Advertisement

Building Equitable Futures for Immigrant-Origin Multilingual Youth: Conclusions and Implications of Longitudinal Interactional Histories

  • Amanda K. Kibler
Chapter

Abstract

This final chapter presents a brief overview of ways that policies and institutions changed during the study and in the years since its conclusion before turning to updates on youth themselves. A synthesis of youth’s cases is then presented to provide insights into the nature of language and literacy development over time for Mexican and other linguistically minoritized immigrant-origin youth. Relationships among macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors influencing these processes are analyzed, as are the roles played by bilingual and biliterate practices both inside and outside of formal educational settings. The chapter closes with a description of the limitations of this study and an exploration of its implications for supporting the creation of more equitable instructional practices, policies, and research for immigrant-origin multilingual youth.

Keywords

Immigration Mexican Bilingual Biliterate Longitudinal language and literacy development Writing Postsecondary transitions Linguistically minoritized youth Longitudinal interactional histories approach 

References

  1. Banks, J. A., Suárez-Orozco, M. M., & Ben-Peretz, M. (Eds.). (2016). Global migration, diversity, and civic education: Improving policy and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bazerman, C., Applebee, A. N., Berninger, V. W., Brandt, D., Graham, S., Matsuda, P. K., Murphy, S., Rowe, D. W., & Schleppegrell, M. (2017). Taking the long view on writing development. Research in the Teaching of English, 51(3), 351–360.Google Scholar
  3. Bunch, G. C., Kibler, A. K., & Pimentel, S. (2014). Shared responsibility: Realizing opportunities for English learners in the common core English language arts and disciplinary literacy standards. In L. Minaya-Rowe (Ed.), Effective educational programs, practices, and policies for English learners (pp. 1–28). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Compton-Lilly, C. (2014). The development of writing habitus: A ten-year case study of a young writer. Written Communication, 31(4), 371–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088314549539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Compton-Lilly, C., Papoi, K., Venegas, P., Hamman, L., & Schwabenbauer, B. (2017). Intersectional identity negotiation: The case of young immigrant children. Journal of Literacy Research, 49(1), 115–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X16683421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Enright, K. A., & Gilliland, B. (2011). Multilingual writing in an age of accountability: From policy to practice in U.S. high school classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(3), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fu, D. (1995). My trouble is my English: Asian students and the American dream. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.Google Scholar
  10. Gonzales, R. G. (2011). Learning to be illegal: Undocumented youth and shifting legal contexts in the transition to adulthood. American Sociological Review, 76(4), 602–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122411411901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gonzales, R. G. (2016). Lives in limbo: Undocumented and coming of age in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hornberger, N. H. (2003). Continua of biliteracy. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Continua of biliteracy: An ecological framework for educational policy, research, and practice in multilingual settings (pp. 3–34). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  14. Hoyle, S. M., & Adger, C. T. (1998). Introduction. In S. M. Hoyle & C. T. Adger (Eds.), Kids talk: Strategic language use in later childhood (pp. 3–22). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kibler, A. K. (2010). Writing through two languages: First language expertise in a language minority classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kibler, A. K. (2016). Promises and limitations of literacy sponsors in resident multilingual youths’ transitions to postsecondary schooling. In C. Ortmeier-Hooper & T. Ruecker (Eds.), Linguistically diverse immigrant and resident writers: Transitions from high school to college (pp. 99–116). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Kibler, A. K., & Valdés, G. (2016). Conceptualizing language learners: Socio-institutional mechanisms and their consequences. Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 96–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kibler, A., Karam, F., Futch Ehrlich, V., Bergey, R., Wang, C., & Molloy Elreda, L. (in press). Who are long-term English learners? Deconstructing a manufactured learner label. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw039.
  19. Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Davis, J. H. (1997). The art and science of portraiture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Leki, I. (2007). Undergraduates in a second language: Challenges and complexities of academic literacy development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Migration Policy Institute. (2018). Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) data tools. Retrieved from: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca-profiles
  22. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Promoting the educational success of children and youth learning English: Promising futures. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Orellana, M. F., & D’warte, J. (2010). Recognizing different kinds of “head starts”. Educational Researcher, 39(4), 295–300. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10369829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Palmer, D. (2009). Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should be listening to Jonathan right now…”. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 177–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00164.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prior, P. (2017). Setting a research agenda for lifespan writing development: The long view from where? Research in the Teaching of English, 52(2), 211–219.Google Scholar
  26. Rosa, J., & Flores, N. (2017). Unsettling race and language: Toward a raciolinguistic perspective. Language in Society, 46(5), 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404517000562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruecker, T. (2015). Transiciones: Pathways of Latinas and Latinos writing in high school and college. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work, and the will to lead. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  29. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 301–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Valdés, G. (1997). Dual language immersion programs: A cautionary note concerning the education of language-minority students. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 391–429. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.3.n5q175qp86120948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Valdés, G. (2015). Latin@s and the intergenerational continuity of Spanish: The challenges of curricularizing language. International Multilingual Research Journal, 9(4), 253–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2015.1086625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Valdés, G., Kibler, A. K., & Walqui, A. (2014). Changes in the expertise of ESL professionals: Knowledge and action in an era of new standards. Alexandria, VA: TESOL International Association.Google Scholar
  33. Valdez, V. E., Friere, J. A., & Delavan, M. G. (2016). The gentrification of dual language education. The Urban Review, 48(4), 601–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-016-0370-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–260). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. van Lier, L. (2010). The ecology of language learning: Practice to theory, theory to practice. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 2–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amanda K. Kibler
    • 1
  1. 1.College of EducationOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations