





































Microsoft Word - ELSR-V1N1-p101


Education, Language and Sociology Research 
ISSN 2690-3644 (Print) ISSN 2690-3652 (Online) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr 

101 
 

Original Paper 

Perceptions of English Language Learners—Teacher Beliefs, 

Professional Development and Student Outcomes: A Literature 

Review 

Stephanie H. Wright1, Fernanda Vargas1 & Tonya Huber1* 

1 Texas A&M International University Laredo, TX, USA  
* Tonya Huber, Texas A&M International University Laredo, TX, USA 

 

Received: May 5, 2020       Accepted: May 24, 2020      Online Published: May 27, 2020 

doi:10.22158/elsr.v1n1p101         URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elsr.v1n1p101 

 

Abstract 

Across America, linguistically disadvantaged youth are struggling through English language arts 

courses without proper support in scaffolding and/or differentiated instruction. Teachers’ beliefs affect 

their classroom instruction, classroom management, and classroom culture. Thus, the need for research 

is of utmost importance as students are being pushed through the educational system without the support 

or respect that they deserve. This literature review examines the connection between teachers’ attitudes 

and perceptions of English Language Learners (ELLs) and how these thought forms affect classroom 

instruction. We narrowed our focus to identify studies and analyze teachers’ perceptions while servicing 

ELL students, specifically Latino/a English language learners. We discerned data and various levels of 

teacher-student engagement based on studies centered around various levels of teacher experience, all 

in relation to ELLs. Further, we analyzed how professional development altered educators’ attitudes and 

perceptions of English language learners. The articles reviewed gave insight into teacher perceptions 

and how most educators felt inadequately prepared to teach those whose first language was not English. 

By studying teachers’ viewpoints—through qualitative and quantitative analyses—we confirmed a need 

for professional development that will improve not only how content is learned for an English language 

learner, but the relationships those students encounter as well. 

Keywords 

academic language, English Language Learner (ELL), long-term English learner, teacher attitudes, 

teacher perceptions, teacher beliefs, professional development 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

102 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

1. Introduction 

As English teachers in Texas, the first two authors daily see the need for more educators to be better 

prepared for the growing English Language Learner (ELL) population. Educators need to be well suited 

for the ELL trends in education that are constantly accelerating. There has been an increase of enrolled 

ELLs not only in border states, but across the United States as a whole. Of the articles reviewed, several 

authors open their research by highlighting the growing ELL population. For instance, two different 

research teams wrote, 

 “In the United States, rising numbers of students are currently classified as English language 

learners” (Mellom et al., 2018, p. 98). 

 “It is well known that English language learners (ELLs) are a significantly growing population 

in U.S. schools in all regions of the country (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2017)” 

(Andrei et al., 2018, p. 1).  

Further, some teachers have not had the most recent trainings available to those who teach ELLs, 

particularly in secondary education. One study investigated how districts in the southern states of the U.S. 

were ill-equipped to educate ELLs based on inexperience with both Latin American culture and working 

with ELLs. Mellom et al. (2018) report, “In many parts of the United States, such as the American South, 

this situation is further complicated by the fact that Latino ELLs are typically enrolled in schools that do 

not have experience serving either Latino students or ELLs” (p. 98). This literature review explores many 

options; as wide as teacher beliefs and professional development and seeing how different states and 

schools address the rise of ELLs in their educational system. Likewise, we considered a broader global 

search to determine if research on teachers of English language learners might provide additional 

information to inform this study. We sought to gather data to bridge the gap to help teachers better serve 

a growing English language learner student population. 

In overview of our articles, we determine a select sample of key definitions, to establish a shared 

knowledge base for our readers, of the traditional education jargon associated with the English language 

arts curriculum in service to ELLs (see Table 1). In addition to consideration of jargon, we focused on 

words that centered around the definitions that were imperative to our study and conducive to 

comprehending the demographic of students. Further, Galvan and Galvan (2017) report, “A table of 

definitions can be helpful if there are diverse definitions of a given variable” (p. 89). Further supporting 

that by defining our terms and providing further explanation on how these words correlate with our 

research, we can make deeper, more meaningful connections. Thus, our readers will find clarity and 

coherence and the review will be strengthened in its “methodology integrity” (APA, 2020, p. 108). 

 

 

 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

103 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Table 1. Key Terms in Relation to ELLs, Teacher Beliefs, and Professional Development 

Term Definition 

Academic 

Language 

Lachance et al. (2018) study many participant responses to get to the meaning of 

academic language. There appears to be what they called, “a unified common 

understanding and comprehensive definition of academic language and was not 

noted…Emphasis on academic vocabulary needed for academic language and 

conceptual understanding in core content areas was a recurring theme” (p. 8). 

Culturally 

Responsive 

Teaching 

Carley Rizzuto (2017) reports “Culturally responsive teaching facilitates and supports 

the academic achievement of all students. It requires teachers to create a learning 

environment where all students are welcomed and provided the best opportunities to 

learn regardless of their cultural and linguistic backgrounds” (p. 185). 

English 

Language 

Learner 

(ELL) 

Andrei et al. (2018) report ELLs “are a significantly growing population in U.S. 

schools in all regions of the country (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2017)” 

(p. 1). 

Carley Rizzuto (2017) states, “Researchers have only recently begun to explore how 

practicing teachers’ perceptions of English language learners (ELLs) impact the 

literacy instruction ELL students receive (Au, 2011; Garcia, 2015; McWayne, 

Hahs-Vaughan, Wright, & Cheung, 2012)” (p. 1). 

Mellom et al. (2018) share, “Students who are simultaneously learning how to 

communicate in English and the academic content expected of them in each subsequent 

grade level of the US school system (Garcia, Arias, Harris-Murri, & Serna, 2010)” (p. 

1). 

Identity McCrocklin and Link (2016) state “a range of social personae, including social 

statuses, roles, positions, relationships, and institutional and other relevant community 

identities one may attempt to claim or assign in the course of social life” (p. 112). 

L2 Learner Further, Kibler and Valdés (2016) describe students as L2 learners “[when] an 

individual whose task of acquisition/development is seen as not yet finished” (p. 102). 

Long-term 

English 

Learner 

Kibler and Valdés (2016) describe students as “long-term English learners [which are] 

students who have not successfully passed language examinations used to measure 

English proficiency in American schools” (p. 97). 

Opportunities 

to Learn 

König et al. (2017) provide this data-driven analysis as “part of their teacher 

preparation program, thus providing detailed insight into how they shape the 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

104 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

(OTL) knowledge of preservice teachers at the end of their training (Blömeke et al., 2014; 

Kömig & Blömeke, 2012; Schmidt, Cogan, & Houang, 2011)” (pp. 109-110). 

Proficiency 

Levels 

Abobaker (2017) includes levels of knowledge in language acquisition and describes 

them as “beginner and advanced levels” (p. 832). 

Teacher 

Attitudes 

Carley Rizzuto (2017) shares, “Researchers have also established that teachers across 

U.S. public schools have largely developed negative theories about mainstream ELL 

students’ ability to learn (Cummins, 2001; Gándara, Maxwell-Jolly, & Driscoll, 2005; 

Garcia, 2015)” (p. 183). 

 

Mellom et al. (2018) make this thought-provoking connection, “A control teacher said, 

‘I try to really stress for them [ELLs] to only speak English when everyone around 

them cannot understand.’ This statement seems to imply that home language use is 

rude and exclusionary unless all students can understand what is being said. This goes 

back to the concept that any use of language other than English would be morally 

unacceptable and does not take into consideration the exclusion the students might feel 

when surrounded by native English speakers and forced to speak a language which 

they have not yet fully acquired” (p. 103). 

Teacher 

Professional 

Development 

Hansen-Thomas et al. (2014) report, “Teachers must develop knowledge in 

multicultural education, second-language acquisition and ESL strategies, among other 

areas. Another layer of complexity to the education of ELLs and, as a consequence, to 

the full preparation of their teachers is the mandate to measure the academic and social 

language achievement of ELLs through standards (the English Language Proficiency 

Standards) (Texas Administrative Code 2007)” (p. 310). 

 

1.1 Authors’ Positionality 

Our experience as high school teachers serving ELLs, has provided the vantage from which we see the 

need for a better structured professional learning environment to help develop our learners to the best of 

their English language capabilities; thus, we determined to exclude any articles in relation to ELLs that 

were not conducive to this targeted population of students. Professional development offered in our 

district, specifically trainings centered around ELLs, is growing tremendously but is comparatively 

lacking when geared towards secondary education. During a recent school year, the district posted 

available trainings called Bella Noche, but these trainings were limited to elementary teachers only. 

However, secondary teachers recently have been able to participate in these trainings. Learning a 

language is not just limited to primary school but, rather, should be continued into secondary school. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

105 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

2. Methods and Analysis 

2.1 Explanation of Methodology and Focus of Analysis 

We see the use of tables to further construct knowledge of the topic in a way that is considered valid in 

research. Data tables are encouraged by Galvan and Galvan (2017) to “deal with complex matters that 

might be difficult for your readers to follow in the text” (p. 92). We consider our topic complex because 

our articles show the rise of ELLs across the United States. With this increase comes frustration with 

educators not knowing how to properly serve their students. One study examined how teachers’ attitudes 

towards ELLs altered their instruction in the classroom. Carley Rizzuto (2017) explained how, 

“Unfortunately, many mainstream teachers hold deficit views toward the ELLs in their classrooms 

(Garcia, 2015). In addition, researchers have also established that teachers across U.S. public schools 

have largely developed negative theories about mainstream ELL students’ ability to learn (Cummins, 

2001; Gándara, Maxwell-Jolly, & Driscoll, 2005; Garcia, 2015)” (p. 183). We considered the many ways 

this information could be searched and used those keywords to build the foundation of our research (see 

Table 2). We initiated research using WorldCat, as encouraged by Galvan and Galvan (2017), because 

“Most scholars that [they] consulted prefer to use WorldCat because they consider the search results to be 

more trustworthy and comprehensive” (p. 20). We used Boolean operators such as “AND,” “OR,” and 

“NOT” to narrow our focus and attempted to eliminate all excess content that we did not consider 

conducive to our study. When beginning our initial research, we tried to limit our sources to strictly focus 

on ELLs in secondary education but were unable to locate enough sources, so studies are included from 

K-12 grade levels. Furthermore, we analyzed the studies with a table of research methods (see Table 3) 

with a column that summarizes the results of each study reviewed. 

 

Table 2. Audit Trail 

Database Dates 

Reviewed 

Search Terms Sources 

Located 

Relevant 

Sources 

WorldCat 

Search 1 

January 

2016-January 

2020 

“ELLs” AND 

“teaching reading” AND 

“teaching writing” AND 

“teacher trainings” 

16 2 

WorldCat 

Search 2 

January 

2016-January 

2020 

“student achievement” AND 

“teacher attitude” AND 

“ELLs” AND 

“Spanish-speaking” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“teaching English”  

2 0 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

106 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

WorldCat 

Search 3 

January 

2016-January 

2020 

“educational disparities” AND 

“ELLs” AND 

“high school” 

18 2 

WorldCat 

Search 4 

January 

2016-January 

2020 

“English language arts” AND 

“classroom culture” OR 

“disparities” AND 

“ELLs” AND 

“high school” 

95 7 

WorldCat 

Search 5 

January 

2016-January 

2020 

“English language arts” AND 

“classroom culture” OR 

“classroom environment” AND 

“ELLs” AND 

“student achievement” 

88 5 

WorldCat 

Search 6 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“teacher professional development” AND 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” 

12 2 

WorldCat 

Search 7 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“teacher professional development” AND 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“testing” 

6 2 

WorldCat 

Search 8 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“teacher professional development” AND 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“testing” AND 

“perceptions” 

22 2 

WorldCat 

Search 9 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“teacher professional development” AND 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“testing” AND 

“perceptions” AND 

“achievements” 

19 4 

WorldCat 

Search 10 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“testing” AND 

“perceptions” AND 

“professional development” AND 

50 3 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

107 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

“teachers” AND 

“students” 

WorldCat 

Search 11 

December 

2014-January 

2020 

“English as a second language” AND 

“secondary” AND 

“testing” AND 

“perceptions” AND 

“professional development” AND 

“teachers” AND 

“students” AND 

“administrators” 

44 2 

 

Table 3. Methodology in Studies 

Authors and 

Publication 

Year 

Participants Detailed Methodology Findings 

Abobaker 

(2017) 

“80 English language 

learner (ELL) participants 

(43 females, 37 males; age 

range, 18-30) were recruited 

for this quasi-experimental 

study. They came from three 

language backgrounds: 

Arabic, Chinese, and 

Portuguese. These learners 

were divided into two equal 

groups of 40 according to 

their different proficiency 

levels (beginner learner 

[BL] and advanced learner 

[AL])” (p. 837). 

“The data were collected during one 

academic year, through which each 

group was introduced to four 

conditions: no scaffold (video and 

audio in English without text), KWC 

(video, audio, and only content words 

in English), FC (video, audio, and 

English full-text that mirrored only the 

spoken words), and FT (audio and a 

sheet with full transcription in 

English)” (p. 838). 

Overall, it appears as if 

“beginner learners scored 

highest on the [full caption] FC 

condition listening 

comprehension test, whereas 

advanced learners’ highest 

scores were on KWC [Keyword 

Captions]. These findings seem 

to indicate that FC and KWC 

might be the best options for 

learners at the beginner level 

and advanced level, 

respectively” (p. 839). 

Andrei et al. 

(2018) 

The main participants are 

Ashley, “a veteran middle 

school ELA teacher [and] 

two of Ashely’s 

Independent study with qualitative 

data collection, centered around, “The 

ELL Writer: Moving Beyond the 

Basics in the Secondary Classroom” 

It was discovered in Ashley’s 

reflections that, “several aspects 

of teaching and learning related 

to the two newcomer ELLs: the 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

108 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

ELLs…were also included 

in this study” (p. 5). 

(Ortmeier-Hooper, 2013)” (p. 6). 

Ashley, also “[chose] three chapters 

that would fit her needs and interest 

from Writing Sense: Integrated 

Reading and Writing Lessons for 

English language learners (Kendall & 

Khuon, 2006)” (p. 6). Ashley collected 

three students’ assignments to be 

reviewed for this study. 

activities she planned, students’ 

progress, and a teacher 

self-assessment” (p. 7). Further, 

unsurprisingly, “the findings 

revolve around the idea that 

Ashley, as a content-teacher, 

was responsible for the teaching 

and learning of the ELLs she 

had in her classroom” (p. 7). 

Carley 

Rizzuto  

(2017) 

“10 female participants, 9 

early-childhood ELL 

educators, 1 Spanish 

teacher” (p. 188). Further, of 

the participants that were 

educators, “teaching 

experience ranged from 3 to 

30 years” (p. 188). 

Additionally, “participants 

taught in grades ranging 

from pre-kindergarten 

through second grade” (p. 

188). 

Gaining understanding of perceptions 

of the study participants educating 

ELLs. “A transformative parallel 

mixed-method design with both 

qualitative and quantitative data 

sources” (p. 186). It is worth 

mentioning that these participants did 

not receive any form of ELL 

professional development (p. 188). 

This study is nonexperimental, were 

studied teachers’ perceptions, and 

there was no attempt to alter those 

perceptions or support for ELL 

students. “A psychometrically 

validated (Cronbach’s alpha = .87) 

quantitative survey instrument was 

utilized to measure mainstream early 

childhood teachers’ perceptions about 

diversity, as well as to determine the 

effect size of the teachers’ perceptions 

toward ELL pupils in their 

classrooms” (p. 187). “Several 

prompts were negatively worded in 

order to avoid creating a response set 

(the tendency for participants to 

answer the same regardless of the 

Of the qualitative data 

collected, “most teachers, [7 of 

the participants], held negative 

perceptions regarding ELL 

students, specifically 

concerning the use of their 

native language in their 

classrooms, and lacked an 

understanding of second 

language acquisition” (p. 190). 

Further, the quantitative data, 

showed that, “for research 

question one…indicated that 

most of the participants were 

open to diversity within their 

classrooms” (p. 194). 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

109 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

prompt), and the participant responses 

for these were reverse coded” (p. 188). 

Hansen-Tho

mas et al. 

(2014) 

The survey was open to 

teachers and staff of all 

levels who interacted with 

ESL students. The inclusion 

criteria to participate in this 

survey were that they all: 

were working in the targeted 

rural and small school 

districts; had a good 

command of the English 

language; and had close 

interaction with ELLs. 

A survey questionnaire was prepared 

and was sent to faculty and staff of 13 

school districts across North Texas. 

The researchers sent emails containing 

the survey web link to ESL and/or 

Federal Programs Coordinators of the 

13 school districts. These coordinators 

were asked to share the web link with 

their personnel. 

“Teachers who had two or more 

college courses perceived 

themselves as being more 

effective in working with ELLs 

than those who had less 

training” (p. 319). 

“Having two or more college 

courses can play an important 

role in the preparedness of rural 

teachers in their work with 

ELLs” (p. 319). “Formal 

training and graduate degrees 

improve teachers’ competence 

in educating ELLs” (p. 319). 

“Byrnes and Kiger (1997) 

concluded that a graduate 

degree can improve the thinking 

of teachers concerning social, 

political and educational issues 

that are associated with 

language diversity” (p. 319). 

König et al. 

(2017) 

 

Sampled preservice teachers 

at the end of their first phase 

(master’s studies at 

university) and second phase 

(last year of internship). The 

sample consists of future 

teachers attending a teacher 

education program that 

would qualify them as lower 

secondary teachers only. 

Data were collected in the PKE 

project, an empirical research study 

conducted in Germany in 2015 in 

order to investigate future secondary 

school EFL (English foreign language) 

teachers’ opportunities to learn during 

initial teacher education in relation to 

their professional knowledge. For this, 

preservice, EFL teachers at different 

preparation stages were sampled. 

“Evidence is provided for EFL 

teacher preparation that specific 

program characteristics are 

relevant for the preservice 

teachers’ acquisition of 

knowledge” (p. 121). 

“It is difficult to generalize 

findings to teacher education 

systems in other countries” (p. 

122). 

Lachance et An initial survey was sent “[They] conducted a qualitative, From authentic participant 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

110 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

al. (2018) out to ESL K-12 teachers, 

and “of the 180, 103 

completed the survey, 

yielding a nearly 60% 

participation rate” (p. 7). 

More explicitly, “the focus 

group was comprised of 

nine participants from the 

district’s core central office 

ESL team of coordinating 

teachers and program 

administrators. Specifically, 

these nine participants 

included four with an 

emphasis on the elementary 

grades, four with an 

emphasis on the secondary 

grades, and one K-12 team 

member” (p. 7). 

interpretive case study (Erickson, 

1986; Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2014) to 

gain clarity on ESL teachers’ 

perspectives regarding the importance 

of access and students’ active learning 

of academic language in one North 

Carolina district” (p. 5). Additionally, 

“the study aimed to explore teachers’ 

demonstrations of facilitating 

academic language development in the 

classroom” (p. 6). 

responses, “[there were] three 

overarching themes (Saldaña, 

2016; Corbin & Strauss, 1998 

[sic]): (a) academic language 

defined, (b) the importance of 

academic language, and (c) 

educators’ roles” (p. 8). 

Furthermore, there were larger 

themes that, “also revealed 

subthematic information 

regarding academic vocabulary, 

academic success, and 

accessibility to academic 

language in the context of 

school” (p. 8). 

Mellom et 

al. (2018) 

“147 3rd and 5th grade 

classroom teachers in three 

cohorts in treatment and 

control groups. They were 

dispersed among 47 

high-poverty elementary 

schools within 15 rural, 

suburban and urban districts 

in the New South, in North 

Georgia” (p. 100). 

“To evaluate the effectiveness of the 

professional development and the 

impacts of the implementation of the 

pedagogy on teacher attitudes and 

practice, the study used ethnographic 

data from a variety of sources. It 

combined the use of: general 

questionnaires (Baer & Weller, 2006) 

at the beginning and end of the study; 

bi-weekly log data (Rees, 2006), 

gathered from treatment and control 

teachers regarding their impressions 

about English language learners, the 

pedagogy, and their practice…” (p. 

101). The participants were split into 

two groups, “Control” and 

It was discovered that teachers 

in the treatment group had 

extremely low opinions of Log 

Questions 2 & 8. Further, 

“these representative examples 

from larger dataset of 147 

teachers show how often, in the 

minds of society and teachers, 

lack of English, or continued 

home language use is tangled 

with an idea of ‘wrongness’ or 

even, in extreme cases, with 

moral turpitude” (p. 102). 

Contrastingly, “none of the 

control teachers in [our] sample 

had overtly negative responses 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

111 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

“Treatment” groups (p. 102) Within 

each group are different levels of 

educators, the control groups are 

predominantly teachers that are ESL 

certified and have experience teaching 

ELLs, and the participants under 

treatment are newly certified or 

noncertified ESL teachers with EL 

students. Further, the treatment 

participant group undergo a new form 

of instruction called, “Instructional 

Conversation pedagogy” (p. 100). 

Further, “the predominance of U.S. 

teachers who are White, monolingual 

and female (US Census Bureau, 2013) 

[and] 28% of the total number of 

school-age children speak a language 

other than English at home” (p. 100) 

and, thus, with the participant groups 

derived from the New South, pointedly 

North Georgia, it is easy to presume 

that these participants are 

predominantly White females. 

to this question” (p. 102). 

Salli & 

Osam (2017) 

“The research was carried 

out at the English Language 

and Teaching Department of 

Eastern Mediterranean 

University (EMU), Northern 

Cyprus with 15 preservice 

teachers enrolled in a 4th 

year teaching practice 

course as part of a practicum 

program in the English 

Language Teaching 

Department at EMU. Eleven 

Data came from a broader qualitative 

study examining identity formation of 

preservice teachers during practicum. 

Data included all blog artifacts and 

semi-structured interviews conducted 

by the course instructor. The 

interviews aimed to scaffold the 

findings gathered from the blog 

artifacts and gain insight into 

participants’ teaching 

practice—experiences, memories, and 

their developing professional selves. 

“Findings revealed that 

preservice teachers were more 

concerned with their personal 

qualities (e.g., being cheerful, 

approachable, dealing with 

students’ problems) and 

relations with their students 

(e.g., praising students, having 

good communication and 

establishing rapport) than with 

instructional strategies or 

professional dispositions” (p. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

112 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

female and four male 

preservice teachers, whose 

age ranged from 21 to 23, 

agreed to take part in the 

study. Twelve participants 

were from Turkey, two of 

them were from Northern 

Cyprus, and one was from 

Russia. None of the 

participants had prior 

blogging experiences” (p. 

486). 

 490). “Receiving feedback and 

watching peers’ video-recorded 

lessons helped preservice 

teachers mitigate feared 

teacher-selves pertaining to 

instructional strategies by 

identifying strategies to deal 

with such problems when they 

arise” (p. 492). 

“Feedback preservice teachers 

receive from their course 

instructor and peers helps them 

diminish feared teacher-selves 

and construct expected 

teacher-selves” (p. 495). 

Sardegna et 

al.(2017) 

“The participants consisted 

of 704 EFL students (aged 

14–17 years) in urban cities 

in South Korea. Originally, 

754 students participated, 

but 50 were excluded from 

the analysis because some (n 

= 3) submitted incomplete 

responses and others (n = 

47) chose multiple responses 

for some items. 

Approximately 49% (n = 

347) of the participants were 

females and 51% (n = 357) 

were males. They were 

either in their third year (n = 

297) in a private middle 

school (equivalent to ninth 

grade in the United States) 

or in their second year (n = 

Two instruments: the SPI inventory to 

assess reported use of pronunciation 

strategies and the LAP inventory to 

assess self-efficacy and learner 

attitudes toward pronunciation 

learning. 

“Adult ESL learners who 

received instruction focusing on 

pronunciation learning 

strategies improved their 

pronunciation skills 

significantly during the 

4-month course and maintained 

significant progress over time” 

(p. 89). 

“Combination of strategies and 

other variables, such as 

learners’ practice engagement, 

progress during the course, and 

sense of self-efficacy, affected 

their long-term improvement” 

(p. 89). 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

113 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

407) in a public high school 

(equivalent to 11th grade in 

the United States)” (pp. 

92-93). 

 

2.1.1 Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis 

By providing this information—participants, detailed methodology, and findings—we structured this 

information for comparative analysis. Galvan and Galvan (2017) stated that “because different research 

methods can result in differences in the outcomes of studies, it is helpful to build a table that summarizes 

the methods employed” (p. 89). By providing the different methodologies and their results, it showed 

how one methodology in relation to professional development and ELLs can shift or change between 

multiple studies. For instance, some of the articles reviewed used quantitative analysis while others used 

qualitative analysis. For example, Carley Rizzuto (2017) explained, “Quantitative data [and] qualitative 

data were collected” (p. 182). Meanwhile, Lachance et al. (2018) reported, “This qualitative interpretive 

study showcases views and perceptions of K-12 teachers of English as a second language (ESL) in a 

North Carolina school district regarding the importance of academic language to ensure equal 

educational opportunities for English learners” (p. 1). Comparatively, a mix of articles used both 

qualitative and quantitative data for a mixed-methodology study. See Table 3 for a comparison of 

qualitative and quantitative data analysis. 

 

3. Findings 

3.1 Introduction to Findings  

Unfortunately, there is a high population of teachers ill-equipped to address the rising population of 

English language learners. For instance, “A recent survey that looked at teachers’ perspectives toward 

inclusion of ELLs in regular classes found that lack of time and professional inadequacy were two 

important notions that affected them in their work” (Hansen-Thomas et al., 2014, p. 311). This 

unpreparedness stems from multi-faceted areas: first, teachers are not ESL certified and this causes 

overcrowding for the teachers that are certified and thus finding ESL certified teachers is difficult; 

second, teachers that are certified are not being properly trained across all grade levels; and lastly, teacher 

perceptions and beliefs of ELLs’ capabilities to learn diminish classroom instruction. What can be 

considered as rigorous, meaningful, relevant texts are liquidated and cheapened by the fear of ELLs not 

being able to grasp the content. For example, Mellom et al. (2018) report: 

Teacher beliefs have been shown to have an effect on their expectations, both 

of their students and of themselves. As Macnab and Payne (2003) have stated, 

“the beliefs and attitudes of teachers—cultural, ideological and personal—are 

significant determinants of the way they view their role as educators (p. 55)” 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

114 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

and continues this explanation of cheapened content by stating, Specifically 

with reference to ELLs, research has demonstrated that when teachers hold 

negative attitudes towards ELLs, this deeply affects the way teachers choose 

to behave toward their students (Harper & De Jong, 2009; Richardson, 1996). 

(p. 99) 

It is unfortunate, but in the reality of education, these strategies hold true in regards to classroom 

instruction as teachers think about their lessons, and then their students, so teachers alter their instruction 

to justify their ignorance and lack of training. Non-certified or ELL-experienced teachers think, they 

cannot handle something like this, so those educators modify the instruction to water-down the content. 

Comparatively, an ELL-experienced teacher may think, if I provide scaffolding and supports, they will be 

able to complete this assignment. 

 

4. Discussions 

4.1 Introduction of Strengths, Weaknesses, and Gaps 

While it was difficult to navigate through such a passionate topic, the research found provided great 

insight into the literature, studies, and experiments centered around this nationwide dilemma (see Table 

4). After dissecting the literature, we have found strengths within the research that provides validity to 

English language learners and their educators that goes against non-ESL teacher beliefs. Contrastingly, 

Mellom et al. (2018) reported that several of their treatment participants, non-ESL certified teachers, 

portrayed various levels of ignorance and/or a complete disregard for their students’ native language: 

A number of participants responded with comments criticizing the students’ use of 

languages other than English in class or even at home. For example, one respondent 

says, “most of the ELL students in my classroom come from homes where their parents 

were born in the U.S. They still do not speak English in their homes (mostly).” It is 

interesting that for this respondent it is almost more damning that the students’ parents 

were born in the U.S. and yet speak a language other than English at home, implying 

that they have even less justification for not using English exclusively. (p. 102) 

It is teacher beliefs and perceptions like these that are suffocating generations of learners with mass 

potential and morality within the educational system. Such statements as these, and others like it, are 

condemning students before they ever enter the classroom. Inexperienced teachers and/or inflexible 

educators that do not allow cross-language discussions in class—translating from Spanish to 

English—are limiting their ELLs potential and snuffing out their light and progression within the 

community and educational system. Comparatively, there are ESL-certified teachers that do use 

translation within the classroom and both the students and teacher grow exponentially because of the 

flexibility in using diverse language within the curriculum. For instance, Mellom et al. (2018) report: 

Three separate treatment teachers indicated their ELL students use their home 

language to understand (or help other students understand) class content and reduce 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

115 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

frustration. They indicated, “They may use if they have difficulty expressing an idea or 

vocabulary”; “they will use it to help another student understand something in class”; 

and “It occurs sometimes when they get frustrated looking for the English word to fit 

what they are trying to say.” These teachers allow their students to use their home 

language during classroom instruction in order to understand academic content and 

express themselves accurately and or to assist other students. (p. 104) 

Further, in some research studies, we found that while there were some gaps in professional development 

training and how the professional development was used to improve teacher-student relations and 

classroom instruction, many studies in the Mellom et al. (2018) study showed growth (see Table 7). 

While there may have been teacher logs and surveys and the like, the authors did not explicitly label how 

the professional development was implemented within the districts or participant’ classrooms. 

Hansen-Thomas et al. (2014) state that “Only 20 US states require some kind of training for teachers of 

ELLs, but the parameters of this training are not clearly spelled out” (p. 310). Additionally, there were 

gaps in the research in consideration to locations across the U.S., classroom sizes, and across grade 

levels. 

4.1.1 Teachers’ Perceptions and Impact on Instruction and Classroom Environment 

One consistent determining factor of how well a classroom functions is based on the teacher’s perception 

of her students and their capabilities and her comfortability in working with that population for the 

academic year. While some teachers tend to work with the same populations and grade levels, depending 

on the district and influx of students, teaching assignments can change yearly. Thus, with a rise in 

English language learners, and varied but minimal certified teachers, it is apparent to see how some 

non-certified teachers feel overwhelmed by large class sizes of ELLs. However, it is not the size of ELLs 

that disturb these teacher-mentalities, but rather, their perceptions of ELL capabilities. Along with 

these—often negative—thought forms, teachers pair such ideas as language, learning capabilities and 

student comprehension and lump them together based on whether a student knows and understands 

English. Such strategies and social engineering diminish, weaken, and dilute curriculum, instruction, and 

classroom environments. 

In school settings, where students are often pushed already, an ELL student is further ostracized and 

segregated by teacher mentalities. In the school building, teachers are the judge and jury, and with such 

authority, they can create high functioning, excelling classrooms or disintegrate learning environments 

within the first five minutes of the start of the period. Such perceptions and thoughts like: Can they even 

speak English, Do they understand me or, worse, They can’t do this assignment/activity further 

implicates students before they walk into the classroom. Then, there are educators that have no 

background knowledge or lack cultural awareness in consideration of Latin American culture. So, when 

ill-experienced teachers are trying to teach ELLs, they tend to have limited, and even negatively 

stereotypical thoughts about their student population and capabilities. Authors Mellom et al. (2018) 

brought to light some ugly yet thought provoking awareness into just how teacher perceptions affect their 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

116 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

opinions of students (see Table 5). Further, Mellom et al. (2018) provide examples of both positive and 

negative uses of Native Languages and how utilizing students’ native tongues can more likely amplify 

learning compared to suppressing and ostracizing native tongues which, research shows, negates teacher 

efforts in curriculum and instruction (see Table 6). When looking at the tables, notice the spectrum of 

emotions that may pool to the surface. Compare the connotations and emotions of the deficit and 

liberation models. If we were students in these courses, which teacher would we rather have? To which 

Table would we rather belong? 

 

Table 4. Methodologies Strengths and Weaknesses 

Authors & 

Publication 

Year 

Strengths Weaknesses or Gaps 

Abobaker 

(2017) 

Discipline and good managerial experience 

were demonstrated when considering how to 

collect the data. There were “80 ELL 

participants [ranging between] 18-30 [most 

likely for maturity, consistency in attendance, 

and for accuracy of dedication in learning the 

English Language and practicing their 

proficiency skills] with three [different] 

language backgrounds” (p. 837). Further, the 

testing methods used seemed accurate to 

educational standards as the videos included 

for demonstration and data collection were of 

appropriate length and was scaffolded in 

various forms to support each ELL. Through 

this, the data showed tremendous growth for 

L2 Beginning ELs, when supported through 

“FC—full caption of video content” (p. 837).

In this study, one point of weakness was that “the 

locations where data were collected lacked 

computer labs. A future investigation is needed to 

explore the effect of viewing these conditions 

though individual computers with headsets where 

learners can play the texts and answer 

comprehension tests at their own pace” (p. 839). 

This causes gaps in research because it limited the 

time accessible to the participants trying to 

complete the comprehension tests. Further, 

another gap within the research is that the only 

level proficiencies tested were beginner and 

advanced. 

Andrei et al. 

(2018) 

One strength was that the focus of the study 

was on “one specific teacher and two ELL 

students” (p. 7). Through this specificity 

comes limited data in the sense that there’s 

only three participants really involved. The 

positive in this experience is that through 

“Ashely’s reflections” (p. 7) and veteran 

One minor gap within the research, that seemed to 

be further supported in the most unbiased way, 

was that the contributing authors to this study were 

friends with the participant, Ashley. It is explained 

further here, “We realize now both of these 

authors might have influenced the data analysis 

and interpretation. However, [they] conducted 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

117 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

teaching experience, it is evident that any 

teacher, even a veteran teacher (when they are 

known for being stuck in their own ways) is 

capable of learning and adapting to how to 

teach with the best strategies that can work for 

their ELLs. Ashley proves that when given 

time for reflection, having small class sizes of 

ELLs, and intermingling ELLs  

with their non-Hispanic counterparts, 

comprehensive instruction can still occur. 

This study can be used as groundwork into 

educating other veteran educators that 

becoming ESL certified is not the end of their 

teaching careers, but a new beginning in a 

rewarding, challenging form of teaching. 

participant check-in and collected three sets of 

participant data to increase reliability (Rossman & 

Rallis, 2012)” (p. 7). Comparatively, had they 

added one or two other teachers with an ELL 

population of 2-3 students, various forms of 

reflections, points of view, and reliability would 

have increased throughout the data collection. 

Further, to combat unreliability, the authors 

recommend for future studies to “look at teachers’ 

writings as well as classroom observations to 

triangulate the data” (p. 16). 

 

Carley 

Rizzuto 

(2017) 

When pulling from qualitative and 

quantitative data, it shows strength, planning, 

and intentional outcomes when researching 

whether teacher perceptions affect their 

teaching. For instance, “a transformative 

parallel mixed-method design with both 

qualitative and quantitative data sources” (p. 

186). An example states, “questionnaires and 

interviews are often used together in mixed 

method studies investigating educational 

practices (Anfara et al., 2002)” (p. 186). 

Thorough tools were used to collect data, 

“The process began with open coding 

utilizing inductive analysis which involved 

inventorying transcripts, classroom 

observations, and classroom artifacts to 

define key words and phrases that appear in 

the data” (p. 189). 

One gap appears, similarly in another article, 

where data collection is not a cross-culture of 

elementary, middle, and secondary schools. If this 

were the case, data collected could determine 

which level needs the most integrative support and 

compare/contrast in support of what is working in 

the school or grade level and transferring those 

skills into other schools and grade levels. Further, 

through focusing on single “research questions” 

(p. 195) independently, it limits the outcome of 

perception, application, and the aftermath change 

in how to operate after the research has been 

conducted. If this study were picked up for another 

round, would the researchers know where to 

begin? Would it be successful in tracking and then 

implementing change in teacher perception? 

How? Just bringing awareness from the study is 

not enough, what happens once the study has been 

conducted? Who is held accountable? 

Hansen-Tho

mas et al. 

“A survey questionnaire was prepared and 

was sent to faculty and staff of 13 school 

One weakness in the study is the portrayal of the 

participant survey because select questions could 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

118 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

(2014) districts across north Texas” (p. 313). Further, 

most school districts responded and of those 

that did, “The inclusion criteria to participate 

in this survey were that they all: were working 

in the targeted rural and small school districts; 

had a good command of the English language; 

and had close interaction with ELLs” (p. 313). 

Moreover, the data collected on participants 

of the survey was incredibly thorough, “From 

1987 teachers in the 13 school districts (Texas 

Education Agency 2012), 159 responded; this 

represented 8% of the total teacher population 

of the districts” (p. 314). Thus, “The teachers 

who responded included 137 females and 22 

males as reported by the survey. In terms of 

their ethnicity, there were a total of 139 white 

teachers, 8 Latino/as, 7 African Americans, 2 

Native Americans and 2 identified as ‘other’” 

(pp. 314-315). Furthermore, the participant 

list provides aplethora of teacher experience, 

“most of the participants had a wealth of 

teaching experience. Fifty-eight percent had 

been teaching for 11 years and more, 

but...nearly one-half of the teachers were 

certified to teach ESL (only 3% were certified 

bilingual (Spanish/English)” (p. 315). 

be skipped. For instance, “Participants were 

allowed to not answer a question and move to the 

next question during the survey. All of the 

participants who started the survey completed it, 

although some did not respond to all questions” (p. 

313). Without a proper log of response questions 

and accurate data of answers, it can be difficult to 

decipher in complete transparency. Another 

negative trait in the study is recognized in the 

participant list and the lack of diversity between 

teacher experience and teaching experience in 

ELL student populations. For example, “The 

majority of the teachers had been teaching for 11 

years or more, but had fewer years working with 

ELLs. More than one-half of the participants held 

a degree or endorsement in ESL, with only 3.4% 

holding a degree or endorsement in bilingual 

education” (p. 315). Further, such discrepancies of 

imbalance between experienced ESL-certified 

teachers and comfortability is shared here, “With 

regard to teachers’ needs, 25% indicated lacking 

knowledge in literacy strategies for ELLs. Many 

reported difficulties understanding ESL 

assessments, with 28% indicating being ‘not at all 

competent’. One-quarter of the teachers believed 

they lacked the ability to understand and interpret 

ESL-related research; and one-third lacked 

knowledge in historical, theoretical and policy 

foundations of ESL” (p. 315).  

König et al. 

(2017) 

“An empirical research study conducted in 

Germany in 2015 in order to investigate 

future secondary school EFL teachers’ 

opportunities to learn during initial teacher 

education in relation to their professional 

knowledge” (p. 113). In this study, the 

participant list consisted of two separate 

While this article provided great insight into 

working with preservice teachers, the study itself 

lacks the full focus for the topic of this literature 

review—Latin American English Language 

Learners and the limitations associated and placed 

on them within education. Contrastingly, though, 

this article does provide knowledge on how 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

119 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

groups—those still in collegiate studies and 

those practicing under internships. 

Additionally, this empirical research takes 

into consideration some levels that other 

listed studies do not pursue—the predestined 

educators. It appears as if these understudies 

have yet delved into the classroom, and as 

such, are being pre-exposed to the struggling 

of literacy education and are being trained in 

such a way that they will be more prepared to 

instruct, uplift, empower, and guide EFL 

learners more so than their counterparts. For 

instance, “We sampled preservice 

teachers at the end of their first phase 

(master’s studies at university) and second 

phase (last year of internship). The sample 

consists of future teachers attending a teacher 

education program that would qualify them as 

lower secondary teachers only 

(Haupt-/Real-/Gesamtschule) and as lower 

and upper secondary teachers 

(Gymnasium/Gesamtschule)” (p. 113). Thus, 

such trainings and implementation of research 

for the participant list can support these new 

educators in their career field as strong 

literacy and language leaders. 

preemptively preparing preservice teachers to 

work with language learners can best prepare them 

for the classroom and can quite possibly redirect, 

diminish, or eradicate any beliefs before entering 

the classroom. However, the targeted goal for this 

study does not strike teacher beliefs, but rather, 

“insights into the question of whether content and 

teaching practice predict test scores in general” (p. 

118). Therefore, there are key points in this study 

worth mentioning even though the target student 

population does not reflect the purpose of this 

literature review. Comparatively, should 

researchers decide to imitate this study with a 

focus on teacher beliefs and center student 

population on Latin American students, it could 

make for an intriguing and telling study of 

perceptions, beliefs, and the impact on classroom 

culture, curriculum and instruction, and student 

outcomes. 

 

 

Lachance et 

al. (2019) 

The critical strength in this review is the focus 

on teacher understanding and utilization of 

academic language. This study portrays a 

different perspective of teaching ELLs in not 

that whether ELLs can be taught, but that 

they’re taught with the highest form of 

support and content. Additionally, this study 

collects data on North Carolina’s school 

districts and the training and implementation 

of academic language for their ELL 

Under recommendations for future research, the 

authors addressed that the study should be 

repeated and should cross into other states so that 

there are more diverse understandings of academic 

language and to see if the definition alters from 

state-to-state. This is a current research gap and 

could be studied again as a trifold with two other 

states with various levels of differences in serving 

student populations (p. 13). Further, should this 

study be considered for future research and 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

120 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

population. Furthermore, “the participants’ 

district had a formalized 3-year plan to 

amplify teachers’ competencies related to 

academic language development, with an 

intentionally designed series of professional 

development for the districts K-12 ESL 

teachers, nearly 200 in total” (p. 6). 

publishing, data collected between elementary and 

secondary schools ought to be compared to one 

another in search of different professional 

development opportunities and teacher beliefs and 

how that affects the classroom and student 

achievement (p. 13). 

Mellom et 

al. (2018) 

This two-part study shows educational 

interaction between teachers and ELL 

students regarding teacher beliefs and the 

effect those beliefs have within the classroom. 

Of the many strengths within this study, one 

example is that the study is for two years and 

the participants are broken into a treatment 

group and a control group. Further, 

“throughout the study years, the log questions 

were uploaded into Survey Monkey every two 

weeks and individual password links were 

sent to each teacher” (p. 101). This shows 

responsibility in the study and reliability that 

the information entered will remain 

confidential so that participants will remain 

honest. Moreover, the study “aims to examine 

the evolution of treatment teacher attitudes 

over time with the intervention and compare 

them to the control teachers’ attitudes by 

coding key themes and indicators” (p. 101). 

As far as weaknesses in this study, there are a few. 

First, this study was initiated in the New South and 

includes participants from districts in North 

Georgia (p. 99). A reason for concern is that in 

rural North Georgia, the population residing there 

is predominantly White. The study does not 

clearly list the areas and school districts used, but 

it can be determined (and is stated in the research) 

that due to limited interaction with diverse 

populations—these teachers already have a bias in 

regard to teaching and educating ELs (p. 99). 

Further, an additional gap and weakness in this 

study is that participants labeled “treatment and 

control teachers were all randomized from a pool 

of volunteers who theoretically had the same 

range of expertise and backgrounds, the 

researchers recognize that there would be some 

control teachers who would have relatively more 

positive attitudes toward English language 

learners due to their having strong backgrounds in 

TESOL or experience with culturally responsive 

pedagogies, and there would be some treatment 

teachers with little experience with ELLs or 

culturally responsive pedagogies who would 

require more training and coaching to shift their 

attitudes and practice” (p. 101). 

Sallı&Osam

(2017) 

The participant list consisted of fifteen 

preservice teachers, “enrolled in a 4th year 

teaching practice course [and] received 42 

“In this traditional format, the course instructor 

and the participants have limited time to share and 

learn from each other. To overcome this problem 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

121 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

contact hours and taught a minimum of four 

lessons to secondary school students, two of 

which were observed and assessed by the 

course instructor” (p. S486). Within the 

required reflections, blogs, and posed 

questions, “Data was analysed qualitatively 

following the stages recommended by 

Markus and Nurius (1986) and Saldaña 

(2015). Transcripts were read several times 

independently by the each of the authors for 

consistency in the initial step of coding. 

Expressions that pertained to ‘selves’ were 

coded according to the Teacher Possible 

Selves Measure and Coding Manual 

(Hamman, personal communication February 

9, 2015)” (p. S488). Further, researchers 

worked to eradicate bias, “Coding was carried 

out and standardized by multiple coders to 

minimize potential weaknesses such as 

personal bias or subjectivity in data analysis” 

(p. S488). Additionally, this research provides 

powerful and meaning insight into preservice 

teacher-experience, “Expected selves were 

clustered into three broad categories: 

interpersonal relationships, instructional 

strategies, and professional dispositions. 

Feared teacher-selves articulated by the 

preservice teachers were also clustered into 

three categories: classroom management, 

instructional strategies and unprofessional 

dispositions” (p. S488). With such return on 

data, future measurements can be 

implemented to liquidate teacher anxieties 

and self-reluctance or apprehensiveness to 

educating diverse populations, contents, 

cultures, and backgrounds. 

and extend in-class time for reflection and 

interaction, the course instructor (i.e., the first 

author) added the use of blogs as another means of 

communication to ‘‘promote a reflective, 

collaborative and dialogic environment for 

academic and professional developments’ of the 

learners” (Tang 2009, p. 89)” (p. S487). While 

incorporating blogging to alleviate the lack of 

practice collaborating and developing their 

communication skills as teachers between 

planning and creation of curriculum and 

instruction, one must take into account that 

“[n]one of the participants had prior blogging 

experiences” (p. S486). Therefore, consumers 

must take into consideration the adjustment period 

for these participants along with consideration that 

the study is a reflection of a course and each blog 

was likely from an assignment of the course and 

lacks alignment with the study in its entirety and 

lacks connection to this literature review. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

122 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Sardegna et 

al. (2017) 

“Originally, 754 students participated, but 50 

were excluded from the analysis because 

some (n = 3) submitted incomplete responses 

and others (n = 47) chose multiple responses 

for some items” (pp. 92-93).Such 

eliminations in the participant list exudes 

constructive and concise decisions within the 

research. It is worth mentioning that, “Both 

schools typify Korea’s low and middle 

socioeconomic neighborhoods and 

standardized curriculum as well as Korean 

students’ lack of exposure to native English 

speakers and pronunciation instruction” (p. 

93). It is imperative to know this information 

since this research determines the honest 

efforts, or lack-there-of within the participant 

list. “The questionnaire items focused 

participants’ attention on specific strategies in 

three sections: (a) strategies for improving 

sounds, (b) strategies for improving 

polysyllabic words, and (c) strategies for 

improving phrases. Each section contained 

statements eliciting prediction, production, 

and perception strategies (a taxonomy 

proposed by Sardegna, 2009a). Second, the 

questionnaire items were reviewed by four 

Korean teachers of English (with 1 to 7 years 

of teaching experience) for translation 

accuracy and readability for adolescent 

Korean EFL learners and then pilot tested 

with five adult Korean ESL learners (aged 

28–30 years). Minor revisions were made to 

the inventory items in both the English and 

Korean versions based on these participants’ 

feedback” (p. 94). 

 

“This study was conducted with Korean EFL 

learners in urban settings. Results might vary 

according to the setting and linguistic and cultural 

background of the learners. Second, our data were 

based on retrospective self-reports. Although a 

self-report measure is a common methodology in 

behavioral science, we cannot exclude the 

possibility that participants could have been 

inclined to give socially desirable answers, label 

strategies incorrectly, or fail to recall their 

behavior accurately (Veenman, 2011). We 

attempted to minimize this limitation by writing 

items that contained little content that could be 

construed as being socially desirable or 

undesirable (Holtgraves, 2004) and providing 

examples in the questionnaire to elicit the correct 

strategy. To decrease the likelihood of memory 

reconstruction problems, future studies might 

consider eliciting strategy use concurrent to a task 

(Veenman, 2011) or supplement the self-report 

questionnaires with other data-collection 

measures, such as observations and interviews. 

Third, because this study was cross-sectional, 

it offered a snapshot of student experience. 

Longitudinal studies may provide insight 

regarding the complex and dynamic interplay of 

learner variables and fluctuations in students’ 

attitudes, strategy use, and self-efficacy” (pp. 

106-107). 

 

 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

123 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Table 5. Teacher Perceptions: Deficit Model 

Author(s) and 

Publication Year 

Prohibiting Native Language(s) Neglecting Native Language(s) 

Mellom et al. (2018)  “Spanish [is] spoken in all the 

homes, parents have low literacy, 

[and] violence/drugs/crime [are] 

prevalent in community.” (p. 

102). 

 “One treatment teacher even 

connected lack of English with 

heathenism: ‘very little English is 

spoken in the home. Most of the 

students do not go to church’” (p. 

102). 

 “One control teacher explained, 

‘They use English at school and 

home language at home unless 

told otherwise.’ These teachers 

seem to use their power as 

authority figures to control their 

ELL student’s home language use 

and exclude it from the 

classroom” (p. 102). 

 “‘I try to really stress for them to 

only speak English when 

everyone around them cannot 

understand.’ This statement 

seems to imply that home 

language use is rude and 

exclusionary unless all students 

can understand what is being said. 

This goes back to the concept that 

any use of language other than 

English would be morally 

unacceptable and does not take 

into consideration the exclusion 

 “Many teachers simply stated that 

their ELL students did not use their 

home language in the classroom or 

at school in general” (p. 103). 

 “Two different control teachers 

said, ‘I have had very few students 

use their home language at school 

with adults or students’ and ‘This 

does not happen with my students,’ 

implying that it would be bad if it 

did and she is proud that it does 

not” (p. 103). 

 “A treatment teacher also stated, ‘It 

really doesn’t exist. Occasionally 

they will use it during recess to 

speak to each other.’ These 

teachers are not explicitly 

prohibiting their ELL students 

from using their home language in 

the classroom. However, there is 

also a lack of acknowledgement 

that the students have a linguistic 

asset that they could integrate into 

the curriculum. These teachers do 

not attempt in any way to use their 

student’s home language to 

facilitate learning” (p. 103). 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

124 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

the students might feel when 

surrounded by native English 

speakers and forced to speak a 

language which they have not yet 

fully acquired”(p. 102). 

 

Table 6. Teacher Perceptions: Liberating Model 

Author(s) and 

Publication 

Year 

Valuing Native Language(s) Implementing Native Language(s) 

Mellom et al. 

(2018) 

 “Several teachers identified 

home language with student 

engagement and school 

success stating, for example, 

‘the students truly seem to 

love to discuss what it was 

like in their home countries,’ 

and, ‘the cultural background 

of the students are in the 

forefront of how they 

communicate and adapt to 

change in their environments. 

Specifically, in the school 

environment.’” (p. 103). 

 “Others indicated that they 

have created classroom 

environments that value and 

promote home-language 

literacy. One control teacher 

notes, ‘Our bi-lingual 

classroom library consists of 

books that provide a view of 

our ethnic diversity. Many of 

the bilingual books are 

primarily Spanish, African 

(various languages from 

 “One treatment teacher (of the 

larger sample of 147) indicated 

that she uses her ELL student’s 

home language in the classroom 

in order to promote higher order 

thinking. She explained, ‘We 

value other languages at our 

school, and I often ask ELL 

students to translate words or 

phrases into their language for 

our class to see how they 

compare or contrast’” (p. 104). 

 “She encourages all students to 

use critical thinking skills to 

compare and contrast two 

languages. This teacher 

integrates her ELL student’s 

home language into the 

curriculum in a way that both 

supports the ELL children’s own 

linguistic and cognitive 

development and encourages 

higher order thinking for all 

students in the classroom” (p. 

104). 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

125 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

different regions in Africa) 

and Hindu.’ This teacher sees 

not only that several different 

languages and cultures are 

represented at her school, but 

also notes that the books only 

offer a view of the diversity. 

This insight is important 

because it implies that she 

understands that cultures are 

complex and multifaceted” (p. 

103).  

 “A control teacher explained, 

‘If they don’t know a word in 

English they will ask another 

student the translated word. 

We often ask them how to say 

things in Spanish so they feel 

respected and an important 

part of our class.’ This teacher 

indicates that use of home 

language in the classroom 

implicitly conveys the 

message that ELL students are 

a valuable part of the 

classroom community and 

that their language and their 

ability to use it are valued 

assets” (p. 104). 

 

5. Conclusion 

Throughout our study, we uncovered a need for professional development that will improve not only how 

content is learned for an English language learner, but the relationships those students encounter as well. 

From teacher beliefs and perceptions to results-centered instruction, it is uncommon for an ELL to 

overcome language barriers put in place by societal norms. Educators need continuous 

development—professionally, culturally, linguistically, and instructionally. As trends in education 

change, so do the students, and with these changes comes a need for improvement and growth. To further 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

126 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

assist the students, it is suggested that not only do districts provide more ELL-related professional 

development, but also make more resources available throughout all grade levels. As Sardegna, Lee, and 

Kusey (2017) found, the “complex and dynamic interplay of learner variables and fluctuations in students’ 

attitudes, strategy use, and self-efficacy” (pp. 106-107) stress the need for longitudinal studies. Teaching 

English should be about making a language as accessible as possible and working to erase the incorrect 

stereotypes that others place on non-English speakers. After all, education is about creating opportunities 

and ensuring success for all students. 

 

CRediT Author Statement 

Stephanie Wright: Conceptualization, Methodology, Analysis, Original Draft Preparation, Reviewing, 

Editing, Meeting with Mentor Co-Author, Publication Edits, and Fulfilling Submission and Reviewer 

Feedback Requests.  

Fernanda Vargas: Investigation, Methodology, Original Draft Preparation.  

Tonya Huber: Development and Publication Mentor, Validation, Reviewing and Editing. 

 

References 

Abobaker, R. (2017). Improving ELLs’ listening competence through written scaffolds. TESOL Journal, 

8(4), 831-849. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.339 

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological 

Association (7th ed.). Author. 

Andrei, E., Ellerbe, M., & Kidd, B. (2018). “What am I going to do?” A veteran teacher’s journey of 

teaching writing to newcomer English language learners. TESOL Journal, 10(2), e00413. 

https://doi.org /10.1002/tesj.413 

Carley Rizzuto, K. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions of ELL students: Do their attitudes shape their 

instruction? The Teacher Educator, 52(3), 182-202. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2017.1296912 

Galvan, J. L., & Galvan, M. C. (2017). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and 

behavioral sciences (7th ed.). Routledge. 

Hansen-Thomas, H., Grosso Richins, L., Kakkar, K., & Okeyo, C. (2014). I do not feel I am properly 

trained to help them! Rural teachers’ perceptions of challenges and needs with English-language 

learners. Professional Development in Education, 42(2), 308-324. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.973528 

Kibler, A. K., & Valdés, G. (2016). Conceptualizing language learners: Socioinstitutional mechanisms 

and their consequences. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 96-116. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12310 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr              Education, Language and Sociology Research              Vol. 1, No. 1, 2020 

127 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

König, J., Tachtsoglou, S., Lammerding, S., Strauß, S., Nold, G., & Rohde, A. (2017). The role of 

opportunities to learn in teacher preparation for EFL teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. The 

Modern Language Journal, 101(1), 109-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12383 

Lachance, J. R., Honigsfeld, A., & Harrell, G. (2018). Equal educational opportunity for English learners: 

ESL teachers’ conceptualizations on the importance of academic language. TESOL Journal, 10(2), 

e00415. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.415 

Mellom, P. J., Straubhaar, R., Balderas, C., Ariail, M., & Portes, P. R. (2018). “They come with nothing:” 

How professional development in a culturally responsive pedagogy shapes teacher attitudes towards 

Latino/a English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71(1), 98-107. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.013 

Sallı, A., & Osam, Ü. V. (2017). Preservice teachers’ identity construction: Emergence of expected and 

feared teacher-selves. Quality & Quantity, 52(S1), 483-500. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0629-x 

Sardegna, V. G., Lee, J., & Kusey, C. (2017). Self-efficacy, attitudes, and choice of strategies for English 

pronunciation learning. Language Learning, 68(1), 83-114. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12263 

 

 


