Teaching Communication, Language and Literacy to Multilingual Learners in Early Childhood Settings

This essay examines modern approaches for teaching communication, language and literacy to multilingual learners in early childhood settings. It also elucidates the value of diverse learners on the optimal language of children.

Running head: COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
Introduction
Language is understood as important mechanism for thinking and learning and devoid of
language abilities, learners’ ability to avail academic texts and critically evaluate will be reduced.
However, as classrooms develop more linguistic and ethnic diversity, it turns out to be highly
crucial for all teachers to obtain profound understanding of language and literacy growth
(Kucirkova et al., 2017). According to the Australian Early Development Census (AEDC),
multilingual students in public education continue to increase in number. These diverse learners
bring an affluence of linguistic and cultural understanding into their schools and involve with
literacy in diverse ways (Temple et al., 2017). The essay will aim to examine the modern
approaches for teaching communication, language and literacy to multilingual learners in early
childhood settings. In addition to this, the essay will elucidate the value of diverse learners on the
optimal language of children.
Discussion
With increasing level of diversity, Australian classrooms have gained the capacity to
develop sites of language, ethnic and knowledgeable learning. According to Cook (2016), while
such as cultural and linguistic multiplicity pertains in school demographics, it has been rarely
been revealed through the approaches that language, communication teaching and education are
abstracted in classrooms. While, educational institute populaces have continued to diversify the
approaches through which teachers have been teaching literacy as well as use linguistic have
developed highly standardized, regulated and supervised particularly for youngest apprentices in
early childhood classroom. Such an importance on standardization typically benefits those
language as well as literacy practices related to dominant principles and entrusts alternative
practices to places beyond school walls (Pacheco & Miller, 2016). Irrespective of these

2COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
encounters, increasing groups of academicians have established instructional approaches which
purpose to foster, sustain and maintain children’s family, legacy and recognized language
practices such as bi-literacy, translanguaging along with ethically sustaining pedagogy (Tharp,
2018). Furthermore, these teaching approaches tend to position young learners linguistic, ethnic
and literate diversity as resources to be refined instead of as encounters to be alleviated.
Moreover, various scholars have positioned all students to the understanding of Pacheco and
Miller who has claimed to call students as ‘strategic users of language’ who tend to involve
themselves with language, communication and knowledge through the implementation of
dialects or popular literacy practices (Pacheco & Miller, 2016). Culturally sustaining pedagogy
(SCSP) seeks to continue as well as substitute linguistic, literate as well as cultural diversity as
part of the independent project of education. During the 1980s, varied approaches have indicated
advancement towards perceiving the languages, communication and literacies of being students
and communities of same race as equal to but varied from the approaches demanded and
legitimated in early education teaching and learning. In the view of Pirchio et al. (2019), the idea
of emphasizing the richness of teacher-learner association aligns with the notion of culturally
sustaining pedagogy postulated by Dyjango Paris. Comprehensive studies have mentioned that
developing teaching practice which aims to improve and ethically sustain has been considered as
constant, iterative journey with no particular framework of doing so. In contrast to lock-step
curricular interpositions which posit to be ‘teacher proof’ thus setting up classrooms where
children tend to feel being observed and heard and place where they can fully reveal their
curiosities and develop effective communication capacities with teachers who show utmost
presence, sincerity and involvement (Adger, Snow & Christian, 2018). There has been found six
important frameworks in CSP which teachers in early childhood education setting can model in

3COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
their programs and further adopt and exemplify in order to enlighten children in humanizing and
sustaining ways.
Hynds et al. (2016) have noted that in contemporary approaches of teaching diverse
students, teachers must increase knowledge regarding diversity where the teachers educators
engaged to early education settings must show involvement towards learning to the greatest
extent regarding threats and triumphs of the Australian pluralist society and its cultural history,
traditions and heritages which have been still restoring the conditions for linguistically as well as
ethnically diverse families and children. Meanwhile, Adger, Snow and Christian (2018)have
claimed that learners who fail to comprehend race relations in Australia and other multicultural
societies show incompetence of educating in early childhood education setting about the
intricacies of race. Consequently, they fail to preserve space for the queries, misperceptions,
obstructions and anxieties living in a culturally stimulating society which eventually cause
misinterpretations within the classroom and lack of learning ability. Furthermore, by following
CSP teachers in early childhood education must set up classroom as a community of trust. These
classrooms, in the view of Pirchio et al. (2019) must be established as spaces where trusting
associations between educators and young students can successfully develop and thrive.
Furthermore, Bishop et al. (2016) have claimed that it is highly imperative for young children to
understand that they can pose questions freely to teachers and will be taken with utmost
importance and will not be discomfited in the process. Additionally, teachers in early education
setting can model diligent responsiveness and develop this act of deference an unchanging part
of classroom culture. On the other hand, comprehensive studies have mentioned that contesting
acts of bias and discrimination in culturally sustaining classroom does not specifically imply to
extensive range of skin tone pastels in their baskets or support readings of all kinds of families as

4COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
well as world languages, while all these approaches undoubtedly breathe fresh life into serious
and monolithic spaces. Rather such an approach shows efficacy of involving young children
regarding the way bias and prejudice function in the world and further involving young children
in critical conversations about the world surrounding them (MacQuarrie & Lyon, 2019).
However, relating to the commitment of increasing knowledge and understanding diversity, it
has been asserted that whether in early childhood or university classroom being well-informed
and learned in such a way as to distinguish the shadows of discrimination and prejudice where
they lurk and expose themselves in order to get dismantled.
There has been found robust experiential and theoretical explanations to encounter the
monolingual values and express range of multilingual instructional strategies which efficiently
addresses the defies of English language and academic progress in domain of early childhood
education. According to Pirchio et al., (2019), being incompetent to express a position on the
issues regarding the use of monolingual in contrast to bilingual instructional strategies risks
related TESOL with a measured assumption stating that monolingual instructional approaches
tend to show greater resilience while teaching English and Aboriginal English to children in
early childhood education. Thus, in recent times, most ELT (Enhanced Language Training)
experts and policy makers have associated their teaching strategies with task-based language
teaching approaches. However, at this juncture, Bishop et al. (2016) have argued that prudent use
of L1 (First Language) in the education of second and foreign language but restraints that
regardless of the acceptability of using the L1 under definite requisites. However, comprehensive
studies of MacQuarrie and Lyon (2019) have claimed that translation skill has been extensively
found amongst bilingual children by late elementary school. Pacheco and Miller (2016) have
highlighted likely pedagogical submissions further claiming that conversion offers an informal

5COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
opportunity to improve linguistic consciousness and conceit in bilingualism, predominantly for
sectional bilingual children whose home linguistic has not appreciated by the popular culture.
For vernaculars related to English as well as Spanish have several cognate connections that can
enhance knowledge level of young students of TL vocabulary. This practice has been recognized
as sample of schooling for transmission, which further appeals on the overall attitude of
theoretical interdependence across vernaculars. On the other hand, stimulating students to
transcribe in their L1 and associate with communal or instructional resource individuals in order
to interpret L1 lettering into English, supports young learners’ capacity in English and facilitates
them to utilize advanced order as well as critical thinking assistances much sooner than if
English is the only appropriate language of knowledgeable countenance in the classroom of early
education settings (Alim & Paris, 2017). In addition to this, academic scholars have been
constantly maintained the effectiveness of bilingual vocabulary use in lieu of vocabulary learning
in contrast to monolingual vocabulary usage or merely knowledge from context alone. Moreover,
teachers in early childhood education domain following interactive approach involve two
significant approaches.
According to Oxford (2016), although it is imperative to make reading evocative,
children must aim to identify proper words in order to develop senses of what they are reading.
However, in order to make this effective, teachers must offer learning environment reinforced by
the framework of range of activities. Moreover, teachers have been incorporating reading,
language, listening and writing. They thus support children’s reading experience by mixing both
explicit instruction and permitting children’s involvement in reading by reassuring them.
Meanwhile, Early, Kendrick and Potts (2015) in their studies have found that stories tend to have
remarkable impact on language development and have been forming linkages which are vital in

6COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
the classroom. By drawing relevance to this, Cook (2016) has found that storytelling has been
understood as important to assist children imagine as well as understand the cornerstone of
teaching. Along with this when the scaffolding of shared reading has been provided in the form
of big print and other engaging activities and then it enhances language learning.
With an aim to develop process of supporting inclusive practices, early education
teachers have been aiming to establish process of planning which supports essential to ensure
accessibility, involvement and advantages. In a cycle of intentional teaching, preparation and
implementing early learning involvements have been considered as continuous procedures,
which take into account engagement of individual children. Individuals in the domain of early
childhood education have been assisting young children to engage in this process, even if they
are not engaged as teachers (Early, Kendrick & Potts, 2015). They strategize early learning
experiences, bearing in mind precise goals, children’s welfares and the way they will engage
families. Moreover, the procedure of safeguarding access, contribution and advantage
encompasses team of people. At this juncture, early childhood professionals for example,
teaching faculty, administration, authorities and family services must be committed to operating
in corporation to accomplish the best likely results for children and their families. Thus, when
children obtain diverse learning needs of optimal language learning, the significance and
magnitude of the team tends to expand.
Conclusion
Hence to conclude, practitioners in lieu of numerous disciplines and families work in
cooperation as a team must strategize and device supports and services to accomplish the
exceptional needs of each child and family. It has been noted by the Division of Early Childhood

7COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
that practitioners and families working in cooperation as a team to methodically and regularly
exchange knowledge, understanding and information to construct team capability and mutually
resolve complications, plan as well as implement interventions. The concept of culturally
sustaining pedagogy (CSP) explains the way learners to resist the hegemonic drive to view
students external to the whitestream through deficit lenses. Studies have revealed that in recent
times, implementation of CSP must explain the objective to respect, rejoice, support in addition
to progress pluralistic ways of being as an instantiation of the educator political clarity besides as
a manifestation of civilizing practice for it necessitates that educators comprehensively view
their students to nourish their whole selves successfully.

8COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
References
Adger, C. T., Snow, C. E., & Christian, D. (Eds.). (2018). What teachers need to know about
language. Multilingual Matters.
Alim, H. S., & Paris, D. (2017). What is culturally sustaining pedagogy and why does it
matter. Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing
world, 1-21.
Aronson, B., & Laughter, J. (2016). The theory Early, M., Kendrick, M., & Potts, D. (2015)
and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across content
areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163-206.
Bishop, D. V., Snowling, M. J., Thompson, P. A., Greenhalgh, T., & Catalise Consortium.
(2016). CATALISE: A multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study.
Identifying language impairments in children. PLOS one, 11(7), e0158753.
Cook, V. (2016). Second language learning and language teaching. Routledge.
Early, M., Kendrick, M., & Potts, D. (2015). Multimodality: Out from the margins of English
language teaching. Tesol Quarterly, 49(3), 447-460.
Hynds, A. S., Hindle, R., Savage, C., Meyer, L. H., Penetito, W., & Sleeter, C. (2016). The
impact of teacher professional development to reposition pedagogy for Indigenous
students in mainstream schools. The Teacher Educator, 51(3), 230-249.
Kucirkova, N., Snow, C. E., Grøver, V., & McBride, C. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge
international handbook of early literacy education: A contemporary guide to literacy
teaching and interventions in a global context. Taylor & Francis.

9COMMUNICATION LANGUAGE AND LITERACY
MacQuarrie, S., & Lyon, F. (2019). A consideration of the inequalities apparent in Gaelic
medium education linked to appropriate language assessment: an outline of the field and
potential future directions. Educational Review, 71(3), 350-361.
Oxford, R. L. (2016). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in
context. Routledge.
Pacheco, M. B., & Miller, M. E. (2016). Making meaning through translanguaging in the literacy
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(5), 533-537.
Pirchio, S., Passiatore, Y., Carrus, G., & Taeschner, T. (2019). Children’s interethnic
relationships in multiethnic primary school: results of an inclusive language learning
intervention on children with native and immigrant background in Italy. European
Journal of Psychology of Education, 34(1), 225-238.
Temple, C. A., Ogle, D., Crawford, A. N., & Freppon, P. (2017). All children read: Teaching for
literacy in today's diverse classrooms. Pearson.
Tharp, R. (2018). Teaching transformed: Achieving excellence, fairness, inclusion, and harmony.
Routledge.
Waitoller, F. R., & King Thorius, K. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy
and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for
dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366-389.