|dc.description.abstract||The purpose of this study was to analyze what a group of In-Service, Content- Area teachers in a middle school were saying to their Limited English Proficient (LEP) students as part of the curriculum and instruction, and lo categorize the comments along the lines of scientific curriculum inquiry (Foshay, 1991, as cited in Short, 1991). Observations and interview s were the primary methods of data collection for this proposed study.
An analysis was made of what the teachers were saying to communicate curricular applications and instructional modifications made by In-Service, Content-Area teachers at a middle school to leach LEP students. The language that this group of teachers used was coded lo describe the originality of the types of statements made by the teachers.
The study attempted to identify the curricular applications and instructional modifications made by In-Service, Content-Area teachers in a middle school. Moreover, the study attempted to fill in the gap in the literature regarding curriculum and instruction for LEP students at the middle school level.
The study did not attempt to evaluate the curricular adaptations and instructional modifications of the second-language-acquisition strategies learned in university-level course for meeting the needs of LEP students. In addition, the study did not attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of the In-Service, Content-Area teacher at the middle school level. Finally, the study did not attempt to predict success of the curricular adaptations and instructional modifications.
The teachers in this study, who had taken university-level courses designed to meet the needs of LEP students, have been found to have applied specific second-language- acquisition methods to their delivery of curriculum and instruction. In addition, this group of In-Service, Content-Area teachers at the middle school level who have been assigned to teach LEP students use language to manage lime, lessons, and the classroom. As a result of further analysis, as related to curricular adaptations and instructional modifications, the language was found as being of substance (what), educational practice (how), and purpose (why).||