Good Teaching is Good Teaching: English Learners and Museums
Dr. Veronica Alvarez, Director of School and Teacher Programs, Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA).
After walking up a dark staircase from a concrete parking lot, this is the view that greeted me on my first field trip to a museum, a trip to The Getty Villa. My nine-year-old self was taken in by all the sensory sensations, the ocean breeze (the Villa is located on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu), the smell of the gardens, the textures in the paintings, and the gilding on the French decorative arts. What I could not take in was the information on the labels, nor what the woman guiding us around was telling us, because I could neither read nor speak English at the time — I am an English Learner (EL). This experience has stayed with me throughout my twenty years in museum education and ultimately led me to conduct a mixed-methods study as part of a doctoral dissertation on effective teaching practices for English Learners in art museums.
This article will address the role of museums as partners to K–12 education, provide recent research on effective teaching strategies for ELs (and how these strategies can apply to a museum setting), and share data from the study’s findings. My research indicates that museum educators use numerous techniques for effective English language instruction, although they can can improve their teaching by providing materials in students’ native language and opportunities for students to transfer skills between their primary and target languages. I hope these findings can provide museum educators with tools to make their practice more inclusive — ones that welcome all of our museums audiences, including English Learners.
English Learners in the Museum
Museums have often been seen as elitist institutions (Cahan, 2016; Costantino, 2004; Knutson, 2002) geared towards select audiences. Indeed, the majority of visitors to art museums are generally older, whiter, and wealthier than the general population. For example, while White people make up 68% of the U.S. population, they make up 79% of museum visitors (Farrell & Medvedeva, 2010). One way museums have sought to disrupt this perception is by partnering with schools to provide educational experiences for students (Burnham & Kai-Kee, 2011; Costantino, 2004; Kindler, 1997) who might otherwise not have access to their collections or institutions. A 2015 nationwide study of museums’ school offerings found that 96% of museums offered single-visit field trips (Korn & Associates, 2015). While these single visits have consisted of a variety of activities such as writing, sketching, or physical movement (activities that have the potential to make content more accessible to ELs), overwhelmingly, 96% of student engagement with museum educators has consisted of a facilitator-led discussions in English (Korn & Associates, 2015) — an activity that is less accessible when language is a barrier.
ELs constitute a significant proportion of the student body in California’s schools and schools across the nation (Kelly-Jackson & Delacruz, 2014; Lavadenz & Armas, 2012; MacDonald, 2004), making it pertinent for museums to think about how they are addressing the needs of English Learners. The first decade of the 21st century saw a 57% growth in the number of EL students in the U.S. (Lavadenz & Armas, 2012). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) report for the 2015 school year, the percentage of English Learners (ELs) was 9.5%, an estimated 4.8 million students (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). The largest increase in the EL student population has been in the Southern United States, but California, where I work and reside, still has the highest population of ELs with 1.3 million students (U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition, 2017; California Department of Education [CDE], 2017). The second largest school district in the country, Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has the largest number of ELs enrolled of all U.S. districts, nearly one in every three students (CDE, 2014). However, there has been very little peer-reviewed research on effective teaching practices for ELs in a museum setting. (My literature review found only two studies that specifically addressed EL learning in an art museum [1]). Due to the lack of scholarship in this particular area, I hope this article can provide guidance on how museums can base their programming decisions on better aligning with their frequently stated missions of being inclusive and responsive institutions to their diverse constituents, many of whom are ELs.
Effective Practices for English Learners in the Museum
In the fall and spring of 2017–2018, I conducted a mixed-methods study of museum educators from a large, encyclopedic art museum in Los Angeles in order to gauge precisely what those implications may be for museums in teaching English Learners. I gathered qualitative data by interviewing the museum educators about their training and approach to teaching ELs. I also gathered quantitative data by conducting observations of the museum educators using the statistically reliable Observation Protocol for Academic Literacies (OPAL). The OPAL describes eighteen strategies, or indicators, that are necessary for successful EL instruction in the classroom. Although created for classroom teachers, this tool nevertheless provided rich data about which strategies for successful EL instruction were being implemented by museum educators and which were not. With the exception of the last two bullet points more explicitly directed at EL instruction, the EL strategies in the OPAL are what many of us in the field consider to be good teaching. Ten of the eighteen indicators (those that scored the highest and lowest in my study) for effective instruction of ELs include:
- promoting critical thinking and problem solving
- connecting subject matter concepts and previous learning
- establishing high expectations for learning that builds on students’ strengths
- explaining key terms by using gestures and/or visuals
- facilitating student autonomy and choice by promoting active listening and questioning
- amplifying student input by questioning, paraphrasing, restating, and expanding
- using flexible groupings to promote positive interactions with peers (such as pair share, group work, etc.)
- providing frequent feedback and checking for comprehension
- providing materials in students’ primary language
- creating opportunities to transfer skills between students’ primary language and target language
In order to enhance inter-rater reliability, a pair of observers conducted several observations of six museum educators teaching classes with a majority EL student population. Observers looked at how effectively each museum educator was implementing the eighteen OPAL strategies. Observers scored each indicator using a Likert scale of 1–6.
The Findings
After four separate observations of each museum educator, results indicated that strategies such as providing materials in students’ primary language and opportunities to transfer skills between students’ primary language and target language scored the lowest (averaging just 1.8 and 1.9, respectively, out of 6 on a Likert scale). Among the highest scoring indicators for effective EL instruction by museum educators were explaining key terms (averaging 5.2 points), critical thinking (averaging 4.97), amplifying student input by questioning (averaging 4.97), connecting subject matter concepts and previous learning (averaging 4.29), and facilitating student autonomy (4.1). Overall, my study found that museum educators are providing high quality arts education through effective teaching practices for ELs that promote learning.
Recent conversations amongst museum educators have centered on our aspiration of encouraging our visitors to be critical thinkers, facilitate experiences that respect our visitors’ lived experiences, foster student-centered questioning, and be cognizant of how we introduce new vocabulary to our visitors. These effective teaching strategies for ELs, which were particular strengths of the museum educators in my study, are best practices for all learners, since good teaching is good teaching.
Dialogical Model: Listening and Speaking
Of particular importance in EL instruction is the way we model and facilitate discussions with works of art. Given that most museum field trips entail facilitator-led tours in English (Korn & Associates, 2015), we can easily fall into making the choice of excluding many of our visitors. We can provide a docent- or educator-led lecture conducted solely in English — thus making the experience unintelligible for English Learners. Alternatively, we can provide opportunities for students to share observations and insights, in English or the language of their choice, with us or with their peers. For English Learners, and I would argue for all of our visitors, the latter approach is crucial — the first approach excludes (as my first field trip to the Getty Villa can attest to), the second includes. A key difference is whether museum educators talk at students about the works of art, or whether museum educators facilitate dialogue that is student-centered and inclusive of all of our visitors. The facilitation can be accessible even if conducted in English, with support such as using flexible groupings for peer-to-peer interaction in their choice of language. Rea and Mercuri (2006), Saunders and Goldenberg (2010), and Snow and Katz (2010) emphasize the need for speaking and listening as an important component for English language development. Providing opportunities for students to express their opinions, thoughts, and insights into works of art — as observed during this study, and as expressed by the museum educators during the study’s interviews — is particularly valuable. Through open-ended, student-centered discussions about works of art, museum educators can effectively implement this strategy. More importantly, student-centered dialogue of works of art not only benefit ELs, it benefits all of our visitors. Again: good teaching is good teaching.
If we want students to learn to read, we encourage them to read. If we would like students to be better writers, we encourage them to write. Thus, if we would like students to become more comfortable speaking English, we need to let them speak English. Typically, most classroom discussions are centered on initiation-response-evaluation (Wells & Arauz, 2006). In this type of classroom discussion, a teacher asks a question, a student responds, and the teacher evaluates the response; and then repeats the process. This cycle limits discourse among students and “provides little or no opportunity for students to voice their own ideas or comment on those of others” (Wells & Arauz, 2006, p. 380). Instead, class discussions in the museum and in the classroom should be dialogical, meaning an experience that encourages participation by all students — amongst peers — as a means of exploration of ideas and opinions, rather than simply for evaluation. Vygotsky (1978) remarks on the importance of dialogue, as it allows knowledge to be co-created through conversation and questioning. After this process, negotiated meaning emerges. As observed in this study, museum educators often asked open-ended questions to engage students in dialogue. Questions included, “What do you see that makes you say that?” “How do you know?” or “Does anybody want to add to what they just said?”
Wells and Arauz (2006) cite the importance of engaging in a dialogical model, as it “involves a much more active participation by learners in which they construct and progressively improve their understanding through exploratory transactions with the cultural world [emphasis added] around them” (p. 379). These two emphasized terms deserve further explanation. Most museum educators adhere to constructivism (Ebitz, 2005) — that knowledge is co-constructed with others through discussion and the learner’s previous knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978). For ELs, and I would argue, for all learners, connecting to previous learning is an important aspect of constructivism, for it, “helps students make connections between subject matter and previous learning” (Lavadenz & Armas, 2012).
Dialogical Teaching in the Museum
In the museum setting, student discussions are centered on cultural artworks/artifacts; students in my study were engaging in dialogue centered on objects, primary sources, from cultures around the world. During the interviews, museum educators discussed the importance of working from art objects. One educator noted, “you are using the objects from the museum, so, it’s a whole other way of understanding.”
The following is an example of an observation that highlights several effective teaching strategies for ELs (and all visitors). When showing this Chinese landscape painting, the educator challenged
students by asking, “What is nature?” and “How would you describe a mountain to someone who had never seen one?” He probed them further, “What else do you notice?” However, students seemed to have difficulty understanding the definition of “nature” even though the image was of a natural landscape. The museum educator adjusted by asking, “Where in nature have you been?” thus making connections to their personal lives. Several students responded with descriptions of trips to Las Vegas and Mexico. He followed up by clarifying that “When you drove to Las Vegas, you drove through nature, a desert.” He checked for understanding and practiced flexible groupings by asking students to “Turn to your partner and share — what does nature mean? And where is the place in nature that you have been?” In addition, the educator often asked students to translate some of the words during their discussion into Spanish, or spoke to students in Spanish. For example, he would say, “If you can hear me, clap dos veces” [two times]. Or, “Does anyone know how to say “landscape” in Spanish?”
Connection to Social Justice
The visual arts have been proven successful in engaging students of color though these students are the least exposed to quality arts education (Rabkin et al., 2011). Because the use of visuals is one of many effective teaching strategies for second language acquisition (Freeman & Freeman, 2001; Lavadenz, & Armas, 2012; Rea & Mercuri, 2006; Reilly, 2008; Snow & Katz, 2010), art museums are uniquely positioned to provide that programming. While it is not the role or responsibility of museums to provide English instruction, we can be places where good teaching, instruction that is welcoming and inclusive, can take place. By promoting teaching that provides students opportunities to dialogue about works of art, to have discussions with us and with their peers in a low-risk, welcoming environment, we can be that place that honors and respects their diverse, lived experiences.
If art museums want to remain relevant within their communities, they ought to have authentic relationships with those increasingly diverse communities (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Museum educators, and museums as institutions, must welcome and include the voices of those that have been silenced and allow for multiple and alternative interpretations of the works of art in their collections. Mayer (2014) urged museum educators to build a knowledge base that is more culturally diverse, identify culturally diverse curriculum, and adopt teaching strategies that are culturally responsive. Being culturally responsive, as Mayer affirmed, means that museums must honor the visitor as holistically as possible, which entails considering our visitors’ class, race, linguistic background, and all other contextual factors, as all of these are aspects of the individual and will impact how that person experiences the museum (Betancourt & Salazar, 2014). If museums and museum educators do not gain self-awareness through critical self-reflection, they, and their programs will continue to be reserved for the elite and serve as yet another example of institutional exclusion, separate and irrelevant to the diverse populations we seek to serve.
Dr. Veronica Alvarez is an educator, historian, and arts advocate. She has worked with elementary, high school, and college students. Currently, she is the Director of School and Teacher Programs at LACMA. Prior to LACMA, she worked in the Education Department at the Getty Museum for over 16 years, mostly writing curricula, creating professional development opportunities for teachers, and overseeing the docent program at the Villa.. Veronica currently serves on the American Alliance of Museum’s EdComBoard and represents CAM on the Policy Council for the California Alliance for Arts Education. Veronica has a BA in Liberal Studies and an MA in Ancient Mediterranean history from CSUN. With a passion for learning and museum education, she recently completed her doctorate at LMU. Her dissertation explored whether museum educators were effectively addressing the needs of English Language Learners.
Endnote
(1) “Art Is a Wonderful Place to Be: ESL Students as Museum Learners,” by Marla Shoemaker (1998) and a study of a two-year partnership between a school with a high level of ELs and several museums in San Diego, California, titled “The Academic Resilience and Psychosocial Characteristics of Inner-City English Learners in a Museum-Based School Program” (Kanevsky et al., 2008).
References
Betancourt, V., & Salazar, M. (2014). Engaging Latino audiences: Visitor studies in practice at the Denver art museum. In J. B. Cuff & L. Evans (Eds.), Multiculturalism in art museums today (pp. 181–196). London, England: Rowan & Littlefield.
Burnham, R., & Kai-Kee, E. (2011). Teaching in the art museum: Interpretation as experience. Los Angeles, CA: Getty.
Cahan, S. E. (2016). Mounting frustration: The art museum in the age of Black power. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
California Department of Education (CDE). (2017). Fingertip facts. Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/ceffingertipfacts.asp
Costantino, T. E. (2004). Training aesthetic perception: John Dewey on the educational role of art museums. Educational Theory, 54, 399–417. doi:10.1111/j.0013–2004.2004.00027.x
Ebitz, D. (2005). Qualifications and the professional preparation and development of art Museum educators. Studies in Art Education, 46, 150–169. JSTOR
Farrell, B., & Medvedeva, M. (2010). Demographic transformation and the future of museums. Washington DC: American Association of Museums Press.
Freeman, D.E., & Freeman, Y.S. (2001). Between worlds: Access to second language acquisition (Second Edition). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kanevsky, L., Corke, M., & Frangkiser, L. (2007). The academic resilience and psychosocial characteristics of inner-city English learners in a museum-based school program. Education and Urban Society, 40, 452–475. doi:10.1177/0013124507304693
Kelly-Jackson, C. & Delacruz, S. (2014). Using visual literacy to teach science academic language: Experiences from three preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 36, 192–210. doi:10.1080/01626620.2014.917364
Kindler, A. M. (1997). Aesthetic development and learning in art museums: A challenge to enjoy. Journal of Museum Education, 22(2–3), 12–16. doi:10.1080/10598650.1997.11510353
Korn, R. & Associates. (2015). Summary of results survey of single-visit K-12 art museum programs (Unpublished manuscript). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Knutsen, K. (2002). Creating a space for learning: Curators, educators, and the implied audience. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & Knutsen, K. (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 5–44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Lavadenz, M., & Armas, E.G. (2012). The observation protocol for academic literacies: Conceptual framework and validation report. Los Angeles, CA: Loyola Marymount University, Center for Equity for English Learners.
Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). (2017). Fingertip facts. Retrieved from https://achieve.lausd.net/cms/lib/CA01000043/Centricity/Domain/32/NewlyUpdatedFingertip%20Facts2017-18_English.pdf
MacDonald, V. M. (2004). Latino education in the United States: A narrated history from 1513- 2000. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Mayer, M.M. (2014). I cannot tell a lie: White privilege in museum education. In J. B. Acuff & L. Evans (Eds.), Multiculturalism in art museums today (pp. 299–315). London, England: Rowan & Littlefield.
Rabkin, N., Reynolds, M., Hedberg, E., & Shelby, J. (2011). A report on the teaching artist research project: Teaching artist and the future of education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Rea, D.M., & Mercuri, S.P. (2006). Research-based strategies for English language learners: How to reach goals and meet standards, K-8. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Reilly, M. A. (2008). Finding the right words: Art conversations and poetry. Language Arts, 86, 99–107. Retrieved from http://www2.ncte.org/resources/journals/language-arts/
Saunders, W. M., & Goldenberg, C. (2010). Research to guide English language development instruction. In F. Ong & V. Aguila (Eds.), Improving education for English learners: Research-based approaches (pp. 21–81). Sacramento: California Department Education.
Shoemaker, M. K. (1998). Arts is a wonderful place to be: ESL students as museum learners. Art Education, 51(2), 40–45. JSTOR
Snow, M. A., & Katz, A. (2010). English language development: Foundations and implementation in kindergarten through grade five. In F. Ong & V. Aguila (Eds.) Improving education for English learners: Research-based approaches (83–148). Sacramento: California Department of Education.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Population. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/
U.S. Department of Education. (2015). The condition of education 2015 (NCES Report №2015–144). Retrieved from the National Center for Education Statistics website: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015144.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Fast facts. Retrieved from the National Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts
U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition. (2017). Fast facts: Profiles of English learners (ELs). Retrieved from the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition website: https://ncela.ed.gov/files/fast_facts/05-19-2017/ProfilesOfELs_FastFacts.pdf
Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 379–428. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
