3rd-5th Grade - Multilingual Learner Supports

The instructional materials for Grades 3–5 partially meet expectations for supporting MLLs in fully participating in grade-level learning of phenomena. While the program includes strategies to promote MLL participation, these are largely general supports that sometimes provide access to content.

In the Curriculum Overview for all modules, the Support for All Students section describes how the curriculum is intentionally designed to support all learners, including MLLs. Specifically, it states, “Support for students from minority or nondominant groups was carefully considered in the design of each Smithsonian Science for the Classroom module (3, 16). Recognizing that supports for such students typically benefit all learners, we used a universal design approach in our series development (17).” In addition, it states, “While we recognize that ELs are a highly diverse group themselves, research has pinpointed some best practices that are broadly useful (18). Throughout each module, relevant research-based EL strategies are embedded at pertinent point-of-use moments.” As detailed in the 3.1.MLL-1 report, each module includes a Support for English Learners document outlining the point-of-use strategies that promote MLL engagement across the three dimensions of learning. Below are examples of how the curriculum engages MLLs in phenomena. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide targeted strategies for MLLs’ full and complete engagement in science content.

The program includes embedded lesson supports for phenomena, and MLL-specific strategies are called out at points of use. However, a majority of the supports are designed for all students and do not go deep enough to support MLLs diverse linguistic needs. 

• For example, one point of use EL Strategy that is used throughout the program states: “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers)”.

While this strategy reflects a best practice for all learners and notes that MLLs also benefit, it provides no further guidance at the point of use. Specifically, it does not clarify which modes of representation are already embedded in the lesson to intentionally support MLLs, nor does it suggest additional visuals, organizers, or linguistic supports that teachers might incorporate to strengthen MLLs’ access to phenomena further.

The program lacks student-facing materials that could support MLLs in engaging with phenomena, as well as teaching-facing examples of what EL strategies could look like in instruction or student work to facilitate implementation. Furthermore, when strategies for MLLs are provided, there is often limited specificity regarding how the strategy should be applied to the phenomenon in the specific lesson. 

One notable area that is partially present but overall lacking related to MLL support for phenomena is support for language function and form, such as sentence frames and sentence stems. Throughout the lessons, the following EL Strategy is provided: 

• “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules (2). This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally (28).”

However, no model sentence frames are provided, missing an opportunity to support students in using the structured language needed for phenomena like Cause and Effect or Patterns.

Other supports to engage students in phenomena include:

• Peer discussions in native language

• Turn-and-Talks with peers

• Visual aids such as videos and anchor charts

• STEM notebooks for drawing and modeling

These scaffolds—along with videos, visual models, investigations, and tables—offer MLLs multiple entry points into sensemaking of phenomena. While supports promote access to phenomena, they are general and do not provide more specific guidance to fully engage MLLs in the science content. 

• For example, in Grade 4, Life Science, How Can Animals Use Their Senses to Communicate?, Lesson 13: Firefly Flashes Part 1, students engage with the phenomenon of fireflies flashing in different patterns. All students read “Flashing Fireflies” in pairs. An EL Strategy states, “Prompt students to describe inferences they made between the text and the phenomenon or problem they are trying to figure out or solve as a class to support student comprehension of the science content text (7).”

Although the prompt encourages MLLs to connect the text to the phenomenon by describing inferences, it doesn’t include sentence frames, model responses, or vocabulary supports to help students express those inferences effectively. MLLs may not be able to fully engage with the content because the support focuses on what students should do (describe inferences) rather than on how to use language to do so. 

Similarly, while students are encouraged to draw diagrams in their STEM notebooks, the guidance does not provide targeted structured opportunities for MLLs to engage in language, which are essential for developing conceptual understanding.

• For example, in Grade 4, Physical Science, How Does Energy Move From One Object to Another?, Lesson 2: Give Me Some Energy, the phenomenon involves observing how a toy car collides with a stationary one—first moving it slightly, then farther when hit with greater speed. Students rotate through three stations to examine indicators of energy in different systems. Teachers are prompted to circulate and use guiding questions to connect observations to evidence of energy. Students also circle the indicators of energy in their notebooks. The EL Strategy states, “Ask students to draw in their STEM notebook. Diagrams that include text and images of science processes help them assimilate new information (7).”  

Although drawing diagrams with text may help students access the phenomenon, the guidance lacks specific examples of text or visuals to support MLLs in understanding the content. Without intentional scaffolds—such as labeled visuals, modeled language, or sentence frames—MLLs may struggle to connect the visuals to key academic language and concepts, limiting both content comprehension and language development.

Although the teacher guidance promotes turn-and-talks and whole-group share-outs, it does not consistently provide the scaffolds necessary to ensure MLLs fully engage in discourse around phenomena.

• For instance, Grade 3, Engineering, How Can We Protect Animals When Their Habitat Changes?, Lesson 6: She Sorts Sea Shells, the phenomenon involves students figuring out what a mystery specimen is and how it ended up in the desert. Students are asked to “compare the specimens from the desert and seashells that were recently collected from a marine environment.” Students then sort the seashells and discuss how they sorted them. An EL Strategy states, “It may be helpful to ask English Learners to discuss the goals of the activity with peers and rewrite them in their own words (6).” 

Asking students to restate goals in their own words ensures they understand the purpose of the activity, which promotes comprehension of the content. However, the guidance lacks deeper targeted support for students to fully engage in the content. While this activity engages students in the language function of comparison, the support does not focus on language function or interdisciplinary connections. 

Overall, while the materials include components that promote MLL participation with exploring phenomena—such as visuals, hands-on investigations, and structured prompts—support is general and does not fully address the range of MLL needs. While Spanish translations are available for all materials, guidance on how to strategically use these resources to reinforce English language structures or build new language skills through students’ existing linguistic strengths is limited. Additionally, translations are only available in Spanish, leaving students who speak other languages without comparable support.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for providing support for MLLs’ full and complete participation in grade-level learning of problems. The instructional materials provide strategies and support for MLLs to participate in grade-level problem-based learning. However, these supports are general and do not ensure full and equitable participation for all MLL students.

In the Curriculum Overview for all modules, the Support for All Students section describes how the curriculum is intentionally designed to support all learners, including MLLs. Specifically, it states, “Support for students from minority or nondominant groups was carefully considered in the design of each Smithsonian Science for the Classroom module (3, 16). Recognizing that supports for such students typically benefit all learners, we used a universal design approach in our series development (17).” In addition, it states, “While we recognize that ELs are a highly diverse group themselves, research has pinpointed some best practices that are broadly useful (18). Throughout each module, relevant research-based EL strategies are embedded at pertinent point-of-use moments.” As detailed in the 3.1.MLL-1 report, each module includes a Support for English Learners document outlining the point-of-use strategies that promote MLL engagement across the three dimensions of learning. Below are examples of how the curriculum engages MLLs in problems. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide targeted strategies for MLLs’ full and complete engagement in science content.

The program includes embedded lesson supports for problems, and MLL-specific strategies are called out at points of use. However, a majority of the supports are designed for all students and do not go deep enough to support MLLs diverse linguistic needs. 

• For example, one point of use EL Strategy that is used throughout the program states: “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers)”.

While this strategy reflects a best practice for all learners and notes that MLLs also benefit, it provides no further guidance at the point of use. Specifically, it does not clarify which modes of representation are already embedded in the lesson to intentionally support MLLs, nor does it suggest additional visuals, organizers, or linguistic supports that teachers might incorporate to strengthen MLLs’ access to problems further.

The program lacks student-facing materials that could support MLLs in engaging with problems, as well as teaching-facing examples of what EL strategies could look like in instruction or student work to facilitate implementation. Furthermore, when strategies for MLLs are provided, there is often limited specificity regarding how the strategy should be applied to the problem in the specific lesson. 

One notable area that is partially present but overall lacking related to MLL support for problems is support for language function and form, such as sentence frames and sentence stems. Throughout the lessons, the following EL Strategy is provided: 

• “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules (2). This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally (28).”

However, no model sentence frames are provided, missing an opportunity to support students in using the structured language needed for problems like Cause and Effect or Patterns.

Other supports to engage students in problems include:

• Peer discussions in native language

• Turn-and-Talks with peers

• Visual aids such as videos and anchor charts

• STEM notebooks for drawing and modeling

• Investigations that provide nonlinguistic access to content

These scaffolds—along with videos, visual models, investigations, and tables—offer MLLs multiple entry points into sensemaking of problems. While supports promote access to problems, they are general and do not provide more specific guidance to engage MLLs in the science content fully.

• For example, in Grade 4, Life Science, How Can Animals Use Their Senses To Communicate?, Lesson 12: Rainforest Protectors, students engage in a problem to design a communication system for the Tembe people to detect illegal logging on their land. The guidance for the lesson for the whole class states, “Direct students’ attention to the Rainforest Protection System chart and the Criteria and Constraints chart to remind students that they are working to develop a solution that will identify chain saw sound, alert forest guardians that there is a chain saw sound, and tell forest guardians where that sound is in the rainforest.” Then, teacher guidance states, “Have students use the activity sheet to describe what each of the components of the Rainforest Protection System does and how the components interact with each other. They will also identify who will play which role and decide if they will send a message with a flashlight or drumbeat.” 

Scaffolds, such as structured academic talk or content-specific sentence stems, are not present. When students are prompted to “describe,” an essential language function, no language supports are provided.

EL Strategy callouts across the lessons provide access to problems, but are general and lack targeted supports for MLLs to use and develop language. 

• For example, in Grade 3, Earth Science, How Do Weather and Climate Affect Our Lives?, Lesson 9: Hazardous Weather, students solve the problem of a roof blowing off a building in a hurricane. In this lesson, they use “evidence obtained from a story and a map to support an explanation about the type of storm that caused hazardous weather in Gueydan, Louisiana.” Students watch a video, share what they notice, and read “Wild and Wacky Weather”. Teachers read the introduction aloud while students follow along. The guidance states, “Tell students that the reading describes what happens in three different types of storms. Each pair of students is going to read about one type of storm. Then they will work with students who read about other types of storms to figure out which type of storm they observed in the video. Assign each pair of students to read about blizzards, hurricanes, or tornadoes and have them read their section. Hand out Lesson 9 Notebook Sheet B to each student. Have students read their section a second time in order to answer the questions on the notebook sheet.” The EL strategy states,  “Asking students to discuss new vocabulary found within a reading is an effective strategy for improving overall vocabulary proficiency for all students, including ELs (12).” 

The lesson prompts teachers to connect the content to students’ prior experiences when discussing problems caused by windy and rainy weather. While the EL strategy may help MLLs build general vocabulary related to the problem, it does not provide the targeted language support needed for students to access grade-level content or engage meaningfully with the concepts.

The EL Strategy to discuss new vocabulary is general and lacks integration of vocabulary within the broader language functions (e.g., describing, explaining, comparing) and disciplinary practices (e.g., constructing explanations, engaging in argument from evidence) that characterize science.

MLLs are introduced to disciplinary vocabulary, but the materials do not consistently support them in distinguishing scientific language from everyday language.

• For example, in Grade 4, Life Science, How Can Animals Use Their Senses to Communicate?, students engage with the problem that the Tembé people don’t always know where or when illegal logging is happening on their land. Students design a solution that uses sound-recording devices to capture and analyze rainforest sounds. In Lesson 10: Digital Sound, students analyze digital recordings of rainforest sounds to identify differences between natural rainforest sounds and those with chainsaws. A vocabulary word for this lesson is “pitch”. The guidance for the whole class states, “Tell students that sounds with a high pitch, like the bird call, are recorded on the top of the spectrogram. Sounds with a low pitch, like the thunder, are recorded on the bottom of the spectrogram. Play the Rainforest Sound 1 again and show students how the bird’s high-pitched call is at the top of the spectrogram and the thunder’s low pitch is at the bottom of the spectrogram. Tell students that the pitch of the sound is how high or low the sound is.”

The explanation of the new vocabulary to the whole class is a step in providing access for MLLs, however, the materials do not provide guidance for distinguishing between this scientific meaning and the everyday meaning of the word “pitch.” “Pitch” can refer to setting up a tent or throwing a ball in baseball, yet the materials do not clarify that this is another meaning of the same word that they will be using in the context of sound in this science lesson.

Although the materials incorporate EL Strategies that provide access to grade-level science instruction, these supports are broad and not specific to the varying proficiency levels of MLLs. As a result, the program partially meets the criteria for fully supporting MLLs. While Spanish translations are available for all materials, guidance on how to strategically use these resources to reinforce English language structures or build new language skills through students’ existing linguistic strengths is limited. Additionally, translations are only available in Spanish, leaving students who speak other languages without comparable support.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for providing support for MLLs’ full and complete participation in sensemaking of the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs).

In the Curriculum Overview for all modules, the Support for All Students section describes how the curriculum is intentionally designed to support all learners, including MLLs. Specifically, it states, “Support for students from minority or nondominant groups was carefully considered in the design of each Smithsonian Science for the Classroom module (3, 16). Recognizing that supports for such students typically benefit all learners, we used a universal design approach in our series development (17).” In addition, it states, “While we recognize that ELs are a highly diverse group themselves, research has pinpointed some best practices that are broadly useful (18). Throughout each module, relevant research-based EL strategies are embedded at pertinent point-of-use moments.” As detailed in the 3.1.MLL-1 report, each module includes a Support for English Learners document outlining the point-of-use strategies that promote MLL engagement across the three dimensions of learning. Below are examples of how the curriculum engages MLLs in SEPs. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide targeted strategies for MLLs’ full and complete engagement in science content.

The program includes supports for the SEPs embedded in the lessons, and MLL-specific strategies are called out at points of use. However, a majority of the supports are designed for all students and do not go deep enough to support MLLs diverse linguistic needs. 

• For example, one point of use EL Strategy that is used throughout the program states: “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers)”.

While this strategy reflects a best practice for all learners and notes that MLLs also benefit, it provides no further guidance at the point of use. Specifically, it does not clarify which modes of representation are already embedded in the lesson to intentionally support MLLs, nor does it suggest additional visuals, organizers, or linguistic supports that teachers might incorporate to strengthen MLLs’ access to the SEPs further.

The program lacks student-facing materials that could support MLLs in engaging with the SEPs, as well as teaching-facing examples of what EL strategies could look like in instruction or student work to facilitate implementation. Furthermore, when strategies for MLLs are provided for the SEPs, there is often limited specificity regarding how the strategy should be applied to the specific SEP in the specific lesson. 

One notable area that is partially present but overall lacking related to MLL support for SEPs is support for language function and form, such as sentence frames and sentence stems. Throughout the lessons, the following EL Strategy is provided: 

• “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules (2). This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally (28).”

However, no model sentence frames are provided, missing an opportunity to support students in using the structured language needed for SEPs like Cause and Effect or Patterns.

Universal supports seen throughout the program engage all students in the SEPs and provide access to the content. However, the materials lack more targeted support for MLLs' full engagement in the program. 

• For example, in Grade 4, Physical Science, How Does Energy Move From One Object to Another?, Lesson 3: A Super Model, all students are supported in the SEP of Developing and Using Models as they discuss their experiences with models and observe the teacher create and explain a kinesthetic energy model that has students toss soft objects to one another to simulate energy flow in a system, identifying the concrete and visual components of the model as a system (MOD-E5). While not called out as a strategy to support MLLs at the point of use, the hands-on approach meaningfully and explicitly engages MLLs, as well as all students, in the SEP to grow in their understanding of how to Develop and Use Models to explain a phenomenon. Although the Support for All Learners section in the Curriculum Overview states that when materials offer “a variety of ways for students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills,” it benefits all students. However, targeted opportunities for speaking, listening, reading, and writing are essential for MLL students to use and develop language as they engage with content meaningfully.

EL Strategy callouts are embedded at the lesson level and included at points of use throughout the program to support MLLs in engaging with the SEPs; however, many are generic and not specific to the lesson, which limits their effectiveness in fully supporting sensemaking of SEPs. 

• Specifically, in Grade 3, Life Science, What Explains Similarities and Differences Between Organisms?, Lesson 3: Nature and Nurture, students engage in the SEP of Planning and Carrying Out Investigations as they explore environmental factors that could influence traits in Fast Plants they have observed (INV-E4). They develop a testable question and predict the results of investigations into how light impacts plant growth. An EL Strategy states, “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers).” A sentence frame is also provided to engage students in a think-pair-share to come up with a testable question: “If we change__________would it affect the traits of a plant?” 

While the sentence structure "If we change... would it affect..." engages students in developing a testable question using cause-and-effect language, there's a missed opportunity to include guidance to highlight the interdisciplinary nature of this sentence stem.

When the materials provide opportunities to engage in argument, the scaffolds provided are general and do not provide targeted support for academic discourse. 

• In Grade 4, Life Science, How Can Animals Use Their Senses to Communicate?, Lesson 15: Firefly Flashes, students engage in the SEP of Engaging in Argument From Evidence (ARG-E3). Specifically, students use the evidence collected in a simulation to work in groups and make a claim, stating their evidence about why fireflies flash in different patterns using a Firefly Argumentation Card. This card includes prompting questions to help students construct their argument in English. An EL Strategy states, “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules. This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally.”

While the guidance prompts teachers to use sentence frames, example sentence frames to support MLLs are not included. This would rely on the teacher knowing how to develop effective sentence frames for the lesson to support their MLLs. There is also a lack of support to provide opportunities for structured discourse. Discourse supports assist students in producing the language necessary to demonstrate their understanding of the task and the content. Without structured opportunities, MLLs may understand the concepts but lack the language or framework to express them.

Some EL Strategies have stronger alignment to support students in the necessary actions related to the SEPs. 

• For example, in Grade 4, Physical Science, How Does Energy Move from One Object to Another?, Lesson 2: Give Me Some Energy, students engage in the SEP of Planning and Carrying Out Investigations as they complete three stations with short investigations to identify indicators of energy in different systems and gather information on how to recognize energy in each system (INV-E3). On their notebook sheet, students are provided a word bank that includes indicators of energy. As students are “gathering information about how they can recognize energy in a system so that they can explain why the stationary car in the second video goes farther”, an EL Strategy guides the teacher to “Ask students to draw in their STEM notebook. Diagrams that include text and images of science processes help them assimilate new information (7).” 

While the use of diagrams with text and images can support MLLs in engaging with science content and the SEPs, the materials lack specific diagrams to enhance or illustrate the implementation of the EL Strategy.

• Moreso, in Grade 3, Engineering Design, What Explains Similarities and Differences Between Organisms?, Lesson 10: The Cycles of Life, an EL Strategy directly provides support to assist MLLs in Developing and Using Models (MOD-E4). Students learn to design models of the milkweed bug life cycle, identify and describe patterns observed in the game, and use those patterns to create a final prediction model of the life cycle. The EL Strategy states, “Providing step-by-step visual support to students of what they’re expected to do will allow students to understand instruction that may otherwise be difficult to understand through auditory and written instruction (5, 16).” A visual support of the prediction model for the milkweed bugs’ life cycle is also included in the guidance. It is limited to words and arrows and does not provide pictures, shape, or color.

This structure will help students understand the expectations for modeling and develop their own model of the milkweed bug’s life cycle. However, the lesson lacks specific guidance to support language development, such as applying the language function “describe” as they develop their final model.

• Additionally, in Grade 5, Engineering Design, How Can We Protect and Clean Earth’s Water?, Lesson 2: An Ocean Full of Plastics, students work in groups of four to research the problem of ocean plastics while engaging in the SEP of Asking Questions and Defining Problems. In the lesson, one pair in the group reads the One Ocean section of the "Ocean in Trouble" text and records information to better understand the problem. The other pair in the group analyzes a graph of ocean pollution. The pairs then share the information they obtained with their group. An EL Strategy listed states: "Provide opportunities for students, but especially EL students, to formulate questions that are surfaced through their reading about the ocean to support their comprehension of complex science content texts. Use those questions in student-led, small group discussions about the reading. Ensure these students' questions receive equal attention as their peers." 

This strategy directly supports MLLs in engaging in the SEP of Asking Questions as they formulate questions. However, guidance does not provide specific scaffolds to produce the precise, complex language required for this SEP.

The materials provide supports, such as text-to-speech and closed captioning for videos, that may help MLL students access the content. Specifically, the Curriculum Overview states, "Full-page blackline masters are available through Carolina Science Online. Closed captioning is provided for all videos with spoken word. Text alternatives are provided for digital simulations. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available with text-to-speech through Carolina Science Online. Student-facing blackline masters and digital resources are available in English and Spanish. Student Activity Guides (grades 3 through 5) are available in English and Spanish. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available in English and Spanish." The materials support MLLs in accessing the content related to SEPs through EL Strategy callouts, however, the guidance is general and lacks more targeted support to use and develop language. Spanish translations are available for all materials, but guidance on how to strategically use these resources to reinforce English language structures or build new language skills through students’ existing linguistic strengths is limited. Additionally, translations are only available in Spanish, leaving students who speak other languages without comparable support.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for providing strategies and supports for MLLs to fully and completely participate in sensemaking of Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCI’s). 

In the Curriculum Overview for all modules, the Support for All Students section describes how the curriculum is intentionally designed to support all learners, including MLLs. Specifically, it states, “Support for students from minority or nondominant groups was carefully considered in the design of each Smithsonian Science for the Classroom module (3, 16). Recognizing that supports for such students typically benefit all learners, we used a universal design approach in our series development (17).” In addition, it states, “While we recognize that ELs are a highly diverse group themselves, research has pinpointed some best practices that are broadly useful (18). Throughout each module, relevant research-based EL strategies are embedded at pertinent point-of-use moments.” As detailed in the 3.1.MLL-1 report, each module includes a Support for English Learners document outlining the point-of-use strategies that promote MLL engagement across the three dimensions of learning. Below are examples of how the curriculum engages MLLs in DCIs. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide targeted strategies for MLLs’ full and complete engagement in science content.

The program includes supports for the DCIs embedded in the lessons and MLL-specific strategies are called out at points of use. However, a majority of the supports are designed for all students and do not go deep enough to support MLLs diverse linguistic needs. 

• For example, one point of use EL Strategy that is used throughout the program states: “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers)”.

While this strategy reflects a best practice for all learners and notes that MLLs also benefit, it provides no further guidance at the point of use. Specifically, it does not clarify which modes of representation are already embedded in the lesson to intentionally support MLLs, nor does it suggest additional visuals, organizers, or linguistic supports that teachers might incorporate to strengthen MLLs’ access to the DCIs further.

The program lacks student-facing materials that could support MLLs in engaging with the DCIs, as well as teaching-facing examples of what EL strategies could look like in instruction or student work to facilitate implementation. Furthermore, when strategies for MLLs are provided for the DCIs, there is often limited specificity regarding how the strategy should be applied to the specific DCI in the specific lesson. 

One notable area that is partially present but overall lacking related to MLL support for DCIs is support for language function and form, such as sentence frames and sentence stems. Throughout the lessons, the following EL Strategy is provided: 

• “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules (2). This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally (28).”

However, no model sentence frames are provided, missing an opportunity to support students in using the structured language needed for DCIs like Cause and Effect or Patterns.

The materials include EL Strategies and routines intended to help MLLs engage in grade-level science instruction through speaking, reading, writing, and listening. However, these supports are general and do not provide targeted guidance to address the diverse needs of MLLs.

• For example, in Grade 3, Life Science, What Explains Similarities and Differences Between Organisms?, Lesson 9: Animal Stories, students identify patterns in the life cycles of animals to make predictions about what will happen to milkweed bugs over time (DCI-LS1.B-E1). Students work in pairs to read an informational text and complete a worksheet in which they describe the events that occur in each stage of life for a particular animal. Then students share what they learned about each specific animal with a different student pair. The guidance states, “Tell each pair to take turns presenting the information about their animal.” An EL Strategy states, “Suggest students each take one minute to share out their idea and for the other members to verbally summarize their ideas afterward. This will ensure equal participation (1).” The following directions state, “The group should work together to decide on a common pattern in life stages that they see in both animals. After discussing, everyone should write or draw this pattern in their STEM notebooks.” Another EL Strategy states, “Ask EL students to draw in their STEM notebooks. Diagrams that include text and images of science processes help them assimilate new information (11).” In the Teacher Guide, an example is provided; however, visuals are not included. 

Although the guidance to share their idea while a partner summarizes it may support MLLs in describing after they read an informational text, it lacks more specific guidance attached to the language function of explaining or describing. Additionally, the strategy itself does not provide students with specific linguistic tools (language forms) to help them execute these functions. The guidance on drawing models aims to support students in using multiple modes of expression. However, it does not guide teachers to utilize visuals strategically to support learners’ engagement with the DCI.

• Another example is in Lesson 10: Bringing it All Together, where students work independently to “describe patterns they found” in a game and “draw their final prediction model for the milkweed bugs' life cycle.” The directions state, “Students can use words, pictures, arrows, shapes, color, and anything else they choose to show their thinking.” An EL Strategy states, “Providing step-by-step visual support to students of what they’re expected to do will allow students to understand instruction that may otherwise be difficult to understand through auditory and written instruction (5, 16).” An example of a visual is present with arrows and words, but pictures and shapes are not present.

This multimodal approach supports MLLs by providing multiple avenues to demonstrate understanding and engage in learning. However, the strategies fall short in helping MLLs access grade-level content and negotiate meaning effectively. More intentional use of visuals —such as diagrams, images, and captions — that clarify complex ideas is needed to fully support their comprehension and language development.

In some lessons, strategies are provided to support students in engaging in discussions, providing opportunities for disciplinary language use. However, the guidance lacks any support for structured academic discourse. 

• For example, in Grade 3, Engineering Design, How Can We Protect Animals When Their Habitat Changes?, Lesson 10: Teamwork, students combine new information from text with evidence from the previous lesson’s videos to develop a revised explanation for why starlings fly in large groups (DCI-LS2.D-E1). They listen to the teacher read about the costs and benefits of animals living in social groups and complete a cause-and-effect “Group Effects” graphic organizer. The EL Strategy states, “Pair bilingual students with students with very limited English if possible. Direct any Spanish-speaking EL students to first try using an English-English dictionary, but if needed, they may refer to a Spanish-English resource for help (3).” 

While an English-English or Spanish-English dictionary may help MLLs translate vocabulary, the guidance is limited to Spanish-English learners and does not provide support for students who speak other languages or for teachers to determine when and how to effectively integrate these tools into instruction. Although students engage in the language function of cause and effect, the guidance does not provide specific support for using this language or fostering discourse around it. During the reading, the Teacher Tip states, “You may want to photocopy the relevant pages from Changing Habitats so students can annotate these pages,” but specific guidance around annotation is not present. Guidance is general, and more specific linguistic modifications or aids to improve comprehension of complex academic text are not present. MLLs are also not encouraged to use interdisciplinary words and phrases related to cause and effect that could be applied across subjects.

The EL Strategy boxes aim to support students' participation in DCIs while negotiating the meanings of vocabulary aligned with science content. However, the guidance is mostly general and not specific to the Disciplinary Core Idea.

• In Grade 4, Engineering Design, How Can We Provide Energy to Meet Diverse Needs?, Lesson 8: Generate, students research two ways that electricity can be generated by making observations of three systems and obtaining information from a text (DCI-ETS1.B-E1). The teacher guidance states, “Remind students that they recorded things they already know about several research topics in their STEM notebooks. Say that as engineers they will continue to use their notebooks to record new information and how their understanding develops as they continue to do research.” Students then record their peers’ ideas about their research on generating electricity. The EL Strategy states, “Invite EL students to use everyday language to begin making sense of content ideas. Then introduce content-specific vocabulary in context after students have begun developing content understanding (16).” 

Although the strategy encourages teachers to help students bridge informal, everyday communication and formal academic language, it does not provide specific guidance for intentionally developing disciplinary language or connecting it to interdisciplinary language.

The materials provide supports, such as text-to-speech and closed captioning for videos, that may help MLL students access the content. Specifically, the Curriculum Overview states, "Full-page blackline masters are available through Carolina Science Online. Closed captioning is provided for all videos with spoken word. Text alternatives are provided for digital simulations. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available with text-to-speech through Carolina Science Online. Student-facing blackline masters and digital resources are available in English and Spanish. Student Activity Guides (grades 3 through 5) are available in English and Spanish. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available in English and Spanish." The materials support MLLs in accessing the content related to DCIs through EL Strategy callouts, however, the guidance is general and lacks more targeted support to use and develop language. Spanish translations are available for all materials, but guidance on how to strategically use these resources to reinforce English language structures or build new language skills through students’ existing linguistic strengths is limited. Additionally, translations are only available in Spanish, leaving students who speak other languages without comparable support.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for supporting MLLs’ full and complete participation in the sensemaking of Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs).

In the Curriculum Overview for all modules, the Support for All Students section describes how the curriculum is intentionally designed to support all learners, including MLLs. Specifically, it states, “Support for students from minority or nondominant groups was carefully considered in the design of each Smithsonian Science for the Classroom module (3, 16). Recognizing that supports for such students typically benefit all learners, we used a universal design approach in our series development (17).” In addition, it states, “While we recognize that ELs are a highly diverse group themselves, research has pinpointed some best practices that are broadly useful (18). Throughout each module, relevant research-based EL strategies are embedded at pertinent point-of-use moments.” As detailed in the 3.1.MLL-1 report, each module includes a Support for English Learners document outlining the point-of-use strategies that promote MLL engagement across the three dimensions of learning. Below are examples of how the curriculum engages MLLs in CCCs. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide targeted strategies for MLLs’ full and complete engagement in science content.

The program includes supports for the CCCs embedded in the lessons and MLL-specific strategies are called out at points of use. However, a majority of the supports are designed for all students and do not go deep enough to support MLLs diverse linguistic needs. 

• For example, one point of use EL Strategy that is used throughout the program states: “All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers)”

While this strategy reflects a best practice for all learners and notes that MLLs also benefit, it provides no further guidance at the point of use. Specifically, it does not clarify which modes of representation are already embedded in the lesson to intentionally support MLLs, nor does it suggest additional visuals, organizers, or linguistic supports that teachers might incorporate to strengthen MLLs’ access to the CCCs further.

The program lacks student-facing materials that could support MLLs in engaging with the CCCs, as well as teaching-facing examples of what EL strategies could look like in instruction or student work to facilitate implementation. Furthermore, when strategies for MLLs are provided for the CCCs, there is often limited specificity regarding how the strategy should be applied to the specific CCC in the specific lesson. 

One notable area that is partially present but overall lacking related to MLL support for CCCs is support for language function and form, such as sentence frames and sentence stems. Throughout the lessons, the following EL Strategy is provided: 

• “Providing sentence frames or prewritten questions helps EL students develop fluency and communicate concepts without getting overburdened with grammar rules (2). This will allow them to construct well-formed sentences to communicate their understanding, both written and orally (28).”

However, no model sentence frames are provided, missing an opportunity to support students in using the structured language needed for CCCs like Cause and Effect or Patterns.

At times, guidance is also provided to the teacher to deliver direct instruction or model a CCC in a lesson. EL Strategy callouts provide guidance to support MLLs' access to content; however, the scaffolds are general and lack the specificity needed to support full and complete participation in the grade-level task. 

• For example, in Grade 3, Earth and Space, How Do Weather and Climate Affect Our Lives?, Lesson 4: Be a Meteorologist, students observe data collected from weather stations, radar, and satellite and work in pairs to notice patterns that might help them figure out a good time for the class to fly their kite (PAT-E2). The EL Strategy states, “One-to-one peer interactions like this are more effective than whole-class discussion in supporting EL students engaged in discourse-heavy science and engineering practices (4).” While the EL Strategy to work in pairs may support MLLs in engaging in listening and speaking when identifying patterns in data, the guidance is general and does not offer opportunities to engage in structured academic discourse when engaging in content related to the CCCs. 

Although guidance to support one-to-one peer interactions may engage MLLs, there is a lack of support to provide specific strategies that fully engage MLLs in the academic discourse around CCC of Patterns. 

In some cases, the lesson approach supports MLLs engagement in discussion of the CCCs, but does not provide more specific content or interdisciplinary vocabulary support for discourse structures. 

• For example, in Grade 4, Engineering Design, How Can We Provide Energy to Meet Diverse Needs?, Lesson 3: The Light Bulb, students explore the configurations of circuit components that cause a light bulb to light up. The design of this activity explicitly demonstrates the CCC of Cause and Effect (the light bulb lights up or does not) and provides MLLs with an opportunity to experience the CCC directly to support sensemaking (CE-E1). Furthermore, the Teacher Guide outlines how to provide direct instruction on what a configuration is to support student understanding, directly aligning with the CCCs of Cause and Effect, Systems, and Energy and Matter. The teacher guidance states: "Have teams discuss what they think the word 'configuration' means then share their ideas with the class. Explain as needed that a configuration is how components are connected to each other. Say that after each pair of students in a group has identified at least two different configurations that result in a bulb lighting up, they should use the drawings on the notebook sheet to record these configurations.”

While the supports do not provide strategies specific to engaging MLLs, the lesson approach helps MLLs engage in grade-level learning focused on developing and using the identified CCCs in their sensemaking and communication of their learning. The guidance focuses on defining the word "configuration," but not the language needed to discuss it. Effective support for MLLs must focus on language functions (what students need to do with the language, e.g., describing, comparing, explaining causality) and language forms (e.g., specific sentence structures, frames) associated with those functions.

Callout boxes for the CCCs are included in the Teacher Guide, providing teachers with tips on how to intentionally support students to engage in specific CCCs during the lesson. In some cases, the callouts are paired with an EL Strategy callout box to support MLLs' engagement in the CCCs.

• For example, in Grade 4, Engineering Design, How Can We Provide Energy to Meet Diverse Needs?, Lesson 2: Flashlight System, students use their STEM notebooks to record observations about the flashlight after brainstorming and discussing ideas with a partner and the class (SYS-E2). The Teacher Guide notes the following CCC callouts:

  • “Systems and system models: Students describe a light-generating system, labeling the  parts and describing how they contribute to the system making light. 

  • Energy and matter: Students may include initial ideas about the presence of energy in the system.”

• An EL Strategy callout states, “Ask EL students to draw in their STEM notebooks. Diagrams that include text and images of science processes help them assimilate new information (4). Students can communicate understanding and complex ideas through drawing, when they otherwise can’t demonstrate them through writing or speaking (5).”

While this callout to use STEM notebooks may help students engage with the CCCs, the guidance does not support them in developing the language needed to demonstrate understanding or connect their ideas through writing and speaking.

More extensive MLL support is provided for certain CCCs throughout the program, including Energy and Matter, Cause and Effect, and Systems and Structures. 

• For example, in Grade 4, Engineering Design, How Can We Provide Energy to Meet Diverse Needs?, Lesson 8: Generate, students are supported in sensemaking using the language of Energy and Matter. The lesson states, “Remind the class that in an earlier lesson they talked about science and engineering vocabulary and how words have specific meanings that may be different from their everyday meanings. Explain that facilities where electricity is made are often referred to as ‘power plants,' but they may more correctly be called ‘electricity-generating facilities.’ These places generate or produce electricity by transforming energy so that it can move via electric current. This energy is not made from nothing. It is stored in some way and humans have figured out how to access and transform it to be useful.” The EL Strategy states, “Invite EL students to use everyday language to begin making sense of content ideas. Then introduce content-specific vocabulary in context after students have begun developing content understanding (16). “

This approach, paired with the EL Strategy, helps students develop language to engage with the CCCs and address misconceptions around energy. By having students use everyday language first, the teacher can help students build the concepts, then clarify their sensemaking and communication of understanding by intentionally addressing accurate language use (“transform” vs. “make”) to ensure proper communication of precise ideas. 

The materials provide supports, such as text-to-speech and closed captioning for videos, that may help MLL students access the content. Specifically, the Curriculum Overview states, "Full-page blackline masters are available through Carolina Science Online. Closed captioning is provided for all videos with spoken word. Text alternatives are provided for digital simulations. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available with text-to-speech through Carolina Science Online. Student-facing blackline masters and digital resources are available in English and Spanish. Student Activity Guides (grades 3 through 5) are available in English and Spanish. Smithsonian Science Stories Literacy Series books are available in English and Spanish." The materials support MLLs in accessing the content related to CCCs through EL Strategy callouts, however, the guidance is general and lacks more targeted support to use and develop language. Spanish translations are available for all materials, but guidance on how to strategically use these resources to reinforce English language structures or build new language skills through students’ existing linguistic strengths is limited. Additionally, translations are only available in Spanish, leaving students who speak other languages without comparable support.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for intentionally developing language in ways valued by disciplinary practices over time, across lessons, units, and throughout the course. The materials provide strategies for teachers to bridge the gap between students’ informal and everyday ways of communicating and support the development of disciplinary ways of communicating, but do not include evidence of an intentional plan for the development of language across lessons, units, and each course.

In the Curriculum Overview, Scientific Discourse, the program highlights opportunities for students to share their thinking verbally and explain ideas, supporting language use and development. However, it does not provide a detailed or intentional progression of language development.

• Specifically, the section states, “Throughout the series students are given myriad opportunities to share their thinking verbally in groups of various sizes. By explaining ideas, students deepen their own understanding. Frequent use of academic language also helps students become familiar with scientific terms. With guidance even very young students can engage in sophisticated scientific discourse.”

Below is a lesson example of an opportunity for students to engage in discourse. 

• In Grade 3, Engineering Design, How Can We Protect Animals When Their Habitat Changes?, Lesson 12: Town and Country, students compare camera trap data from three locations (Florida woodland, Virginia woodland, and Virginia city) to investigate why Alex observed different animals in the Virginia city and Florida woodland. Teacher guidance states, “1. Organize students into groups of four. Assign the following roles or ask students to agree on them: Speaker, Artist, Messenger, and Questioner. 2. Hand out the Habitat cards to each group of students. 3. Invite the groups to read the text on the cards. Suggest students take turns reading and sharing what they have learned about the habitat with their group.” An EL Strategy states, “Suggest students discuss content in both their native language and in English. This can help them become more familiar with the potential similarities between English and their native language (3).”

Although this guidance may help students bridge their native language and English, it is general and does not offer specific strategies or an intentional plan for developing language throughout the lesson.

In the Curriculum Overview, Supports for English Learners, Developing Language Through Multiple Modalities, it states that students are using language across modalities (speaking, writing, through models, or verbally in small or whole groups) but it does not explicitly describe the plan or progression for how the complexity, sophistication, or precision of these language demands increases over time, across units or the course:

• Specifically, the guidance states, “Smithsonian Science for the Classroom units are packed with activities that allow students to both take in information and communicate information through multiple modes. Consistently across units, students view phenomena first-hand and record observations as data, interpret that data, and use it to support an argument or explanation in writing, through models, or verbally in small or whole groups. Other lessons may include gathering information and recording information from texts to construct more robust explanations, arguments, or design solutions. Central to the curriculum is the systematic exchange of listening, reading, viewing, speaking, writing, and representing information. This interdependence between interpretive and communicative modes is indicative of teaching science through authentic disciplinary practices. The following point-of-use EL strategies are shared throughout the series to support language development through multiple modalities:

  • 1. All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers) (2). 

  • 2. Providing step-by-step visual support to students of what they’re expected to do (1) will allow students to understand instruction that may otherwise be difficult to understand through auditory and written instruction (4).”

Although the guidance discusses EL Strategies to support language development through multiple modalities, the materials do not provide an intentional plan across the lesson sequence.

Vocabulary is developed at key points through the lessons and units; however, there is no evidence of an intentional, long-term plan for language development that is intentionally sequenced.

• Specifically, in the Curriculum Overview, Vocabulary section, it states, “A glossary of key terms is provided for students in grades 3, 4, and 5. We also find that multiple, repeated, hands-on experiences with the terms—as students experience in our lessons at the appropriate points—provide a richer context for learning than do lists of words and definitions alone.”

• An example of lesson guidance is in Grade 5, Earth Science, How Can We Use The Sky To Navigate?, Lesson 4: Telling Time With The Sun, students conduct research before designing a solution and read a story to learn about ways that people living in other times and places solved a similar problem. Then, students read “The Shadow Knows” in Sailing under the Stars in pairs and complete the Lesson 4 Notebook Sheet. After reading and before completing the Notebook Sheet, an EL Strategy states, “Ask students to discuss the vocabulary words 'sundial' and 'gnomon.” Discussing new vocabulary within a reading is an effective strategy for improving overall vocabulary proficiency for all students, including ELs (13).” The guidance then states, “Once both pairs of students in a group have finished reading ‘The Shadow Knows’ and completed their notebook sheet, have them come back together as a full group. Have students discuss the story and any new ideas they have for solving the problem of coming home on time. Have students return to their Lesson 4 Activity Sheet A to revise their ideas. Give groups a new Lesson 4 Activity Sheet A if they want it. Encourage students to look at the How Do You Know When to Go Home? chart, especially if students previously shared any ideas about using the Sun or the amount of light to know when to go home."

Although the guidance supports MLLs with specific vocabulary and encourages teachers to have students revise their ideas, it lacks a deliberate focus on targeted language development.

While the materials offer strategies that support students in developing academic language alongside science content, they do not present a fully cohesive, unit-wide system for language development, or guidance for teachers to bridge between students' informal and everyday ways of communication and formal academic ways of communicating.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for providing teacher guidance to support MLLs and to utilize strategies, supports, and/or accommodations found. The materials offer general guidance for supporting MLL students, including suggested strategies, supports, and accommodations. However, the guidance does not intentionally facilitate understanding in teachers new to the work while simultaneously refining the knowledge of MLL experts. In addition, the guidance does not clarify when or how to support productive struggle before providing intervention.

For each module, the Supports for English Learners document, located under the Resources tab in the digital resources, provides teachers with guidance for the embedded lesson supports listed below:

• Point of Use EL Strategies,

• Leveraging students’ language, cultural, and intellectual resources

• Developing language through multiple modalities

• Supporting language development through collaboration and discussions

• Supporting language development through reading and vocabulary acquisition

• Supporting language development through writing

To facilitate teacher implementation, the document outlines the strategies present in each lesson, accompanied by an example of what they look like. 

• For example, in the Developing Language Through Multiple Modalities section, it states, “Consistently across units, students view phenomena first-hand and record observations as data, interpret that data, and use it to support an argument or explanation in writing, through models, or verbally in small or whole groups. Other lessons may include gathering information and recording information from texts to construct more robust explanations, arguments, or design solutions. Central to the curriculum is the systematic exchange of listening, reading, viewing, speaking, writing, and representing information. This interdependence between interpretive and communicative modes is indicative of teaching science through authentic disciplinary practices.” It then states the specific strategies that are included within the lessons: “The following point-of-use EL strategies are shared throughout the series to support language development through multiple modalities:

  • 1. All students, including EL students, are more likely to understand a concept if it is presented and expressed in multiple ways (e.g., graphs, charts, tables, pictures, graphic organizers) (2).

  • 2. Providing step-by-step visual support to students of what they’re expected to do (1) will allow students to understand instructions that may otherwise be difficult to understand through auditory and written instructions (4).”

This guidance demonstrates an intention to include opportunities for all four language domains (and visual modes) to foster MLL students' regular and active participation. The guidance also supports MLL access to content without lowering the rigor, through use of visuals (pictures/charts) and organizational tools (graphic organizers) to clarify complex ideas. However, the supports throughout the lessons are general and do not provide strategic content-specific strategies.  

Furthermore, in the Leveraging Students’ Language, Cultural, and Intellectual Resources section, it explains how the materials prompt teachers to gather students' background knowledge at the beginning of a learning sequence. 

• Specifically, it states, “At the beginning of each learning sequence, students share initial ideas about the cause of a phenomenon or the solution to a problem and support their ideas with background knowledge through narrative or personal stories. Pre-assessment questions for teacher reflection support teachers in recognizing and building on common and uncommon student ideas. Throughout the full learning sequence, guidance is provided to teachers to more fully leverage students’ prior experiences and develop increasingly complex and robust explanations or solutions.”

The guidance also provides strategies, such as asking open-ended questions and connecting student’s community and culture to the content through Family Letters. Although pre-assessments and Family Letters may provide access to content, the guidance does not include language look-fors and listen-fors to attune teachers to specific needs of MLLs.

Other guidance supports vocabulary acquisition, collaboration strategies for whole-class and peer-to-peer discussion, such as using Group Roles, and the capture of predictions, data, claims, and solutions in STEM notebooks when building content knowledge. While these strategies promote access and collaboration, the materials do not help teachers anticipate potential language demands, challenges, or opportunities as students’ language development progresses throughout a lesson.

The curricular supports are intended to prioritize student sensemaking, however, they lack explicit guidance on when and how to support productive struggle, especially for MLLs. The guidance does not clarify when to allow students to work independently or how to identify the need for intervention or additional support. While the materials include suggested strategies, supports, and accommodations, the guidance does not intentionally support both building foundational understanding for teachers new to the work and deepening expertise for those experienced with MLLs.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for including guidance for intentional and flexible grouping structures for MLLs to ensure equitable participation. While students are frequently asked to work in pairs, small groups, and whole-class discussions, the guidance does not consistently ensure equitable participation or include guidance specific to English proficiency levels. 

The example below promotes oral language use, but there is no direction for intentional grouping by need or English proficiency levels to ensure equitable participation.

• In Grade 5, Physical Science, How Can We Predict Change in Ecosystems?, Lesson 1: From Seed to Plant, teachers are instructed to pair students and have them develop investigation questions. The guidance states, “Organize students into pairs and hand out a copy of Lesson 1 Notebook Sheet F to each student. Explain to the students that they will work in their pairs to develop questions that they can investigate to figure out where the radish plants in the containers that don’t have soil get most of the matter they use to live and grow. Have pairs work together to complete the notebook sheets by discussing and recording what questions they think are most useful in investigating. Remind them to use the Plant Growth spidergram as a source of possible factors.”

Some EL Strategy callouts include guidance on intentional grouping to support MLLs, but this support is applied inconsistently across the program.

• In Grade 4, Earth and Space Science, How Can We Stay Safe on a Changing Earth?, Lesson 8: A Ship on the Ocean, the EL Strategy box advises teachers to pair bilingual students with students who have very limited English, or to group students by a shared primary language, stating, “For this activity, pair bilingual students with students with very limited English if possible (17), or group students with a common primary language to facilitate support. This will allow students to first discuss the activity in their primary language and then, together or individually, express their thoughts in English (19).”

Overall, while the materials occasionally demonstrate intentional pairings of MLL students, the absence of consistent guidance for flexible grouping fails to ensure equitable participation for MLLs in group work and, consequently, limits opportunities for them to interact with peers and develop disciplinary language meaningfully.

The instructional materials for Grades 3-5 partially meet expectations for providing guidance to encourage teachers to draw upon students' home language to facilitate learning. The materials provide some suggestions and strategies for using the home language to support students in learning grade-level science while presenting multilingualism as an asset in reading and learning grade-level science.

Within lessons, EL Strategies include ways to value and leverage a student’s home language to help them access the grade-level learning. However, the guidance lacks how teachers can actively draw upon the home language or linguistic resources strategically to support students in learning grade-level science and engineering.

• For example, in Grade 5, Life Science, How Can We Predict Change in Ecosystems?, Lesson 5: Explaining the Radish Plants, there is an EL Strategy that supports oral language development of MLLs, which states, "encourage students to use language that is representative of their culture and community. Avoid pressing students to shift their speech to mimic assumptions that may be held about how a scientist speaks". 

While this guidance represents acceptance of student home language, it does not provide further support to use the home language to support students in learning.

• For example, in Grade 4, Earth Science, How Can We Stay Safe on a Changing Earth?, Lesson 6: Patterns on the Surface, an EL Strategy is provided to support students in investigating maps. The EL Strategy states: “While investigating the maps, suggest students discuss what they notice in both their native language and in English. This can help them become more familiar with the potential similarities between English and their native language (17).” 

• Another example, in Grade 4, Earth Science, How Can We Stay Safe on a Changing Earth?, Lesson 2: Gorges Views, students reflect on a text. The EL Strategy states, “Ask open-ended questions that invite students to connect reading content to their own life experiences (8). Invite students to look back at the chart as they read and think about other experiences they have that are similar to the processes in the text.” This shows students that their experiences and cultures are valued and can serve as an important resource for making meaning of the content. 

These strategies encourage teachers to support students in using their home language and connect learning to students’ cultural and linguistic experiences. While such approaches are consistently embedded throughout the program, the guidance does not help teachers gather critical information, such as students’ home language proficiency, literacy skills, previous schooling experiences, or families’ preferred language of communication, that would enable them to tailor instruction more effectively.