
Table 3: Home Language Inclusion and Teacher Attitudes Regarding 75
Chicano English

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 6
List of Figures
Figure 1: The process of developing academic language in an arts integration curriculum 54
Figure 2: Summary framework from findings 99
Figure 3: Attributes of arts integration identified as supporting language development 100

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 7
Abstract
The purpose of this case study was to explore how an arts integration school model facilitated
home language use by SEL students. The purpose of the study was also to identify specific
attributes of the arts integration model that support SEL student’s acquisition of
Academic/Standard English. Research was conducted into the areas of home language
admittance, mediation, and/or respect, third space learning environments, and arts integration
programming and practices.
This qualitative study used teacher interviews, classroom observations, and a student
focus group. Triangulation and analysis of these data revealed the level of home language
admittance, mediation, and respect in the classroom to directly impact the ability of teachers to
facilitate authentic learning experiences for SEL students. In classrooms that resembled third
space learning environments, the activity, dialogue, and discourse observed and discussed during
the interviews was found to be a critical factor for learning and language development. In
addition, the performance-focused arts integration program was found to positively impact SEL
students, both academically and socioemotionally.
The study identified important implications for educators and educational leaders.
Identification of the relationships between home language use in the classroom and specific
attributes of arts integration programming provides schools and districts an evidence base to
strengthen and improve teaching and learning for SEL students.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 8
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
“Language is an essential component of a student’s culture and identity.”
--James A. Banks, 2011
Introduction
Public education in the United States still struggles to find solutions to a chronic
achievement gap found in urban schools (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Hemphill & Vanneman,
2011; Hess, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 2006). Thirty years of reform since A Nation At Risk (1983)
and teachers, administrators, and policymakers are not able to craft and implement reforms that
result in significant gains in achievement (Ravitch, 2011). National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP) 2013 data show that only 35% of eighth-grade students in the United States
achieved proficiency in reading and math. In particular, a group of culturally and linguistically
diverse students identified as Standard English learners (SELs) have scored lower than their
peers year after year on standardized assessments. Widespread low achievement frequently leads
to an opportunity-to-learn gap and a subsequent achievement gap among SEL students
(LeMoine, 2001). At the root of problem is literacy, as well as the practices of teaching and
learning the English language in schools (Goldenberg, 2008). The stark reality for SELs in public
education is that equitable opportunities to learn are inconsistent and access to academic
language is limited, and at times, systematically out of reach (Graff, 1999). These practices
frequently lead to a school system that does not serve all students equally, one that effectively
marginalizes diversity and validates a monolingual dominance that perpetuates the achievement
and opportunity-to-learn gap.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 9
Background of the Problem
A particular group of students that has experienced a consistent lack of access to
academic English leading to an opportunity-to-learn gap is Standard English learners (SELs).
Students who fall into the SEL category are a diverse group and include large numbers of
students who speak a version of vernacular English including speakers of African American
Vernacular English, Chicano Vernacular English, Hawaiian Pigeon, Native American Vernacular
English, and others (LeMoine, 2001). In addition to the significant linguistic diversity SELs
represent, cultural differences as well as socioeconomic struggles frequently accompany SELs’
linguistic diversity (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; Cummins, 2001). In the face of such
diversity and disparity, teachers and school systems often succumb to attitudes and perceptions
that perpetuate oppression in the classroom and further contribute to an opportunity-to-learn gap
for SELs (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). The achievement gap is consistent with systemic
oppression and an opportunity-to-learn gap that students identified as SELs have experienced
over the course of history in the United States and is significantly influenced by cultural and
linguistic differences as well as socioeconomic disparities (Katz & Rose, 2013; Kozol, 2012;
LeMoine, 2001). A closer look at the history and experience of SEL students serves to further
expand the context of the study and the problem of limited access to academic language.
The history of struggle that SEL students know and bring with them to the classroom is
defined by conquest, forced immigration, or subjugation bearing a term “involuntary minority”
(Ogbu, 1992). This history has fundamentally influenced the perceptions, attitudes, and
experiences of SELs while fueling the observed opportunity-to-learn gap (Smitherman &
Villanueva, 1995). Supreme Court cases Mendez v. Westminter School District of Orange
County (1946), Brown v. Board of Education (1954), and especially Lau v. Nichols (1974) are
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 10
salient examples of concerted efforts to overcome barriers to SELs’ opportunity-to-learn.
However, as the research illustrates, the laws brought forth by these high profile cases have not
fixed the problem. A closer look at language classification in schools sheds more light on the
opportunity-to-learn disparities affecting SELs.
Historically, in schools, the vast majority of SELs have been classified as “English Only”
(EO), not English learners (ELs), a determination that effectively devalues the language diversity
SELs bring to schools from the very beginning and follows SELs throughout their education
(Alim, 2005). In addition, the consistent low performance of SEL students who are erroneously
classified as EO points to language problems. In the classroom, educators typically view SELs
from a “language deficit” perspective without taking into account the value of the language
students bring with them. In essence, the assumption that SELs’ first language is English is a
mistake and contributes to an opportunity-to-learn gap. Furthermore, schools that ignore SELs’
linguistic diversity also fail to provide SELs with the kind of linguistic, cultural, and academic
supports they need (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman, 1995). Throughout their education experience,
SELs have consistently seen their educational rights confused, limited, and—many times—
denied (Noguera, 2012). Moreover, the English language variations SEL students speak at home
and bring with them to school are commonly undervalued, understudied, under-diagnosed or
misdiagnosed, or altogether dismissed (Bunch, 2014; LeMoine, 2001). All of these factors have
led to low achievement, limited access to academic language, and an opportunity-to-learn gap for
SELs.
In California, linguistically diverse students are an increasingly central part of the
education landscape. Since 1965, Los Angeles–area public school systems have seen a tidal shift
in the demographics of students served, from 85% White and middle class in 1957 to nearly 85%
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 11
percent poor students of color in 2007 (Menefee-Libey, Mulfinger, & Clayton, 2008), the vast
majority of whom are Latino and have a language that differs from the academic or standardized
English used in schools. Teachers, ergo, face ever-growing permutations of cultural and
linguistic diversity in the classroom that further complicates the over-arching educational goal of
providing all students equal opportunities to learn (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003).
In addition, the consistent low achievement among students identified as SELs is an
indicator that the dominant mono-linguistic approach to curriculum and assessment is not
working for SELs. In fact, such a limited pedagogy is negatively impacting SELs’ opportunities
to learn (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). Moreover, various policies, court
cases, and other official interventions have impacted SELs’ opportunities to learn, both
positively and negatively; however, the overall trend has been one of comparatively low
academic performance over time (Goldenberg, 2008).
In the classroom, SELs face myriad challenges that are similar to those of English
learners (ELs). Commonly, SELs and ELs experience a marginalization of home languages,
language differences, and diversity in general that leads to an unintegrated, incomprehensive,
and, at times, irrelevant learning experience (LeMoine, 2001). Approximately 60% of officially
classified ELs are in essentially all-English instruction, with about 12% of all ELs receiving no
services or support related to their limited English proficiency. The remaining 40% of ELs are in
programs that make little use of their home language (Goldenberg, 2008). Further, 100% of
SELs, in comparison, consistently face obstacles in school that do not allow, encourage, or foster
the use of home languages (LeMoine, 2001). The reality for SELs is that the education system
struggles to consistently and appropriately acknowledge and support their cultural and linguistic
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 12
diversity. SEL students, as a result, struggle to gain access to academic language, participate in
equitable opportunities to learn, and—ultimately—achieve.
Statement of the Problem
Diversity is a prominent feature of Los Angeles. In the classroom, such diversity has the
potential for enriching students’ perspectives as well as significantly enhancing their ability to
construct knowledge (Cummins, 2001). However, the traditional classroom does not often allow
students to share their cultural and linguistic diversity with each another or the teacher
(LeMoine, 2001). Thus, teachers and students often lose an important opportunity to develop
language and literacy skills through constructing shared meaning (Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover,
the traditional classroom typically does not create a mediated “third space” that views students’
cultural and linguistic diversity as an asset and a source for constructing new knowledge and
skills (Gutiérrez, 2008). The reality for many culturally and linguistically diverse students is
limited access to academic language and subsequent limited access to the curriculum (Alim,
2005). The result is low achievement and a limited opportunity-to-learn gap.
The arts present a possible pathway for closing the opportunity-to-learn gap and
providing places for students to develop language and literacy skills through a shared “third-
space” education model. A significant body of research has illustrated how the arts have
provided unique opportunities for all students to engage in deeper and richer learning (Deasy,
2002; Eisner, 2002; Winner & Hetland, 2001) while pointing to especially powerful practices for
culturally and linguistically diverse students to develop academic language, and ultimately
achieve at higher levels through participation in arts education (Asbury & Rich, 2008; Catterall,
Dumais, & Hampden-Thompson, 2012; Ingram & Meath, 2007). In particular, arts integration
programs, whereby artistic disciplines and artistic practices are interwoven across the
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 13
curriculum, have been found to be especially effective for traditionally disadvantaged students,
many of whom are SELs (Burnaford, 2007; Rabkin & Redmond, 2008; Robinson, 2013).
Additional longitudinal research has showcased how disadvantaged students, including
students with limited English proficiency like SELs, have benefitted from arts education in
unique ways (Caldwell & Vaughan, 2011; Catterall et al., 2012; Deasy, 2002). Furthermore, as
the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) move to the fore, and pressure mounts to develop
literacy and metacognition, and to prepare for college and career readiness, the arts again present
themselves as a legitimate pathway toward high achievement (Burnaford, 2007). Moreover,
national and international leaders of business, civics, and beyond frequently bang the drum of
innovation, and loudly call for our systems of education to foster 21st-century skills (Friedman,
2006; Markuson, 2012). The arts intrinsically foster these skills and, in particular, arts integration
programs, whereby students learn through the arts, are a practice that exhibits great promise for
students and society in general (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Rabkin & Redmond, 2008).
The current reality for students is that arts programs are often in decline, and in some
cases, have disappeared altogether, further shaping the problem as one of access (Parsad &
Spiegelman, 2012). Typically, high-quality arts programs are found only in more affluent or
suburban areas, whereby inner-city schools struggle to have consistent access to even the most
basic arts curriculum (Chappell & Cahnmann-Taylor, 2013; Heilig, Cole, & Aguilar, 2010). In
addition to limited access to high-quality arts programs, arts integration programs are even
scarcer, further marginalizing SELs, students who have consistently faced oppression and
discrimination in schools and who have been found to significantly benefit from arts instruction,
and even more significantly from arts integration instruction (Burnaford, 2007; Deasy &
Stevenson, 2005; Ingram & Meath, 2007; Luftig, 2000; Robinson, 2013).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 14
Through limited access and the deterioration of arts programs, schools may experience
“unintended consequences” (Gardner, 2006), whereby reforms fall short of success when
implemented in schools that have an incomplete or unbalanced curriculum with no access or very
little access to the arts. Deep into the second decade of the new century, the unintended
consequences may best be articulated as stagnant achievement, severe dropout, and further
fragmentation of learning and literacy for SELs. The following section presents an overview of
some of the history and background behind the problems discussed thus far.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore how an arts integration school model facilitated
home language use by SEL students while also supporting SEL students’ acquisition of
Academic/Standard English. Research will contribute to knowledge about home language
admittance, mediation, and/or respect, third space learning environments, and arts integration
programming and practices.
Identifying the relationships between home language use in the classroom and specific
attributes of arts integration programming has the potential of providing schools and districts an
evidence base to strengthen and improve teaching and learning for SEL students. Extensive
research literature on language variation and literacy has revealed a limited body exploring the
intersection of arts-based education and development of Academic/Standard English proficiency.
This case study examined the knowledge and perceptions of students and teachers at an arts
integration performing arts academy serving a high population of Chicano English–speaking
SEL students.
The study contributes to the limited body of knowledge about the role an arts integration
curriculum model can play in fostering language development for SEL students. The study was
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 15
grounded in sociocultural and sociolinguistic theories of teaching and learning (Gee, 2004;
Vygotsky, 1978).
Research Questions
1. In schools with large SEL populations that are implementing an arts integration program,
how is students’ use of African American English or Chicano English admitted, mediated,
or respected as a valued contribution in classroom discourses that resemble “third space”
learning environments?
2. What are the attributes of arts or arts integration programs and practices that support SEL
student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency?
Importance of the Study
This study can help clarify the ways in which the arts can be an integral part of a school’s
curriculum by supporting students’ cultural and linguistic diversity as a means of developing
language and literacy skills through third-space models of teaching and learning. A wide range
of stakeholders, including teachers, parent, and policymakers, will benefit from the findings of
this study. The study can also help educators address the new demands of the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) through the arts, a powerful platform for developing speaking and
listening skills, metacognition, and cross-curricular literacy. In so doing, educators can
contribute to a more creative and thoughtful work force for the 21st century. Almost daily, calls
are made for analytical and creative skills that go beyond mere technical ability. The next
generation of workers will need the ability to embrace diversity as a basis for unity. The new
world of work is also calling for creative thinkers who are able to envision new creations for a
highly competitive international marketplace. The study can assist students who do not connect
with the traditional classroom setting in finding identities as thinkers and scholars in
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 16
sociocultural contexts where the multiple funds of knowledge that students construct outside and
inside of school are accepted and respected.
In sum, not enough is known about how the arts and arts integration programs can
provide a valuable platform for language and literacy development, cognition, and deep
metacognition, key pillars of high quality education (Noddings, 2006). Lastly, the discipline of
developing a practice of improvement (Elmore, 2003) includes constant reflection, risk taking
and experimentation, and accountability, effectively cultivating healthy learning environments
that are able to meet the needs of all students, regardless of socioeconomic status (SES), family
background, or other variables. This study may provide significant evidence to support practices
of reflection and improvement across school systems. Above all, public education in the United
States is charged with uplifting all students for the public good (Hochschild & Scrovronick,
2003); as such, an essential feature of this study will be to bring to light practices and behaviors
that facilitate success for all learners.
Limitations
For the purposes of this study, the term SEL refers to students who speak a version of
African American Ebonics and Mexican American vernacular. In addition, because SELs are not
officially recognized by all stakeholders and schools, students who are categorized under federal
guidelines as English Only but have not achieved proficiency in English will be designated a
SEL. This study was conducted during a limited time frame and was confined to schools in the
Los Angeles area with a minimum of 30% enrollment of either African American or Latino
enrollment or a combination of the two groups that equaled 30% or more and had a functioning
arts integration program already in place.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 17
Delimitations
Tracking and reporting of SEL students is not specifically mandated for monitoring in the
greater Los Angeles area, nor in most of the nation. Therefore, to conduct research on issues
related to SEL students, a combination of proxy identifiers were used to identify and describe
this population. For purposes of this study, SEL proxy characteristics were race (African
American or Latino), school identification as English Only (EO), and below basic performance
on teacher-made and/or standards based assessment for three or more years in the area of English
Language Arts (ELA).
For the purposes of this study, schools with high SEL populations are defined as those
that have majority populations of individual or combined ethnicities of African American and/or
Latino students. For this study, student performance of this group of students consisted of three
or more consecutive years of school-wide performance at a below basic level on standardized
assessments.
For the purposes of this study, there was not a significant presence of African American
students at the research site, resulting in a focus on Chicano English. In addition, the limited time
frame and number of teachers included in the study resulted in an exclusion of math and science
teachers.
Definition of Terms
Academic English: A variety of English that involves proficiency in reading, speaking,
and listening as well as mastery of formal written English. Academic English is a system of
specific academic conventions that are traditionally associated with long-term success in public
schools, completion of higher education, and employment with opportunity for professional
advancement and financial rewards (Scarcella, 2003).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 18
Arts integration: Arts integration programs feature the development of interdisciplinary
relationships between learning in the arts and learning skills and concepts in other subjects across
a diverse school curriculum (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). The co-equal cognitive arts integration
approach (Robinson, 2013) requires students to use higher-order thinking skills and aesthetic
analysis to gain further understanding of concepts. This approach also attempts to seamlessly
merge arts standards with the core curriculum to “build connections, provide engaging context,
and differentiate both the processes and products of learning” through authentic learning and
assessment (Robinson, 2013, p. 33).
Standard English learner (SEL): Standard English learners (SELs) are students whose
language is based in an English vocabulary with syntactical and grammatical structures heavily
influenced by their heritage language. Examples are African American English, whose syntax,
grammatical structures, and phonology are influenced by West African and Niger Congolese
languages and Mexican American or Chicano English, whose syntax, grammatical structures,
and phonology are influenced by Spanish. These students speak varieties of English that utilize
unique linguistic features that differ from Standard English (“English Learner Master Plan”,
2012; LeMoine, 2001). Neither federal, state, nor district guideless recognizes the existence of a
category of learners known as Standard English learners. For practical purposes in this study,
SELs will be identified as African American and Latino students who are designated as EOs (not
ELLs) who have failed to score at proficient or above on standardized tests or school-designed
measures for two years or more.
Third space: The third space is an expansion of the “Zone of Proximal Development”
(ZPD) concept (Vygotsky, 1978) and is framed as the space in which students' primary language
(those used in the home, community, and informal social interactions) known as first space, and
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 19
the teacher’s use of Standardized English (endorsed in school and other formal institutions)
interact to form a third space in which the teacher and student construct new knowledge,
including the student’s acquisition of Standardized English (Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje,
Ciechanowski, Kramer, Ellis, Carrillo, & Collazo, 2004; Vygotsky, 1978).
Organization of the Study
This dissertation is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the problem of access
to academic language and arts integration programs that support SELs as outlined in the
theoretical frameworks for the study. Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature including
additional background to the study, theories of language and learning, effective and defective
school practices aimed at helping SELs, and an investigation into the practices and benefits of
arts education programs, with specific emphasis on arts integration programs. Chapter 3
describes the methodology and the case study approach used to investigate various learning
environments using observation, in-depth interviews, and focus group interview. Chapter 3 will
also give detailed information about the context of the study and the participants as well as data
collection strategies and the methods used to analyze the data. Chapter 4 explicates the findings,
information gathered, and the analyses conducted, as guided by the conceptual framework of the
arts integration model. Chapter 4 includes a discussion of the questions and issues raised in the
literature review, which are reexamined in the light of the findings in Chapter 4. Chapter 5
features further discussion of key findings, presents conclusions and recommendations, and
offers direction for further research.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 20
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature reviewed in Chapter 2 presents a conceptual foundation for perennial
problems facing certain groups of students, identified here as Standard English learners (SELs).
SELs consistently face an opportunity-to-learn gap fueled by limited access to academic
language (Graff, 1999). The purpose of this literature review is to identify ongoing efforts for
understanding and mediation of chronic low achievement among SELs (Cummins, 2001;
Goldenberg, 2008; LeMoine, 2001) and to present existing evidence and strategies around how
SELs can achieve higher academic, social, linguistic, and cultural gains through participation in
high-quality, well-established arts integration programs (Catterall et al., 2012; Winner &
Hetland, 2001).
The first section of the review includes background and contextual information regarding
some of the current challenges facing SELs. These challenges include issues regarding language
proficiency, language status, socioeconomic status, demographics, and various learning
challenges (Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011; Zhou, 2003). The second section will feature an
overview of language and its essential role in learning (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999;
Byrnes & Wasik, 2009; Freire, 2000; Gutiérrez, Rymes, & Larson, 1995; Schleppegrell, 2012;
Vygotsky, 1978), including a review of the guiding theories informing practice as well as
research showcasing what it looks like in the classroom when the guiding theories are put into
action.
The third section will feature an overview of school practices that provide access to
academic language, as well as school practices that do not acknowledge the importance of
language to learning (Dutro & Moran, 2002; “English Learner Master Plan”, 2012; Scott,
Straker, & Katz, 2010; Wiley & Lukes, 1996). The fourth section will look closely at the role the
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 21
arts can play as a mediator among language development, literacy, and ultimately, academic
achievement (Ingram & Meath, 2007; Luftig, 2000; Robinson, 2013). Also included in this
section will be a review of best practices that teachers and institutions have used to foster high-
quality and equitable arts integration programs (Adler, 2006; Burnaford, 2007; Caldwell &
Vaughan, 2011). The literature review will conclude with a conceptual framework for the study
followed by a summary of Chapter 2.
Current Challenges Facing SELs
The persistence of the achievement gap in public education for Standard English learners
(SELs) in the United States is a problem that, over time, has only grown in complexity and
importance (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; Cummins, 2001). Students who fall into the
SEL category are a diverse group and include large numbers of students who speak a version of
vernacular English including African American Vernacular English, Chicano Vernacular
English, Hawaiian Pigeon, Native American Vernacular English, and others (LeMoine, 2001). In
addition to the significant linguistic diversity SELs represent, a common thread of cultural
differences, as well as socioeconomic struggle, accompany the linguistic diversity (Charity
Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; Cummins, 2001). The cultural and linguistic differences, along with
the socioeconomic disparity that accompanies SELs can lead to oppression in the classroom and,
ultimately, result in an opportunity-to-learn gap (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). In sum, the
achievement gap noted earlier is consistent with an oppression and opportunity-to-learn gap that
students identified as SELs have experienced over the course of history in the United States and
is significantly influenced by cultural and linguistic differences as well as socioeconomic
disparities (Katz & Rose, 2013; Kozol, 2012; LeMoine, 2001).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 22
Over the course of history, large numbers of people have been brought to the United
States involuntarily or have been driven from land annexed by what became the United States;
these populations are classified by Ogbu (1992) as “involuntary minorities.” Students who are
born from involuntary minorities constitute most of the students identified as SELs. For further
clarification, involuntary minorities and subsequent SELs include the displacement and forced
removal of indigenous people (Native Americans), the forced immigration of people for the
expressed purpose of labor exploitation (African Americans), and the colonization of an entire
people (Hawaiian Americans and Mexican Americans). In sum, the conquest, forced
immigration, or subjugation of involuntary minorities has fundamentally influenced the
perceptions, attitudes, experiences, and the resultant academic and opportunity-to-learn gap
SELs face (Smitherman, 2003). After extensive struggle and many court cases, speakers of
languages associated with distinct national origin other than English-speaking nations have been
designated as English Learners (ELs) who received support for acquiring Standard/Academic
English in structured and funded English Language Development programs. Supreme Court
cases Mendez v. Westminter School District of Orange County (1946) and Brown v. Board of
Education (1954) are salient examples of concerted efforts to overcome barriers facing EL’s
opportunity-to-learn. A closer look at language classification in schools sheds more light on the
opportunity-to-learn disparities for SELs.
Historically, in schools, the vast majority of SELs have not been classified as English
learners (ELs), but rather as English Only, a classification that effectively devalues the language
diversity SELs bring to schools and follows SELs throughout their education (Alim, 2005). As a
result of the English Only classification, educators consistently view SELs from a “language
deficit” perspective. Educators who ignore SELs’ linguistic diversity also fail to provide them
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 23
with the kind of linguistic, cultural, and academic supports they need to be successful
(Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). Moreover, throughout their education experience, SELs have
consistently seen their educational rights confused, limited and, many times, denied (Noguera,
2012). More specifically, the English language variations SEL students speak at home and bring
with them to school are commonly undervalued, understudied, under-diagnosed or
misdiagnosed, or altogether dismissed (Bunch, 2014; LeMoine, 2001).
In addition, stigmas plague SELs and are significant factors in limiting access to the
academic language SELs need for success (Graff, 1999). Examples of negative attitudes and
perceptions interjected by teachers, schools, and school systems include practices that
communicate to SELs that they are “inferior and incapable of high academic achievement”
(Noguera, 2012), or that SELs must leave what educators mistakenly consider “their street lingo”
at home (Alim, 2005) and not “mumble” as well as being told “don’t write like you talk”
(Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2011). Moreover, SELs are often taught by teachers who would
rather not teach them and who have “low expectations for their success” (LeMoine, 2001). As a
result, SELs often have deep reservations about assuming the role of “self-conscious
intellectualizer” (Graff, 1999) and more often than not, achieve low levels of academic success
on top of feeling marginalized and alienated. Although these are dominant perceptions, attitudes,
and practices, research has pointed to a different approach that puts much greater value on the
home languages students bring to the classroom (Freire & Macedo, 1995).
Labov (in Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2011) and others have approached the issue
sociolinguistically, whereby language “differences” are valued, home languages welcomed, and
English language vernaculars used in the classroom to support the development of academic
language, regardless of origin or “quality.” Labov (2011, p. 5) concretized the issue further,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 24
stating, “language varieties are not the result of deficits in language learning capacity but are the
product of a different set of rules with their own logic and internal consistency.” However, the
language variations or differences are vast and present both a challenge and an opportunity for
further research. The next section will look at the demographic and socioeconomic factors
affecting SELs that result in a lack of access to academic language and result in a pronounced
achievement gap and subsequent opportunity-to-learn gap.
Socioeconomics, Demographics, and Achievement
Academically, SELs have consistently performed academically at levels similar to ELs,
highlighting a parallel lack of access to academic language for both ELs and SELs. Given the
current lack of an “official” designation for SELs in the data, a look at the socioeconomic factors
and achievement affecting ELs offers an informed glimpse into accompanying challenges facing
SELs.
In California, students classified as EL comprise 25% of all students, or 1.4 million, 85%
of whom speak Spanish at home (Hill, 2012), the remaining 15% include almost 60 different
home languages. An important part of the EL policy landscape is also rooted in the fact that over
80% of ELs are high poverty, compared to the 20% average of all school-aged children (Hill,
2012). The poverty rate for EL students (as well as students identified in this study as SELs)
elucidates many of the equity challenges that persist in certain communities. In particular, ELs as
well as Ebonics speakers and Chicano English speakers from urban areas consistently struggle to
be competitive academically and acquire academic English and the content knowledge such
access provides (Cummins, 2001; LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman, 2003). In essence, complex
linguistic diversity coupled with low socioeconomic status drive many of the challenges facing
both ELs and speakers of Ebonics and Mexican American English.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 25
Linguistically diverse students are an increasingly dominant part of the education
landscape in California. Over the past 50 years, Los Angeles–area public school systems have
seen a sea change in the demographics of students served, from 85% White and middle class in
1957 to “nearly 85% percent poor students of color in 2007” (Menefee-Libey et al., 2008), the
vast majority of whom are Latinos whose language differs from the academic or standardized
English used in schools. Thus, the cultural and linguistic diversity teachers encounter in the
classroom contribute to the complexities teachers face in providing equal opportunities for all
students to learn. A closer look at official test data illustrates more specifically the opportunity-
to-learn gap faced by ELs and students identified as SELs.
NAEP (2013) data for reading and mathematics showed that only 35% of eighth-grade
students in the United States were proficient, and that growth since 1990 had been only marginal.
California Standards Test (CST) data from 2003 to 2013 illustrated similar levels of achievement
for the Spanish-speaking ELs who had not yet been reclassified as RFEPs and African American
students, who were almost exclusively classified as English Only. The consistent low
achievement among students who met the definition of SELs among researchers indicated that
the dominant mono-linguistic approach of English Only to curriculum and assessment is not
working for SELs; in fact, such a limited pedagogy is significantly impacting their opportunities
to learn. However, although official testing data illustrated a clear lack of achievement for
students identified as SELs, over time, various policies, court cases, and other official
interventions have also impacted SELs’ opportunities to learn. Moreover, historical policies
affecting culturally and linguistically diverse students have been a prominent cause of SELs’
comparatively low academic performance—policies that have both helped and hindered
culturally and linguistically diverse students gaining opportunities to learn (Goldenberg, 2008).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 26
The following section outlines some of the influential policies on culturally and linguistically
diverse students.
Policies Governing Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students
Over multiple decades, policy efforts have consistently failed to meet the needs of
linguistically diverse students in the United States, yet diversity is increasing in volume and
complexity (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2011). Students in the United States come from over
400 language backgrounds, and most were born in the United States (Goldenberg, 2008).
However, 80% of the parents of culturally and linguistically diverse students tend to come from
lower economic and educational backgrounds than either the general population or other
immigrant and language minority populations (Goldenberg, 2008).
In the classroom, culturally and linguistically diverse students face myriad challenges
including monolingual dominance and scarce supports (Goldenberg, 2008). In addition,
culturally and linguistically diverse students, including SELs, consistently face obstacles in
schools that do not allow, encourage, or foster use of home languages (LeMoine, 2001). The
common experience for SELs is that home languages, language differences, and diversity in
general continue to be marginalized and un-integrated into a comprehensive and relevant
learning experience for students (LeMoine, 2001). In sum, systems of education have struggled
and continue to struggle to acknowledge and support linguistically diverse students. The
following section outlines some of the key policies and efforts of reform that have positively and
negatively impacted culturally and linguistically diverse students in American education.
Attention to Language Differences in Schooling Has a Mixed History
Two Supreme Court cases represent key facets of the fundamental problem of access and
opportunities to learn for culturally and linguistically diverse students. The first, Mendez v.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 27
Westminter School District of Orange County (1946), was a groundbreaking ruling holding that
the segregation of Mexican and Mexican American students into separate “Mexican schools”
was unconstitutional. In a similar case, the landmark Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
decision declared segregation of Black students into separate schools from White students to be
unconstitutional, effectively overturning the “separate but equal” ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896). Both the Mendez (1946) and Brown (1954) decisions were important steps to solving
stark inequities for students of diversity. However, significant barriers to opportunities to learn
persist for culturally and linguistically diverse students, many of whom were once physically
segregated by law, but now face a less visible type of marginalization in the form of rigid and
dominant monolingual pedagogy (Smitherman, 1995). Twenty years after the Brown (1954)
decision required states to educate Black and White students together, a seminal case—Lau v.
Nichols (1974)—was propelling the issue of linguistic diversity to the forefront of education
reform.
In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Lau v. Nichols, effectively requiring districts
to take affirmative steps to ensure access to the curriculum for students with limited English
proficiency. Two years later in California, the Chacon-Moscone Bilingual Bicultural Education
Act of 1976 (AB 1329) explicitly stipulated that districts offer bilingual educational
opportunities to any student identified as an English learner. The Chacon-Moscone Act was
important in recognizing linguistic diversity; however, just 11 years later, Proposition 227
appeared on the ballot. Remarkable, at the time, 30% of students in California designated as ELs
were in official bilingual instructional programs (De Cos, 1999). This was a significant
population of students engaged in educational programs that recognized linguistic diversity in the
classroom. As it turned out, Prop. 227 changed everything (Parrish et al., 2006).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 28
In 1998, Proposition 277 passed by 61% of the California electorate. The bill required
that ELs be taught “overwhelmingly in English” through sheltered or structured English
immersion (SEI) programs during a transition period, and then transferred to “mainstream”
English-only classrooms (Parrish et al., 2006). Proposition 227 put the brakes on bilingual
programs and other programs that recognized and valued linguistic diversity. Thirteen months
after passing Proposition 227, the California Legislature enacted the English Language
Acquisition Program (ELAP) under AB 1116. The purpose of ELAP was to increase California
students’ English proficiency in grades 4 through 8 and better prepare them to meet the state
standards (Maxwell-Jolly, 2000). Many of the provisions of ELAP have been viewed as
beneficial to students; however, the general trend of reform around linguistically diverse students
in particular has placed mounting pressure to perform academically in the face of rapidly
diminishing supports. In concert with growing accountability pressures, the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) changed the priorities of public education for the foreseeable future.
To this day, the creed of NCLB significantly impacts culturally and linguistically diverse
students in a way not mandated previously—either at the current depth or scale. NCLB ushered
in a new commitment to standards-based instructional practice and echoed the call for increased
accountability. Published and disaggregated data sets have fundamentally altered the
conversation about public school policy and reform, effectively “dominating the field of K-12
education” (Carnoy, Elmore, & Siskin, 2013). NCLB brought into focus the regular practice of
disaggregating test performance data to include subgroups of students. Further analysis of state
testing data, NAEP, and other norm-referenced measures provide a great deal of context for
understanding the chronic underachievement of student groups that include linguistically diverse
students.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 29
The increased accountability measures mandated by NCLB (2001) and other state
measures have further thrown into stark relief the achievement gaps for students whom the
demographic data reveal to be linguistically different students. Whereas significant efforts have
been made to diminish the opportunity-to-learn gap for all students, there exists a very wide
range of agreement across the country as to what the role of learning and education should be for
society (Chappell & Cahnmann-Taylor, 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2010). Now, nearly 15 years
after the enactment of NCLB, low academic success persists among ethnic/racial groups, with
large numbers of students whose home language differs from Standardized/Academic English
(Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; Hollie, 2011). A new national set of “career and college
ready” standards known as the Common Core present new opportunities for all students to
experience equitable and rigorous learning opportunities.
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) represent a tidal shift for teaching and
learning in public schools and is the newest and biggest reform in education. The initiative is
sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School
Officers (CCSSO) and seeks to “establish consistent education standards across the states as well
as ensure that students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit-bearing courses
at two- or four-year college programs or enter the workforce” (http://www.corestandards.org).
Metacognition, reading, writing, speaking, and listening are hallmarks of the new standards for
all students. Common Core’s new focus on understanding “language as action that is developed,
with support, in and through meaningful and engaging activities across the curriculum” (Bunch,
Kibler, & Pimentel, 2013) is especially relevant and holds the potential to significantly impact
learning and achievement for ELs and SELs. Time will tell, however, whether the Common Core
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 30
will be effective in reforming the ingrained linguistic practices that enslave students to a mono-
linguistic system that does not empower students to learn (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003).
To conclude part one of the literature review, Cummins (2001) offered a reflection on
whether education should automatically reinforce the status quo or should challenge the
structures of society. The complexity and contentiousness of the issues challenge schools in
pursuit of equitable opportunities to learn to adopt policies and practices that promote students’
multilingual talents and support different perspectives that this multilingual access represents
(LeMoine, 2001). Delpit (1995; as cited in Cummins, 2001) questions whether America’s
schools really believe that all children should be encouraged to take pride in their linguistic
creativity. Furthermore, are schools willing to explore varieties of English that are stigmatized in
the wider society? (Alim, 2005) School and district approaches to education policy design,
implementation, and the type and quality of assessment used to measure outcomes of
linguistically diverse students are fundamental to how and if SELs will learn and achieve.
Theories of learning, language, and learning in the classroom, and specific learning challenges
facing SELs—most notably self-efficacy, motivation, and engagement—are key factors to the
problem and are outlined in the following section.
Language and Learning
“Every subject is taught and learned through language” (Schleppegrell, 2012, p. 416).
The elements of language and learning are inextricably connected, making language essential to
learning (Friere, 2000). This section of the literature review brings contextual focus to the
importance of language to learning. More specifically, the sociocultural considerations of
motivation, engagement, and self-efficacy are of great concern in educating SELs. Furthermore,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 31
SELs’ limited access to academic language and classrooms that admit, mediate, or even respect
student’s home language is a substantial barrier.
Learning Challenges Facing SELs
Many SELs face learning challenges that are explicitly tied to the systemic language
diversity devaluation that occurs throughout their formal education. This section of the literature
review will look at three challenges: self-efficacy, motivation, and engagement. The challenges
discussed here are presented individually; however, it is important to note that they usually occur
simultaneously, fueling an overall academic struggle for SELs and a subsequent opportunity-to-
learn gap illustrated by a distinct lack of access to academic language.
Self-efficacy, defined as a student’s belief in his or her capabilities to achieve at a certain
level, is a fundamental driving force for all learning (Rueda, 2011). For SELs, who struggle to
assimilate in traditional classrooms, consistent failures experienced during various learning
activities—coupled with the inability to utilize their home language as a resource—can have
devastating effects on a student’s sense of self-efficacy (LeMoine, 2001). Many students, and
SELs in particular, according to Graff (1999, p. 140), may at times “recognize the personal and
cultural power that comes with mastery” and the rewards a school can offer; however, they often
still feel “deep reservations about assuming the role of intellectualizer.” Motivation is another
challenge directly impacting academic success for SELs (Graff, 1999).
Motivation, defined by Pintrich (2003, p. 673), is a “goal-directed activity” and includes
components of instigation and sustainment both influenced by internal cognitive and affective
factors as well as external sociocultural factors, among others (Rueda, 2011). For SELs, this
process is quite significant, as many struggle to find the necessary motivation to sustain their
learning through cognitively challenging tasks that do not include their home language.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 32
A third challenge SELs face in the learning environment is engagement. Rueda (2011)
has emphasized that engagement cannot be seen as separate from other factors and should always
be directed toward achievement of a goal or goals. As the achievement data suggest, SELs’
struggle to engage in goal-oriented learning effectively leads to less engagement, less motivation,
and less self-efficacy over time. In sum, SELs face many learning challenges and fail to see
enough evidence of the “worth” of education (Zhou, 2003). Even more distinctly, SELs exist in a
learning environment that fails to demonstrate to them the power of education, or rather,
“education as the practice of freedom” (Freire, 2000, p. 47). In an effort to foster a practice of
freedom, schools engage in various practices aimed at developing literacy, increasing access to
academic language, and diminishing the opportunity-to-learn gap for SELs.
Language and Learning in the Classroom for SELs
The following section of the literature review will provide an overview of research that
has illustrated more specifically what learning looks like in the classroom when the theories of
learning discussed in the previous section are put into action. In particular, this section will begin
with a discussion of key research that has been conducted around the area of academic discourse,
an essential tool for learning that has important implications for linguistically diverse students.
Moreover, academic discourse is an especially relevant activity that teachers and schools can use
to identify needs and cultivate successful attainment of academic language for SELs. Finally, a
strong system of academic language supports specific to the sociocultural and sociolinguistic
needs of SEL students is discussed.
In considering the role of language in learning, it is important to note that both the oral
and written forms of languages play a pivotal role in the formation and development of human
intellectual capacity (Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, language serves as a mediator that effectively
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 33
produces “qualitative transformations” (Moll, 2013, p. 31) for individuals and their environments
in the process of learning. In turn, language formed in the context of the home, family, and
community is developed and given meaning through action (Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, the
intersection of self and action Vygotsky (1978) has described is aligned to Gee (2004), who
stated that a language includes who you are and what you do when you use it. Moreover, a
student’s home language or primary discourse provides an initial and often enduring sense of self
and sets the foundation of our culturally specific vernacular (Gee, 2004). This dynamic is
significant for all learners, and for SELs, is an especially important issue given that home
languages—represented as English language variations and vernaculars—are typically
unwelcome in schools.
The practice of mono-lingualism experienced, especially by SELs in schools, effectively
stunts opportunities for students’ intellectual development (Smitherman, 2001). Furthermore, the
de-legitimization of linguistic diversity and related disenfranchisements provides an explanation
for why many students who also happen to be high-poverty (many of whom are SELs) begin to
“give up” in the third grade (Hart & Risley, 2003, LeMoine, 2001). In sum, language and use of
language as speech is paramount to all student learning. The sad reality, however, is that a
student’s linguistic diversity is routinely ignored or shunned, effectively diminishing learning
significantly. A closer look at speech and discourse adds further context to the importance of
language to learning.
Gutiérrez (1995, p. 22) has framed the discussion appropriately, stating explicitly that
language development includes “opportunities for socialization to academic discourse and, thus,
membership into a particular community.” Furthermore, Gutiérrez (1995) characterized language
as inherently dialogic and interactive, moving the discussion beyond a deficit-model explanation
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 34
for linguistic variability and toward a more authentic and “expansive” model of language use and
development in the classroom. Moreover, Gutiérrez (1995) redefined academic language
development in the classroom as a process of welcoming and studying linguistic, social, and
cultural practices that students bring to the classroom. In sum, for learning to become
internalized, children and adults “must share reference in order to share meaning” (Gutiérrez
1995, p. 29).
The systematic welcoming of linguistic diversity as a platform for academic discourse
and language development is aligned to the constructivist theory of learning (Vygotsky, 1978).
For SELs, who frequently come from fragmented sociocultural backgrounds, a welcoming
environment for linguistic and cultural diversity promotes healthy academic discourse (LeMoine,
2001). Moreover, discourse is an essential function of language learning for all students
including SELs. What students learn, how that knowledge is transmitted, and who is present in
the learning activity, are fundamental features of the goals and motives that drive learning (Moje
et al., 2004).
Academic discourse as a “socially mediated process” (Gutiérrez, 1995, p. 22) is an
important pathway for learning. Furthermore, academic discourse and the resultant
constructivism inherently communicate respect for the value of diversity and are essential to the
process of learning language, developing literacy, and ultimately gaining academic achievement.
A deeper look at discourse through the lens of constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978) further frames
learning language in the classroom for SELs.
Language is essential to learning and constructing knowledge Vygotsky (1978). In
addition, the process of “co-constructing” knowledge and meaning through collective
experiences such as academic discourse and other discourses is also essential (Gutiérrez, 1995).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 35
The process of knowledge co-construction is an important element of all learning environments,
and for SELs, where the learning environment is linguistically diverse, marginalized SELs
desperately need regular opportunities to use and leverage whatever language they have (Alim,
2005). Moreover, academic and other discourses allow students to reflect, effectively relating
“new knowledge to old” (Barnes, 1974 in Gutiérrez, 1995, p. 21), all the while sharing,
reflecting, and being challenged through activities that are inherently constructivist (Vygotsky,
1978). The relationship of speech to action and ultimately to learning further frames the role
language use plays in increasing access to academic language for SELs.
“Speech not only accompanies practical activity but also plays a specific role in carrying
it out” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 25). Thus, the relationship between language and activity in the
classroom has profound implications for learning. Moreover, SELs may struggle to assimilate
and feel comfortable using the language they bring to the classroom. Such a suffocation of the
speech and action relationship can have devastating effects for SELs (LeMoine, 2001;
Smitherman, 1995), as discussed in the first section of Chapter 2. A closer look at how speech is
used highlights additional key considerations and frameworks for understanding the role
language plays to learning.
Students use speech to describe what they are doing, effectively making the speech and
action into a singular complex psychological function (Vygotsky, 1978). The more complex the
action and situation, the greater the importance of speech to the operation as a whole. In essence,
students solve problems, and hence learn, through the use of their speech, used in concert with
specific actions and perceptions (Vygotsky, 1978). This kind of speech can be called “public” or
interpersonal speech (Vygotsky, 1978) and is used by students in the classroom to communicate
with each other and with the teacher. Another important form of speech is known as
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 36
intrapersonal speech, or “inner” and “private” speech, and is also essential for learning
(Gutiérrez, 2008; Lantolf & Appel, 1994).
Intrapersonal speech is a type of language use that students rely on increasingly as a task
or action becomes more complex (Vygotsky, 1978). Lantolf and Appel (1994) have further
articulated important subtleties relating to inner speech, stating, that word “sense” and word
“meaning” interact as an “inner dialogue” between two different subjects of one thought.
Furthermore, students use inner speech dialogically with themselves, often distilling complex
thoughts down to a single utterance (Jackendoff & Pinker, 2005; Pavlenko & Lantolf, 2000). The
phenomenon was observed during a puzzle game, for example, as a child speaking just the word
“green,” versus a more complex statement like, “Ok, now I need to look for a green piece”
(Lantolf & Appel, 1994, p. 29). Observations of this kind illustrate the dialogic nature of inner
speech for students, making this an important issue for SELs, who clearly need tools and
mechanisms for accessing the language they have developed, as well as methods to successfully
leverage those skills to the tasks designed for them. A final consideration for the role language
plays to learning is in the following section around the concept of the third space (Gutiérrez,
2008; Vygotsky, 1978).
Third Space
The third space is an expansion of the “Zone of Proximal Development” (ZPD) concept
(Vygotsky, 1978) and is framed as the space in which students' primary discourses (those used in
the home, community, and informal social interactions) and students' secondary discourses
(those endorsed in school and other formal institutions) intersect to form a third space of newly
constructed meaning (Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004; Vygotsky, 1978). Recognition and
cultivation of the third space in the learning environment are what education leaders and
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 37
researchers increasingly call “deep learning” or “new generation learning environments”—the
kinds of environments that engender the skills that are often cited as necessary for success in the
21st century. Moreover, the key qualities of such learning environments and, in particular, the
shifts that they both demand and help to create in student-teacher relationships and students’
roles in their own learning, are also recognized as essential strategies that help students develop
literacy, and may be of particular benefit for SELs.
School Practices and Access to Academic Language
The following section of the literature will feature an overview of school practices that
support access to academic language, as well as school practices that inhibit access or do not
acknowledge the importance of providing access to academic language (Dutro & Moran, 2002;
“English Learner Master Plan”, 2012; Scott et al., 2010; Wiley & Lukes, 1996). The literature
presented here offers an overview of different approaches that have been taken, including
suggestions; however, the primary areas of concern this section will highlight include language
status classification practices, instructional and curricular practices, and systems of
accountability affecting access to academic language and the opportunity-to-learn gap for SELs.
The manner in which English learners are identified, classified, and assessed throughout
their schooling in K–12 is essential to understanding the complexity of the problem. In
California, parents complete the Home Language Survey, a state-mandated instrument used by
educators to categorize students as ELs or English Only speaking students (Wiley & Lukes,
1996). This instrument presents a fundamental problem for SELs, as there is has never been an
option for parents to select a version of vernacular English as the primary language spoken in the
home (LeMoine, 1999). A more diversified language survey could help illuminate some of the
cultural and linguistic challenges SELs face before they enter the classroom and begin “the slow
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 38
march towards isolation” (Alim, 2005, p. 25). Moreover, Scott et al. (2010) proclaimed the need
for a more a disaggregated data set from the very beginning of a students’ language status
designation, effectively giving educators more of the tools they need to help SELs access
academic language.
In essence, the methods by which the state of California administer EL mandates,
including how students are classified as an English learner, are linguistically limiting, effectively
over-simplifying the language diversity present in schools (Scott et al., 2010). Parents of SELs
select “English Only” in the Home Language Survey, inadvertently placing their children in
mainstream English classrooms that offer little or no support for them to participate. Language
diversity and bilingualism is seen as a “curse” by many educators and policymakers, whereby a
student’s first language is meant to be phased out as soon as possible, in order to make room for
English Only (Wiley & Lukes, 1996). This situation is highly problematic for SELs, who face a
complex sociocultural challenge of assimilation into a school system that does not recognize
English language diversity or variation (LeMoine, 1999). SELs, misidentified as English Only,
struggle in the mainstream English Only classroom. Even if SELs were properly identified,
educators are typically ill equipped to meet their needs (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). The
varied landscape of effective curriculum and instruction are outlined in the following section.
Instruction and curriculum practices currently in place at schools are dominated by
“mono-linguistic” approaches to teaching and learning (Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003).
Research has pointed to the several detrimental effects on SELs who participate in schools that
do not welcome language diversity academically, culturally, and socially, as discussed in the
previous section of the literature review. A different approach is essential for SEL success.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 39
A strong theory of action for all classroom instruction should feature informal and
formal language learning opportunities across the curriculum and throughout the school day
(Dutro & Moran, 2002). These opportunities are fundamental to establishing the kind of learning
environment that will provide access to acquire proficiency in academic language. Dutro and
Moran (2002) also proposed a blueprint of instructional methodology that is heavily drawn from
Cummins’s (2008) Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) framework built around
“functions, forms, and fluency.”
The CALP instructional framework is a useful model for embracing SELs in the
classroom; however, Cummins (2001) laid out five principles that are especially relevant to the
challenges SELs face when access to academic language is limited. The five constructs Cummins
(2001) proposed for effective instruction are built around one fundamental and overarching
principle, which is that all teachers, regardless of content area, must teach language and establish
clear objectives for both language and content every step of the way. The literacy standards
within the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a step in this direction and are essential
frameworks for increasing Academic/Standard English proficiency for SELs. The speaking and
listening standards of the Common Core are especially beneficial for SELs as they ask students
to regularly engage in the use and analysis of speech, both formal and informal. In addition, the
Common Core standards around language directly support SELs’ acquisition of
Academic/Standard English proficiency and are explicit in the methods and assessments needed
for growth.
The remaining four principles laid out by Cummins (2001) include more specific
instructional strategies, such as lesson “front-loading” that provides students with new
knowledge, vocabulary, and opportunities to activate prior knowledge, as well as the purposeful
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 40
integration of various visual and experiential scaffolds, plentiful and differentiated opportunities
for language production and practice, and finally, systematic assessment that covers both
language and content objectives. The principles outlined by Cummins (2001) and others are
foundational practices for good instruction, regardless of student population; however, for SELs,
in particular, the five instructional principles are guiding practices that schools can and should
use to increase access to academic language.
Another approach has been taken by the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD),
which, in 2012, produced a English Learner Master Plan, which provides guidance and direction
to administrators, teachers, paraprofessionals, and students regarding the options available to
parents and the expectations the district holds for each school and classroom in the district,
including guidelines for staff, programs, professional development, and accountability affecting
the education of ELs and SELs. The master plan is particularly important for SELs, as it serves
as a formal set of guidelines that identify the specific academic language challenges and needs of
SELs as well as explicit linguistic considerations for instruction and assessment across the
district (LeMoine, 2001).
The underlying principles guiding the LAUSD Master Plan for SELs are similar to
recommendations made by Cummins (2001), explicitly stating that SELs possess a variety of
linguistic and cultural assets; similar to the CALP practice of accessing prior knowledge, focused
instruction for SEL students builds on their cultural and linguistic strengths. SEL programs must
provide “meaningful access to a curriculum that is standards-based, cognitively complex,
rigorous and coherent,” in which “all teachers are teachers of both language and content.”
(“English Learner Master Plan”, 2012, p. 83 All of the guiding principles outlined in the
LAUSD master plan drive the centerpiece of instruction, aptly named the Mainstream English
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 41
Learner Development (MELD) program. MELD is an intervention program designed to develop
listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills in Academic/Standard English. The purpose of
MELD is to ensure that SELs have broad and relevant access to the core curriculum as well as
career and college readiness. The tenets of strong SEL instructional practice echo those
articulated earlier in the literature review and are practices that support SELs’ access to academic
language while directly supporting the effective ramification of the opportunity-to-learn gap.
Additional elements of the master plan that support access to academic language for
SELs include a clear MELD framework that emphasizes that language for SEL students is
“additive, not subtractive.” The additive approach is fundamental to the master plan framework,
utilizing a “dual grammar study of the students’ home language variety and the target language
(standard English).” (LAUSD Master Plan, 2012, p. 88) The “contrastive” analysis of the
language variations outlined by the master plan is an evidence-based approach that research has
pointed to as effective for both the identification and intervention of SEL students and programs.
The Academic English Mastery Program (AEMP) provides specific instructional and
support intervention program developed by LAUSD that is both comprehensive and research-
based, with a focus on SELs. The AEMP framework, although a small presence in its current
iteration, provides educators in LAUSD with a range of resources designed to help SELs,
including curriculum, technology, and activities guides, as well as a list of instructional supports
and resources available to teachers, students, and families. Within AEMP are services to include
Mexican American English, African American English, and other linguistically specific language
diversity instruction. The AEMP program represents a rare concerted effort aimed at increasing
access to academic language for SELs and diminishing the prevalent opportunity-to-learn gap. In
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 42
addition to curriculum and instruction, current accountability systems in place in schools are
found to directly affect success for SELs and are outlined in the following section.
In the new era of high-stakes testing accountability (Ravitch, 2011), schools struggle to
meet the needs of all students, and in particular, a mono-linguistic education may not be the
recipe for success in the 21st century and beyond (Cummins, 2000). For SELs in particular, the
assumption that English is the passport to success creates a great deal of tension (Alim, 2005).
Unfortunately, more comprehensive performance assessments that reflect the full range of
learning, critical thinking, and creative writing, as well as cultural and linguistic diversity, are
costly and time-consuming on a large-scale, if available at all. The current reality is one of
widespread standardized tests that are reliable and efficient to administer, typically reflecting
only a narrow band of easy-to-test curriculum objectives. Inside of this dichotomous mix of
unresolved issues exists a rapidly growing linguistic diversity, including SELs, making for a
slippery high-stakes problem for the gatekeepers of educational quality control (Cummins,
2000). The accountability arena, along with other school practices, is a significant barrier to
academic language access for ELs and serve to contribute to the opportunity-to-learn gap.
Promising Practices for Cultural and Linguistic Diversity
School systems have many curricular, instructional, and accountability practices at their
fingertips that have the potential to help or hinder access to academic language for SELs as they
engage in opportunities to learn (Scott et al., 2010). In particular, one of the instructional
elements present in many schools that research has suggested could be extremely beneficial for
SELs is the arts (Catterrall et al., 2012), both as an immersive practice for students and teachers
to engage in together, as well as an area of content, history, and pedagogy that educators of all
stripes can learn and be inspired from as a platform for meeting the needs of all students,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 43
especially linguistically diverse students. The following section of the literature review presents
a broad overview of research that supports strong instructional practice featuring the arts and
how the arts are found to significantly impact student learning.
Arts Education, Literacy, Achievement, and Best Practices
“Language is acquired in the midst of activity.”
--Lev Vygotsky
The previous section presented an overview of school practices that both positively and
negatively impact access to academic language and the opportunity-to-learn and subsequently
succeed for SELs. The following section of the literature review will look at another dimension
of schools that is often overlooked, under-resourced, and undervalued by schools and school
systems (Heilig et al., 2010). This section will look at the visual and performing arts as an
important pathway for culturally and linguistically diverse students. More specifically, this
section will focus on the role the arts play—and can play—in providing greater access to
academic language for SELs and support equitable opportunities to learn for all students,
including culturally and linguistically diverse students who have historically been left behind.
The arts education literature has stressed the importance of the arts to society (National
Endowment for the Arts, 2013) in general, as well as, what the arts look like in American schools
(Burnaford, 2007; Deasy, 2002; Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). Included in this section is research
and evidence that showcases increased opportunities to learn and achieve for disadvantaged
students who regularly engage in the arts (Catterall et al., 2012; Ingram & Meath, 2007;
Robinson, 2013). Research around what arts education looks like in schools can be broadly
organized into two areas: (a) participation in discipline-specific arts education programs and
related academic, social, and cognitive outcomes; and (b) arts integration frameworks whereby
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 44
the arts are infused or otherwise leveraged as a creative or project-based lens for learning and
inquiry. A close look at arts integration research and models (Fiske, 1999; Luftig, 2000; Rabkin
& Redmond, 2004) in particular will be included in this section of the literature review to
provide a deeper context for the problem.
Providing connections to increased cognitive functioning through the arts (Asbury &
Rich, 2008; Hyde et al., 2009), as well an effective mediation tool between language and literacy
are two important functions of the arts (Bolduc, 2008; Carger, 2004; Hetland & Winner, 2004;
Salcedo, 2010). This section of the literature review will conclude with a look at future research
using the arts as an essential lens of activity and practice, both in discrete arts disciplines, as well
as arts integration frameworks.
The arts have many benefits for learning, building community, creativity, and beyond
(National Endowment for the Arts, 2013). The arts are essential to a healthy school culture and
are virtually synonymous with high achievement and a positive learning environment (Caldwell
& Vaughan, 2012). Moreover, the arts give students a voice (Heath in O’Brien & Donelan, 2008)
and provide multiple opportunities for the community to come together to experience culture
organically (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). Furthermore, the arts are intrinsically metacognitive
(Eisner, 2002) and challenge students to explore their own concepts of identity (Heath, 2004). In
sum, the arts are an essential part of humanity and serve multiple functions of expression,
reflection, creativity, and innovation (Robinson, 2011). The following paragraphs frame the
primary categories of research dealing with the arts in schools with specific emphasis on the arts
as they relate to language and learning while ultimately serving as an important mediator in
developing literacy and increasing opportunities to learn for SELs.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 45
In general, large amounts of quantitative data are hard to come by in the arena of arts
education research; however, a 2012 report published by the National Endowment for the Arts
(NEA) made a significant contribution to the continuum. Catterall et al. (2012) presented
findings from the NEA report offering strong quantitative evidence around high participation in
the arts during middle and high school and associated levels of achievement, college attainment,
prosocial behavior, such as voluntarism and political participation, as well as findings specific to
ELs. Data were analyzed from four large-scale, longitudinal, national data sets to examine how a
student’s level of arts participation during the K–12 years is related to his/her academic
achievement and civic engagement in the postsecondary years. The data sets included interviews,
academic transcripts, assessments, questionnaire and survey data, drawn from 71,610 five to 27
year-olds. The researchers compared outcomes for students from low SES backgrounds with low
participation in arts activities, low SES youth with high participation in arts activities, high SES
youth with differing levels of arts engagement, and the general population.
The researchers found that students with high participation in the arts outperformed peers
with low arts participation on measures of academic and civic outcomes in the examined data
sets. In particular, the researchers found that this relationship was especially robust for students
from low SES backgrounds. However, the methods did not allow for an assessment of whether
high participation in the arts caused these positive outcomes. Additional research is needed to
further clarify the nature of the established relationship and factors that may be related to the
causes of the findings discovered. Regardless, the study suggested a strong role for arts education
in providing a significant pathway to improving outcomes for youth who have not been served
well by educational institutions. SELs comprise a large segment of this group. Moreover,
increased participation in the arts may be part of a larger solution to closing the achievement gap
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 46
between low- and high-income students (Catterall et al., 2012) and for SELs, who largely
comprise economically disadvantaged students.
Two additional studies have underscored the positive relationship among arts
participation and academic, social, and cognitive achievement. Winner and Hetland (2001)
conducted a meta-analysis of 188 studies (synthesized from 11,467 articles, books, theses,
conference presentations, technical reports, unpublished papers, and unpublished data) prepared
between 1950 and 1999 with the goal of identifying connections between arts participation and
academic achievement. Findings from this seminal work suggested three areas with reliable
causal links between the arts and academic achievement: (a) listening to music and spatial-
temporal reasoning, (b) learning to play music and spatial reasoning, and (c) classroom drama
and verbal skills. Two additional areas with reliable causal links based on just a few studies
included learning to play music and mathematics and dance and nonverbal reasoning.
In another study, Deasy (2002) offered insights into the specific contribution of the arts
disciplines, suggesting a strong relationship among the arts, student learning, and achievement.
Deasy (2002) presented a large compendium of 64 studies that also highlighted connections
between the arts and student social development in addition to academic development and
achievement. In sum, the compendium titled Critical Links is a goldmine of research and
evidence supporting a range of academic, linguistic, cultural, and literacy benefits observed
during engagement in arts education. More specifically, Critical Links highlights in a number of
studies how the arts impact academics: (a) Drama develops higher-order language and literacy
skills, (b) Music enhances language learning, (c) Art experiences develop literacy and writing
skills, and (d) Arts experiences develop numeracy skills.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 47
Overall, Critical Links serves as an entry point for research around the arts and learning
by showcasing the arts as an important and unique pathway to language learning and literacy for
students who are disadvantaged—a group that includes the vast majority of SELs. Although the
findings compiled in Deasy (2002), Winner and Hetland (2001), and Catterall et al. (2012) have
formed a large scope of data, the study of arts programs and arts participation is just one part of
the linkages between the arts and academic achievement. The emergent field of brain research
around the arts has provided further evidence of the value of arts education to cognition and
learning.
Research published by the Dana Arts and Cognition Consortium presented significant
evidence to support the arts and cognitive enhancement with specific connections made to
language and literacy development (Asbury & Rich, 2008). In one example, Asbury and Rich
(2008) stated that clear correlations exist between music training and both reading acquisition
and sequence learning. One of the central predictors of early literacy, phonological awareness,
correlates to both music training and the development of a specific brain pathway. Such a finding
has given insight into how music education holds great potential for developing academic
language and literacy.
In a related study, Hyde et al. (2009) showed that musical training in young children is
associated with improved motor and auditory skills. The researchers also noted clear physical
changes in the brain in regions associated with motor and auditory skills following 15 months of
musical training. Findings of this nature may have implications for educators and therapists to
include instrumental music instruction as a means to improve motor and auditory skills. Modern
brain imaging techniques used in the Hyde et al. (2009) study could establish further connections
between arts education and increased cognitive functioning. Moreover, the fast-evolving
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 48
potential of MRI research and other brain imaging designs could unlock unrealized potential for
the arts to shine as a unique pathway to learning for all students.
The arts can also serve as a mediator between students’ first language and the
development of academic literacy. Bolduc (2008) presented evidence from a review of quasi-
experimental studies, showing that through participation in musical and first-language
interdisciplinary programs, students developed auditory perception, phonological memory, and
metacognitive knowledge more efficiently than their classmates who did not participate in such
programs. Moreover, Bolduc (2008) illustrated the potential for early childhood educators to give
young children the opportunity to fully develop their potential in emergent literacy by supporting
music education and interdisciplinary projects that enabled them to acquire skills in many fields.
In another study, Carger (2004) examined how including visual arts in reading circles can
enhance language and literacy learning for young bilingual students. Carger (2004) worked as a
teacher-researcher with small groups of six to seven kindergarten through fifth-grade elementary
school students in a pullout group format for 30–40 minute periods twice per week. Visual art
was introduced as a way for students to react to multicultural stories and demonstrate their
knowledge about the stories. Through qualitative analysis of recorded class discussions, Carger
(2004) observed that EL students seemed to grasp literature at a deeper level when art was
integrated into to the reading block. The findings in the Carger (2004) study suggested that the
inclusion of visual arts during reading benefited EL students in the development of English
language proficiency.
The studies cited have provided a context for further research in arts education, with
specific emphasis on how the arts have helped students develop academically, socially,
cognitively, and emotionally. In addition, the research presented here highlights how the arts can
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 49
serve a crucial role in helping students access language and develop literacy (Deasy, 2002;
Eisner, 2002; Winner & Hetland, 2001). Even more importantly for this study, significant
research has suggested that inner-city youth, of whom SELs comprise a large portion, are
particularly impacted by long-term arts programs (Catteral, 2009). An overview of arts
integration programs—a particular kind of arts education—has been shown to be especially
beneficial for students.
Arts Integration
The arts take on another form and function when serviced as arts integration, or
sometimes referred to as integrated curriculum, interdisciplinary, fused curriculum, or project
curriculum (Robinson, 2013). Deasy and Stevenson (2005) differentiated arts integration
programs from discrete discipline-specific domains of study (i.e., music, dance, etc.) and further
delineated the intent of arts integration programs as the development of interdisciplinary
relationships between learning in the arts and learning skills and concepts in other subjects across
a diverse school curriculum. Eisner (2002) defined arts integration as simply the merging of arts
curriculum with other arts and into other arts and nonarts curricula. Eisner (2002) hypothesized
that as individuals engage in the arts, their understandings of concepts shift in ways that enhance
literacy. Eisner (2002) also made the argument that whereas the arts have significant intrinsic
value, they also enhance a variety of cognitive abilities, including perception, memory, and the
ability to interpret events and concepts, due in part to changes in neurobiological functioning and
perception that occur in the process of creating art. These factors, although not directly
connected to language acquisition, can provide students with more powerful and meaningful
pathways toward language development and literacy.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 50
The type of arts integration practice considered to be the most rigorous, meaningful, and
effective for learning is referred to in the literature as the “co-equal cognitive arts integration
approach” (Robinson, 2013). The co-equal cognitive arts integration approach requires students
to use higher-order thinking skills and aesthetic analysis to gain further understanding of
concepts. Moreover, this approach attempts to seamlessly merge arts standards with the core
curriculum to “build connections, provide engaging context, and differentiate both the processes
and products of learning” (Robinson, 2013, p. 192). The co-equal cognitive arts integration
model also creates opportunities for students to use 21st-century learning skills to demonstrate
proficiency in the Common Core. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is an additional
connection to the kind of cross-curricular pedagogy that arts integration programs facilitate.
In sum, Robinson (2013) articulated the universal pathway to learning that co-equal
cognitive arts integration programs feature, including (a) imagine, examine, and perceive; (b)
explore, experiment, and develop craft; (c) create; (d) reflect, assess, and revise; and (e) share
their products with others. Lastly, co-equal cognitive arts integration engages students in ongoing
individual, peer-based, and teacher-based reflection and self-assessment. Such a model has clear
connections to theories of effective learning for students, and—as arts education research has
illustrated—significantly boosts potential for an effective arts integration framework to impact
disadvantaged students especially, and SELs, particularly. The following paragraphs go a step
further in outlining the different forms arts integration programs and practices take and how they
are affecting students’ abilities to learn language, develop literacy, and ultimately achieve at
higher levels.
Burnaford (2007) via The Partnerships for Arts Integration Research (PAIR) summarized
results from a four-year, federal Department of Education Arts in Education Model Development
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 51
and Dissemination (AEMDD) project administered by the Chicago Arts Partnerships in
Education (CAPE) and the Chicago Public Schools from 2007–2010. The project brought
together three “pairings” of magnet schools (three fine-arts cluster schools paired with a world
languages cluster school, a math and science cluster school, and a literature and writing cluster)
to work with teaching artists in fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade classrooms. Student arts learning
and academic performance, particularly in learning language and literacy development, from the
six treatment schools compared favorably to the six control schools of similar status, resources,
student population, demographic factors, and comparable levels of academic achievement prior
to the start of the PAIR project. Studies other than Burnaford’s have (2007) also posited the rich
potential for arts education to help students learn language and develop literacy.
In an earlier study, Luftig (2000) used a quasi-experimental research design to discern the
effects of a school-wide arts infusion program called SPECTRA+. The study investigated the
impact of the arts-infusion program on students’ creative thinking, academic achievement, self-
esteem, locus of control (students’ beliefs about their ability to influence the events that affect
their lives), and appreciation of the arts. Two treatment schools received the SPECTRA+
program, one modified control group received an innovative program, and one full control group
did not receive any special funding. Findings from the Luftig (2000) study showed the
experimental group that received arts infusion exhibited growth in creativity, academic
achievement in reading and math, social self-esteem (the extent to which students feel
comfortable and secure in their peer relationships), and parental self-esteem (the degree to which
students believe that their parents love them and are proud of their achievements), and an
increased appreciation of the arts. Aside from the strong academic gains observed during the
study, growth in the areas of self-esteem echoed Heath’s (2004) work in illustrating the kinds of
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 52
benefits the arts and arts integration have had on human development and identity. Moreover, the
academic achievement findings around language and the student growth exhibited in reading
have shown great potential for helping students gain access to Academic/Standard English.
In a different study, Ingram and Meath (2007) presented a summative evaluation of the
Arts for Academic Achievement (AAA) program and examined student-learning outcomes of
arts integration instruction measured by standardized tests, as well as effects not captured by
standardized tests. The AAA program was implemented in 37 Minneapolis public schools to
improve student achievement, school climate, and communities through arts-integrated curricula.
As a result of the program, students were reported to have improved academically on
nonstandardized measures. Specifically, students were more engaged in instruction and acquired
learning and skills in nonarts content areas.
Moreover, students who were reported to be less likely to participate in class were more
likely to participate in an arts-integrated class. Furthermore, Ingram and Meath (2007) reported
student cognitive, social, and emotional gains as a result of the program as well as learning new
ways of self-expression, expressing, empathy, perseverance, diligence, patience, and risk-taking.
Perhaps the most powerful finding this study was that the more frequently a teacher reported
integrating the arts to expand student reading skills, the more his or her students’ scores
increased from year to year, or his or her students performed higher on a single test given during
the year.
In conclusion, there is abundant evidence that the arts have the capacity to encircle
learning with meaning and thereby make comprehension and engagement fundamental for
participation (Heath, 2004). In arts integration instruction in particular, the research has pointed
to how the arts can transform the context for teaching and learning and that other disciplines are
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 53
welcomed into a transformed, third space (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Gutiérrez, 2007), and
benefit from its possibilities, which are not as readily available in traditional instructional
contexts. Moreover, the powerful third space framework of learning is a possible pathway for
SELs to gain access to Academic/Standard English. Typically, the arts invite all manner of
diversity and discourse to the table, creating a learning environment that could successfully
foster language and literacy development through a third space intersection of newly constructed
meaning (Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004; Vygotsky, 1978). Lastly, the key qualities of such
learning environments and, in particular, the shifts that they both demand and help to create in
student-teacher relationships and students’ role in their own learning, are also recognized as
essential strategies that help students develop literacy, and may of particular benefit for SELs.
Conceptual Framework
The arts may provide unique opportunities for SELs to access academic language.
Moreover, arts education and arts integration programs, in particular, have provided students
identified here as SELs increased access to academic language and opportunities to learn. The
arts do so through highly contextualized, differentiated, collaborative-based, and identity-driven
opportunities to learn and develop proficiency through the third space co-construction of new
language and literacy meaning (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004;
Robinson, 2013; Vygotsky, 1978). The conceptual framework is visually represented as Figure 1.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 54

Figure 1. The process of developing academic language in an arts integration curriculum.

Summary
The literature reviewed in Chapter 2 provided a conceptual foundation for many of the
problems faced by certain groups of students, identified here as Standard English learners
(SELs). The literature included in this chapter established some of the background leading to
why SELs have consistently faced an opportunity-to-learn gap fueled by limited access to
academic language (Graff, 1999). As a whole, the literature reviewed was an attempt at
supporting ongoing understanding and mediation of chronic low achievement for SELs
(Cummins, 2001; Goldenberg, 2008; LeMoine, 2001) with supporting research, evidence, and

Teacher
dominant classroom script
Academic/Standard
English

Student
English language heteroglossia
Home Languages
English language
variations

ART MAKING
as a HEURISTIC
promotes authentic interaction
between the dominant language
and heteroglossia
- Process
- Discourse
- Critque

Third Space
Authentic Dialogue
Merging of world views,
knowledge, and experience

Construction of:
- new language
- new knowledge
- new power structures
- new identities

SCRIPT'
COUNTERSCRIPT'
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 55
strategies related to how schools can provide purposeful opportunities for SELs to acquire
academic English that enables them to become literate in academic English as a means for higher
academic achievement, as well as social, linguistic, and cultural gains while in school.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 56
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methodology for collecting and analyzing data for the study as
well as outline the basic design for this study. This was a basic applied research study of
qualitative design in the form of a case study and focused on examining arts integration
programs in Visionary Unified School District (pseudonym). The purpose of this study was to
explore the ways in which the arts integration school model fostered a third space teaching and
learning environment that promoted access to academic language and opportunities to learn for
Standard English learners (SELs).
Research Questions
1. In schools with large SEL populations that are implementing an arts integration program,
how are African American English and Chicano English variations admitted, mediated,
or respected as valued contributions in classroom discourses that resemble “third space”
learning environments?
2. What are the attributes of arts or arts integration programs and practices that support SEL
student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency?
Research Design
This qualitative study was developed for an in-depth study of arts integration programs
in schools. Qualitative data were collected in the following ways: (a) in-depth, semistructured
teacher interviews; (b) direct classroom observation; and (c) student focus group interview
(Patton, 2002). Analysis of all of the data collected was triangulated by coding developed from
the lenses, including the conceptual framework and the known literature, as presented in Chapter
2. The study featured an inductive process so as to find a rich understanding of the meaning of
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 57
the experiences, perceptions, and artifacts collected and analyzed during the study (Maxwell,
2012; Merriam, 2009).
Sample and Population
To understand how SELs access, perceive, and benefit from arts integration programs,
the researcher used purposeful sampling to select a school that featured a large population (at
least 20%) of students identified as SELs according to the definitions adopted for this study and
that had implemented an arts integration curriculum. Purposeful sampling was used in order to
ensure maximum relevancy for the data set in relation to the research questions and conceptual
framework (Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002). Appendix D outlines a diagnostic tool that assisted in
identifying SEL students, in addition to the academic performance criteria outlined in Chapter 1.
Data Collection
Data were collected using a grounded theory approach (Merriam, 2009) and included
classroom observations, teacher interviews, and a student group interview. The researcher took
an inductive stance throughout the process of data collection and analysis. Themes and
connections emerged from the data, grounded in the theoretical frame, providing the researcher
with an evidence base from which to derive meaning. The researcher used an iterative refinement
of all research instruments and protocols throughout the data collection process as a means of
deepening and triangulating the data gathered to ensure accurate adherence and reflection of the
research questions and conceptual framework. The researcher worked to represent a clear and
truthful account of the attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge of participants and respondents
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Fink, 2009; Maxwell, 2012; Merriam, 2009).
Purposeful sampling was employed in the selection of teachers and included respondents
who were actively engaged in the implementation of the arts integration program at the school.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 58
Four teacher respondents were interviewed and included in the data collection. Appendix A
outlines the teacher interview protocol. Four classroom observations took place at the school site
and featured a range of durations from 20 minutes to 90 minutes. Appendix B outlines the
observation protocol. A student focus group was interviewed as well. Appendix C outlines the
focus group interview protocol.
Data Analysis
The teacher interview, classroom observation, and student focus group interview data
attempted to fill a portion of the knowledge gap (Merriam, 2009) as well as the attitudes and
perception of teachers and students around the function, access, and importance of the arts
integration program for the school community in relation of SELs’ access to and development of
Academic/Standard English.
Approach to Coding
The goal of coding was to fracture the data into categories that facilitated comparison and
contextualization (Maxwell, 2012) of the perceptions, experiences, and attitudes of SEL students
and teachers in relation to the arts integration school model respondents were participating in.
Furthermore, coding focused on the themes of SELs’ Academic/Standard English access and
development through participation in an arts integration learning environment.
Approach to Analysis
The analysis of data featured a process of making sense out of the categorization and
organization of the themes identified during and following the data collection phase that were
tied to the research questions and conceptual framework outlined in the previous section.
Throughout this process, a grounded theory approach informed the construction of further
understanding and the development of meaning (Merriam, 2009). In the study, these principles
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 59
were manifested through an iterative process of data refinement and triangulation. Furthermore,
triangulation as a rigorous process of data interrogation and analysis through the lens of the
conceptual framework and research questions advanced deeper understanding of how SELs
gained access or did not gain access to Academic/Standard English through participation in an
arts integration learning environment and whether this participation did or did not ultimately lead
to literacy.
Validity and Reliability
Internal validity was sought throughout the study to reflect as much as possible the reality
of students’ perceptions and behaviors identified during periods of arts participation (Maxwell,
2005). Reliability is stated as an assumption that “there is a single reality and that studying it
repeatedly will yield the same results” (Merriam, 2009, p. 220). Presumably, there were
substantial threats to both the validity and reliability as a result of time and sample size
limitations; however, rigorous and thorough triangulation aimed to ensure increased validity and
reliability throughout the course of the study.
Ethics
Every aspect of the study involved an important consideration—from design and methods,
to data collection and analysis, to the dissemination of findings. As such, strict adherence to the
guidelines of IRB and best practices were followed throughout the study (Maxwell, 2012).

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 60
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Chapter 4 will begin with a review of the qualitative research design of the study,
including the research questions, purpose of the study, and the methodology used for collecting
and analyzing the data. This was an applied research study of qualitative design in the form of a
case study and focused on examining an arts integration program in the Visionary Unified
School District (pseudonym). The purpose of this study was to explore the ways in which the arts
integration school model fostered a third space teaching and learning environment that promoted
access to academic language and opportunities to learn for Standard English learners (SELs).
In addition, the conceptual framework and supporting literature presented in Chapter 2
provides essential guidance throughout the presentation and analysis of findings in Chapter 4, as
well as implications for the findings, conclusions, and recommendations to be presented in
Chapter 5. The conceptual framework used forthwith states that an arts integration school model
may provide unique opportunities for SELs to access academic language through activity-based
learning that includes high admittance, mediation, and/or respect for students’ home language as
a foundational element in the curriculum. Moreover, the arts integration program may provide
increased access to academic language through highly contextualized, differentiated,
collaboration-based, and identity-driven opportunities to learn (Gutiérrez, 2008; Heath, 2004;
Moje et al., 2004; Vygotsky, 1978). Features of the arts integration learning environment bear
many of the characteristics of a third space co-construction—a space to which students are able
to bring their home language to construct meaning while they are acquiring the new language of
the classroom through interaction with their teacher and other students in the context of authentic
learning and assessment (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Robinson, 2013).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 61
The following research questions guided the study. Tables representing the data collected
are then presented. The tables are followed by a detailed account outlining the research site,
findings, analysis, and initial conclusions for the study.
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
1. In schools with large SEL populations that are implementing an arts integration program,
how is students’ use of African American English or Chicano English admitted, mediated,
or respected as a valued contribution in classroom discourses that resemble “third space”
learning environments?
2. What are the attributes of arts or arts integration programs and practices that support SEL
student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency?
Research Site
East Arts High School (pseudonym) was located in Southern California, had a
predominantly Latino (98%) student population, and had implemented an arts integration
curriculum. East Arts High (EAH) was a small school of 400 students located on a campus with
four other high schools of the same size. Each school was governed by the pilot school model
whereby the staff and leadership had been granted several key autonomies from the district, most
notably increased freedom and decision-making powers around staffing, budget, curriculum and
assessment, professional development, and calendar. In addition to the autonomies, pilot schools
in general are unique in their design around collaboration, equity, increased accountability, and
school mission and vision.
Students at EAH spoke varieties of English with unique linguistic features that differed
from Standard English (“English Learner Master Plan”, 2012; LeMoine, 2001). Standard English
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 62
Learners (SELs) have no official designation for reporting student performance on standardized
tests at the federal, state, or, in most cases, district level, yet they represent the language
attributes and needs of a large number of students. Virtually all of the students at EAH spoke
Chicano English or Mexican American English (Ornstein-Galicia, 1988) and could be identified
as SELs according to the definitions adopted for this study. The analysis and interpretation of the
data gathered for this study consisted of triangulation of teacher interviews, classroom
observations, and a student focus group interview (Table 1). The qualitative data derived from
these methods were the basis for the research question findings.
Table 1
Matrix of Data Sources to Research Questions
Research Question Observations Interviews Focus Group
1 X X X
2 X X X

Interviews were conducted with four teachers at the research site (Table 2). Teacher
participants represented a range of experiences, ethnicities, and subject matter. Each interview
was conducted in a semistructured format and ranged in length from 25 to 45 minutes. All
interview participants answered each question and provided in-depth descriptions and reflections
during the interviews. Specific themes that emerged from the interview data will be discussed in
more detail as they pertain to each research question.
Classroom observations were conducted within the classrooms taught by the teachers
interviewed for the study (Table 2). The observer conducted the observations in a nonparticipant
role; observations ranged from 45 to 90 minutes. Detailed field notes were taken for each
observation and included completion of a rubric and evidence guide for Mediated Third Space
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 63
Arts Integration Classrooms (Appendix B). Specific themes that emerged from the observation
data are discussed in more detail as they pertain to each research question.
Table 2
Description of Teacher Participants and Subject Area Observed

Teacher

Gender

Ethnicity

First
Language

Teaching
experience

Grade Level
Observed

Subject
Observed

Subjects
Taught

1

Female

Caucasian

English

15 years

10

English

English,
Film-
making

2

Male

Mexican
American

Spanish

10 years

11

US History

History,
AP
History

3

Male

Caucasian

English

20 years

10/11

AP English,
CAHSEE
Prep

English,
AP
English

4

Male

Japanese
American

English

25 years

11

English

English,
History,
Piano

In addition to the characteristics included above, each of the four teachers can be
classified as having had a different level of knowledge, attitude, and understanding around the
use and acceptance of linguistic diversity in the classroom as well as the level of arts integration
implementation in their classroom and across the curriculum. Ethnicity, heritage, and experience
may all play a role in how each teacher approached the challenge of using language diversity in
the classroom (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010).
In general, Teacher 1 was found to have a high level of home language admittance,
mediation, and respect during instruction that featured a high level of arts integration
implementation. Among the four teachers, Teacher 1 was also found to have the most evolved
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 64
conceptual framework for arts integration practice as a model for long-lasting meaning making
generated from a positive dialogic classroom environment and authentic assessment (Gutiérrez,
1995; LeMoine, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978).
Teacher 2, in contrast to all of the other teachers, intrinsically approached Chicano
English admittance, mediation, and respect from the perspective of being a native Chicano
English speaker himself. Teacher 2’s heritage was found to be a defining factor in what seemed
to be an understanding that the other teachers did not have regarding home language use and the
challenges and difficulties inherent to Chicano English speakers. In the classroom of Teacher 2, a
high level of discourse and student learning was present (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman &
Villanueva, 2003).
Teacher 3 fostered a welcome and positive environment in the classroom around home
language admittance, mediation, and respect; however, in the classroom observation, students
were not engaged in rich discourse. Nevertheless, Teacher 3 was unique among the teachers
included in this study, as he was the only teacher to describe the growth of an extra-curricular
music club during the lunch period that seemed to represent a very high level of discourse and
home language use and offered an example of a broader integration of the arts into the larger
school program. The researcher found the evidence around Teacher 3 to suggest a strong
connection among art making, identity, and learning language (Heath, 2004). However, this
connection did not occur in the classroom in a similar manner.
Lastly, Teacher 4 presented minimal evidence of home language admittance, mediation,
and/or respect, with virtually no discourse observed in the classroom and a sense of neutrality or
even negativity pervading the learning environment. Teacher 4 also showed minimal evidence of
arts integration practice in the classroom. Evidence collected around Teacher 4 suggested that
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 65
learning and achievement are negatively affected by curriculum that is nondialogic and not
inclusive of students’ language diversity (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; Cummins, 2001).
A focus group interview was also conducted with a group of 10 students at the research
site comprised of seven girls and three boys. Student participants represented a sampling of 10th-
grade English students, all of whom had predominantly Mexican-American heritage and spoke
Chicano English. The focus group interview was conducted in a semistructured format that lasted
45 minutes. All interview participants answered each question and provided rich descriptions and
reflections during the interview around home language use, classroom discourse, and arts
integration practice. Specific themes that emerged from the interview data are discussed in more
detail as they pertain to each research question.
Findings
Research Question 1: In schools with large SEL populations that are implementing an
arts integration program, how is students’ use of African American English or Chicano English
admitted, mediated, or respected as valued contributions in classroom discourses that resemble
“third space” learning environments?
Chicano English in the Classroom
All of the data collected pointed to recognition of language diversity in the classroom;
however, among the teachers interviewed, the classrooms observed, as well as student responses
during the focus group, the researcher found a range of approaches to how Chicano English was
admitted, mediated, or respected as a valued contribution to classroom discourses (Charity
Hudley & Mallinson, 2010; LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003). In addition, the
different approaches and evidence captured around classroom discourse as a key feature of third
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 66
space learning environments (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005) are presented here with accompanying
discussion and analysis.
Student focus group. The many ways in which Chicano English was admitted,
mediated, or respected as a valued contribution to classroom discourse is illustrated in the
following section via evidence from the focus group interview. The student focus group data and
analysis are presented first as a means of providing a key perspective for the rest of the findings
around home language admittance, mediation, and/or respect by teachers interviewed and
observed.
In response to Question 3 of the focus group interview protocol, Student 4 offered an
overview of how using a different form of English than Academic/Standard English played out
in teacher student relationships, stating:
I think it’s depending on the teacher. They’re some teachers that, you can talk the way
you talk with your friends, but there are other teachers that will just look at you like,
excuse me, I’m your teacher, you don’t talk to me in that way.
It is not clear whether the student interpreted the question as including slang; however, the
evidence was one example of the overall language ecology that was present at the research site.
Moreover, the student’s comment offered an example of the kind of sociolinguistic tension
students experience when their home language is not valued (Charity Hudley & Mallinson,
2011). The student’s response may have also indicated that students are not able to make
distinctions between slang and their Chicano English, which they sometimes call “Spanglish.”
For teachers who shared the same heritage as the students, Student 7 reflected in response
to the same interview question: “I feel like if I talk to any of the Mexican teachers, it’s fine…but
if I talk to my principal like that, she’ll just look at me like…what? We’re not friends, I’m
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 67
higher authority.” Although it is unclear whether students in the focus group were able to
distinguish exactly what kinds of language were used during the interactions described, the data
indicated the positive social and emotional impact of acceptance by their teachers in contrast to
low or inconsistent acceptance of language diversity. Acceptance or rejection of students’
language contributed to a positive or negative teacher-student relationship, the student’s
willingness to participate in class, and opportunities for language and literacy development
(Cummins, 2001; LeMoine, 2001; Schleppegrell, 2012).
In addressing Questions 3 and 4 around how students’ use of Chicano English was treated
in the classroom, the student focus group spoke freely about their experiences, at times
expressing some of the challenges students have faced in terms of language and vocabulary.
Student 2 spoke to this point, stating:
I feel like, not only is the vocabulary different, but the language is different too, because,
many of us speak Spanglish [group giggles]. We usually speak Spanish and English in
the same sentence. You don’t see that in the books that they give us.
Student 2 seemed to suggest that a barrier existed for SEL students as they sought to gain access
to textbooks that did not include the languages SEL students’ used. Furthermore, Student 2
provided insight into the experiences of SEL students as they attempt to make meaning of text.
In addition, when Student 2 brought up the term “Spanglish,” the rest of the group agreed that
they also spoke Spanglish, with Student 3 proclaiming that she spoke three languages—English,
Spanish, and Spanglish. The common form of English language variation referred to as
Spanglish is spoken among Chicano Americans, Mexican Americans, and other Latin American
descendants. In the case of the sample Chicano population included in this study, Spanglish was
synonymous with Chicano English.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 68
Students in the focus group also talked with varying degrees of knowledge and
understanding about their own language use while exhibiting a wide range of perceptions and
attitudes around language use at the school, both in and out of the classroom. The student group
findings provided an important entry point into the findings analysis and were significant for
understanding language use and acceptance at the school. The student findings were triangulated
with the teacher interview and classroom observation findings presented in the following
sections and served to illuminate answers to research Question One.
Teacher interviews. All four of the teachers interviewed for the study expressed
different attitudes and understandings around home language use, admittance, mediation, and
respect in the context of teaching Academic/Standard English in an arts integration learning
environment. To begin, in addressing the topic of Standard English or the formal SEL student
designation by the district, the teachers interviewed were varied in their responses.
Teacher 1 described all of her students as “lifelong English learners,” but made the
distinction that her Mexican American students had an easier time learning the Standard English
because “they can see and hear the difference,” as opposed to African American students,
because the vernacular “is so close, it’s not exactly another language.” Teacher 1’s observation
was accurate (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman & Villanueva, 2003) but he/she did not articulate
during the interview a clear understanding of what constitutes a language. The teacher was likely
referring to the similarity between Standard English and African American English in that both
use English vocabulary. However, Teacher 1’s attitudes and instructional practice around home
language admittance, mediation, and/or respect as a means of providing equitable opportunities
to learn for all students (Delpit, 1995; LeMoine, 2001) was very high, as evidenced by the
following film project described by a ninth-grade English class. The project highlighted a form
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 69
of arts integration and illustrated the depth of language and culture acknowledgement in her
classroom:
The students have to go out and collect cinema verité in their neighborhoods, and they
also have to include some voiceover – talking about themselves and their lives. They also
have to interview someone that they know in their neighborhood who’s over 50 and ask
them about something that happened when they were young. So then they work on the
questions…and sometimes they ask me if the person can answer the questions in Spanish,
and I say yeah, but work on it with someone [who speaks Spanish] or your Spanish
teacher to get a translation for subtitles. So we try to be very inclusive of their English,
because when they are expressing themselves; they are expressing their lives.
The project described by Teacher 1 was an example of arts integration practice that exemplified
an authentic third space in which students’ home language and culture were viewed as assets in
completing an authentic task that would ultimately be presented in Standardized Academic
English. The project involved a variety of languages, each respected for role it played in
completing the assignment (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Lantolf & Appel, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978).
Moreover, the film project represented the kind of authentic task that illustrated the role of
language in helping students find meaning in their lives, carry out tasks, and solve problems
(Bunch, 2014; Cummins, 2001; Freire, 2000; Labov, 2011; Schleppegrell, 2012).
Teacher 2, as discussed previously, represented a completely different perspective as a
result of his shared language and culture with the students. The following comment by Teacher 2
in response to Question 11 around barriers SEL students experienced in gaining access to
Academic/Standard English resembled the kind of attitude and experience expressed by students
in the study: “The way the state tests are set up, even the AP test, they don’t incorporate the
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 70
English language variations or even recognize the language diversity.” Teacher 2’s comment was
undoubtedly more resonant coming from a Chicano English-speaking Chicano teacher as
opposed to the other non-Chicano teachers included in this study. His comment underscored the
importance of culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and learning (Hollie, 2011). In
response to Interview Question 8 around teacher perception of students feeling included in
classroom discourse, Teacher 2 stated the following:
The students feel disconnected, they don’t see themselves what they’re learning, but in
the way they speak. At the beginning of the year, every year, my students are like…you
know, we don’t speak like this, but I’m like, but guess what, the test does! And people
with college degrees are able to talk like this and understand this. And for me, I’m a
college graduate but I don’t go home and talk to my wife with Academic English…we
use slang and other stuff.
The comments by Teacher 2 around the way both he and his students experienced the demands
of using and learning academic language as Chicano English speakers was an important source
of data for this study.
Teacher 3 occupied a completely different part of the spectrum. In response to Interview
Question 6 around SEL student designation, Teacher 3 was adamant in his reflection, stating:
Whether or not they were born here, students have been speaking English as their
dominant language. It’s what they listen to music in, it’s what they watch TV in, it’s what
they gossip with their friends in, I mean, that’s what ‘dominant language’ means. To me,
to call those people English learners is nonsense, it’s like backwards linguistics.
Teacher 3’s comment effectually described SEL students and underscored the importance of
students’ home language as a means of experience and knowledge building (Friere, 2000; Labov,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 71
2011). His descriptions of the multiple uses students made of their home language underscored
how important students’ home language is to people in the daily activities of their lives. These
multiple uses highlighted how important access to their home language was to their making
meaning of the school experience, even as they transitioned to a second language, for example,
Standardized/Academic English (Cummins, 2001; Goldenberg, 2008; Hollie, 2011).
Furthermore, the statement from Teacher 3 revealed the serious problem involved when teachers
do not have an understanding of students’ language needs and how the labels identify students’
needs that must be addressed intentionally (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman, 1995). Similar to
Teacher 1’s comments described above, but from a slightly different perspective, Teacher 3’s
statement seemed to suggest that he did not recognize that students who had an English
vocabulary may not have had the syntax and grammatical structures of Academic English
(Cummins, 2000); thus they had limited access to the curriculum and literacy.
Teacher 4 was similarly adamant about his view of the term “Standard English,” calling
the term “standard” a misnomer, stating, “What is standard really? Certainly not a national
standard.” In this case, Teacher 4’s comment highlighted a positive attitude toward language
diversity, but was not triangulated by the classroom observation. The evidence around Teacher
4’s classroom practices highlighted a lack of acknowledgement that students need explicit
instruction to acquire the “standardized” version of English in order to access the curriculum and
acquire literacy in Standardized English (Byrnes & Wasik, 2009; LeMoine, 2001). Nevertheless,
Teacher 4 was correct in challenging how any language gets defined as the “standard” and
seemed experienced and knowledgeable about the political influences that determine language
policies (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 72
Classroom observations. Classrooms that were implementing arts integration instruction
in the curriculum yielded many examples of the admittance, mediation, and at times, celebration
of the Chicano English that students spoke in the classroom. Of the four teachers observed, all of
them during the interviews consistently acknowledged and celebrated the arts integration
approach while providing specific examples of curricular and cross-curricular instruction;
however, during the classroom observations, Teacher 1 and 2 exhibited the highest level of arts
integration and authentic learning and assessment in the data set.
In particular, a high level of authenticity in student learning was observed in a 10th-grade
English class. Teacher 1 began the lesson with students by first listening to, and then discussing,
an National Public Radio (NPR) segment by an African American speaking about how and when
to sound “White” and the challenges and questions he faced. Undoubtedly, fitting in and feeling
accepted in classrooms that frequently do not comfortably admit, mediate—let alone respect—
linguistic diversity is never far from students’ minds (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2010). The
following excerpt from the observation script highlights the impact and relevance this NPR
segment had for the students:
Teacher 1: What is the main idea?
Ramon: He just said that he questioned the sound of his own voice.
Cynthia: Like he wished he could sound more like himself.
Jocelyn: Yeah, like he wants to connect more with his listeners too, so they know what
he really is.
Directly following the NPR discussion of language and identity, several students presented their
personal stories to the rest of the class of 40 students—an ongoing project featuring six to eight
story presentations per class period. The purpose of each story was to describe a specific conflict
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 73
that occurred in the past. Each story presented a window into the culture, heritage, and
experience of the students. After each student presented, the teacher led a discussion about the
structure of the story. Students spoke with a high level of poise, and freely used Standard English
and Chicano English interchangeably. Some examples of the Chicano English used during the
storytelling portion included the following:
Student 1: Her presentation was very well.
Student 2: I swung one, and I striked out.
Student 3: I’m the person they always depend.
Student 4: I will not have any child!
Student 5: I cannot see anything no more.
These examples reflect grammatical structures associated with Spanish, but using an English
vocabulary. Student 2’s statement is particularly illustrative of Chicano English use in classroom
and was neither corrected nor ignored by Teacher 1, suggesting that students felt comfortable
using their language in front of each other and the teacher. Student 1 did not distinguish the need
for an adjective instead of an adverb following a linking verb, a distinction that would require
explicit teaching. Although the student was not classified as an English Learner, the student still
needed support in acquiring Standard/Academic English proficiency. Student 2 made a common
mistake seen in children who are just learning a language. The student uses the “ed” inflection
rule to indicate past tense, but the rule doesn’t work in this instance; so the student needed
explicit instruction. Student 3 didn’t know where to put the preposition or even recognize the
need for a preposition in English.
Throughout the observation, Teacher 1 demonstrated clear respect and purposeful
mediation of students’ Chicano English while emphasizing the importance of speech, stating at
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 74
one point, “I want to hear everyone speak”. As students recited their stories, featuring a historical
conflict in their lives to the rest of the class, their home language was clearly welcomed and used
alongside academic language. Teacher 1 stated repeatedly throughout the lesson that she wanted
the students’ “true voice to come out”. The teacher’s tone of respect and acceptance of language
in the classroom of Teacher 1 seemed to foster a positive student-teacher relationship, a factor
that has been shown to lead to improved learning and achievement (Freire, 2000; Hollie, 2012)
The following dialogue between Teacher 1 and two students highlighted an example of
how the storytelling project generated authentic dialogue that led to learning through mediation
of the students’ home language:
Teacher 1: Let’s talk about the story arc – using dialogue in telling your story really adds
realism.
Graciela: Yeah, I can really feel her pain.
Alexandra: The conflict made logical reason.
Teacher 1: Yes, we need to know what the conflict is. This is a great example of how
the initial conflict drove the entire story.
The opportunity for students to use language actively and the subsequent high participation
observed demonstrated how authentic learning experiences can be an effective instructional
practice for SEL students. Furthermore, the free use of Chicano English in the context of
authentic learning experiences that have integrated the arts in some form has been found to
directly support students’ literacy development, both written and oral (Deasy & Stevenson,
2005). Moreover, the observation data triangulated with related interview and focus group data
suggested that a healthy admittance, mediation, and respect of students’ home language
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 75
supported the Academic/Standard English language development (Cummins, 2001; LeMoine,
2001; Schleppegrell, 2012). Table 3 shows an overview of these data points.
Table 3
Home Language Inclusion and Teacher Attitudes Regarding Chicano English

Teacher

Level of home
language
inclusion

Attitudes regarding
Chicano English use

Level of arts integration
implementation
1 dialogic Positive high
2 dialogic Positive high
3 nondialogic Positive medium
4 nondialogic neutral/positive low

The scale for distinguishing the term “dialogic” vs. “nondialogic” to indicate the level of
home language inclusion observed in the classroom has been determined to be the difference
between teacher and student two-way communication through language as the mediator to
promote learning in contrast to the teacher issuing one-way communiqués to the students without
waiting—or setting the expectation—for student responses and discourse (Freire, 2000). The
scale for determining the terms “positive,” “neutral,” or “negative” to indicate the teacher’s
attitudes regarding Chicano English was rooted in how teachers described their knowledge and
understanding of linguistic diversity in the interviews. In the observations, “positive” attitudes on
the part of teachers were identified as the teacher waiting for student responses, acknowledging
the student’s comments, and/or setting an expectation that all students would participate in the
discourses of the classroom. A “negative” attitude was identified as one in which the teacher
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 76
ignored students who were speakers of Chicano English, failed to acknowledge their comments,
and/or interrupted the student to “correct” her or his language use (Byrnes & Wasik, 2009;
Labov, 2011; LeMoine, 2001).
The scale for determining the observed levels of arts integration implementation was
significantly informed by Robinson (2013). A high level of arts integration was considered the
co-equal arts integration model whereby core curriculum seamlessly merged with arts content,
skills, or practices. A medium level could be described as an inconsistent or underdeveloped co-
equal approach to arts integration. A low level of arts integration could be defined as having little
or no evidence of arts content, skills, or practice in the core curriculum or including arts content,
skills, or practice as “filler” or as a compulsory showcase.
The potential for SEL students to experience authentic learning in the context of a
welcoming environment for home language use and arts-based inquiry was evidenced by the
student focus group, teacher interviews, and classroom observations. An important facet of the
language equation in question here is evidenced in the following section around third space
(Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004).
Identifying and Fostering Third Space
Understanding how and when a third space learning environment occurred at the research
site is critical to understanding how and if arts-based learning fosters a third space for discourse
to occur and language to develop (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004).
To triangulate the data around third space, the researcher used the Third Space Discourse Rubric,
a specially designed observation tool for looking at the third space (Appendix B).
Data from the rubric were presented and analyzed around each of the four rubric
indicators: (a). physical domain: evidence of student artwork on display, portfolio use, level of
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 77
participation by all students; (b). social domain: evidence of respectful speaking and listening
protocols, inclusive decision making, shared leadership, dialogic/diachronic talk; (c) cognitive
domain: evidence of knowledge being constructed and contested in a social context, construction
of knowledge as a shared responsibility; (d). academic language domain: evidence of teacher
and students initiating and engaging alternately in discourse and contrastive analysis using both
Chicano English and Academic/Standard English.
First, in the physical domain, one classroom had no student work on display (Teacher 1),
whereas the other three classrooms featured visiual student work representing student diversity,
with the classroom of (Teacher 2) displaying the highest degree of student work, including maps,
portfolios, posters, written work, drawing, and collaborative brainstorming. The prominence of
student work and language use indicated a respect for students’ language and student-made
products as valued contributions to classroom discourse. In the classroom of Teacher 3, every
inch of wall space was taken up by exemplary student work mixed with instructional posters,
charts, diagrams, or maps. The potpourri of student work and exemplars gave Teacher 3’s
classroom a powerful ambiance of inquiry and celebration of knowledge. In contrast, Teacher 2’s
classroom featured a great deal of student work but seemed to feature group work from
everyone, not just exemplars, and the work was displayed in such a way as to suggest that the
work changed frequently to reflect the current unit of study. It also communicated that all
students’ work was valued. In addition, the classroom of Teacher 2 seemed to utilize wall space
as more of a workspace with dynamic functionality for students to express their knowledge and
exhibit for the rest of the class on a regular basis.
Also in the physical domain, data were collected around classrooms that actively
participated in a community focused on creating and critiquing arts integration work. Two
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 78
classrooms (Teacher 1 and 3) were observed functioning in this regard at a high level whereas
the other two classrooms (Teacher 2 and 4) were observed as evolving or beginning. More
specifically, Teacher 1 and 3 exhibited visible routines and expectations around creating and
critiquing work while Teachers 2 and 4 seemed less prepared to facilitate a high level of active
participation as the rubric described. The variability observed around this indicator may have
been rooted in the varying degrees of implementation of the arts integration model to which the
teachers at the research site had committed. The researcher also recognized the limitation of the
small data set presented here; nevertheless, the inconsistency of the learning environments has
been a known challenge for arts integration programs and has been linked to the relatively few
arts integration programs in existence. Undoubtedly, there is a need for greater research in this
area in an effort to both explore new methods and models as well as to thoroughly propagate
known best practices, including the use of language to mediate classroom learning. A
presentation of findings around best practices and further discussion on the topic is included later
in this chapter.
Second, in the social domain, three out of four classrooms were observed as having the
same level of evolving awareness of respectful listening, speaking, and decision making, as well
as leadership structure of the classroom. The fourth classroom, Teacher 2, scored the highest in
the social domain with the researcher observing clear protocols for discussing student work,
inclusive decision-making patterns, and routine use of mutually respectful speaking and listening
norms. During the researcher’s observation of Teacher 2, students were engaged in creating three
tableaux representing different facets of 1920s U.S. History. The student groups first designed,
then practiced, and finally presented their collaborative work to the rest of the class while the
teacher led a critique and discussion following the presentations. Students were thoroughly
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 79
engaged and seemed to be intimately familiar with the process and expectations of the work and
performance. The rich activity observed in the classroom has been identified as an important
factor for learning (Vygotsky, 1978), in particular, the presented discourse and cycle of inquiry
and art-making (Robinson, 2013). As students worked together in small groups, they used a
mixture of Chicano English and Standardized/Academic English to co-construct knowledge. A
third space seemed to emerge whereby new knowledge, distributed power structures, identities,
and language could thrive (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). In particular, the moments when students
were exploring the concepts and ideas needed to successfully create their tableaux, the third
space was thriving as students’ language, creativity, and imagination were driving the learning.
Teacher 3 in the social domain was observed as having a similar level of mature
discourse. Students worked together and with the teacher in the analysis of Robert Johnson song
lyrics and were very focused as they explored on their own in small groups and were questioned
by the teacher. Students went on to perform a rough version of the song as a classroom, with the
teacher leading by playing an electric guitar. Additional discussion of song structure or form and
the many metaphors or allegories identified in the lyrics followed the performance. During this
activity in particular, students were extremely active and learning seemed to flow, naturally
(Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Vygotsky, 1978) creating a kind of third space.
Third, in the cognitive domain, the process of knowledge co-construction and the
merging of worldviews and experience were observed as a mix of “evolving” and “mature”.
Three out of the four classrooms had numerous opportunities for knowledge construction in a
social context whereas the fourth classroom (Teacher 4) featured no evidence of dialogic or
dialectic exchanges focused on multiple perspectives. The lack of shared responsibility for the
co-construction process resulted in individual student volition or complete disengagement by
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 80
some students—an area noted for growth for Teacher 4. However, among the other three
classrooms (Teacher 1, 2, and 3), teachers and students shared roles in the facilitation of
discussions, assessment, and knowledge co-construction, with Teachers 1 and 2 having the
highest degree of dialogic inquiry while also featuring the greatest amount of activity during the
observation. Moreover, the teachers who had the greatest success in fostering dialogue with and
between students were observed constantly asking questions, offering input, recognizing and
demonstrating respect for language diversity, and remaining positive and supportive.
Lastly, in the academic language domain, teachers and students were observed around the
acceptance, inclusion, or dismissal of Chicano English alongside Academic/Standard English use
as a means to foster a third space learning environment. Consistent with other features Teacher
2’s classroom was heavily dialogic and exhibited a kind of flow between Standard English and
Chicano English not observed in the other classrooms. The evidence around Teacher 2’s
classroom supported the claim that culture and heritage have a direct impact on how students
learn, and in particular, how students learn language (LeMoine, 2001; Smitherman & Villanueva,
2003). As described earlier in the chapter, Teacher 2 appeared to have a different relationship
with his students—one directly related to a shared heritage and language with the students. The
researcher saw a visible comfort level among students in Teacher 2’s classroom that was
markedly different from that observed in the other classrooms. The researcher took note of the
differences and reflected briefly on the observed barrier for Chicano English students who have
struggled to gain access to Standard English while non-Chicano teachers have struggled to gain
access to Chicano students.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 81
Summary
The admittance, mediation, and respect of students’ home language were evidenced in all
classrooms included in the study. However, variation was found in the degree to which teachers
fostered a welcoming environment for language diversity (Freire, 2000; LeMoine, 2001). The
classrooms of Teacher 1 and 2 were found to be heavily dialogic whereas Teacher 3 was found
to foster a welcoming environment, but it was not dialogic. Finally, Teacher 4 was found to have
an inattentive presence in the classroom resulting in a heavily nondialogic learning environment.
The level of home language admittance, mediation, and respect was found to directly
impact the ability of teachers to facilitate authentic learning experiences for SEL students
(Cummins, 2001; Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). Furthermore, the free use of Chicano English in
the context of authentic learning experience that integrates the arts in some form was found to
support students’ linguistic diversity, again with varying degrees of depth and success across the
data set. Although Teacher 1 was found to exhibit model instructional practices around language
and authentic learning, Teacher 2, because of his shared language and heritage with the students,
seemed to reach his students in a way not available to Teachers 1, 3, and 4. This data point
underscored research highlighting the impact teachers have on students with whom they share
the same linguistic and cultural heritage (Gee, 2004; Hollie, 2012; Smitherman & Villanueva,
2003).
Although no data were recorded showing extreme alienation among SELs, members of
the student focus group did share feelings of negativity demonstrated around home language use
at the school, a finding known to significantly shape the education experience for SEL students
(Alim, 2005; Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2011). Nevertheless, the welcoming of home
languages in the classroom regardless of origin or “quality” (Labov in Charity Hudley &
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 82
Mallinson, 2011) to support linguistically diverse students was evidenced. However,
inconsistency across the four teachers around knowledge and understanding of Chicano English
and methods for successfully leveraging the home language in a welcoming authentic learning
environment remained an area of growth for all teachers observed, suggesting the need for
further understanding of the professional development available and in place to support SEL
students.
In the classrooms that resembled third space learning environments, the rich activity
observed and discussed during the interviews seemed to be a critical factor for learning rooted in
activity theory (Lantolf & Appel, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, the meaningful discourse
embedded in the cycle of making and performing or critiquing art was featured throughout the
activity (Robinson, 2013). When these elements are strong, the third space learning environment
appears to thrive (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005), subsequently fostering greater opportunities to
learn new knowledge, equalize power structures, shape positive student identities, and support
language development for SEL students.
Among the small data set included in this study, the authenticity of the experience
observed among students working on projects integrating the arts, language arts, and humanities
seemed to directly support student literacy development from story comprehension to
sophisticated interpretations of texts, identification of characters and their motivations,
recognition of irony and other literary devices, and the development of expressive language, both
written and oral. These preliminary conclusions are strongly supported by Deasy and Stevenson
(2005) in their work researching third space and arts integration programs found across the
United States.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 83
Research Question 2: What are the attributes of arts or arts integration programs and
practices that support SEL student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency?
Throughout the data set is a range of arts education and arts integration practices and
strategies that appeared to support language development for SEL students. In particular, three
attributes of arts integration programming and practice were identified by the researcher to be
especially impactful in supporting SEL student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English
proficiency. The three attributes identified included a healthy socioemotional ecology (Freire,
2000; Heath, 2004; LeMoine, 2001), a cross-curricular approach (Lantolf & Appel, 1994;
Vygotsky, 1978), and authentic learning and assessment (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Robinson,
2013). The findings for each pillar are presented with brief analysis and discussion.
Healthy Socioemotional Ecology
A healthy socioemotional ecology in the classroom has been found to be an important
factor for SEL students gaining access to language (Freire, 2000; Heath, 2004). In particular, the
“community” element of healthy academic discourse has been found to be a welcoming
environment for linguistic and cultural diversity to flourish (LeMoine, 2001). In the context of
teacher and student interviews and classroom observations, data were collected around how the
arts integration program fostered a healthy socioemotional ecology. Elements of this kind of
environment were evident in the students’ statements in the focus group.
Student focus group. In response to questions around what students perceived to be the
purpose of the arts integration program at their school, Student 3 stated her summary of learning
with and through the arts: “It [the arts] forces you to teach yourself…and express it in the way
you understand. Like, you put your soul into it, not the book’s so-called soul.” This sentiment
was shared by the majority of students in the focus group and was evidenced by Student 5, who
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 84
stated, “it [the arts] makes us intrigued and interested.” Many students also spoke of the arts
integration program in terms of increased motivation as well as offering greater variety
throughout the day. To this point, student 4 stated: “I’m excited because I get to do something I
love, dance. It’s something that gives us a reason to want to come to school, it’s a motivation.”
Students in the focus group also described the prevalence of performance and performance-based
opportunities embedded in the arts integration curriculum. Performance as a form of authentic
learning and assessment was found to be a key attribute of the arts integration program that also
seemed to support a healthy socioemotional ecology for students. Student 7 described this
benefit, stating:
I feel like without performing so much, we wouldn’t be nearly as outgoing or confident.
We’ve all performed in front of a bunch of people, we’ve done this and we’ve done that.
I feel like that gives us a bigger advantage because we’re not going to hold back. So, I
feel like it does help.
The evidence around the importance of performance to developing confidence articulated by
Student 7 was underscored by observations in which performance and performance-based
activities met the mature (high) criteria in the social and cognitive domains of the Mediated
Third Space Arts Integration rubric. The classroom of Teacher 1 was a good example—use of
language was prominent in individual performances of storytelling. Language was also the
mediator in developing the film project described by Teacher 1 that effectively put students in
touch with their heritage language, their own Chicano English, and Standardized/Academic
English in the final product that they presented. These performances and the preparation behind
them involved heavy use of third space dialogue among the students and between the teacher and
the students. Production of performance-based projects required similar dialogue. Thus, language
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 85
as a mediator of student-teacher shared space contributed to students’ facility with language to
express their creativity while fostering a positive socioemotional ecology that supported SEL
student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Heath, 2004;
Robinson, 2013).
Teacher interviews. More specific to how the arts integration program fostered a healthy
socioemotional ecology for students, Teacher 1 reflected:
There are a million reasons to incorporate the arts, but the most important one is
engagement. And ownership…once students have done something creative, they create it,
they own it, and they begin to take more ownership of what they are learning overall. Art-
making also builds community, and it also gives students an opportunity to collaborate
with others, bring the social into learning—and the social at this point in their life is
really, really important—and that also raises their level of engagement.
Teacher 1’s statement was evidenced by a high level of student engagement repeatedly observed
in the classrooms of Teachers 1, 2, and 3.
Teacher 4 also reflected at length around the impact of the arts integration program on
students’ socioemotional development, stating:
I think it’s given them an appreciation of the arts, number one, and it’s softened them. I
joke with my students that a sports heavy program, which a lot of them are used to, tends
to coarsen the personality in terms of language and locker room humor. I think the arts
have really helped soften and even tame the wildness in our students.
It was not clear what the teacher meant by “the wildness in our students,” but the teacher was
making a point about socioemotional development of students through the arts. Student 9 from
the focus group echoed Teacher 4’s reflection, describing how the arts-heavy curriculum allowed
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 86
for “more complex thoughts, ideas, and emotions.” The comment from Student 9 suggested how
important a healthy socioemotional ecology was in fostering authentic learning experiences
(Robinson, 2013).
Teacher 1 also reflected during the interview on the role performance played within a
broader socioemotional ecology and drew the connection between the role performance played in
students’ facility with learning language and fostering student confidence, stating:
The first step is for the kids to have confidence… and when they perform, I say “Wow,
you were really great!” and when others say the same, I’ve noticed a big difference in
students’ ability and confidence in getting up in front of people and speaking well
publicly—you know, stand up straight, use poise, make eye contact, take a plunge—
because you cannot learn a language without speaking. If you’re too shy to speak, that’s
really going to work against you.
Teacher 1’s comments about the critical role speaking played in learning a language have been
supported by research stating that language is socially developed during shared activity (Lantolf
& Appel, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978). Furthermore, Teacher 1’s comments were evidenced in her
classroom where the researcher observed a heavily dialogic learning environment within a
positive socioemotional ecology.
Classroom observations. Notes from Teacher 2 described a “bustling level of student
activity” during the preparation of students’ tableaux performances, whereas notes from Teacher
3 described the “natural and total collaboration between teacher and students” in the performance
of the Robert Johnson blues song following analysis of the lyrics. Finally, notes from the
observation of Teacher 1 described a “comfortable space for students to express themselves
personally to each other”. All three classrooms highlighted evidence of a healthy socioemotional
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 87
ecology for SEL students. Furthermore, there was no evidence of their Chicano English creating
an obstacle to their learning. The high level of engagement, motivation, and confidence observed
in these classrooms suggested positive academic outcomes for SEL students (LeMoine, 2001;
Rueda, 2011).
Cross-Curricular Approach
Across the data set, a school-wide practice of cross-curricular planning and teaching was
observed and discussed. The cross-curricular approach was found to feature strong coherence
across the curriculum and to exemplify the constructivist learning theory (Vygotsky, 1978). The
cross-curricular constructivist approach inherently communicates respect for the value of
diversity and recognizes that people learn best when information is integrated and coherent
(Luftig, 2000; Rabkin & Redmond, 2004; Robinson, 2013). Examples are drawn from the
student focus group, teacher interviews, and classroom observations.
Student focus group. The students interviewed for the study provided essential
perspective and insight around the research questions and are again presented first as a means to
frame the findings. Student 2 in the focus group broadly reflected on her experience in the arts
integration program: “I feel like we’ll learn something in one class and that same thing will
happen to show up in another class.” Student 3 agreed, elaborating: “That’s the best part about
our school. They kind of link everything so we know what we’re doing.” Student 5 was able to
identify a more specific aspect of the arts integration program that seemed to facilitate increased
language development. She briefly described her experience: “When I was in the Shakespeare
Company last year, English became way easier. His words are everywhere, and all of sudden I
could really understand the vocabulary.” The reflection by Student 5 echoed Teacher 1, who
stated that vocabulary was a significant challenge for SEL students. The importance of
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 88
vocabulary to learning language and to learning in general was widely recognized
(Schleppegrell, 2012). Furthermore, the role the arts can play as a venue for allowing students to
use and mediate language to learn (Luftig, 2000) was evidenced by the student focus group data
around the connection Student 5 made between the theater program and her English class.
Teacher interviews. The instructional strategy of coplanning/coteaching and/or cross-
curricular instruction was mentioned by Teacher 1 and 4 but was not observed in any classroom;
however, teachers mentioned it in their interviews. Teacher 1 described an example of
coplanning and cross-curricular instruction in the English class and the AP Spanish class:
The AP Spanish students have been studying poetry so they have memorized certain
Spanish poems. The film class is going to record them speaking using good vocal
expression and good diction and gestures and everything and then, they will decide how
they’re going to use this footage. So, the students in the AP Spanish class are responsible
for giving us an interpretation of the poem in Spanish that can be better understood
through their performance of it and through the presentation and documentation designed
by the film class.
Here, performance was mentioned again—a seemingly valuable practice purposefully embedded
into many curricular areas across the school. More importantly, this performance task placed a
value on performance as a means of interpreting language to make meaning.
Teacher 1 offered another example of a coplanning cross-curricular instructional practice
she used across her own class-load in the form of a film project among students in her film and
English classes. The project used technology to address a large class size problem and issues of
plagiarism:
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 89
The problem with research projects is, in this day and age, it is very easy to plagiarize, or
even accidentally plagiarize. So, one of the ways to work against that is to have people do
oral presentations, but it’s really hard to hear 46 oral presentations. But if you do it as
film, you can, and across two of my classes, it makes it really interesting for everyone.
Students are limited to a minute, so they have to be concise, and they can include maps,
and they can include dates and things that can be written on screen. So, my English
students in my Film class collaborate to create an oral presentation that has some
background, images, maps, timelines, and an explanation of stoicism including claims
and supporting evidence as to why stoicism might be a positive thing, from their point of
view, or not. That was a really good project.
This kind of project invites rigorous cognitive engagement, deepening of content knowledge,
and increased opportunities to use language. (Teacher 1 represented a possible model teacher to
document further at a future time.)
Teacher 1 also worked collaboratively with Teacher 4 in planning and instructing
students. Teacher 4, in this case, was acting in his piano teacher capacity. Both described a
project entitled “I Hear A Waltz” that featured the English students of Teacher 1 writing and
performing poetry and literature while collaborating with the piano students of Teacher 4 in a
performance of piano music that used a waltz time signature. The increased opportunities for
learning and using language were myriad in these arts integration examples and were evidenced
across the data set. The next section of the chapter will present data around the mission, vision,
and policymaking at the school in this study that may significantly support SEL students.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 90
Authentic Learning and Assessment
In many ways, authentic learning and assessment was a hallmark of the school in focus.
Teachers and students provided numerous examples of this focus; it was observable and
evidenced in the classrooms, and by walking around the campus during lunch. Authentic
learning and assessment encouraged the active learner and fostered a learning environment in
which language can develop in a social context and in the midst of activity (Lantolf & Appel,
1994). In addition, the intersection of authentic assessment and activity theory aligned to Gee
(2004), who described how a language includes who you are and what you do when you use it.
Furthermore, performance- and project-based learning allowed the students to turn the language
they learned in a social context into inner speech, further enabling them to solve problems,
manage the environment, and manage their own behaviors and actions (Deasy & Stevenson,
2005; Vygotsky, 2012). In these ways, students effectively used language to mediate learning.
Student focus group. Performance again surfaced as a key theme for the findings
presented around authentic learning and assessment. Performance played a huge role at the
school as evidenced throughout the data collected. Student 2 reflected on her experience
attending a performing arts magnet school:
Since we’re used to performing, we’re used to being on stage with people looking at us,
so we don’t get that nervous. And, since this is an English class, she makes us stand up,
read poems, speak in front of the class…so that really helps us, like, not be shy, speak
more fluently, use bigger words, and not break down.
Student 2 gave an example of how performance as an authentic task can foster fluency and/or
proficiency in Academic/Standard English (Gee, 2004):
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 91
Talking about performance…us not being nervous makes us more open-minded, making
us have more complex thoughts, ideas, and emotions. We need bigger words to express
them, so that really helps with English, because in English they can teach us the words.
The depth of understanding Student 2 exhibited around the important role performance played in
the arts education curriculum was strong evidence of the impact of authentic learning models on
students’ identities as students. However, students also reflected on some of the challenges
inherent to a school program built around performance. Student 10 offered:
I think that combining the arts and education is a really good idea but I feel like they
don’t really understand that we have so many things to do, we’re not going to get
everything on time, and we’re not going to do everything perfect the way they want us to.
Student 5 agreed, stating:
I’m always on top of my schoolwork because I have Honors classes and then I have a lot
of music performances and it’s tough, but it helps me keep and open minded when it
comes to the academic classes. But it is still hard to keep attention on both things and turn
in the work that they want all perfectly.
Regardless of the challenges articulated by Student 5 and 10, Student 4 (in agreement with the
other students in the focus group) reflected on the increased motivation in an arts-integrated
curriculum:
I think that arts integration is a good [idea] because it gets us to focus more. I feel like it’s
something to give us a reason to want to come to school (agreement among students),
because, let’s face it, many of us don’t want to come to school every day. Our teachers
use the arts like a motivation for us to come to school and we’ll be able to focus more.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 92
The anecdotal data were supported by research around the importance of identity, behavior, and
social-emotional factors to learning language through the arts (Heath, 2004). In addition, the
student and teacher interview data regarding the process of making and performing art seemed to
strongly connect to Deasy and Stevenson (2005) who concluded in a national study that the
authentic experience found while working on projects integrating the arts and language arts
directly supported students’ literacy development, both written and oral.
Teacher interviews. All four of the teachers interviewed for the study offered many
examples of arts integration programming in or around the school. Teacher 2 gave an example of
how arts integration played out in one of his classes:
I will give them a key term like “industrialization” and then I ask them to choreograph an
assembly line. They see it first in the video, they read about it, I will give them examples
and models, and then they create their own movement and dance towards a guy swinging
a hammer and the next person is screwing on a tire, or whatever it is that they picture and
visualize. I think it helps them retain this information a little bit better.
The authentic learning and assessment embedded in the lesson cycle described by Teacher 2 was
a strong example of how language takes on meaning in the midst of a social context of activity.
Moreover, the added elements of dance and other creative visuals heightened opportunities for
students to use metacognition and inner speech in their learning (Lantolf & Appel, 1994;
Vygotsky, 1978). Teacher 2 proceeded to validate the arts integration approach by describing the
steady performance growth on state-wide high-stakes tests (CSTs), stating:
Literally, the way we talk about it here at the school is, don’t even worry about the test.
Just teach an engaging, long lasting, fun and memorable lesson, and the rest will fall into
place. And we saw it every year with our scores going up. And we’re on a quarter system,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 93
which means they’ll take all of history in a semester, and the CST won’t be until the
spring, it’ll be two months without history, and they still do well…it’s because of those
long lasting impressions in class.
The claim made by Teacher 2 was verified by steady API growth for the last three years of
measured growth (2011–2013) of 62 points (California Department of Education, 2015).
The emphasis on “long lasting impressions” was a constant theme for Teacher 2, as
evidenced by additional examples of arts integration instructional practice he described. These
included using a “steady beat” for key term practice, translating the Declaration of Independence
into slang or vernacular, and having one geography class teach the other four geography classes
the dance from a Saharan tribe in Africa. The translation of the Declaration of Independence, in
particular, is a form of contrastive analysis, which LeMoine (2001) and others have advocated to
help students acquire another language without losing their first language, thus leading to
proficiency in both languages.
Teacher 2 described one particular example of arts integration instructional practice that
seemed to especially support SEL students’ acquisition of Academic/Standard English:
I use, for example, a Bob Dylan song, just the instrumental…and tell the kids to write a
song to it using the information from the book chapter. And then I say, ok, the chorus is
your thesis statement, the rest of the lyrics are your topic sentences – you just wrote an
essay. And the students are like, woah! Then they add and take away different things to
the song as they go…and I’ll have them do the same thing with a poem.
Although the arts integration model seemed to be quite ubiquitous throughout Teacher 2’s
curriculum, he was explicit in stating:
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 94
One thing I want to make clear is that we’re not singing and dancing every day. It’s more
like culminating projects. We do the basic high school boring book stuff…but I tell my
kids, ok, Monday and Tuesday, we’re going to do the boring book stuff and Wednesday
and Thursday we’re going to write poems or songs or tableaux based on what we read
and learned. It isn’t every day because it will wear you out…it’s about finding the middle
ground and that is school-wide. I frequently talk to other teachers about it and we discuss
how to space out the projects.
The comments by Teacher 2 suggested a level of complexity and iteration inherent to the arts
integration model (Robinson, 2013). In addition, the evidence collected around the scope and
sequence of an arts integration model seemed to be a promising area of future research and is
discussed further in chapter five.
Once again, the conscious commitment to performance was evidenced throughout the
curriculum. All teachers and students described a culture of performance whereby performances
took place constantly, guest artists were regularly featured, field trips were commonplace, and
students freely and enthusiastically worked together in small groups during class time, lunch, or
after school to prepare for performances, both required and elective. Teacher 4 provided a
description of the arts integration model in terms of performance, stating:
At our school you can’t say, gee, let’s have an English event but exclude the Orchestra –
we find some way to bring them in. It’s hard to separate it because it’s so much a part of
the fabric of our curriculum. And I think that’s the goal really, we’re becoming more and
more integrated – that’s just an overall feeling, it’s the zeitgeist of this place.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 95
Another positive outcome articulated around the mission and policy of plentiful performance
opportunities at the school was evidenced by Teacher 3, who reflected on the remarkable growth
of the Rock Band Club during lunch and after school:
A couple of years ago our Rock Band Club met once a week after school, sometimes.
Now, not only this room, but the room across the hall, and the room downstairs, are busy,
every day at lunch. Like, 30 people practicing everyday at lunch. This room and that
room over there are sometimes booked for after school practice too. So, one of the ways I
describe this in a melodramatic way, is walking through the halls at lunch time, I feel like
I’m in some kind of movie, or some imaginary place where students enjoy school.
The researcher wondered if this activity would have been possible in a school that not only
emphasizes performance, but also had the necessary instruments, tools, and capacity to foster the
depth and breadth of student engagement evidenced by the Rock Band Club.
In contrast, teachers and students articulated a few challenges inherent to the
performance-heavy arts integration curriculum. Teacher 1 described one of the challenges:
It is easy to lose sight of the fact that this is a means, not an end, meaning the arts.
Because it’s very easy for the arts to kind of take over the school. And we have a LOT of
performances. And we have a LOT of field trips. All very good, but when you’re
teaching AP or something like that, you get a little annoyed when your class is always
gone, and you feel like you’re not doing your job.
Teacher 2 articulated a different approach in facilitating the growth and development of
the arts integration program, stating: “We try to hire. The way we hire is we look at a number of
different ways the perspective teachers use the different art forms in their curriculum. Hiring is
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 96
very important.” Teacher 1 further underscored the importance of finding the right people to
teach at a school striving for arts integration:
Some people are extremely collaborative and really like to collaborate and have an open
classroom. We might have curriculum that involves curriculum in both subject areas and
a final project that’s combined between two classes. But then there are other teachers
who are little bit more like the older model where they really don’t want other teachers in
and out of their classroom, where they really teach their subject a certain way and have
been doing that way for a while and have been successful at it, but, everyone’s moving
toward collaboration.
A final piece of evidence that supported the kind of authentic learning and assessment the arts
integration model provided for SEL students came from an impromptu follow-up question asked
during the student focus group. When asked if students were given the opportunity to have had
all of their public schooling be in an arts-integrated school, a resounding “yes” was declared. The
researcher recognized how definitive the agreement was in a room where every single student
was undeniably a Standard English leaner. The researcher was inspired by this data point and
hopes to research this area of inquiry further in the future.
Classroom observations. The field notes from the observation of Teacher 2 further
underscored the process of art making as a valid part of language learning pedagogy. Teacher 2
was recorded telling students during the creation of their small group tableaux based on the text
they read on 1920s U.S. History: “Remember you are doing storybooks…you guys are going to
be the picture inside the question.” The creativity, collaboration, and metacognition that the
tableaux activity demanded of the students seemed to support many levels of language and
literacy development, including constructivism, activity theory, and contrastive analysis. The
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 97
next section of this chapter features additional qualitative data around the arts integration
strategies and best practices observed at the research site that seemed to support SEL students’
acquisition of Academic English.
Among the four teachers interviewed for the study, only one (Teacher 4) did not feature
some form of arts integration in the classroom observed. It should be noted, however, that
Teacher 4 did describe several projects he was currently implementing or had implemented that
featured arts integration.
Summary
The findings presented around research question two showcased an instructional
framework of co-equal arts integration (Robinson, 2013), whereby the arts were taught side-by-
side other content areas and were interwoven across the curriculum in such a way as to promote
increased learning (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). These findings seemed to precipitate significant
positive outcomes for SEL students. Many of the positive outcomes included increased
vocabulary, confidence, identity, speaking, listening, and critiquing work, motivation, social,
emotional, and behavioral development, and higher-level thinking. Classroom observations
collected during the case study validated many of the interview data descriptions of instructional
strategies or best practices articulated by teachers and students.
Out of these data, three specific attributes of the arts integration program were being
implemented at the research site that seemed to supports SEL students’ acquisition of
Academic/Standard English proficiency. The attributes found to support SEL students included a
healthy socioemotional ecology (Freire, 2000; Heath, 2004; LeMoine, 2001), a cross-curricular
approach (Robinson, 2013; Vygotsky, 1978), and a curriculum rich in authentic learning and
assessment (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Lantolf & Appel, 1994).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 98
Across the data set, evidence of a healthy socioemotional ecology was present at the
school. The high admittance, mediation, and respect of student’s home language created a
welcoming environment for language diversity. Furthermore, the welcoming environment
fostered the growth of student motivation, engagement, and confidence. The second attribute of
the arts integration program that seemed to support SEL students was a purposeful coherence
across the curriculum (versus discrete disciplines) that recognized that people learn best when
information is integrated and coherent. The resultant constructivism evidenced across the
research site fostered a rich venue for cross-curricular and cocurricular instruction and planning.
The third attribute of the arts integration program found to support SEL students’
acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency came out of a bounty of evidence around
authentic learning and assessment observed and recorded at the research site. In the authentic
learning model, students are active learners as they regularly participate in rigorous performance
and project-based learning. The evidence around the performance and project-based learning
seemed to allow students to turn the language learned in a social context into inner speech,
further allowing students to solve problems, manage the environment, and manage their own
behavior and actions. In these ways, students discussed and were observed using language to
mediate their own learning. Making art as an embedded activity within nearly every lesson in the
curriculum inherently asked students to put their own personal stamp on the work and promoted
authentic learning experiences for all students (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005).
Conclusions
This chapter provided data analysis for a case study focused on examining the arts
integration program at East Arts High (EAH) in the Visionary Unified School District
(pseudonym). The purpose of the study was to explore the ways in which the arts integration
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 99
school model fostered a third space teaching and learning environment that promoted access to
academic language and opportunities to learn for Standard English learners (SELs).
Triangulation of the data showed that the arts integration program promoted third space learning,
which generated dialogue that ultimately fostered learning and achievement (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Summary framework from findings.
The findings offer a rich qualitative overview of the attitudes and perceptions around
SEL students at the research site who spoke Chicano English. The findings also offer a range of
data around how students’ Chicano English was included or not as a valued contribution to
classroom discourse as well as the how arts might have been helping facilitate learning
Academic/Standard English through generation and cultivation of third space learning
environments. Finally, the findings presented in Chapter 4 provided an overview of three specific
!
!
Arts%
Integration%
creates!
Third%Space%
generates!
Dialogue!
fosters!
Learning%&%
Achievement%
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 100
attributes of the arts integration program being implemented at the research site that supported
SEL student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency. Attributes of the arts
integration program that were found to strongly support SEL students included a healthy
socioemotional ecology (Freire, 2000; Heath, 2004; LeMoine, 2001), a cross-curricular approach
(Robinson, 2013; Vygotsky, 1978), and a curriculum rich in authentic learning and assessment
(Deasy & Stevenson, 2005; Lantolf & Appel, 1994). Figure 3 shows a visual framework of the
attributes of arts integration identified as supporting language development.

Figure 3. Attributes of arts integration identified as supporting language development.
Although the data set is rich and, at times, symbiotic, a wide range of conceptual
understanding and implementation of arts integration was happening at the school site.
Furthermore, the teachers interviewed and observed did not share the same understanding of
linguistic diversity in their classrooms. Nevertheless, the arts integration program did seem to
!
!Language!
Development!
Authentic!
Learning!&!
Assessment!
Cross7
Curricular!
Approach!
Healthy!Socio7
Emotional!
Ecology!
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 101
promote student learning and was observed to regularly engage students in dialogic activity, in
most cases. In addition, the concept of third space was not widely known or understood at the
research site, suggesting a possible area of focus for professional development and future
research.
This chapter reviewed the findings, analysis, and interpretation of the data. The data
provided evidence to answer the study’s two research questions. Chapter 5 will present a
summary of the study, implications for practice, limitations, noted items for future research, and
a conclusion.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 102
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to explore how an arts integration school model
facilitated home language use by SEL students. The purpose of the study was also to identify
specific attributes of the arts integration model that support SEL students’ acquisition of
Academic/Standard English. Research was conducted into the areas of home language
admittance, mediation, and/or respect, third space learning environments, and arts integration
programming and practices.
Identifying the relationships between home language use in the classroom and specific
attributes of arts integration programming has the potential to provide schools and districts an
evidence base to strengthen and improve teaching and learning for SEL students. Extensive
research literature on language variation and literacy reveals a limited exploriation of the
intersection of arts-based education and the development of Academic/Standard English
proficiency. This case study examined the knowledge and perceptions of students and teachers at
an arts integration performing arts academy serving a high population of Chicano English-
speaking SEL students.
The study contributes to the limited body of knowledge about the role an arts integration
curriculum model can play in fostering language development for SEL students. The study was
grounded in sociocultural and sociolinguistic theories of teaching and learning (Gee, 2004;
Vygotsky, 1978).
Research Questions
Two research questions guided this study:
1. In schools with large SEL populations that are implementing an arts integration program,
how is students’ use of African American English or Chicano English admitted, mediated,
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 103
or respected as a valued contribution in classroom discourses that resemble “third space”
learning environments?
2. What are the attributes of arts or arts integration programs and practices that support SEL
student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English proficiency?
Methodology
The study utilized a qualitative case study approach to collect data in one urban high
school that was implementing an arts integration program serving a large concentration of Latino
SELs who spoke Chicano English. The unit of analysis in this study was high school classrooms.
The researcher was cleared through an Institutional Review Board process, and data were
triangulated using multiple sources of data: four teacher interviews, one classroom observation
of each teacher, and a student focus group. Interviews and observation data were transcribed,
coded, and organized to reflect patterns and themes. Sociocultural theory, sociolinguistic theory,
and language theories were used to frame interpretation of the data.
Summary of Findings
The section that follows presents a summary and analysis of findings, using existing
research literature as a lens through which to interpret the data.
Research Question 1
An analysis of the data informed the following key findings regarding home language use
in the classroom:
1. The level of home language admittance, mediation, and respect was found to directly
impact the ability of teachers to facilitate authentic learning experiences for SEL students
(Cummins, 2001; Deasy & Stevenson, 2005).
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 104
2. In the classrooms that resembled third space learning environments, the rich activity
observed and discussed during the interviews seemed to be a critical factor for learning
(Lantolf & Appel, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978).
3. Meaningful dialogue and discourse embedded in the cycle of making and performing or
critiquing art was found to be an important factor for language development (Robinson,
2013).
4. A highlight from the data around Research Question #1 indicated the possibility of
unique teacher-student learning relationships between students and teachers who shared
similar language and cultural backgrounds. (Gee, 2004; Hollie, 2012; Smitherman &
Villanueva, 2003).
The admittance, mediation, and respect of students’ home language were evidenced in all
classrooms included in the study; however, variation was found in the degree to which teachers
responsed to students’ home language (Freire, 2000; LeMoine, 2001). Nevertheless, the level of
home language admittance, mediation, and respect was found to directly impact facilitation of
authentic learning experiences for SEL students (Cummins, 2001; Deasy & Stevenson, 2005).
In the classrooms that resembled third space learning environments, the rich activity
observed and discussed during the interviews seemed to be a critical factor for learning (Lantolf
& Appel, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, the meaningful discourse embedded in the cycle of
making and performing or critiquing art was featured throughout the activity (Robinson, 2013).
When these elements were strong, the third space learning environment appeared to thrive
(Deasy & Stevenson, 2005) and subsequently fostered greater opportunities to learn new
knowledge, equalize power structures, shape positive student identities, and support language
development for SEL students.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 105
Research Question 2
An analysis of the data informed the following key findings regarding arts integration
programming:
1. Arts integration programs seemed to lead to positive outcomes for SEL students, in the
areas of increased vocabulary, speaking, listening, and critiquing work, and higher level
thinking (Burnaford, 2007).
2. Arts integration programs seemed to lead to positive outcomes for SEL students, in the
areas of confidence, identity motivation, social, emotional, and behavioral development
(Heath, 2004; Luftig, 2000).
3. Three specific attributes seemed to support SEL students’ acquisition of
Academic/Standard English:
a. Healthy socioemotional ecology (Freire, 2000; Heath, 2004; LeMoine, 2001)
b. Cross-curricular approach to instruction (Robinson, 2013; Vygotsky, 1978)
c. Curriculum rich in authentic learning and assessment activities (Deasy &
Stevenson, 2005; Lantolf & Appel, 1994).
The findings presented around Research Question Two showcased an instructional
framework of co-equal arts integration (Robinson, 2013), whereby the arts were taught side-by-
side other content areas and were interwoven across the curriculum in such a way as to promote
increased learning (Deasy & Stevenson, 2005). This dynamic was evident and seemed to
precipitate significant positive outcomes for SEL students. Many of the positive outcomes
included increased vocabulary, confidence, identity, speaking, listening, and critiquing work,
motivation, social, emotional, and behavioral development, and higher order thinking. Classroom
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 106
observations collected during the case study validated many of the interview data descriptions of
instructional strategies or best practices articulated by teachers and students.
In the performance-based arts integration curriculum model, students are active learners
as they regularly participate in rigorous performance and project-based learning. The evidence
around the performance and project based learning seemed to allow students to turn the language
learned in a social context into inner speech, further allowing them to solve problems, navigate
the environment, and manage their own behavior and actions. In these ways, students discussed
and were observed using language to mediate their own learning. Making art an embedded
activity within the lessons in the curriculum inherently asks students to put their own stamp on
the work and promotes authentic learning experiences for all students (Deasy & Stevenson,
2005).
Delimitations
To adhere to a short time frame needed to complete the study, a small sample size of only
four teacher interviews, four classroom observations, and one student focus group was
conducted.
Conclusions
1. There were no cause-effect relationships identified in the data; however, conditions
known to foster learning were present at the research site.
2. In general, the arts integration model being implemented at the school supported
student’s language diversity; however, the depth and breadth of arts integration varied
from teacher to teacher.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 107
3. The performance focus of the arts integration program was shown to foster a healthy
socioemotional ecology for students, nearly all of whom were Chicano English-speaking
SELs. The healthy socioemotional ecology generated by the performance focus and
performance-based assessment was shown to foster confidence, motivation, and
engagement. All of these factors are known to be important factors for learning.
4. The performance focus of the arts integration program provided SEL students with many
diverse opportunities to experience authentic learning and assessment through project-
and performance-based activities.
5. The rich activity inherent to a performance-based arts integration program observed in
the classroom and discussed during the interviews was shown to be a critical factor in
fostering meaningful dialogue and discourse. Moreover, the meaningful dialogue and
discourse embedded in the cycle of making and performing or critiquing art was featured
throughout the activity. When these elements were strong, the third space learning
environment appeared to thrive and subsequently foster greater opportunities to learn new
knowledge, and support language development for SEL students.
6. Although the school-wide performance focus was shown to foster a positive learning
environment for students, both teachers and students expressed stress and frustration over
the time and energy demands inherent to the performance-based program.
7. Cross-curricular and/or co-curricular planning and instruction as a facet of the arts
integration program was found to be uneven. When curriculum was integrated across the
curriculum, both students and teachers described the benefits of the coherence. However,
teachers were inconsistent in their level of implementation as a staff and in the classroom.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 108
8. One of the teachers included in the study shared the same language and heritage as the
students at the school. Students in the focus group described the different kind of
relationship this similarity allowed. In addition, students were observed exhibiting a
different level of comfort and engagement in the classroom taught by the teacher who
shared the same heritage and language, resulting in different level of discourse.
9. The arts integration program was found to place an emphasis on using language in the
learning environment. The prominence of language in the curriculum was found to help
students develop socially; however, this limited study does not provide sufficient
evidence that the integration program led to a higher degree of Academic/Standard
English proficiency. It does provide evidence that arts integration programs as observed
in this study enhanced students’ facility with language (home language or academic
language) as a means of mediating their own learning.
10. The arts integration performance model was found to legitimize students’ home language
as a psychological tool for learning. Furthermore, the model allowed students to see their
home language as an asset that allowed them to make meaning of their lives and their
learning experience.
11. The arts integration performance model fostered a third space learning environment
whereby student-to-teacher and student-to-student discourse was heavily dialogic with
students as subjects, rather than objects. Through their art, the students were co-
contributors and co-creators in the construction of knowledge that mattered in the
classroom.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 109
12. Students didn’t necessarily need to have a positive relationship with the principal to be
successful. The classroom really mattered more than the principal for positive interaction.
Recommendations
1. Expand sample size for the study to include more teachers and teachers of all content
areas, including math, science, and physical education.
2. Expand the period of time for a replication of the study. It is difficult to know the impact
of the arts integration model on acquisition of proficiency in Standardized/Academic
English, as language acquisition takes place over time.
3. Explore the depth and breadth of professional development being implemented at the
school and district levels around supporting SEL students acquisition of
Academic/Standard English proficiency through an arts integration performance model.
4. Schools and districts need to understand that the arts are not extras. The arts help students
understand key concepts, support them in adopting identities as students, and foster
learning across the curriculum.
5. It was clear through the study that the arts integration performance model used language
as a psychological tool to advance facility of language. Ergo, language development
programs should embed the arts in their curriculum.
6. Replicate the study with at least two other arts integration programs serving SEL students
who are speakers of Chicano English, as well as speakers of African American English,
Native American English, and/or Hawaiian Pidgin.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 110
7. Schools like the one in this study should have great latitude in hiring. Explore how the
recruitment and hiring process of schools implementing an arts integration program
impacts the success of the program and the achievement of students.
8. Explore the role leadership plays in the implementation of a successful arts integration
program serving SEL students generally, as well as more specifically in the areas of
Academic/Standard English language development, socioemotional development, and
cross-curricular approaches.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 111
References
Adler, N. J. (2006). The Arts & Leadership: Now that we can do anything, what will we do?
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 486–499.
Alim, H. S. (2005). Critical language awareness in the United States: Revisiting issues and
revising pedagogies in a resegregated society. Educational Researcher, 34(7), 24–31.
Academic Performance Index (API). (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2015, from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/
Asbury, C. H., & Rich, B. (Eds.). (2008). Learning, arts, and the brain: The dana consortium
report on arts and cognition. New York, NY: Dana Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research in education. An introduction to
theory and methods (5th ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bolduc, J. (2008). The effects of music instruction on emergent literacy capacities among
preschool children: A literature review. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 10(1),
n1.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
Bunch, G. C., Kibler, A., & Pimentel, S. (2012). Realizing opportunities for English learners in
the common core English language arts and disciplinary literacy standards. Stanford, CA:
Understanding Language Initiative. Retrieved March, 25, 2013.
Bunch, G. C. (2014). The language of ideas and the language of display: Reconceptualizing
“academic language” in linguistically diverse classrooms. International Multilingual
Research Journal, 8(1), 70–86.
Burnaford, G. (2007). Arts integration frameworks, research practice. Washington, DC: Arts
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 112
Education Partnership.
Byrnes, J. P., & Wasik, B. A. (2009). Language and literacy development: What educators need
to know. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Caldwell, B., & Vaughan, T. (2011). Transforming education through the arts. Florence, KY:
Routledge.
Carger, C. L. (2004). Art and literacy with bilingual children: Literature becomes significant
for children though engagements in art and talk about books. Language Arts, 81(4),
283.
Carnoy, M., Elmore, R., & Siskin, L. (Eds.). (2013). The new accountability: High schools and
high–stakes testing. New York, NY: Routledge.
Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in
at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies. Washington, DC: National
Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from http://www. nea. gov/research/Arts-At-Risk-
Youth.pdf.
Chappell, S. V., & Cahnmann-Taylor, M. (2013). No child left with crayons the imperative of
arts-based education and research with language “minority” and other minoritized
communities. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 243–268.
Charity Hudley, A. H., & Mallinson, C. (2010). Understanding English language variation in
us schools. Multicultural Education Series. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (Eds.). (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire (Vol.
23). Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 113
Cummins, J. (2001). HER classic reprint: Empowering minority students: A framework for
intervention. Harvard Educational Review, 71(4), 649–676.
Cummins, J. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction. In
Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 487–499). New York, NY: Springer US.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to
equity will determine our future. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Deasy, R. J. (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social
development. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.
Deasy, R. J., & Stevenson, L. (2005). Third space: When learning matters. Washington, DC:
Arts Education Partnership.
De Cos, P. L. (1999). Educating California's Immigrant Children: An Overview of Bilingual
Education. (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2015, from
https://www.library.ca.gov/crb/99/09/99009.pdf
Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2003). Rethinking English language instruction: An architectural
approach. English Learners: Reaching the Highest level of English Literacy, 227, 258.
Eisner, E. W. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Elmore, R. F. (2003). A plea for strong practice. Educational Leadership, 62, 13.
English Learner Master Plan. (2012). Retrieved January 26, 2015, from
http://www.lausd.net/lausd/offices/Office_of_Communications/EnglishLearnerMasterPla
n_FINAL_06-14-12.pdf
Fink, A. (Ed.). (2009). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fiske, E. (1999). Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning. Washington, DC:
Arts Education Partnership.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 114
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. P. (1995). A dialogue: Culture, language, and race. Harvard
Educational Review, 65(3), 377–403.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum International
Publishing Group.
Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat [updated and expanded]: A brief history of the twenty-
first century. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Fryer Jr, R. G., & Levitt, S. D. (2004). Understanding the black-white test score gap in the first
two years of school. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(2), 447–464.
Fryer, R. G., & Levitt, S. D. (2006). The black-white test score gap through third grade.
American Law and Economics Review, 8(2), 249–281.
Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future--Hb. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling.
New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners. American Educator.
Graff, G. (1999). The academic language gap. The Clearing House, 72(3), 140–142.
Gutiérrez, K. D. (1995). Unpackaging academic discourse. Discourse processes, 19(1), 21–37.
Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research
Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164.
Gutiérrez, K., Rymes, B., & Larson, J. (1995). Script, counterscript, and underlife in the
classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard Educational
Review, 65(3), 445–472.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3.
American Educator, 27(1), 4–9.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 115
Heath, S. B. (2004). Learning language and strategic thinking through the arts. Reading Research
Quarterly, 338–342.
Heilig, J. V., Cole, H., & Aguilar, A. (2010). From Dewey to No Child Left Behind: The
evolution and devolution of public arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(4),
136–145.
Hemphill, F. C., & Vanneman, A. (2011). Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White students
in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the National Assessment of
Educational Progress. Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2011-459. National Center for
Education Statistics.
Hess, F. M. (2011). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washingon, D.
C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Hetland, L., & Winner, E. (2004). Cognitive transfer from arts education to nonarts outcomes:
Research evidence and policy implications. Handbook of Research and Policy in Art
Education, 135–162.
Hill, L. E. (2012). California's English learner students. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy
Institute of California.
Hochschild, J. L., & Scovronick, N. B. (2003). The American dream and the public schools.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Hollie, S. (2011). Culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and learning: Classroom
practices for student success. Huntington Beach, CA: Teacher Created Materials.
Hyde, K. L., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E., Evans, A. C., & Schlaug, G.
(2009). Musical training shapes structural brain development. The Journal of
Neuroscience, 29(10), 3019–3025.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 116
Ingram, D., & Meath, J. (2007). Arts for academic achievement: A compilation of evaluation
findings from 2004–2006. St. Paul, MN: Center For Applied Research and Educational
Improvement.
Jackendoff, R., & Pinker, S. (2005). The nature of the language faculty and its implications for
evolution of language (Reply to Fitch, Hauser, and Chomsky). Cognition, 97(2), 211–
225.
Katz, M. B., & Rose, M. (Eds.). (2013). Public education under siege. Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Kozol, J. (2012). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools. New York, NY: Random
House.
Labov, W. (2011). Principles of linguistic change, Cognitive and cultural factors (Vol. 3).
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding
achievement in US schools. Educational researcher, 35(7), 3–12.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (Eds.). (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language research.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
LeMoine, N. (2001). Language variation and literacy acquisition in African American students.
Literacy in African American Communities, 169–194.
Luftig, R. L. (2000). An investigation of an arts infusion program on creative thinking, academic
achievement, affective functioning, and arts appreciation of children at three grade levels.
Studies in Art Education, 208–227.
Markusen, A. (2012, May). Arts, innovation, and regional development: A consumption base
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 117
approach. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Endowment for the Arts and the
Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maxwell-Jolly, J. (2000). Factors influencing implementation of mandated policy change:
Proposition 227 in seven northern California school districts. Bilingual Research Journal,
24(1–2), 37–56.
Menefee-Libey, D. J., Mulfinger, L. S., & Clayton, S. E. (2008). Learning from LA: Institutional
change in American public education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004).
Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds
of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70.
Moll, L. C. (2013). LS Vygotsky and education. New York, NY: Routledge.
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (2013). Retrieved fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/
nationsreportcard/subject/publications/main2013/pdf/2014451.pdf
Noguera, P. (2012). Saving Black and Latino boys. Education Week, 693–703.
Noddings, N. (2006). Critical lessons: What our schools should teach. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
O'Brien, A., & Donelan, K. (2008). The arts and youth at risk: Global and local challenges.
Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 118
Ogbu, J. U. (1992). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Educational researcher,
21(8), 5–14.
Ornstein-Galicia, J. (1988). Form and function in Chicano English. Malabar, FL: RE Krieger.
Parrish, T. B., Merickel, A., Perez, M., Linquanti, R., Socias, M., Spain, A., & Delancey, D.
(2006). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of English
learners, K–12: Findings from a five-year evaluation. Final report for AB 56 and
AB1116. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.
Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary
schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10. NCES 2012–014. Washington, D.C.: National Center
for Education Statistics.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Designing qualitative studies. Qualitative research and evaluation
methods, 3, 230-246.
Pavlenko, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Second language learning as participation and the (re)
construction of selves. Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning, 155–177.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Rabkin, N., & Redmond, R. (Eds.). (2004). Putting the arts in the picture: Reframing education
in the 21st century. Chicago, IL: Center for Arts Policy at Columbia College Chicago.
Ravitch, D. (2011). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and
choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Robinson, A. H. (2013). Arts integration and the success of disadvantaged students: A research
evaluation. Arts Education Policy Review, 114(4), 191–204.
Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 119
Sons.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Salcedo, C. S. (2010). The effects of songs in the foreign language classroom on text recall,
delayed text recall and involuntary mental rehearsal. Journal of College Teaching &
Learning (TLC), 7(6).
Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. University of California,
Irvine: Linguistic Minority Language Institute.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2012). Academic language in teaching and learning. The Elementary
School Journal, 112(3), 409–418.
Scott, J. C., Straker, D. Y., & Katz, L. (Eds.). (2010). Affirming students' right to their own
language: Bridging language policies and pedagogical practices. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Smitherman, G. (1995). " Students' Right to Their Own Language": A Retrospective. English
Journal, 21–27.
Smitherman, G., & Villanueva, V. (Eds.). (2003). Language diversity in the classroom: From
intention to practice. Carbondale, IL: SIU Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
Washington, F. L., Mount, R., & EA13, P. D. National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP)/Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA): 2013. Evaluation and Assessment, 7.
Wiley, T. G., & Lukes, M. (1996). English‐only and standard English ideologies in the US. Tesol
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 120
Quarterly, 30(3), 511–535.
Winner, E., & Hetland, L. (2001). Beyond the soundbite: arts education and academic outcomes.
In Conference proceedings. J. Paul Getty Trust, publishers.
Zhou, M. (2003). Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse children. The
Teachers College Record, 105(2), 208–225.

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 121
Appendix A: Teacher Interview Protocol
Purpose: To assess the knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes of teachers around the function
and access of the arts integration program at the school as it relates to SELs.

• Thank you for taking the time to visit with me today.
• I am a student at the University of Southern California conducting research for my
dissertation.
• I want to assure you that this interview is strictly confidential. Information provided
by the school is reported in aggregated form only. Districts, schools and individuals
are not identified.
• I have an Informed Consent form outlining your rights as a research participant. Your
rights include the right to freely decide not to participate in this study or to withdraw
from this study at any time. I have a copy for you to sign and one for you to keep for
your use.
• It is important that you are a willing participant. As such you are free to decide to
participate or withdraw from any time. Are you willing to participate in this
interview?
• I will be transcribing this interview so that I will have accurate information from this
interview.
• Please feel free to discuss your views openly. I may have additional questions to
further understand a concept you have shared.
• Let’s begin. Please state your name, school, district and give verbal permission to
record this interview by repeating this statement “I (your name) at (school/district)
willingly give my permission to record this interview”.

Adapted from (Isernhagen & Florendo, 2013).

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 122
Interview Questions

1. What is the mission and function of the arts integration program at your school?

2. Can you provide a description of the arts integration program at your school?

3. How long has your arts integration program been in effect?

4. What are some of the goals of the arts integration program?

5. What has been the impact of the arts integration program on your students in general?

6. Do you have a group of students identified as Standard English Learners? If so, please
answer the following questions.

7. How do you see the arts integration program at your school affecting SELs?
a. In terms of achievement?
b. In term of identity?
c. In terms of creativity and metacognition?
d. In terms of language development?
e. In terms of literacy?
f. In terms of academic achievement on standardized tests?

8. Looking ahead, what do you see as the greatest opportunities for the arts integration
program at your school to help SELs gain access to Academic/Standard English and
develop literacy?

9. Also looking ahead, what do you see as the most significant barriers that will affect SELs’
gaining access to Academic/Standard English and developing literacy?

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 123
Appendix B: Classroom Observation Protocol
Research Questions
1. What are the positive and negative experiences of schools that have arts programs and
arts integration programs serving SEL students?
2. (process) In what ways to the arts or arts integration programs foster language-rich
“Third Space” relationships in the classroom?
3. (outcomes) What features of arts integration programs correlate to SEL student’s
acquisition of Standard/Academic English?

Name of Observer Date & Time Number of Participants

Location Study

Arts Integration Study

Brief Summary of Observation

Follow-up Inquiry Questions

Additional Notes & Reflection

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 124
Field Notes Script
Essential Questions & Themes
(Highlighted as Circled Numbers during Script Recording)
1. How is the “Third Space” teaching and learning framework employed?
2. In what ways do teacher and student participants use academic language?
3. In what ways do teacher and student participants use vernacular language?

Time Notes Comments

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 125
Appendix C: Focus Group Interview Protocol

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Arts Integration and SEL Student Development of Academic/Standard English Proficiency

I am conducting research on arts integration and academic achievement for African
American and/or Chicano students and my research focuses on the classroom experience
involving language use in the context of arts integration classroom instruction, specifically the
home language of African American and/or Chicano students. I would like to learn about your
experiences as language diverse student who speaks some form of African American English or
Chicano English in a typical English class. I will show you some examples of African American
English and ask you questions related to your use of language and your experiences in the
classroom.
(Showcase of MELD Diagnostic Protocol and Brief Discussion)
These examples illustrate some of the language diversity among speakers of African
American English and Chicano English and hopefully help you understand the focus of my
study. Most linguists and researchers believe that the different English variations found in
schools and at home are different from Academic/Standard English, but not negatively different,
and this is the framework of my study as well.
I would like to learn from you whether you are aware of any teaching strategies that may
be helpful to your becoming proficient in Academic/Standard English, which is the common
language of the classroom.
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 126
I should tell you that your names will not be identified; and, your teachers nor anyone
except me, will not have access to any identifiable information. Instead of your names, I will be
using code numbers to identify your responses. The research I am doing is part of my doctoral
dissertation study at USC and your confidentiality is protected. Even if I use something that was
said in this group to make a point, your identity is not be linked to the information. I will use
what I learn from this forum to strengthen my findings about what students believe to be
teachers’ perceptions of speakers of African American English or Chicano English and strategies
teachers use to assist language diverse students to gain access and ultimately develop proficiency
in Academic/Standard English.
To make our time meaningful I want to define some of the terms I am using. When I say
discourse, I am referring to class discussions and instruction time; the term everyday language is
the way you communicate with your family, and friends. Sometimes everyday language may be
the same way you communicate with your teachers. The term “academic language” refers to the
language that is commonly used in the classroom. It can look like the English used in textbooks
and sometimes spoken by educators during classroom discussions, written work, and is
sometimes viewed as “proper” English because it is viewed by some people to be the “right” way
to speak English. The term proficient in this context is referring to an acceptable level of
performance in English Language Arts on standardized tests such as the CAHSEE, the CST, and
the new Smarter Balance test that is considered to assess standardized English. Do you have any
questions about the process or the research?
Do you understand the intentions of this focus group? At any time, if you are
uncomfortable, you do not have to respond to a question. If you desire to stop and not participate
ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 127
you are free to do so. Your participation is not connected to any grade or credit with the school’s
program.
Together we will establish norms for our discussion. (Researcher note: the students and
moderator/researcher will establish norms that maintain respect, wait time, opinions being
important, confidentiality, tape recording for documentary purposes.)

Before we begin, I would like to thank you for agreeing to participate in the focus group.

Focus Group Discussion Questions

1. What do you feel is a positive teacher/student relationship that enables you to learn?

2. How do you feel your everyday language is similar or different from the academic
language used in the classroom?

3. How does your teacher respond to you when you use your everyday language in the
classroom? Do you feel your teacher responds more positively, more negatively, or do
you feel it is neutral?

4. How do you feel the teacher's response to your language affects your overall classroom
experience?

5. How is it communicated to you which language to use in the classroom?

6. Do you feel you speak two languages; an everyday language and one for school?

7. In what way do you feel your teacher is helping you use your two languages?

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 128
8. How do your teachers use the arts to learn? Is it helpful?

9. What strategies does your teacher use to help you become more proficient in academic
language? Are any of the strategies arts-based?

10. Do you feel you are becoming more proficient in academic language by studying an art
form? How can you tell? Why do you think you feel that way?

11. What do you wish your teacher would do more of to help you become more proficient in
academic language? Are there any arts-based activities you think would be especially
helpful in developing academic language proficiency?

12. Is there anything else you would like to add to the discussion, or do you have any
questions?

ARTS INTEGRATION AND SELS 129
Appendix D: MELD Diagnostic Tool

Student Name_____________________ Grade/Subject_________

Directions: Read the sentence aloud to your student. Have the student repeat the
sentence to you. If the student repeats the sentence using Home Language (MxAL)
format, check the box and highlight which MxAL linguistic features they use for the
purposes of explicit contrastive analysis study/instruction.

Standard English Possible
(MxAL)
Responses
Linguistic Features
(Explicit)
√
1. Don’t be bad. Doont be
baaad.
Circumflex Intonation
(sing-song musical intonation)

2. She has an umbrella. a Indefinite Article
3. Do you have a pen? pin Vowel Pairs/Homophones
4. We were driving down the street. was Past Tense Auxiliary Verb
5. Miguel wore a white hat. hwite Breath “h” Sound
6. He doesn’t have any friends. don’t, no Multiple Negation
7. My brother is going to the movies. he’s Topicalization
8. She runs everyday. run Third Person Singular
9. She doesn’t mind if you talk. don’, mine Consonant Clusters
10. Alex is sitting on the couch. in Prepositional Variation
11. Yesterday, he started selling
newspapers.
start Past Tense Marker

12. The Pharaohs were the kings of
Egypt.
in Prepositional Variation
13. Raise the flag! race “Z” Sound
14. The firemen saved many lives. lifes “V” Sound
15. This game is new, it just came out. barely Lexical Item “barely” replaces the colloquial use of
timeliness or scarcity.

16. The apple. Thuh Pronunciation of “the” as “thee” before a word
that starts with a vowel

18. He jumps rope to get into shape. jump Third Person Singular

19. There’s a big tree with leaves on it. them Prepositional Variation.
20. He is washing his hair. …is washing
the hair
Pronoun Usage

MELD Diagnostic Tool for Identifying the Use of
Mexican American Linguistic (MxAL) Features

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this case study was to explore how an arts integration school model facilitated home language use by SEL students. The purpose of the study was also to identify specific attributes of the arts integration model that support SEL student’s acquisition of Academic/Standard English. Research was conducted into the areas of home language admittance, mediation, and/or respect, third space learning environments, and arts integration programming and practices. ❧ This qualitative study used teacher interviews, classroom observations, and a student focus group. Triangulation and analysis of these data revealed the level of home language admittance, mediation, and respect in the classroom to directly impact the ability of teachers to facilitate authentic learning experiences for SEL students. In classrooms that resembled third space learning environments, the activity, dialogue, and discourse observed and discussed during the interviews was found to be a critical factor for learning and language development. In addition, the performance-focused arts integration program was found to positively impact SEL students, both academically and socioemotionally. ❧ The study identified important implications for educators and educational leaders. Identification of the relationships between home language use in the classroom and specific attributes of arts integration programming provides schools and districts an evidence base to strengthen and improve teaching and learning for SEL students.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners

PDF

The influence of language and culture in the literacy development of speakers of African American English

PDF

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

Influences that impact English language acquisition for English learners: addressing obstacles for English learners’ success

PDF

Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement

PDF

The role of teachers in academic discussion

PDF

Equitable learning opportunities for English Language Learners

PDF

The impact of learning communities on the retention and academic integration of Latino students at a highly selective private four-year institution

PDF

The effect of a language arts intervention on the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Optimal applications of social and emotional learning paradigms for improvements in academic performance

PDF

Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis

PDF

Effective coaching of teachers to support learning for English language learners

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Building capacity in homeroom teachers to support English language learners

PDF

An investigation on the integration of science and literacy for English language learners

PDF

The intersections of culturally responsive pedagogy and authentic teacher care in creating meaningful academic learning opportunities for students of color

PDF

First and second grade teachers' knowledge and perceptions about African American language speakers

PDF

A phenomenological study of the impact of English language learner support services on students’ identity development

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K–12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

Asset Metadata

Creator Ostermann, Daniel Fisher (author)

Core Title Arts integration for standard English learners: implications for learning academic language

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 07/28/2015

Defense Date 06/11/2015

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag academic discourse,academic English,art,arts integration,Chicano English,Dance,disadvantaged students,Drama,ESL,home language,Latina,Latino,LAUSD,Los Angeles,magnet,Music,OAI-PMH Harvest,Performing arts,pilot,SEL,socioemotional development,Spanish,standard English learner,Theater,third space,vernacular

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee chair), Ott, Maria G. (committee member), Robles, Darline P. (committee member)

Creator Email danostermann@earthlink.net,dosterma@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-610673

Unique identifier UC11301036

Identifier etd-OstermannD-3722.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-610673 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-OstermannD-3722.pdf

Dmrecord 610673

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Ostermann, Daniel Fisher

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA