Translanguaging and Bilingual Learners: A Study of How Translanguaging Promotes Literacy Skills in Bilingual Students

This study was conducted in order to research the impact that the use of translanguaging strategies has on bilingual learners and discovered whether or not these strategies supports their English language development. Data was collected during lessons taught, interviews with students and teachers, questionnaire feedback, and participation in a collegial circle. Findings revealed that translanguaging did promote the growth of students’ English language development. Findings also showed that teachers use various translanguaging strategies in their classrooms, but only some are confident about the positive effects of these strategies. Implications from this study indicated that teachers need to be formally trained in using translanguaging, and supported in their use of these strategies in alignment with current language policies and programs

Translanguaging and Bilingual Learners: A Study of How Translanguaging Promotes Literacy Skills in Bilingual Students

This study was conducted in order to research the impact that the use of translanguaging strategies has on bilingual learners and discovered whether or not these strategies supports their English language development. Data was collected during lessons taught, interviews with students and teachers, questionnaire feedback, and participation in a collegial circle. Findings revealed that translanguaging did promote the growth of students’ English language development. Findings also showed that teachers use various translanguaging strategies in their classrooms, but only some are confident about the positive effects of these strategies. Implications from this study indicated that teachers need to be formally trained in using translanguaging, and supported in their use of these strategies in alignment with current language policies and programs

Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for Advanced Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Comparison of Outcomes between CD34+ Selected and Unmodified Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

In this study, we compared transplantation outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) who received a CD34+ cell-selected and those who received an unmodified allograft. This analysis initially included 181 patients, 60 who received a CD34+ cell-selected transplant and 121 who received an unmodified transplant. Owing to significant differences in disease characteristics, the analysis was limited to patients with <10% blasts before HSCT (n = 145). Two groups were defined: low risk, with low- and intermediate-risk cytogenetics (CD34+, n = 39; unmodified, n = 46), and high risk: poor and very poor risk cytogenetics (CD34+, n = 19; unmodified, n = 41). In the low-risk group, the incidence of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) at 1 year post-transplantation was 18% in the CD34+ subgroup versus 41.3% in the unmodified subgroup (P = .015). There were no differences between the subgroups in the incidence of grade III-IV aGVHD. The incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) at 3 years in the 2 subgroups was 5.3% and 56%, respectively (P < .001). At 3 years post-transplantation, relapse, overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS) were similar in the CD34+ and unmodified subgroups: 8.1% versus 19.4% (P = .187), 58.5% versus 53.7% (P = .51), and 59.5% versus 52.4% (P = .448). However, the composite outcome combining extensive cGVHD-free status and relapse-free status (CRFS) at 3 years was 59.5% in the CD34+ group versus 19.2% in the unmodified group (P < .001). In the high-risk group, grade II-IV aGVHD at 1 year was 31.6% in the CD34+ subgroup versus 24.4% in the unmodified subgroup (P = .752). There were no differences between the subgroups in the incidence of grade III-IV aGVHD. The incidence of cGVHD at 3 years in the 2 subgroups was 0% versus 27.6% (P = .013). At 3 years post-transplantation, relapse, OS, RFS, and CRFS in the 2 subgroups were 31.6% versus 69.3% (P = .007), 35.5% versus 14.5% (P = .068), 31.6% versus 10.7% (P = .045), and 31.6% versus 6.1% (P = .001), respectively. Cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis and transplant type had significant univariate associations with RFS in the high-risk cohort. Only cytogenetics (P = .03) remained associated with this outcome in a multivariate model. OS was similar in the 2 transplant groups; however, CRFS was superior in the CD34+ cell-selected transplant group