This paper points out three different ways that language is involved in the standards: language requirements in the content standards, English language arts standards, and language-convention-specific standards. It calls for a thoughtful integration of these three dimensions.The authors also frame language in the context of the Common Core, focusing on what students can accomplish using language rather than on whether or how students use specific language features. This broader definition encourages the development of cognitive, linguistic, and affective strengths in ELLs and gives students the opportunity to take valuable actions toward academic success.

This paper makes recommendations for developing mathematics instruction for English Language Learners (ELLs) aligned with the Common Core State Standards. The recommendations can guide teachers, curriculum developers, and teacher educators as they develop their own ways of supporting mathematical reasoning and sense-making for ELLs.Some instructional recommendations discussed in the paper include: Focus on ELL students' mathematical reasoning, not the correctness of their mathematical language use. Shift to a focus on mathematical discourse practices; move away from simplified views of language. Support ELL students as they engage in complex mathematical language. Use ELL students' language and experiences as resources. Provide professional development to enhance teachers' awareness of ways to support ELs as they develop both language and mathematical knowledge.

This unit shows instructional approaches that are likely to help ELLs meet new standards in English Language Arts. Built around a set of famous persuasive speeches, the unit supports students in reading a range of complex texts. It invites them to write and speak in a variety of ways and for different audiences and purposes. Students engage in close reading of Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, Martin Luther King, Jr.'s I Have a Dream speech, Aristotleí˘ä‰ĺ䋢s Three Appeals, Robert Kennedyí˘ä‰ĺ䋢s On the Assassination of Martin Luther King, and George Wallaceí˘ä‰ĺ䋢s The Civil Rights Movement: Fraud, Sham, and Hoax, Barbara Jordaní˘ä‰ĺ䋢s All Together Now. The five lesson culminate with student's constructing their own persuasive texts.

This paper opens a larger conversation about what must be done to realize opportunities presented by the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and the literacy standards in other subject areas. It emphasizes the simultaneous challenges and opportunities for ELLs.The paper emphasizes that texts are approached differently for different purposes. Students need opportunities to approach texts with these varied purposes in mind. It also highlights how ELLs may be well served by opportunities to explore and justify their own textual hypotheses, even if their initial interpretations diverge from those of the teacher.

Even among educators who have been successful at educating ELLs under traditional supports and programs, the level of knowledge required to do the job successfully has increased. This paper considers more aggressive and creative capacity-building initiatives that strengthen and integrate the disciplinary teaching strategies with literacy and language development strategies. The authors discuss the value and implications of new partnerships, of structures for collaboration, and of time dedicated to engaging experts from different fields in the design and delivery of teacher preparation and professional development.

This paper addresses the implications, for ELLs, of the new standard's requirement that students be able to read and understand complex, informationally dense texts. The authors discuss the types of supports that learners need in order to work with complex texts. They also provide a sample of what academic discourse involves, using an excerpt from Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Letter from Birmingham Jail. They demonstrate how English learners can be provided with strategies for accessing complex texts, such as closely examining one sentence at a time. The authors argue that instruction must go beyond vocabulary and should begin with an examination of our beliefs about language, literacy and learning.