Effective administrators facilitate the educational success of English learners (ELs) by implementing and directing well-designed EL programs. Administrators typically understand the need to attract and retain high-quality teachers and provide these teachers with ongoing relevant professional development (PD). Less, however, is known about how to retain and provide relevant PD to paraprofessionals in EL programs (Abbate-Vaughn, 2007). Yet, paraprofessionals, who are also referred to as teachers’ aides or teaching assistants, are often integral to high quality programs of instruction for ELs. They work on the front lines to support classroom instruction for individual or small groups of ELs. Paraprofessionals frequently share the culture and language of their students and therefore often have more direct contact with ELs and their families than do other school personnel. While paraprofessionals may be vital to the education of ELs, their roles and their preparedness has been overlooked by research (Abbate-Vaughn, 2007) and thus may well be overlooked by program administrators.

At the 2014 Annual TESOL Convention & English Language Expo, we presented a session entitled “Tapping the Potential of EL Paraprofessionals Through Professional Development.” In this presentation, we shared existing research about the retention and preparation of paraprofessionals, most of which was drawn from the field of special education. We then presented what we learned from EL paraprofessionals who worked in a midsize urban school district with a high population of ELs. In this article, we provide an overview of what we learned about preparing and retaining EL paraprofessionals and relevant guidelines for administrators who are tasked with supervising paraprofessionals and/or implementing district- or school-wide programs for ELs.

Research About Paraprofessionals

Most of the research about paraprofessionals comes from the field of special education. With regard to PD and paraprofessional retention, the research focuses on two major areas: preparedness and respectful work environments. Research (e.g., Giangreco, Suter, & Doyle, 2010) suggests that paraprofessionals are frequently underprepared for the support they are expected to provide to students. Interestingly, it is the opportunity to participate in meaningful PD that not only prepares paraprofessionals, but also results in paraprofessionals’ feeling valued and respected (Giangreco, Edelman, & Broer, 2001). Paraprofessionals are also likely to feel valued when they have respectful relationships with teachers (Causton-Theoharis, Giangreco, Doyle, & Vadasy, 2007). This sense of being valued may contribute to retaining high-quality paraprofessionals.

Paraprofessionals in This Study

The school district examined in our study employed approximately 135 paraprofessionals to work with ELs, all of whom had associate degrees or higher, yet had not received previous PD for supporting the instruction of ELs. In 2013, principals in the district schools invited paraprofessionals to participate in 10 hours of PD and compensated them for the PD at their regular hourly rate. One hundred and nine paraprofessionals across all grade levels (pre-K–12) completed the PD (100 females and 9 males).

Paraprofessional PD

The PD, which was funded through a National Professional Development grant, was consistent with district initiatives. For example, the state in which the district was located had recently adopted the World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) standards for educating ELs, and the district was providing WIDA PD to teachers. The PD for paraprofessionals, therefore, drew from WIDA principles and provided ongoing practice using WIDA standards. The PD consisted of four interactive modules:

• The role of the paraprofessional in working with ELs in the district
• Second language acquisition theory and practice, academic language
• Vocabulary strategies, including how to select words to teach
• Assessment of language and content with ELs

During the modules, paraprofessionals learned and practiced new strategies. Between each module, participants completed a reflective journal entry about the module and tracked their use of these strategies using a worksheet-like tool, which we refer to as a strategy tracker.

What We Learned About EL Paraprofessionals

To understand what paraprofessionals learned and felt competent doing as a result of the PD and to explore their perceptions of their roles and overall work experience, we reviewed their PD materials (journals and strategy trackers). We also sought volunteers for interviews. Fifty-seven paraprofessionals submitted PD materials and 12 paraprofessionals (from early childhood, elementary, middle, and secondary grades) volunteered to be interviewed.

Our review of paraprofessionals’ PD materials indicated that paraprofessionals found the PD very useful and that it had increased their skills, their efficacy, and their confidence. For example, paraprofessionals reported that they had learned many strategies that would develop academic language and that they found these strategies to be valuable classroom tools. As one participant explained, “It gave us marvelous ideas of how to increase the vocabulary for students.” Paraprofessionals also spoke about what they learned about EL assessment. According to Scarlet, an early childhood paraprofessional, “With the use of the formative assessment, teachers can observe if the students are getting the learning targets and be prepared to set new goals for them if they are ready.” Although we did not explicitly ask paraprofessionals if they were using the new strategies, 26% of paraprofessionals reported that they had implemented newly acquired strategies successfully with their ELs. Paraprofessionals began implementing strategies during the PD, approximately four months prior to the interviews. The interviews took place six weeks after the final workshop. Participants also reported growing confidence as a result of the PD. For example, Sara, a paraprofessional in the secondary grades, told us, “The first thing I learned was that every time I set foot in a class I should be confident because paraprofessionals are very important to the school.”

Seventy-five percent of the EL paraprofessionals stated that they wanted to be valued for their work, which is consistent with research on special education paraprofessionals (Giangreco, Suter, & Doyle, 2010). Several paraprofessionals explained that they felt more valued because the district offered relevant PD and then also compensated them for participating. Paraprofessionals in this study highlighted the importance of being valued by their teachers for the capabilities and the skills they bring to the classroom. Three of the twelve paraprofessionals we interviewed explicitly discussed the positive and open relationships they had with their teachers. As one paraprofessional explained, “[My teacher] asks for my opinion and takes my advice.”

We found two primary structural barriers that interfered with paraprofessionals feeling valued both by their districts and by their teachers: scheduling and a lack of professional communication with district teachers. Scheduling for paraprofessionals of ELs was often inconsistent. Whereas in special education the presence of a paraprofessional may be specified by a student’s individualized education plan (IEP), a binding document, ELs do not have IEPs for language development. EL paraprofessionals were often called on to substitute for teachers or for other tasks. Another scheduling issue was prevalent at the middle and secondary levels. Here, paraprofessionals often float between classes or are assigned to a small group of students or to an individual student whom they follow. Thus, they work with many teachers leaving little or no time to meet with teachers to discuss student needs.

Other communication issues seemed to occur because not all teachers were clear as to how to use the services of an EL paraprofessional. Several paraprofessionals explained that although they had the expertise to support EL instruction, teachers often relied on them for discipline or housekeeping tasks, such as cleaning up after activities and sweeping the room. While some teachers instinctively tap into the strengths of their paraprofessionals, not all teachers may be able to do this without receiving PD themselves. While some teachers are able to effectively communicate with paraprofessionals, districts cannot assume that all teachers are able to do this without PD. A lack of preparation for teachers with paraprofessionals may result in situations similar to those from this study.

Guidelines for Program Administrators

1. Ensure that PD for paraprofessionals is included in program planning and implementation. Align this PD with district initiatives for teachers so that paraprofessionals and teachers are learning about the same instructional strategies.

2. Consider compensating paraprofessionals for attending PD outside of their regularly scheduled hours. The paraprofessionals in our study were clear that this type of support, which was a relatively small investment for the district, made them feel recognized, valued, and respected as important members of the EL instructional team.

3. Include teachers in PD with paraprofessionals. Our findings suggested a clear need to provide PD to paraprofessionals and teachers together for two reasons: 1) to keep teachers informed about what paraprofessionals were learning, and 2) to provide a time and space for teachers and paraprofessionals to communicate about instruction.

4. Address scheduling issues. While it may be convenient to call upon a paraprofessional to substitute in a classroom or to perform a clerical or other support staff task, removing the paraprofessional from her or his regular schedule creates inconsistency that interferes with effective EL instruction. If paraprofessionals work in the classrooms of several teachers, find a way to build in time for short meetings with each teacher at least once a week. This will promote continuity of EL instruction.

Paraprofessional PD was funded by the U.S. Department of Education (Preparing Excellent Teachers of All Language Learners [PETALLs] - T365Z120232).

References

Abbate-Vaughn, J. (2007). Paraprofessionals left behind? Urban paraprofessionals’ beliefs about their work in the midst of NCLB. Journal of Poverty, 11(4),143–164.

Causton-Theoharis, J., Giangreco, M. F., Doyle, M. B., & Vadasy, P. F. (2007). Paraprofessionals: The "sous chefs" of literacy instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 56–62.

Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S., & Broer, S.M. (2001). Respect, appreciation, and acknowledgment of paraprofessionals who support students with disabilities. The Council for Exceptional Children, 67(4), 485–498.

Giangreco, M. F., Suter, J. C., & Doyle, M. B. (2010). Paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: A review of recent research. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20, 41–57. doi: 10.1080/1047441090353535

Qing Zhao, EdD, is the research coordinator for PETALLs. She is an adjunct instructor at the Graduate School of Education at UMass Lowell and an ESL instructor for the University of Massachusetts Navitas program. Before coming to the United States, she worked as an ESL instructor in Mainland, China.

Heidi Perez, MA,is the K–12 ESL supervisor for the Methuen Public Schools and an adjunct instructor at University of Massachusetts Lowell. As a former ESL teacher and ESL coach, she has the unique opportunity to bridge current research and theory into classroom practice to improve education for ELs.