Safe Spaces

PROBLEM BRIEF

DE BB I E R A M P E R S A D I NSTRU CTOR : A. SAUDE R

K E V I N CH A N PME 801
L I ND S AY B R UN
M E GA N K OT
J E NNI F ER CR OS S ON
March 10, 2018

INTRODUCTION
Collaborative inquiry is a powerful design for professional learning that supports
the notion of educator leadership as it recognizes the role of teachers in shaping the
learning environment. It provides a systematic approach for teachers to explore issues
and determine resolutions through shared inquiry, reflection, and dialogue. Educators
engaged in collaborative inquiry become producers and disseminators of knowledge
rather than mere consumers of research. This powerful tool provides a framework for
teachers to authentically guide students’ learning thus ensuring a more holistic
approach to educational inquiry. Leadership opportunities should extend beyond
simply serving on a committee or acting as a department or grade level chair. Through
their collaborative work and willingness to engage in lifelong learning, teachers have
the potential to become more meaningfully involved in school-improvement and
catalysts for change.
The power to change practices and improve academic achievement lies in the


hands of educational leaders,  who with open and flexible mindsets, are at the forefront
of student development. Over the years, the concept of safe in schools has evolved to
the provision of an atmosphere that facilitates the emotional, physical and overall well
being of the students (Sindhi, 2013). Therefore, fostering pedagogical practices and
safe spaces that provide teachers and facilitators with the autonomy to enact change is
necessary for improvements within education.
 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

3
Inquiry Focus
3
Project Background
4
Method
5
Findings and Implications
5
i. Participation Paradox and Safe Space
6
ii. English Language Learners and Safe Space
8
iii. At-Risk Youth and Safe Space
10
iv. Relational Trust and Safe Space
12
v. Cultural Sensitivity and Safe Space
Recommendations 15
Bibliography 16
 INQUIRY FOCUS

To identify or explore ways to create safe spaces in the fields

of education and learning.

PROJECT BACKGROUND: WHY SAFE SPACE?

Discussion and active participation are two pillars of collaborative inquiry at any level.

In an ever-growing world of educational theologies, safe spaces become an all-

encompassing factor to the success of an educator’s profession. Creating safe learning

spaces allows for meaningful, positive, and progressive impact on student learning as it

helps develop conflict management traits, meta-cognition, and diversity awareness.


Author Tom Hierck states that teachers can establish clear expectations, enhance

instruction and assessment practices, and foster quality relationships with students,

thereby maximizing the potential of all students (Pg. 3).The educator’s role in fostering the

development of a positive and welcoming learning environment for all, is fundamental to

successful student growth.

The purpose of this design/problem brief is to identify and explore ways to create

safe spaces to enhance educational experiences within school systems and beyond the

classroom. We seek to navigate processes of safe space using the four stages of the

Collaborative Inquiry: Facilitator’s Guide. Through this process, we intend to examine

common issues within education as they relate to the development of safe spaces. These
areas include: participation paradox, ELL success, at-risk youth, relational trust and cultural

sensitivity.
 METHOD

In framing the problem, we followed the Facilitator’s Guide to identify student

needs and common issues. Subsequently, we were able to prioritize the issues that

could use further examination, thus allowing for the natural development of our sphere
of concern. Each of these steps led us towards a shared vision. From this point, the

development of the purpose statement seemed authentic and genuine.


After developing the basis for this problem brief, we each examined this issue

from a different lens. That is to say, we were each focused on the big idea of safe

spaces while researching specific ways in which these safe spaces may be created
and, therefore, addressed within this collaborative inquiry.    


Key pieces of literature were selected for analysis in the above noted areas.

Following the review of these sources, a dialogue was initiated using the Collaborative

Inquiry Facilitator’s Guide, as well as our personal and professional experiences.

1

Through careful examination of articles and connections with professional learning
communities we will discuss the implications of our findings in the following areas to

address our problem. Using the Facilitator’s Guide to articulate our analysis, we

reviewed critical pieces of literature, the implications found in the literature, and areas of

interest of safe space learning when determining the final solution. Specifically, the

analysis of data will follow four key points:

a) What does the data tell us about the problem?

b) What are the assumptions we make about students and their

learning?

c) What are some things we could do to deal with this?

d) What are the strengths and weaknesses you see based on the data?
 FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS

PARTICIPATION PARADOX AND SAFE SPACES

a) What does the data tells us about the problem?

The data tells us that students generally wish to have their comments and ideas
validated and discussed in the traditional classroom. Furthermore, personal
experiences in marginalized groups who face barriers such as race, class, gender,
and sexual orientation, indicate that they are more aware of the risks in discussing
difficult topics.The creation of effective learning environments showed that students
would respect others for their experiences, motivate critical thinking/reflection, take
risks in learning about peers, and support colleagues while encouraging deeper
thinking.

b) What are the assumptions we make about students and their learning?

The participation paradox shows critical aspects in how educators view the

traditional classroom and how students learn or view safe spaces. More notably, the

absence of conflict in a classroom is often viewed as a safe classroom, when in fact

may very well be the opposite. The lack of challenge or conflict poses discomfort or

dysfunctional atmospheres. Educators need to manage conflicts, as opposed to

prohibiting it when it relates to critical thinking and frictions of dialogue.

c) What are some things we could do to deal with this?

We as educators must understand our own classroom, expertise, and trade-offs of

introducing safe spaces. Educators must not neglect a student's background and how

their views intertwine with bias. Rather, they should understand that discomfort and

conflict as necessary when addressing issues. Should safe spaces be introduced into an

educator's classroom, then the management and reflection of these difficulties become

crucial in the progression of student learning.

d) What are the strengths and weaknesses you see based on the data?
Although the article and data is arguably recent (2013), safe spaces are directly

intertwined with social constructs and the progression of modern day society. How students

gain their bias and perspective of these difficult topics are dependent on such a large variety

of aspects, that is becomes unpredictable. As time moves forward, this data becomes less

reliable, at a much faster pace.

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND SAFE SPACES

a) What does the data tells us about the problem?

Classroom strategies and program development needs to be reassessed to include

culturally sensitive responsive language. English Language Learners perform below the
norm for their age groups by at least 1-2 years. According to the Organization for Economic

Co-operation and Development(OECD), Canada does an above average job of showing

equality between native English speakers and ELL’s. There are many factors that influence

the full engagement of educational success of ELL’s: Program development, relational

experiences, cultural acceptance, or learning disabilities.

Program development data shows that ELL students show similar success rates when

compared to native English speakers in Canada. Programs that assist in developing

interpersonal and intra-personal skills amongst students has been key. Canada has shown

that the task of tending to the emotional and educational needs of ELL students is critical to

engaging them in learning.   Creating authentic respect for students’ first language can
enhance learning experiences for both teachers and students. In addition to a student’s

language barrier, students may have issues of trauma, difficulties at home, difficulties

adjusting to their new life, or learning disabilities. One other factor is the usual placement or
living circumstance of being placed in where students are mostly socially disadvantaged.

Most new families to Canada live in areas where poverty is higher than average.

b) What are the assumptions we make about ELL students and their

learning?
Teacher education is key to ensuring that ELL’s are in environments that foster
growth. Being in an environment that places importance on one language over another is
not beneficial to the learning of any student.  Using metaphors to describe our teaching
doesn’t necessarily mean that we are improving learning conditions for our students.
Saying that our classrooms are safe spaces without knowing exactly what a safe space
looks like for these learners will only hinder the pace of their success. Teachers need to
be equipped with the skills to provide support in ways that does not allow serious issues
to be disguised as language barriers. Developing, but not fully ensuring that
implemented strategies and programs are followed will affect the expected learning
outcomes of our students. Ensuring that each student is ready for the transition from
their native language to English is important to the amount of language acquisition a
child takes in. Looking at the Seven Key Learning Environments in Your
Classroom( Solution Tree, 2017) shows that safety and security comes before Love and
Belonging. Therefore, expecting a child to apply their skills to learning we would require
them to first have an understanding of what is needed from them. Teachers who can
adopt and practice these principles are more apt to having successful connections to
ELL students.

c)  What are some things we could do to deal with assumptions?

English speakers sense that their native language is more important than the
language of the non-native speakers.  This could cause imbalance in the way that ELL’s see
themselves, furthering the issues of self-concept and ability.  Teachers not having the right
pedagogical skills to teach the required competencies are not able to foster a good learning
environment that promotes growth. The OECD and the Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA) has many resources that allows administrators and teachers to assess
themselves to ensure that they are on the right track to creating successful learning
environments. Their surveys allows us to answer questions that will help to guide our
philosophies and program planning while measuring how successful the programmes are.

d)  What are the strengths/weaknesses based on data?

The strength in the data is that here in Canada we are doing a good job of fostering
good learning environments for ELL students. Her in Canada our ELL students are just as
successful or sometimes more successful than our native born speakers. Second
generation ELL’s are showing better statistics than that of their parents, which is a positive
result. Overall, learning is the knowledge and understanding of our global world and its
issues. Understanding each other inter-culturally through shared values of human dignity
and respect can simply create environments that foster change and growth for everyone.
Showing empathy and respectful interactions are skills that all students could benefit from.
Creating sensible accountability means having good practices in place to meet the needs of
all students.

AT-RISK YOUTH AND SAFE SPACES

a) What does the data tell us about the problem?

At-risk youth can be successful academically despite the adverse circumstances that
they have been forced to endure. This is done primarily through the development of
resiliency which refers to the ability to develop “characteristics and coping skills that enable
them to succeed” (McMillan & Reed 137). In order to aid students in developing resilience,
they must be surrounded by “a network of people who have a common bond and work in
cooperation with each other” (McMillian & Reed 139). To effectively do this, our primary2
focus should be on “identifying solutions beyond the individual level to the broader
environment and system” (LeMoine & Labelle 1) by essentially creating a safe space for all.

b) What are the assumptions we make about students and their learning?

We make assumptions that students who suffer from a difficult home life may not be
willing to put forth the same effort as those with stable living situations. This is simply not
true. At-risk students who are able to build resilience do so through developing a “strong
sense of self-efficacy…[wherein they] see themselves as being successful because they
have chosen to be so and give much credit to themselves” (McMillan & Reed 138).


c) What are some things we could do to deal with this?

As educators and members of a school community, we can create a safe space by

providing “a refuge for resilient students…[to] help promote the growth of self-

esteem” (McMillan & Reed 138). We can do this by creating opportunities for students to

connect with peers and trusted adults outside of the classroom through various clubs and
sports teams. At-risk students may find solace by becoming involved in helping others such

as volunteering for community service hours, helping peers with homework assignments or

taking on responsibilities around the home. This “required helpfulness” has been found to be

a motivator for resilient students (McMillan & Reed 138).

Although at-risk students may demonstrate independence and strength, those who have
developed resilience often seek out the guidance and support of “at least one caregiver who
gives them needed attention and support” (McMillan & Reed 138).    In the school system,
the role of this caregiver is frequently adopted by teachers, coaches, and mentors who
connect these at-risk youth with resources in the school community that provide "spaces
where [they] can be engaged, build and sustain social support networks" to promote
building resilience (LeMoine & Labelle 15).
d) What are the strengths/weaknesses based on data?

These articles demonstrate a positive outlook on the educational outcomes of at-risk

students by discussing the importance of “showing a strong sense of self-efficacy” thus
fostering a “sense of hope [and the]... belief that doing well in school is necessary to doing
well in life” (McMillan & Reed 139). Creating a safe, comfortable environment that nurtures
these resilient characteristics is certainly the priority of educators. The use of goal setting,
mentor support and community activities all seem like realistic strategies and techniques that
could very-well be implemented in the school systems. However, these articles only briefly
mention the unwillingness of at-risk youth to voluntarily participate in the school community
“because of their general feelings of disconnectedness” (McMillan & Reed 140). This is a
complex issue which I think needs greater exploration in order to be properly addressed.
Nonetheless, I would agree with the overall consensus that “resilient students give us hope
and encouragement” for the development and usefulness of safe spaces within schools
wherein at-risk youth can thrive and achieve success.

RELATIONAL TRUST AND SAFE SPACES

a) What does the data tell us about the problem?

The classroom is a transitional space; where students transform unconscious knowledge

to explicit knowledge articulated between and amongst others (Kisfalvi and Oliver 714).
Teaching style is identified as a primary contributor to unsafe space: if the teacher talks at
students in order to impart knowledge (i.e., lecturing), when students solicit their
understanding, a greater sense of judgement is feared by students as they did not get to co-
create this knowledge but rather consume it (ibid 717). The teacher must be an experiential
participant-using experience and observation with content to become a co-creator with
students in learning. This creates a negotiation for both student and teacher: in this learning
style the teacher must confront their fear of not fulfilling what they have aimed to achieve in
teaching; the student is not instantly validated by the teacher as their knowledge acquisition
is now a contribution to learning, rather than an absorption of it. Correspondingly, Holley and
Steiner found that in their questionnaire to Social Work graduate and undergraduate
students, the teacher is vital in creating a foundation for classroom safe space rules and
regulations (57). Teacher attention to identity was one important means in which conflict
management to difference of opinion was dialogued.

b) What are the assumptions we make about students and their learning?
Often times we equate silence with acceptance of the current learning situations

occurring in the classroom. As suggested in each reading, silence may be a reactionary

response, one that does not seek to reinforce the current status quo, but rather resist it. The

labels and language we use in the classroom to capture the identities and experiences of

learners and teachers must be mindful to the historical sensitivities of power that limit some

folks and privilege others (i.e., Who is more likely to occupy space in learning? Who is

allowed to speak? How does everyone speak?)


c) What are some things we could do to deal with this?

"An important area of difficulty in establishing open communication lines in the

experiential classroom has to do with the challenges for both student and instructor of

deeply listening to sensitive material that others share," (Stanford and Roark cited in Kisfalvi

and Oliver 729-730). Witnessing differs from active listening in which the person who speaks
is not interrupted or ask to clarify immediately (ibid 730). The silence that may/may not follow

becomes a subtext of latent thought, alongside body language; nonverbal communication

functions as an important moment for learning. As educators, while our interjections to

student-student conversations helps facilitate further dialogues, I think that there becomes a

reliance on teachers to then take over the learning process when silence happens. Silence
enacted by the student is an alternative representation of response, one that is not created

by the teacher but rather evinced by the student: silence speaks back to the expectations of
how students should participate. Silence may be a productive response to a power dynamic

going on in the classroom. In order to channel silence as such, the teacher must also have a

reflexive attitude to that moment (ibid 734). Silence can be an unexpected direction that
challenges power dynamics going on in the classroom, but dealing with it must be

productive (i.e., get the speaker to break their own silence with prompts).



d) What are the strengths and weaknesses you see based on the data?

Technology and communication styles are constantly changing, and in dynamic flux:

direct instructional guidance in dealing with paradoxes of safe space for students and
teacher cannot fully capture the intricacies of each classroom environment. Reflexivity, and
the re-visiting the monitoring processes must be open to incorporate new ways in which
students learn. It is important to put safe space on a continuum, it is not a discrete
happening in the classroom, but rather an ongoing negotiation of trust building, active
witnessing, and evaluating one's participation and their role in knowledge creation.

CULTURAL SENSITIVITY AND SAFE SPACES

a) What does the data tell us about the problem?

English Language students who are afforded spaces in which to gain and practise self
regulation strategies while engaging in meaningful problem solving lessons have increased
perceptions of efficacy. The way students perceive their ability to problem solve or perform a
task directly affects how motivated they will be to attempt future tasks (Wang, Quach et al,
2009). Therefore, it is imperative that educators cultivate relationships and provide spaces
that encourage students to challenge, reflect and develop deeper understandings through
collaboration with their peers. It is not enough for educators to simply designate safe spaces
without fully understanding what they entail (Stengel, B.S., & Weems, L., 2010). Safe spaces
require developing a school culture that fosters tolerance, diversity, understanding and
respect so ELL students  feel safe in learning to express themselves, and challenge opinions
that expand their collaboration and problem based inquiry skills. Teacher lesson designs
must be carefully constructed to include differentiation through tools such as technology that
motivate and empower students (Diallo, 2014).

b) What are the assumptions we make about students and their learning?

With the ever changing diversity in Canadian schools, teachers are feeling overwhelmed
trying to meet the needs of all learners (Andrade, M.d.L., 2014). Many educators feel it is an
insurmountable task to provide ELL students with dynamic, engaging curriculum that fosters
collaborative inquiry due to limitations in language, understanding and cultural uncertainty.
They are unsure how to implicitly teach self-regulation skills without traditional feedback of
language, writing or comprehension from students. They are unsure how to incorporate
technology and are concerned about the limits and logistics of access to technology within
schools (Robertson pg. 13). Although teachers are   limited in their understanding of the
encompassing complexities of today’s ELL students they want to be sensitive to cultural
practises and foster safe spaces for learners. However, they are concerned that safe spaces
for ELL students could further confuse or create challenges for new learners due to limited
language, delayed processing and misunderstandings that might not be contained within
the safety of the classroom/school.

c) What are some things we could do to deal with assumptions?

School districts, administrators and educators should continue to engage in Collaborative
Inquiry to address safe spaces, technology   in schools and classrooms. Prioritizing and
developing a school culture that fosters tolerance, diversity, understanding, and respect will
create an environment in which all stakeholders will be able to actualize their potential.
Administrators and teachers can provide safe environments within the larger school culture
and in classrooms by including students in the collaborative process. Surveys to access
school climate and engaging students in collaborative inquiry problem solving initiatives to
create and implement action plans will further sense of ownership and feelings of belonging
for ELL students and create a truly safe environment for all (Stengel, B. S., & Weems, L.,
2010). Providing training, fostering collaborative inquiry and opportunities to create
curriculum for teachers will increase teacher efficacy and contribute to increased inquiry
based lessons and learning in classrooms (Genc, G. et al., 2016). Collaboration and
understanding of the complex nature of ELL students diverse backgrounds will provide a
structure that ensures consistency across curriculum and within the school. Finally, schools
need to engage the parents of ELL students and the larger community in collaborative
problem solving to create environments that are reflective of encompassing input. Through
regular consultation with associate schools, hosting community events within the school and
highlighting events that students can “showcase” their successes will encourage parents,
family and community business involvement in school culture.

d) What are the strengths/weaknesses based on data?

Although there are limited studies of ELL students and technology the data examined
does support the assertion that technology empowers students as it is a motivating tool that
allows students to show their learning (Diallo, A., 2014)). Further research is suggested to
investigate the barriers to accessing technology and more analytical data is needed to
reveal the extent to which technology improves reading and writing. Student engagement is
key to perseverance in problem solving and students’ perceived success. Therefore,
problem based inquiry lessons that include technology and instruction and of self regulation
strategies will increase efficacy and success due to students contributing success to effort.
As students gain skills perceptions will evolve so regular monitoring of best practises will be
important. Further study and research on incorporating inquiry based learning and tools in
which ELL students can show their learning needs to be a priority in education as the
population of Canada will continue to become increasingly diverse (Andrade, M.d.L., 2014).
The empirical data supports the theory that problem based inquiry in technology and
providing safe places will empower ELL students and promote collaboration thereby,
increasing language acquisition. However, as stated previously, priority study of ELL
challenges and more analytical data will increase validity. Furthermore, research will need to
keep up and be ongoing as new technology and communication styles are growing
exponentially.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Educators must take into consideration the advantages and roadblocks of safe
space learning within their own subject, classroom, or specific training environment. Rather
than steering discomfort away, educators will find that understanding discomfort and conflict
is more beneficial in resolving issues for all involved. This aspect of conflict management
requires the educator to establish a clear relationship of trust with and among students.
Building relational trust between teachers and students is a preventative measure
geared towards effective conflict management. Inviting discomfort to challenge the status
quo of the classroom fosters safe space; this is done by dealing with conflict in a way that
does not pacify or ignore power dynamics in the classroom. To help diffuse hierarchical
relations, it is essential that teachers develop foundational rules that are in collaboration with
students in creating their learning space. Furthermore, educators may choose to allow
students the space to negotiate their discomfort by empowering them to engage in
discourse with their peers at their discretion.
Creating a network of support is paramount to the development of self-efficacy and
resiliency within students. In the creation of a supportive environment, caring educators
provide guidance and leadership thus fostering an atmosphere of safety, security and
acceptance. This safe space allows students to develop coping skills for dealing with
discomfort; these characteristics may then manifest within a student’s self-confidence and
motivation to achieve success. Educators must recognize that the individual needs of
students will vary, and may often be influenced by factors beyond the control of the teacher.
Continuing to develop a nurturing environment in which students of all abilities can thrive is
at the core of teaching practice.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrade, M.d.L. (2014). Role of Technology in Supporting English Language

Learners in Today’s Classrooms. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of
Toronto.

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/

publications/books/109003/chapters/Fostering-a-Healthy,-Safe,-and-Supportive-Learning-
Environment@-How-HP~HP-Schools-Do-It.aspx

Baguley, M., Midgley, W., & Kerby, M. (2013). Creativity and collaboration in the
education sector. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 8(1), 53-54. Retrieved
from https://search-proquest-com.proxy.queensu.ca/docview/1470865278?accountid=6180

Barre , B. J. (2010). Is "Safety" Dangerous? A Critical Examination of the Classroom

as Safe Space. e Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1 (1). h
p://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2010.1.9

Brinegar, K. (2010). I Feel Like I’m Safe Again: A Discussion of Middle Grades
Organizational Structures from the Perspective of Immigrant Youth and Their Teachers, RMLE
Online, 33:9, 1-14. DOI: 10.1080/194004476.2010.11462072

Folorunsho, A. (2014). Instructional models for english language learners as

contributors to elementary teachers' effectiveness (Order No. 3665442). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1640913403). Retrieved from https://search-
proquest-com.proxy.queensu.ca/docview/1640913403?accountid=6180

Gayle, Barbara Mae Dr.; Cortez, Derek; and Preiss, Raymond W. (2013) "Safe
Spaces, Difficult Dialogues, and Critical inking," International Journal for the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning: Vol. 7: No. 2, Article 5.
Available at: h ps://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2013.0702053

Greene, K., & Mitcham, K. (2012). From the Secondary Section: Community in the
Classroom. The English Journal, 101(4), 13-15. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/
41415466
 Genc, G., Kulusakli, E., & Aydin, S. (2016). Exploring EFL Learners’ Perceived Self-
efficacy and Beliefs on English Language Learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,
41 (2).
http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n2.4

Hierck, T., Seven Keys to a Positive Learning Environment in Your Classroom.

https://www.solutiontree.com/blog/category/instruction/page/3/

Holley, Lynn C., & Sue Steiner. "Safe Space: Student Perspectives on Classroom
Environment." Journal of Social Work Education, vol. 41, no. 1, 2005, pp. 49-64.

Hughes, Janette Michelle (2017) "Digital making with “At-Risk” youth", International
Journal of Information and Learning Technology, Vol. 34 Issue: 2, pp.102-113, https://doi-
org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1108/IJILT-08-2016-0037

Inlay, L. T. (2016). Creating a culture of respect through the implicit curriculum.

Middle School Journal, 47(2), 23-31. 10.1080/00940771.2016.1102600

Kisfalvi, Veronika., & David Oliver. "Creating and Maintaining a Safe Space in
Experiential Learning." Journal of Management Education, vol. 39, no. 6, 2015, pp. 713-740.

LeMoine, Karen, and Labelle, Judy. What Are the Effective Interventions for Building
Resilience among At-risk Youth. Brampton: Peel Public Health, 2014.  Canadian Electronic
Library/desLibris. Web. 20 2 2018.

Lichtinger, Einat, and Judith Leichtentritt. "Self-Regulation Programs for at-Risk

Youth: Are Teachers Affected Too?" Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
(JESPAR) 21.2 (2016): 104-17. Web. 20 Feb. 2018

McMillan, J. H. & Hearn, J. (2008) Student Self Assessment: The Key to Stronger
Student Motivation and Higher Achievement. Educational Horizons, v. 87. n 1. p. 40-49.

McMillan, James H., and Daisy F. Reed. “At-Risk Students and Resiliency: Factors
Contributing to Academic Success.” The Clearing House, vol. 67, no. 3, 1994, pp. 137–140.
JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30188771.

McGee, John J., and Fan-Yu Lin. "Providing a Supportive Alternative Education
Environment for at-Risk Students." Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for
Children and Youth 61.2 (2017): 181-7. Web. 20 Feb. 2018
 Parris, H., Estrada, L. & Honigsfeld, A.M. (2016). ELL Frontiers: Using technology to
enhance instruction for English learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Robertson, K. Preparing ELLs to be 21st Century Learners (2018). Colorin

Colorado. orghttp://www.colorincolorado.org/article/preparing-ells-be-21st-century-learners

Stengel, B. S., Weems, L . (2010). Questioning Safe Space: An Introduction.

Published online: 29 September 2010. Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 Stud
Philos Edu. 29:505–507 DOI 10.1007/s11217-010-9205-8

Sindhi, Swaleha A. "Creating safe school environment: role of school principals."

The Tibet Journal, vol. 38, no. 1-2, 2013, p. 77+. Academic OneFile, http://
link.galegroup.com.proxy.queensu.ca/apps/doc/A355558883/AONE?
u=queensulaw&sid=AONE&xid=40d9e32e. Accessed 17 Feb. 2018.

Svihla, V. (2010). Collaboration as a dimension of design innovation. CoDesign,

6(4), 245-262. 10.1080/15710882.2010.533186

Sweet, C., Blythe, H. and Carpenter, R. (2016), Why the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
Is Essential to Creative Teaching. The National Teaching & Learning Forum, 26: 7–9. doi:
10.1002/ntlf.30095

Wang, Chuang, Quach, Lan Hue, and Rolston, Joan. (2009) Understanding English
Language Learners’ Self-Regulated Learning Strategies: Case Studies of Chinese Children
in U.S. Classrooms and Home Communities, New Perspectives on Asian American Parents,
Students and Teacher Recruitment, p 73-99.Information Age Publishing.


Wang, Chuang & Schwab, Götz & Fenn, Pete & Chang, Mei. (2013). Self-Efficacy
and Self-Regulated Learning Strategies for English Language Learners: Comparison
between Chinese and German College Students. Journal of Educational and Developmental
Psychology. 3. 10.5539/jedp.v3n1p173.

Ward, N. L., Woods, L. N., Crusto, C. A., Strambler, M. J., & Linke, L. H. (2011).
Creating a safe space to learn: The significant role of graduate students in fostering
educational engagement and aspirations among urban youth. Community Psychologist /
Division of Community Psychology of the American Psychological Association, 44(1), 33–36.