Languages in School and Society: Policy and Pedagogy 9783110869132, 9783110125764

Citation preview

Languages in School and Society

Languages in School and Society Policy and Pedagogy

Edited by Mary E. McGroarty Christian J. Faltis

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

1991

To Robert L. Politzer with respect and affection from his colleagues and students

Contents Part I: Language issues in wilder contexts

1

Introduction

3

The logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism: A parallel between Classical grammarians and Moslem legal theorists Joseph H. Greenberg

5

A methodological check on three cross-polity studies of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell

21

Am6nagements de frontiere et datations des changements phonologiques Αηάΐέ Martinet

31

L'etat, gardien de la langue: A diachronic view of language policy and planning in Quebec Sandra R. Schecter

39

Part II: Developments in second language pedagogy

53

Introduction

55

Interaction: The prelude to communication Wilga M. Rivers

57

The scenario: Its use in interactive second language instruction . . . . 71 Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco Four conversations: Task variation and classroom learner discourse Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon What do we know about effective second language teaching? Mary McGroarty Second language teaching methodologies: Past influences, current practices, future trends Ann K. Fathman

85 107

117

Contents

ix

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students: Insights from a case study of curriculum development Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C, Coughran

335

Using qualitative research to shape policy and promote effective practice in bilingual education: The case of Connecticut Cynthia D. Prince

359

Part V: The testing of language proficiency

379

Introduction

381

Testing linguistic and communicative proficiency: The case of reading comprehension

383

Andrew D. Cohen On teaching and testing learner proficiency in the case of foreign languages used in a diglossic situation Albert Valdman

409

The validation of oral performance tests for second language learners Mindy A. Meldman

423

Part VI: Home and school contexts for language learning

439

Introduction

441

Ethnolinguistic minority groups and literacy: Tom, Dick and Harry at home and at school Johanna S. DeStefano

443

Using the ethnography of African-American communications in teaching composition to bidialectal students Mary Rhodes Hoover

465

Home and school contexts for language development: The experience of two Mexican-American preschoolers Lucinda Pease-Alvarez

487

Parti

Language issues in wider contexts

Introduction

The papers in this section examine macrosociolinguistic concerns, concerns that shape the contexts for language use. Joseph Greenberg offers a provocative look at the historical tension between prescriptivism and descriptivism in grammatical theory and shows that the widely held rejection of prescriptivism on the part of linguists is a relatively modern development. Joshua Fishman, Frank Solano, and Grant McConnell present a method for quantifying linguistic homogeneity within countries. Using a method developed to permit continuous rather than dichotomous classification of variables, their approach allows more precise cross-national comparisons that inform the understanding of the relationships (and lack thereof) between linguistic heterogeneity, political turmoil, and economic development around the world. The next two chapters are based on case studies of sociolinguistic questions related to French which illustrate more general trends in the treatment of macrosociolinguistic issues. Andr6 Martinet discusses the methodological problem of determination of the relative importance of synchronic versus diachronic influences on phonetic changes which contribute to identification of dialect boundaries in contintental French. Sandra Schecter's chapter discusses the historical developments which have replaced religious with secular regulation of language in the language policy of Quebec. Together, these papers give evidence of the larger social and intellectual factors that have affected the global milieux of language use and language learning.

The logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism: A parallel between Classical grammarians and Moslem legal theorists Joseph H. Greenberg All linguistics except that in the Western tradition during approximately the last one hundred and fifty years has been prescriptivist. Even now in popular belief and in the Third World prescriptivism is virtually taken for granted, and values and attitudes associated with it must be taken into account by socio linguists in their researches. It has thus been almost everywhere and in all periods in which human beings have made language an object of conscious study that the setting of standards of correctness and incorrectness, the choice of forms of speech for standardization and other normative judgements are integral parts of the task of the linguist. The question then becomes, not so much why linguistics has generally been prescriptive, but how the notion that it was solely descriptive arose in Western tradition. The grammaire gonorale that was dominant in Europe before the rise of historical linguistics was clearly prescriptive. However, it was inherent in the nature of the historical linguistics that developed into the dominant force in the course of the nineteenth century that scientific linguistics should be purely descriptive rather than normative. For if language is in a constant process of change, norms become relative to a particular historical stage of a language. What was correct in an earlier period is not correct now and what is correct today will not be at some future stage. It is of interest in regard to the central topic of the present study, a comparison of the principles by which grammatical rules are justified with those that have arisen in jurisprudence to validate legal norms, that Karl von Savigny, the founder of the historical school of law in the early nineteenth century, had among his pupils Jakob Grimm, one of the founders of comparative linguistics. Savigny was strongly influenced by his student's ideas about the organic nature of linguistic change (von Savigny 1831:24-31).

6

Joseph H. Greenberg

I have not investigated this problem in detail, but it appears that this connection between the historical approach to language and the question of descriptivism versus prescriptivism did not become fully explicit until the Neogrammarian period of the 1870's. In particular, it arose in connection with the problem of analogical change which was often called "false analogy". In a lengthy footnote (1876: 317-20), Brugmann noted that many linguists resisted the notion of analogical explanation in older languages like Classical Greek and Sanskrit because they regard analogy as something pathological and degenerative. Hence the name "false analogy" is unfortunate because it suggests that the grammarian has the duty of prescribing in what ways a language should change whereas he should simply accept the phenomena which present themselves. He asks whether we can suppose that the Hindus of Vedic times or the Homeric Greeks resisted the tendency to create new forms analogically and thus differed from modern speakers. In fact some of these earlier formations were in their own time "false analogies." Brugmann thus comes down on the side of what has been called the principle of uniformitarianism, a term introduced by Lyell into nineteenth century geology. According to this principle, we have no right to assume that processes of change in earlier periods not subject to direct observation were any different in kind from what we observe now. This anti-prescriptivist view was inherited by structuralism and was particularly emphasized in American structuralism which often called itself descriptive linguistics. Esper, in a strongly anti-generativist work on the subject of analogy (1973: xxx ) declares himself astounded by the acceptance by many linguists of what in his view is a form of prescriptive grammar. The issue, to my knowledge, is hardly discussed by generativists and they would no doubt say that they were descriptive and not prescriptive. There is, however, an interesting lapse in Chomsky (1965:13), when he says that in the right-branching "This is the cat that caught the rat that stole the cheese", the intonational breaks are put in the wrong places, that is, after "cat" and "rat" rather than where the main brackets appear in his syntactic analysis and which reflect the constituent structures. We shall see that Brugmann and, in this case at least, Chomsky have chosen differently among a small set of basic criteria whenever the problem of justifying a rule, whether linguistic or legal, arises.

Logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism

1

To advocate, in Hall's well-known phrase to leave your language alone is just as much a choice as not to. The present study, which is of a preliminary nature, developed out of my observation that, in what is the most explicit theory of the justification of legal norms of which I am aware, the doctrine of the "roots of jurisprudence" in Moslem canon law, the principles can be equated without serious difficulty with the chief criteria for linguistic correctness developed though in a far less systematic way by classical grammarians. Similar principles, as might be expected, are found in other systems of law in discussions of linguistic norms in other grammatical traditions; occasional reference will be made to them in the course of the discussion. In particular since certain Arab grammarians were well aware of the parallel between grammar and jurisprudence, and sought in conscious imitation of law to elaborate a doctrine of "roots of grammar", there will be a brief discussion of this aspect of Arabic grammatical theory. I shall first consider Moslem canon law, the sharica as it is called. Orthodox Islam is a law-centered religion. Jurisprudence, as in Judaism, covers a far wider range than our civil, criminal and administrative law. It embraces the details of religious ritual and numerous other matters pertaining to human conduct. Within Sunnite Islam, there developed four standard schools, whose distribution at present is largely geographical and whose substantive differences are realtively minor. Mohammed died in 623; by approximately 900 "the gates of independent interpretation (ijtihäd) were closed", although some modernists have sought to reopen them. The doctrine of the four roots of jurisprudence is basically due to Al-Shäffi (767-820), the founder of one of the standard four schools of jurisprudence. The four roots are Koran, Tradition (Hadith), Consensus (Ijmac) and Analogy (Qiyäs). Two schools, the Malikite and the Hanafite precede the Shaffite. During this earlier period the basic distinction was between cilm 'knowledge' and ray Opinion'. The former was based on Koran and Tradition. These were authoritative where they sufficed. Malik also used the notion of Consensus. Since he lived in Medina where the Prophet spent his last years, he had access to those who know him in his lifetime and it was the agreement of these "Companions of the Prophet" which underlay Malik's notion of consensus. Where these sources were inadequate, Malik used his own personal views, that is to say "opinion". This last source was used in a rather free

8

Joseph H. Greenberg

way especially by Abu Hanifa who lived in Iraq, not in Medina, and who did not have access to the Companions in the way that Malik did. It was in reaction to what he perceived as the free-wheeling use of opinion by the Hanafites, that Shaffi sought to develop specific rules of analogy (qiyäs). In the course of developing his views on these questions, he founded a branch of inquiry which concerned the "roots of jurisprudence" (*usul al-fiqh) or general principles as distinct from the "branches" (fumc) which constituted the substantive legal rules. A great deal of controversy among the legal schools revolved around the admissibility, interpretation, and relative importance of sources of jurisprudence which became the orthodox ones of developed Islamic law.1 We now consider these four roots in turn. It is clear that in principle only three are involved. Koran and Tradition may be collapsed under the single rubric of authority, so that we have authority, consensus, and analogy. The Koran itself contains only occasional instances of legal regulations revealed ad hoc to deal with particular cases which arose in the course of Mohammed's lifetime. The Koran by itself could not form the basis of a fully developed legal system. By about 720, people were beginning to write down what either Mohammed himself had said or done on specific occasions or in some instances words or actions of his companions. Each such recording consisted by two parts, a chain of transmission and a text. This body of material was called Tradition (Hadith), a derivative of the verb hadatha 'he said or related'. It became evident to the Moslems themselves that traditions were being forged on a large scale to support specific theological, political or legal opinions. The attempt was therefore made to determine which were genuine and which were not. The part tested was the chain of transmission, e.g. the trustworthiness of the people themselves, whether they could in fact have been in communication etc. By the ninth century there were a number of standard collections, usually arranged by topics so that they could be used by lawyers and theologians. The most prestigious, that of al-Bukhari is significantly entitled alSahih 'The Genuine'. It is the general scholarly opinion that very few of these are genuine. They have been extensively used in historical research as evidence for the views of various schools and currents of opinion during the early period of Islam. It is important to note in the present connection that the standard collections of Tradition are later than the period of the formation of the earlier school of legal

Logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism

9

thought so that they often used traditions which are not recognized in these collections. Tradition is at least as important as the Koran as a basis of authority. Discrepancies in the Koran (the abrogating and the abrogated verses) are resolved by Tradition. The five daily prayers are based on Tradition rather than the Koran etc. The Arabic term qiyäs 'analogy' comes from a verb meaning "to measure". It was used in mathematics to mean "ratio" or proportion and in grammar for regularity of paradigms or linguistic regularity in general at least as early as it was used in law. The parallel with the uses of the Greek term analogia is obvious and no doubt historically significant. In law it means that when a case arises one should find another already decided case, deduce the general principle underlying the older case and apply it to the new one. A famous writer of the thirteenth century al-Shahrastani justified analogy in the following terms. "The number of possible cases is infinite. The law is finite. The finite cannot contain the infinite, therefore there must be analogy". The final generally accepted principle is ijmac 'consensus' from an Arab root that means "come together, collect, etc." What has been settled by general agreement should not be set aside. But whose agreement? For Malik it had been that of the Companions of Mohammed. Abu Hanifa sought to define it as the agreement of all believers. What ultimately prevailed was the consensus of those jurisprudents who possessed, by general consent, the status of mujtahids, that is, those capable of independent judgement. The principle of consensus itself has sometimes been founded on a Tradition of doubtful authenticity, "My community will never agree in an error". The founder of the latest of the standard four schools of Sunnite Islam, Ibn Hanbal, wished to reject analogy as substituting fallible human judgement for divine guidance. It was, however, at the cost of being very liberal in his acceptance of traditions of doubtful authenticity. An even more extreme view was that of Dawud, called "the Literalist" (al-Zahir) whose views have not formed the basis of an accepted legal school. His opinions are best known from the works of Ibn-Hazm, his student, since none of his own works have survived. The Zahirite school rejected not only analogy, but consensus since

10

Joseph H. Green berg

many agreed on decisions rested on non-canonical traditions used by jurists of the early period, or involved analogical reasoning, or both. According to this school one must not search for the cause of any of God's laws. "The only cause for their creation is God's sovereign will" (Goldziher 1971:42). Hence, for example, a tradition accepted by them which states that "he who drinks from golden or silver vessels, sips hell fire into his stomach" is confined to gold and silver vessels and analogical extensions even to the use of such vessels in ritual ablutions, accepted by the other schools, is rejected by them. If God had wished to extend the prohibition, it would have been explicitly stated in the tradition. In other instances they rejected legal rules which had been deduced in an earlier period from traditions which were no longer accepted as genuine in the standard collections. In so doing they once more rejected consensus. Here they are like the school of original intent in modern constitutional law who reject precedents in some instances and go back to the original text of the constitution to make new independent interpretations.2 We can see that there are complex relationships among these three principles of authority, analogy and consensus. The consensus of a given period grows out of interpretations, largely analogical, which are drawn from the original texts which have been endowed with authority. Another relationship is that authority and consensus can be opposed to analogy in that they cannot be rationally grounded. Authority depends on a single document, person or small specified group of persons. Consensus requires the agreement of a collective body. Analogy requires reasoning. It thus constitutes a source of difference between rationalists and those who accept only authority and tradition. We shall find similar factors and interrelationships among them when we turn to Classical grammatical theory in its attempts to establish criteria for correct Latin (latinitas) and correct Greek (hellenismos). In the only book-length treatment of the subject of which I am aware, Siebenborn, after describing the various criteria of linguistic correctness found in Classical literature, distinguishes three major recurrent ones (Siebenborn 1977:56) as analogy, authority and custom (Latin analogia, auctoritas and consuetudo. This last we may equate with consensus in Moslem law. Although, as is usual, the Roman concepts derive from Greek thought and have Greek equivalents, the major listings of these criteria are found in Latin writers, particularly Varro and Quintilian. Of course

Logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism

11

there are variant terms and other criteria, regarded by Siebenborn as minor. The most exact correspondence to the principles of Moslem law are found in Augustinus (Keil V. 494, 1) where they are called ratio, auctoritas and consuetudo.3 In a fragment of Donatian (Keil V. 275, 13), this further simplified to a binary opposition between usus 'use' and ratio 'reason'. However ratio is divided into two factors, analogia and etymologia, a distinction also found in Quintilian (/«stitutio 1,6, 1). We may consider the major criteria in turn. Analogia is of course a borrowing from Greek. As with analogy in Islam it was first used in mathematics where it refers to like ratios or proportions. Indeed Varro (de Lingua Latina 10:41) gives the mathematical example 2:1 = 20:10 followed later by the linguistic example amorem:amori= dolor em :dolori. He subsequently elaborates this mathematical parallel to include instances in which the linguistic correspondence would involve the deduction of a stem rather than inflection from the analogical proportion.4 For this kind of morphological analogy Varro at another point (10:2) gives proportio as the Latin equivalent of analogy. The principle of analogy is not confined to morphology in Classical theory. The most general, or one might say vague use is simply to treat similars in a similar fashion. In many instances in the Alexandrian school of Homeric text criticism the similarity cannot be reduced to an analogical proportion, and indeed the distinction between proportional and non-proportional analogy was not made. Often such non-proportional instances involved the criterion of etymologia which, as we saw above, is often linked with analogia under the more general term ratio 'reason'. The criterion of etymology was used by the Alexandrians mainly in reference to orthography. Since ei had merged with / before the rise of the Alexandrian School, one of the most common problems was whether to write ei or z in specific cases. Thus, as cited by Herodian (Uhlig III, 2.431), Aristarchus said that the word for 'nose' rhh should be spelled rheis because of its supposed derivation from rhein 'to flow'. The criterion of analogy can be taken in a broader sense, just as its correspondent qiyäs in Moslem law, to mean linguistic regularity in general as in the Analogy-Anomaly controversy which will be referred to later in the discussion. The concept of authority, immediately brings up the question "whose authority?" In general one meant the "best writers". The

12

Joseph H. Greenberg

very first sentence of Dionysius Thrax, the fountainhead of all later codifications of Greek grammar states that its subject matter was the study of the predominant (hos epi to polu) practice of poets and prose writers (Uhlig 1.1.5) On the other hand Quintilian (Institutio 1, 6, 2) only accepts the authority of orators and historians; poets use deviant forms because of the demands of meter. Regarding custom (consuetudo, usus), Quintilian (Institutio Oratoria 1, 6, 45) understands it as consensus eruditorum 'the agreement of the learned', presumably a tacit criticism of Varro's consensus multorum 'agreement of the many'. The resemblance of consuetudo to auctontas is noted by Colson (1919:32) in that both may be used to justify an anomalous form. This can lead to a simplification of the criteria to the opposition usus 'use' versus ratio 'reasoning' as in Donatian, cited earlier, and by Heliodorus in his commentary on Dionysius Thrax (Uhlig 1.3.446) to the corresponding concepts in Greek analogia and khresis 'usage'. The three criteria just discussed, when reduced to twofold form as in Donatian and Heliodorus, have an obvious relationship to the famous dispute among ancient grammarians between the Analogists and Anomalists. Our chief source is Varro's De Lingua Latina in which the eighth book is devoted to the anomalist's argument, the ninth to the analogists and the tenth to an attempt to reconcile the two viewpoints. Between on one hand, the extreme conclusion of Lersch in the earliest modern treatment of the subject that the battle was central to all ancient thinking about language and lasted through all antiquity, and on the other that of Fehling that the whole thing was invented by Varro, a middle view seems to be supported by most classicists. According to this it arose in the context of the later Alexandrian grammarians who, having first employed analogy in Homeric text criticism, proceeded to use the principle to systematize the entire morphology of contemporary Greek, a result we see codified in Dionysius Thrax and carried on by his commentators and successors. The anomalists are represented by the Stoics of Pergamum, particularly Crates of Mellos whose lost work is generally believed to be the main source of Varro's Book VIII and in which the anomalist arguments are presented by pointing out the many irregularities in the Greek inflectional system. The spur of these criticisms, we may suppose, led the Analogists to systematize as much as was possible. Their greatest difficulty was with derivation which showed only sporadic regularities,

L ogical bases of lingu istic prescrip tivism 13

i.e. was non-productive. However like the Greek term klisis, Latin declinatio originally covered both. Varro realizes that derivation cannot be reduced to an analogic system of any scope, hence he, as it were, writes it off, calling it declinatio voluntaria 'derivation', that is subject to the will of the speakers as against declinatio naturalis 'inflection'. The key opposition here is between analogy, taken as the prototype of regularity in language and both custom and authority which cannot be rationally grounded. Between the analogists who espouse the former and the anomalists who support the latter, there is clearly a basic difference of attitude not confined merely to the problem of declinatio, but the whole notion of regularity in language. In setting forth the anomalist argument Varro (De Lingua Latina VIII. 15.30) makes the following statement: Therefore, since difference prevails not only in clothing and in buildings, but also in furniture, in food, and in all other things which have been taken into our daily life for use, the principle of difference should not be rejected in speech either which has been framed for purposes of use.

To this we may contrapose the Analogist argument which points to the regularities of nature and asks why language should be an exception. "For if there were regularity (analogia) in no place at all, then it follows that there would be none in words either; not that when it is everywhere present (as it is in fact), there is none in words". The analogist attitude leads easily to prescriptivism in language, which in its extreme form not only formulates a choice where it exists of that variant that conforms to analogy, which Quintilian indeed approves, but to the actual introduction of new forms which extend existing analogies, a practice of which he disapproves. Attempts to change either the language or to criticize individual deviations from an assumed norm appear much earlier than the Alexandrian formulation of regular inflectional paradigms based on analogy. In two passages, Aristotle criticizes the sophist Protagoras because of his prescriptivist ideas. In one of these (Poetics 19) Aristotle says "What fault can one see in Homer's 'sing the wrath goddess' which Protagoras criticizes as being a command where a prayer was meant, since to bid one to do or not to do, he tells us is a command'?" In the other (De Sophisticis Elenchis 14) more complexly argued reference to Protagoras, Aristotle states:

14

Joseph H. Green berg If as Protagoras used to say mSnis "wrath" and pSleks "helmet" are masculine, he who calls wrath a destructress oulomonSn commits a solecism though he does not appear to anyone else to do so but he who calls it a destructor oulomenon appears to commit a solecism but does not do so.

Aristotle and later Classical writers distinguished between two kinds of violations of linguistic norms, a barbarism which concerns the sound or meaning of a single word and a solecism which involves relations between words e.g. incorrect agreement in gender. In the preceding example the agreement of a masculine participle with "wrath" would be considered a solecism by ordinary speakers since "wrath" is in actual practice grammatically feminine while to Protagoras this is a deviation because such notions as "wrath" and "helmet" have masculine connotations in the real world. Therefore the language is wrong. The first example is rather different. A single individual, Homer, is blamed for a deviation from a linguistic norm. In both cases a somewhat vague and extended sense of analogy is involved e.g. things associated with males should be masculine in grammatical gender just as in other instances they are. Whether Protagoras actually spoke in this fashion we do not know. Quintilian, however, sarcastically refers to prescriptivists who, for example, said robur 'strength' instead of the usual robor because the stem of all the cases except the nominative singular is robur—. The only ancient writer whom we know of who defined "custom" not by the agreement of cultivated speakers but by the ordinary speakers of any particular period was the sceptic Sextus Empiricus. In his writings he attacked all the sciences and among these is a treatise against the grammarians. He rejects both analogy and authority. His basic line of argumentation is highly similar to that of Hall (1950). The following extracts will give some notion of the flavor of his argument. . . . the man who speaks good Greek is he who is most practiced and versed in common usage and not he who understands analogy. (1.189)

As with the Arab grammarians, those on the anomalous end of the scale show some awareness of the factor of linguistic change. So Sextus Empiricus (1.208): To sum up, just as Homer himself but followed the usage (synalheia) of his age, so too will we by no means cleave to an analogical form which has the authority of Homer, but will conform our speech to the usage of men of our own age.

L ogical bases of lingu istic prescrip tivism 15

Finally, Sextus Empiricus, noting the argument of those who tell you to say khrästhai 'to use' and not khresthai, the usual form, because of the analogical proportion ktesis 'the act of obtaining': ktästhai 'to obtain' = khresis 'the act of using': khrästhai 'to use' says "if you press them further and ask how we know this word ktasthai itself is a correct form, they will say that it is the form customarily used. And in so saying they will be granting that one should adopt common usage as a criterion and not analogy". He compares one who refuses to follow common usage to one who refuses to use the local coinage. He who thus "cuts out a new way of his own is near to madness" (I. 178). It should be carefully noted though that Sextus Empiricus uses the term hellenismos which he grounds on the "usage of all" during a particular period. This does not rule out standards of clarity and effectiveness of expression and he twits the grammarians on their own poor style. As mentioned earlier, Arab grammarians were aware of the parallel between law and grammar and some of them sought to establish a science of roots of grammar in imitation of that of roots of jurisprudence. The term qiyas 'analogy' already occurs in the first grammar which has come down to us, the famous kitäb of Sibawayhi (latter part of the eighth century) and was thus at least as early in grammar as in jurisprudence. Corresponding to Latinity and Hellenism is the term Arabiyya 'correct Arabic'. The identity of authority in Arabic grammar is clearer than in classical grammar although it is a complex one. It was generally agreed that the Koran was an infallible source of linguistic correctness. However, the Koran largely because of its relative shortness and limted subject matter was not an adequate source of guidance. There was also the problem of the Koran text itself.5 It was a dogma that the best Arabic was that of Mohammed's tribe the Koreish, but when this did not suffice recourse was taken to the Beduin tribes of Arabia who were sometimes ranked in regard to the purity of their Arabic. Goldziher (1920:70) cites a Tradition from Ibn-Abbas, the uncle of Mohammed and a highly respected authority. "If something appears strange in the Koran then search in the poetry for it is genuine Arabic". By this was meant primarily pre-Islamic poetry. However, grammarians who lived long after Mohammed's death resorted to Beduin speakers very much as modern linguists use informants. Corresponding to consensus, the actual usage of speakers was

16

Joseph H. Greenberg

what was commonly called same? 'hearing', that is, what was actually heard as against qiyäs 'analogy', the deduced rules of language. The tendency to stress one of these over the other was, much as in Classical grammar, the main source of difference between two schools, that of Basra in southern Iraq, and that of Kufa in northern Iraq, the former of which stressed analogy and the latter usage. These are compared by Weil (1913) in his introduction to the Arabic edition of Al-'Anbari our basic source concerning the Arabic grammatical schools, to the Analogists and Anomalists of antiquity. The Basra school, the proponents of analogy, not only excluded variants which could not be explained by analogy and provided ingenious analogical explanations of apparently deviant forms, but condemned a large portion of existing language as ungrammatical. Just as not all acts were ethically correct, so not all expression were grammatically correct. Some did not hesitate to alter the text of the Koran if these expedients failed.6 The following is an example. It is a rule of classical Arabic that the dependent genitive must immediately follow the governing noun which is then put in a form called the construct. In Koran, chapter 6, verse 138, in the accepted text the dependent genitive is separated from the governing noun by an intervening word. Zamakhshari, an adherent of the Mutazilite rationalist school of theology and also the author of a well-known work on grammar in the Basra tradition which by then had become the standard one, changes the text at this point. A century later Ibn al-Munayyir, an orthodox Malikite judge attacked this, saying, "The text of the Koran is not subject to grammatical analogy, rather it is the model and source for it" (Goldziher 1920:50). He cited an instance of the separation of the noun from its dependent genitive in poetry. Thus we encounter here as in the Moslem law and classical grammar, that what might be loosely called the liberal or radical viewpoint embraces analogy in law but custom (usage) in language. The present study is to be viewed as a preliminary and highly restricted study in a general area which has been little explored. It should be kept in mind that different legal systems differ to some extent in their fundamental principles as do differing grammatical traditions in regard to linguistic prescriptivism. Nevertheless, the basic question of justifying a legal rule or a linguistic have a certain similarity which in the cases considered does involve a limited set of principles which are at least in broad outline equatable.7

Logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism

17

Studies of this kind might be said to belong to a class of studies which has not consciously been pursued up to now. The field might be called empirical metatheory in that it compares empirically given theories in the same or different fields which show similarity of structure (isomorphism). It is distinct on the one hand from philosophy of science which is concerned with the problems of the construction of valid scientific theories and the history of actual theories but which is not concerned with the comparison of their structures.8 Naturally empirical metatheory as here defined will draw on the results of both these fieMs. Linguistics as the study of a highly complex phenomenon is particularly suited to such studies. An example is Greenberg (1967) in which Aristotelian physics is compared to phonological feature theories of the Prague School type. The only comparison of this kind involving language which has been pursued to any degree is that between evolutionary biology and the genetic model in historical linguistics (Hoenigswald and Wiener 1987). The value of such comparisons is that it forces us to ask such questions as why certain properties of a theory are prominent in one case and not in the other or why in some instance a correspondence is not immediately obvious and must be looked for. Another and deeper question, perhaps, is what there is about the two phenomena that leads to the formulation of similarly structured theories. Some theories, like atomism, or the genetic model seem to be recurrent in a number of fields. Perhaps there are a finite number of such basic models which might be identified.

Notes 1. Moslem law has been treated here as though it were completely autonomous. In fact there were important specific legal rules and concepts derived from foreign sources, particularly Roman law. For treatments of Moslem law see Juynboll (1910), Schacht (1964), and articles in the Encyclopedia of Islam especially shari'a '\aw\fikh 'juresprudence',/t(yos 'analogy', idjimä' 'consensus' and hadith 'tradition' and the references there. 2. The basic structural parallel of Moslem law to American constitutional law is clear. We have an authoritative written document, a body of specific rules deduced by analogy (case law) and the principle of consensus (stare decisis). What is conspicuously lacking is the notion of legislation. There was a principle of istisläh 'general welfare' used by Abu Hanlfa which never attained the status of a canonical root.

18

Joseph H. Greenberg

3. Latin and Greek grammarians are cited by volume and page in the standard collections of Keil and Uhlig. References to other writers and the translations are from the Loeb Classical Library. 4. For fuller discussion see Taylor (1974:4648). 5. On the history of the Koran text see Goldziher (1920) and Noeldeke (1961). 6. The Basra school sought to explain everything. Language was a product of reason. In doing so they often resorted to the device of taqdlr 'existing virtually or by implications' so that, for example, a deviant end order was explained as exemplifying the normal one by taqdlr. Their methods are not dissimilar in spirit and sometimes even detail to modern generativism. On the other hand the school of Kufa, with its interest in poetry, dialect variants and its willingness occasionally to conjecture historical explanations is in some ways like the ancient Anamolists, in others like the modern sociolinguists. 7. A basic difference between law and language would obviously be the existence of sanctions in the former and not in the latter. But the difference is one of degree. In Moslem law all actions are divided into five classes, forbidden, disapproved, indifferent, preferred, and required. At times penal sanctions have been used for linguistic deviations, e.g. in France. More important are the diffuse sanctions of social disapproval and in extreme cases inability to communicate. 8. The closest approach to the notion of empirical metatheory as outlined here of which I am aware is Holton (1973) with his concept of theme e.g. atomism, but it is confined to the Western tradition and physical science. I am indebted to Professor Knorr for this reference.

References Brugmann, K. 1876 Nasalis sonans in der indogermanischen Grundsprache. Curtius'Studien zur Griechischen und Lateinischen Grammatik, 9, 285-338. Chomsky, N. 1965 Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, ΜΑ: Μ.Ι.Τ. Press. Colson, F.H. 1919 The analogist and anomalist controversy. Classical Quarterly, 13, 24-36. Esper, E.A. 1973 Analogy and association in linguistics and psychology. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Goldziher, I. 1920 Die Richtungen der islamischen Koranauslegung. Leiden: Brill. 1971 The Zahiris, their doctrine and history. Leiden: Brill. Greenberg, J.H. 1967 The first (and perhaps only) non-linguistic feature analysis. Word, 25,214-220. Hall, R.A. 1950 Leave your language alone\ Ithaca, New York: Linguistica.

Logical bases of linguistic prescriptivism

19

Hoenigswald, H.M., and Wiener, L. 1987 Biological metaphor and cladistic classification: and interdisciplinary perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Holton, G.J. 1973 Thematic origins of scientific thought: Kepler to Einstein. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Juynboll,T.W. 1910 Handbuch des islamischen Gesetzes. Leiden: Brill. Keil, H., ed. 185 5 -80 Grammatici latini. Leipzig: Teubner. Noeldeke,T. 1961 Geschichte des Korans (F. Schwally, Ed.). Hildesheim: Olms. Schacht, J. 1964 An introduction to Islamic law. Oxford: Clarendon. Siebenborn, E. 1976 Die Lehre von der Sprachrichtigkeit und ihre Kriterien, Studien zur antiken Normativgrammatik. Amsterdam: Gruener. Taylor, D.J. 1974 Declinatio, a study of the linguistic theory of Marcus Terentius Varro. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Uhlig, G. 18831901 Grammatici Graeci (Vols. 1 -4). Leipzig: Teubner. Von Savigny, F.K. 1831 Of the vocation of our age for legislation and jurisprudence (A. Hayward Trans.). London: Littlewood (Original work published 1814). Weil, G. 1913 Die grammatischen Schulen von Kufa und Basra. Leiden: Brill.

A methodological check on three cross-polity studies of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell Introduction The two first-mentioned authors of the present paper have recently completed three studies pertaining to the linguistic homogeneity of most of the countries of the world (Fishman and Solano 1989a, 1989b and 1989c). "Linguistic homogeneity" is defined in terms of mother tongue and the more a single mother tongue predominates in a country the more linguistically homogeneous it is said to be, whereas the less that condition obtains the more linguistically heterogeneous it is said to be. In two of the above-mentioned studies linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity was utilized as one independent variable among many others (over 200 in all) in attempts to explain the variance among most of the countries of the world (our data pertained to roughly 130 countries) either in civil strife or in per capita gross national product. The focus of these two studies was to determine whether linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity would or would not show up within the optimal subset of variables needed in order to most parsimoniously and powerfully account for the worldwide crosspolity variance in connection with these two dependent variables. In the third study, linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity was treated as the dependent variable and an attempt was made to determine the optimal subset of independent variables that most powerfully and parsimoniously accounted for its variance across most of the nations of the world. Of crucial methodological concern in connection with all three studies is the nature of the linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity variable. The way in which this variable is measured may itself influence the outcomes of the studies that utilize it. Since 1963, when Banks and Textor published their Cross-Polity Survey, a small group of investigators has conducted a series of studies utilizing the data on linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity that Banks and Textor provided (see, e.g., Fishman 1966 [1968]; McRae 1983;

22

Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell

Pool 1969 [1972]; Rustow 1968). Banks and Textor designated almost all of the polities of the world as either linguistically homogeneous or heterogeneous, depending primarily on whether or not 85% of the population of any country shared a common mother tongue. This was admittedly a rough, dichotomous measure, but there was no other similarly exhaustive source that provided better data and, therefore, the Banks and Textor data remained in use for a quarter century, even after it had become rather outdated. Furthermore, the above-mentioned investigators all utilized the Banks and Textor data in a rather similar fashion, namely, they selected a handfull of other variables (usually no more than two or three), either from Banks and Textor or from some more recent source (e.g. Feierabend and Feierabend 1972 or Sivard 1977), and reported their relationships with each other and, primarily, their relationship to Banks and Textor's linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity variable. The three recently completed Fishman and Solano studies mentioned above, attempted to break out of the latter mold (a methodological mold which had lasted for a quarter century) by utilizing stepwise multiple regression analysis and factor analysis so that all of the available cross-polity variables (over 200 in all!) could be analyzed simultaneously. In this way, it was hoped, a more realistic appreciation could be arrived at of what other variables most influence linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity as well as of what variables are most influenced by it per se. The present study therefore represents another "break with tradition". The dichotomous Banks and Textor data will finally be set aside and continuous data will be substituted in its stead, namely, the proportion of the total population of each country that can be attributed to the most prevalent mother tongue in that country. The source of the later data is the extensive and constantly updated databank of the International Center for Research on Bilingualism (Kloss and McConnell 1974-1984). A methodological check, such as the one we are about to report upon, may or may not have substantive consequences. The recent Fishman and Solano studies have definitely yielded new substantive insights, finding that cross-polity variance in linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity (measured dichotomously) is not most powerfully and parsimoniously explained on direct economic grounds (as had been previously assumed) and that neither cross-polity variance in civil strife nor cross-polity variance in per capita gross national product are most powerfully and parsimoniously explained via the

Three studies of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity

23

involvement of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity (measured dichotomously). We now turn our attention to the issue of whether the findings of the above-mentioned Fishman and Solano studies are dependent on the dichotomous nature of the Banks and Textor data that they employed in connection with measuring linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity or whether these findings hold constant even when that variable is measured in a more refined (and in a more up-to-date) fashion.

Re-examining linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity (as one independent variable among many) when predicting civil strife and per capita gross national product When cross-polity differentials in linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity are expressed along a continuum, instead of dichotomously (as in the original Banks and Textor tradition), there is absolutely no effect on either the resulting optimal subset of independent variables that most powerfully and parsimoniously predicts cross-polity differentials in civil strife or on the optimal subset of independent variables that most powerfully and parsimoniously predicts cross-polity differentials in per capita gross national product. The foregoing being the case, then the factorial compositions of these two optimal subsets of independent variables also remain unaltered. Finally, just as the dichotomous definition of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity did not enter into the two optimal subsets, so the continuous definition of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity also did not enter into those subsets. This substantive constancy is reassuring, since it implies that the findings of Fishman and Solano (1989b, 1989c) are not likely to be merely reducible to a crucial methodological difference between two different ways of measuring linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity, thus holding out more hope that they may be attributable to more substantive considerations. Apparently, since all the other variables involved in these two studies remained unchanged, and there were over 200 of them in each instance (first and foremost among them their respective dependent variables, civil strife and per capita gross national product), the effects of this overall constancy easily outweighed the effects of the change in how linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity itself

24

Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell

was measured, regardless of how welcome and important that particular change may have been in its own right. However, as we will note below, when we turn to re-examining the third study (Fishman and Solano 1989a), the one in which linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity is the dependent variable — i.e., where we are trying to most parsimoniously and powerfully explain the cross-polity differentials with respect to linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity itself — then the method by which this variable is measured apparently makes for a goodly amount of substantive difference which we must try to understand and interpret.

Re-examining linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity as the dependent variable Table 1 lists the 10 independent variables that constitute the optimally most parsimonious and powerful subset of variables for the prediction of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity when the latter is measured as a continuous variable. A mere 10 variables (out of more than 200!) yield a multiple correlation of .8094 and account for 65.52% of the total cross-polity variance in linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity when the latter is measured as a continuous variable. The zero-order correlations with JF (=the criterion or dependent variable, i.e. the continuous measure of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity) are positive when any particular variable in the optimal subset correlates with greater homogeneity and they are negative when any particular variable in the optimal subset correlates with lesser homogeneity (i.e., with greater heterogeneity). Linguistic homogeneity correlates most strongly with greater life expectancy (IR=.569), moderately with westernization (CW=.308) and weakly with pronounced Personalismo (FZ=.192) and with Islamic religion (CF=.112). Linguistic heterogeneity correlates most strongly with indigenous legal systems (HK= -.548) and significant or moderate interest articulation by non-associational groups (ER= -.481), moderately with extreme or moderate sectionalism (EJ= - .384), significant interest aggregation by the executive (FC= -.377), and Moslem or partly Moslem legal system (HJ= - .313), and weakly with African transitional party systems (FR=-.250).

Three studies of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity

25

Table 1. The cumulative multiple prediction of the criterion (linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity measured as a continuum) by the optimal subset of predictor variables+ Variable entered++

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

IR CF EJ HJ FZ ER CW HK FR FC

Multiple R R2 .5686 .6305 .6883 .7137 .7293 .7459 .7634 .7879 .8022 .8094

.3234 .3976 4737 .5094 .5319 .5563 .5828 .6209 .6434 .6552

Change in R2

F to enter

r With criterion

.3234 .0742 .0761 .0357 .0225 .0245 .0265 .0380 .0226 .0117

61.17 15.65 18.22 9.10 5.95 6.79 7.74 12.12 7.61 4.05

.569* .112 -.384* -.313* .192** -.481* .308* -.548* -.250* -.377*

+ For n=125, *p.01 = .228 and **p.05 = .174 ++Variable names (abbreviated): IR = Life expectancy ;CF = Polities where the religion is Muslim; EJ = Polities where sectionalism is extreme or moderate; HJ = Polities where the character of the legal system is Muslim or partly Muslim; FZ = Polities where personalismo is pronounced rather than negligible; ER = Polities where interest articulation by non-associational groups is significant or moderate; CW = Polities that are historically western or significantly westernized; HK = Polities where the character of the legal system is partly indigenous; FR = Polities where the party system is qualitatively African transitional; FC = Polities where interest articulation by the executive is significant.

The above pattern of correlations once again implies, as it did when we were predicting linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity as a dichotomous variable (Fishman and Solano 1989a), the linguistic homogenizing influences of westernization, modernization, democratization and centralized religions, on the one hand, and the linguistic heterogenizing influences of indigenouous and Moslem law, strong or moderate sectionalism and the departures from democracy that characterize various developing settings in Africa and elsewhere, on the other hand. Furthermore, not only are the two optimal subsets of independent variables, the one we obtained earlier, when predicting linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity as a dichotomous variable, and the one we have obtained now, when predicting linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity as a continuous variable, interpretively similar, but their individual constituents are identical in connection with four out of the ten variables that enter into the latter optimal subset: EJ, HJ, ER and CW. These four were also encountered in the former

26

Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell

subset when we attempted to predict linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity measured dichotomously. Finally, the factorial structures of the variables entering into the two optimal subsets of predictors are rather similar. Both CP (= linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity measured as a dichotomous variable) and JF (=linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity measured as a continuous variable) load highest on Factor I (.425 for CP and .466 for JF) and Factor I is the factor on which most of the variables load highest in each of the two optimal subsets of predictors (13 out of 18 for CP and 6 out of 10 for JF), with Factors IV and V being of maximal additional importance in both cases. These three factors taken together account for nearly three-quarters of the variance in the total 238 χ 238 matrix of intercorrelations from which they have been extracted. They even more obviously account for the lion's share of the variance in cross-polity linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity, no matter how the latter is measured. Factors II and III are of greater significance than Factors IV and V insofar as accounting for variance in the total matrix of intercorrelations is concerned, but IV and V are more important than II and III insofar as accounting for variance in Linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity is concerned.

Discussion and conclusions Table 2 succinctly summarizes the major reason why altering the method by which linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity at the polity level is measured does not alter our original substantive findings. The correlation between linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity measured dichotomously and linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity measured continuously is .710. That being the case, it can come as no surprise that they both stand in a similar relationship to civil strife, on the one hand, and to per capita gross national product, on the other hand. In both cases the zero-order correlation with the latter is substantially stronger and positive (i.e., linguistic homogeneity contributes very modestly to higher per capita gross national product or, vice versa, higher per capita gross national product contributes very modestly to greater linguistic homogeneity) and the zero-order correlation with the former is both smaller and negative (i.e., linguistic heterogeneity contributes almost nothing to civil strife or, vice versa, civil strife contributes almost nothing to linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity).

Three studies of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity

27

Table 2. Intercorrelations between the various dependent variables+ Ling. H/H dichotomous Lingh. H/H dichotomous Civil strife Per capita G.N.P. Ling. H/H continuous

Civil strife

Per capita G.N.P.

Ling. H/H continuous

-.120 .253*

-.284*

.710*

-.217**

.319*

+ For N = 125, *p.01 = .228 and **p.05 = .174

However, the latter relationships obtain only at the zero-order level, when variables are considered two at a time. When the data as a whole is examined simultaneously, capturing thereby all of the manifold variety and power of over 200 variables pitted against each other in order to explain any given dependent variable, then the relationship between linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity (no matter how measured) and civil strife, on the one hand, or per capita gross national product, on the other hand, becomes far more questionable. Neither civil strife nor per capita gross national product enter into the optimally powerful and parsimonious subset of predictors of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity (no matter how measured) nor does linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity (no matter how measured) enter into the optimally powerful and parsimonious subset of predictors of either civil strife or per capita gross national product. Thus, although the three criterion variables that have been of crucial interest to us in our various studies are either mildly or negligibly related to each other in more abstract ways (e.g., greater life expectancy, the best single predictor of cross-polity differentials in linguistic homogeneity measured as continuous variable, is quite predictably and understandably [even intuitively] related both to civil strife and per capita gross national product), but this relationship is not a direct or immediate one and, therefore, life expectancy does not appear in the optimally powerful and parsimonious subset of predictors explaining cross-polity differentials in civil strife, on the one hand, or explaining cross-polity differentials in per capita gross national product, on the other.

28

Joshua A. Fishman, Frank R. Solano, and Grant D. McConnell

The major lesson that we have learned from all of our studies is that it is easy to be mislead and intellectually impoverished by studies that examine only a small handful of variables whereas the circumstances of the real world actually involve very complex interrelationships between much larger numbers of variables. While journalists and politicans may prefer to concentrate on the relationships between a very few variables, because they lack the means for conceptualizing, analyzing and interpreting large data sets, the sociology of language and the social sciences as a whole are duty-bound to look further and to dig deeper. We have also learned that surface differences between two ways of measuring the same phenomenon may mask the underlying similarities between them, unless ways are found (e.g., via factor analysis) to look below the surface. Finally, we have found that multivariate data pertaining to the past does not support a lugubrious view of the impact of lingustic heterogeneity upon other sociocultural variables. If that is so when we analyze the forces derived from past centuries of modernization and westernization, how much more possible may it be in the future to pursue both goals simultaneously, i.e. to seek both linguistic heterogeneity and modernization at the polity level, and, accordingly, to derive the benefits of both. References Banks, A.S., and R.B. Textor 1963 A cross-polity survey. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Feierabend, Ι.Κ., and R.L. Feierabend, eds. 1972 Anger, violence and politics: Theories and research. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Fishman, J.A. 1966 Some contrasts between linguistically homogeneous and linguistically heterogeneous polities. Sociological Inquiry. 6, 146-158. Reprinted (1968) in J.A. Fishman, C.A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta, eds. Language problems of developing nations. New York: Wiley, 53-68. Fishman, J.A., and F.R. Solano 1989a Societal factors predictive of linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity at the cross-polity level. Cultural Dynamics, 1,414-437. Reprinted (1989) in J.A. Fishman. Language and ethnicity in minority sociolinguistic perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 580-604. 1989b Cross-polity perspective on the importance of linguistic heterogeneity as a possible "contributory cause" of civil strife. In J.A. Fishman. Language and ethnicity in minority sociolinguistic perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 605-626.

Three studies of linguistic homogeneity /heterogeneity 1989c

29

Cross-polity linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity and per capita gross national product: An impirical exploration of a "touchy" political issue. Language Problems and Language Planning, 13, 103-118. Kloss, H., and G.D. McConnell 1974 The Linguistic composition of the nations of the world / La compo1984 sition linguistique des nations du monde. Volumes 1 to 5. Quebec City, CIRB: Presses de l'University Laval. McRae.K.B. 1983 Conflict and compromise in multilingual societies: Switzerland. Waterloo, Wilfrid Laurier University Press. (See pp. 5-33 and, most particularly, 23-27). Pool, J. 1969 National development and language diversity. La Monda LingvoProbleme. 1, 140-156. Reprinted (slightly revised) (1972), in J.A. Fishman, ed. Advances in the sociology of language. The Hague: Mouton, 213-230.

Amenagements de frontiere et datations des changements phonologiques*

Andre Martinet Avant d'aborder le probleme qui retiendra ici notre attention, il peut etre utile de prociser la nature des rapports langagiers dans les rfegions dont il va etre question. On s'excuse aupros de ceux qui, connaissant bien les situations en cause, n'auraient nul besoin d'un tel preambule. II s'agit de ce qui a parfois ete designe comme le bilinguisme patoissant. La ou existe ce bilinguisme, la population locale se transmet, de g6n6ration en genferation, une langue adaptoe aux besoins quotidiens et aux techniques lioes au sol. Les gens venus d'ailleurs, pretres, fonctionnaires, commer9ants, oisifs, pratiquent entre eux une langue differente, en g n ral celle, officielle, de l'6tat-nation. Dans les contacts entre les deux classes, il est rare que les "etrangers" aient recours au parier local. Ce sont, normalement les "indigenes" qui utilisent, dans ce cas, la langue officielle dont ils ont du apprendre, au moins les rudiments, ä l'ecole ou ä 1'armee. C'est cette meme langue officielle qu'on utilise avec les inconnus, ceux qu'on n'identifie pas immodiatement comme appartenant ä la communauto villageoise. II en resulte que les "indigenes" auront de moins en moins d'occasions de confronter leur propre usage et celui des localites environnantes, done de maintenir 1'unite dialectale. Le dialecte, qui fonctionnait au niveau de la province, va se trouver 6miett6 en patois dont chacun ne gardera finalement de validite communicative que dans un seul village. Ceci aboutira, ä temps, ä sä disparition pure et simple. On est tente d'identifier ce type de situation et la diglossie teile qu'elle a et£ dfefinie par Charles Ferguson, avec la hi6rarchie entre une forme linguistique "haute" (high) et une autre "basse" (/ow). Toutefois, les situations considferoes ici n'impliquent pas necessairement un apparentement gonotique, 6troit ou lache, entre les deux formes langagieres en pr6sence. II faut d'ailleurs noter que la notion de diglossie a evoluo de facon ä couvrir ogalement les cas ou cet apparentement est loin tain ou improbable, done non seulement francais - occitan, par

32

Martinet

exemple, mais egalement frar^ais - basque et fransais - breton. Ce qu'il faut preciser,en tout cas,est que,dans le cas qui nous intoresse, il ne s'agit pas de varietfes d'une meme langue, mais de deux langues de structures differentes. Les criteres en sont que: 1° les formes emprunt6es d'une langue ä l'autre sont soumises ä une adaptation phonologique et morphologique, tout comme 1'anglais -week-end devient, en frangais par!6, ouiquenne, et le francais restaurant passe ä resterong dans 1'usage britannique; 2° la langue de moindre prestige (low), lorsqu'elle disparait, le fait, non par identification graduelle ä l'autre (high), mais par interruption de la transmission d'une generation ä la suivante, comme lorsque, dans une famille d'origine russe, 6tablie en Angleterre ou en France, on renonce ä s'adresser en russe aux enfants. Le degre d'apparentement ganetique n'est certainement pas sans effet sur le comportement des bilingues en ces mati£res: en France, la nette distinction entre les deux registres a ete relevee dans les zones occitane et franco-provencale, alors que les observations faites en Picardie ou en Vendee, par exemple, done dans des zones dites d'oil, montrent la coexistence de differents degros de francisation du patois qu'on a pu etre tente de ramener ä quatre types distincts: francais local, frangais patoise, patois francise, patois local. II resterait ä tenter une typologie complete des situations de bilinguisme patoissant.

II va s'agir ici d'observations portant sur des parlers franco-provengaux, r6pondant aux deux crit£res degagos ci-dessus et manies par des populations dont la langue officielle et de prestige a 6t6 et demeure le francais. Selon toute vraisemblance, le franQais estaujourd'hui, dans ces parages, la premiere et seule langue de l'ensemble de la population si met ä part quelques vieillards. II s'agit done de situations d6pass6es. Dans l'ete 1943, ä une 6poque ou il n'otait pas difficile de trouver des informateurs bilingues, j'avais entrepris de soumettre ä un questionnaire la population de ce qu'on dosigne comme la Combe de Savoie, c'est-a-dire la valloe de l'Isere et ses annexes, entre Albertville, au nord, et la frontiere du departement de la Savoie, au sud. II y avait

Dotations des changements phonologiques

33

lä une trentaine de villages ou de bourgs, situ6s, pour la plupart, sur les cötos des vallees de l'Isore et de son affluent, le Gelon, le centre de la vallee, le long du cours d'eau, ayant ete, autrefois, marecageux et, normalement inhabito. Aujourd'hui, c'est que se trouvent les routes de grande communication, comme la Nationale 6, de Paris au MontCenis, les chemins de fer et 1'autoroute, en voie de roalisation. D'autre part, les communications sont faciles d'un cöte ä l'autre des vallees. Mais le souvenir demeure, chez les plus ages, d'une epoque ou les rivieres et les fonds de vallee pouvaient etre un obstacle aux relations entre les zones laterales. A 1'extreme sud de la zone en question, se trouve le village de la Chapelle-Blanche, derniere localitfe du departement de la Savoie, ä la limite du departement de l'Isere. L'informateur que j'y ai trouve, Antoine Thouvard, 6tait, sans contestation possible, natif et rfesident de ce village. Je ne lui avais pas soumis les trois premiers items de mon questionnaire, que son usage se rfevelait dejä comme profondement different de tous ceux, des villages plus septentrionaux, dans lesquels j'avais dejä enquete. Le vocabulaire d'abord. II s'y revolait soit plus proche du franfais: pour "poche" ['potsa], au lieu de ['fatal, pour "mouilloe", [mo'Ae] au lieu de ['blatä]; soit directement emprunte: pour "et6" [e'te], au lieu de [iöo'te], ou encore different du francais, mais formellement plus proche: pour "pomme de terre", ['trgfg] (frangais truffe) au lieu de [ti'fara], pour "poire", ['psro] au lieu de [pa ]. Sur les plans de la phonie, divergeaient: 1° la roalisation phonotique des voyelles breves inaccentuees finales [aouä, o, 9] au lieu de [ä,5, 9 ] ; 2° les phonfemes correspondant ä certains prototypes latins: [a], pour A en syllabe ouverte, au lieu de [o], comme dans [bla] "bio", au lieu de [blo]; [ ], pour , en syllabe ouverte, au lieu de [a], comme dans [fr ] "froid", au lieu de [fra] ; [e], pour EN tautosyllabique, au lieu de [ ], comme dans ['gkro] "encre", au lieu de [' krö] ; [ts], pour c ( A ) , au lieu de [ ], comme dans [tsa'vo] "cheval" au lieu de [ a Vo ] ; [dz], pour consonantique, au lieu de [3], comme dans [dzo] "joug", au lieu de [3 ], [ 3 0 ] . Sans doute, en matiore de vocabulaire, y avait-il des cas ou la ChapelleBlanche (d6sormais Ch.-B.) s'accordait avec ses proches voisins sa-

34

Αηάτέ Martinet

voyards et s'opposait aux formes attestees plus au nord: soit, par ex., [tsa'vi] "finir", equivalent de [0ά'νί] des localitos voisines et s'opposant [fra'ni], [frg'na] au nord-est de la Combe; de meme ['jsta] "profonde", proche du ['jet ] du tiers sud de notre aire et distinct du [pr 'f d ] des deux tiers nord. Mais, ici comme en matiere de phonie, c'est un faisceau d'isoglosses qui separe Ch.-B. du reste du domaine, alors, qu'ailleurs, chaque isoglosse a son propre parcours: la zone [tsa'vi] - [θά'νΐ] ne coincide que tres partiellement avec celle de i'jet ] -['jet ]. Renseignements pris, il s'est τένέΐέ que Ch.-B. et le village voisin de Laissaud, l'ouest, ou je n'ai pas enqueto, etaient traditionnellement dauphinois, done tres anciennement francais. Us avaient ete attribues, en maniere de compensation, aux princes de la Maison de Savoie, en 1720, au trait6 de Madrid, au moment ou on leur conservait, certes, le titre royal reconnu sept ans plus tot, mais en le transferant de la riche Sicile a la beaucoup moins prestigieuse Sardaigne. Ceci veut dire que la frontiere entre la Savoie et la France, qui, jusqu'alors, laissait Ch.-B. cette derniere, se voyait reportee vers le sud, separant ce village et Laissaud, du bourg voisin de Pontcharra et de la localite de Saint-Maximin. En d'autres termes, depuis 1349, date du rattachement du Dauphine la Couronne de France, jusqu'en 1720, done pendant pres de quatre siecles, une frontiere d'etat avait separe Ch.-B. de la Savoie voisine. De 1720 1760, Fattribution de Ch.-B. au Royaume de Sardaigne semble avoir et6 contestee. Ce ne serait done qu'en 1760 que le village avait ete definitivement integr6 la Savoie, pour retomber d'ailleurs, avec la Savoie tout entiere, sous la coupe de la France, quelques trente ans plus tard, au cours de la periode de la Rfevolution et de l'Empire et, apres un 6pisode de 45 ans, pour etre d6finitivement annexo en 1860. Si Γόη se rappelle qu'avant le XIVerne siecle, les domaines des Dauphins du Viennois et ceux des comtes, puis dues de Savoie faisaient partie de l'Empke romain germanique, on peut supposer qu'il n'existtait pas, entre eux, de frontiere politique tres stable et tres accusoe. D'autre part — mais ceci resterait confirmer — Ch.-B. et les regions circonvoisines devaient appartenir la meme circonscription ecclosiastique, peut-etre l'eveche de Saint-Andr6, localito situoe moins de 10 kms l'ouest de Ch.-B., ensevelie au Xllleme si£cle par l'6croulement de la montagne du Granier. Tout cela tendrait έ faire croire que 1'evolution linguistique a pu etre sensiblement la meme au cours des si£cles qui ont prec6d6 l'annexion du Dauphin6 aux domaines du roi de France,

Dotations des changements phonologiques

35

et que les divergences que releve entre Ch.-B. et ses voisines du nord ont du se produire dans le temps qui separe le XIVe du XVIII6 siecle. Elles n'affectent en rien les grands traits du franco-provencal. De part et d'autre, on retrouve une opposition de voyelles breves ä des voyelles non-breves, une tendance ä l'ouverture des syllabes par reduction des diphtongues et nasalisation des voyelles devant nasales tautosyllabiques. Mais elles permettent probablement de replacer dans le temps des evolutions qui ont caracteriso la majorite des usages patoisants Savoyards. ROYAUME DE SARDAIGNE puis D E P A R T E M E N T DE LA SAVOIE O Villaroux

Pontcharra

Les Bretonnieres (Saint - Maxfmir.) FRANCE DEPARTEMENT DE L ' I S E R E

On pense, tout d'abord, aux interdentales comme aboutissement des produits de ce qu'on peut designer comme la seconde palatalisation gallo-romaine. Le / / et le /3/ representent certainement des innovations par rapport aux palatales encore attestees dans des residus, comme la forme "expressive" [ta'vstä] du nom de la chouette. Entre /t/, /d/, d'une part, /0/ et /&/, d'autre part, on peut penser ä /ts/ et /dz/ comme des intermediates possibles qui se maintiennent dans ce qu'on peut considerer, du point de vue Savoyard, comme des marges, les [tsä'vi] et [dzo:] de Ch.-B., ou le [dz] de Tarentaise, dans ['dzslna] ou [dzä'länä] "poule", et les formes ä motathese du type [sts'vo] pour "cheval", roguliares au nord de la zone qui faisait l'objet de mon enquete de 1943. Une autre innovation que le temoignage de Ch.-B. nous permet de replacer dans le temps est le traitement de [a] gallo-roman en syllabe

36

Andra Martinet

ouverte. On sait que son maintien comme [a] dans des contextes non-palatalisants est le trait retenu comme caracterisant le francoprovencal, par opposition au francais qui le fait passer [e] ou [ ε ] , et au provencal qui le conserve dans tous les cas. Mais cet [a] a ete, sur un vaste domaine, posterioris6 en [o] . En fait, on a int6ret considorer ce changement comme un des e!6ments d'un processus affectant les voyelles non-breves les plus ouvertes du Systeme: [o] repr6sentait une "case vide" c'est-a-dire un produit phonique d 'articulation labio-velaire et du degro d'ouverture de [ε] , non utiliso a un certain point de 1'ovolution phonologique. Le processus qu'on a d6crit comme la tendance l'6quidistance entre les phonemes a eu pour effet, dans une assez vaste partie du domaine ι franco-provencal, de doterminer un passage de /α/ / D / , [a'ma] de A M A R E passant [o 1 m o]. Mais la suite, le /ε/ issu de E, Ϊ, dans NIUEM, par ex., s'est inflochi vers [a], liborant une "case" qui a et£ occupee par le produit denasaliso de /έ/ issue de EM 1 , IN tautosyllabique, dans [νε] "vent", d'un ancien [νέ]. Cette d6nasalisation a permis /e/, issue de IN , de s'ouvrir pour atteindre le meme degr6 d'ouverture que / o/. Tout ceci est rfesumo dans le tableau qui suit: e

I

Parmi les localitos soumises 1'enquete, deux d'entre elles, situfees l'ouest de l'Isere, ont comble le vide laisso par le passage de [α] [o] en allongeant l'ancien [ ] , dans un mot comme /'vafla/ "vache", par exemple; ailleurs, g6n6ralement /'va09/. L'ancien [ε] n'a, dans ce cas, pas bougfe, meme s'il s'exposait ainsi se confondre avec le produit de la denasalisation de ε. Ceci est rfesumo dans le tableau suivant: e

Iε -?·ε a

Τ

Dotations des changements phonologiques

37

A Ch.-B., la "case vide" [ ] a 6te occupoe par le produit de la monophtongaison de l'ancienne diphtongue [ou], par exemple, dans /'posä/ "pousse", ailleurs, le plus souvent avec "bascule accentuelle" /'pwosa/, /'pw0sä/. Le Systeme vocalique y presente les memes traits generaux, les memes "cases", que celui de la Combe de Savoie, mais, avec dans maintes cases, des produits d'origine differente. La dynamique du Systeme des voyelles non breves y est beaucoup plus stable qu'ailleurs et peut etre esquissee comme suit:

ou

II pourrait etre interessant de reconstituer la dynamique du Systeme dans les parlers Savoyards des zones plus montagneuses ou le /a/ traditionnel a generalement pr6serv6. La documentation necessaire pourrait etre trouvee dans les descriptions existantes et, avec les procautions dosirables, dans les donnees des atlas linguistiques. II y a beaucoup de chances pour que les conditions devolution y aient ete tout autres qu'ä Ch.-B. Dans la prfesente confrontation de la phonologic dynamique de la Combe de Savoie et de celle de la Chapelle-Blanche, il aurait interessant de faire intervenir une documentation relative 1° au parier local de Laissaud village situ6, ä vol d'oiseau, ä moins de trois kilometres de Ch.-B. et qui a suivi les vicissitudes politiques de cette derniere, 2° ä ceux des localites constamment dauphinoises de Pontcharra et de Saint-Maximin, situees ä des distances analogues vers le sud, 3° au patois du village constamment Savoyard de Villaroux, ä moins de deux kilometres vers le nord. Une enquete ä Villaroux etait prevue des l'origine de l'entreprise, et les rfesultats obtenus ä Ch.-B. incitaient ä poursuivre la recherche ä Laissaud, ä Pontcharra et ä Saint-Maximin. Mais l'enqueteur a pris de court. D'ailleurs, les rosultats inattendus obtenus ä Ch.-B. posaient des problemes qui n'avaient pas 6t6 envisages dans la vision essentiellement synchronique adoptoe au depart. II n'est pas sür qu'on pourrait, aujourd'hui, rfeunir sur place une documentation comparable ä celle de 1943. Ce que nous savons actuellement suggore que la frontiere franco-savoyarde, de 1349 ä 1720 reprosentait une barriere efficace ä l'expansion, dans l'espace, des changements

38

Andri Martinet

linguistiques. Mais ceci recevrait une intferessante confirmation s'il etait prouve qui Villaroux partageait tous les traits evolutifs de ses voisins du nord et aucun des conservatismes de ceux du sud. On voudrait egalement etre s r que l'ecart de Saint-Maximin qu'on apergoit, de la Chapelle-Blanche, au-del des Gorges du Breda, est, linguistiquement, foncierement en accord avec eile d'une part, avec l'ensemble des locaIit6s dauphinoises du Haut-Gresivaudan d'autre part. Sur I'efficacite, en mauere de frein aux echanges, de la nouvelle frontiere qui a amenfe Ch.-B. dans le giron Savoyard, on peut etre, au depart, un peu sceptique puisqu'elle n'a du etre frontiere d'6tat que quelques docennies avant et apres la p6riode de la Revolution et de rEmpire qui avait entraine son obliteration et que l'usage du francais avait commenco des lors se gfeneraliser et offir un recours ceux qui s'entendaient mal dans leurs propres vernaculaires. Note * Get expose" reprend un theme expose* ρΓέοέάεηιβηί dans Phonotique et linguistique romanes, Melanges offerts a M. Georges Straka, T. l; Lyon-Strasbourg, 1970, p. 230-237, et reproduit dans un recueil d'articles intitulo Evolution des langues et reconstruction, Paris, P.U.F., 1975, chap. XVI, p. 208-216. C'est ce texte qu'on renverra le lecteur qu'intoresse le dotail des faits lexicaux et grammaticaux. On a tento, ici, de delimiter plus pr^cisoment les poriodes ou le contact a έΐέ rompu ou sorieusement affectd par les vicissitudes de la politique et, de ce fait, d'identifier les poriodes ου les parlers Savoyards desrogions de faible altitude ont ένοΐυέ dans un sens qui les oppose nettement aux autres parier franco-provengaux. On trouvera dans Economic des changements pho^tiques, Berne, Francke, 1945, parag. 2-16, 2-17, 3-29 a 31, un premier expose" de Involution phonologique des parlers franco-provengaux de la Combe de Savoie.

L'etat, gardien de la langue: A diachronic view of language policy and planning in Quebec Sandra R. Scheeler

Introduction The central question I want to address is the relationship between language — particularly language education — policy and the role of the state in promoting ethnolinguistic vitality and manipulating interethnic group relations.1 I propose to do this by establishing the links between the evolution of language policy in Quebec and the evolution of the sociohistorical context in which Quebeckers have viewed the French language. In situating the present sociolinguistic climate within its historical context, I will describe first the shifts in ideology that propelled language to the centre of the debate on Quebec autonomy, and then how changes in the fundamental nature of Quebec nationalism have affected the role of the provincial government in the language planning arena (cf. d'Anglejan 1984). Before proceeding, however, I would like to underscore the distinction between language policy as defined at the official level and language experience as observed at unofficial levels. Policy decisions (or the absence of decisions, as the case may be) are expressions of political relationships among constituent power groups (Williams 1988:303). However, these political relationships have other manifestations as well, in the forms of significant political movements reflecting swells in popular sentiment, shifts in demographic trends and in patterns of economic control groups exert over their respective situations, and changes in language use patterns in private and public domains (Giles, Bourhis & Taylor 1977; Mackey 1983). A diachronic approach is thus most useful when it can help elucidate the relationships among activities and events occuring at these various levels.

40

Sandra R. Schecter

La langue, gardienne de la foi The population of Quebec is 80 percent Francophone, and 20 percent Anglophone or other variety dominant. French is the official language of Quobec. The principle of a unilingual Quebec is confirmed in Bill 101, the legislation under which the linguistic affairs of the province are now conducted, introduced by the former Parti qtäbacois government in 1977. The bill states that French is the official language, that it is ordinarily the language of education and work, that English is the language of a minority receiving state recognition as such, particularly in the educational field, and that the knowledge of languages other than French by Francophones is desirable and, in some cases, necessary. The controversy over language has played a prominent role in the history of Qu6bec since the inception of the Canadian Confederation in 1867, and has been exacerbated drastically in the last 30 years. For our purposes, the history of how language has been viewed in Quebec can usefully be separated into two eras. The first one, which I call la langue, gardienne de la foi (language, guardian of the faith), lasted until about 1960. During this era there was virtually no government action on behalf of language. There is a complex of reasons for the rarity of government intervention in the language arena, but it is possible to isolate two major ones. The first is that for a long time the dominant ideology did not favor.state action in any field. The church and the family were regarded as the most important institutions in society, and the role of the state was seen as decidedly secondary. Even after 1867, when French Canadians had control of a state appartaus, the provincial government of Quebec, functions that were performed by the state elsewhere in North America were either left to other institutions or simply not done. The educational system was perhaps the most dramatic example of this hands-off attitude; Qufebec did not have a Department of Education until 1964. Given this attitude, it is not surprising that the state did not try to legislate in such a cloudy area as language. The second reason why the provincial government did not bother to legislate about language before 1960 has to do with the infrequency of contacts between the French and the English populations. In the middle of the nineteenth century, the French Canadian population was still essentially rural, while Montroal was a majority English city

Language policy and planning in Qubbec

41

and Qufebec City had a sizable English minority. The urbanization of Qufebec took place unevenly but inexorably over the next century, eventually leading to increased contact between the two linguistic groups. The effects of that contact, however, were slow to be felt. Before the Second World War, less than 25 percent of the Frenchspeaking population lived in Montr6al, where the English-speaking population was concentrated; outside Montreal, contacts between members of the two linguistic groups were "both rare and superficial," according to Quebec historian Andrfe Bernard (1978:38).

L'etat, gardien de la langue By the beginning of the second era, which I call Γέίαί, gardien de la langue (the state, guardian of the language), the two factors that made language legislation unlikely in the pre-1960 period no longer prevailed. With the industrialization of Quebec, the needs of capital had changed. The state had to provide trained technicians and an industrial infrastructure to service the new, more sophisticated economy. If the Quebec government before 1960 had been slow in adapting to economic changes, it caught up quickly after that date. A province that had once given privately owned hydroelectric companies virtually unlimited freedom now became the owner of the largest electrical utility in North America. The government entered the steel industry, the forest products industry, the business of exploring for minerals. It established a firm presence in the educational system at all levels. In a wide-ranging series of reforms to be known as the Quiet Revolution, the old idea of a purely defensive, reactive provincial government, taking a back seat to the church, was cast aside. In addition, increasing numbers of Quebeckers were now coming into contact not only with the English of Montr6al but also with immigrants and the children of immigrants whose mother tongue was neither French nor English. These people had a strong tendency to prefer English as their New World language (Mackey 1983; Smith, Tucker & Taylor 1977; Vallee & de Vries 1978). The Qu6bec of the 1850s, in which the rural masses had little contact with the city, could tolerate such a situation; the Qufebec of the 1960s and 1970s, in which Montrfeal was the hub of a metropolitan area that contained more than a third of the province's French-speaking population and the centre of an increaingly vital national life, could not. The

42

Sandra R. Scheeler

question of the language of education of immigrants was to provide the spark for the first significant attempt at provincial language legislation, and would remain a major focus of language controversies for the next decade. I will return presently to the discussion of the controversy over the issue of the language of education of immigrant minorities. First, however, it is important to take stock of a third important change that has taken place since 1960, and that is a change in the fundamental nature of Quebec nationalism. One of the few lines of continuity between the older ultramontane nationalism, centered on the church, and the new secular nationalism is the French language. As Quebec nationalism has changed, so has the context in which Quebeckers view the French language, and the meaning and significance they attach to it. If the dominant form of French Canadian nationalism before 1960 tried to keep Quebec out of the twentieth century, the new Quebec nationalism tried to bring Quebeckers more of the benefits of that century, at least as it had unfolded in North America. In other words, it was a modernizing movement, and as such displayed the characteristic goals of such movements — national unity, authenticity, and modernity, with language a significant component (Fishman 1972). From the early 1960s, the major thrust of Quebec nationalist leaders' efforts would be directed toward establishing an environment in which the business of a modern nation could be conducted in French. In 1961, the provincial Liberal government of Premier Jean Lesage created the Ministere des affaires culturelles (Department of Cultural Affairs) and, within it, the Office de la langue frangaise, in effect giving notice that the provincial government would henceforth be a major actor in the linguistic and cultural arena. In establishing the Office, the government was also announcing its intentions to ensure the vitality of the French language by means of both status and corpus planning (Kloss 1969). It was the Office that would endeavor to keep Quebec abreast of the latest developments in a wide variety of fields, recommending technical vocabularies and trying to establish French equivalents for the latest English vogue words from the United States. In its quarterly publication, Neologie en Marche, the Office suggested French expressions for highrise ("tour d'habitation"), crisis-management team ("commando de crise"), and streaking ("manifessation"), among many others.

Language policy and planning in Quabec

43

In 1968, the Mouvement pour I'integration scolaire (MIS) was formed in the Montroal suburb of St-Leonard with the goal of phasing out the bilingual — French and English — classes which the suburb's Italian children had been attending and introducing French classes in their places. The bilingual system was seen as a vehicle for Anglicization, as most of the Italians went on to English-speaking high schools and then to English-speaking jobs. In June, the MIS candidates won a sweeping victory in the St-Leonard school board elections, and began to carry out their program. The "St-Loonard affair" awakened powerful passions in both the French and English communities. For nationalists, it was the beachead of the movement for French unilingualism. For many English Quebeckers, it was a threat to the right of parents to determine the language of their children's education, and it was not the last time that that phrase would be heard. The growing bitterness of the language of education issue made it imperative that the provincial government move to clarify the situation. In 1968, the Union nationale government of Jean-Jacques Bertrand introduced its language legislation, Bill 85. Bill 85 would have taken away the freedom of local school boards to act in the manner of the one in St-L6onard. The rights of the English minority were implied in the bill, although not explicitly guaranteed, and immigrants were to have the freedom to choose the language of their children's education, while being encouraged to send them to French schools. The English complained of the vagueness with which their rights were set forth. The MIS saw its beachhead being taken away and organized demonstrations in Quebec City. The government set up a Commission of Inquiry on the Position of the French Language and on Language Rights in Quebec, under the chairmanship of JeanLouis Gendron of Laval University. It also sent Bill 85 off to a parliamentary committee, from which it never returned. Language was a continuing concern for nationalist forces in 1969, and two large demonstrations focused on it - the McGill Francais demonstration2 and a renewed show of strength in St-L6onard, which was broken up with tear gas, the reading of the Riot Act, and sedition charges. In this volatile atmosphere the government, under pressure to show where it stood, introduced a new version of Bill 85 — Bill 63. Under Bill 63, French and English became official languages of Quebec, with priority given to French. French became the language of "courses of study from first grade level to eleventh grade level,

44

Sandra R. Schecter

adopted or recognized by Catholic, Protestant or other public schools," but parents could get instruction in English for their children instead simply by asking for it. Immigrants were to be encouraged to learn French, and French as the language of work was to be promoted. Despite even larger demonstrations, Bill 63 was passed. The first round of the struggle ended in a defeat for the unilingual movement. The idea of a unilingual Quebec was still too new, especially for a government that had come into office as a reaction against the rapidity of the changes set in motion by the Liberal government. In 1970, Bertrand's premiership ended in electoral defeat. It was left to Robert Bourassa's Liberals to preside over the next round. On the language question, as on others, the Bourassa government attempted to tread a middle course. While such a course was an inevitable one for a government faced with the task of pleasing conflicting and often irreconcilable interests, it was also risky and carrying it off required a great deal of political skill. The Bourassa government was not always up to the challenge, as became clear in 1971 in its handling of the Victoria Charter. Under pressure from the federal government, it accepted a draft of a repatriated Canadian constitution worked out at a conference in Victoria, British Columbia. Back in Quebec City, Bourassa found himself faced with nationalist demonstrations opposing the charter and reversed his decision. The episode added to his government's growing reputation for weakness. Initially, the government declared itself open to revising Bill 63, but wanted to wait until after the Gendron Commission reported. The Gendron Report was made public at the end of 1972, and its message was an ambivalent one. On the one hand, the Commission recommended that, while French alone should be made an official language, English as well as French should be accorded the status of a national language of Quebec. Even more important, it came out in favour of freedom of choice for determining the language of education of immigrant children, and suggested that Bill 63 be kept on the books for another three to five years to allow time for its effect to become discernible. On the other hand, the Gendron Report gave ammunition to those who maintained that French was a threatened language, especially in the work world and even more especially in Montreal. Commission studies found that while outside Montroal French-speaking workers worked in French 93 percent of the time, on average, in Montrfeal they worked in French only 78 percent of the time; and while 77

Language policy and planning in Qu bec

45

percent of French-speaking workers outside Montroal worked in a French-only environment, that was true for only 46 percent of the French-speaking workers in Montroal. For workers in the province whose mother tongue was neither French nor English, 10 percent worked in their mother tongue, 40 percent used French and English, 36 percent used English only, and a mere 14 percent used French only. Also, the use of English went up, at the expense of French, as these workers went up the social and economic ladder. As it turned out, it was this second part of the message that would get through most clearly to the government. However, it was in no hurry to act, and it was only after being reelected with the largest majority in the history of the province in October 1973 that the Bourassa government tackled the language question. Its language legislation, Bill 22, was introduced in the National Assembly in 1974. Like its predecessors — and its successor — Bill 22 was controversial. Its primary historical signifance, however, is that it was in Bill 22 that the idea of a unilingual Quebec first took legislative shape. The Bill made French the sole official language of Qufebec; in fact, it was called the Official Language Act, a pointed play on the federal government's Official Languages Act. Bill 22 outlined various procedures that business firms had to go through in order to obtain "francization certificates" indicating that they had become French-speaking concerns. The language of education was to be French except for Indians and Inuit and those children who qualified as English-speaking. The method of determining which children were English-speaking was a singularly unfortunate one, and had much to do with the bill's unpopularity. Five- and 6-year-old children were given tests of their command of English. If they passed they could go to English schools; if they failed they were to be to be educated in French. As many expected, severe problems arose in the administration of the language tests. Bill 22 was one of the many factors contributing to the precipitous decline in the standing of the Bourassa government among Quebec voters, and all opposition parties campaigned on the language issue in the 1976 election. One of the first tasks of the victorious Parti quebecois was to clean up the anomalies that Bill 22 had created. Its efforts culminated in Bill 101, the legislative underpinning of the current language policy in Quebec. The differences between Bill 22 and its successor, Bill 101, were differences of detail rather than

46

Sandra R. Schecter

of principle. The most important changes were in the punishment meted out to businesses that failed to get a francization certificate — in addition to being unable to do business with the government, they were subject to fines - and in the criterion used to determine whether a child starting school could be considered part of the English minority and hence eligible for education in English — rather than a language test, the determining factor became whether at least one of the child's parents was educated in English in Quebec.3 Yet although the Parti q^becois government, in introducing Bill 101, was by and large only confirming principles that had already been enshrined in law, that did not stop it from issuing a ringing declaration of those principles. These were contained in its Livre blanc (White Paper) on language policy (1977), which preceded the actual legislation by about one month. "Irr Quebec," said the White Paper: The French language is more than a transitory mode of expression; it is an institution, a way of life, a manner of conceiving one's existence. It is not acceptable to confine this language to private life or to subordinate it to a bilingual collective life; the result would be to reduce it to the level of folklore. The history of our people has willed otherwise and it is understandable that we, today, have no intention of contradicting our history (p. 43).

Although the language legislation conceded the need for English in certain cases, the recognition on the part of its authors of this need has been a grudging one. The White Paper also noted that: We do not deny that it is essential for certain French-speaking Quebeckers to speak English. This is irrefutable. There are two main conditions, however: the learning of English must not be imposed so early on that it constitutes a danger to the required basic technical and cultural training which in any country must remain a fundamental human concern, and the learning of another language must not be inconsistent with the need to play a full part in one's own culture (p. 43).

In consonance with the new legislation, the ensuing rethinking of educational policy, contained in the Livre orange (1979), prohibited English instruction to Francophone children before fourth grade level; time previously devoted to English instruction in the early grades was allocated to additional instruction in French. (The goals delineated for "Anglais langue seconde" at the primary and secondary levels were far more restrained than those defined for "Frangais langue seconde" for students of English mother tongue.) In this manner, the language curriculum would ensure the practical

Language policy and planning in Quebec

47

implications of the new legislation. Since in public life English was no longer — strictly speaking — needed, there was no reason to emphasize its instruction in the schools. Thus, English would be relegated to the status of a "foreign" (rather than a "second") language, that is, a variety not greatly reinforced in the learner's daily interactional environment (Marckwardt 1963).

Planned change: A new era? Perhaps the most striking mandate of Bill 101, at least from a sociolinguistic perspective, was the indtpendantiste government's program of francization of the workplace.4 With the introduction of fines into the equation, companies could no longer ignore the government's standards concerning the use of French on the job. They had to comply, and Quebec — through the Office de la langue fra^aise — had to verify compliance. Denise Daoust (1987) noted the similarities between planned linguistic change and a controlled experiment (e.g., intended locale, starting time, time scale, and desired outcomes are specified in advance) in her study of an intensive campaign to francize technical vocabuary within the institutional structure of a large privately owned freight transport company. She also noted that this "laboratory" of planned change differed from situations of natural linguistic change in that basically economic factors, such as job status and responsibilities (rather than ideological factors like language prestige or linguistic nationalism) were the predictors of terminological change. The full impact of the indupendantiste government's program of francization of the workplace is not yet entirely known. However, it is clear that the purpose served by this type of policy is a more aggressive one than language or ethnolinguistic maintenance. In the case of language, the Qu6bec legislation cannot claim the goal of maintaining preexisting patterns since, by definition, planned change is not a natural process. It may at times accelerate trends; it may also decrease or even reverse them (Cooper 1979; Ferguson 1983). In the Quebec francization campaign, measures are taken to avert the natural borrowing of words from English by introducing "neologismes" into the dialect, thus transforming through intervention the linguistic behaviours of a national speech community.

48

Sandra R. Scheeler

It is equally important to bear in mind with respect to this aspect of the Quebec legislation that in seeking to verify the on-the-job application of language norms, the authors of the Charter of the French Language advance beyond both corpus and status language planning, into the domain of "labor-market planning" (P.E. Laporte, cited by Daoust-Blais 1983:229). Thus positioned, they are better able to manipulate the ethnolinguistic character of substantial sectors of the national economy.

Prognosis The assertive role the Quebec government has played over the past three decades in promoting the French language has done much to ensure the fundamental predominance of French in Quebec, both on the official level and as a mode of communication among Quebeckers. As for the future need for English on the part of Francophone Quebeckers, this is difficult to predict. Chances are that these needs will not be uniform and much will depend on how broad or constrained is the linguistic frame of reference in which individual speakers will choose to interact (Simard 1981). For Francophone Quebeckers, then, the communicative competence necessary for interaction with the English-speaking community remains negotiable. Although through language legislation the Quobec government also seeks to bring about structural changes in the status relationships among ethnic groups in the province, it is not clear that its more recent aggressive efforts at planned change will accomplish this goal. In fact, a significant by-product of compulsory French education for the children of non-Francophone immigrants as well as non-compulsary but increasingly attractive French Immersion education for the children of Quebec Anglophones is an adaptive, and therefore competitive, workforce comprised of individuals who are fluent in French but who are not ethnically French Canadian and who do not identify with French Canadian culture. This is not to say, however, that the government's interventions in the language arena over the years have not produced substantive changes in relationships among power groups within Quobec society. On the one hand, developments in the area of language policy may be viewed as signposts in the ongoing negotiation among Quebeckers of a linguistic meeting ground on which the affairs of a self-sustaining

Language policy and planning in Quebec

49

nation can be carried on. At the same time, though, Quebec's history teaches us that language policy decisions taken by modern bureaucratic governments are more than reflections of popular sentiment. They are also deliberate attempts to specify, and sometimes rearrange, the roles and prerogatives of the state, community, and individual in the complex relationship between language and social space. Notes 1. Some of the historical material in this paper is adapted from Schecter (1980). 2. "McGill Francais!" was the rallying cry of a group of Qu6bocois militants who advocated the conversion of the prestigious English language McGill University into a French institution. 3. In July 1984, acting under Canada's new Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down this clause, insisting instead that any child should have the right to an education in English if at least one of his or her parents was educated in English anywhere in Canada. The Parti Quabocois government announced its intention to abide by the decision, which did not affect language education for children of immigrants. Thus amended, Bill 101 remains law at the time of writing. 4. Bill 101 stipulates that business firms employing 50 or more employees must hold "a francization certificate" attesting that the firm is "applying a francization programme . . . or that French already enjoys the status in the firm that such programmes are designed to ensure" (sections 136 and 138).

References d'Anglejan, A. 1984 Language planning in Quobec: An historical overview and trends. In R.Y. Bourhis (ed.), Conflict and language planning in Qudbec (pp. 29-52). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. Bernard, A. 1978 What does Quebec want! Toronto: James Lorimer. Cooper, R.L. 1979 Language planning, language spread, and language. In J.E. Alatis & G.R. Tucker (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1979 (pp. 23-50). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Daoust,D. 1987 Planned change and lexical variation. Language problems and planning, 11(2), 148-165.

50

Sandra R. Schecter

Daoust-Blais, D. 1983 Corpus and status language planning in Qu6bec: A look at linguistic education. In J. Cobarrubias & J.A. Fishman (eds.), Progress in language planning (pp. 205-234). Berlin: Mouton. Ferguson, C.A. 1983 Language planning and language change. In J. Cobarrubias & J.A. Fishman (eds.), Progress in language planning (pp. 29-40). Berlin: Mouton. Fishman, J.A. 1972 Language and nationalism: Two integrative essays. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Giles, H., Bourhis, R.Y., and Taylor, D.M. 1977 Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations. In H. Giles (ed.), Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 305-348). London: Academic Press. Kloss, H. 1969 Research possibilities on group bilingualism. CIRB publication B-18. Quobec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism. Mackey, W.F. 1983 U.S. language status policy and the Canadian experience. In J. Cobarrubias & J.A. Fishman (eds.), Progress in language planning (pp. 174-206). Berlin: Mouton. Marckwardt, A.H. 1963 English as a second language and English as a foreign language. Publications of the Modem Language A ssociation, 78 (2), 2 5 -28. Quobec (province) 1969 An act to promote the French language in Quobec (18 Eliz. 2, chap. 9). In Statutes of Qudbec, 1969 (pp. 61-63). Quebec: Editeur officel du Quobec. 1974 Official language act (23 Eliz. 2, chap. 6). In Statutes of Quebec, 1974 (pp. 53-77). Quobec: Editeur officiel du Quobec. 1977 Charter of the French language. In Revised statutes of Quebec, 1977, chap. C-l 1. Quebec: Editeur officiel du Quobec. Quobec (province). Commission of inquiry on the position of the French language and on language rights in Q^bec (Gendron Commission) 1972 Report. Quobec: Editeur officiel du Quebec. Q^bec (province). Ministere de Γ education 1977 L 'enseignement primaire et secondaire au Quέbec: Livre vert. Q^bec: Editeur officiel du Quebec. 1979 L'ecole quebecoise: Enonce de politique et plan d'action. Quobec: Editeur officiel du Que"bec. Quebec (province). Ministere de Γ education. Direction gonerale du doveloppement pe'dagogique 198la Le materiel didactique de base pour l'enseignement de programme d'anglais, langue seconde au primaire: Devis (No. 16-4311-03). Quobec: Ministere de l^ducation.

Language policy and planning in Quebec 1981b

51

Materiel de soutien a l'implantation des programmes du primaire. Quöbec: Ministere de Foducation. 1981c Programme d'otudes anglais langue seconde au primaire: Guide p dagogique. Quebec: Ministere de l'oducation. 1981d Programme d'atudes primaire: Anglais langue seconde (No. 16-2204). Quebec: Ministere de l'oducation. 1982 Mise a l'essai de la version prbliminaire du programme d'btudes d'anglais langue seconde, au primaire: Rapport devaluation (No. 16-2204-03). Quobec: Ministere de 1'education. Quebec (province). Ministere des affaires culturelles. Office de la langue frangaise 1975 Neologie en marche (Nos. 4 & 7). Quobec: Editeur officiel du Quebec. Quobec (province). Ministere d'otat au doveloppement culturel 1977 Quebec 's policy on the French language (White paper). Quobec: Editeur officiel du Quebec. Schecter, S. 1980 Teaching EFL in a unilingual Quebec. The Canadian Modem Language Review/La revue Canadienne des langues vivantes, 36, 201-214. Simard.L.M. 1981 Intergroup communication. In R.C. Gardner & R. Kaiin (eds.), A Canadian Social Psychology of Ethnic Relations (pp. 172-194). Toronto: Methuen. Smith, P.M., Tucker, G.R., and Taylor, D.M. 1977 Language, ethnic identity and intergroup relations: One immigrant group's reactions to language planning in Quobec. In H. Giles (ed.), Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 283-306). London: Academic Press. Valle, F.G., and De Vries, J. 1978 Trends in bilingualism in Canada. In J.A. Fishman (ed.), Advances in the study of societal multilingualism (pp. 761-792). The Hague: Mouton. Williams, C.A. (ed.) 1988 Language in geographic context. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Part II Developments in second language pedagogy

Introduction

The papers in this section describe developments in second language pedagogy occurring in the last ten years. Their central theme is the development of an interactive approach to teaching methods and syllabus design that grew out of earlier instructional philosophies. Thus, interactive teaching is not a new departure but a natural evolution of trends first articulated by linguists, psychologists, and teachers who worked with language instruction at the turn of the century. More recent innovations in pedagogy thus stem from increasingly precise understanding of the variety of learner needs observed in different instructional contexts and the growing body of knowledge regarding techniques appropriate for different settings rather than mere recognition of the interactive dimension of teaching, a recognition that has a long and honorable history in second language pedagogy. Wilga Rivers notes that the primacy of interaction, emphasized by Jespersen and Leontiev, is a central theme in current thinking about methodology, and one which helps us understand the possibilities and limitations of classroom instruction. Robert Di Pietro and Frederick Bosco provide a framework or scenario for interactive instruction as one tool that overcomes some of the limitations of the formal instructional setting. Celeste Kinginger and Sandra Savignon demonstrate that variation in the tasks used in the classroom provides differential opportunities for learners to engage in natural communication. These papers provide both historical context and contemporary information regarding the place of interaction in language teaching. The two chapters on methodology offer more global views on changes in language teaching trends. In a survey of effective language teaching practices, Mary McGroarty notes that particular techniques are now judged effective if they are consistent with the learner's communicative development. Ann Fathman shows that, to the degree that interactive teaching implies more learner involvement, teacher direction is de-emphasized; this development challenges the teacher to supplement the standard curriculum by using a wider range of instructional and managerial skills. However, the second language curriculum itself has not remained unchanged in the face of growing emphasis on interaction. Patricia

56

Introduction

Porter discusses developments in syllabus design that have placed learner needs rather than linguistic structures at the center of communicative language teaching. Drawing on anthropological concepts, James Robinson points out that not only learner's language capabilities and needs but also the learner's own academic culture must be taken into account in developing appropriate methodology. These chapters establish the diachronic roots of current language teaching methods and, at the same time, show how recent developments have helped to refine the understanding of effective language instruction. In addition, they set the stage for the discussion of contemporary research into second language learning processes presented in the next section.

Interaction: The prelude to communication' Wilga M. Rivers At a conference in Cambridge in 1969, Belasco asked those present whether even 50,000 structure-dependent operations internalized by a foreign language student could be considered "a fair sample of the 'real' world (Belasco 1971)," thus questioning the practice still prevalent at that time of requiring foreign language learners to memorize chunks of language as the keystone of the learning process. At the same meeting, Oiler concluded that "there is fairly general agreement that the basic goal of foreign language teaching is to enable the student to successfully send and receive messages in the foreign language; that the necessary and sufficient means for achieving this objective is to involve the student in active communication in the target language. The sooner, the better," he said (Oiler 1971:177). Already in 1904, Jespersen had asserted that: The first condition for good instruction in foreign languages would seem to be to give the pupil as much as possible to do with and in the foreign language; he must be steeped in it, not only get a sprinkling of it now and then; he must be ducked down in it and get to feel as if he were in his own element, so that he may at last disport himself in it as an able swimmer. (Jespersen 1904:48)

In 1916, Cummings had summed it up this way: "We must learn to talk by talking. We cannot learn to swim before we go into the water" (Cummings 1916:22). (Now we would include in Cummings's statement: "And we learn to listen by listening.") Communication of messages of genuine concern to the interlocutors is now widely accepted as the major objective of foreign-language learning, but are Oiler's "necessary and sufficient means" employed? There has been much research in areas of foreign-language learning since 1969. Much information has come to us from linguistics (we now talk familiarly of discourse attributes, pragmatic functions, and Gricean implicatives); from cognitive psychology (particularly in areas of listening, retention and recall, and scripts, plans, and Schemas); and from the burgeoning fields of first and second-language acquisition, with ongoing research on interim grammars, interlanguage, and the

58

WilgaM. Rivers

creative role of errors.1 Pedagogy has focused on the learner's needs, on motivation, individual capacities, and on the autonomous role of the learner.2 Curriculum and syllabus have been rewritten to emphasize the particular competencies we feel our students should be able to demonstrate at the end of a period of language study. Yet, we may ask, are we any nearer than in 1969 to helping learners send and receive messages in a foreign language, that is, to communicate with each other in some real sense of that term? Much is said and written about communication; we hear of communicative approaches, communication activities, and crosscultural communication. It sounds so obvious and easy, as though communication can be turned on by our willing it into being. There is, however, a step we are skipping — a necessary process that motivates and encourages students to communicate, namely, interaction. Communication springs from within: one individual may have something to convey to another, in speech or writing - information, an emotional reaction, a personal viewpoint, a request to do something - but this personal intent to communicate is realized or inhibited in an interactional setting. We may feel the urge to tell the woman in the red hat on the bus something of importance, but "the moment doesn't arise": we don't know her well enough or we are afraid of a rebuff. "I couldn't tell her; it didn't seem the right time," we say. There was no interaction at that point and, therefore, the opportunity for communicating did not arise. If we were both strap-hanging and there was a sudden lurch, then a moment of interaction might have been forced on us, thus providing an opportunity for some communication, although probably not to any great depth. The sudden opportunity for interaction may have precipitated a communicative interlude. Just throwing people together, however, will not necessarily result in communication, as many an inexperienced "conversation instructor" has soon discovered. For communication of genuine messages, we need interactive situations which arouse communicative intentions that reflect deeper involvement of the participants. How to bring such situations into being in a formal setting is a considerable challenge to the language teacher. In 1986, I had a serious accident in Japan. Falling down a flight of stairs in a railway station, I broke some vital bones and consequently was confined to a hospital bed. In the Japanese system of family care, I needed a practical nurse, so Sano-san from Fuji City came into my life — a jolly, rosy-cheeked lady, with black curly (or was it curled?)

Interaction: The prelude to communication

59

hair — and we spent two and a half weeks together, in constant company. There was inevitably interaction — things had to be done — and this interaction grew, as we came to know and like each other, and had many hours to fill. It was inevitable that we would want to share meanings. To use the felicitous description of Wells and his colleagues, "linguistic interaction is a collaborative activity" (Wells et. al. 1981:29,46-47). There was much communication of meaning between myself and Sano-san during those eighteen days, but minimally through language. It was in this interactive situation, with much motivation to communicate, that I learned how much of communication is non-linguistic. How then were meanings shared? For they certainly were shared in a happy, laughing relationship, with never a dull moment. First of all, there was a shared context, with clear expectations as to the matters to be communicated and with few surprises. Objects and pictures (on television or in the newspaper, for instance) and the hospital routine — all of these helped in conveying meaning. Next in importance came gestures, facial expressions, head movements, intonation, tone of voice, degree of emphasis, and certainly persistence on the part of both of us. With a few content words in Japanese closely related to the context, communication was ample: "Breakfast . . . you (pointing) . . . now"; "Tomorrow 3 p.m. Temma sensai or Koike sensai"; "Dozo akete kudasai", when the room became too hot. There was a genuine desire to communicate; we were mutually at ease; there was no feeling of criticism, no embarrassment, and no need to impress, so there was no anxiety in the interaction. (Laughter is always relaxing.) In this situation there was plenty of communication, but to a small degree through language. Linguistic interaction was beginning but I did not have the necessary knowledge of the Japanese language to express anything complicated. Everyday, I sought more expressions in my Berlitz and Instant Japanese books and through questions. As I acquired more linguistic knowledge, communication of meaning increased and became communication through language. The linguistic interaction then grew (as a two-way process) because Sano-san presumed I knew more than I did. Then she really talked; I tried to latch on to clues (words, context, expectations), but despite her enthusiasm communication ceased at times, when I did not have the knowledge to inform my guesses, until it was revived again by non-linguistic means (objects, pictures, or mime).

60

WilgaM. Rivers

One day, on Coming-of-Age Day, a special celebration for young women who are twenty years old, there was a picture in the Englishlanguage newspaper of a female gorilla in the zoo who was twenty years old and who was fed a special feast of bananas and fresh fruit for her festival day. I tried to share this amusing incident with Sano-san, who could see only the picture of a gorilla. With persistence and words in Japanese like "young woman", "feast", "20 years old", "fruit", and "today", and with a little pointing at the television where we had seen young women sauntering around in beautiful kimonos, light dawned for Sano-san and communication finally took place, with great hilarity on her part. We have all had these experiences, you may say. What of it? We certainly have, and they are worth reflecting on. It is well for us to remember that, in these situations, most of the communication comes from shared context, cultural knowledge, and expectations, rather than from the conveying and receiving of a linguistic message of any sophistication. Interaction provides a process by which communication via language may take place, but it does not ensure that this will be the case. Nor does the use of words of itself constitute "communication via language". Words, as we know, fill in embarrassing pauses; they act as a social cushion; we talk for the sake of talking. Who of us has not said, in a moment of conversational desperation, "Lovely day today, isn't it?" and then looked out of the window to see the rain pouring down? Goffman observes that "the discovery that communication could be used broadly to refer to what happens when individuals come together has been almost disastrous: Communications between persons in each other's presence," he continues, "is indeed a form of face-to-face interaction or conduct, but face-to-face conduct itself is never merely and not always a form of communication" (Goffman 1969:ix). There must be involvement and communicative intent. It is the task of the teacher, in cooperation with the learners, to develop opportunities for involved interaction. To quote Goffman again, when "this moment of talk in a communion of reciprocally sustained involvement" takes place, it is the "spark that lights up the world" (Goffman 1967:116-117). We have plenty of talk in the classroom - teacher instructions, communicative drills, communicative activities, Total Physical Response (see Asher 1966), lots of comprehensible input, communication over texts — but unless we have involved students who care about what

Interaction: The prelude to communication

61

is being communicated and wish to communicate reciprocally, all this activity remains sterile and unproductive. Halliday (1985:68) sees "an 'act' of speaking" as "something that might more appropriately be called an 'interact' . . . an exchange, in which giving implies receiving and demanding implies giving in response". "In the act of speaking," he says, "the speaker adopts for himself a particular speech role, and in so doing assigns to the listener a complementary role which he wishes him to adopt in his turn" (Halliday 1985:68). Allwright (1984:159) speaks of interaction as a "coproduction of all the participants". How rarely do episodes of talk in the classroom seem to reflect this complementarity and reciprocity! We teach "openers" and "closers", ways of taking the floor and holding it, even how to take "turns at talk" (Kramsch 1987:21); then, the practice over, the teacher moves on in a continuing unilateral pattern. In Kramsch's words, "the teacher selects the next speaker and automatically selects him or herself for the succeeding turn. There is little motivation for students to listen to one another and the only motivation to listen to the teacher is the fear of being caught short on an answer" (Kramsch 1987:22). There is an old adage worth remembering: "A good teacher is one whose ears get as much exercise as his [or her] mouth." To achieve interactive communication by means of a foreign or second language, we need more than something to share, gorillas notwithstanding. We need both knowledge of language and control of language.3 We need, in Leontiev's terms, to be able to say not only what we have to say, but also to say it "as it needs to be said in order to influence or to promote interaction" (Leontiev 1981:23, italics in the original). As we speak, we have a mental representation of the lexico-grammatical structure of the language we are using (call it competence, if you will); the more highly developed this linguistic and sociolinguistic competence, the more precisely and effectively we will convey and receive meanings. "What are communicated in language are the semantic content and the pragmatic intent, but the vehicle of their transmission remains the lexicogrammatical structure of the utterance" (Waryas & Stremel-Campbell 1978). In recent years, some teachers have become caught up with the former (the semantic content and pragmatic intent) to such an extent that they have left the latter (the lexicogrammatical structure) to take care of itself as of lesser importance. Consequently, we have produced students who know how to interact but cannot communicate a clear message. A book worth rereading is T.F. Cummings's slender 1916 volume, How to

62

Wilga M. Rivers

Learn a Language (a very contemporary-sounding title). In this book, Cummings gives helpful ideas to language learners, who, in far-off lands, may be receiving instruction in a language from a native informant who knows very little of how languages are learned or should be taught. It is Cummings's intention that the reader of his book be able to push his or her instructor gently in the right direction. The book is full of common sense and wise counsel. "Every art and science," Cummings observes, "has its fundamentals. He who would be a master of any art must gain an automatic control of its basic principles" (Cummings 1916:22). When Cummings insists on "automatic control" of basic principles, he is not promoting a traditional, grammar-steeped rule-learning approach. "We must, of course, learn grammar," he says, "but concretely, and after it is so learned we shall be able to appreciate it when stated abstractly." Beginning with the abstract "does not make speakers of a language," he continues, and he quotes a grammar-bedeviled student who maintained that "Arabic grammars ought to be well bound, so as to stand being thrown violently about the room" (Cummings 1916:15). Unpopular as it is in some circles to speak of a grasp of grammatical structure, it is through lexico-grammatical control that we achieve precision and nuance of meaning, and it is by lexicogrammatical control that we will be judged, because it is basic to our ability to use the language appropriately in social situations and to success in persuading, dissuading, conveying our feelings, and so on. Through lexicogrammatical control we are liberated to choose among the many possible ways of expressing our meaning that enable us to make our message palatable or forceful, as circumstances require. In "Notional syllabuses revisited", Wilkins says: "The notion that an individual can develop anything other than a rudimentary communicative ability without an extensive mastery of the grammatical system is absurd" (Wilkins 1981:85), but the way we acquire this ability is fundamental to its future use. How, then, do we reconcile this emphasis on language knowledge as basic to language control with our theme of promoting communication through interaction? The approach we take to the internalization of language structure forms the bridge. "Learning grammar . . . is not listening to expositions of rules, but rather inductively developing rules from living language material and then performing rules" (Rivers 1987:13). This active way of internalizing the language structure, through experience in expressing our own meanings, develops our

Interaction: The prelude to communication

63

ability to use it in future communication. As Politzer (1965:12) has put it, "Ultimately we learn only what we do." When we learn rules concretely through use in Cummings's sense, we gain experience in manipulating structure for our own purposes. What better way, then, to internalize rules than to perform them in genuine interaction from the beginning? To round off our discussion of Cummings, we find that he was not hung up on accuracy in grammatical use; in fact, he was well aware of the interrelationships of fluency and accuracy. "Some will argue," he says, "that accuracy should come first and not fluency. Taking the cue from nature, however, we find that children attain fluency first, and that sometimes many years elapse before all their inaccuracies clear away." He makes an exception, however, for pronunciation and rhythm. In these areas, he finds, "the only way to learn accuracy is by being fluent, for fluency is an integral part of accuracy" (Cummings 1916:23). Would-be speakers of a language, he maintains, must learn to communicate at a natural speed of speech, with acceptable and comprehensible stress and intonation. This will carry the flow of not necessarily accurate speech, enabling them to convey their meaning comprehensibly while they are learning to express meanings through communicative interaction. To return to performing rules: rules in the Chomskyan sense, are not consciously applied, but, having been assimilated, they subconsciously determine our performance. They may be acquired in indirect ways, but they are, nevertheless, integrated into the mental representation — approximating more or less to the native speaker's model, or competence, depending on the care with which this mental representation has been developed, and the time and motivation the student has devoted to it. As teachers, we must recognize the limitations of the formal classroom and for a time be satisfied with a rough approximation, which can be polished and perfected as opportunities arise for communicative use. Leontiev develops the concept of an "absolute minimum" — a core — of language knowledge "without which the teaching of any speech activity would be impossible". He speaks of three floors of language development of increasing complexity — ground floor, first floor, and second floor. "In practice," he says, "we always put finishing touches to the lower floors while work on the upper floors is already under way" (Leontiev 1981:25). On the basis of information-processing research, McLaughlin, Rossman, and McLeod have hypothesized that active use of language

64

WilgaM. Rivers

utilizes both controlled and automatic processes. The automatic processes, they maintain, become routinized through constant use, but are available for scrutiny as controlled processes when our more sophisticated knowledge of the language requires us to increase their complexity. Conversely, controlled processes, of which we are consciously aware, can become routinized and automatic with frequent use and familiarity (McLaughlin, Rossman & McLead 1983). Both of these processes constitute active knowledge of language, in the sense in which I am using it. By control of language, I mean ability to use the forms and structures of the language (syntactic, semantic, phonological, kinesic, and pragmatic) to express personal meanings comprehensibly and acceptably, and to do this with ease and confidence in social settings while concentrating on communicative interaction. Control of language necessarily implies also the ability to understand messages and their full implications in the context, interpreting tone of voice, stress, intonation, and other paralinguistic features as well as actual words and structures. This control of language implies using the language not only with the forms native speakers use but also with the meanings they convey through those forms, in other words, with authentic cultural impact.4 Knowledge of language is what many teachers concentrate on; control of language in this rich sense is supposed somehow to take care of itself. Long and Sato (1983) found that, in the ESL classrooms they studied, display questions like "Is this a book?" with its anticipated response: "Yes, it's a book", which encourage manipulation of structure, constituted 51% of classroom questions, but were "virtually unknown" in native speaker-nonnative speaker conversation, where, conversely, information-seeking questions occurred 76% of the time, although they were heard only 14% of the time in class. Long and Sato concluded that "contrary to the recommendations of many writers on [second-language] teaching methodology, communicative use of the target language makes up only a minor part of typical classroom activities. 'Is the clock on the wall?' and 'Are you a student?' " they say, "are still the staple diet, at least for beginners" (Long & Sato 1983:280). Mueller (1983) found that in foreign-language classes she studied: "In class after class purporting to teach students to understand, read, write and speak a foreign language, the language is spoken only in bone-dry grammar exercises, never in an authentic exchange of ideas or information." And this despite many years of urging communicative activities in the class. In 1954

Interaction: The prelude to communication

65

Politzer observed that "if we believe in learning through doing rather than learning through 'talking about' . . . doing", this in our case, "means using the foreign language, and using it well" (Politzer 1954: 104). Where are imagination, innovation, and dynamism in so many of our classrooms? Where there is no interest on the part of the students, there may be a perfunctory exchange of words, but communication of personal messages does not take place. We need to stimulate interactive situations and activities, if communication, authentic, even if elementary, is to take place among our students, or even between teacher and students or students and teacher. Language is then used "as a medium which will engage the thought, perception, and imagination of the learner" (Leontiev 1981:65). To promote interaction in another language, we must stimulate and maintain a lively attention and active participation among our students. If we ourselves lack imagination, we draw on the inventiveness of our students. This is the essence of the participatory classroom. Students are too often treated as blocks of wood (or sponges) — identical ones at that — whereas, encouraged and stimulated to take responsibility for what is going on, they are full of ideas. We need to recognize and encourage Seliger's High Input Generators, who seek opportunities to communicate, to stimulate their less confident fellows and support and encourage the Low Input Generators to take risks and launch out (Seliger 1983). To use language communicatively, any content, any activity will do, so long as the students' interest is caught and held. Morgenstern at MIT uses simulations a great deal. In one such simulation he divides the class into two neighboring countries, providing them with maps and demographic, economic, and cultural information. These countries have a border dispute and one has invaded the other. The teacher acts as a radio broadcaster announcing the fast-moving events, while the students hastily decide on their course of action and mobilize their fellow citizens (Morgenstern 1986). This creates an interactive situation with an urgency for communication. Simulations like this have enormous possibilities, which are realized only through student decisions and elaboration, and there is much spontaneous use of the language being learned. To maintain this kind of interactive classroom is not easy. It requires a great deal of skill and forethought on the part of the teacher if it is to work well within the time limits of an ordinary class. We can

66

WilgaM. Rivers

acquire the skill of developing communication in interactive situations in the classroom through careful preparation and openness to learn from experience and from our students. As Seneca once said, "While we teach, we leam" (Ad Lucilum V, vii). In an interactive class, the teacher needs to know the students well, being quick to note the stirring of emotions that militate against or for comfortable participation: the impulse to guard oneself from hurt, fear of the reactions of peers or authority figures: desire to excel, to please, to be successful; anxieties based on factors of which the teacher is unaware (be they peer relationships, fear of failure, perfectionism, or discouragement caused by previous unpleasant classroom experiences). Teacher and students need to cultivate open relationships that encourage initiation of activities from either side, because interaction is not just a matter of words. (Words, we may note, may express or camouflage the interactive intent.) The caring teacher "tempers the wind to the shorn lamb". With care and thought, interactive activities can be made to appear natural and to develop naturally. Then interaction becomes desirable, even inevitable, and words (in communication) slip out or pour out to accompany the developing interest. As the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, the interactive, participatory activity brings more experience and develops more confidence than the isolated utterances of the individual involved. Such interactive experiences are not just "pie in the sky" for the average teacher. Interactive techniques are available to all because they are invented by all, but each individual must take the first step. The sooner, the better. To quote Montaigne: Voicy mes Ie9ons: Celui-la y a mieux proffito qui les fait, que qui les sgait!

Notes * The chapter is a revised version of a plenary address given at the 8th International Congress of AILA, Sydney, Australia, 1987 1. Already in 1958 R.L. Politzer based the experimental version of his te\t, Active Review of French, published with M. Hagiwara in 1963, largely on a study of student errors. In the Introduction, we read: The materials included are based upon a comparison of English and French structures, . . . (on) the assumption that the clash of patterns of the two

Interaction: The prelude to communication

67

languages is the primary cause of errors committed in French by native speakers of English. This assumption was borne out by the careful analysis of mistakes made by two hundred second-year students at the University of Michigan on their final examination. The analysis further revealed frequent errors which could not have been predicted on the basis of linguistic comparison alone, and it also determined the inclusion or exclusion of some materials (Politzer 1963:v). 2. Individual differences and the need to adapt foreign language teaching to learners' interests and motivations is discussed in Politzer (1971). 3. For a discussion of these terms, see Rivers (1981:356-357). 4. For further development of this distinction, see "Ten principles of interactive language teaching" (National Foreign Language Center 1989).

References Allwright, R.L. 1984 The importance of interaction in classroom language learning. Applied Linguistics, 5,2, 156-171. Asher, J.J. 1966 The learning strategy of the total physical response: A review. MLJ 50: 79-84. Belasco,S. 1971 The feasibility of learning a second language in an artificial unicultural situation. In P. Pimsleur & T. Quinn (eds.), The psychology of second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cummings, T.W. 1916 How to learn a language. An exposition of the phonetic inductive method for foreign resident language students. A direct, practical, scientific way of mastering any foreign tongue. New York: privately printed. Goffman, E. 1967 interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. 1969 Strategic interaction. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Halliday, M.A.K. 1985 An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Jespersen, 0. 1904 How to teach a foreign language. London: George Allen & Unwin. Kramsch, C.J. 1987 Interactive discourse in small and large groups. In W.M. Rivers (ed.), Interactive language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 17-30. Leontiev, A.A. 1981 Psychology and the language learning process. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

68

Wilga M. Rivers

Long, M.H., and Sato, C.J. 1983 Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of teachers' questions. In H.W. Seliger & M.H. Long (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 268-286. McLaughlin, B., T. Rossman, and B. McLeod 1983 Second language learning: An information-processing perspective. Language Learning, 33,135-158. Morgenstern, D. 1986 Simulation, interactive fiction and language learning: Aspects of the MIT Project. Bulletin of the CAAL, 8 (2), 23-33. Mueller, M. 1983 The Tower of Babel in Libertyville. Daedalus, 112,229-247. Oller, J.W., Jr. 1971 Language communication and second language learning. In P. Pimsleur & T. Quinn (eds.), The psychology of second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 171-179. Politzer, R.L. 1954 Developing cultural understanding through foreign language study. In H.I. Mueller (ed.), Report of the Fifth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Teaching. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 99-105. 1963 Active review of French. Boston: Ginn & Company. 1965 Foreign language learning: A linguistic introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1971 Toward individualization in foreign language teaching. Modern Language Journal, 5 5,207 -212. Rivers, W.M. 1981 Teaching foreign-language skills, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1987 Interaction as the key to teaching language as communication. In W.M. Rivers (ed.), Interactive language teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3-16. 1989 Ten principles of interactive learning and language teaching. Occasional paper no. 2. Washington, D.C.: National Foreign Language Center at Johns Hopkins University. Seliger, H.W. 1983 Learner interaction in the classroom and its effect on language acquisition. In H.W. Seliger & M. Long (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 246-266. Seneca AdLucilum. V, vii. Waryas, C.L., and Stremel-Campbell, K. 1978 Grammatical training for the language-delayed child, in R. Schiefelbusch, ed., Language intervention strategies (Baltimore: University Park Press), p. 159, cited in Newmeyer, F.J., On the applicability of transformational generative grammar, Applied Linguistics, 1983, 3,101.

Interaction: The prelude to communication

69

Wells, G.,etal. 1981 Learning through interaction: The study of language development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wilkins, D.A. 1981 Notional syllabuses revisited. Applied Linguistics 2,83-89.

The scenario: Its use in interactive second language instruction

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco With attention increasingly being drawn to the shortcomings of language processing models for second language acquisition, the need grows for more holistic approaches to second language instruction. Such approaches must take into consideration the social nature of humans and the universally shared propensity to engage in problemsolving as a group activity. The scenario incorporates both features and is therefore an ideal activity for engaging second language learners in tasks that enhance acquisition of the new language. Instructional approaches that utilize the scenario are called "interactive" because they challenge the learners to adopt strategies that are similar to the ones used in natural social discourse. This paper begins with a succinct commentary on the current fashion of theorizing about second language acquisition and then outlines the use of the scenario in second language. Second language research has shaped a "deterministic" image of the second language learner. Whether in or out of the classroom, second language are seen to be following an order of acquisition of the target language that is universal and inevitable. To help in conceptualizing the acquisition process, researchers have embodied it in a grandiose metaphor known as the LAD or "Language Acquisition Device". Conjecture as to how the LAD works has led Stephen Krashen (1985) to formulate the so-called "Input Hypothesis". According to this hypothesis, second language learners process "comprehensible input" from the target language. Acquisition comes about in small steps as the learners are exposed to input that is just beyond whatever stage of competence they happen to be in at the moment. Evidence of what has been acquired is sought in the output that is produced. In the words of Breen (1985), second language learners have been reduced to "generators of input-output". The role of the teacher has been re-defined in keeping with the new image of the second language learner. No longer the controling

72

Robert J. EH Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco

force in instruction, the teacher best serves as a facilitator or provider of reliable and comprehensible input. The teacher's intercession in a more directive way (such as in giving rules or leading drills) is apt to fuel a grammatical "monitor" that can never serve the subconscious acquisition process because it makes the learner aware of language structure or norms of usage. There is also the likelihood, as White (1987:108) points out, that we may never know precisely what factors in the input are relevant to the i + 1 formula. This shortcoming has not deterred the appearance of a new text purporting to apply Krashen's imput theory to the classroom (see Brown & Palmer 1988). Krashen's claim that learners acquire foreign language by listening for an extended period before speaking serves to justify the creation of a number of exercises by Brown and Palmer that unfortunately do not show just how input is actually at work. VanPatten (1987) is more pedagogically sound in his suggestion that interaction should be mixed with silent phases. In any event, the foreign-language teaching profession proceeds — as it must — with only the bits and pieces of evidence of learning that have been uncovered by researchers. Thanks to the impetus given by Hatch (1978) and others, some researchers in second language acquisition have turned their attention to the significance of discourse in learning a new language (see, for example, a recent survey by Grandcolas and Susbielles 1986). An awareness is growing of the mechanisms of conversation such as topic shift and turn taking (Athay & Darley 1982). However, in applying discourse findings to second language instruction, the emphasis has been largely on how meaning is negotiated and how conversational discourse is managed rather than on how learners might implement conversational strategies to create knowledge and solve problems that go beyond language (see discussion in Auerbach & Burgess 1985). Of course, linguists should continue to explore the boundaries of grammar in order to uncover all aspects of what must be learned in order to be called "proficient" in a new language. However, we must also consider the possibility that grammar may turn out to be deficient as an all-encompassing model of human language. Pragmatic studies have demonstrated increasingly that grammar cannot be understood independently of how language serves a wide range of human uses (see Lee & Thompson 1987). This state of affairs is clear to the second language learner who quickly discovers that there is much more to be learned about the language being studied than could ever be encased in a formal grammar of it.

The scenario in second language instruction

73

A reasonable expectation for teachers is that we will succeed in leading our students to a point where they will be able to do with the language much of what habitual users of it can do. We can also aim at helping them do it with a level of proficiency that is acceptable to those habitual users. We should abandon the ideal of "nativelike proficiency" as unrealistic not only because it is almost an impossible instructional goal but also because it is unexpected in the community of speakers of the language we are teaching. A language is as much the property of the community as it is of the individuals who function in that community. It is through social interaction that language norms are established and the meanings of words are agreed upon. It is also through interaction that individuals create a "self and along with that "self engage in all activities that require both cooperation and confrontation with others. All communities of humans are characterized by a range of competencies in the language of languages spoken in them. If we teachers have the goal of bringing each of our students to a degree of second language proficiency that allows them to function in a community of speakers of that second language then we cannot afford to ignore the social foundations of language in what we do in the classroom. As teachers of language we must also come to grips with the realities of language use. The social use of language extends beyond conformity to norms, i.e., it demands more than what has been called "communicative competence". No society makes all the decisions for its members. In every human society there are personal desires to be fulfilled and problems to be solved. To become proficient in the language of a society requires that the individual become able to use that language not only to fulfill needs but also to seek innovative approaches to mutually shared problems. The sharing of thought made possible by language leads to the creation of new knowledge which is then available to all members of the community. The claim that knowledge has a social base is not a new one. It has been formulated by Vygotsky and other Soviet psychologists for many years (see Vygotsky 1978; Wertsch 1981). What is different here is the claim that even a new language can be part of the knowledge created by group activity. In an interactive approach to second language instruction, new knowledge is promoted in two steps: first, by putting learners together in cooperating groups charged with mapping out procedures to complete a shared task and then, by facing off representatives from those

74

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco

groups whose tasks are thematically related. The scenario becomes the embodiment of these two steps. Di Pietro (1987) defines it as the "strategic interplay of roles functioning to fulfill personal agendas within a shared (social) context". The scenario leads students to shape a plan of action (i.e. an "agenda") built upon a comunally shared reservoir of knowledge and then attempt to carry it out in facing others who have also shaped a plan of action built upon a thematically related task. The following two roles exemplify the kinds of tasks assigned to diverse groups of students in a scenario. The roles are socially interrelated (husband/wife) and the tasks assigned to them are based on problems that are both personal and, ultimately, shared: Role A (Husband): You are employed by an international firm and you have just been offered the opportunity to work overseas at a considerable increase in salary. However, company policy does not permit you to take your wife with you for the first year. Prepare to discuss this offer with your wife who is employed with another firm. Role B (Wife): You are a newlywed who has continued to hold a good job. You have recently discovered that you are pregnant. Prepare to tell this news to your husband and discuss any changes this situation may cause in your professional career.

Each of the above roles allows for the development of a personal agenda. Inevitably, modifications will come about in both agendas when the two meet and realize that a final solution to their problems requires some accommodation or, alternatively, the dominance of one agenda over the other with whatever new social problems (divorce? separation?) that might arise. It is important to point out that scenarios are significantly different from standard role-plays or from the activities associated with psychoand sociodrama. Labarca and Hendrickson (1988:77) provide some typical role plays as follows: (1) Tell a classmate what you had for breakfast this morning. Your companion will then comment on what you ate. Afterward, change roles. For example: — For breakfast I had a cup of coffee and toast. — Why didn't you have something more? (2) If you have to lose weight, tell a companion what you can eat in the following instances: 1. Before luch, at 11AM. 2. At lunch on Sundays.

The scenario in second language instruction

75

3. In mid-afternoon. 4. After the movies, at 11PM. 5. At a birthday party. In neither type of role-play illustrated above are the students asked to involve themselves personally or interactively with what they are asked to say. They need only display knowledge already accumulated about the language. Sociodramas, as described by Robin Scarcella (1983), are more likely to call for creative language because they address problematic aspects of human life. In the typical sociodrama, students are given a story or situation that is stopped at the point of its climax. The following example is adapted from Scarcella (1983): You are entertaining your mother-in-law for the first time in your new married life. You know that she was not entirely in favor of her son's marriage to you. As you sit and chat with her, you remember that you left the roast to cook in the oven. You rush to the kitchen only to find that the roast has been badly burned. You go back to the livingroom and say to your mother-in-law. ..

The task for the students is to assume the role of the protagonist and bring the narrative to a resolution or conclusion. Success in completing the task depends to a considerable extent on the degree to which the student playing the part of the protagonist can identify with her problem. Psychodramatic activities bear a strong resemblance to sociodramas, with the episodes being more emotionally charged, e.g., how to deal with a child's questions about death or how to handle the loss of a spouse (see Stern 1983). Neither psychodrama nor sociodrama, however, has the interactive element that is essential to scenarios. Missing from both is the dialectic element invested in the counterposed scenario roles. There is no opportunity for mapping out a plan of action and then having to modify it in confrontation with others who have alternative plans. The dramatic element is deliberate in sociodrama and psychodrama while in scenarios it derives naturally from the choices for action made by the students themselves. Scenario players are free to invest as much - or as little - emotion as they wish in resolving the problem before them. The knowledge to be developed in the execution of a scenario can be conceptualized as schemata. These schemata include such matters as the following: (1) Role portrayal. What verbal and nonverbal behaviors typify the projection of specific roles in the target community? Roles are,

76

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco

by their nature, difficult to classify. However, we can point to several features that seem to be shared by all roles: goal orientation, multidimensionality, and pairing. Each of these features is discussed at some length in Di Pietro (1985). Briefly, goal orientation refers to attachment of an agenda to a role. That is, every role carries with it a purpose for interacting with others. Agendas may entail such projects as: (a) securing the cooperation of others in furthering a course of action, (b) getting confirmation of one's self image, (c) maintaining or modifying social bonds, (d) establishing normative principles of action. Multidimensionality is the feature that accounts for the variety of ways in which a role may be performed. For example, the husband's role in the scenario cited earlier in this paper can be played in a number of different ways. The choice ultimately falls to the student who is placed in it. The feature known as pairing refers to whether the agendas attached to the roles are matched or unmatched. "Husband" and "wife" should be a pair of matched roles since their agendas should complement one another in most social situations. However, they may discover the the new role of "mother" being thrust upon the female protagonist in the sample scenario may bring about a mismatch with the role of "career business executive" which is associated with the male protagonist. (2) Situational and/or contextual frames. What are the ways in which shared (old) and unshared (new) information are handled in an interaction? Every social group has ways of arranging information that is pertinent or potentially pertinent to an interaction. An obvious example is how the groups preparing the husband and wife roles in our sample scenario may order their priorities. For the husband role, one task is to decide which has a higher priority: making more money or remaining at home. The wife is confronted with the problem of deciding what to do about her own professional career now that she is becoming a mother. Both husband and wife will be forced to make yet another decision about priorities when the unshared information given separately to each role group becomes information shared between them. (3) Transactional frames. What illocutionary effect will an individual's utterances have on others involved in the same discourse? If, for example, the wife in our sample scenario should say to her husband,

The scenario in second language instruction

77

"We must do what is best for our baby", the husband would have to go beyond the face-value of the utterance as a statement of fact. Does she mean to direct her husband to forsake the raise in pay and stay at home? His interpretation of the illocutionary force of her statement will depend in part on the position she might have already articulated in the interaction. If he wishes to block the illocutionary force of her statement he may decide to answer, "the extra money I will make overseas will ensure our baby's economic future". In any case, the conversation between the husband and wife will proceed on a level that lies beneath the surface exchange of information. It will embody the give and take of strategies as each strives to settle the matter. (4) Language artifact frames. How is the structure of the target language organized? Under language artifact are included all aspects of lexicon, syntax, morphology, and phonology. This schema is the one most familiar to the teacher as well as to the learner. In fact, the tradition of language instruction has long promoted the view that learning a new language is equivalent to mastering its artifactual component. "Grammar" customarily defines the artifact and we have yet to break away from the notion that everything relevant to being competent in a language is encorporated in a grammar ofthat language. Even though transformational/generative linguistics has not been overwhelmingly successful in its application to foreign-language instruction, it has helped to fortify the mindset that a language is a finite body of rules with an independent existence from the speakers of that language. There is no intention here to discard "grammar" as a legitimate component of language. We hope rather to place it within its proper but limited context as an artifact of forms and structures about which learners may or may not need explicit information. The four schemata given above are not necessarily made known to the learners. The teacher is the one who must be aware of schemata because they are important in rehearsing and debriefing scenarios. If a given scenario is successful, each schema will become evident at one point or another to the learners. We will use the following scenario to illustrate the interplay of schemata: Scenario Title: How shall we end the term? Role A: You are the instructor of an ESL class. Several of your students have requested that a party be organized for the last day. Much needs to be done in preparation for the party. Work out a check-list and prepare to discuss the assignment of tasks with the class.

78

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco Role B. You have been offered the opportunity to go on a field trip to New York, with transportation and housing to be paid by the school. This field trip is slated for the last day of class. The other alternative for the final day's activity is a party. Discuss among yourselves which you would rather do and be prepared to present your choice to your instructor (Role A). If the group is more or less evenly divided in opinion, you may want to appoint a spokesperson for each option. You may even want to have spokespersons for majority and minority factions, even if the group is not evenly divided.

The preparation of the roles and the agendas that go with them is a group activity to be carried out in rehearsal. Separate groups of students are given each role. No rehearsal group is permitted to know what is contained in the role assigned to the other group. The tasks falling to each group are identifiable according to the schematic frames outlined above. The group preparing role A, for example, will have to decide on what specific tasks must be completed in order to organize the party (contextual frame). These tasks might include the following: (a) decorate the room, (b) obtain the necessary plates and eating utensils, (c) prepare the coffee, (d) bring the soft drinks, (e) arrange for music, (f) make the sandwiches. The next step is to assign these tasks to individual students. Who from group B would be most likely to undertake each? The answer to this question develops from the discussion engaged in by group A. Group A will also have to decide on what verbal strategies would be most appropriate to use in the assigning of the tasks to members of group B (transactional frame). Some possibilities are the following: (a) I'd like you to decorate the room. (b) Can you get the paper plates? (c) Would you make the coffee? (d) Please bring the soft drinks. (e) Could you arrange to have some music? (0 I want you to make the sandwiches. The members of group A will have to determine what illocutionary force would be attached to each utterance and how the particular individual to which it is directed will react. As the group draws up its list of verbal strategies, some members are likely to ask questions about such matters as the vocabulary to be used and how each directive is structured in terms of its syntax

The scenario in second language instruction

79

and morphology. Several of them are expressed as questions (b, c and e). Two utilize the first person pronoun (a and 0- Three employ would or could (a, c and e). It might even be useful to mention that either would or could would fit (c). Whatever grammatical queries might arise, students are encouraged to make their own notes from the discussion that ensues. Contrary to the orientation taken by Krashen and others that distinguishes between input and intake, the best way to treat aspects of the language artifact may be as output from the students themselves. Let them be as explicit as they wish about grammatical matters. It is unlikely that any grammatical explanation given to them will be as effective as the deductions they make themselves about how the language is structured. The task remaining for the group is a major one: deciding on who is to represent the group in the interaction with the representative from the other group. Whoever is chosen will have the right to decide on how the role is to be portrayed and what particular strategies will be utilized. It is useless to talk about role portrayal separately from the individual who will actually be cast in that role. In other words, the interactive frame necessitates a personalization of the role. Once that person is chosen or is elected, then the other members of the group become supporters and consultants, ready to give their help whenever it is needed during performance. In running through the four frames for role group B, we observe that this group must align the pros and cons of going on a field trip over having a party. Operating in the contextual frame may produce a list of "advantages" and "disadvantages" for each option, e.g., Advantages of the field trip: (a) opportunity to visit a very important American city, (b) the trip will not require a large expenditure of money. Advantages of the party: (a) the class will have a chance to practice their English in a social situation, (b) the party is a more appropriate way to end a semester's work. With regard to the transactional frame, the group's attention shifts to how to present each option most effectively. Some appropriate verbal strategies would be: (a) I really think a party/trip is better because . . . (b) Wouldn't you rather have a party/take a trip? It is quite possible that the students will think of verbal strategies that did not occur to the teacher. In such cases, note should be taken

80

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco

of them so that they become part of the teacher's personal inventory for suggestion to other students in the future. In fact, the opportunity given to the teacher to witness diverse treatments of a scenario is part of the teacher's own development. Each classroom session should be a learning experience for all. The creative ways that students resolve scenarios as well as the open and sincere questions they are led to ask about the artifacts of the target language provide the teacher with material for her own growth in the profession as well as to increase her competence in the target language, if she is not already a fluent speaker of it. Among the matters that might arise with regard to the language artifact from this scenario are the following: (a) Placement of the adverb really in the utterance, "I really think a party is better". Students might ask about the possibility of moving it to the position following the verb, as in "I think a party is really better". (b) A lexical alternative to rather in "Wouldn't you rather have . . . .' Here the teacher might introduce the verb prefer (as in "Wouldn't you prefer "). Since group B is involved in making a choice between two activities, it is likely that they will be interested in how to express the comparative in the target language. After several performances of the same scenario with different groups of students, the teacher should have a general idea of the kinds of grammatical matters that are likely to arise. As far as the interactional frame is concerned, two representatives may be selected as suggested above. One may stand for the majority opinion and the other may voice the minority one. If two are chosen, then group B inevitably splits into two separate consulting bodies during the performance. Although it is impossible to predict the actual discourse that will come out of the performance of the scenario, we can anticipate that the representative of group A will enter the interaction prepared to assign tasks to individual students while the representative(s) of group B may not be ready to accept such assignments. We might suppose that the interaction will begin with a disambiguation phase in which each strives to understand the other's position on the issue and, at the same time, clarify his/her own views. Consultations with supporting groups may occur often during this phase and the instructor should encourage each role player to seek help of this sort.

The scenario in second language instruction

81

All four of the schematic frames necessarily come in for reassessment during the performance. New strategies have to be formulated by role player A, as the intentions of B become evident. The final outcome of the interaction, depends, of course, on the skill with which the two sides negotiate. The supporting groups should be ready to help with additional vocabulary and structures as they are needed. It may even happen that the players will reinterpret their roles. For example, A may decide that a field trip is a better idea and consequently abandon the anticipated task of assigning duties for the party. The debriefing that follows the performance phase provides an opportunity for the teacher to go systematically through the contents of the four schematic frames. Many of the points in each frame were probably of concern to individual learners during rehearsal and performance. These points can now be brought out for general discussion. Through student/teacher collaboration in debriefing, each learner contributes his or her part to the pool of knowledge about the target language while, at the same time, drawing new knowledge from the same pool. Of course, the teacher should also be willing to add and take knowledge from the group's pool. The teacher's knowledge is extensive because she can draw from work done in the field. Bosco (1985), for example, shows that the thematic content of utterances can be ordered by means of perceptual frames. Danesi (1985) reminds us that the findings of contrastive analysis can reveal much about how the speakers of the target language use their culture to give shape to their conversations. Obviously, this information is relevant to how situational frames operate but should not shape them. A comment about the use of the native language is in order. Rather than attempt to suppress it entirely, we recognize that it has an important didactic function. In an interactive classroom, the focus of attention falls on using the target language in the performing of scenarios. The native language, however, can be most useful during the rehearsal phase and in debriefing, to discuss important points of grammar, style and culture. The native language cannot be avoided when dealing with rank beginners, nor should it be. As students gain fluency in the target language, that language takes over the rehearsal and debriefing functions. The transition from native to target should be without the loss of the communicative and interactive power needed by the learners. At the outset of this paper we provided a sketch of second language in its currently fashionable garb. We rejected the notion that the second

82

Robert J. Di Pietro and Frederick J. Bosco

language learner is a passive processor of "comprehensible input". We also saw the teacher as actively involved in the learning process. In outlining the use of the scenario and the organization of the learning tasks according to four schematic frames, we have offered a view of the learner as a participant in activities that are both social and personal in nature. Second language pedagogy must answer the human need for social interaction. Using language to resolve difficulties and to gain some measure of control over adversity allows for the target language to be situated in a realistic societal framework. The tools of the new language become refined as learners come to use them for purposes that go beyond mere display of well-formedness. The artifactual aspects of the target language retain their significance as things to be learned but they cede their centrality to the more critical need for learners to develop a "self that exerts control in interactions. References Athay, M., and J. Darley 1982 'Social roles as interaction competencies'. In: Personality, Roles and Social Behavior, ed. by W. Ickes and E. Knowles. New York: SpringerVerlag, p. 55-83. Auerbach, E. and D. Burgess 1985 'The hidden curriculum of survival ESL', TESOL Quarterly 19, 475-95. Bosco, F. 1985 'Pattern-practice revisited', In: Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles C. Fries in Perspective, ed. by P. Fries in collaboration with N. Fries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, p. 297-317. Breen, M. 1985 "The social context for language learning — a neglected situation'? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7,135-58. Brown, J.M., and A.S. Palmer 1988 The Listening Approach. New York: Longman. Danesi, M. 1985 'Charles Fries and contrastive analysis', In: Toward an Understanding of Language: Charles C. Fries in Perspective, ed. by P. Fries in colloboration with N. Fries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, p. 277-295. Di Pietro, R. 1985 'Roles in the foreign language classroom'. Paper presented at the Seventh Delaware Symposium on Language Studies, Oct. 25, 1985. To be published in the Proceedings volume.

The scenario in second language instruction

83

Di Pietro, R. 1987 Strategic Interaction: Learning Languages through Scenarios. New York: Cambridge University Press. Grandcolas, B., and N. Soulo-Susbielles 1986 'The analysis of the foreign language classroom'. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 8,293-308. Hatch, E. 1978 'Discourse analysis and second language acquisition'. In: Second Language Acquisition: A Book of Readings, ed. by E. Hatch. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House, p. 401-35. Krashen, S. 1985 The Input Hypothesis. London: Longman. Labarca, A., and J. Hendrickson 1988 Nuevas Dimensiones. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Lee, H-S., and S. Thompson 1987 Ά discourse account of the Korean accusative marker'. Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics, vol. 1, p. 2349. Scarcella, R., 1983 'Sociodrama for social interaction', In: Methods that Work, ed. by J. Oiler and P. Richard-Amato. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House, p. 239-245. Stern, S. 1983 'Why drama works: a psycholinguistic perspective'. In: Methods that Work, ed. by J. Oiler and P. Richard-Amato. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House, p. 207-225. VanPatten, B. 1987 On babies and bathwater: input in FL learning', Modern Language Journal 71, p. 156-64. Vygotsky, L. 1978 Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard Educational Press. Wertsch, J. 1981 "The concept of activity in Soviet psychology: an introduction'. In: The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology, ed. by J. Wertsch. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, p. 3-36. White, L. 1987 'Against comprehensible input: the input hypothesis and the development of second-language competence', Applied Linguistics 8, 95-110.

Four conversations: Task variation and classroom learner discourse

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon Introduction The promotion of various activities for group and pair work represents a new and significant trend in second language pedagogy. These techniques have been recommended for a variety of psycholinguistic and pedagogical reasons. At the heart of the matter, however, is the currently accepted understanding that the goal of second language teaching is to enable learners to communicate as freely as possible in real situations. In order to make this possible, the language use of the classroom ought to bear some ressemblance to the encounters in which learners might participate after instruction. (Breen & Candlin 1980; Savignon 1972, 1983). Where conversation is concerned, the obvious recommendation which emerges is that the classroom must somehow be decentralized. For purely logistic reasons, it is difficult, if not impossible, for learners to become involved in truly conversational encounters while working in a large, teacher-led group. Therefore, in the absence of willing native speakers, it is helpful for them to talk to each other. This is a very simple idea. Yet, until recently it was felt that the disadvantages of learner/learner interactions would far outweight any potential benefits. No doubt, the primary objection which might have been raised, had the question been asked, would have been that learners would teach each other to make grammatical mistakes. Within the behaviorist/American structuralist methodological paradigm that informed audio-lingual teaching, this objection makes perfect sense. Providing learners with potentially ungrammatical models would undercut and perhaps defeat the process of habit formation. Today there remain some methodologists who would object to unmonitored learner/learner conversations on these grounds. Communication practice is recommended, but only if it can be achieved without error; the acquisition of grammatical form is, after all, the

86

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

primary concern of learners, and this is to be achieved by attending to form at all times. If the teacher is not present to maintain the proper level of formal accuracy, some other provision to this end must be made. In other fields, and in other language teaching contexts, the behaviorist model is a matter of mere historical interest. It is to the discredit of the American foreign language teaching profession that this model has never really left us. Rather, it has gone "underground", remaining very much intact in the collective unconscious of the profession. This view of language learning is, of course, quite incompatible not only with expanding notions of "language" and of the roles of classrooms, but also with the picture currently emerging from second language acquisition research. In contemporary models of language learning, many of which are principally concerned with the acquisition of the formal propeties of language, an essential element is the formation and testing of hypotheses based upon active participation in communicative events, (e.g. Hatch 1978; Krashen 1982; Long 1981; Swain 1985). From the perspective of the teacher, there is no way to know which of these hypotheses may be subject, at a given point, to revision through corrective feedback (Bley-Vroman 1986). For the early or early-intermediate stage learner, simultaneous attention to message content and accuracy of form is most probably impossible, due to information procession limitations (VanPatten 1986). Indeed, to date there has been no research definitively confirming the positive effects of explicit focus on form for early and early-intermediate stage learners (VanPatten 1988). Far from suggesting continual, cautious avoidance of error, the implication here is that the acquisition of grammatical form requires at least some participation in unmonitored communicative events. Since second language learners outside the target speech community can rarely obtain this sort of experience on their own, and since the traditional teacher-centered classroom tends to inhibit true communicative exchange, meaningful interaction between peers is considered highly desirable. On another level, some theorists concerned with the transition of classroom skills to the outside world suggest that a major problem for learners stems from the classroom's failure to develop usable skills in discourse management (Kasper 1982; Kramsch 1984, 1985; Widdowson 1979). In traditional classrooms, particularly where the principle focus is upon formal accuracy, learners become fully com-

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

87

petent only in their restricted role of student. For example, since their contributions tend to be restricted to sentence length, they do not learn to combine sentences into cohesive and coherent texts. Since they do not engage in naturalistic conversation, they lack strategies, especially politeness strategies, for managing face-to-face interaction in equal power situations. Since their speaking problems are corrected for them, they may not develop the self-correcting strategies typical of conversation in other settings (cf. Schwartz 1980). Learner/learner speaking activities are suggested because they are believed to broaden the discourse options of the classroom. When learners are engaged in such activities they may address conversational problems such as turn-taking, topic management and repair (Kramsch 1984). Investigations of learners' interactions have, thus far, largely supported related theory-based pedagogical recommendations. In addition to increased opportunities to speak, learners are able to provide one another with varied language practice, including comprehensible input through negotiation of meaning (Long et al. 1976; Pica & Doughty 1985; Rulon & McCreary 1986). It has also been demonstrated that they are able to do so without misleading each other with regard to linguistic form (Bruton & Samuda 1980; Porter 1986). Additionally, in group interactions as opposed to teacher-led activities, learners are more likely to attend to their own speaking problems through self-repair (vanLier 1988). Although these studies provide evidence for the utility of learner/ learner interactions, they often do not seek to relate to context of classroom learning to the quality of those interactions. Kramsch (1985) has observed that classroom interactional styles may be represented along a continuum from that which is most instructional to that which is most natural. Instructional discourse is characterized by fixed roles, teacher-oriented, position-centered tasks and a two-fold focus: on accuracy of facts, and on content, which in many language classes consists of facts about linguistic form. The "natural" end of the continuum is characterized by negotiated roles, group-oriented and personcentered tasks and focus on the process and fluency of the interaction. If the motivations for having learners talk to each other include broadening of discourse options, providing a variety of interactional roles and increasing meaning-centered communication, it is important to observe the style actually adopted by participants: "Despite their good intentions at increasing the amount of communication in the

88

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

classroom, students and teachers have often fallen short of their goal because their style of interaction has remained at the instructional end of the continuum" (Kramsch 1985:181). In his 1987 study, Brooks demonstrated that the constraints upon social interaction and discourse production characteristic of the teacherled class can remain much in effect during pair "communicative exercises". The participants in his study attempted above all to produce grammatically accurate utterances, combined with evaluative comments modelled after those of their teacher. In creating this kind of interaction, Brooks argues, the learners were adjusting their performance to match the perceived goals of the larger environment, where grades were assigned primarily on the basis of grammatical accuracy. Although the exercises may have been intended to promote communication, in the pedagogical context under study exchange of meaning per se was sacrificed in favor of proper classroom behavior. In light of these findings, it seems likely that the classroom context will, at least to some degree, affect the quality of learners' interactions with one another. Teachers and students typically bring years of experience, and well-established expectations of their roles and duties to the classroom (Saville-Troike 1987). This means that, under pressure of pedagogical matters at hand, the simplest solution is to fall into ritualized patterns of interaction. "It is characteristic of the traditional foreign language classroom that this conflict between immediate pedagogic goals and the reality of communication outside the classroom is solved by giving priority to the former" (Kasper 1982:106). If, as in the Brooks study, the task assigned to learners for group work may in any way be interpreted as reflecting traditional expectations for language use in classrooms (e.g. an overriding concern for formal accuracy), attempts at promoting true communication among learners may be effectively sabotaged. At a time when the American second language teaching profession, under the banner of the "proficiency movement" (Higgs 1984; Omaggio 1986), is increasingly reasserting a methodology that stresses teacher control of discourse and concern for formal accuracy, it seems important to assess the impact of these practices upon the quality of learners' experience. If, in form-centered interactions, learners are practicing the same discourse patterns as in traditional teachercentered lessons, at least one of the more compelling motivations for including group work is no longer addressed. Namely, it is not clear that such interactions will help students learn to make appropriate

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

89

and interpretable contributions to second language conversation. Nor is it clear that these conversations involve the sort of negotiation of meaning which is currently believed to enhance acquisition of the formal properties of language. If the nature of group work discourse is not qualitatively different from that of standard classroom talk, the consequences my indeed be unfavorable (e.g. Harder 1980; Kasper 1982). If, on the other hand, in classroom discussions which are clearly message-oriented "the cues of actual talking spring spontaneously from involvement in real relationships" (Richards & Schmidt 1983:150), there is an obvious advantage to having learners talk, unmonitored, about matters of concern to them.

Method The present study, part of a larger-scale investigation of classroom task types and learner discourse, examines the quality of conversations and the amount of language elicited under four task conditions, conditions. Tasks The four tasks selected for inclusion in the study are all representative of the pair work undertaken by early and intermediate stage learners of French at the University of Illinois. The tasks are assumed to represent a range from least to most likely to promote truly purposeful language use; they vary in their focus and expected outcome, along the following dimensions: (a) focus on form (b) prespecified language (c) focus on content (d) prespecified goal Task #1, directed conversation, involves both focus on form and prespecified language. The activity is carried out with "converstation cards", indicating to learners questions they are to ask of one another. These exercises are designed to directly accompany the chapter of the textbook under consideration (Omaggio et al. 1984), providing practice in producing the grammatical structures and vocabulary of

90

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

the current lesson. Two learners are to ask and answer a series of questions, displayed on the cards in English. The learners are encouraged to ask the questions of their partner as best they can, and expect a response. Questions on the cards used in the conversation recorded for this study were intended to illustrate vocabulary about scholarly and environmental concerns, and the use of the conditional and imperfect verb tenses. For example, learners asked each other what they would do differently if they could start the semester over again, and whether or not they would recycle paper if there were a recycling center on campus. A third learner checks the accuracy of the questions posed using a card displaying corresponding gramatical questions in French. This task is representative of the structured group work promoted by proponents of the methodological implications of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines (Omaggio 1986). Task #2, dialogue construction or meta-conversation, involves focus on form without prespecified language. In this second task, students are given an element around which they are to create a simulated conversation. For the task used in this study, the students were to imagine a situation in which someone might say Tu n'aurais jamais du faire ςα. 'You should never have done that: Then they were to write a dialogue including that sentence for presentation to the class. Task #3, sharing information about class presentations, involves focus on content without a prespecified goal. As part of their final grade for the course, students were required to make an in-class oral presentation in groups of two. In this task, students not belonging to the same presentation pair were asked to tell each other about their plans for their talk. They were encouraged to provide each other with helpful suggestions for improving their presentations, but no particular outcome was expected. Task #4, finally, involves focus on content and a prespecified goal. Initial planning for the class presentations took place in class. In this task, students who were working together discussed their plans. The topics for the presentations were selected from a large number of possible topics by the individuals themselves. In order to present an acceptable talk, library research would have to be done, and audio-visual or other adjunct materials would have to be located ad and organized.

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

91

Participants The nine learners who participated in this study were all enrolled in an intermediate French course at the University of Illinois. The course in question is a fourth-semester grammar review and conversation course designed to meet the needs of students who anticipate majoring in French. A high average in previous French courses and a high score on the departmental placement exam are prerequisites for enrollment in the course. Most of the learners were in their first or second year of university study and did plan to major in French. As a group, they appeared to be both highly motivated and gifted. Their levels of achievement, as measured by departmental exams, were strikingly homogenous and high. All of the students who participated in the study received a final grade of 88% or above; their grades on departmental tests of speaking ability were all above 90%.

Data collection and analysis Students who voluteered to help were audio recorded as they performed the tasks during their regular classes. The data were all gathered during the l l t h week of a 16 week semester. One example of each task type was recorded and transcribed with approximate English translations. Analyses of three types were undertaken. First, in descriptions of the discourse dynamics of each conversation, emphasis was placed upon the extent to which the learners treated the task as a more private continuation of instructional discourse patterns, or alternatively, as a meaning-based conversation. Secondly, a quantitative analysis included: 1) counts of words and communication units during the first five minutes, 2) counts of the number of different words in a given learners' first 50 words and 3) counts and descriptions of repair by type (self or other initiated and/or completed). Finally, a separate consideration of repair strategies and code-switching is included.

92

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

Results Analysis of discourse dynamics

Task #1 In the first task, the structure of the conversation was predetermined by the questions given in English on the conversation cards, thus the conversation itself divides neatly into question and answer cycles. The pattern of these cycles was followed rigorously throughout the conversation: 1. First, the student whose turn it was to ask a question attempted to produce a linguistically accurate utterance. 2. If at any point in the utterance an error was perceived, the error was directly corrected by providing the proper form. This continued to occur until the student monitor was satified with the form of the question. 3. A brief, uninterrupted answer was provided by the student who was taking an answering turn. 4. Finally, the student who had just answered a question took an asking turn. In the example (1) provided, N and J are the students designated to ask and answer questions. D is the student monitor. Example (I) 1 1) N:Sis'ilya...SΪΙy aurait... 'If if there are...If there could be...' 2) OiAvait. 'Were' 3) N: S'il y avait une autre crise d^nergie, qu'est-ce que... comment... roagirais... rέagiras-tu? 'If there were another energy crisis, what...how...would you react... will you react?' 4) J: Je ne preniez pas une douche. Ί would not take a shower'. OK. Comment... comment...aima... alma... aimeraisl OK. How... how... wou.. wou... would like?' 5) O:0ui. 'Yes'. 6) J:Aimerais. Oh wow! aimerais-tu... 'Would like. Oh wow! Would you like...' 7) D: Aimerais-tu. 'Would you like'.

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

93

Throughout the conversation, the learners appear to understand that the focus is to be on the grammaticality of the questions posed. The student in the role of monitor not only corrects but also provides "teacher type" evaluative comments, such as "Good, yes uh-huh" and the like. In this setting, the possibility of carrying on a thematically directed conversation is ignored altogether. The learners do not arrange their questions by theme, although this would be possible, neither do they fill in the missing thematic content in their answers. Some questions, such as the one posed by J in turn number 4 of Example (1), lose whatever illocutionary force they may have been intended to carry, becoming instead instances of the questioner asking for feedback on linguistic form. Answers were brief and mainly to the point, although many of them were obviously not primarily intended to convey meaning. For instance, when N asks what J would do if there were no more gasoline, J replies that she would live in an apartment To this D responds "Good!" presumably because J has correctly formed an example of the conditional tense. In this sample, then, the students were motivated to complete the task as efficiently as possible. The conversation looks very much like the kind of interaction that goes on in a teacher-directed lesson during which mechanical exercises and overt error correction are practiced. As in the Brooks (1987) study, the learners observed a tripartite exchange structure complemented by "teacher-type" evaluative comments and overt, other-initiated repair. Task #2 In the second task two learners, D and K, were collaborating on the construction of a dialogue about going to a party instead of studying for this morning's exam. Again, it seems that the learners were intent upon carrying out the wishes of the teacher as efficiently as they could. After the meaning of the teacher-imposed sentence ('You should never have done that') had been established, an idea for the dialogue was proposed. One learner took over the task of creating the dialogue while the other corrected and wrote down her suggestions. Concern for the form of the dialogue was stressed over and above questions of content. The creation of the dialogue was frequently interrupted to cope with trouble sources of two kinds: problems with K's command of linguistic form, and problems arising from the lack of an established context for the dialogue. In the example given (Example 2), K tries

94

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

to suggest such a context, but is reminded of the task. In her attempts to create the dialogue, she is interrupted and corrected frequently by her partner, D. Later, the lack of context for the dialogue creates further difficulties: Example (2) 1) K: Peut-etre quand un atudiant... 'Maybe when a student...' 2) D: Le dialogue. The dialogue'. 3) K: Ooh la la. J'ai un examen ce matin et je suis alUe une partie la... Oohlala. I have an exam this morning and I went to a party...' 4) D: Soirte, c'est ςαΊ Tarty, is that it'? 5) K: Oui, soirae la nuit dernier e. 'Yes. Party last night'. 6) D: Oui. Et? 'Yes. And?' 7) K: Et je ne riussira pas une bonne lettre. 'And I will not succeed a good letter'. 8) D: Note! Sur vos examens? 'Grade? On your ((V)) exams'? ...((later)): 9) K: Dis aussi: C'est votre faute. 'Say too: its your ((V)) fault'. 1 0) D: Qa c 'est. ..qac 'es t ta faute! That is... that is your ((T)) fault?' 'Yes'. 12)D: Et ςα c'est ta faute. £a c'est seulement ta faute. Non. Oh! je suis ton pere? Je suis ton pere? Tu es... 'And that is your fault. That is only your fault. No. Oh! I am your father? I am your father? You are...' 13)K:7Vo«. Uh...non. 'No. Uh... No.' 14) D: Je suis ton ami, pas... Uh.. les amis ne disent ςα. Us ne disent pas ςα! Ί am your friend, not... uh... friends don't say that. They don't say that!' Overall, this conversation reflects general constraints which may be attributed to focus on form; in the example given, nearly all of

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

95

K's contributions are implicitly or explicitly remodelled or corrected by D. Although the students eventually produced a perfectly acceptable dialogue, a context for the dialogue was never established, and the dialogue's content was not discussed. Task #3 In the third conversation, two students were to talk about their separate plans for class presentations, but the discussion did not really evoWe in this manner. T, who was a veteran of the study abroad program of the University of Illinois, had prepared a presentation on the importance of keeping abreast of world affairs. She used the conversation as a testing ground for persuasive public speaking in French, and in so doing monopolised the discussion. B, who was at a less advanced stage of preparation for the class presentation, wished to study abroad. She took the opportunity to find out about T's experiences. Example (3) is drawn for the very beginning of the conversation, where T introduces the topic and rationale of her presentation: Example (3) T: Je vais presenter mon expose urn... sur sur les actualitos... comme... et si tu voudrais atudier ä l Stranger ou en Europe c'est important. Je... um je vais expliquer um... pourquoi on doit lire les ac(Halite's dans le New York Times ou um... ou les autres um... journaux um... oü on peut trouver des actualitös. Et pourquoi? Je vais expliquer pourquoi aussi. C'est urn... ce pourrait urn... parce que les autres personnes dans Angleterre et dans Europe pensent que les americains n 'est... ne sait pas rien. am going to present my talk urn...on on the news...like...and if you want to study abroad or in Europe it is important. I... um I am going to explain um... why you should read the news in the New York Times or um...or the other urn... newspapers urn... where you can find news. And why? I am going to explain why too. It is um... it could be urn... because the other people in England and in Europe think that Americans is not... don't know nothing'. B's contribution consisted primarily of questions and comments related to her desire to spend a year in England. It is interesting to note that in spite of the relatively low level of linguistic accuracy which characterizes B's contributions in particular, T appears to have had little difficulty in interpreting her intent, and in responding

96

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

appropriately. The main difference between this task and the previously discussed tasks is that the focus is no longer upon how things are said. Instead, each participant uses the situation to express her own meaning according to her own interests and abilities. Task #4 In the fourth conversation, two students were discussing the organization and preparation of their own in-class talk. Here, the topic was a very real concern for the participants. The success or failure of their class presentation would affect not only their final grade, but also their place in the estimation of their classmates. The students made plans for the time, place and nature of their research, they discussed what they already knew of their topic, and they engaged in friendly small talk. The focus throughout was on the cooperative establishment of plans. In Example (4), the students are attempting to agree on a time during which they can meet to do research: Example (4) C: Comment... quand est-ce que tu veux aller au bibliotheque pour etudier... ensemble*! 'How... when do you want to go to the library to study... together'? S: Oui, oui. Je ne sais pas.,, cette semaine? Est-ce que cette semaine est d'accord? Mercredi... 'Yes, yes. I don't know... this week? Is this week ok? Wednesday...' C: Le weekend va bien pour moi parce que j'ai... j'ai beaucoup des examens cette... ce semaine. J'ai une... un «mm... The weekend is good for me because I have a lot of exams this week. I have one (f.)... one (m.)umm' S: Uh... je mais je ne sais pas. Je ne peux pas aller au bibliotheque ce weekend parce que mon petit ami.. 'Uh... I but I don't know... I can't go to the library this weekend because my boyfriend...' C: ttvienticil 'He's coming here'? S: Oui. Ce weekend. 'Yes. This weekend'. C: Ah! C'est chouette, ςα\ 'Ah! That's neat!' The tone of this conversation is fairly relaxed and the "fw" form, appropriate for discussion among peers, is used most of the time.

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

97

Turns at talk are negotiated, rather than fixed, and the use of conversationally appropriate cohesive devices is common. In other words, the orientation toward content inherent in this speech situation seems to elicit a content-oriented discussion, with little evidence of classroom style behaviors present. Quantitative analysis To determine whether the amounts of language produced in each task seem to vary, counts of words and utterances were undertaken. Since the time required to complete the tasks varied from 5 minutes, 45 seconds for Task #1, to 12 minutes, 10 seconds for Task #4, counts of words and utterances refer only to the first five minutes of speech in each sample. Because of the small number of observations for each task type, any attempt to obtain statistical significance would be inappropriate. However, the values shown do demonstrate a clear trend: when the proficiency level of the participants is held constant, as it is in the homogeneous class under study, the amount of language produced tends to increase along with the communicative potential of the task. Words. The number of completed words in French per student during the first five minutes was counted for each task. These are listed in Table 1 for the nine learners who were subjects in this study. Table 1. Words/student first five minutes Total Task#l -J:90,N:96,D: 19 Task #2-D: 125, K: 102 Task #3 -T: 228, B: 146 Task #4 -C: 164,8:224

205 227 374 388

Table 1 shows that the form-focused conversations produced a little more than half the number of words observed in the content-oriented discussions, where there are fairly large differences between the values for each of the participants. For Task #3, T no doubt produced more words because she was better prepared that day for the task of discussing class presentations. In Task #4, the difference probably has to do with the fact that S had discussed the presentation date with

98

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

the teacher and thus, initially, had a greater amount of pertinent information to relate than did C, Communication Units. The number of communications units in French for each student in the first five minutes was also counted. These data are displayed in Table 2. A communication unit is defined as "an independent grammatical predication; the same as a T-unit, except that in oral language, elliptical answers to questions also constitute complete predications" (Chaudron 1988:45). Table 2. Communication units/student first five minutes Total Task#l -J: 16, N: 10, D: 12 Task #2-D: 36, K: 29 Task #3 -T: 30, B: 26 Task #4 -C: 37, S: 44

38 65 56 81

The difference observed'between Tasks #1 and #4 is striking. In Task #1, as opposed to #4, there was a good deal of hesitation related to concern for accuracy, and the rate of speaking was therefore slowed. The numbers for Task #2 and #3 do not adequately reflect the reality of those situations, since in #2 communication units tended to be short (often consisting of only one word), whereas in #4 they consisted of longer and more complex syntactic structures. Vocabulary. In addition to the word and communication unit counts, a measure of the variety of vocabulary employed by the participants was obtained by counting the number of different words produced by each student in that student's first 50 words. These type/token ratios obtained are displayed in Table 3. Table 3. Different words/first 50 words Task #1 - J: 19 (.38), N: 32 (.64) Task in - D: 31 (.62), K: 30 (.60) Task #3 - T: 33 (.66), B: 27 (.54) Task #4 - C: 34 (.68), T: 37 (.74)

Here, the difference between the tasks is less marked, suggesting that they may be more comparable along this dimension than along

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

99

the others. There is still, however, a large difference between the ratio obtained for J's vocabulary in Task #1 (.38), and that of S in Task #4 (.74). Although the data for this study are drawn from a limited sample, Tables 1-3 do suggest that there are quantitative differences between the tasks in addition to the qualitative differences already discussed. Given the homogeneity of the subjects' proficiency levels and of the contexts in which the tasks were situated, the content-oriented tasks tended to produce greater amounts of speech on the part of the students. Repair strategies and code switching The variation in task type also produced variation in the amount and type of repair. To count the instances of repair, the distinctions proposed by Schegloff, Jefferson and Sacks (1977) have been employed. This analysis includes counts of (1) self-initiated, self-completed, (2) self-initiated, other completed, (3) other-initiated, selfcompleted, and (4) other-initiated, other-completed repairs in the first five minutes. Repair here refers only to attention given in French to trouble sources having their source in discourse history. These counts are displayed in Table 4. Table 4. Repair first five minutes Repair type Task Task Task Task

#1 #2 #3 #4

self/self

self/other

other/self

other/other

Total

6 1 12 4

5

0 1 0

4 4 1

0

1

15 7 14 5

1 1 0

Table 4 shows that the preference for self-completed repair (Schegloff, Jefferson and Sacks 1977) believed to involve preservation of "face" (Brown and Levinson 1978) is operative in the content-oriented tasks, whereas other-completed repair is characteristic of the form-focused tasks. As in the case of the general structure of the discourse, the uses of repair are qualitatively different for each task. For Task #1, nearly all of the repair focuses on the verb forms and vocabulary to be practiced. The speaker self-corrects repeatedly, and the monitor steps in to provide correct forms when self-repair fails.

100

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

Code switching in this task occurs primarily as emotional response to something occuring in the discourse, either of frustration ("I dunno!"), or of pleasure at having uttered a correct form ("Oh wow!"). There are no instances of repair generated by miscommunication, neither are there instances of meaning-based use of English. This may be because the purpose of the exercise is clear to all participants, and communication is, after all, not really the point. Both the nature and purpose of repair in Task #2 are different from those of the first task. Here, all levels of language, from phonology to sociolinguistic rules of appropriateness (see Example 2) are addressed in repair moves, and repair is effected in a manner similar to the of the teacher, by remodelling with the correct form (Examples 5-7): Example (5) K: D'accord. Comme... quand vous...vous fait es um [/waz] tort? tort? Ok. Like... when you... you do a /waz wrong'? D: [/waz]? Chosel 'Thing?' Example (6) K: Urn Oh la la. J'ai un examen et je suis allee a une partie la... Oh la la I have an exam and I went to a partie the...' D: Soirte, c'est cat 'Party, is that it?' Example (7) K: Non... non. J'ai une soiree. 'No...no... I to a party'. D: Tu es...tu es... tu es αΐΐέε ά une soiree hier! 'You... you... you went to a party yesterday?' K: Hier! Oui. 'Je suis altte a une soiree. 'Yesterday! Yes. I went to a party'. The use of repair in this conversation seems to be related to two main factors. On one hand, concern for form was required, since the completed dialogue would be presented to the class. D repeatedly corrects the form of K's utterances no doubt in part because he is equally responsible for the eventual form of the dialogue. On the other hand, nonunderstanding routines occurred more often here than in the other conversations, since the context of the imagined dialogue was unclear and the meaning of K's utterances therefore unpredictable.

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

101

Instances of code-switching were rare in this sample. However, Example (8) shows how its use is incorporated into the general dynamic of the conversation. When challenged as to the appropriateness of her contribution, K responds by switching to English, whereupon D again corrects her by translating her utterance into French: Example (8) D: Je suis ton ami, pas... Uh les amis ne disent ςα, Us ne disent pas ςα. 'I'm your friend, not ... uh friends don't say that, they don't say that'. K: That's too bad.. Well... D: C'est dommage? That's too bad?' D's corrective feedback to K, in fact, seems to be the primary raison d'etre of this interaction. In Task #3, repair strategies reflect the ways in which the conversation was perceived by each of the two participants. T produced most of the instances of self-repair, as she was in the process of refining her class presentation as she spoke (Example 9): Example (9) T:... Je vais expliquer pourquoi aussi. C'est... um ce pourrait urn parce que les autres personnes dans Angleterre et dans Europe pensent que les Am ricains n'est... ne sait rien. Ί am going to explain why too. It is... it could be... because the other people in England and in Europe think that Americans is not ... don't know nothing'. B used code-switching as her primary means of self-repair. She was talking about a topic, her proposed study abroad, which is obviously very significant to her at this point. Although she expresses emotional response in her use of English, her code-switching is qualitatively different from that of Task #1. B's use of English is strategic in that it is very much oriented toward getting a message across when the requisite structures cannot be retrieved (Example 10): Example (10) B: Oui j'ai dit "Est-ce que c'est tres difficile pour ςα" et Us Us veulent que avant aller, ou avant se uh... accepter pour ca on n'a pas une nervous breakdown. Et eile dit que tous les tous les Anglais urn sera um poser aura poser des questions parce que Us Us sait Us savent que les e urn... they want to throw you off balance.

102

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

'Yes I said "Is it very difficult for that?" And they they want that before going, or before uh... to be accepted for that you don't have a nervous breakdown. And she says that all the all the English will be ask will ask questions because they they knows they know tht the urn... They want to throw you off balance'. Relatively few instances of repair were recorded for Task #4, and of these, most appear to be of a different character than the repairs in the other tasks. Self-initiated and completed corrections occurred in the beginning of the conversation as both students adjusted their use of the tu/vous pronoun distinction. Other self-repair corrected for meaning rather than for form (Example 11). Example (11) C: ä cause... j'aidejä... je n'aipas etudio en... 'Because... I have already ... I have not studied in...' This relative absence of repair from the conversation probably has to do with the fact that, in this task, the cooperative establishment of meaning, not production of accurate language, was the underlying motivation for speaking.

Conclusion To summarize, this pilot study has demonstrated that there may exist profound qualitative differences between the conversations constructed by learners of French under four task conditions. Generally, if a task could be interpreted as reflecting the traditional concern for formal accuracy in the classroom, the learners adopted this interpretation. The form-centered learner/learner conversations in this study are representative of the instructional end of Kramsch's (1985) continuum of classroom styles, taking on many of the characteristics of the discourse observed in teacher-directed work (i.e. fixed exchange structure, preponderance of other-initiated and completed repair). On the other hand, tasks that clearly required learners to enact themselves in exchange of meaning were treated as such, eliciting conversations which could be characterized as approaching the "natural" end of the continuum. In these interactions, turns at talk are negotiated, repair tends to be self-initiated and completed, and the use of English is strategic and message oriented. Additionally, in terms of raw numbers of words and communication units, the learners in the content oriented

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

103

speech situations talked almost twice as much, in the same amount of time, as did the learners doing form-focused work. Because of its small sample size the results of this study cannot be regarded as anything more than a frail indication that differences between the tasks may exist. Nonetheless, the differences between the four conversations under study are striking, given the homogeneity of the participants' levels of achievement and of the contexts in which the tasks were situated. Although this study is concerned only with description, not with learning outcomes, if the results were generalizable to other learners in other contexts there would be important implications. To date, in spite of widespread awareness of the need to do so, few researchers have fully approached the issue of how learner/learner interactions may impact upon the development of components of communicative competence beyond the grammatical (i.e. sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic competence, see Canale and Swain 1980;Canale 1983; Savignon 1983). This may be because, at least in the United States, the mainstream of second language acquisition research is highly positivistic, requiring highly specified elements of behavior for empirical investigation. Of course, it is exceedingly difficult to specify aspects of classroom behavior which represent or promote a concept as ill-defined as "communicative ability", but this is perhaps not cause for despair. Studies do exist which provide some insight into the ways in which communicative ability is acquired in classrooms. On one hand, from studies comparing approaches to teaching, such as Savignon (1972), Lee (1987) and Beretta's positive evaluation of the Bangalore/Madras Communicational Teaching Project (1987), we have some indication of how this occurs. Learners who are involved in active negotiation of meaning, learners who communicate, in other words, develop more communicative ability than those who do not. On the other hand, we also have some information about how communicative competence does not develop. Classrooms which focus exclusively on linguistic form as object, where the teacher controls the discourse and where interactional roles are fixed and restricted may be safely presumed to delay, and perhaps to inhibit the development of communicative competence (Breen and Candlin 1980). This may be true, for example, because learners in such classrooms, through lack of participation in communicative events, are inhibited in their gathering of "optimal input" (Krashen 1982) and because such learners have no exposure to non-pedagogic discourse (Kasper 1982).

104

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

There is, in short, little doubt that purposeful language use ought to be a regular part of classroom routine. The results of this study show, however, that as long as learners expectations of the roles and rituals of the classroom remain in effect, this goal may be incompatible with the traditional explicit focus on the formal propeties of language. Classroom communication is a matter which needs to be pursued fully in its own right. If teachers are concerned with broadening classroom discourse options so as to encourage the development of communicative competence and communicative confidence, this most probably cannot be done by monitoring learners' formal accuracy even as they speak with one other. Note 1. Transcription conventions used in the examples: ... hesitation . falling intonation, declarative ? rising intonation, interrogative underlining stressed syllables (( )) transcriber's comments

References Beretta, A. 1987 The Bangalore project: description and evaluation. In S. Savignon and M. Berns (eds.), Initiatives in communicative language teaching //(pp. 83-106). Read ing, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Bley-Vroman, R. 1986 Hypothesis testing in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 36,353-76. Breen, M., and Candlin, C. 1980 The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 89-112. Brooks, F. 1987 Foreign language learning: a social interaction perspective. Paper presented at the Conference on the Relationship between Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Learning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, April, 1987. Brown, P., and Levinson, S. 1978 Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Task variation and classroom learner discourse

105

Brut on, A., and Samuda, V. 1980 Learner and teacher roles in the treatment of error in group work. RELCJournal, 11 (2), 49-63. Canale,M. 1983 From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards and R. Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2-27). New York: Longman. Canale, M., and Swain, M. 1980 Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language learning and teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1 (1), 147. Harder, P. 1980 Discourse as self-expression and the reduced personality of the language learner. Applied Linguistics, 1 (3), 262-70. Hatch, E. 1978 Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401-435). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 1980 Conversation analysis: an alternative methodology for second language acquisition. In R. Shuy & A. Shnukal (eds.), Language use and the uses of language (pp. 182-196). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Higgs, T. 1984 Teaching for proficiency: The organizing principle. Lincolnwood, II.: National Textbook. Kasper, G. 1982 Teaching-induced aspects of interlanguage discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4 (2), 99-113. Kramsch, C. 1984 Interactions langagieres en travail de groupe. Le Francais dans le Monde, 183,52-59. 1985 Classroom interaction and discourse options. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(2), 169-83. Krashen, S. 1982 Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Lee,J. 1987 The impact of reading on students' writing. Paper presented at the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Annual Meeting, Atlanta. Long, M. 1981 Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379,250-78. Long, M., Adams, L., McLean, M., and Castanos, F. 1976 Doing things with words: verbal interaction in lockstep and small group classroom situations. In R. Crymes and J. Fanselow (eds.), On TESOL 1976 (pp. 137-53). Washington, D.C. TESOL.

106

Celeste S. Kinginger and Sandra J. Savignon

Omaggio, A. 1986 Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Omaggio, A., Chamberlain, J., Chevillot, F., and Harbour, L. 1984 Kaleidoscope: Grammaire en contexte. New York: Random House. Pica, T. and Doughty, C. 1985 The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7 (2), 233-48. Porter, P. 1986 How learners talk to each other: Input and interaction in task-centered discussions. In R. Day (ed.) Talking to learn (pp. 200-222). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. Richards, J., and Schmidt, R. 1983 Conversation analysis. In J. Richards and R. Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication (pp. 117-153). New York: Longman. Rulon, K., and McCreary, J. 1986 Negotiation of content: teacher-fronted and small group interaction. In R. Day (ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 182-199). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. Savignon, S. 1972 Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language teaching. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development. 1983 Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Saville-Troike, M. 1987 Dilingual discourse: Communication without a common language. Linguistics, 25, 81-106. Schegloff, M., Jefferson, G., and Sacks, H. 1977 The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361-382. Swain, M. 1985 Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass and C. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. VanLier, L. 1988 Classroom interaction patterns of foreign language teachers. ERIC/ CLL News Bulletin, 11 (2), 3-8. VanPatten, B. 1986 Second language acquisition research and the teaching/learning of Spanish: Some research findings and implications. Hispania, 69,202-16. 1988 How juries get hung; Problems with the evidence for a focus on form in teaching. Language Learning, 38 (2), 243-260.

What do we know about effective second language teaching?*

Mary McGroarty Introduction: Classroom research on language teacher effectiveness As second language scholars have noted, research in the 1970s placed heavy emphasis on language learning processes and hence "subtly denigrated" (Stern & Cummins 1981:198) teaching. There have since that time emerged a number of research projects which address matters of pedagogy directly. Indeed, over the past decade the growing body of descriptive and experimental information on classroom processes and the more extensive exploration of the theoretical and practical linkages between language teaching and learning offer promise for all who wish to understand the way language instruction takes place.1 In the three arenas of second language teaching most active in the U.S. over the past ten years, namely bilingual education for students who speak other languages, English as a second dialect instruction, and foreign language education for students whose mother tongue is English, we have access to several studies aimed at empirical validation of effective language teaching. While no research has yet provided a foolproof method for teaching — indeed, none could, or should supersede the teacher's or "expert pedagogue's" (Berliner 1986) judgement - we have some basis for identifying teacher behaviors associated with student success in learning a language for different purposes and in different settings. We can say with confidence that second language teaching makes a difference (Long 1983) and begin to show some of the ways it is superior to informal exposure to a language. Let us begin our survey by identifying the research that examines issues of teacher effectiveness directly by means of studies of classroom interactions and their results. These studies fit the "processproduct" (Shulman 1986) paradigm of the 1970s and show how teaching activities bear on learning results achieved. While this is but

108

Mary McGroarty

one perspective on classroom research (see Chaudron 1988: chapter 2, for considerations of other research traditions), it is the one that has provided scholars and teachers alike with the most specific behavioral information on the teacher's role in classroom work and thus the most specific pedagogical implications. Examining work done in bilingual, bidialectal, and foreign language classrooms, we find that process-product research has begun to make it possible to characterize the teaching techniques that are most effective in differing L2 settings.

Bilingual and bidialectal classrooms: A role for direct instruction Support for certain types of interaction and techniques appropriate for formal language learning comes from several investigations of the classroom experience of bilingual and bidialectal students. Taken togehter, these studies help to define the parameters of effective language teaching in elementary school settings. They also suggest some general principles applicable to areas of second language teaching. In the area of bilingual and ESL instruction, three representative studies show how students acquire a second language, English. To identify teacher behaviors associated with ESL learning by Spanishspeaking children in grades K-3, Ramirez and Stromquist (1979) videotaped nineteen teachers and correlated their instructional behaviors with students' adjusted gains in comprehension and production of English. Teacher behaviors associated with gains in comprehension were modeling (or repetition) and the use of visuals, while those associated with improved production of English were asking guided question (i.e., those for which an answer had been implied in the discourse): giving commands; and using direct correction of grammar, English synonyms, or Spanish translation to keep the lesson moving. Pace of the lesson and use of a variety of behaviors also contributed to achievement. The importance of a variety of teacher behaviors, some involving traditional techniques such as modeling and correction and others involving the focus on meaning typical of more recent theories of second language learning, was thus established. It is no surprise to discover that a combination of classroom techniques is superior to reliance on one or two procedures for giving

Effective second language teaching

109

learners exposure to and experience in using the second language. Related questions are, then, 1) what classroom behaviors on the part of the teacher and the other students are associated with gains in receptive versus productive language skills; and 2) whether the optimal combinations of teacher and peer behaviors differ according to student proficiency levels or other factors such as linguistic or cultural background. Another large-scale study of Spanish- and Chinese-speaking children learning English also revealed that different teacher behavior patterns, particularly management of group instructional activities, were indeed associated with differing gains in comprehension and production (Wong Fillmore et al. 1985). Classrooms rated higher on opportunities for peer teaching and interaction with Englishspeaking classmates produced gains in the children's oral production (Wong Fillmore et al. 1985:212 ff.); these measures, however, were not associated with comprehension gains, which in turn showed distinct differences in the gains for Chinese and Spanish speakers of different initial proficiency levels. Generally, Hispanic children at beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels of English gained in English comprehension when they were in classrooms rated high on Quality of Learning Environment (promotion of learning activities and teacher's concentration on instruction), and Quality of Instructional Language (getting good input and feedback from teachers, receiving appropriate content, and being able to practice). Intermediate and advanced Chinese learners of ESL benefitted from these conditions too, although low-level Chinese students did not. Such students made greater comprehension gains in classrooms where formal practice of English in lessons took place under the teacher's close direction (Wong Fillmore et al. 1985:227). While not large in magnitude, these significant associations show clearly that both traditional aspects of instruction such as teacher's method of presentation of verbal material and the more currently emphasized role of the teacher as creator and manager of group structures figure in effective second language instruction for elementary school students. Additional insights into effective language teaching based on the links between program design, teacher language behavior, and student outcomes are derived from the work of Legarreta (1979, 1977) who observed teacher and student language use in five kindergartens serving Spanish-speaking children. Her findings show that the teacher's role as program designer can have major impact on students' exposure to adequate amounts of both the first and second language: in classes

110

Mary McGroarty

using the concurrent translation model, English was used more than 70% of the time by teachers, and students responded in kind, a great imbalance in terms of the program's stated goal of equal use of both Spanish and English. In the one classroom using an alternate day approach to instruction (where one day's work took place entirely in English and the next day's activity completely in Spanish), distribution of the languages was far more equal. Furthermore, such an instructional approach did not retard the children's acquisition of English. On the contrary, both the concurrent and the alternate day approaches produced greater gains in English oral comprehension than those demonstrated by the two groups experiencing Englishonly instruction. The data also suggested that students with low initial English proficiency derived some benefit from a more structured, audio-lingual formal ESL component which for them improved comprehension, a finding similar to that of Wong Fillmore and her colleagues, while the mastery of more complex communicative and productive second language skills required more varied approaches, differently orchestrated to give children a variety of practice. Milk (1985) made a related point in calling for an integrative approach which combines second language practice with content-area instruction and also creates a variety of conditions for interactive activities in bilingual classrooms. Encouraging integration of fluency-oriented activities ought not replace more structured language instruction in all teaching situations, however. We have seen in the three studies just summarized that formal ESL instruction which includes a variety of teacher-directed techniques is beneficial for students at the beginning level of English proficiency. In bidialectal situations, too, there is a place for formally directed language learning activities. Reporting a study of nineteen third-grade teachers providing instruction in standard English negation to speakers of Vernacular Black English, Politzer (1980) found that teachers who used a high frequency of direct imperatives (for instruction rather than management) and thus maintained a highly structured, fast-paced atmosphere were more successful in increasing student gains in recognition of standard forms. Further analyses of the discourse functions of language in these classrooms also suggested that frequent active teacher elicitation of student response was characteristic of teachers whose students did well on criterion tests of ability to recognize standard English (Politzer, Ramirez, & Lewis 1981). This implies that formal, structured methods of language teaching coupled

Effective second language teaching

111

with frequent communicative use of second language forms have a place for students of second dialects as well as second languages.

Foreign language classrooms: Using time and grouping students Turning now to the area of foreign language instruction, we find that recent research has also provided a more precise understanding of the links between classroom processes and student language outcomes. Observational studies have shed light on relationships between time spent in various foreign classroom activities and student skills. Continuing the stream of process-product research exemplified by Politzer and Weiss (1972) who investigated the relationships between teacher characteristics, instructional behaviors, student attitudes, and achievement, second language investigations have sought to develop more detailed portraits of effective foreign language classrooms. Recent research on language teachers' beliefs and on their classroom language use has provided a preliminary step. Much recent foreign language research has refined the understanding of the processes of foreign language instruction through investigation of teacher beliefs and behaviors. While many of these lack explicit attention to measured learning outcomes of students, they have expanded awareness of the ways teachers make the second language accessible to students. Swaffar and colleagues (1982) conducted a survey of nineteen university level teachers of German and concluded that, based on a cluster analysis of the instructors' preferences and beliefs regarding language teaching, the teachers could be classified into one group emphasizing traditional mastery of the four skills and another which tended to favor a comprehension-based, process-oriented approach. The contrast was not completely binary and suggested a continuum of opinion in both directions. The authors conclude that to reveal methodological differences, a detailed look at the task hierarchy, the "when" and "how" of instructional decisions of a lesson, was necessary (Swaffar, Arens & Morgan 1982:31) to define appropriate teaching. One approach to defining the "when" and "how" of foreign language teaching uses discourse analysis as a method of categorizing what teachers do. This is exemplified in the work of Gayle (1982), who observed twenty-seven French as a second language classes taught by nineteen teachers in grades 5, 6, and 7. On the basis of discourse

112

Mary McGroarty

functions observed, she classified teacher verbal styles into three clusters, one emphasizing automaticity of correct response; one preferring to use clues and directives in instruction; and one favoring broad exposure to the second language through a variety of activities (Gayle 1982:259). These observations reflect some of the same tendencies found in the teachers surveyed by Swaffar et al. above and thus imply that at least two (and perhaps more) distinctive approaches to second language instruction are current: one tends to emphasize automatic responses and highly directed use of the second language, a heritage of audio-lingualism, while the other tends to emphasize more varied exposure to the second language (Gayle 1982:259). Though not directly comparable, these studies suggest that teacher values, beliefs and preferences are in fact apparent in classroom verbal behaviors, as Savignon (1976) and Walmsley (1982) have remarked. The crux of the issue here, then, is whether these differences affect student outcomes, and if so, how they do. Building on work done in the general areas of teacher effectiveness as well as previous foreign language research, Nerenz and Knop (1983a) developed a descriptive format based on allocation of curricular time coupled with measures of student engagement in learning tasks. These comparisons allowed them to determine the amount of active learning time available to students in the fourteen junior and senior high school language classes they visited. Active learning time was further categorized according to second language content, grouping patterns, materials, and type of teacher-student activity and interactions. Using this observation system, they trained experienced secondary-level foreign language teachers to observe the eight student teachers with whom they worked (Nerenz & Knop 1983a). Results allowed them to generate a detailed picture of the way second language instruction took place and amplified the understanding of foreign language instruction by showing the kinds of group structures involved. Listening practice for example, nearly always (91% of the time) occurred in a large group, teacher-dominated format; speaking, too took place mainly in large groups (86%), with some use of pairs (10%) and small groups (4%). Reading, like listening, took place mainly in large groups (85%); writing was done almost equally in individual (41%) and largegroup (43%) settings. Observation of the student outcomes mirrored the teacher behaviors. For listening, students were highly engaged, mainly in a large group format (82%); for speaking, while they were producing oral language

Effective second language teaching

113

30% of the time, they were also nonetheless more often involved in listening (53%) to each other or the teacher speak the foreign language. Students participated in reading mainly in the large group, where they also practiced their speaking (19%) and listening skills (52%). Writing, split between individual and large-group settings, required students mainly to write (38%) and listen (21%), with considerable teacher explanation and monitoring (Nerenz & Knop 1983a:227-229). All together, students received two or three times as much instruction in speaking and grammar as they did in reading and writing; direct listening instruction received less time still (1983a:231-232). The students' engaged time reflected the teachers' emphases, with some modifications associated with different grouping strategies and materials used. It could be assumed, then, that student achievement outcomes would also be influenced by these patterns of time use, though such assessment was not a part of this study. In showing how skill instruction is shaped by pedagogical grouping, this study showed that teacher decisions affected the nature of student exposure to the second language. Additionally, it served to train teachers to increase active learning opportunities by decreasing time spent on transitions between one activity and another (Nerenz & Knop 1983b). Hence such work supplements information on a teacher's method of using time in the second language classroom with documentation of connection between classroom activities and the language use opportunities they afford to students. Work on direct observation and descriptions of teachers is further complemented by the current focus on the student behaviors, both those that are teacher-directed and the "spontaneous" or voluntary actions that students carry out. Indeed, the study of interactions between students has virtually exploded over the past decade, and many of these studies have begun to add the consideration of learning outcomes to the description of interactive processes. Working with students at preschool (Johnson 1983) through university level (see, for example, research reviewed in Long and Porter 1985 and McGroarty, in preparation; and the studies reported by Kinginger and Savignon, this volume), investigators have described some of the ways talk between students contributes to language learning. Because the teacher is usually responsible for planning classwork, knowledge of potentially useful grouping strategies enhances teaching effectiveness (Enright & McCloskey 1985; Enright, this volume).

114

Mary McGroarty

Even student behaviors that do not take place in immediate response to specific teacher commands illuminate aspects of good teaching and learning; Faltis (1986) showed that, at the high school level, certain key or "sway" students in a Spanish class were effective in getting the teacher to expand on responses that improved learning opportunities for all. When testing a causal model of attained proficiency with first-year students of Spanish, Ely (1986) also found that students' willingness to take risks in classroom work positively predicted class participation and, in turn, higher Spanish proficiency, while the degree of self-reported discomfort experienced in class was negatively related to proficiency (1986:20-21). He concluded that teachers should actively try to decrease the level of discomfort and anxiety students experience in class in order to provide the conditions that will enable students to participate more freely (1986: 23). Thus the teacher's role as architect of classroom work and creator of a comfortable atmosphere for instruction is another vital aspect of successful teaching.

Conclusion To sum up, the classroom research conducted with a process-product orientation over the last ten years has shown us which behaviors can be termed "effective" for differing groups of learners in various second language educational settings. Research on student interactions has begun to complement the more teacher-centered investigations. Together, these research currents contribute to a "learning-teaching" view of second language instruction (Hosenfeld 1979) in which teaching activities are judged successful according to the degree to which they engage and support the learner's own path towards mastery, one of the goals for second language research identified by Politzer and Weiss (1972). Research in the 1980's has demonstrated that effective teaching consists of different proportions of teacher-directed and studentcentered activities that vary according to learner proficiency level and background. Current investigations of second language classrooms such as those described in Johnson (this volume) will provide additional insights into the connections between teaching and learning that will shape our understanding of effective second language pedagogy.

Effective second language teaching

115

Note * I am grateful to Carol Hosenfeld and Donna Johnson for their insightful comments on language teaching expressed in critiques of this paper.

References Berliner, D.C. 1986 In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher 15 (7), 5-13. Chaudron, C.J. 1988 Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ely, C.M. 1986 An analysis of discomfort, risk taking, sociability, and motivation in the second language classroom. Language Learning 36 (1), 1-15. Enright, D.S. this volume Tapping the peer interaction resource. Enright, D.S., and McCloskey, M.L. 1985 Yes, talking! organizing the classroom to promote second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 19 (3), 437453. Faltis.CJ. 1986 Sway students in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals 19 (3), 195-202. Gayle, G.M.H. 1982 Identifying second language teaching styles: A new approach to an old problem. Canadian Modern Language Review/La revue canadienne des langues vivantes 38 (2), 254-261. Hosenfeld, C. 1979 A learning-teaching view of second language instruction. Foreign Language Annals 12 (1), 51 -54. Johnson, D.M. 1983 Natural language learning by design: A classroom experiment in social interaction and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 17 (l),55-68. 1991 Some observations on progress in research in second language learning and teaching (this volume, pp. 173-190). Kinginger, C.S., and Savignon, S.J. 1991 Four conversations: Task variation and classroom learner discourse (this volume, pp. 85-106). Legarreta, D. 1977 Language use in bilingual classrooms. TESOL Quarterly 11 (1), 8-16. 1979 The effects of program models on language acquisition by Spanishspeaking children. TESOL Quarterly 13 (4), 521-534.

116

Mary McGroarty

Long, M.H. 1983 Does second language instruction make a difference? TESOL Quarterly 17 (3), 359-382. Long, M.H., and Porter, P.A. 1985 Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 19 (2), 207-228. McGroarty, M. in preCooperative learning and second language acquisition. Chapter to paration appear in Cooperative learning for students of diverse language backgrounds. California State Department of Education. Milk, R.D. 1985 The changing role of ESL in bilingual education. TESOL Quarterly 19 (4), 657-672. Nerenz, A.G., and Knop, C.K. 1983a Allocated time, curricular content, and student engagement outcomes in the second-language classroom. Canadian Modem Language Review/ La revue canadienne des langues vivantes 39(2), 222-232. 1983b Helping student teachers maximize class time in the second-language classroom. Canadian Modem Language Review/La revue canadienne des langues vivantes 39 (4), 840-846. Politzer, R.L. 1980 Requesting in elementary school classrooms. TESOL Quarterly 14 (2), 165-174. Politzer, R.L., Ramirez, A.G., and Lewis, S.A. 1981 Teaching standard English in the third grade: classroom functions of language. Language Learning 31 (1), 171-193. Politzer, R.L., and Weiss, L. 1972 The successful foreign language teacher. No. 3 in Language and the teacher: A series in applied linguistics. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development. Ramirez, A.G., and Stromquist, N.P. 1979 ESL methodology and student language learning in bilingual elementary schools. TESOL Quarterly 13 (2), 145-158. Shulman, L.S. 1986 Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: a contemporary perspective. In M.C. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, 3rd ed., pp. 3-36. New York: Macmillan. Stern, H.H., and Cummins, J. 1981 Language teaching/learning research: a Canadian perspective on status and directions. In J.K. Phillips, (ed.), Action for the '80's: A political, professional, and public program for foreign language education (pp. 195-248). Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company. Swaffar, J.K., Arens, K., and Morgan, M. 1982 Teacher classroom practices: Redefining method as task hierarchy. Modem Language Journal 66 (1), 24-33. Wong Ffllmore, F., Ammon, P., McLaughlin, B., and Ammon, M.S. 1985 Final report for learning English through bilingual education (Contract No. 400-80-0030). Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education.

Second language teaching methodologies: Past influences, current practices, future trends Ann K. Fathman Introduction Second language teachers today have many more options available to them in classroom teaching than ever before. New theories of language and models for language learning have provided a basis for new approaches and methods. Changes in the perceived role of the teacher and learner in the second language process have contributed to the development of new teaching techniques and innovative methodologies. There have been changes in the role of methodology in the total second language teaching process. The role of methodology is changing as the role of the teacher changes. The actual methods a teacher uses have become less central, or at least less obvious, as teacher direction is de-emphasized in activities such as computer-assisted instruction, peer tutoring, or cooperative learning. No longer does one methodology dictate the materials or methods that are used in second language classrooms. Robert Politzer has frequently researched and commented on second language methodologies, teaching and learning behaviors and student achievement (see Politzer 1970a, 1981, 1983). He has repeatedly noted that there is no one best method in second language teaching. He has suggested that successful teachers are those who are concerned with supplementing the curriculum, rather than implementing it, and has suggested that individual teachers must determine what techniques to use based upon their students and learning setting. Indeed today there is a tendency for teachers to use practical and theoretically sound techniques from old and new methodologies. Most teachers would agree that "all methods work some of the time and no methods work all of the time" (Bowers 1986:405). Teachers now have the opportunity to choose methods that best fit their individual teaching styles, particular objectives and specific students.

118

AnnK.Fathman

Historical influences For years there has been an inconsistency in the use of terms which describe second language teaching principles and practices. We refer to audiolingual method and approach, the cognitive code approach, and pattern practice techniques. During the audiolingual era, there was a fairly unified body of theory and practice and little concern about distinctions between approach and method. But as new theories of language learning encouraged varying approaches and methods, the use of these terms became confusing. Anthony (1963) attempted to clarify terminology by making distinctions between approach, method and techniques, and Richards and Rogers (1982) have more recently modified his framework in an attempt to provide systematic descriptions of current methodologies. They have defined a method in terms of three levels: approach or theory of language, design of content, and techniques used. It is the techniques associated with various methodologies that will be the focus of discussion in this paper. Methodologies used in second/foreign language classrooms over the years reflect changes in the goals of language teaching, the development of new theories of language learning and changes in attitudes towards the role of the teacher and student. New methods/approaches have developed as the effectiveness of older methods was questioned for pedagogical or linguistic reasons. All too frequently, limitations of past methodologies are cited. Few inherently bad ideas, however, have been produced by the many methodologies which have been advanced over the years (Kelly 1969). All methodologies have weaknesses as well as strengths, and through a comparison of techniques germane to various methodologies, it becomes evident how the benefits of past methods prefigure in the goals of methods espoused today. Aspects of the Grammar-Translation, Direct, and Audiolingual Methods, among others, are evident in methods used in classrooms today. The identification of positive aspects of historically important methodologies can provide insights into current trends. The Grammar-Translation Method was widely used in teaching ancient and modern languages in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Although the primary focus was on developing reading and writing skills, many of the techniques used are evident in second language classroom teaching today. Meaningful contexts were provided

Second language teaching methodologies

119

through literary passages which were used as a basis for lessons. Many ESL reading and writing classes today use authentic academic readings as a focus for lessons, and primary emphasis is the development of language skills to master these materials. Many of our current bilingual classes prescribe the use of native language in the explanation of rules and translation of key concepts similar to use of native language in grammar-translation. "Appeals of grammar-translation included the cognitive, systematic use of grammar rules as a basis for instruction" (Bowen et al. 1985). Students were required to understand the meaning of what they read and learn to apply the rules they learned. The method was easy for teachers to use, and the goals were limited, clear and attainable by the students. Thus, this method which was formulated more than two centuries ago had a number of attributes which are prescribed for successful foreign language classes today. In the first half of the twentieth century when oral communication became a goal of second language instruction, the Direct Method gained popularity. In this method, meaning was connected directly with the target language and native language use was avoided. Real life contexts, rather than literary passages, were used to help students understand meaning. Emphasis was placed on listening and speaking, and self-correction of errors was encouraged as is the case in many second language classrooms today. In addition, this methodology encouraged a receptive period prior to a productive period when students were required to speak, similar to the prescribed receptive states in the Natural Approach today. The development of the Audio-Lingual Method in the 1940s and its popularity in following decades was based on the behaviorist belief that people could learn to speak a language quickly through habit-formation. Audiolinguism may have been a reaction also against the grammartranslation focus on the learning of rules in reading and writing. Teachers were ready for a well-organized oral-aural methodology, which was lacking in the Direct Method, and provided in this method through carefully planned lessons where language was viewed as a collection of discrete items which could be systematically ordered and arranged. Oral competence was taught through mimicry, memorization and analogy. Other positive principles often associated with this method which have been incorporated into current classroom practice are: an emphasis on speech, the separation of students' native language and second language, the use of native speakers as models, and an emphasis on repetition and reinforcement.

120

Ann K. Fathman

The influences of theory and practice contributed to the decline in popularity of audiolingualism in the 1960s. In cognitive psychology and transformational grammar, language was viewed as a creative, cognitive activity rather than a response to stimuli. At the same time, teachers were looking for a way to teach their students to use language more creatively and meaningfully, especially at the intermediate and advanced levels. Both theorists and teachers challenged the rigid order in the teaching of skills and the emphasis on mimicry and other aduiolingual techniques which precluded the possibility of students making mistakes and did not require understanding of what was being said. Communicative Language Teaching, which originated in Britain in the 1960s, is one approach that has had a strong influence on current teaching methods and materials. It pays "systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language" (Littlewood 1981: 1). Students must learn the target language forms and their functions and use this knowledge in interactions to communicate meaning. In recent years, there have been many options available, but no one methodology has emerged as the one dogmatic all-encompassing answer to language teaching.

Current practices A number of "innovative" methodologies have gained popularity among various groups of teachers in recent years. Some of these methodologies have been in existence for more than twenty years and have gained quite loyal followings, but never has there been widespread acceptance as during the audio-lingual era. The actual techniques involved vary considerably as do the theories they are based upon. Many of the objectives of "innovative methodologies" are similar such as the Silent Way (Gattegno 1972), Total Physical Response (TPR) (Asher 1977), Suggestopedia (Lozanov 1978), Community Language Learning (CLL) (Curran 1976) and the Natural Approach (Krashen and Terrell 1983). Techniques are used which enhance communication, provide meaningful input, encourage interaction, emphasize meaning conveyed visually or through actions, minimize anxiety and maximize motivation. Importance in current thinking is placed on the nature of the learner activity, the classroom atmosphere, the non-verbal environmental support and the role of the teacher. A comparison of these meth-

Second language teaching methodologies

121

odologies demonstrates, however, that frequently alternative ways are used for achieving similar goals. The active role of the learner is an important component of the "innovative" methodologies. Students are encouraged to self-correct, work with peers, interact and create their own utterances. The type of response required by students varies (especially in the early stages of learning) among methodologies. In the Silent Way teachers provide non-verbal cues to elicit student oral responses. Whereas TPR and the Natural Approach encourage an initial silent period where the students listen and respond non-verbally. In Community Language Learning students are encouraged to actively participate and interact at an early stage using their native language. Interaction and communication among students is an important component of all the methodologies at later stages. The teacher initiates these interactions through role plays, discussions, and problem solving activitives. The role of the teacher in innovative methodologies is that of listener, knower, facilitator, command-giver. Initially, the teacher in the Silent Way is responsible for eliciting student responses but gives students only minimal spoken cues and remains actively silent up to 90% of the time. However, in TPR and the Natural Approach the teacher directs all that is presented to the class through verbal modeling and commands. The teacher as the "knower" in CLL translates what students meant to say in the target language. The teacher's role is not to correct and prevent errors as in audiolingualism, but teachers tolerate some errors, realize their value and encourage communication where the students learn to self-correct. Non-verbal environmental support is also an important component of innovative methodologies and provides a meaningful focus for students, while de-emphasizing the role of the teacher as initiator and evaluator. The Silent Way uses charts and rods to initiate oral responses, while Counseling-Learning uses color-coded signals as a means of evaluation. Krashen and Terrell (1983) recommend the use of realia, charts and visuals to facilitate discussions and serve as transitions between speaking and writing. The use of music, the type of furniture, and its arrangement all contribute to creating an atmosphere which is non-threatening and interactive in Suggestopedia and Counseling Learning. The classroom atmosphere is an important component of many innovative methodologies. This atmosphere is one where students are confident and can cooperate in learning. Lozanov (1978) believed

122

AnnK.Fathman

that learning is facilitated in a comfortable environment where students can relax and use their imagination, while Curran (1976) emphasized the importance of creating a feeling of belonging and sharing with others. On the other hand, in beginning Silent Way classrooms the atmosphere is quite intense due to the concentration required of students, the avoidance of native language, the teacher direction and the lack of assistance. A non-competitive atmosphere is, however, encouraged in all methodologies for students are encouraged to interact and help one another. The "innovative methods" have offered new ways of approaching language teaching with their learner-centered characteristics and communicative focus. The developers of new methods have attempted to overcome deficiencies perceived in past methodologies. But, at the same time, practices from the past are evident in present methodologies. The use of native language in Counseling Learning and Suggestopedia reflects aspects of grammar translation; the use of realia, actions and the target language only in the Natural Approach and TPR are techniques similar to those used in the Direct Method. The "innovative methods" have not been spared from criticism in recent years. The effectiveness of the Silent Way and TPR for intermediate and advanced students has been questioned. Suggestology and Counseling Learning require bilingual teachers who are of the right temperament and students who are linguistically homogeneous. Other criticisms include the lack of provision for developing reading and writing skills. Although a great deal has been learned about second language learning from research and practice, a large number of questions remain unanswered regarding "innovative methods". In current methodologies questions are frequently raised concerning the role of grammar, when and how to correct students, how to incorporate advanced academic or literary skills. The characteristics evident in many of the innovative methodologies are reflected in the teaching of specific second language skills. The emphasis is on teaching skills within meaningful, interactive contexts. There is a synthetic rather than analytic approach to skills development. "Teachers no longer feel the need to defer or widely separate reading and writing lessons from listening and speaking activities" (Newton 1979:20). In many classes skills are taught simultaneously rather than as separate entities. In sheltered English classes, content area material

Second language teaching methodologies

12 3

is presented and activities designed to develop all skills are integrated into lessons. In a cooperative learning activity oral, reading and writing skills can simultaneously be incorporated into a problem-solving activity. Even in college academically-oriented classes the teaching of reading and writing is integrated and discussion about readings and writing are an integral part of classroom practice. There is also more flexibility in when various skills are introduced. The tendency is for the students to talk about materials or topics before reading a passage or writing an essay, or for the teacher to demonstrate or discuss a problem or concept before requiring students to write about it. But no longer is there strict adherence to the listeningspeaking-reading-writing order. Practical considerations of student needs have an increasing influence over what skills will be emphasized, when and how they will be taught. There is an emphasis on communication and purpose in the teaching of all skills. In speaking and listening, participatory, meaningful activities are used where topics and materials are socially or academically relevent. In writing and reading, there is a focus on the process. Students are given prewriting and prereading activities. They are provided with teacher and peer feedback and with time to explore topics through writing and reading. The writing and reading processes become a means of discovering new ideas and new language forms to express those ideas orally and in writing.

Future trends An analysis of current methodology textbooks (see Bowen, Madsen and Hilfery 1985; Laren-Freeman 1986; Richards and Rogers 1986; Richard-Arnato 1988) reveals trends in second language methodology which will undoubtedly affect practices in the future. In these texts, various teaching methods are described, and teachers are told to select techniques which best fit their particular teaching situations. Past and current methodologies constitute the models, and teachers are encouraged to choose the appropriate techniques to meet their goals and their students' needs. There is perhaps too great an emphasis on methodology in current textbooks and training courses. The methods one uses are only a small part of the total teaching program. The first question asked by teachers is not "What methods will I use to teach the language?", but "Who

124

Ann K. Fathman

are my students? What are their goals? What do I plan to teach them?" A good description of alternative methods and techniques is valuable for teachers, but in the future more critical information should be available so teachers can make "informed" choices about which methods to use. An eclectic approach is often encouraged, but few suggestions are given prescribing when to use various methods. A systematic evaluation of methodologies is needed to determine which methods work best with specific groups of learners in various learning settings. Experienced teachers seldom change practice drastically. Thus, there may be differences between what teachers intend to do and what they actually do in the classroom. As methods become more interactive, we need to pay serious attention to the people who are interacting. Thus, individual teacher factors as well as individual and group student factors need to enter into the determination of effective methods for second language teaching. Politzer and McGroarty (1985) note that it will always be a challenge for teachers to match their teaching behaviors to the learning behaviors of their students. The concept of a "methodology" may change as teachers use techniques reflecting various methods in their classroom and as more is learned about actual classroom practices. Second language methods research and other trends such as content-based instruction and cooperative learning should be drawn upon to create a unified instructional approach suitable to a particular setting (see Milk, this volume, on bilingual/ESL teacher preparation). Prescriptive guidelines may consist of the description of techniques and strategies in various contexts, rather than more general approaches and methods. In the future, there may well be less concern about developing new innovative methods and more emphasis on setting up guidelines for the use of existing materials. Not only the individual needs and learning styles, but the social environment should be considered. The learning context should play a major role in choice of appropriate methods. Contextual features such as social setting, learner and teacher background and culture should influence choices. (See other chapters in this volume dealing with contextual influences such as dialect considerations, type of school setting and age of students.) Teachers should also develop individual approaches to methods that reflect their personal philosophy and classroom personality. The techniques a teacher uses are determined in large part by what best fits that teacher, and not infrequently, there is a difference between

Second language teaching methodologies

125

intent and actual classroom practice. Swaffar, Arens and Morgan (1982) suggest that classroom practices often do not reflect the underlying philosophies of a method. Teachers use methods they are comfortable with and experienced teachers seldom change practice drastically. Changes that have taken place in teaching practices in the past have focused primarily on the methods used in teaching rather than the content of what is taught. In the future, there will probably be a closer relationship between content and methods. Programs increasingly are being organized around basic themes, topics or concepts and the necessary proficiencies are being taught in an integrated manner with a focus on meaning. The holistic approach to skill development will be continued and emphasis will as well be placed on the teaching of successful learning strategies. Changes in linguistic and cognitive theory have historically contributed to changes in methodologies. Future methods and the study or evaluation of methods will reflect new theories and will at the same time influence trends in the field of applied linguistics. New methods will evolve as new SLA theories and models are developed. Influence from the Accommodation Theory (Giles & Byrne 1982), Discourse Theory (Hatch 1978), Variable Competence Model (Ellis 1984) and others will most likely be evident in future methodological trends. For example, methods will be developed which emphasize quality and quantity of exposure to language and provide input which allows student participation in various types of discourse. Politzer has over the years explored the relationship between linguistic theory and practice in his research and methodology books (see, for example, Foreign Language Learning and Teaching: A Linguistic Introduction [1970b], Teaching French: An Introduction to Applied Linguistics [1965]. He emphasizes the importance of the application of linguistics to language teaching, but he notes that linguistics does not furnish evidence for all practices, and some problems must be handled in the light of psychological insight and practical experiences. He suggests that "specific strategies for pedagogical efficacy must be determined by the language teacher in the specific learning setting" (Politzer & Politzer 1972:23). Methodologies must be sound theoretically, but ultimately it is the teacher who translates a methodology into practice. Teachers are increasingly becoming aware that different situations call for different techniques, and all methodologies can be valuable resources.

126

Ann K. Fathman

Teachers today are becoming more flexible, more informed, more discriminating as they choose from the many options available to them in second language teaching. References Anthony, E. 1986 Approach, method and technique. English Language Teaching, 17, 63-67. Asher, J. 1977 Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher's guidebook, Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions. Bailey, K., C. Madden, and S. Krashen 1974 Is there a natural sequence in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 243,235-243. Bowen, J.D., H. Madsen, and A. Hilferty 1985 TESOL techniques and procedures. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Bowers, R. 1986 English in the world: Aims and achievements in English language teacher. TESOL Quarterly, 20,393410. Curran, C. 1976 Counseling-leaming in second languages. Apple River, IL: Applied River Press. Ellis, R. 1984 Classroom second language development. Oxford: Pergamon. Gattegno,C. 1972 Teaching foreign languages in schools: The silent way. 2nd ed. New York: Educational Solutions. Giles, H., and J. Byrne 1982 An intergroup approach to second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 3,17-40. Hatch, E. 1978 Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings, (pp. 401-474). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 1979 Simplified input and second language acquisition. In R. Anderson (ed.), Pidgenization, creolization and language acquisition (pp. 64-86). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Hymes, D. 1972 On communicative competence. In J. Pride and J. Homes (eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Harmondworth, England: Penquin Books. Kelly, L. 1969 25 centuries of language teaching. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Krashen, S. 1982 Principles and practices in second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.

Second language teaching methodologies

127

Larsen-Freeman, D. 1986 Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Littlewood,W. 1981 Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Long,M., and C.Sato 1983 Classroom foreigner talk discourse. In H. Seliger and M. Long (eds.), Classroom-oriented research in second language acquisition (pps. 268-285). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Lozanov, G. 1978 Suggestology and suggestopedia: Theory and practice. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Madsen, H. 1979 Innovative methodologies applicable to TESOL. In M. Celce-Murcia and L. Mclntosh (eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pps. 26-38). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Moskowitz, C. 1978 Caring and sharing in the foreign language classroom. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Newton, A. 1979 Current trends in language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia and L. Mclntosh (eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pps. 17-26). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Politzer, R. 1965 Teaching French: An introduction to applied linguistics. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell Publishing Company. 1970a Some reflections on 'good' and 'bad' teaching behaviors. Language Learning 20,3143. 1970b Foreign language learning: A linguistic introduction. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. 1981 Effective language teaching: Insights from research. In J. Alatis, H. Altman, P. Alatis (eds.), The second language classroom (pps. 21-36). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1983 An exploratory study of self reported language learning behaviors and their relation to achievement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 6 (1), 54-88. Politzer, R., and M. McGroarty 1985 An exploratory study of learning behaviors and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly 19(1),103-123. Politzer, R., and F. Politzer 1972 Teaching English as a second language. Lexington, MA: Xerox College Publishing. Politzer, R., and L. Weiss 1968 The successful foreign-language teacher. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development.

128

Ann K. Fathman

Raimes, A. 1983 Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richards, J., and T. Rodgers 1982 Method: Approach, design and procedure. TESOL Quarterly 16, 153-68. Richard-Amato, P. 1988 Making it happen. New York: Longman. Swaffar, J.K., K. Arens, and M. Morgan 1982 Teacher classroom practices: redefining methods as task hierarchy. The Modem Language Journal 66,24-33.

Communicative syllabus design Patricia A. Porter Introduction: Definitions and framework In designing second language teaching programs that aim to promote communicative competence, educators usually approach the task in one of two ways (Long 1984; Richards 1984; Stern 1981): one route is through the syllabus, the way the content of language teaching is selected and organized; the other is through theories of learning and pedagogical procedures. Because the syllabus is an important starting place for program development, an understanding of how syllabus designs have changed and multiplied over the past twenty years aids in our awareness of the variety of program options in communicative language teaching today. First, a clarification of terms is in order, beginning with "communicative". Communicative language teaching is generally identified as an outgrowth of sociolinguistics and its emphasis on the way language is used in socially appropriate ways. Although Richards and Rodgers (1986) link the roots of communicative language teaching specifically to the notional-functional approach developed in Europe in the 1970s, the scope of communicative language teaching is quite broad today. (See the chapters in this volume by Fathman and McGroarty.) In terms of this discussion of communicative syllabus design, Howatt's distinction between the strong and weak versions of communicative language teaching further clarify "communicative": the weak version generally entails "learning to use" English, with learners being provided with language samples and then given opportunities to use this language for communicative purposes; the strong version involves "using English to learn it", with learners beginning with communication and then developing the necessary language to succeed (Howatt 1984:279). This distinction is important in that it helps us differentiate among the current types of syllabus design which will shortly be described. The term syllabus itself has come into use relatively recently in North America. As Stern has pointed out (1984), the terms more

130

Patricia A. Porter

widely used here have been "course of study", "curriculum", and "program". However, most second language educators now use the term "curriculum" as something broader than syllabus. For example, Stern defines curriculum as referring "not only to subject matter or content, but also to the entire instructional process including materials, equipment, examinations and the training of teachers, in short all pedagogical measures related to schooling or the substance of a course of study" (1983:394). Allen draws a similar distinction, viewing curriculum as a consideration of "the whole complex of philosophical, social and administrative factors which contribute to the planning of an educational programme", while syllabus refers to "that subpart of curriculum which is concerned with a specification of what units will be taught..." (1984:61). This definition of syllabus as units to be taught is consistent with Richards and Rodgers' definition of syllabus as "the selection of language items that are to be used within a course or method", with these items including both the subject matter (what to talk about) and the linguistic matter (how to talk about it) (1986:20-21). In their view, syllabus is part of design, one of the three major components of methodology, the others being approach (the theories about the nature of language and language learning that serve as sources of practices and principles in language teaching), and procedure (the actual techniques, practices, and behaviors that are observable in the classroom). Besides the syllabus, the other features of design are the objectives of instruction, the learning and teaching activities, and the roles of learners, teachers, and instructional materials. What differentiates methods from each other at the syllabus level, according to Richards and Rodgers, is what is chosen as the relevant subject matter and language to be presented and what principles are used in the sequencing of that content. For example, an ESP course or a junior high school "sheltered English" mathematics course would be more subject matter focused than linguistically focused, while a structurally based method such as the Audiolingual Method would be more linguistically focused. Most language teaching professionals have definitions of syllabus consistent with this one. For example, Wilkins defines syllabuses as "specifications of the content of language teaching which have been submitted to some degree of structuring or ordering with the aim of making teaching and learning a more effective process" (1981: 83). Johnson offers this definition: "A syllabus is in general terms

Communicative syllabus design

131

a list of items we wish to teach" (1981:2). McKay (1980) also emphasizes that the syllabus focuses on what is to be learned and in what order; however, she sees method as separate from syllabus and focusing on how a language is learned, rather than viewing method as an overarching construct as do Richards and Rodgers. While some definitions imply that syllabus content is a list of linguistic units, others are less specific about the meaning of "content". A further complication with syllabus definition is that, as pointed out by Stern (1984), the term syllabus varies from a narrow conception in which methodology is expressly eliminated (e.g., McKay 1980; Widdowson 1984) to a much broader use in which syllabus encompasses content, objectives, learning experiences, and evaluation procedures — design and procedure, in Richards and Rodgers' view (e.g., Candlin 1984). As used here, syllabus will be defined in the narrower sense, that is, of content, sequence, and rationale only. As a framework for communicative syllabus design, I propose an initial division into those types which are based on language content and those which are based on something other than language content. (See Figure 1.) Within the language content types, I follow Richards and Rodgers' distinction between linguistic-based syllabuses and subject matter syllabuses, where content is topical, rather than based on some linguistic units of analysis. The three types of linguistic-based syllabuses are structural, notional/functional, and "combination" syllabuses. The two major types of non-language-based syllabuses are process syllabuses and task-based syllabuses. This overall distinction into two types is consistent with Breen's recent division of syllabuses between propositional plans as opposed to process plans (1987). This figure and the following discussion further parallels the historical development of syllabus types, with the language-based on the left being the older and the non-language-based the more recent developments. Just how these types are related to the weak and the strong view of communicative language teaching and how they mesh with Richards and Rodgers' distinction between the a priori syllabus and the a posteriori syllabus will be considered in the following description and discussion of these various syllabus types.

132

Patricia A. Porter Syllabus types

Language based

Linguistically based

Structural Notional/functional Combination

Non-language based

Subject-matter based

Content based Process Task based

Figure 1. Language-based and non-language-based syllabus types

Language-based syllabuses The two types of language-based syllabuses are those that are based on analysis of language as linguistic units (e.g., the structural, the notional/functional, or a "combination" of these) and those that are based on content or subject matter. Both types are a priori syllabuses, in Richards and Rodgers' distinction (1982), because units of language are preselected and ordered as a basis for what is given to the students. For the most part, the first type, those based on linguistic units, tend to be more closely associated with the weak version of communicative language teaching: students are given the "units" to be practiced and then are put in some communicative situation to use and manipulate those units. The content-based syllabus tends to be more closely linked to the strong version of communicative language teaching: students immediately perceive language as meaningful; the focus is on the content and not on the units.

Communicative syllabus design

133

Linguistic-based syllabuses Structural syllabus The structural or grammatical syllabus is the one perhaps most familiar to practitioners in the field today, and a number of articles have described and critiqued it (e.g., Byrd 1983; McKay 1980; Swan 1981; Valdman 1980; Widdowson & Brumfit 1981; Wilkins 1972). With roots in the analysis of classical languages, the structural syllabuses in use since the end of World War II were largely influenced by the descriptive analysis of structural linguists such as Fries (1945) and Lado (1964), and thus represented a view of language as a formal collection of subsystems of phonology, morphology, syntax, and lexis. The structural syllabus is typically a listing of grammatical patterns or features, often with related appropriate vocabulary. For example, Book 1 of Side by Side (Molinsky & Bliss 1989) lists linguistic units such as these, with each lesson featuring one or more units: to be, to be + location, the present continuous tense, possessive adjectives, possessive nouns, yes/no questions and short answers, there is/there are, singular/plural. The sequencing of the structures is typically based on such criteria as simplicity, regularity, frequency, and contrastive difficulty. Language teaching materials based on the structural syllabus are still used widely today (e.g., Molinsky & Bliss 1989; O'Neill, Anger &Davy 1981;Yorkey«?fa/. 1984). The continued popularity of the structural syllabus is based on its economy, according to Widdowson and Brumfit (1981): a limited set of rules can lead to a very large amount of operational skill. In addition, a structural syllabus has the practical advantage that linguists and teachers are familiar with it, and there is a great deal of information available, including textbooks and linguistic research on errors. A relatively recent conception of how the syntactic system of the language can fit into the syllabus is described by Brumfit (1983). He takes a broader view of syllabus design than that of simply content and sequence, stating that the syllabus must specify a starting point and the ultimate goals of instruction as well as the sequence of events for arriving at those goals; additionally, the criteria for sequencing are to be based on a theory of language acquisition, as well as on administrative needs or other variables of the educational setting. He suggests a syllabus with two components: what can be systematized serves as the basis for syllabus development and what cannot be systematized serves as a spiral around this core (1980). For the core,

134

Patricia A. Porter

he suggests the syntactic system of the language in that it is generative and therefore economical. Notional/functional syllabus A second type of language-based syllabus which is based on linguistic units, here termed the "notional/functional", is equally familiar. The relevant analysis of language with this syllabus is semantic, rather than structural, based on the emerging sociolinguistic view in the early 1970s that language is in fact a means of communication. The focus shifted from the formal nature of language to the way this language system is used in socially appropriate ways in differing situations, and from a concern with linguistic competence to a concern with communicative competence (e.g., Hymes 1972), that is, a concern for what learners need to be able to do with language (e.g., ask for directions, give opinions, write memoranda). The notional/functional syllabus has its basis in the work of Wilkins (1972, 1976) and Van Ek and Alexander (1980a, 1980b) for the Council of Europe in developing a syllabus for adult foreign/second language education. In its original conception, the syllabus has two notional categories: 1) semantical-grammatical categories (time, quantity, space, matter, case, deixis) and 2) communicative functions (modality, moral evaluation, suasion, argument, rational enquiry and exposition, personal emotions, emotional relations, and interpersonal relations) (Wilkins 1972). Each of the functional categories has specific utterance functions: for example, "suasion" includes persuading, suggesting, advising, recommending, begging, and urging; "personal emotions" includes expressing pleasure, expressing hope, expressing displeasure, expressing dissatisfaction. One well-known textbook based on a notional/functional syllabus lists items such as the following as the chapters around which lessons are based: asking for information (question techniques, answering techniques, getting more information); getting people to do things (requesting, attracting attention, agreeing and refusing); talking about past events (remembering, describing experiences, imagining) (Jones & von Baeyer 1983). Examples of current materials based solely on a notional/functional syllabus are Strategies (Abbs & Freebairn 1975), Functions of English (Jones 1978), Functions of American English (Jones & von Baeyer 1983), and Speaking Naturally (Tillitt & Bruder 1985).

Communicative syllabus design

135

One common concern that teachers often express about the notional/funcational syllabus is that learners will not be able to see the general patterns of the language. Canale and Swain, who favor a communicative syllabus which is functionally based, insist that such a syllabus need not be grammatically disorganized, and suggest that grammar items can be selected on these criteria: their complexity, their generalizability and transparency with respect to functions, their role in facilitating acquisition of another form, their acceptability in terms of perceptual strategies, and their degree of markedness in terms of social and geographical dialects (1980:21-22). They favor the functional syllabus at all levels because it has face validity for students (and teachers) and thus improves motivation; furthermore, they feel it provides for a more natural integration of knowledge of the second language culture, the second language, and of knowledge of language in general. Most educators are quick to point out the difficulty of selection and sequencing with a notional/functional syllabus (e.g., McKay 1980; Johnson 1982): it is impossible to teach all the notions and all the functions of the language in the same way that one can teach all the structures. The solution has been to approach selection from the standpoint of learner needs and to examine the situations in which learners will use the language, to see what settings, roles, and topics are attached to them, and then to identify important notions and functions and corresponding language forms that are associated with them (e.g., Munby 1978). As Johnson points out, however, though this works well for clearly specified groups of learners, it is not apparent how to proceed in the case of an audience learning the language for general purposes (Johnson 1981:7). The Council of Europe writers solved this problem by developing a common core of notions and functions felt to be relevant to all learners and by setting up a system under which learners could study common core units as well as specialized ones according to their needs (van Ek & Alexander 1980a, 1980b). Combination syllabuses A third type of language-based syllabus is what I have labeled a "combination" syllabus, which incorporates at least some elements of a structural syllabus and/or some of a notional/functional and/or some other element beyond this. Textbooks based on such combinations

136

Patricia A. Porter

of elements became very popular in the United States in the early 1980s, with publishers aiming to please those who were reluctant to give up the structural syllabus because of its economy and/or familiarity, yet wanted to teach more "communicatively" by including functional material. I have opted to place the functional, competencybased syllabus in this category, along with Allen's syllabus incorporating an experiential component and Yalden's proportional syllabus. Each of these will be briefly described. The functional competency-based syllabus has been used for adult immigrant training in the U.S. and in refugee camps abroad since the early 1980s. The extent of its current use in the U.S. is made clear by Auerbach: "By the end of 1986, any refugee who wishes to receive federal assistance will be required to be enrolled in competency-based program" (1986:412). Although there is great variety among such syllabuses, since the terms "functional" and "competency-based" are defined in various ways, the common feature of such syllabuses is their emphasis on observable behaviors (competencies) that are necessary for living in society, such as filling out forms and writing checks (thus the term "life skills" for these competencies). As defined by Grognet and Crandall (1982:3), A competency based curriculum is a performance-outline of language tasks that lead to a demonstrated mastery of the language associated with specific skills that are necessary for individuals to function proficiently in the society in which they live.

As developed for ESL programs, the syllabus is designed to teach language as a function of communication about concrete tasks: the focus is on just those language forms and skills required by specific situations in which the learners will function. Additionally, emphasis is on overt behaviors rather than on knowledge or the ability to talk about language and skills (Auerbach 1986). For example, the table of contents for Basic English for Adult Competency (Keltner, Howard, & Lee 1983) indicates that "the students will show orally, in writing, or through demonstration that they are able to use the language needed to function in the following situations", and among the situations listed are "time: tell time by the hour and half hour; identify periods of time in days, months, and years". Moreover, the table of contents lists the "basic structures" that are to be learned to perform these behaviors, for example, imperative, be (present), be + adjective, subject pronouns, possessive adjectives, and "wh" questions (what, where,

Communicative syllabus design

137

how, how old, how many). Competency texts generally include either language functions or language forms or sometimes both as a part of the content, thus their classification as combination syllabuses. This syllabus type has been the target of a great deal of criticism, a major criticism being the degree to which the content promotes the socialization of immigrants for specific roles, i.e., limited working class roles, in the existing socioeconomic order (Auerbach 1986:411). For example, students are taught skills such as reading directions or following orders in a job, but may not be taught skills such as changing or questioning the nature of that job (Kozol 1980). Additionally, critics argue that the performance-based, behavioral orientation of competency-based materials precludes critical thinking and conflicts with student-centered learning; also, the focus on mastery learning may be incompatible with what we know about second language acquisition (Auerbach 1986). Among other concerns expressed by Tollefson is the basis on which competencies are chosen for inclusion into the program: there is no way to determine what such competencies are nor a way to choose among them (Tollefson 1986:652; see also Auerbach and Burgess 1985). Another example of a combination syllabus is the "variable focus model" developed by Allen (1984) for use in subject-related ESL modules for high school students. Here, the combination is that of structural, functional, and experiential elements, all centered around a communicative setting (a topic, theme, or task). The experiential component is fluency oriented, meaningful, and organized according to the task or message (1984:69). The model is called variable focus because the three areas can alternate, can be balanced, or can be asymmetrically incorporated. Such a variable focus is also possible in Yalden's "proportional" or "balanced" syllabus (1983), but the elements here are a combination of structures and communicative functions, with the relative amount of each — the proportion or the balance — changing over the duration of the course of study. The framework which provides support for these two components is the ideational layer of meaning: here, topics, general notions, situations, and themes, which would come out of a needs survey taken as part of the process of planning the syllabus. The proportional shift over the course of study works this way: at the very beginning level, Yalden recommends a brief structural phase, focusing on the formal and ideational layers of meaning only; here,

138

Patricia A. Porter

learners get some basic knowledge of the systematic side of language, since at this point they cannot be expected to solve communication problems or engage in much interaction. Then throughout the major part of the instructional process, there is a "balance" of the formal component and the communicative function component, the latter including functional, discourse, and rhetorical components. Over time the proportion of time devoted to the formal component decreases and that devoted to the functional component increases. Finally, at the advanced level when communicative performance skills are well established, the syllabus provides for a specialized phase in which the focus might be on difficult formal features, especially in written English. The model could then be extended to subject area learning. Although at this point materials based on Yalden's and Allen's ideas are not generally available in the marketplace (see Nunan 1988 for a description of a curriculum design related to Yalden's syllabus), a large number of textbooks combining a structural and notional/ functional syllabus are. For example, the In Touch series (Castro, Kimbrough, Lozano, & Sturtevant 1980) follows a "functional approach, giving priority to basic communicative needs so students can immediately see the relevance and usefulness of the language they are learning" (Students' Book 1, back cover), but it is clear that a structural syllabus also underlies the materials. One series claims to be the first course that integrates grammar, functions, and life skills (Anger, Fuchs, Pavlik & Segal 1987) and many others have joined the ranks by now. Content-based syllabuses A great deal of communicative language teaching in a diversity of settings today is based on language not as linguists analyze it, as in the previously described syllabus types, but as the academic and technical world divides it up, i.e., into subjects and topics. Thus, another major type of language-based syllabus is what I am calling content based. In this type, subject matter content such as mathematics, psychology, literature, or science, or a set of topics within such content, is selected and sequenced as the basis of the syllabus. An ESP course, for example, might be developed from a syllabus focused solely on the content of the field, without regard to sequencing of linguistic units, either structures or functions. One such example is a text based on engineering content, Basic Engineering Communi-

Communicative syllabus design

139

cation Skills: An English Language Course for Technician Level Engineering Students, published by the Ministry of Education in Sri Lanka (1985). The table of contents lists topics such as these: hydroprojects — small scale: general background and hydrology, civil works, turbines, electrical power, economics and running costs; hydro-projects — large scale: at the power station, the urban consumer. The text has no functional or grammatical component, even though there a few very brief "language guidance" sections. For a comprehensive review of ESP programs see Selinker, Tarone, and Hanzeli (1981) and Hutchinson and Waters (1987). Content-based syllabuses have been widely used in elementary and secondary schools in immersion programs in Canada and in bilingual and ESL programs in the U.S. (For thorough discussions, see Cantoni-Harvey, part III, 1987; Genesee 1987; Mohan 1987.) Immersion programs, such as those developed in Canada, could be said to use content-based syllabuses in that the second language is used to teach regular academic subjects. As Genesee (1987:15) points out, immersion programs are designed to create the same kinds of conditions that are thought to occur during first language acquisition; namely, there is an emphasis on creating a desire in the students to learn the language in order to engage in meaningful and interesting communication, and thus second language learning in immersion is often incidental to learning about mathematics, the sciences, the community, and one another.

Although students in French immersion programs do have language arts instruction, the teaching of grammar, when it does occur, is more like instruction given to native speakers than like that to non-native speakers. Two quite recent approaches to syllabus design in elementary and secondary schools that seem to be gaining popularity in the United States are "sheltered English" and Chamot and O'Malley's Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA). Sheltered English involves content instruction in subjects such as mathematics, social studies, science, and language arts, but with teacher talk and instructional tasks modified to allow for comprehensible language (Freeman & Freeman 1988). Clearly, Krashen's view (1985) of the importance of comprehensible input as the determining factor in second language acquisition and Terrell's "Natural Approach" (1982) have influenced this content-based design. Recent research into the importance of learning strategies has influenced the CALLA design of Chamot and

140

Patricia A. Porter

O'Malley (Rubin & Wenden 1987; Chamot & O'Malley 1987). Their CALLA is designed for intermediate and advanced students with limited English in upper elementary and secondary grades who are being prepared to enter mainstream content-area instruction (1987). Unlike immersion and sheltered English programs, CALLA is not actually intended to teach the subject matter and thus be a substitute for mainstream content-area instruction; it is designed to provide English language development related to science, mathematics, and social studies by using concepts drawn from these three content areas. The three components of the CALLA model are: curriculum based on mainstream content areas, English language development integrated with content subjects, and instruction in the use of learning strategies (Chamot & O'Malley 1987:231). Content-based approaches have also been used recently at the postsecondary level, especially in the teaching of academic writing. (For a review and critique of five different approaches, see Shih 1986.) Examples of some other applications of a content-centered syllabus are: sheltered psychology classes offered to English and French immersion students at the University of Ottawa (Wesche 1985); learning French through a civilization course (Lafayette & Buscaglia 1985); a topic-centered course on American Indians at the University of Turin (Cortese 1985); use of writing-across-the-curriculum texts designed for native speakers, such as Behrens and Rosen (1985); an "adjunct model" approach, in which students enroll in a regular academic course such as history, psychology, or biology and simultaneously enroll in an ESL "adjunct" course in which they work on literacy skills based on the content of the academic course (Snow &Brinton 1985).

Non-language-based syllabuses Syllabuses which take as the "what" of syllabus design something other than structures, functions, a combination of such linguistic units, or subject matter can be considered non-language based. These are the process syllabus and the task-based syllabus. This is not to say that language is not a part of these syllabuses; in any language class there will be language content. The point is that the content which is to be selected and sequenced and turned into a syllabus is not the language itself. Like the content-based syllabus, these syllabus

Communicative syllabus design

141

types can be said to be consistent with the strong version of communicative language teaching in that the starting point is meaning, rather than form. The process syllabus and the task-based syllabus represent the most recent developments in the field of language teaching, motivated by changing views of language, teaching methodology, and learner contributions (Breen 1987). For example, our view of communicative competence has now extended to include strategic competence (Canale & Swain 1980); consequently, in Breen's view, "the underlying ability to negotiate may be seen as the catalyst for the learning and refinement of language knowledge itself" (1987:158). Additionally, the continued dissatisfaction with audiolingual methodology has led to much interest in alternative methodologies (e.g., Stevick 1976; Blair 1982) and new ways to implement syllabuses in the classroom (e.g., Yalden 1983). Third, learners are currently viewed as making their own contributions to the learning process in terms of what they choose to learn (e.g., Allwright 1984) and in terms of their learning strategies and preferences (e.g., Rubin & Wenden 1987). Process syllabuses The process syllabus, a "learner-generated syllabus", as described by Breen and Candlin in various articles (e.g., Breen 1984; Breen & Candlin 1980; Candlin 1984; Breen 1987) falls under Richards and Rodgers' category of an a posteriori syllabus. These educators see the preselection of items to be learned by the student as totally unfounded, emphasizing that each student brings with him/her a definite expectation of what the learning process is all about: any material taken into the classroom is interpreted and restructured by both the teacher and the students. Breen and Candlin argue that rather than basing a syllabus on a repertoire of the target language (whether structures, functions, or communication events or situations), a syllabus should be based on a repertoire of communication or on the capacity for communication: the focus should be on "the skills and abilities which learners initially bring to communication and which they have to engage during communication" (Breen 1984:52), rather than on systems of knowledge external to learners (i.e., target repertoires of language). The what of syllabus design should not be language, but should be learning a language.

142

Patricia A. Porter

What does such a syllabus look like, then? Breen's answer is that the syllabus consists of different levels of questions requiring classroom decisions and an index of possible alternative procedures, activities, and tasks which students are to choose by consensus. At the top level are questions about how classroom language learning will proceed, that is, questions about participation, procedure, and subjectmatter (students and teacher together decide who does what with whom, on what content, with what resources, when, how, and why); at the other levels are alternative procedures to be chosen from and agreed upon, then alternative activities to be selected from, and finally alternative tasks to be chosen within the activities. Evaluation of the chosen tasks, activities, and procedure is continual. This framework of questions and catalog of alternative procedures, activities, and tasks may be predesigned; the actual process syllabus which is worked out in the class is designed as the teaching and learning proceeds and is in this sense an a posteriori syllabus. In his arguments in favor of the process syllabus, Candlin points out that such an interactive syllabus "suggests a model which is social and problem solving in its orientation rather than one which transmits preselected and often predigested knowledge" (1984:34). Candlin also emphasizes the importance of this type of syllabus in curriculum change, for by writing down as a syllabus an account of how learners and teachers react to, make choices about, and work through materials, we are able to see what is relevant and useful to the society of the classroom and to the world outside. In sum, a process syllabus is characterized by "a set of problem solving tasks which have the purpose of creating conditions for valueidentification, meaning-negotiation, and comprehensible input by the learner" (Candlin 1984:42-43). Such a task-based approach, in his view, honors the evidence from second language acquisition research (e.g., see Long 1984), it honors current views of the nature of language (e.g., see Leech 1983), and it places control of syllabus development in the hands of the learners, where it rightly belongs.

Task-based syllabuses The task-based syllabus also features problem-solving tasks, but it is quite different in other respects from Breen and Candlin's design. The best known example of this type is the procedural syllabus developed by N.S. Prabhu for the Bangalore Project which has been·

Communicative syllabus design

143

described by Brumfit (1984b), by Johnson (1982), and by Prabhu (1987). The project arose out of a dissatisfaction with the structural syllabus widely used in South India and involved the development of new materials as a way of getting at pedagogical innovation, rather than changes in classroom organization, class size, or classroom technology. Prabhu's thinking about syllabus design is similar to Breen and Candlin's in that he feels that there is likely to be conflict between the predetermined syllabus imposed on the learner and the way the learner can use that syllabus. Also like Breen and Candlin, Prabhu values the learner's natural interest in problem solving and pre-occupation with meaning. At the basis of Prabhu's syllabus is the belief that form is best learned when the learner's attention is focused on meaning; consequently, the materials developed for the Bangalore Project are a series of problems, requiring the use of English, which have to be solved by the learner (Brumfit 1984b; Johnson 1982; Prabhu 1987). Among the problem-solving tasks are reading maps, interpreting railway timetables, solving simple mysteries, interpreting rules, following drawing instructions, and comprehending dialogs (Brumfit 1984b; Johnson 1982; Prabhu 1987). The problems are not based on any overt language syllabus or linguistic preselection; sequencing of the tasks is "intuitive" and based on their conceptual difficulty, with similar tasks being grouped together. The materials have no explicitly language-focused activities: learning comes about, according to Prabhu, as students have to interpret and use language data to solve the problems. (The name of the syllabus derives from the procedures students follow in solving the problems.) The procedural syllabus is similar to the process syllabus in that there is no syntactic or semantic syllabus imposed on the learners and thus teachers and students are free to interact in a way natural to the task at hand and use language appropriate for the task at hand. The designs are also similar in their task content. The major difference, however, is in the area of negotiation and learner control: in Breen and Candlin's design, the procedures, participant structures, activities, and tasks are all open to negotiation. In Prabhu's design, there is no negotiation whatsoever about which materials will be used or about how they will be used. Among the questions syllabus designers have raised about the procedural syllabus is whether or not it does in fact have a built-in lin-

144

Patricia A. Porter

guistic syllabus. The syllabus includes sub-tasks or rehearsal tasks which teachers introduce as preparation for the main tasks. According to Prabhu, one of the aims of rehearsal is "to ensure that strategies for tackling the task (as well as the language that will be needed for the purpose) will, when needed, be available for recall and re-application" (cited in Johnson 1982:141). Thus, in Johnson's view, whether or not there is an overt or covert mapping out of language items depends on just how much rehearsal or pre teaching is needed or permitted. Another conception of a task-based syllabus is provided by Long (1985). In an attempt to formulate a second language teaching program design which links methodology and syllabus, he suggests the task as a meaningful and viable unit of analysis for identifying learners' needs, defining syllabus content, organizing language acquisition opportunities, and measuring student achievement. The syllabus comes about in this way: a needs analysis is done to obtain an inventory of target tasks which are necessary for an individual to function adequately in a particular target domain (e.g., occupational or academic). These tasks are then classified into task types (for example, a target task such as "selling something" might be classified into task types such as "selling a train ticket" and "selling an airline ticket"). Then from the task types, pedagogical tasks are derived, these specifying the participants, context, and complexity of the task (for example: travel agent and middle aged couple meet in travel agency; middle aged couple immediately like the tour proposed by the agent). Certain of these tasks are then selected and sequenced to form a task syllabus. In Long's syllabus, selection would be made on the basis of ensuring that pedagogical tasks adequately represent the task types; grading would be based on the degree of difficulty of the tasks themselves — in terms of the difficulty of accomplishing the task and not the complexity of the linguistic demands of the task. Long's task-based syllabus has models of language use accompanying performance of target tasks that will be provided to learners. But the models serve as targets, not pieces of language to be accurately replicated by the learners. Like Prabhu's syllabus, the focus is on problem solving, and learner success is measured by task accomplishment, not target-like linguistic production. However, Long's tasks would be selected according to learner need, whereas Prabhu's are not. Long has worked on designing prototype task-based teaching materials and conducted some small-

Communicative syllabus design

145

scale studies of the use of pedagogic tasks and is positive about the outcomes; however, he is hesitant at this point to advocate task-based language teaching as the solution to the program design problem.

Conclusion One of the things that this description of syllabus types shows is the great diversity in points of view about what the content of a language teaching program should be. Two cautions about the limitations of this description are in order. First, the boundaries among types are not as clear as I have represented them: a language-based syllabus may include features of a non-language-based syllabus. For example, the engineering ESP text previously cited as content based (Ministry of Higher Education, Sri Lanka, 1985) includes a series of tasks such as taking measurements, drawing graphs, and writing reports of experiments. Another example is the CALLA model developed by Chamot and O'Malley (1987), which is also content based but includes instruction in the use of learning strategies. Second, because of length limitations, it has not been possible to discuss the complex interaction of approach, procedures, and other elements of design as they interrelate to syllabus. As is well known, no matter what the syllabus and the teaching materials developed from the syllabus, what actually goes on in the classroom is mediated by the teacher and the learner and what gets learned in the classroom is not necessarily the same as what teachers and course designers intend (e.g., Allwright 1982). What do these syllabus types suggest about current views of communicative language teaching itself? The most recent developments in syllabus design - content-based, process, and task-based syllabuses represent the strong version of communicative language teaching, implying a primary focus on meaning, on communication. The process and task-based prototypes, however, suggest that there is currently an even "stronger" view of communicative language teaching, one that includes a focus on the process of learning. For many years language teachers and researchers have been talking about the contributions of the learner to the language learning process, yet with language-based syllabuses the learner focus has been primarily in the area of needs analysis and content selection. In their critiques of language-centered and skill-centered approaches to ESP design, Hutchinson and Waters point out that in these approaches the learner is still viewed

146

Patricia A. Porter

"as a user of language rather than as a learner of language" and that the focus is on the processes of language use rather than processes of language learning (1987:70). The syllabus of a truly innovative and learner-centered approach must include attention to learning processes. The question that remains is how such new syllabus designs can be implemented in the face of the constraints of particular educational settings and the expectations of learners and teachers strongly influenced by established educational practices. I would agree with Clark (1985) that a true process syllabus assumes an unrealistically high level of expertise of teachers and self-knowledge of learners. Yet I would argue that the task-based syllabus with a learning component as described by Breen (1987) is a pathway to educational innovation: it can provide the source of security that teachers and learners need in the form of a predetermined syllabus and materials. But it can also provide attention to the learning process itself. Once teachers and learners are familiar with the task-based design and begin to feel more comfortable with a focus on learning processes, then the switch to a true process-based syllabus with all its incumbent alternatives, negotiation, and decision making can be implemented. References Abbs, B., and Freebairn, I. 1975 Strategies. London: Longman. Allen, J.P.B. 1984 General-purpose language teaching: A variable focus approach. In C.J. Brumfit (eds.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon. Allwright, R.L. 1982 Perceiving and pursuing learner's needs. In M. Geddes & G. Sturtridge (eds.), Individualisation. Oxford: Modern English Publications. Anger, L., M. Fuchs, C. Pavlik, and M. Segal 1987 On your way. White Plains, NY: Longman. Auerbach, E.R. 1986 Competency-based ESL: One step forward or two steps back? TESOL Quarterly, 20, 411-429. Auerbach, E.R., and D. Burgess 1985 The hidden curriculum of survival ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 29,475-495. Behrens, L., and L.J. Rosen 1985 Writing and reading across the curriculum (2nd ed.). Boston: Little, Brown. Blair, R.W.(ed.) 1982 Innovative approaches to language teaching. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Communicative syllabus design

147

Breen, M P. 1984 Process syllabuses for the language classroom. In C.J. Brumfit (ed.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1987 Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design, Part I and Part II. Language Teaching, 20,81-174. Breen, M f., and C.N. Candlin 1980 The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1,89-112. Brumfit, C.J. 1980 From defining to designing: Communicative specifications versus communicative methodology in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3,1-9. 1984a Function and structure of a state school syllabus for learners of second or foreign language with heterogeneous needs. In C.J. Brumfit (ed.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1984b The Bangalore Procedural Syllabus. EL T Journal, 38, 233-241. Byrd, D.R. 1983 Putting language in its place — an assessment of notional-functionalism. Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention, Toronto. Canale, M., and M.Swain 1980 Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 147. Candlin, C.N. 1976 Communicative language teaching and the debt to pragmatics. In C. Rameh (ed.), Georgetown University Round Table 1976. Washington: Georgetown University Press. 1984 Syllabus design as a critical process. In CJ. Brumfit (ed.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Cantoni-Harvey, G. 1987 Content-area language instruction: Approaches and strategies. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Castro, O., V. Kimbrough, F. Lozano, and J. Sturtevant 1980 In touch. New York: Longman Inc. Chamot, A.U., and J.M. O'Malley 1987 The cognitive academic language learning approach: A bridge to the mainstream. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 227-249. Clark, J.L. 1985 Curriculum renewal in second-language learning: An overview. Canadian Modern Language Review, 42, 342-360. Corder, S.P. 1973 Introducing applied linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Cortese.G. 1985 From receptive to productive in post-intermediate EFL classes: A pedagogical "experiment". TESOL Quarterly, 19, 7-25. Freeman, D., and Y. Freeman 1988 Sheltered English instruction. ERIC Digest, October, 1988.

148

Patricia A. Porter

Fries, C.C. 1945 Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Genesee, F. 1987 Learning through two languages. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Grognet, A.C., and J. Crandall 1982 Competency-based curricula in adult ESL. ERIC/CLL News Bulletin,

6,3-4. Guntermann, G., and J.K. Phillips 1981 Communicative course design: Developing functional ability in all four skills. Canadian Modem Language Review, 37, 329-343. Howatt, A.P.R. 1984 A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hutchinson, T., and A. Waters 1987 English for specific purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, K. 1981 Introduction: Some background, some key terms and some definitions. In K. Johnson and K. Morrow (eds.), Communication in the classroom. Harlow: Longman. 1982 Communicative syllabus design and methodology. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Jones, L. 1978 Functions of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jones, L., and C. von Baeyer 1983 Functions of American English. New York: Cambridge University Press. Keltner, A., L. Howard, and F. Lee 1983 Basic English for adult competency. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, Inc. Kozol, J. 1980 Prisoners of silence. New York: Continuum. Krashen, S.D. 1985 The input hypothesis. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Lado, R. 1964 Language teaching: A scientific approach. New York: McGraw- Hill. Lafayette, R.C., and M. Buscaglia 1985 Students learn language via a civilization course — a comparison of second language classroom environments. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 323-342. Leech, G.N. 1983 Principles of pragmatics. Lon d on: Longman. Long, M.H. 1985 A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M.Pienemann(eds.),Moiie//ing and assessing second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Communicative syllabus design

149

Massey, M. 1985 Directions in ESL Curriculum. Canadian Modern Language Review, 42,261-270. McKay, S.L. 1980 On Notional Syllabuses. Modem Language Journal, 64, 179-186. Ministry of Higher Education, Sri Lanka 1985 Basic engineering communication skills. Colombo: Author. Mohan, B.A. 1986a Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. 1986b Language and content learning: Finding common ground. ERJC/CLL News Bulletin, 7,8-9. Molinsky, S.J., and B. Bliss 1989 Side by side, Second edition, Book 1. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall Regents. Munby, J. 1978 Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. 1988 The learner-centred curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O'Neill, R., L. Anger, and K. Davy 1981 AKL beginning. New York: Longman, Inc. Prabhu,N.S. 1987 Language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richards, J.C. 1984 The secret life of methods. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 7-23. Richards, J.C., and T. Rodgers 1982 Method: Approach, design, procedure. TESOL Quarterly, 16,153-168. 1986 Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Selinker, L., E. Tarone, and V. Hanzeli (eds.), 1981 English for academic and technical purposes. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Shaw, A.M. 1977 Foreign language syllabus development: Some recent approaches. Language Teaching and Linguistics Abstracts, 70,217-33. Shih,M. 1986 Content-based approaches to teaching academic writing. TESOL Quarterly, 20,611-648. Snow, M.A., and D. Brinton 1985 Linking ESL courses with content courses: The adjunct model. Paper presented at the 19th Annual TESOL Convention, New York. Stern, H.H. 1981 Communicative language teaching and learning: Toward a synthesis. In J.E. Alatis, H.B. Altman, & P.M. Alatis (eds.), The second language classroom: Directions for the 1980's. New York: Oxford University Press.

150 1983

Patricia A. Porter

Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1984 Review and discussion. In C.J. Brumfit (ed.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Stevick, E.W. 1980 Teaching languages: A way and ways. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Swan, M. 1985 A critical look at the communicative approach (Part 2). ELT Journal, 39, 76-87. Terrell, T.D. 1982 The natural approach to language teaching: an update. Modem Language Journal, 66, 121-32. Tillitt, R., and M.N. Bruder 1985 Speaking naturally: Communication skills in American English. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tollefson, J.W. 1986 Functional competencies in the U.S. refugee program: Theoretical and practical problems. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 649-664. Valdman, A. 1980 Communicative ability and syllabus design for global foreign language courses. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3, 81-95. van Ek, J.A., and L.G. Alexander 1980a Threshold level English. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1980b Way stage English. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Wesche,M.B. 1985 Immersion and the universities. Canadian Modern Language Review, 4J, 931-940. Widdowson, H.G. 1984 Educational and pedagogic factors in syllabus design. In C.J. Brumfit (ed.), General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Widdowson, H.G., and C.J. Brumfit 1981 Issues in second language syllabus design. In J.E. Alatis, H.B. Altman, & P.M. Alatis (eds.), The second language classroom: Directions for the 1980's. New York: Oxford University Press. WÜkins, D.A. 1972 Grammatical, situational and notional syllabuses. Paper presented to the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Copenhagen. 1976 Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1981 Notional syllabuses revisited. Applied Linguistics, 2,83-89. Yalden, J. 1983 The communicative syllabus: Evolution, design and implementation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Yorkey, R.C., R. Barrutia, A.U. Chamot, I. Rainey de Diaz, J.B. Gonzalez, J.W. Ney, and W.L. Woolf 1984 New Intercom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, Inc.

Teaching across academic cultures: Toward an anthropology of ESL

James H. Robinson Introduction Academic culture shock is a phenomenon that ESL teachers recognize in study skills curricula for international students and in programs for international teaching assistants (Mestenhauser 1988), but this phenomenon has not been addressed in ESL teacher preparation programs, and little has been written on teaching across academic cultures. When Byrd prepared the (1986) volume Teaching Across Cultures in the University ESL Program, papers were presented on relevant issues, current programs, and materials used in the teaching of culture within ESL, but the call for abstracts "on work being done with students from particular cultural backgrounds" elicited too few papers for the inclusion of this topic (Byrd 1986:viii). This paper will suggest the need for research on "particular cultural backgrounds" of students: a contrastive analysis of academic culture. It will also suggest that ESL teachers need to know the differences between their and their students' academic cultures, as ESL instruction is in a real sense, teaching across academic cultures. In the U.S., when teaching the target language through the target academic culture, ESL teachers need to be cognizant that their students may be operating in their native academic culture, and so they may experience "academic culture shock" in the ESL classroom. In settings outside the U.S., ESL teachers need to realize that this academic culture shock may affect responses to instruction by students, colleagues, and administrators and that these responses in turn may generate their own culture shock for the ESL teacher. The focus of this paper will be on academic culture, since the ESL classroom is an educational context where cross-cultural interaction occurs between ESL teachers and their students and among students. It is not just that the teacher and the students come from different cultures, but more specifically, that they both have years of experience

152

James H. Robinson

as students within different academic cultures. Seldom has the ESL classroom been discussed within the context of teaching across academic cultures. Ironically, in the literature on the role of culture in ESL curriculum, ESL teachers are charged to be culture brokers who help their students overcome culture shock and thus facilitate language learning (Valdes 1986:vii), but differences in academic culture between our ESL academic sub-culture and the academic culture of our students may create "academic culture shock" that stunts language learning. These differences in academic culture should be addressed by ESL teachers in their classes, and therefore, should be taught in ESL teacher training programs. This discussion will, first, review the cross-cultural literature for ESL professionals, second, present examples of the contribution of a cultural analysis of teaching across academic cultures, and third, conclude with recommendations for the role of the field of anthropology and education in professional preparation of ESL teachers.

Culture and ESL Politzer (1954) was one of the earliest advocates of the idea that culture should be an integral part of foreign language teacher preparation. Some thirty year later, one of his students, Mary McGroarty repeated his call, stating that teachers need to know what culturally based expectations they and their students bring to the classroom and how to help their students learn American culture (McGroarty AGalvan 1985:89). The literature on culture for ESL professionals tends to fall into the following areas: 1) ESL travelogues, 2) cross-cultural communication, and 3) the training of International Teaching Assistants (ITA). While each genre has an important contribution, only the last one touches on culture within academic contexts.

ESL travelogues The opening up of a country to native speaking ESL teachers often results in a wave of ESL travelogue articles (Balhorn & Schneider 1987; Cowan, Light, Mathews & Tucker 1979; Hou 1987; Light 1978; Maley 1984; Robinson 1978; Utley 1987). These descriptions are

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

153

similar to those of missionaries, traders, or travellers who wrote travel books or reports on the ways of life of peoples when first encountered by Europeans. These ESL descriptions (including one by this author) are often insightful, accurate, and helpful in preparing new ESL teachers for some of the realities of teaching in another country, but they are seldom extended to a cultural analysis that explains how and why students behave and perceive the way they do. For example, Maley lists advantages and disadvantages of the Chinese approach to education. This taxonomy provides important information, but two problems present themselves: 1) the criteria for these two lists are decidedly western (Chinese criteria might result in a different categorization), and 2) Chinese culture or academic culture is not used to explain why these characteristics of Chinese students and teachers are important and how they are reflections of Chinese values and culture. Unfortunately, more often than not, we emerge with unexplained stereotypes or lists of "do's and don't's". These stereotypes can lend themselves more to explaining why ESL teachers are frustrated in their teaching assignments overseas than to cross-cultural understanding.

Cross-cultural communication The literature on cross-cultural communication provides a cultural contrastive analysis to identify the content of cultural instruction for ESL classes. This literature can be divided into several categories: 1) cultural influences on language, and 2) cross-cultural understanding. For examples of this first category, Kaplan (1966) identifies how intercultural differences affect preferences for rhetorical structures. Field (1984) uses cultural influences to explain a Chinese psycholinguistic reading model. Morain (1984) examines the importance of non-verbal communication in intercultural communication. The second category concentrates on the role of culture in communication. Condon and others have introduced North Americans to Mexican (1985) or Japanese culture (Condon & Kurata 1974). Osterloh (1984) shows how third world traditions affect expectations that students bring to the classroom. Parker (1984) reports on the culture of Middle Eastern students, and Frechette (1987) on Saudi students. While this literature provides important insights into the culture and society from which ESL students come and to which ESL teachers go, its focus is on culture in social rather than academic contexts.

154

James H. Robinson

ITA literature Differences in academic cultures have been identified as a significant problem for International Teaching Assistants in American classrooms (Constantinides & Byrd 1986; Pialorsi 1984; Robinson 1988; Shaw & Garate 1984; Tanner, Hoekje & Miller 1987; Zukowski/Faust 1984). To address this problem, Pialorsi (1984) has suggested "an Anthropology of the Classroom". Essentially, the ITA and ESL classroom involve similar problems of conflicting academic cultures. The obvious difference is that the teachers and students are reversed; in both cases, however, teachers must begin to learn to teach in ways that are culturally matched to student expectations. The ITA literature also provides an analogy that illustrates how cross-cultural communication of social situations are not sufficient for teaching across academic cultures. Testing procedures for ITAs have shown that simply testing conversational or English skills in social situations is not sufficient to determine whether an ITA will be able to survive as a teacher in the American classroom (Abraham & Plakans 1987; Braswell & Green 1987). Successful programs for ITAs include testing, orientation, and special courses on the culture and language of teaching in American classrooms (Pialorsi 1984; Robinson 1988). For similar reasons, ESL teachers need courses or orientation programs that focus on the culture and language of teaching in the non-American classrooms of their students. However, simply knowing the appropriate behaviors and their cultural meanings within social contexts is not enough; ESL teachers need cross-cultural understanding within the academic context.

The influence of academic culture When he first issued his call for including culture in foreign language teacher preparation, Politzer (1954) also suggested that what was needed was a comparative analysis of the native and target cultures of language learners (1954:99-100). As the above examples from the literature indicate, most of the comparisons done have been made at the level of general culture differences and not between cultural differences within academic contexts. The importance of understanding cultural difference within academic cultures in ESL has, however, received some attention in recent literature. For example, McGroarty

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

155

and Galvan (1985:89) point out that "knowledge of the many cultural influences on language learning, teaching and use increases a language teacher's ability to offer students appropriate, interesting, and relevant language instruction". In this article, they mentioned that several studies show a clear difference between non-American students and American students' perceptions of what "good teachers" are (1985: 83-84). Archer (1984) has referred to instances of culture shock in the classrooms as "bumps", and she provides several examples of how both ESL teachers and ESL students experience these bumps as their cultures collide in the classroom. Osterloh (1986) explained how the three cultural concepts of "a text", of the "status of the author", and of giving opinions as "creating conflict" might interfere with learning in ESL classrooms. More recently, Richmond (1987) provided an analysis of how Native American and Anglo-American culture can cause a cultural dissonance that ends up hindering ESL learning. Furey (1986) advocates the need for all ESL teachers to study educational anthropology as a foundation field for ESL teaching and provides a framework for an analysis of teaching across academic cultures. In a similar vein, Johns (1988) argues for the importance of learning academic culture for the international student and has suggested that ESL teacher trainers need to provide students with the ethnogrpahic skills so that they can learn about American academic subcultures through their own observation and analysis. In light of these concerns and calls for a better understanding of cross-cultural teaching in the field of ESL, the following analysis will center upon preparing ESL teachers to be school anthropologists of the academic sub-cultures of their students. While the approach to contrastive analysis of academic culture offered below differs from what Politzer first envisioned in 1954, it does draw heavily on the spirit of his intentions. The approach that I advocate includes the three following factors: 1) ethnographic description, 2) contrastive analysis of general cultural concepts, and 3) analysis of how the general cultural concepts relate to the classroom behavior. The example used for the analysis centers on three major components of academic culture in East Asian schooling: 1) Confucian orthodoxy, 2) "playing things by eye", and 3) "face". The comparisons between schooling in East Asia and schooling in the United States will highlight significant differences in ways of teaching and learning across academic cultures. Through these examples, the argument will be made that "teaching academic cultures" is a foundation subject for ESL teachers and hence, should be part of their academic preparation.

156

James H. Robinson

Confucian orthodoxy meets ESL East Asian students face an "academic culture shock" when they enter the ESL classroom, because the educational systems in East Asia are fundamentally different from the methods, techniques, and practices of the ESL classroom in the U.S. Whereas the goals of the ESL teachers and East Asian students are the same — namely improving the student's English to enable him or her to succeed in a U.S. university, the "academic culture shock" comes in the differences between the perception that the ESL teacher and the East Asian student have of the way this goal of English improvement should be implemented. The doctrine of Confucian orthodoxy and its influences on education in China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan can explain part of this academic culture shock. This brief description of the Confucian influenced educational environment and the resulting "academic culture shock" of East Asian students in ESL classes is intended to provide guidance for ESL teachers who seek to help their East Asian students overcome "academic culture shock". Confucian orthodoxy stated that the Confucian classics only had one interpretation (Rohlen 1983:49-50). The opposite view was heterodoxy; a viewpoint that was banned in China, Japan, and Korea in the last century. This perspective on education began with Confucius and Mencius. They were more concerned with learning ". . . moral precepts than with advocating a method of critical thinking". (Cleverly 1985:8-9). Consequently, learning was not a heuristic endeavor but an effort to learn the correct form, the correct answer, the correct way. Memorization was stressed even when the meaning was not understood. Critical thinking was reserved for those few masters, sages, who had completely mastered the Confucian corpus and so were then able to and entitled to make a contribution to this corpus. Confucian orthodoxy influenced classroom practice by emphasizing rote learning, as has been documented in China, (Chance 1987:229; Yang 1970:117), in Japan (Rohlen 1983:12; Singleton 1967:36) and in Korea (Robinson 1980:18-19). These studies indicate that, in general, instruction is teacher-centric, students are passive receptors of knowledge, and student-generated questions are not appropriate. Typically, a teacher will ask a question, pause, and then supply the answer. For their part, students are expected to be writing both the question and the answer in their notebooks. In a modern Korean first

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

157

grade, rote learning means that the students copy from the blackboard to their notebooks the teacher's representation of the textbook, even though the students have their textbooks open on their desks next to their notebooks. Confucian-influenced education is also expressed by several student learning preferences. From a teacher-centered learning perspective, preferences exist for: a textbook for reference and memorization, a notebook to record the information presented in class, and a teaching method that is repeated with little variety. Passive learning preferences are revealed in the student's lack of eye contact, in the surprise when asked to participate, in the time spent puzzling over an answer, and in the embarrassment when unable to answer. With regard to questioning, inquiries by students during class would be interpreted as a challenge to a teacher and thus should be held until after class. Teacher questions are used as a teaching strategy to introduce new material and not to encourage critical thinking. Individual recitation or choral repetition are the only proper means of student classroom response and serve chiefly as a testing rather than a learning function. When the "confucian student" enters the ES L class, there is a strong potential for "academic culture shock". The aforementioned description of rote learning from the Confucian-influenced classroom contrasts sharply with the teaching methods recommended by current ESL practice. In place of Confucian orthodoxy, manifested as teachercentric instruction, passive learning, unquestioning students, and rhetorical questions, the U.S. educated ESL teacher tends to stress eclecticism, student-centric instruction, active learning, verbal activity, and questions from and among students. Consequently, in this setting, the East Asian student is likely to experience cross-cultural academic shock. In short, it appears that there is an educational mismatch between the East Asian preferred mode of instruction and the instructional process found in most ESL classes in the United States. This mismatch between preferred instructional modes will remain a problem of conflicting academic cultures until ESL teachers learn to incorporate their students' academic culture into their own repertoire of teaching approaches. Three possible teaching strategies would be: 1) to use a textbook, 2) to teach with a consistent method, and 3) in advanced classes, to discuss differences in academic cutlure, as they are encountered in the ESL classroom.

158

James H. Robinson

Playing things by eye Another major cultural difference between East Asians and North Americans exists in the focus of sensory perception. East Asians tend "to play things by eye" while North Americans "play them by ear". This difference in perception can cause serious miscommunication and frustration in both social and educational settings. The cultural concept of "playing things by eye" and the corresponding examples are drawn wholly from Korean culture, but they appear to be generalizable to most East Asian cultural groups. In Korean, nunchi is a cultural concept, and denotes "eye measured" (Kang 1972; Park 1979:92). More figuratively, the concept roughly translates to mean "eye sense" or "playing things by eye". Martin and his colleagues (1967) define nunchi's nominative usage as, "tact, savoir faire, sense, social sense, perceptiveness, an eye for social situations", and its predicate function as, "tries to read one's mind, probe one's motives, studies one's face; grasps a situation, sees how the wind blows" (Martin, Lee & Chang 1967:364). The stare that comes with the use of nunchi may have resulted in western stereotyping of East Asians as being inscrutable, based on the way East Asians silently fix themselves upon an object or event without uttering a word before acting. An illustration from a cross-cultural encounter may help explain how this cultural concept works in social communication: A Korean wife walks up to and stands next to her American husband, who is preparing food in the kitchen. The husband does nothing. The wife reaches in front of the husband for the cabinet door. The husband makes a face. The wife becomes angry. The husband does not understand his wife's anger.

In this scene, the husband was "playing things by ear" and the wife was behaving as if her husband had nunchi. First, by standing next to her husband, the Korean wife was telling him that she wanted to get into the cabinet above him. The husband was waiting for his wife to say, "Excuse me". The wife was expecting a behavioral response as a result of a seemingly clear-cut visual cue, but at this point, the husband would only be cued by audio means. In other words, the wife expects that the husband will have the "good sense" to see "what is going on", but the husband wants the wife "to spell things out" for him, 'tell him what she wants him to do". Second, when the wife reaches in front of the husband, the husband's space has been invaded, and so he "makes a face", but says nothing.

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

159

The wife responds strongly to this visual cue and gets angry. The husband wonders what he did. He certainly said nothing to elicit this anger. In this part of the interaction, the husband emits a visual response, and this response elicits a strong reaction from the wife. He is surprised by the response because he would expect that a audio rather than a visual cue would have to be the cause of such a reaction. The analysis illustrates how American system of cues relies more on audio cues and the Korean on visual cues. In educational context, "playing things by eye" translates into a preference for visual learning, and "playing things by ear" for audio learning. These differences can be seen clearly in the daily classroom behaviors across the two cultures. North American classrooms are dominated by the following pattern of verbal exchange: the teacher questions, the student answers, and the teacher responds, usually in the form of an evaluation (Gage & Berliner 1975:588-593). In contrast, in the typical East Asian classroom, the teacher writes on the blackboard, and the students copy this information in their notebooks exactly as the teacher has written it (Robinson 1982, 1988). Based upon this difference, two major implications are directly relevant for ESL classrooms with East Asian students. First, ESL teachers can use this preference for visual learning to help their East Asian students learn English. For adult learners who have already studied English for years, many ESL teachers have found that weak oral skills can be improved by introducing material in written form. Stronger reading skills are used to provide a topic for oral questioning or discussion. For child learners who have never encountered English, classroom activities could focus on visual rather than audio cues. The use of cuisenaire rods in Silent Way provides a concrete example of a method that relies on visual cuing. Second, ESL teachers need to help their students learn "to play things by ear" in order to survive in either social or educational situations in North America. In other words, teachers can use the cultural concepts of the student to promote learning, but they must also, at the same time, prepare the student to use American cultural concepts. Accordingly, the teacher needs to slowly integrate audio cued material into the lesson. The learning activities should focus on both the proper initiating of and response to "playing things by ear", and they should incorporate both cognitive and affective learning tasks. For example, students could listen to and practice producing the proper audio cues involved in making formal and informal requests

160

James H. Robinson

of information: learning "to spell things out" or to be more specific. In another activity students could work on interpreting affective responses, such as friendliness or anger, to carefully selected audio cues. These affective response activities might focus on deemphasizing visual cues, such as facial cues and emphasizing audio cues — what the person actually says.

"Face" in the ESL classroom A third academic cultural concept is "face". Many ESL teachers have encountered the hard-working but silent East Asian student in their classrooms. This silence in class is often attributed to shyness but is actually an "avoidance process" used to prevent face-loss (Goffman 1967:15). For ESL teachers, then, several questions deserve attention: What is "face" in East Asia? Why does the concept of "face" silence the East Asian student? And how can ESL teachers structure their classes and design their lesson plans to encourage East Asian students to participate without loosing "face"? In the Western sense, "face" has three characteristics: a positive nature, a claim of ego, and a recognition from others (Goffman 1967: 5). Using Goffman's definition, Brown and Levinson (1978) have tried to establish "face" as a universal construct related to politeness. It is clear, however, that "face" in East Asia connotes something entirely different from the western definition. According to Hu (1944: 61), "face" has a negative connotation, which often extends beyond the claim of ego, and has societal consequences. To illustrate the concern over "losing face", Lin Yu Tang (1935:201) has written that in China, "Not to give a man face is the utmost height of rudeness and is like throwing down a gauntlet to him in the West". More recently, Crane (1967:102) has pointed out that in Korea, "Face is sometimes considered more important than the endangering of human life". In a comparison of American and Korean communication styles, MacMahon (1975:84) claims that Westerners are more concerned about "gaining face" or "keeping up with the Jones", while East Asians are more concerned with "losing face". Park (1979:76) states that in general, Americans desire self-respect whereas Koreans seek group respect. In short, American concepts of "face" are ego-oriented and can be earned, but for the Korean, "face" is third-party oriented and must be protected.

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

161

A story might better illustrate the meaning of "face" in East Asia: Imagine yourself a woman in a communal bath house. You have soap in your eyes and the steam further restricts your vision. You head for the door to the changing room, but by mistake open and walk through a door that puts you on the street outside. The outside door has no knob. Where do you put your hands?

This story was a Korean woman's explanation of the meaning of "face". The Asian answer to the question, of course, is that you would cover your "face". I do not believe that the Western concept of "face" would result in the same gesture. In the classroom, this different sense of "face" and how it is gained and lost has implications for cross-cultural teaching and learning. Within the East Asian classroom, the teacher is defined as the actor and the student as the passive recipient. This dyadic relationship is strongly influenced by the exam orientation of Confucian-influenced educational systems that do not allow for active students (Rohlen 1983:155). In Confucian-influenced classrooms, students are reluctant to ask and to answer questions. For a student to ask a question or interrupt a lecture would be an admission of ignorance and would mean a loss of "face". These behaviors would also be viewed as "disruptive, hostile, or disrespectful" (Show & Garate 1984:27) and so would challenge the "face" of the teacher. Hu (1944:48) reported that in China, "students at certain universities used to subject every new instructor to an intense questioning during his first lectures. Should he prove unable to answer, his incapability would be proven and his lien [face] lost". So, "face" could also be lost if a teacher did not have the right answer to a student's question. This author's own summary of Korean observations concluded that students did not ask questions because of a possible negative chain reaction: if the teacher did not have the answer, the teacher would "lose face", the dyad relationship between teacher and student would be weakened, and learning would suffer. Thus, "face" is a key cultural concept in the teaching-learning process involving East Asian ESL students. For the East Asian student, answering a question can also be a "face"-threatening situation. Crane (1967:102) explains this phenomenon as follows: "To admit lack of experience and knowledge is to lose face". Students are taught to seek perfection and therefore, they are reluctant to answer if any doubt is present. A wrong answer to a teacher's questions would be a public display of ignorance. In

162

James H. Robinson

other words, answering a teacher's question requires a strong sense of "face" (confidence). If the answer given was incorrect, one response might be to smile widely, in an attempt to save "face". Normally, in the East Asian classroom, the students' "face" is not challenged, since teachers ask all of the questions as well as provide all of the answers. In the ESL classroom, the student may choose silence as an "avoidance behavior", to avoid losing face. This silence may appear as "shyness", but more accurately should be considered a face saving behavior. Bridging the "face" gap may be easier than understanding the difference between the Eastern and the Western sense of "face". The ESL teacher must develop strategies to help students to gain "face" when speaking English and to relieve their fear of "face loss" in English speaking contexts. In Japan, La Forge (1975) developed a strategy to reduce the silences and to increase the speaking among female Japanese students in junior college. Adapting methods developed by Curran (1976), he designed group and pair activities that gave his students a chance to practice language among themselves before using a new structure in front of the class or teacher. This practice gave the students time to gain "face" (Americans might say to gain confidence) in English in a situation with a lower threat (in front of fewer people). The more such practice students had, the greater their sense of gaining "face" became, and as a result, the more confident they became about speaking in class with the teacher in whole group instruction. In short, students who use silence to avoid the loss of "face" may be problematic for the ESL teacher not used to this kind of academic behavior. Overcoming this problem means that the ESL teacher should first organize tasks that are perceived by students as non-threatening to their "face". The two least threatening task structures teachers can incorporate are pair work and small-group work. By moving from pair to small group, and finally to whole class work, ESL teachers can help their East Asian students gain "face" in English before others. Over time this strengthening of "face" in English will result in fewer silences and will enable your students to participate in classes in a more active manner. In other words, within the target culture, your East Asian students will abandon the use of the native culture, the "face-saving" strategy of silence, and develop western "facegaining" strategies.

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

163

Toward an anthropology of ESL The preceding analyses of teaching across academic cultures had a dual purpose: first, to show how much ESL teachers can learn about their students' academic cultures, and second, to suggest that the more ESL teachers know about their students' academic cultural backgrounds, the more effective both will become in the classroom. The three examples of academic cultural components served to demonstrate how teaching across academic cultures varies, as well as to illustrate the need for ESL professionals to learn about the anthropology of education as it applies to classroom instruction. The examples identified cultural concepts that are important in schooling. More importantly, they allowed us to see their impact on classroom behavior. Neither the ESL travelogues nor the literature on crosscultural communication adequately addresses these areas of concern. In conclusion, ESL teachers need to know what their students expect of schooling, and be willing to adjust their teaching styles in accordance to these expectations (Furey 1986). In addition, ESL teachers in ΕΑΡ or ITA programs need to know about differences across academic culture in order to know what and how to teach students about American academic culture. Being sensitive to the students' culture is necessary, but clearly not enough (McGroarty & Galvan 1985); knowing about American culture and how to teach it properly is essential, but also not enough; and learning about crosscultural communication in non-academic contexts is desirous, but this too is not enough. What is needed is a deep understanding of students' academic culture, especially the meanings of and the behaviors of appropriate classroom teaching and learning. The anthropology of education provides a rich source on information about academic culture throughout the world. For example, this field of inquiry has provided insights into how differences between cultural groups who must study and learn together promote or hinder learning (Trueba, Guthrie, & Au 1981; Erickson 1987). From this perspective, the examples in this paper are part of an applied anthropology of education for the ESL classroom. At the same time, we need more than just additional studies in this applied anthropology of education for the ESL classroom. As Politzer (1954) pointed out three decades ago, simple intellectual knowledge about culture is not enough. ESL teachers need a "visceral as well

164

James H. Robinson

as rational knowledge" of cultural differences (Archer 1984:176). In other words, ESL teachers need an affective as well as a cognitive understanding of how culturally based values are expressed in classroom behaviors. ESL teacher preparation programs would do well to incorporate experiential approaches to this study of "teaching across cultures". There are a number of cross-cultural communication packages, such as Ba-Fa Ba-Fa (Shirts 1977) and Crosstalk (Twitchin 1979) that help address problems of cross-cultural understanding at both the affective and cognitive levels, but they fall short in the area of academic contexts. The videotape, Cross-cultural Dynamics of the Classroom with Foreign Students as Teaching Assistants, (Dege 1980) is a good example of what can be done to help ITA students learn about teaching in American academic settings. Archer's "cultural bump" pedagogy (1984) offers an interesting way for practicing ESL teachers to turn the behaviors of academic culture shock in the ESL classroom into second culture learning. In short, ESL teacher preparation programs need two elements: 1) research reports that provide cognitive understanding, and 2) activities that lead to affective acceptance. The resulting cross-cultural understanding of the differences in academic culture should contribute to more effective teaching and learning within the ESL classroom. With this anthropological view of the ESL classroom, ESL teachers could make further insights into the anthropology of education for themselves and for the rest of us who teach across academic cultures, as they can become anthropologists for their own classrooms. References Abraham, B., and B. Plakans 1987 Evaluating a testing/training program for non-native teaching assistants. Paper presented at the 21st Annual TESOL Convention, Miami, FL. Archer, C. 1984 Culture bump and beyond. In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. 170-178). New York: Cambridge University Press. Balhorn, M., and J. Schneider 1987 Challenges of teaching EFL in Korean universities. TESOL Newsletter, 2 J (5), 15-19. Bras well, J., and G. Green 1987 Foreign TAs: Which test to administer^. Paper presented at the 21st Annual TESOL Convention, Miami, FL.

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

165

Brown, P., and S. Levinson 1978 Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness (pp. 56-289). New York: Cambridge University Press. Byrd,P. 1986 Barriers to cross-cultural communication in English-as-a-second-language programs in the United States. In P. Byrd (ed.), Teaching across cultures in the university ESL program (pp. v-x). Washington, D.C.: NAFSA. Chance, N. 1987 Chinese education in a village setting. In G. Spindler (ed.), Interpretive ethnography of education: At home and abroad (pp. 221-248). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cleverley, J. 1985 The schooling of China: Tradition and modernity in Chinese education. Boston: George Allen and Unwin. Condon, J. 1984 Good neighbors: Communicating with the Mexicans. Washington, D.C.: Intercultural Press. Condon, J., and K. Kurata 1974 In search of what 's Japanese about Japan. Tokyo: Shufunotomo. Constantinides, J., and P. Byrd 1986 Foreign TA's: What's the big problem. Journal of International Student Personnel, III (I), 21-32. Cowan, J.R., R.L. Light, B.E. Mathews and G.R. Tucker 1979 English teaching in China: A recent survey. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 465-482. Crane, P.S. 1967 Korean patterns. Seoul, Korea: Taewon. Curran,C.A. 1976 Counseling-learning in second languages. Apple River, ILL: Apple River Press. Dege,D. 1980 Manual to accompany five "cross-cultural" videotapes. (Available from NAFSA, Washington, D.C.) Erickson, F. 1987 Transformation and school success: The politics and culture of educational achievement. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 335-356. Field, M. 1984 A psycholinguistic model of the Chinese ESL reader. In P. Larson, E. Judd & D. Messerschmitt (eds.), On TESOL '84: A brave new world for TESOL (pp. 171-182). Washington, D.C.: TESOL. Flechette,E. 1987 Some aspects of Saudi culture. In C. Cargill (ed.), A TESOL professional anthology: Culture (pp. 61-72). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook.

166

James H. Robinson

Furey, P. 1986

A framework for cross-cultural analysis of teaching methods. In P. Byrd (ed.), Teaching across cultures in the university ESL program (pp. 15-28). Washington, D.C.: NAFSA. Gage, N.L., and D.C. Berliner 197 5 Educational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally. Goffman, E. 1967 Interaction rituals: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine. Hou, Z.M. 1987 English teaching in China: Problems and perspectives. TESOL Newsletter, 21 (3), 25 -27. Hu, H.C. 1944 The Chinese concept of 'face'. American Anthropologist, 46, 45-64. Johns, A.M. 1987 Our students, ethnography and university culture. EFS/E-SC Newsletter, 5 ( l ) , \-2. Kang, S.P. 1972 The East Asian culture and its transformation in the West. Seoul, Korea: American Studies Institute. Kaplan, R. 1966 Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16,1-20. La Forge, P. 1975 Research profiles in community language learning. Apple River 111: Counseling-Learning Institutes. Light, T. 1978 Foreign language teaching in the People's Republic of China. In C. Blatchford & J. Schachter (eds.), On TESOL 78: EFL policies, programs, practices (pp. 90-98). Washington, D.C.: TESOL. Lin,Y.T. 1935 My country and my people. Taipei, Taiwan: Mei Ya. MacMahon, H. 1975 The scrutable Oriental. Seoul, Korea: Sejong. Maley, A. 1984 XANADU - "A miracle of rare device": The teaching of English in China. In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. 102-111). New York: Cambridge University Press. Martin, E.M., Y.H. Lee, and S.U. Chang 1967 A Korean-English dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press. McGroarty, M., and J. Galvan 1985 Culture as an issue in second language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed.), Beyond basics: Issues and research in TESOL (pp. 81-95). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Mestenhauser, J. 1988 Concepts and theories of culture learning. In J. Mestenhauser, G. Marty & I. Steglitz (eds.), Culture, learning, and the disciplines (pp. 133-167). Washington, D.C.: NAFSA.

Across academic cultures: An anthropology ofESL

167

Morain, G. 1984 Kinesics and cross-cultural understanding. In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. 64-67). New York: Cambridge University Press. Osterloh, K. 1984 Intercultural differences and communicative approaches to foreignlanguage teaching in the Third World. In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. 77-84). New York : Cambridge University Press. Park, M.S. 1979 Communication styles in two different cultures: Korean and American. Seoul, Korea: Han Shin. Parker, O.et al. 1984 Cultural clues to the Middle Eastern student. In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. 94-101). New York: Cambridge University Press. Pialorsi, F. 1984 Toward an anthropology of the classroom: An essay on foreign teaching assistants and U.S. students. In K. Bailey, et al. (eds.), Foreign teaching assistants in U.S. universities (pp. 16-21). Washington: NAFSA. Politzer, R. 1954 Developing cultural understanding through foreign language study. In H.J. Mueller (ed.), Report of the fifth annual round table meeting on linguistics and language teaching (pp. 99-105). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Richmond, K. 1987 Cross-cultural coping: Suggestions for Anglo teachers of ESLto Native Americans. In C. Cargill (ed.), A TESOL professional anthology: Culture (pp. 21-32). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook. Robinson, J. 1978 Modern education in Korea? Korean Educational Development, 2, 1980 1982

Spare the rod and spoil the culture. Korea Quarterly, 1 (3), 6-20. Social typing in Korean schools: The effects of differential teacher interactional styles (Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43/44 3562A. 1988 ITA training needs: Evidence from a case study. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Southeast TESOL Conference, Orlando, FL. Rohlen, T.P. 1 983 Japan 's high schools. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Shaw, P.A., and E.M. Garate 1 984 Linguistics competence , communicative need s, and university pedagogy : Toward a framework for TA training. In K. Bailey et al. (eds.), Foreign teaching assistants in U.S. universities. Washington, D.C.: NAFSA. Shirts, R. 1977 Ba fa bafa. Del Mar, CA: Simile II.

168

James H. Robinson

Singleton,!. 1967 Nichu: A Japanese school. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Spindler, G., and L. Spindler (eds.) 1987 Interpretive ethnography of education: A t home and abroad. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Tanner, M., B. Hoekje, and K. Miller 1987 The foreign TA: Establishing authority in the classroom. Paper presented at the 21st Annual TESOL Convention, Miami, FL. Trueba, H., G. Guthrie, and K. Au 1981 Culture and the bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Twitchin, J. (Director) 1979 Crosstalk. [Film/video]. London: BBC. Utley, J. 1987 English language teaching in China. TESOL Newsletter, 21 (4), 6. Valdes.J. 1986 Preface, In J. Valdes (ed.), Culture bound: Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching (pp. vii-xi). New York: Cambridge University Press. Yang, M.C. 1970 A Chinese village: Taitou, Shantung Province. In H. Linguist (ed.). Education: Readings in the process of cultural transmission (pp. 115120). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Zukowski/Faust, J. 1984 Problems and strategies: An extended training program for foreign teaching assistants. In K. Bailey, et al. (eds.), Foreign teaching assistants in U.S. universities (pp. 76-88). Washington: NAFSA.

Part III Research in the second language classroom

Introduction

These papers examine the trends in second language classroom research which amplify some of the ideas noted in the chapters on pedagogy. Most striking is the importance of classroom interaction as not only a central tenet of methodology but as a focus for research. Current classroom investigations have moved beyond the interaction analysis of the 1960's to incorporate insights from diverse branches of linguistics and psychology. Two of the papers discuss trends in techniques for second language research. Donna Johnson notes that one of the major developments in research has been the detailed study of classroom interaction, including both observational data and studies of subjective reports of social and affective perceptions of participants carried out through sophisticated quantitative and qualitative methods. Arnulfo Ramirez surveys the different approaches to the use of discourse analysis as a means for understanding instruction in second language classrooms and demonstrates its value in identifying communicative teaching. The final three chapters discuss methodological guidelines that have grown out of research. In enumerating the characteristics of children's peer interaction that encourage second language development, Scott Enright explains how research on language acquisition and child development has contributed to knowledge of the processes involved in language mastery. Elizabeth Whalley shows that research on children's literature provides a strong rationale for employing such literature with second language learners. Finally, Robert DeVillar traces the connection between use of small groups in computer instruction and provision of instructional contexts which support second language development.

Some observations on progress in research in second language learning and teaching

Donna M. Johnson

Introduction To provide an overview of research completed during the 1970s, Robert Politzer wrote a chapter entitled "Effective Language Teaching: Insights from Research" (Politzer 1981). In that chapter, he provided an assessment of the state of the art in research on second language teaching. He analyzed the contributions of the major paradigms for research on language teaching from the 1960s through the end of the 1970s, explaining the insights gained from each type of research. He chose to focus on research that related the processes of classroom teaching to student outcomes. Based on his assessment of the state of the art, he made a number of predictions and suggestions for research in the 1980s. In this chapter I assess whether, and in what ways, several of his predictions and suggestions for future research have been realized in classroom studies conducted in the 1980s. I focus on three themes that emerge from Politzer's discussion and that are reflected in directions taken in research in the 1980s: (a) the theoretical bases for second language classroom research; (b) a focus on both the social and personal nature of learning in formal contexts; and (c) expanded quantitative and qualitative methodological approaches employed in second language teaching and learning research. In each section I first present some of the insights and recommendations that Politzer put forth. I then examine progress made toward these goals in studies in the early and mid-1980s and provide examples of studies that illustrate the nature of this progress.

174

Donna M. Johnson

Putting aside the teaching/learning dichotomy Politzer, in his (1981) article, first provided a brief summary of the major outcomes of large-scale studies of the 1960s that compared methodological and other teaching variables. He pointed out that the findings were not very conclusive, primarily because it is fruitless to operate on the assumption that what is good for one learner in one context is good for another in another context. In the 1970s the emphasis in second language research shifted to a focus on the learning process. Politzer documented this shift by conducting a content analysis of journals to determine the relative numbers of articles focusing on learning and teaching. The journals he analyzed were the four major U.S. journals that published research in foreign language and second language teaching: the TESOL Quarterly, Language Learning, Foreign Language Annals, and The Modern Language Journal. He determined the frequency of data-based articles addressing foreign language learning processes (including, for example, pupil errors, aptitudes, learning styles, etc.) and foreign language teaching (including an independent teaching variable). The data showed a trend toward learning-oriented over teaching-oriented research. Of the 1,146 articles published in these journals from 1970 through 1979, only 56 were devoted to research on teaching variables. Of these, the most prevalent general topics were the benefits of immersion and bilingual education, and the benefits of individualized instruction over inflexible, lockstep instruction. Politzer noted that very few of these 56 studies, however, examined teaching as a classroom process or isolated the very specific kinds of variables that classroom teachers could control. About twice as many research articles of the 1970s addressed research on learning. From his analysis, Politzer concluded, "The 1970s were clearly the decade of the 'focus on the learner'. The overall message of the research effort of the 1970s is the importance of understanding the learning process (1981:26)". Politzer then predicted that research of the 1980s would focus on teaching, but teaching processes based on a theory of learning.

Observations on progress in second language research

175

Theoretical bases for classroom research Thus after the rather unproductive large scale comparisons of teaching methods of the 1960s, and after a decade of focusing on the learner during the 1970s, Politzer recommended that research on teaching should turn toward studies of teaching that are related to models of second language learning. He stated, "Teaching research related to a model of learning is the next logical step in foreign language education" (1981:32). Happily there has been much progress in this area in the 1980s. Theories of second language acquisition, particularly input theories (Krashen 1982, 1985;Gass & Madden 1985) and discourse/interaction theories (Ellis 1985; Hatch, Flashner & Hunt 1986; Long 1985; Pica 1987; Varonis & Gass 1985; Wells 1981, 1986), have informed research and practice at all levels. Much research on teacher talk, for example, has been linked to input theories (see Chaudron 1988 for a review). Krashen's theories have had wide appeal to teachers, particularly those working with elementary- and secondary-school second language learners who are acquiring English in the host environment. Teaching methods tied to input theory (Krashen 1985), such the Natural Approach (Krashen & Terrell 1983) and its adaptations (RichardAmato 1988), have influenced ESL teachers in bilingual education programs (California State Department of Education 1986) and many other settings. Input theories have had an influence on foreign language educators as well, although to a lesser extent (see O'Maggio 1986, for example, for a critique). Discourse /interaction theory. In the 1980s however, the theoretical focus on the role of input, which is teacher-centered, evolved to an focus on communicative interaction, emphasizing the active role of the student. Discourse-based second language acquisition theories attempt to account for the ways that communicative interaction can contribute to second language learning (Ellis 1985; Hatch, Flashner & Hunt 1986; Long 1985; Pica 1987; Varonis &Gass 1985). Theorists claim that when second language users communicate with an interlocutor with a mutual goal of understanding one another, both partners negotiate the meaning of their messages by modifying the interactional structure of the conversation. As a result of these interactional modifications aimed at achieving understanding, second language users manage to comprehend aspects of language beyond their current level of competence. It is claimed that they internalize this new knowledge

17 6

Donna M. Johnson

and ultimately incorporate it into their own written and oral production. If comprehension of linguistic input is a necessary condition for second language acquisition (as Krashen 1985 claims), then interactional modifications, through which communicators come to better understand one another, should contribute to second language acquisition. This theory provided a basis for much research in the 1980s in second language development that occurs through both writing and conversation. Politzer (1981) pointed out that research on teaching based on a model of learning allows researchers to arrive at cumulative results. He suggested that series of small-scale experiments based on the same model fo learning be conducted and related to each other (1981:32). Discourse/interaction theory did, in fact, spurred a series of small-scale studies focused primarily on examining and refining the theory and, perhaps secondarily, on improving teaching practices that promote acquisition through interaction. Studies of the benefits of negotiated interaction represent the major realization of Politzer's call for a series of small-scale studies based on a theory of learning.

Studies of classroom interaction I will briefly discuss two studies of this type. One deals with oral interaction, while the other examines written conversation. Pica, Young, and Doughty (1987) in one of a series of related studies, examined a link in this chain of claims regarding the benefits of negotiated interaction for second language acquisition. The purpose of their study was to determine whether input that is modified through native speaker/non-native speaker (NS/NNS) interaction results in greater comprehension than does input that is premodified. In a small experiment (n = 16) simulating a classroom environment, they examined intermediate adult ESL students' comprehension of instructions for placing objects on a board under two conditions. In the first condition a native speaker read a linguistically premodified script of instructions to the subjects. Input premodifications included reducing syntactic complexity (number of S-nodes per T-unit), increasing the number of words per instruction, and repeating content words. In this condition subjects could not interact with the native speaker reading the instructions. In the second condition, however, subjects were read an unmodified version of the instructions and were en-

Observations on progress in second language research

177

couraged to interact and negotiate meaning with the native speaker to achieve comprehension. The researchers found that, as predicted, greater comprehension resulted from the discourse modified through interaction; that is, subjects in the second condition were able to place more items correctly on the board. More importantly, Pica, Young, and Doughty found that redundancy in input was an important factor contributing to comprehension, while syntactic complexity made little difference in comprehension. While this study was experimental, with an emphasis on outcomes, other researchers have used very different approaches to examine second language learning through negotiated interaction. A discourse analytic study of second language writing by Peyton and MackinsonSmyth (1989) provides an interesting example of research that examines the process of negotation. This study, a result of researcher/teacher collaboration, illustrates potential benefits of written conversational interaction for second language learning. Peyton and MackinsonSmyth show how two second language writers negotiate meaning as they engage in a computer-based written conversation over a local area network (LAN) in their elementary school classroom. The more proficient of the two girls initiates topics and modifies her language so that the two can understand one another. The less proficient user of English learns words and expressions from her partner in context, and is able to use them appropriately right away in her own written production. The girls use their first language (in this case American Sign Language) as a resource for negotiation of meaning in English: that is, the less proficient English user uses ASL to request the English version of words from her conversational partner. Peyton and Mackinson-Smyth do not provide traditional outcome measures in this study. Rather, they provide examples of how the use of new lexical items can occur through a process of meaningful, negotiated written interaction. Because students print their written conversations and later discuss and edit them, it is assumed that much of what they learn is retained.

Limits in interaction theory Each of these studies is based on a discourse/interaction theory of second language learning and each makes a significant contribution. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that the theory is limited and is not without major flaws. Most important, the theory is not

178

Donna M. Johnson

a comprehensive, general theory of second language acquisition; it is quite narrowly focused. It does not address the extremely complex and interrelated social, cognitive, and linguistic factors involved in second language acquisition in varying contexts. Rather, the theory complements other narrowly focused theories and more general theories (see, for example, Beebe 1987; McLaughlin 1987; Gardner 1985;Spolsky 1988; Stern 1983). The work of several scholars points out some of the specific problems with the theory. Saville-Troike's research (1988), as described below, illustrates how private speech contributes to language learning for children who go through a silent period. For these children, learning progresses without overt verbal interaction. This work refutes any strong claim that acquisition occurs only through negotiated verbal interaction. Another claim, that comprehension increases as the amount of negotiation increases, has been appropriately challenged by Aston (1986), who illustrates that negotiation does not necessarily lead to comprehension and, in fact, sometimes signals severe problems in mutual comprehension. Other problems with the theory are that in interactive communication with second language learners, native speaker interlocutors often oversimplify language or content (SchinkeLlano 1986) and/or "talk down" to learners (Lynch 1988). Learners, for their part, may avoid negotiating meaning in order to save face (Kramsch 1985). Moreover, research (Lautamatti 1987) on written texts indicates that when teachers modify a text with the intent to simplify it, they can actually complicate its information structure. Rather than enhancing learning, then, these problems in negotiating input can detract from learning by limiting the richness of the input data, by reducing comprehension, and by introducing negative affective orientations toward the communicative situation. In addition, for advanced learners, there is little empirical support for the subsequent learning of new language encountered in negotiated interaction. Despite the restricted scope and the limitations of the theory, and the flaws in its claims, it is an important one. To the extent that communicative interaction can and does plays a significant role in second language learning, studies of negotiated interaction in classroom situations should continue to be one important line of inquiry in classroom second language and literacy development. These studies can be linked to one another as well as to more general theories of language learning.

Observations on progress in second language research

179

Toward a balanced view of the social and personal nature of second language learning In addition to the growth of classroom studies with a stronger foundation in second language acquisition/learning theory, classroom research in the 1980s has moved toward a more balanced view of the social and personal nature of learning. Politzer stressed that second language teaching is embedded in a social context that affects individuals in different ways. He suggested a shift from the process-product paradigm in research in teaching to a mediating process paradigm. As he explained : "Instead of simply studying the effects of teaching procedures or teacher-pupil interactions on learner outcomes, the researcher must also take into account the specific pupil behaviors or reactions that account for pupil learning" (Politzer 1981:32). In his discussion of the problems associated with interpreting research findings, Politzer emphasized that it is not fruitful to make generalizations across teaching situations and across learners. Inappropriate generalizing has been and remains a persistent problem in second language research. In fact, the contribution of the aptitude/treatment interaction (ATI) (Hauptman 1971) and attitude/treatment interaction studies (Tang 1974) of the 1970s was to identify learner characteristics that interact with teaching variables, showing how learners react differently to different teaching situations. Researchers in the 1980s have abandoned the old and naive search for the average effects of the one best method of second language teaching. They have, instead, focused more attention on how the social contexts for learning affect and interact with the individual characteristics, strategies, and processes of learners as they engage in using and learning a second language in school settings. These processes and strategies have been shown to vary widely among second language speakers and writers in different contexts (Wong Fillmore 1983; Hudelson 1989). During the 1980s we have arrived at a more balanced view, then, of the individual and social nature of learning. I will briefly discuss two studies that provide examples of recent insights into the social and personal nature of learning. A study of the private speech of young language learners by Saville-Troike (1988) illustrates how children use language in the service of intrapersonal goals, while Goldstein's (1987) study of language preferences of high school, second language learners addresses interpersonal relationships and the social-psychological nature of language learning goals.

180

Donna M. Johnson

Saville-Troike's study provides one of the best illustrations of the personal side of second language development in childhood. She set out to determine the nature of second language learners' private speech and to analyze ways private speech can reveal the use of learning strategies that contribute to children's acquisition of English. The children she observed were speakers of Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. Working in both nursery school and elementary school settings, she and her colleagues used wireless microphones to tape record the naturally occurring private speech of nine children ranging in age from 3 ;3 to 83- They audiotaped and videotaped the children over a period of several months. Saville-Troike found that three of the children were "other-directed" in their early social orientation and did not go through a silent period. The other six — the majority of children - were "inner-directed", reflective children who went through silent periods ranging from 5 to 23 weeks. One child, in fact, remained silent and learned no English. During the silent period the five who did learn English used virtually no overt English speech with others but did continue to interact nonverbally with English speakers and with their first language peers using their first language. For five of these six children, the nature of their private speech indicated that they were actively engaged in using the second language for intrapersonal cognitive purposes in ways that contributed to learning. For example, they used strategies such as repeating other's utterances, chanting phrases (illustrating attention to and awareness of morphological patterns), creating new words with English phonological structure, recalling meaningful portions of scripts for events, and rehearsing utterances for later social performance for the teacher. As Saville-Troike states, these findings illustrate metalinguistic awareness of sound, form, and meaning and suggest that, when second language learning is at issue, some children exercise self-regulatory control of learning strategies at a younger age than expected for other domains of knowledge (1988:587). The results have implications for interaction theories of second language acquisition. They illustrate that the kinds of interactions that can contribute to second language acquisition are not necessarily two-way verbal interactions. This study illustrates important aspects of the intrapersonal side of child second language learning about which we previously had little, if any, information. Implications for teaching are to expect that many learners will go through a silent period, and to provide

Observations on progress in second language research

181

opportunities for meaningful first language verbal interaction as well as meaningful second language nonverbal interaction, without demands to speak, understanding that most children are engaged in attending to sound, form, and meaning with the intent to learn to communicate with English speakers in order to participate more fully in school life. While this naturalistic work in private speech has helped to illuminate the personal strategies of learners, sociolinguistic research has helped shed light on the social factors that influence second language learning. Goldstein's (1987) study of target language varieties illustrates the importance of social psychological and affective factors in the second language acquisition of adolescents. She provided some evidence that the high school second language learners with whom she worked were well aware of variation in the target language (English) and had preferences for the varieties they wanted to speak and learn. As one boy stated when asked about his language goals, ". . . to the right people you talk the right English" (Goldstein 1987:429). Standard English was not necessarily the target language, or the only target language for her adolescent learners. Some of her students preferred Black English over Standard English as a target language and some preferred to know and use both. Goldstein investigated the relationship between two variables, extent of contact and feelings of identification with black Americans, and the frequency with which subjects used two features of black English: the negative concord (example: They won't tell nobody else) and distributive be (indicating intermittent rather than permanent qualities; example: You sometimes be scared). Her subjects were 28 Spanish-speaking, male high school students. The boys, 15-19 years of age, were advanced users of English as a second language, who had lived in New York for at least two years and had not studied English before their arrival. While Goldstein found no relationship between her measure of identification with blacks and the use of the two features of black English, she did find statistically significant relationships between a measure of contact with black friends/acquaintances and frequency of use of these features in an informal interview in which they discussed friends and fear of death. The boys with extensive or medium contact did not use negative concord categorically, however, but variably. The importance of the study for teachers is that some deviations from Standard Engish in a learners' language may not be errors at all, but features of the variety of the target language that they choose to use.

182

Donna M. Johnson

These two studies show that students' second language learning takes place in a social context that affects different learners in different ways. For many of the learners in Saville-Troike's study of children's private speech, their second language use went "underground", but it reflected what occurred through first language interactions and in second language interactions that the learners observed or in which they participated nonverbally. Goldstein's study illustrates the importance of social psychological factors in adolescents' variable use of target language forms. As these and other studies in the 1980s have shown, both child and adolescent learners have personal goals and reactions to language use situations, and they engage in personal stragegies to use and acquire a second language in the classroom and in the broader social environment.

Advances in qualitative and quantitative approaches to second language research A recognition of the complex and interacting variables involved in the social and personal sides of language use and learning has paralleled important advances in research method that allow researchers to examine these complexities more adequately. In the 1960s and 1970s quantitative methods were favored. Much emphasis was placed on constructing tightly controlled experiments. While that goal remains, the options for research method have expanded dramatically in the 1980s. The field now embraces a wider repertoire of quantitative and qualitative methods (Chaudron 1988; Wittrock 1986). Politzer (1981) proposed the continued use of experimental studies, but of experimental studies that also examined the processes and factors that mediate learning. He also called for approaches involving art or literary criticism, linguistic analyses of classroom discourse, sociolinguistic studies of the teaching process, and ethnographic methods. While warning against "blitzkrieg ethnographies", he stated, " . . . ethnographic studies hold out considerable promise for a real understanding of what happens in classrooms. Ethnographic research leading to understanding of the cultural processes of second language teaching and learning and a resulting increase of second language teaching efficiency should be among the attainable goals of the 1980s" (Politzer 1981:30). These goals have only begun to be attained in the 1980s.

Observations on progress in second language research

183

Qualitative approaches. The use of ethnographic methods in linguistically and culturally diverse classrooms (Au 1980; Cazden 1987; Heath 1983; Mehan, Moll & Reil 1985) has gained in importance in work in education in general, but these methods have been less widely used in second and foreign language classroom research, particularly with students beyond the elementary-school level. Ethnographic work is increasing, however. Studies in second language teaching draw on research traditions from the social sciences as well as from education, linguistics, and the humanities. While some suggest (Swales 1988; Henning 1986) that second language research is shifting from a humanities to a social science orientation, with a concommitant rise in quantitative research, the influence of educational research is a powerful one. In educational research, methodological changes have brought a larger role for ethnographic, interpretive, qualitative studies of teaching and learning. As an example of ethnographically oriented research that focuses squarely on second language teaching, I have selected Enright's (1986) study of a teacher's modifications of her input because it provides "a real understanding of what happens in classrooms" (Politzer, 1981:30). I have also selected this study because it describes patterns of behavior that are under the control of the teacher, a goal of importance to Politzer and to most teachers. In Enright's study he describes "the way it is in one ESL classroom" (1986:119). He documents how an elementary teacher, Molly, adapted her teaching when she switched from teaching in an allEnglish environment to teaching in a classroom that included both native English-speaking students and ESL students of a wide variety of proficiency levels. Using data collected through a variety of techniques, including naturalistic observations, interviews, and the gathering of teachers' plan and journals as well as students' work, Enright examined the range of interactive events that Molly organized for her class. His analysis focused on specifying patterns of adaptations. He found and describes a variety of general instructional adaptations, such as new grouping strategies and input strategies. For example, discourse strategies that Molly used included repeating, recycling, and rephrasing. A rich description of each strategy is provided with examples that clearly illustrate how classroom language use was meaningful and focused on activities in which the teacher and students were engaged. Enright's notion of "contextual contrast" is both theoretically important and highly practical. He reports that Molly's way of dealing

184

Donna M. Johnson

with the diversity in her classroom was to "contextualize and recontextualize her input and her students' own language use both within and across her classroom events" (1986:148). First, she established predictable classroom events, allowing children to take on increasingly linguistically demanding roles within the events. Second, she created new contexts within predictable events. Third, she used similar language across classroom events, each providing a different context, meaningful, but with differing degrees of abstraction. More ethnographic/qualitative studies of this nature will add rich insights to our knowledge of teachers' changing thought processes and the nature of second language teaching in various contexts. Quantitative approaches. More recent quantitative research methods have also enriched second language research. Quantitative methods generally involve the quantification and systematic measurement of variables, experimental and quasi-experimental designs, statistical analysis, and the use of mathematical models and causal inferencing (Linn, 1986:92). Since the 1970s researchers using quantitative methods have moved toward an attempt to achieve greater validity by accounting for more variables within a single study. In the 1980s, than, researchers tended to study more complex clusters of educational variables (Kamil, Langer, & Shanahan 1985:107). For example, Gardner's (1985) social psychological research on the learning of French as a foreign language involves examining relationships among large numbers of variables using sophisticated causal modeling techniques and computer programs such as LISREL (Linear Structural Relations Analysis). Ely's (1986) study of student participation in first-year university Spanish courses provides a good example of a classroom study employing complex quantitative methods to examine relationships among a number of social and affective factors in the foreign language classroom. Ely used causal modeling to study the relationships among students' oral participation in the second language classroom, their affective characteristics, and learning outcomes. As Ely notes, it is commonly assumed that extraversion is an affective characteristic that promotes second language proficiency, but research results on the issue have been mixed. Therefore, Ely chose to measure risktaking, sociability, and discomfort in the context of classroom interaction, rather than as general personality traits. He predicted that these measures would be positively associated with measures of voluntary oral participation. He obtained measures of risktaking, sociability,

Observations on progress in second language research

185

and discomfort on his 75 subjects through the use of a questionnaire. He also obtained measures of a number of other variables including motivation, class attitude, concern for grade, and foreign language aptitude. Direct observations were conducted of classroom participation, which was defined for this study as self-initiated oral contributions. Several proficiency measures were also administered. Ely found that language class risk taking positively predicted classroom participation. Classroom participation, in turn, positively predicted oral correctness. However, language class discomfort was a significant negative predictor of language class risktaking and language class sociability. He suggests that some students must be made to feel more psychologically comfortable in class before they will take linguistic risks, and that teachers should devise and test the effectiveness of strategies for lessening language class discomfort (Ely 1986: 23). Ely appropriately points out the limitations of his study, and reminds the reader that correlation does not imply causation. Nevertheless, anxiety, as addressed in this study, in the work of Gardner and his colleagues (see Gardner 1985 for a review), and in work on related phenomena, such as communication anxiety (Ross & Reitzel 1988), writer's block (Jones 1985), second language writing apprehension (Gungle & Taylor 1989), has received considerable attention in recent research on second language classrooms. We now need additional research on the effects of teaching approaches designed to reduce excessive, nonfacilitative apprehension of students engaged in using a second language. In quantitative studies such as Ely's and those of Gardner, the attempt to systematically account for a richer array of interacting variables has served to improve the ecological validity of the studies making them more meaningful to teacher readers. At the same time, teachers are benefitting from the rich descriptions provided in recent ethnographic and interpretive research. These are positive developments. Politzer's hope for a solid place for ethnographic research as an attainable goal of the 1980s, however, has not been fully realized in research on second language teaching even though significant progress has been made. The next decade should bring increased numbers of ethnographic studies of second language learners of all age groups.

186

Donna M. Johnson

Conclusion In this chapter I have discussed several ways in which Politzer's suggestions for research in the 1980s have been realized in classroom studies conducted in the early and mid-1980s. I have focussed on three themes that I drew from his discussion and that seem to be important in recent directions in second language research. First, studies of teaching based on theories of second language acquisition are accumulating. One way Politzer's call for classroom studies linked to a model of learning has been realized is in a number of studies based on discourse/interaction theories. These studies are contributing to our knowledge of how communicative interaction, in spoken or written conversations, can contribute to learning. Second, a focus on both the social and personal nature of learning can be seen in a number of studies conducted in the 1980s. Work in individual differences in the learning strategies of children in varying social contexts has made a contribution, as has work in the social psychological orientations of teenagers toward the different varieties of English that they hear, use, and learn. Third, expanded quantitative and qualitative methodological approaches employed in second language teachinglearning research have enriched our options for conducting more meaningful research, for more adequately examining teacher and student reactions and processes as well as outcomes, and for improving the validity of studies. Improved validity makes the research more useful to teachers as they reflect on its meaning for them and modify their own views of effective teaching. References Alatis, I.E., H.B. Altman and P.M. Alatis, (eds.) 1981 The second language classroom: Directions for the 1980's. NY: Oxford University Press. Aston, G. 1986 Trouble-shooting in interaction with learners: The more the merrier? Applied Linguistics, 8, 75-88. Au, K.H. 1980 Participation structures in a reading lesson with Hawaiian children: Analysis of a culturally appropriate instructional event. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 11, 91-115.

Observations on progress in second language research

187

Beebe.L. (ed.) 1988 Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives. NY: Newbury House/Harper & Row. California State Department of Education (ed.) 1986 Sociocultural factors in schooling language minority students. Los Angeles: California State University, Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center. Cazden,C.B. 1987 Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Chaudron,C.

1988 Ellis, R. 1985

Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ely.C. 1986

An analysis of discomfort, risktaking, sociability, and motivation in the second language classroom. Language Learning, 36, 1-25. Erickson, F. 1986 Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock, (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). Enright, D.S. 1986 "Use everything you have to teach English": Providng useful input to young language learners. In P. Rigg & D.S. Enright (eds.), Children and ESL: Integrating perspectives (pp. - ). Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.

Gardner R. 1985 Social psychology and second language learning. London: Edward Arnold. Gass, S.M., and C.G. Madden 1985 Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Goldstein, L.M. 1987 Standard English: The only target for nonnative speakers of English? TESOL Quartely, 21, 417-436. Gungle, B.W., and V. Taylor, 1989 Writing apprehension and ESL writers. In D.M. Johnson & D.H. Roen (eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp. 235-248). NY: Longman. Hatch, E., V. Flaschner and L. Hunt 1986 The experience model and language teaching. In R.R. Day (ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 5-22). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Hauptman, H.C. 1971 A structural approach vs. situational approach to foreign language teaching. Language Learning, 21, 235-244.

188

Donna M. Johnson

Heath, S.B. 1983 Ways with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Henning, G. 1986 Quantitative methods in second language acquisition research. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 701-708. Hudelson,S. 1989 A tale of two children: Individual differences in ESL children's writing. In D.M. Johnson & D.H. Roen (eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp. 84-99). NY: Longman, Inc. Johnson, K. 1988 Mistake correction. ELTJournal, 42, 89-96. Jones, S. 1985 Problems with monitor use in second language composing. In M. Rose (ed.), When a writer can't write (pp. 96-118). New York: Guilford Press. Kamil, M.L., J.A. Langer and T. Shanahan 1985 Understanding research in reading and writing. Boston: Ally n and Bacon. Kramsch, C. 1985 Classroom interaction and discourse options. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 169-183. Krashen, S. 1982 Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergam on Press. 1985 The input hypothesis. NY: Longman. Krashen, S., and T. Terrell 1983 The natural approach. Hayward, CA: Alemany. Lautamatti, L. 1987 Observations on the development of the topic of simplified discourse. In U. Connor & R. Kaplan (eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of second language text (pp. 87-114). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Linn.R.L. 1986 Quantitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock, (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). Long, M. 1985 Input and second language acquisition theory. In S.M. Gass and G.G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 377-393). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Lynch, A.H. 1988 Speaking up or talking down: Foreign learners' reactions to teacher talk. ELT Journal, 42, 109-116. McLaughlin, B. 1987 Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold. Mehan, H., L. Moll and M. Reil 1985 Computers in classrooms: A quasi-experiment in guided change. Final report to the National Institute of Education, June 1985 La Jolla, CA: University of California, San Diego.

Observations on progress in second language research

189

O'Maggio, A.C. 1986 Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Peyton, J.K., and J. Mackinson-Smyth 1989 Writing and talking about writing: Computer networking with elementary students. In D.M. Johnson & D.H. Roen (eds.), Richness in writing: EmpoweringESL students (pp. 100-119). NY: Longman, Inc. Pica, T. 1987 Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8,3-21. Pica. T., R. Young and C. Doughty 1987 The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 737-758. Politzer, R. 1981 Effective language teaching: Insights from reserch. In I.E. Alatis, H.B. Altman, & P.M. Alatis (eds.), The second language classroom: Directions for the 1980's (pp. 23-35). NY: Oxford University Press. Richard-Amato, P. 1988 Making it happen. New York: Longman, Inc. Ross, K.A., and A.C. Reitzel 1988 A relational model for managing second language anxiety. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 437-454. Saville-Troike, M. 1988 Private Speech: Evidence for second language learning strategies during the "silent" period. Journal of Child Language, 15, 567-590. Schinke-Llano, L. 1986 Foreigner talk in joint cognitive activities. In R. R. Day (ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 99-117). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Spolsky, B. 1988 Bridging the gap: A general theory of second language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 377-396. Stern, H.H. 1983 Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swales, J. 1988 20 Years of TESOL Quarterly. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 151 -163. Tang, B.T. 1974 A psycholinguistic study of the relationship between children's ethnic linguistic attitudes and the effectiveness of method used in second language reading instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 8, 233-251. Varonis, E., and S.M. Gass 1985 Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6,11 -90. Wells, G. 1981 Learning through interaction: The study of language development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

190 1986

Donna M. Johnson The meaning makers: Children learning language and using language to learn. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Wolfson, N. 1986 Research methodology and the question of validity. TESOL (Quarterly, 20, 689-699. Wong Fillmore, L. 1983 The language learner as an individual: Implications of research on individual differences for the ESL teacher. In M. Clarke & J. Handscombe (eds.), On TESOL '82: Pacific Perspectives on language learning and teaching (pp. 157-174), Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.

Discourse processes in the second language classroom Arnulf o G. Ramirez Introduction Language in second language classrooms functions both as a system of communication ( a teacher tells the students to open their books, a student asks the teacher for further clarification) and as a means for providing linguistic input (the teacher presents vocabulary and grammatical structures in the context of specific communicative situations/dialogues). Language is used both as process and product since language teachers must utilize the second language and sometimes the first language as the vehicle to teach/explain/practice the target language. The classroom can be seen as a special sociolinguistic setting governed by a set of highly structured turn-taking rules between teachers and pupils. Often, it is the teacher who calls/nominates specific pupils to answer questions that are not genuine requests for information. In recent years the nature of verbal interaction in the second language classrooms has attracted considerable scholarly attention. The classroom has been examined from the perspectives of input and interactional structures (Gass and Madden 1985), the development of conversational competence as a result of instructional activities and learning tasks (Day 1986), types of language learning - incidental versus intentional, metalinguistic awareness, and strategic competence (Lantolf and Labarca 1987), and the development of second language discourse (Fine 1988). Language learning under classroom conditions is a rapidly growing field within the broader concerns of second language acquisition (Faerch and Kasper 1985). Long (1987:97) notes that classroomcentered research which focuses on the teaching and learning processes can provide much needed information "to put modern teaching on a scientific footing". Chaudron (1988) offers in his Second Language classrooms: Research on Teaching and Learning a comprehensive

192

Arnulf o G. Ramirez

synthesis of classroom-based research on such topics as teacher-student classroom interaction, teacher talk, learner behaviors, learning outcomes, and directions for research and teaching. At a more practical level, Malamah-Thomas (1987) guides language teachers toward a more critical appraisal of classroom interaction by asking them to consider the nature of communication in the classroom, examine classroom language from various frameworks and teaching approaches, and explore their own classroom through a series of tasks designed to promote professional development and changes in teaching behaviors. This chapter will examine major aspects of classroom discourse: (1) characteristics of language classrooms, (2) ways of describing language in the classroom, and (3) language teaching approaches and their effect on discourse processes.

Some characteristics of classroom language Classroom language has been described as an exceedingly constrained form of communication, often distinct from conversations between social equals (Stubbs 1976). Pupils, for example, must learn to give appropriate replies to teachers' questions: Teacher: Where do you live, Steve? Student: 35 Lexington Avenue. Teacher: Answer in a complete sentence. Student: I live on 35 Lexington Avenue. Teacher: Good. This example also serves to illustrate the artificial nature of classroom dialogue, especially when questions are asked by the teacher not as "requests for information" but as opportunities to check for the mastery of particular linguistic structures/vocabulary (e.g., / live on . . .11 like to eat. . .). In many classroom situations, students play a passive role, never initiating a discussion and usually speaking only when addressed by the teacher. Some students spend a considerable amount of time learning words and grammatical structures that correspond to a range of communicative situations which pertain to a distinct culture (e.g., ordering a meal in a German restaurant, buying food in open markets in Spain, asking directions from a policeman in Paris). Natural discourse among students can often be reduced to a rehearsal role (e.g., practicing "greetings", "farewells", ways of asking for information or praising

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

193

others) that might become real at a later date when they interact with native speakers in the target country (Kramsch 1985). In second language situations (English as a second language in the United States) students will have the opportunity to engage in authentic communicative situations outside the classroom, negotiating meaning with native speakers, taking turns at speaking, and using different communication strategies to maintain the dialog. The nature of the verbal exchanges between teachers and pupils can be influenced by such factors as lesson content and classroom activities (Green 1983). The language used to greet pupils is different from that required to present a new grammatical point of communicative function. From a sociolinguistic perspective, each language lesson (speech situation) can be seen as consisting of a series of speech events (e.g., greetings, lecture, review, question/answer drills, and role playing situations) with a specific set/range of communicative acts (e.g., greetings, directives, informatives, requests, leave-taking). To accomplish the lesson, various interactional structures (student groupings — teacher with whole class, teacher with small group, pupils in small groups, pupils in pairs, pupils working individually) are used. The following series of lesson events based on Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983:106) is presented in Table 1 to illustrate the nature of classroom discourse with respect to events, interactional sequences, and language functions. Much of the communicative activity in this lesson is teacher-centered and lesson-oriented. Of the 10 lesson events, students interact with students in only two activities (events 6 and 7), and only in one event (7) do students engage in "free fluency" practice. The type of language that is used can be classified according to McTear's (1975) four basic categories: 1. Mechanical, where no exchange of meaning is involved (e.g., event 3). 2.Meaningful, where language usage is contextualized, but no real information is conveyed (e.g., events 4 and 6). 3. Pseudo-communicative, where information is exchange, but in ways that would not likely occur outside the classroom (event 7). 4. Real Communication, which consists of spontaneous natural speech. The extent to which one will find example of "real communication" in the classroom may depend on such factors as the teacher's communicative goals, the students' level of proficiency, and the type of activity - role playing, paired interviews, surveys/polls, or problem solving simulations. The presence of "mechanical" or "pseudo-communicative"

194

Arnulf o G. Ramirez

Table 1. Classroom discourse during a second language lesson Event

Interactional structures

Teacher interacts with whole class, nominates some students to speak;pupils directed to initiate dialogue with others 2. Correction of Teacher interacts with whole homework class, nominates some students to answer questions 3. Pronunciation Teacher interacts with whole practice class, nominates students individually or in group/rows 4. Discussion to in- Teacher interacts with whole class, nominates students to troduce new material — narra- answer questions, pupils can ask teacher questions about tive dialogue, cultural situation topic 5. Presentation of Teacher presents to the whole new material (lan- class (recorded dialogue, guage functions, reading of text, use of visual vocabulary, representations), students grammatical listen and observe, taking structures) notes at times Students work individually, 6. Practice of new material sometimes in groups or pairs; students can solicit help from the teacher Students engage in group ac7. Free fluency tivities (role playing) or work activity in pair situations 1. Greetings and warm-up activity

8. Summary of lesson

9. Homework assignment and references to next lesson 10. Dismissal and leave taking

Language functions Greetings, requests for information, reports, descriptions, expressing emotions Pseudoquestions and replies, corrections, inquiries about possible answers to questions Modeling, repetitions, pseudoquestions and replies, correction of errors Requests for information about topic/situation, explanations, descriptions, reports, expressing opinions and attitudes explanations, descriptions, narrations, translating

Pseudoquestions and replies, directives, suggestions, inquires about possible answers to questions/exercises Interpersonal (greetings, introduction, praising, advising greeting, apologizing, offers) and personal (opinions, attitudes, concerns) and imaginative (creating stories, dialogues) use of language Explanations, narration, Teacher presents to whole questions/answers about class the major linguistic/ cultural points, students listen lesson content and can ask questions for clarification Teacher explains to the whole Directives information class, students listen and can about assignment (suggesask questions for clarification tions, requests, advice)

Teacher speaks to whole class, Leave taking/farewell forsome students respond, some mulas, expressions of perstudents may address each sonal feeling/emotions other From Ramirez (1987:32)

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

195

language may also depend on what features — grammar, vocabulary, functions — are being introduced for the first time and what aspects of language are being reviewed or practiced in different contexts. An important aspect of classroom language is the "tension" that exists between classroom management and target language discourse. Teachers use directives, ask questions, and correct their students in order to accomplish their lessons. At the time, students are asked to engage in "authentic" language functions such as "greetings", "asking for directions", "providing information", "expressing personal feelings" in various sociolinguistic situations — checking-in a hotel, ordering a meal at a restaurant, or getting directions from a police officer — all in the distant target culture. Thus, the foreign language classroom can be seen as "co-existing discourse worlds" (Edmondson 1985) where the target language may serve multiple functions and purposes: the content of instruction, the goal of instruction, the medium of instruction, the medium of classroom management, the medium for non-pedagogical talk, and the medium for practicing the so-called "authentic" language use in specific target culture situations. Teachers appear to make numerous modifications in their discourse presumably to aid learners' comprehension. Chaudron (1988:85) offers the following list of ways that teachers adapt their speech to lower-level second language learners: 1. Rate of speech appears to be slower. 2. Pauses, which may be evidence of the speaker planning more, are possibly more frequent and longer. 3. Pronunciation tends to be exaggerated and simplified. 4. Vocabulary use is more basic. 5. Degree of subordination is lower. 6. More declaratives and statements are used than questions. 7. Teachers may self-repeat more frequently. At the level of discourse, teachers can be observed performing three basic communication moves (Fanselow 1988, based on Bellack 1966) while interacting with their students. 1. Structuring moves by the teacher serve to set the context/direction the discussion should take (e.g., "Now, let's review for the test tomorrow".). 2. Soliciting moves serve to elicit a response from another speaker, usually teacher to pupil (e.g., "Who knows the word for toothpaste in Spanish"?).

196

Amulfo G. Ramirez

3. Responding moves bear a reciprocal relationship to soliciting moves, usually a pupil's answer to a teacher's question (e.g., "Pasta por dientes, Sonora Jones".). 4. Reacting moves serve to modify, clarify, synthesize the preceding utterance and/or to rate the response postiively or negatively (e.g., "No, se dice pasta para los dientes".). Moreover, Chaudron (1988) notes that teachers provide vocabulary and grammatical explanations through the use of such devices as paraphrase, definitions, exemplification, and focusing (e.g., "the expression 'fill-it-up' means . . .").

Ways of describing classroom discourse Descriptions of discourse processes in second language classrooms during the 1970s tended to focus on the ratio of teacher to pupil talk and communicative uses of language, primarily on the part of the teacher (e.g., giving directions, asking questions, praising, criticizing, and accepting). The observational system FLINT (Foreign Language Interaction System) developed by Moskowitz (1971) and based on Flanders (1970) had categories for coding teacher and pupil talk with respect to content, pedagogy, and procedure. It also included categories for quantifying the amount of first language (English) as well as some nonverbal behaviors. Fanselow (1977) developed a more sophisticated system to describe the teaching act. The instrument, called FOCUS (Foci for Observing Communications Used in Settings) included five characteristics: 1. Who communicates? teacher, individual student, group of students or whole class. 2. What is the pedagogical purpose of the communication? to structure, to solicit, to respond, to react (based on the categories from Bellack 1966). 3. What mediums are used to communicate content? linguistic (e.g., aural, visual, written), non-linguistic (e.g., aural, visual, representational, symbolic), para-linguistic (e.g., aural, visual, real, symbolic). 4. How are the mediums used to communicate areas of content? attend, characterize, present (e.g., call words, question, state), relate (explain, interpret), re-present (e.g., combine, imitate, paraphrase, transform).

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

197

5. What areas of content are communicated? language systems (e.g., contextual, grammatical, meaning, speech production), life (e.g., formula, personal, public, skills), procedure (e.g., administration, social behavior, teaching rationale), and subject matter. FOCUS includes over 70 categories and seems to encompass most of the components of speech events included by Hymes (1972) in his ethnography of speaking (e.g., participants, channel, message, purpose). Allwright (1980) proposed to examine classroom interaction in terms of three basic elements: 1. Turn-taking analysis, consisting of twelve categories grouped under the general headings of "turn-getting" and "turn-giving". 2. Topic analysis, uses of the target language (e.g., information, modeling, management). 3. Task analysis, for which a detailed set of categories is not provided, but distinguishes tasks at the levels of turn-taking and topic management, and also at the cognitive level. The system requires the coding of each utterance in the interaction. By taking an extract from a language lesson, Allwright illustrated how the system could reveal useful information about the nature of verbal interaction between the teacher and specific students during brief classroom episodes. The focus of classroom discourse from the perspective of interactional analysis has been criticized on both educational and linguistic grounds (Coulthard 1977; Long 1980). The coding systems, while they may appear to be reliable as far as interrater agreement is concerned regarding the classification of classroom language behaviors in specific communicative categories, tend to concentrate on surface language forms rather than on communicative intent (e.g., using a question, "Why don't you sit down, Jane"? instead of the imperative form "Sit down, Jane"). In addition, it is not clear to what extent the categories (language behaviors) included in the various systems correspond to the findings in second language acquisition research (Long 1980; Ellis 1985). The study of classroom language from a discourse perspective allows for an examination of verbal interactional exchanges between teachers and pupils as well as analysis of the way individual utterances function and are combined to form larger units of discourse. Developments in the sociolinguistic analysis of natural language (Coulthard 1977; Stubbs 1983) have provided a number of discourse categories/levels

198

Arnulf o G. Ramirez

to describe classroom language. The hierarchical system proposed by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) classified classroom discourse at different ranks/levels: LESSON -+ TRANSACTION (expressed in terms of interactional exchanges)-> EXCHANGE (informing, directing or eliciting exchanges involving a turn-taking sequence of two or more participants) -*· MOVE (the contribution of one of the participants involving three classes: opening — initiatory, serving to convey information, a verbal or nonverbal response; answering — occurring in relation to opening moves; and a follow-up, serving to accept, modify or evaluate the speaker's previous contribution) ->· ACT (smallest identifiable unit of discourse behavior within the move category, often in the form of an independent clause and serving a specific linguistic function - question, request, acknowledge, praise, correct). Hernandez (1981) utilized the levels of exchange, move, and act to analyze English as a second language lessons taught in the context of eight bilingual elementary calssrooms. The example that follows (Table 2) represents the application of the system to a segment of the transcript involving the lesson on "adjectives of comparison" taught by one of the teachers in the sample. The teacher initiated the six exchanges, defining the role of the pupil as respondent in the answering move. The opening move consisted of mostly commanding acts, some nominations of specific pupils and one yes/no question. In every exchange the teacher was eliciting a particular response, usually a non-verbal reaction to a command. The teacher's reply (follow-up) to the students' behaviors was an almost ritualistic expression of "very good". The lesson continues following a series of these patterns, allowing for almost no pupil initiation of exchanges and no examples of authentic communication between the teacher-pupils or pupil-pupil. In France, Grandcolas and Soule-Susbielles (1986) modified the Sinclair-Coulthard model (1975) for use in the in-service training of language teachers. In addition to the categories of "lesson" (class), "transaction", "exchange", and "move", the units of "activity" (a didactic task with a specific overall objective — composing a role play in group work) and "episode" (each stage in the carrying-out of an activity — what characters will be needed in role play? who will play what (role?) were added to the framework. In Canada, Fröhlich, Spada, and Allen (1985) developed an instrument designed to highlight differences in the communicative orientation of classroom interaction in various educational settings. The

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

199

Table 2. Discourse processes for a segment of an ESL lesson Exchange type Elicit

Opening move

Act

I want you to come and hold in your hands the ball that is bigger than the toy ball. Raul.

Elicit

Show it to the children.

c

Elicit

I want you to come and hold in your hand the ball that is bigger than the ping-pong ball. Hector.

c

Answering move Act

NV

rea

Very good

NV

rea

Very good

NV

rea

Show it to them.

NV

rea

Elicit

All right. Teresa. Give the ball that is bigger than the pingpong ball to Sylvia.

NV

rea

Okay, that is bigger than the ping-pong ball, isn't it?

Yes

rpl

c = commanding n = nominating q = questioning

Act

f

n

Elicit

Elicit

Follow-up move

NV = non verbal rea = react rpl = reply

Very good

yes, it's bigger

rf

f = feedback rf = reinforce

From Hernandez (1981:147)

instrument referred to as COLT (Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching) consists of two parts: Part A which contains five major parameters of classroom events (Activity, Participant, Organization, Content, Student Modality, and Materials) and Part B which includes seven features of verbal interaction during classroom activities (use of target language, information gap, sustained speech, reaction

200

Arnulfo G. Ramirez

to message/code, incorporation of preceding utterances, discourse initiation, and restriction of linguistic form). The authors note that the instrument cannot answer the question: "What kind of communicative orientation is most beneficial for developing different aspects of seond language proficiency"? Each activity can be categorized into content (language — forms, function, discourse, and sociolinguistic aspects; topics — narrow, limited, broad; topic control), student modality (listening, speaking, reading, writing, or other), participant organization (class, group, individual, or combination of any of these), and materials (type — textbook, audio, visual, pedagogical; use — highly controlled, semi-controlled, minimally controlled). With this framework classroom discourse can be described both in terms of sociolinguistic considerations and educational concerns.

Language teaching approaches and classroom discourse Language teaching approaches can differ in a number of ways: theories of language and language learning; language goals; organization of the syllabus/lessons; role of teachers and students;classroom procedures and techniques; and the use of materials and media. In Community Language Learning (Curran 1976), for example, students pass through five stages of growth, from dependence on the teacher to independence from the teacher. In the first stage the teacher translates in "chunks" what the students want to say in the target language. The students then tape record the "chunks", the conversation is then transcribed, and the transcript becomes the text for several lessons. Classroom discourse is student-centered, based on the needs and interests of the students with the teacher serving as the language counselor. With methodologies such as the Total Physical Response (Asher 1982) and the Comprehension Approach (Winitz 1981), students are silent for an extended period of time. Teachers do most of the talking in the form of commands: "Stand up", "Go to the blackboard and write your name", "Draw a picture of a tree next to a house". Students act out the commands and eventually roles can be reversed. With this approach the use of directives, particularly the imperative form, tends to be the basic discourse feature. Communicative language teaching approaches focus on the uses of language (greetings, suggestions, apologies, directives, and informatives) within a social context (a friend's home, the doctor's office,

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

201

the train station). Students receive practice by interacting with their teacher and peers. Class activities are usually characterized by interactive situations where there is an information gap (one of the speakers knows something the listener does not know — "Where do you live?", "What are your plans for the summer?"). The speaker who wants to obtain this information needs to use the appropriate linguistic forms (grammatical structures, vocabulary) to convey the meaning to the listener. Based on the feedback received from the listener, the speaker may have to negotiate the meaning of the message by paraphrasing, restating, or using non-linguistic resources. Procedures for developing "communicative ability" among second language learners in the ESL classroom have been formulated by Little wood (1981). Classroom activities are organized so that there are both pre-communicative (part-skills language drills) and communicative activities (functional language use and social interaction practice). During the pre-communicative phase, the focus initially is on the linguistic forms/structures of the target language, emphasizing acceptability and/or accuracy. Later, an attempt is made to relate the language forms to their potential functional meanings (e.g., "Shall we go ... ."/"Oh, no, I don't feel like . . . . " = ways of making and rejecting suggestions). During the communicative phase, the learner is placed initially in a "functional" situation, which requires various uses of language: 1. Sharing information with restricted cooperation (e.g., yes/no questions). 2. Sharing information with unrestricted cooperation (e.g., information gap activities — discovering differences). 3. Sharing and processing information (e.g., discuss or evaluate information - pooling information to solve a problem). 4. Processing information (e.g., discuss and evaluate facts in order to solve a problem or reach a decision). The last phase involves social interaction activities which require the learner to pay close attention to the social as well as the functional meanings that language conveys. The communicative activities call for role playing situations through cued dialogues, role playing controlled through information, situations, goals, debate, and improvisation. Some of the activities call for language use in the context of the actual classroom situation, while others use simulation as a means to place the learner in target culture situations. Thus, sequences of discourse activities ranges from the use of mechanical drills in the

202

Amulfo G. Ramirez

pre-communicative phase to the practice of "authentic" language use in specific sociolinguistic situations included during the communicative phase. The communicative language teaching perspective has been extended to the foreign language classroom by Omaggio (1986). She argues that it is possible to developing high levels of communicative abilities among learners by organizing classroom activities around the concept of language proficiency. Several hypotheses are advanced to provide a framework for proficiency-oriented instruction: Hypothesis 1. Opportunities must be provided for students to practice using language in a range of contexts likely to be encountered in the target culture. Corollary 1. Students should be encouraged to express their own meaning as early as possible after productive skills have been introduced in the course of instruction. Corollary 2. A proficiency-oriented approach promotes active communicative interaction among students. Corollary 3. Creative language practice (as opposed to exclusively manipulative or convergent practice) must be encouraged in a proficiency-oriented classroom. Corollary 4. Authentic language should be used in instruction wherever and whenever possible. Hypothesis 2. Opportunities should be provided for students to practice carrying out a range of functions (task universals) likely to be necessary in dealing with others in the target culture. Hypothesis 3. There should be concern for the development of linguistic accuracy from the beginning of instruction in a proficiencyoriented approach. Hypothesis 4. Proficiency-oriented approach should respond to the affective needs of students as well as their cognitive needs. Students should feel motivated to learn and must be given opportunities to express their own meanings in a nonthreatening environment. Hypothesis 5. Cultural understanding must be promoted in various ways so that students are prepared to live more harmoniously in the target-language community. From a discourse orientation, the classroom procedures necessary to implement this type of proficiency-oriented learning would call for

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

203

more student-centered activities. Students would interact with other students, engaging in creative language use related to their affective needs and interests. Authentic language and cultural situations would be used as much as possible, creating as many opportunities for students to carry out a range of communicative functions. The teacher would correct errors which would affect linguistic accuracy (phonology and grammar) along with errors of meaning and information.

Conclusion The nature of discourse in second language classrooms can vary considerably from lesson to lesson as well as from teacher to teacher. Teaching approaches can influence such aspects as the organization of specific language lessons and the roles of the teacher and learners. In many classroom situations, one will find few examples of "real communication". Many teachers will find themselves engaging in "mechanical" or "pseudo-communicative" language activities. Those that follow a communicative framework such as the one proposed by Littlewood (1981) may follow a similar pattern, ranging from "pre-communicative" activities to "communicative" activities. The usefulness of the three-part exchange between the teacher and pupil has been questioned as a suitable source of input data (Ellis 1985): Teacher: Is the book on the desk? (Opening) Pupil: Yes, the book is on the desk. (Answering) Teacher: Very good. The book is on the desk (Follow-up) This type of discourse pattern severely constrains the role of the learner and at the same time distorts language input. While the effect of formal (classroom) instruction is beyond the scope of this paper, language instruction can serve a number of purposes. The classroom situation can be exploited so that learners are capable of engaging ultimately in more natural communicative situations. With the perspectives from Littlewood (1981) and Omaggio (1986), teachers can plan language activities so that students can participate in various interactive situations, carrying out a range of language functions which reflect both instructional and natural communication. Van Lier (1982) notes four major types of interactional situations in the classroom, which reflect different degrees of teacher/group controlled activities with respect to a particular topic and the linguistic and/or procedural rules that may co-vary with the activity.

204

Arnulfo G. Ramirez

For example, students can engage in private conversations in pairs without teacher monitoring of the way the interaction is organized or the level of accuracy. In another situation, the teacher may assign the topic to a group, which may result in the students' working on a text, participating in a role playing context, or taking part in a problem-soliving situation. The teacher may direct the whole class on a topic, controlling and managing the course of the conversation as in a discussion of a text, structured role-plays, or communicative exercises illustrating a grammar point or vocabulary items. There is also the situation in which the teacher controls the interaction during a mechnaical drill (e.g., pronunciation exercises, transformation/ substitution drills) where students respond on cue without regard to a specific conversation topic. A number of procedures have been proposed to alter the discourse options available to learners. Kramsch (1981), for example, offers a number of practical suggestions for teaching natural discourse in the classroom (e.g., turn taking rules, negotiation for meaning, management strategies). She provides numerous examples in French and German. Long and Porter (1985) argue for the use of group work based on sound pedagogical arguments as well as a psycholinguistic rationale. They suggest that teachers should consider including as many two-way tasks (e.g., question/answer situations, problem solving tasks) as possible among those activities students can carry out successfully in small groups (including pairs of students). Enright and McCloskey (1985) provide criteria for organizing the classroom to promote second language acquisition, especially among ESL learners in elementary schools. The criteria include ways of organizing classroom interaction, arranging materials, and the physical environment. Pica and Doughty (1988) found that the nature of the task in group work appeared to be a particularly critical factor affecting the type of discourse patterns among pupils. This suggests that group work activities need to be examined in relation to the task requiring the exchange of information among the participants. Thus, it is possible to vary discourse options available to learners in the language classroom. Teachers can vary the interactional situations so that students can engage in more natural communication exchanges. To be sure, the discourse patterns found in classrooms differ from those which occur in other contexts where issues of status (teacher-pupil) and instructional language are not relevant. Descriptions of classroom discourse can provide valuable insights about the ways

Discourse processes in the second language classroom

205

teachers and pupils interact and the functions of the target language. Language teaching approaches can affect the verbal interaction between teachers and pupils as well as the uses of language. While language will continue to be used as both process and product, teachers can exploit the classroom situation to insure a place for genuine communication. References Allwright, R.L. 1980 Turns, topics and tasks: Patterns of participation in language teaching and learning. In D. Larsen-Freeman (ed.), Discourse analysis in second language acquisition research (pp. 165-187). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Asher, J. 1982 Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher's guidebook (2nd ed.). Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions. Bellack, Α., Η.Μ., Kliebard, R.T. Hyman and F.L. Smith 1966 The language of the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Chaudron,C. 1988 Second language classrooms. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Coulthard, M. 1977 An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Longman. Curran,C. 1976 Counseling-leamingin a second language. East Dubuque, IL: CounselingLearning Publications. Day, R.R. (ed.) 1986 Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Edmondson, W.J. 1985 Discourse worlds in the classroom and in foreign language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition [Special issue], 7(2), 159-168. Ellis, R. 1985 Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press. Enright, D.S., and M.L. McCloskey 1985 Yes, talking: Organizing the classroom to promote second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 431-453. Faerch, C., and G. Kasper 1985 Introduction. Studies in Second Language Learning [Special issue], 7,131-133. Fanselow, J.F. 1977 Beyond Rashomon — Conceptualizing and describing the teaching act. TESOL Quarterly, 11, 17-39.

206 1988

Arnulfo G. Ramirez

What kind of a flower is that? An alternative model for discussing lessons. In J. Fine (ed.), Second language discourse: A textbook of current research: Vol. XXV. Advances in discourse (pp. 59-85). Norwood, NJ: Ab lex. Fine, J.(ed.) 1988 Second language discourse: A textbook of current research (Vol. XXV). Norwood, NH: Ablex. Finocchiaro, M., and C. Brumfit 1983 The functional-notional approach: From theory to practice. New York: Oxford University Press. Flanders, N.A. 1970 Analyzing teaching behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Fröhlich, M., N. Spada and P. Allen 1985 Differences in the communicative orientation of second language classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 27-57. Gass, S.M., and C.G. Madden (eds.) 1985 Input in second language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. Grandcolas, B., and N. Soulö-Susbielles 1986 The analysis of the foreign language classroom. In V. Valdman & C. Schroen (ed.), Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Vol. 8, pp. 293-308). Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Green, J.L. 1983 Research on teaching as a linguistic process: A state of the art. In E. Gordon (ed.), Review of research of in education (Vol. 10, pp. 151252). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Hernandez, H. 1981 English as a second language lessons in bilingual classrooms: A discourse analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Hymes, D. 1972 Models of the interaction of language and social life. In J.J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (ed.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Kramsch, C.J. 1981 Discourse analysis and second language teaching. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. 1985 Classroom interaction and discourse options. Studies in Second Language Acquisition [Special issue], 7(2), 169-183. Lantolf, J.P., and A. Labarca (eds.) 1987 Research in second language learning: Focus on the classroom. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Littlewood, W. 1981 Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Long, M.H. 1980 Input, interaction and second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

Discourse processes in the second language classroom 1987

207

The experiemental classroom. In R.D. Lambert (ed.), The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences: Vol. 490. Foreign language instruction: A national agenda (pp. 97-109). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Long, M.H., and P.A. Porter 1985 Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 207-228. Malamah-Thomas, A. 1987 Classroom interaction. Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press. Me Tear, M. 1975 Structure and categories of foreign language teaching sequences. In R. Allwright (ed.), Working paper: Language teaching classroom research. Essex, Eng.: University of Essex, Department of Languages and Linguistics. Moskowitz, G. 1971 Interaction analysis — A new modern language for supervisors. Foreign Language Annals, 5, 211 -221. Omaggio, A.C. 1986 Teaching language in context. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle. Pica, T., and C. Doughty 1988 Variations in classroom interaction as a function of participation pattern and task. In J. Fine (ed.), Second language discourse: A textbook of current research: Vol. XXV. Advances in discourse processes (pp. 41-55). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Ramirez, A.G. 1987 Assessing the communicativeness of language lessons. In P.W. Wood (ed.), Creating an environment for second language acquisition (pp. 3139). Schenectady, NY: New York State Association of Foreign Language Teachers. Sinclair, J.M., and R.M. Coulthard 1975 Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stubbs, M. 1976 Language, schools and classrooms. Great Britain: Richard Clay (The Chaucer Press). 1983 Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Van Lier, L.A. 1982 Analyzing interaction in second language classrooms; Unpublished dissertation, University of Lancaster, England. Winitz, H. (ed.) 1981 The comprehensive approach to foreign language instruction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Tapping the peer interaction resource D. Scott Enright Introduction A word that is frequently used to describe the U.S. public schools of today is "diversity". Classroom teachers in the 1990s are being asked to fulfill an increasingly diverse set of societal goals and expectations with an increasingly diverse set of students, including those who are learning English as a second or additional language. Yet these same professionals are also expected to meet the enormous challenge that this diversity creates with very little control, very little status, very little support, and very few materials and resources. The only way that teachers can adequately address today's diverse educational challenges is to make maximal use of every single instructional resource that is available to them. With that idea in mind, this paper is dedicated to describing one of the "natural resources" present in every classroom which can be tapped to support second language students' language and literacy development: the students themselves. The paper also provides some suggestions for ways to tap this valuable instructional resource in order to benefit all students.

The value of peer interaction: The five M's There are several characteristics of peer interaction that make it a potentially rich and productive language teaching resource for second language students as well as a potentially valuable general teaching resource for all students. Let's review the five most important ones, the "five M's". 1. Meaningful. The first characteristic of peer interaction that makes it a potentially valuable instructional resource is that it is meaningful to children. Anthropologist Brian Sutton-Smith (1982) contends that most theories and analyses of children's peer interaction are "adultcentric" in that they view and describe peer interaction in

210

D. Scott Enright

terms of its developmental, adult socialization potential rather than in terms of its immediate significance for children themselves. In Sutton-Smith's words: Peer interaction is not a preparation for life. It is life itself. It is life's interpretation in action, a making of life a meaningful event often in a largely symbolic manner. Play with peers allows for a buffered orientation to experience within which it can be restructured to afford more flexible control and excitement with others. This is what peer interaction seeks to be about and when successful makes its members enjoy their lives on this planet. (1982: 75)

If Sutton-Smith is correct, then peer interaction is an intrinsically meaningful and satisfying method used by children to organize and make sense of their experiences. In this way it offers the potential for being productively combined with our adult instructional goals for children in order to facilitate their learning. In a similar vein, one of the dominant themes that has emerged from the recent research in the area of children's literacy development in their native language is that the language processes of reading and writing — like the processes of listening and speaking — are developed best when they are actually used to create students' own meanings and to satisfy their own purposes (Britton 1970; K. Goodman 1977; Holdaway 1979; Rosenblatt 1983; Harste, Woodward and Burke 1984; Roen 1989). Just as children learn to talk by talking and learn to listen by listening, so too do they learn to write by writing and learn to read by reading, and the development of each language process can also support the development of the others. Edelsky (1986) uses the term "authentic" to distinguish between those language and literacy activities which have genuine meaning and purpose and usefulness for students and which therefore promote language and literacy development, and those activities which try to teach oral and written language as isolated from their real life contexts and meanings and uses. An example of an authentic language and literacy activity would be students discussing the upcoming visit to the school of a young Norwegian student and then writing their own letters to her. An example of an inauthentic, meaningless language and literacy instructional activity would be students listening to a teacher's lecture about the upcoming visit of a Norwegian student and then copying a letter written to the student by the teacher off of the blackboard.

Tapping the peer interaction resource

211

Because peer interaction is intrinsically meaningful to students and helpful to them in organizing their experiences, it can be directly used to create authentic language and literacy development activities of the kind Edelsky describes. However, peer interaction can also be used to structure meaningless and disconnected language and literacy tasks, an enterprise which is more likely to strip it of much of its own intrinsic meaning than it is to add meaning and authenticity to intrinsically meaningless tasks. Two students working together to create and produce a new play to be performed for their class are engaged in an authentic language and literacy task in which peer interaction is an integral part of the activity and adds a further dimension of meaning to it. On the other hand, two students taking turns reciting vocabulary words from flashcards held up by each other are engaged in a meaningless and disconnected language and literacy task in which peer interaction is as external to the activity as the rest of the children's meaning-making resources. With specific regard to second language learners, one of the central conclusions of the research on second language acquisition of the past two decades or so is that some kinds of instructional discourse (or input} in the target language are more helpful to second language learners than others. According to Krashen (1980, 1982) and others (e.g., Long 1981; Schachter 1984; Wong-Fillmore 1985; Edelsky 1986), the most useful second language input is language that is comprehensible, immediately useful, and interesting to the second language learner. Thus those classroom activities which can be designed to expose second language students to meaningful input are the most likely to assist them in learning English. Enright and McCloskey (1988) describe four types of meaningful discourse that can be embedded in ongoing instruction for second language students to promote their oral language and literacy development in English. The first type is "fun discourse", or language that is used for the sheer joy of using it; for example, students singing songs or challenging one another with tongue-twisters. The second type is "share discourse", or language that is used to accomplish interpersonal communication and reach social goals; for example, students using oral language to poll other students in order to create a class graph of favorite colors and using written language to keep track of the responses. The third type is "fact discourse", or language that is used to discover and create new knowledge; for example, a student reading newspapers and watching newscasts in order to prepare the

212

D. Scott Enright

weekly classroom newscast. The fourth type is "thought discourse", or language that is used to imagine and to create and organize new ideas; for example, students writing fantasy stories or students meeting to discuss the merits of different varieties of fish before purchasing the class aquarium. As these examples illustrate, all four of these kinds of meaningful discourse can be easily and effectively offered to second language students by having them collaborate with one another in performing classroom instructional tasks. 2.Motivating. The second characteristic of peer interaction which makes it a valuable natural teaching resource is that it's fun! SuttonSmith (1982) notes that when children are left to themselves, they ordinarily choose to spend as much of their time as possible interacting with other children. Peer interaction is as intrinsically motivating to children as it is intrinsically meaningful to them — just think of all the enthusiasm and communication that can be found on the streets and playgrounds where children gather to play! Peer interaction offers us as adult educators the potential for engaging children much more fully in their own learning and in school tasks than most forms of adult-child interaction — just think of the kinds of learning that could take place if we could bring children's playtime energy and communication into our classrooms! When peer interaction is carefully incorporated into instruction, curriculum objectives and activities become an integral part of children's experience rather than serving as external impositions upon children's experience. Again with specific regard to the second language learner in school, the characteristic of interest or motivation is consistently interwined with the characteristic of meaningfulness in discussions of the kinds of language input that are the most helpful to second language learners (Krashen 1982; Ventriglia 1982; Wong-Fillmore 1983; Urzua 1985; Genesee 1987). The language teaching input that is offered to second language students only becomes language intake when they attend to that input and attempt to process and (eventually) use it. Interaction with peer language models has been shown to be one of the key potential sources of such motivated learning intake (Peck 1978; Johnson 1983; Hester 1984;Beebe 1985; Gomez 1987). Unfortunately for second language students and their peers, the typical public school classroom response to the peer interaction that results from its intrinsically meaningful and motivating nature has been to attempt to eliminate it rather than to utilize it for the students' benefit. The notion that "Silence is golden" has largely prevailed in

Tapping the peer interaction resource

213

our public school classrooms and corridors, with quiet and with the absence of peer interaction often being equated with good management and good learning. Teacher lectures and presentations and private student seatwork continue to be the predominant instructional activity structures used by teachers in our public schools (Sirotnik 1983). Thus peer interaction — in spite of its intrinsically motivating and meaningful nature — remains a largely untapped natural resource in today's classrooms. Worse yet, grade-level teachers of classes with second language and English dominant students report that the nonteacher-directed peer relations negotiated by the students themselves often isolate the second language students from the rest of their peers (Penfield 1987). 3. Multiplicative. The third characteristic of peer interaction which recommends its inclusion in classroom instruction has more to do with its practical administrative potential than with its intrinsic nature, and that is that when it comes to creating opportunities for teaching and learning, "many heads (the students') are better than one (the teacher's)". The ever-increasing diversity in the curriculum and in the student population of public school classrooms has brought about an increased need for finding ways to tailor instruction to meet individualized student needs. The response to this need within the general educational arena has largely centered on two approaches: peer and cross-age tutoring and cooperative/small group learning. Considerable evidence exists documenting the generally positive academic achievement effects of both dyadic, tutoring interactions (Allen 1976; Cohen and Kulik 1981); and small, cooperative learning task interactions (Sharan 1980; Slavin 1983a, 1983b;Kagan 1986), although this literature also indicates that there are considerable differences in these achievement effects depending upon the manner in which the peer interactions are organized and conducted.1 Just as many heads can be better than one in facilitating students' learning in general, so too can many mouths be better than one in facilitating second language students' language learning. The current theoretical consensus within second language education is that second language development is a highly interactive and collaborative process in which second language learners actively engage in constructing and testing out hypotheses about how language works as they participate and communicate with others in meaningful activities (Dulay, Burt and Krashen 1982; Ventriglia 1982; Tough 1985). This conceptualization of second language learning places a roughly equal emphasis

214

D. Scott Enright

on providing useful language input to second language students and providing opportunities for second language students to practice and use that input in meaningful ways. There is considerable evidence indicating that the culturally appropriate use of paired and small group interaction activities in the language classroom can indeed increase the amount of interesting and meaningful input that is provided to second language students and can also greatly multiply the number of opportunities for them to practice and use the target language (Wong-Fillmore 1983; Johnson 1983; Long and Porter 1985; August 1987; Gomez 1987; Weisner, Gallimore and Jordan 1988). Using peer interaction activities in this manner can also multiply the teacher's own opportunities to provide language instruction and input to individuals while the class is working in groups. Again, however, the effectiveness of using peer interaction to provide extra language input and practice for second language learners is dependent upon the ways that these activities are organized — a theme which is discussed later. 4. Multidimensional. The fourth characteristic of peer interaction which makes it an important natural teaching resource is that it can involve students in practicing and learning many different things at the same time, potential which is strikingly absent from the lessons and seatwork activities dominating current instruction. First, peer "interaction" activities by definition involve students in communicating and collaborating with one another in the process of developing some kind of knowledge or skill. Thus, peer interaction can be incorporated into the traditional subject-matter curriculum so that a widely variety of forms of oral and written discourse can be practiced and developed in addition to the content that is the focus and major objective of a given activity. For example, the "favorites" polling activity cited earlier provides students with opportunities for asking and answering wh- questions, for stating personal preferences, and for reviewing and recording information accurately in written form besides providing them with opportunities to learn about individual differences, about how polls work, and about how to display numerical results in graphic form. Recent ethnographic investigations of the culture of the classroom (Hammersley 1977; Michaels 1981; Philips 1983) have demonstrated that one of the critical precursors of academic success for students is the possession of "interactional competence" (Mehan 1982) in the culture of the school. Interactional competence consists of knowing when, where , to whom, and how to produce a certain

Tapping the peer in terac tion resource

215

action (whether that action be an answer to a teacher's question, a timely raising of a hand, or a smile), in addition to knowing what action to produce. Many language and literacy researchers (Barnes and Todd 1977; Cook-Gumperz and Gumperz 1982; Pinnell 1984; Cazden 1988) have pointed out the valuable practice in learning how to recognize and follow social rules and in learning how to successfully negotiate social interaction which can result from classroom peer interaction. In the "favorites" polling activity mentioned earlier, for example, the students interviewing other students about their preferences not only get exposure to mathematics and social studies and practice in speaking and writing English, they also get practice in recognizing and following the teacher's social rules for conducting the polling activity (such as when during the school-day it is acceptable to approach other students to poll them, how much interrupting and noise and time is allowed for each polling interaction) and they get practice in negotiating social interaction with other individuals (such as beginning and ending the polling encounter, phrasing and re-phrasing questions to understand and be understood, trying out various strategies to elicit the information needed). Still another potential instructional dimension that can be found in peer interaction activities is in the cognitive realm. Peer interaction learning activities have the potential for involving all students fully and frequently in using their powers of critical thinking and problemsolving. Studies of cooperative small group activities in both native English-speaking classrooms (D.W. Johnson, R. Johnson, J. Johnson, and Anderson 1976; Sharan 1984) and bilingual classrooms (Cohen 1986) have demonstrated the positive contribution that peer interaction can make to developing students' critical thinking processes. To return to the polling activity one more time to illustrate, students serving as polling respondents could be asked to provide a rationale for their selections when providing their favorite answers, and pollsters could be asked to synthesize this inofrmation into overall polling "results" and attributional "patterns" to be reported to the full class. This example also illustrates that peer interaction can be used to create meaningful opportunities for students to develop critical thinking skills in the same manner as it can be used to create authentic content and language learning opportunities. The multidimensional learning potential that peer interaction offers all students is particularly valuable to second language students, who

216

D. Scott Enright

are expected to learn the same subject-matter curriculum as their native English-speaking peers while simultaneously having to learn a new language and a new culture. By itself, the exposure to meaningful input and opportunities for meaningful practice in the target language than can be embedded in peer content-learning activities is invaluable to students new to English. But beyond this, peer interaction activities can also give second language students the opportunity to develop both interactional competence in the new culture in which they are living and learning as well as "analytic competence" (Bruner 1975) in their new language - opportunities which might not be as readily available to them in settings outside the classroom. 5. Multicultural. The fifth characteristic of peer interaction which makes it a rich natural instructional resource worth tapping is that it can promotes ethnic relations and creates interethnic awareness and understanding far beyond those developed by any text or curriculum unit. Recent research suggests that incorporating cooperative peer interaction activities into ethnically heterogeneous classrooms leads to positive effects such as a greater number of interethnic friendships, more positive attitudes towards members of other ethnic groups, and increased interethnic contact when students are allowed to form their own work and play groups (Slavin 1977; D.W. Johnson and R. Johnson 1981; Sharan 1984; Kagan et al. 1985; Kagan 1986). Consistently placing students from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds together to cooperate with one another in the completion of classroom tasks helps to create a genuine multicultural classroom community in which the knowledge and experiences of all students are both valued and utilized for the benefit and enrichment of the entire class (Enright and McCloskey 1988). In this way, the peer interaction resource has the potential for benefiting all of the members of the class, native English-speaking and second language students alike. When used at its best, the peer interaction resource in the multicultural classroom provides enrichment for the many rather than remediation for the few. These five M's - meaningful, motivating, multipicative, multidimensional, and multicultural — summarize the potential characteristics of peer interaction which make it a valuable instructional resource to be tapped for second language and non-second language students alike. But notice the word "potential" in the sentence above. None of these five positive characteristics of peer interaction and their instructional payoffs automatically occurs when peers are placed

Tapping the peer in terac tion resource

217

together in the classroom. Clearly, turning the learning potential of peer interaction as summarized by the five "M's" into reality requires careful planning and careful implementation. This section has addressed the "why" of incorporating peer interaction into instruction. The following section addresses the "What, how, and who" of successfully accomplishing this incorporation.

Things to consider in planning useful ESL peer interaction activities: What, how and who There are three key things to consider in planning a cooperative peer interaction activity for the classroom: what tasks the activity will involve, how students will interact in order to complete the task, and who will be involved in working together to complete the tasks. When all three of these dimensions of peer interaction activities are thoughtfully arranged before students are actually placed together to learn, the odds that the subsequent peer interaction will be productive are considerably improved.

The "what": Types of peer interaction tasks The first thing to consider in designing peer interaction activities for the classroom is the kind of task(s) that will be the focus of the activity and the materials and language that will be required to carry out the task(s). Even when they are interacting on their own time, children engage in specific, planful group activities when they play with one another, such as playing rule-governed sports and games, engaging in dramatic and imaginary play, arguing, and exploring the world around them. These same kinds of activities can be incorporated into the classroom to the language and cognitive development and subject-matter learning in students that we are most concerned with. Cohen (1986) provides a clear and useful list of some of the characteristics of tasks that either do or do not support productive classroom peer interaction and groupwork. According to Cohen, the characteristics of a task which does support groupwork are: — Has more than one answer or more than one way to solve the problem — Is intrinsically interesting and rewarding

218

— — -

D. Scott Enright

Allows different students to make different contributions Uses multimedia Involves sight, sound and touch Requires a variety of skills and behaviors Also requires reading and writing Is challenging (1986:57-58)

The characteristics of a task which does not support groupwork are: — Has a single right answer — Can be done more quickly and efficiently by one person than by a group — Is too low level — Involves simple memorization or routine learning. (1986:58) Here are six kinds of peer interaction tasks which can be organized to encompass Cohen's characteristics of a supportive groupwork task and which can be used to take full advantage of the meaningful, motivating, multiplicative, multidimensional and multicultural potential of peer interaction: 1. Group investigations. In a group investigation task, a group of students take up an interesting question or a puzzling situation and does research to collect information dealing with the question or situation. A group investigation might involve actual experimentation (for example, collecting different items and putting them in water to discover whether they float or not) or it might involve consulting expert references (for example, reading a book or talking with a scientist about the principles of buoyancy). Quite often a group investigation task concludes with the group reporting to others in some way on the results of their investigation.2 2.Discussion groups. Students engaging in group discussions are generally assigned a topic or an issue or a problem and are asked to work together to fashion a group response or solution to the assignment. Discussion groups can also be used to structure learning across the regular curriculum, such as having students generate at least four strategies for cleaning up the environment (science), having students write a group fairy tale (language arts), having different "candidates" and their "staffs" plan campaign strategy for a class election (social studies), and having students solve mathematical word problems together in groups (mathematics). Quite often the topics and tasks for group discussions arise spontaneously out of other class activities.3

Tapping the peer in ferae tion resource

119

3.Drama, role-playing and simulations. Students' imaginations and abilities to fantasize can be used to create peer interaction tasks in which students take on feelings of personalities or novel situations which stretch their cognitive, linguistic and interactional resources. Role-playing tasks can range from very simple (such as doing improvisations of everyday activities or practicing what to say in a particular social setting such as a school dance) to the very complex (such as students doing a simulated congressional debate over the merits of slavery before the civil war, or students writing the script, making the sets and props and costumes, and performing a play). Drama tasks could also include puppet shows, choral readings or recitations, and story theater productions.4 4. Games. Many popular games and sports activities can be adapted and utilized in the classroom to tap the learning potential of peer interaction. These include parlor games such as "Twenty Questions" and "Charades", board games such as "Monopoly" and "Uno", and sports activities such as relays. The games that work best for promoting productive peer interaction are those which are non-competitive or team-oriented and which have both "share discourse" and "fun discourse" embedded in them (for example, an obstacle course relay activity in which members of each team must successfully negotiate a course of tires and slides and puddles and ropes while simultaneously announcing what they are doing — "I am jumping over the puddle", etc.).5 5.Projects. One broad type of peer interaction activity is the small group project in which groups of students are given a task with several different steps and work together to complete it. Projects usually involve both concrete, "hands-on" and paper-and-pencil materials. Projects also require a relatively long period of time to complete. Like discussion groups, projects may be incorporated into all subjectmatter areas of the curriculum, and they can also be used to integrate different content areas and language processes together. Following the topics previously used to illustrate group discussions, project activities could include having groups of students go on "pollution searches" around the school grounds and the neighborhood to collect and record the kinds and frequency of pollution and to write up their results for the principal or custodian (science); groups of students could examine folk tales from different countries and kinds of magic used in them and then compare their results (language arts); student campaign groups could actually carry out their campaign by making posters

220

D. Scott Enright

and buttons and delivering speeches (social studies); and student groups could prepare original sets of word problems based on actual school and class personalities and topics to try to "stump" other groups in the class (mathematics). 6. Feedback conferences. Students can also learn to give each other specific kinds of instructional help and feedback in pairs or in small groups. Peer conference activities might include writing conferences in which authors share their drafts with an audience of peers to receive suggestions for improving their compositions. They might include "brainstorming" sessions in which authors or playwrights or inventors or scientists "bounce ideas" off of receptive peers and receive feedback on their plans as well as new ideas for modifying or improving them. Once feedback conferences are well-established in the classroom, students will quite often begin to use this peer interaction activity throughout their daily work without having to be assigned to it.6 Each of the six types of peer interaction tasks listed above can be adapted to be used with students of various grade levels and with various school-district or grade-level curriculum objectives. The list is not an exhaustive one but it is a good representation of the wide range of productive learning tasks that can be incorporated into the classroom using peer interaction. As Cohen's lists of task characteristics suggest, part of the selecting and planning of the task(s) to be used in a given peer interaction activity is the selection of the materials and discourse which go with the task(s). The selection of these two components of the activity should be aimed at giving focus and structure to the students' task so that their collaborating will be maximally purposeful and related to the instructional goals of the activity. For example, the group discussion of ways to clean up the environment could be planned to follow up on a viewing of a documentary videotape or it could get its focus from magazine photos of pollution. Students could then be asked to write their final recommendations to include specific pieces of information in a particular form, such as [kind of pollution problem -*· Method for solving it ->· What is needed to use this method]. The "how": Types of participation within peer interaction activities After the task and the language and materials of the peer interaction activity have been selected, the next key planning consideration is

Tapping the peer interaction resource

221

how students will participate within the activity and what role(s) they will play in getting the learning task accomplished. There are three primary types of participation that can be used to organize peer interaction across all of the types of tasks that have already been mentioned: 1. Equal du ties/roles. The simplest way to organize participation within a given peer interaction activity is to assign everyone the same duties and roles within the activity in order to create the final group product. For example, in the group discussion of ways to clean up the environment, each group member could be made equally responsible for contributing to the brainstorming and discussion leading to the fiveclearn-up strategies or each member could be asked to think about and to do some resarch to generate one strategy and then bring it back to the group to be discussed along with everyone else's strategies in order to generate the final list. 2. Different duties roles. Another way to have students participate together in a learning activity is to assign them different duties or roles within the group. Continuing with the pollution examples, in the discussion activity, one student could be appointed (or elected) to be the chair of the group to oversee the discussion, another could be the recorder to write down the various strategies suggested and to make up the final list, and still another student could be the reporter to present the final list to the class. One way of developing and assigning individual duties and roles within peer interaction activities which is particularly useful in the multilingual classroom is the "instructional chain" (Cazden et al. 1979) in which a few students are taught a skill or a process or a bit of content and then become the group "instructors" or leaders who teach the same item to their peers. When second language learners are given content expertise in this manner and their colleagues know that their job is to collaborate with their second language student instructor to accomplish the group learning task, the result is a maximal "share discourse" situation in which the language learning that occurs is as great or greater than the content learning! Of course this same "chain" method can also be used to take advantage of students' natural, previously developed expertise in peer interaction activities; thus in a multilingual/multicultural classroom, origami experts could be used to lead peer art activities, soccer experts could coach class soccer teams, and experts with firsthand experience of various countries from around the world could share their knowledge in social studies activities.

222

D. Scott Enright

The assigning of duties and roles can also be extended from planning for interaction between individuals in peer group in interactions between the groups themselves. One such plan is the "Jigsaw" method (Aronson, et al. 1978); in which each student participates in two small groups, first in "expert" groups in which they are responsible for learning one "piece" of an overall curriculum project or unit "puzzle" and then in "teams" in which the various learning pieces are put together to create the final class project. As an illustration of this design as it might be loosely applied to the pollution discussion activity, students could be divided into groups and provided with special instructional materials dealing with only one form of pollution (air, water, solid, noise) and after generating a plan for dealing with that specific form of pollution, these experts could go back to their planning teams to work with other experts to develop an overall class clean-up scheme covering all forms of pollution. 3. Self-selected duties roles. The third way to organize participation within peer interaction activities is to allow the students to determine their roles and responsibilities within these activities. This strategy cannot be applied right away, but requires that students first be given extended practice in working together in pairs and groups and in learning how to identify and carry out the various roles and duties involved in classroom learning activities. What often happens when students do become able to organize themselves to accomplish group learning tasks is that cooperative learning becomes an automatic and integral component of students' everyday classroom participation. The "who": Types of members of peer activity groups The last key thing to consider in planning peer interaction activities is the types of students who will be placed together to carry out the various tasks, duties and roles that have been designed for them. One thing to remember in forming collaborative pairs and groups in the classroom is that there is really no such thing as a "homogeneous" group, because even when children are placed together according to similarities along one dimension it is almost a certainty that they will differ along many other equally important dimensions. Student diversity is an important strength rather than some sort of administrative problem in classrooms where the peer interaction resource is being tapped.

Tapping the peer interaction resource

223

The following is a list of five of the most important student characteristics that should be kept in mind in assigning students to peer interaction activities (again, the list is not exhaustive and other student characteristics could also be used): I.Expertise. This student characteristic can only be determined in relation to the task (the what) and the participation (the how) that are being used in the peer interaction activity. Expertise might include academic achievement, previous experience, or content knowledge related to the skill or subject-matter that is the focus of the activity. As already mentioned, students' natural expertise can be deliberately used within peer activities or expertise can be developed in advance of an activity in class (see the "instructional chain" examples). In general, when more than one expert on a given topic is available they are assigned to different groups to provide expertise to greater numbers of students. However, it is also useful to occasionally assign all of the class experts to one group to give them the opportunity to challenge each other and "stretch" each other as far as possible. 2. Interest. In most classes and with most activities, the amount of individual student interest in a given activity will vary greatly. Thus it is helpful to consider individual students' levels of interest in a peer learning activity before assigning them to their student groups. It is often the case that one student's excitement and interest in a given task will prove contagious and will assist in mobilizing the attention and effort of all group members towards completing the assigned activity. 3. Social style. Whereas the first two student characteristics center on students' relationships with the tasks involved in given activity, this and the following student characteristic center on the students' ongoing relationships with one another. In any class there will be students with a variety of social styles and social skills. Some students are particularly good at drawing out other students, others are good listeners, others are good leaders. In classrooms with second language students, this variety is likely to increase due to the diverse sociocultural backgrounds often represented in this group of students. In placing students together to work on a given learning task, it is important to consider their sociocultural backgrounds and their different social styles in order to produce the kind of group social dynamics needed to support the kinds of interaction and learning that are desired (Weisner, Gallimore and Jordan 1988).

224

D. Scott Enright

4. Compatibility. Just as students have developed different kinds of sociability, so too have they developed different specific social relationships with other students in the class, both positive and negative. These specific relationships should be considered. For example, placing sworn enemies together to complete a cooperative project might force them to practice the skills of self-control and working collaboratively with everyone, but it might not enhance their learning of a specific content skill within the activity! Similarly, placing best friends together can lead to highly disruptive or highly productive collaboration depending upon the tasks that they are asked to complete. 5. Proficiency. In classrooms with second language students, it is also necessary to consider the native language (first language) of students and their English proficiency and interactional competence when creating peer learning groups. As previously mentioned, opportunities for English language practice in the multilingual classroom can be considerably multiplied if native English-speaking or fully bilingual students are placed with second language students to collaborate on learning tasks and are provided with the language and materials that will support their collaboration (Enright and Gomez 1985). These English language teaching and learning opportunities can be further enhanced if the proficiency level and the interactional competence of both the second language students and their Englishspeaking colleagues are taken into account in making the assignments. All students bring a complex array of discourse and interaction skills to their interactions with peers. The more of these skills that we can learn about and use in establishing peer interaction activity groups, the more likely it will be that we will fully tap the rich instructional potential that peer interaction offers.

Teaching cooperative peer interaction Once the what, the how and the who have been considered in planning peer interaction activities for the classroom and some activities have been prepared to be introduced, the final step in tapping the peer interaction resource is to explicitly teach the forms of classroom participation involved in it as it is introduced. No matter how thoroughly planned a peer interaction activity is, it will not achieve its desired effects if students are simply placed together and given the assignment and then commanded to "Talk!" or to "Learn together!". Before

Tapping the peer interaction resource

225

introducing any new kind of peer interaction task to students, it is important to spend some time discussing and even practicing the cooperative and interactive skills and rules and procedures needed to carry out the activity. D.W. Johnson, R.T. Johnson, Holubec and Roy (1984) have identified four levels of cooperative peer interaction skills and provide several suggestions for how to go about introducing and practicing these skills in the classroom. Cohen (1986) and Kagan (1987) also discuss the importance of explicitly teaching classroom cooperation and provide several materials and exercises for accomplishing this goal. One reason that it is necessary to explicitly teach the skills and the rules and procedures of peer interaction is because quite often there are students in class who have spent much of their previous lives in school engaged in competitive and individualistic activities and who have had little practice in cooperative peer interaction. Another reason it is necessary is because quite often there are also students in class who have developed prejudices against students who are not the same as they are. Immediate, firm and explicit responses to instances of prejudice and non-cooperation in class coupled with the explicit teaching and practice of the rules and skills involved in peer interaction activities will go a long way towards establish the norm of cooperation and the community milieu which are necessary for peer interaction activities to flourish. Finally, in teaching cooperation and in incorporating peer interaction activities into the classroom, it is important to keep in mind that productive peer interaction is developmental. It will take time to develop a classroom community and a cooperative norm — how much time will depend on the particular class. If peer interaction activities are used consistently in class and are carefully monitored and reviewed with the students, the quality of interaction and learning within these activities will continue to improve and become more and more automatic over time.

Conclusion In the post-industrial, information era in which we presently find ourselves, the skills of interaction, communication and cooperation are more important than ever before, while the "basics" of full literacy,

226

D. Scott Enright

critical thinking and tolerant, productive and well-balanced citizenship remain as important as they have always been. Peer interaction is an obvious yet neglected instructional resource which can be used to develop our students' strengths in all of these areas. Yet even beyond this broad potential, the intrinsically meaningful and motivating nature of peer interaction can be used to give students of all ages their own personal stake in what goes on in our classrooms and in their own education. All too often in our well-intentioned but misplaced eagerness to prepare our students for the difficult adult lives that we know they face, we have engaged them in meaningless, fragmented, narrow, boring, adult- and future-centered classroom exercises at the expense of utilizing and nurturing their own quite genuine curiosities, wishes, interests, meaning-making powers and desires to learn. The final reason for tapping the peer interaction resource, then, may lie in its potential for directly incorporating these wishes and powers and dreams into the curriculum while simultaneously sharing the wisdom and experiences which we as their adult teachers also have to offer them.

Notes 1. For detailed reviews of the numerous factors which may affect these peer interactions, see Jenkins and Jenkins (1987) for tutoring interactions and Slavin (1983a) and Kagan (1986) for cooperative learning. 2. Group Investigation is one of the "models of teaching" described by Joyce and Weill in their (1972) book of the same title. Sharan and Hertz-Lazarowitz (1980) also explain how group investigations can be used during peer interaction activities. Heath (1983) describes how group investigation teams can become informal "ethnographers" to collect cultural information in their own homes and communities. 3. Barnes and Todd (1977) and Pinnell (1984) set forth some of the reasons why group discussions should be used in classrooms as well as some ways for doing this. Pasternak (1979) and Wallerstein (1983) provides some good suggestions for using group discussions to specifically teach cultural concepts and language. 4. There are many wonderful books on using drama in the language classroom, including Fox (1984), Maley and Duff (1978), and Jones (1982). 5. There are many fun and useful published collections of games. Some of this author's favorites are Street Games (Milberg 1976), The Cooperative Sports and Games Book (Orlick 1978) and The Second Cooperative Sports and Games Book (Orlick 1982), The Incredible Indoor Games Book (Gregson 1982), and Everybody Mns(Sobel 1983).

Tapping the peer interaction resource

221

6. Calkins (1983, 1986) gives a careful description of the uses and ways to organize peer writing feedback conferences. Urzua (1987) provides an insightful illustration of some second language children engaging in peer writing feedback conferences.

References Allen, V.L. (ed.) 1976 Children as teachers: Theory and research on tutoring. New York: Academic Press. Aronson, E., N. Blaney, C. Stephan, J. Sikes and M. Snapp 1978 The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. August, D.L. 1987 Effects of peer tutoring on the second language acquisition of Mexican American children in elementary school. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (4), 717-736. Barnes, D., and F. Todd 1977 Communication and learning in small groups. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Bee be, L.M. 1985 Input: Choosing the right stuff. In S.M. Gass & G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, (pp. 404-414). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Bruner, J. 1975 Language as an instrument of thought. In A. Davies (ed.), Problems of language and learning. London, England: Heinemann Educational Books. Calkins, L.M. 1983 Lessons from a child: On the teaching and learning of writing. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. 1986 The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. Cazden.C.B. 1988 Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. Cazden, C.B., M. Cox, D. Dickinson, Z. Steinberg and C. Stone 1979 "You all gonna hafta listen": Peer teaching in a primary classroom. In W.A. Collins (ed.), Children's language and communication, pp. 183-231. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cohen, E.G. 1986 Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Cohen, P.A., and J.A. Kulik 1981 Synthesis of research on the effects of tutoring. Research Information System, 39, 227-229.

228

D. Scott Enright

Cook-Gumperz, J., and J.J. Gumperz 1982 Communicative competence in educational perspective. In L.C. Wilkinson (ed.), Communicating in the classroom (pp. 13-24). New York: Academic Press. Dulay, H., M. Burt and S. Krashen 1982 Language two. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Edelsky,C. 1986 Writing in a bilingual program. Habla una vez. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp. Enright, D.S., and B. Gomez 1985 PRO-ACT: Six strategies for organizing peer interaction in elementary classrooms. NABE Journal, 9(3), 5-24. Enright, D.S., and M.L. McCloskey 1988 Integrating English: Developing English language and literacy in the multicultural classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Fox, M. 1984 Teaching drama to young children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. Genesee, F. 1987 Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Gomez, B. 1987 "Friends gotta talk": An ethnographic study of behavioral patterns exhibited by young children in the process of acquiring English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta, G A. Goodman, K.S. 1977 Acquiring literacy is natural: Who skilled Cock Robin? Theory into Practice, 16(5), Gregson, B. 1982 The incredible indoor games book. Belmont, CA: Pitman Learning. Hammersley, M. 1977 Schools learning: The cultural resources required by pupils to answer a teacher's question. In P. Woods & M. Hammersley (eds.), School experience: Explorations in the sociology of education, pp. 57-86. New York: St. Martin's Press. Harste, J., V. Woodward and C. Burke 1984 Language stories and literacy lessons. Postmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. Heath, S.B. 1983 Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Hester, H. 1984 Peer interaction in learning English as a second language. Theory into Practice, 23 (3), 20S-217. Holdaway, D. 1979 Foundations of literacy. Sydney, Australia: Ashton-Scholastic.

Tapping the peer interaction resource

229

Jenkins, J.R., and L.M. Jenkins 1987 Making peer tutoring work. Educational Leadership, 44 (6), 64-68. Johnson, D.M. 1983 Natural language learning by design: A classroom experiment in social interaction and second language acquisition. TESOL Quartely, 17 (1), 55-68. Johnson, D.W., and R. Johnson 1981 Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning experiences on interethnic interaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73,444-449. Johnson, D.W., R. Johnson, J. Johnson and D. Anderson 1976 The effects of cooperative vs. individualized instruction on student prosocial behavior, attitudes toward learning, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 446-452. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, E.J. Holubec and P. Roy 1984 Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Jones, K. 1982 Simulations in language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Joyce, B., and M. Weill 1972 Models of teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kagan, S. 1985 Cooperative learning resources for teachers. Riverside, CA: Spencer Kagan and Associates. 1986 Cooperative learning and sociocultural factors in schooling. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students, (pp. 231-298). Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University, Los Angeles. Kagan, S., G.L. Zahn, K.F. Widaman, J. Schwarzwald and G. Tyrrell 1985 Classroom structural bias: Impact of cooperative and competitive classroom structures on cooperative and competitive individuals and groups. In R.E. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum Press. Krashen, S.D. 1980 The input hypothesis. In J.E. Alatis (ed.), Current issues in bilingual eudcation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 1982 Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Long, M.H. 1981 Input, interaction and second-language acquisition. In H. Winitz (ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, No. 379, (pp. 259-290). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. Long, M.H., and P.A. Porter 1985 Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 207-225.

230

D. Scott Enright

Maley, A., and A. Duff 1978 Drama techniques in language learning: A resource book of communication activities for language teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Mehan, H. 1982 The structure of classroom events and their consequences for student performance. In P. Gflmore & A.A. Glathorn (eds.), Children in and out of school, (pp. 59-87). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Michaels, S. 1981 "Sharing time": Children's narrative styles and differential access to literacy. Language in Society, 10,423-442. Milberg, A. 1976 Street games. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Orlick,T. 1978 The cooperative sports and games book: Challenge without competition. New York: Pantheon. 1982 The second cooperative sports and games book. New York: Pantheon. Pasternak, M.G. 1979 Helping kids learn multi-cultural concepts. Champaign, IL: Research Press. Peck, S. 1978 Child-child discourse in second language acquisiton. In E.M. Hatch (ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings, (pp. 383400). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Penfield.J. 1987 ESL: The regular classroom teacher's perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 21-39. Philips, S.U. 1983 The invisible culture: Communication in the classroom and community on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. White Plains, NY: Longman. Pinnell, G.S. 1984 Communication in small group settings. Theory into Practice, 23 (3), 246-254. Roen, D.H. 1989 Developing effective assignments for second language writers. In D.M. Johnson & D.H. Roen (eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp. 193-206). White Plains, NY: Longman. Rosenblatt, L.M. 1983 The reading transaction: What for? In R.P. Parker and F.A. Davis (eds.), Developing literacy: Young children's use of language, (pp. 118135). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Schachter, J. 1984 Nutritional needs of language learners. In M.A. Clarke and J. Handscombe (eds.), On TESOL '82: Pacific perspectives on language learning and teaching, pp. 175-189. Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.

Tapping the peer interaction resource

231

Sharan, S. 1980 Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes and ethnic relations. Review of Educational Research, 50,241-271. 1984 Cooperative learning in the classroom .-Research in desegregated schools. Hfllsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sharan, S., and R. Hertz-Lazarowitz 1980 A group-investigation method of cooperative learning in the classroom. In S. Sharan, P. Hare, C.D. Webb, and R. Hertz-Lazarowitz (eds.), Cooperation in education. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press. Sirotnik, K.A. 1983 What you see is what you get: Consistency, persistency and mediocrity in classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 53 (1), 16-31. Slavin, R.E. 1977 How student learning teams can integrate the desegregated classroom. Integrated Education, 15,56-58. Slavin, R.E. 1983a Cooperative learning. New York: Longman. 1983b When does cooperative learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94 (3), 429-445. Sobel, J. 1983 Everybody wins: 393 non-competitive games for young children. New York: Walker. Sutton-Smith, B. 1982 A performance theory of peer relations. In K.M. Borman (ed.), The social life of children in a changing society, pp. 65-77. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Tough, J. 1985 Talk two: Children using English as a second language. London, England: Onyx Press. Urzua, C. 1985 How do you evaluate your own elementary program? Look to kids. In P. Larson, E.L. Judd and D. S. Messerschmitt (eds.), On TESOL '84: A brave new world for TESOL. Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 1987 "You stopped too soon": Second language children composing and revising. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (2), 279-304. Ventriglia, L. 1982 Conversations of Miguel and Maria: How children learn a second language. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Wallerstein, N. 1983 Language and culture in conflict: Problem-posing in the ESL classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Weisner, T.S., R. Gallimore and C. Jordan 1988 Unpackaging cultural effects: Native Hawaiian peer assistance and child-generated activity. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 19 (4), 327-353.

232

D. Scott Enright

Wong-Fillmore, L. 1983 The language learners as individual: Implications of reason on individual differences for the ESL teacher. In M.A. Clarke and J. Handscombe (eds.), On TESOL '82: Pacific perspectives on language learning and teaching, pp. 157-173. 1985 When does teacher talk work as input? In S.M. Gass & C.G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, (pp. 17-50). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

ESL children and children's literature Elizabeth Whalley Introduction Children's literature consists of a variety of genres: picture books, folklore, fables, myths, poetry, fantasy, realistic fiction (including, all puns intended, short stories), and nonfiction. Reading any of these genres aloud brings pleasure both to the reader and to the audience. The importance of reading aloud, to young children in particular, has long been recognized. In fact, it is known that children who are read to grow up to read more on their own than children who are not, and children who are read to — after they are able to read for themselves — read more than children who are just left to read on their own (Oppenheim, Brenner, & Boegehold 1986). A variety of information about children's literature, in general, is readily available. Teacher preparation courses in children's literature, for example, teach students about (a) the value of children's literature, both for the children themselves and in the teaching of reading, (b) the criteria for evaluating children's books, (c) major and authors, and (d) the history of children's literature. In addition to the information available in courses, many sources — journals for librarians, catalogues of children's books, and guides to books for school media centers — also describe special books for young readers: ethnic books, books for reluctant readers, "best" books, and books written in foreign languages. The October through December 1987 issues of Booklist, for example, describe books in Korean, Portuguese, Spanish, French, Persian, Japanese, Slovenian, and Hungarian. In spite of all this information about children's literature, and all the interest in the growing number of English as a second language (ESL) students in our schools, little has been written about the use of children's literature with young ESL children in English-only classrooms (Hough, Nurss, & Enright 1986; Moustafa 1987). In fact, the 1986 edition of Children and Books by Mary Hile Arbuthnot and Zena Sutherland ignores the question of which books might be parti-

234

Elizabeth Whalley

cularly useful for ESL children to read alone or hear read aloud. The standard book selection criteria for children's literature (Oldham 1981) — development of plot, delineation of character and setting, stimulation of imagination, insight into the child's world, and extension of the child's experience — while important for all children, are too limited. These criteria do not take into consideration the special needs of ESL children. This paper presents important social/psychological, linguistic, and pedagogical factors to take into account when selecting books to be used in a mixed ESL and native-speaker classroom, as well as in a class with mixed levels of ESL students. It also outlines a number of ways to involve ESL students so that they respond actively to the books and participate competently with their native-English-speaking classmates.

Book selection criteria Social/psychological factors The social/psychological factors in book selection are critical in determining how the students ultimately feel about themselves and the things they do, including reading. Following are the five most important social/psychological factors to consider: the teacher's own appreciation of the book, the cultural context of the reading situation, the social perspective the book presents, the attitudes the book presents towards various groups, and student choice. It makes sense psychologically that the teacher's own appreciation for a book would be important. Although for the past fifteen years the focus has been away from a teacher-centered classroom toward a student-centered one, teachers can still acknowledge and respect their own reading interests and needs without negating, ignoring, or undermining those of the students. If teachers want to encourage enthusiasm for reading, they should choose books which they themselves enjoy. Not only does the teacher's interest influence student's interest, but, as Veatch and Cooter (1986) have shown, student reading skill also increases when teachers use books which they themselves have selected. Correspondingly, if a teacher does not like a particular book, there is usually no need to review the other characteristics of acceptability, or to read the book to the children. A teacher can, however, make books which he or

ESL children and children 's literature

235

she finds inherently uninteresting available to students on a reading table or in a reading corner. The cultural context of the reading situation — the attitude toward reading held by the cultural group that is reading or being read to — should also be considered. Fishman (1987) describes difficulties that might arise because of the differences in attitudes toward reading between the majority mainstream culture and a non-mainstream culture with different values. She points out that the Amish, an English/Dutch bilingual community, do not value critical reading or individual interpretation of a text, so mainstream teachers who try to teach these skills might experience difficulties with Amish children. However, because the Amish have their own school system, no conflict has occurred. Cultural divergences from the mainstream culture are significant for all non-mainstream learners, even when the children are not visually different, as in the Amish example. So, it is important for teachers to be aware of potential deleterious cultural conflict when they are selecting a book or requiring student participation. Cultural context is closely tied to social perspective. Social perspective concerns are ones which deal with the place of the individual within the society. In this regard, the Amish are very similar to the Japanese and the Indochinese. In all three cultures, great value is placed on fitting in with the norms and values of the community, and while research examining the preferences of children is quite scarce, it is not hard to imagine that children from these cultures would be more comfortable with stories that support collectivism. Mainstream Americans, by contrast, value individualism, so the books that mainstream American children prefer are likely to foster individualism. It is certainly the case that a large majority of the books written by American authors promote individualism. In a random sample of 30 books selected by mainstream children, and published as "Children's Choices" of favorite books from 1978, 1980 and 1982, Shannon (1986) found that 29 fostered individualism. None promoted collectivism alone, and only one book presented a balanced perspective of the importance of the individual and the importance of community. As a result of this study, Shannon suggests that teachers should be conscious of selecting and using at least some books which portray "an all for one and one for all" perspective, or a balanced perspective between individualism and collectivism. He points out that Dixon (1977) and Zipes (1976) provide good sources for such books, as does the Council for Interracial Books for Children (1976).

236

Elizabeth Whattey

Books which reflect a positive attitude toward various ethnic groups are, obviously, the most desirable ones to choose. The best books are those that present a realistic view of the way of life of the group portrayed in the text, be it Anglo, Asian, African, Hispanic, Slavic, or another group. Moreover, books that demonstrate diversity within the ethnic group are better than books that do not. Of course, the former type also helps children avoid stereotyping. While mainstream children may choose books with an individualist perspective, it is not yet known what books children from non-mainstream cultures and age groups will choose. Nevertheless, some information is available. Peterson (1982) reports that seventh grade MexicanAmerican children liked what American children liked in terms of setting; that neither group favored stark or pleasant settings, and that, interestingly enough, both groups chose to read about negative group interaction. In addition, she found that Mexican-American children appear to have a slight preference for characters that demonstrate low self-esteem. Although this finding is disconcerting, it is heartening to learn that Mexican-American children viewed themselves as more competent than their teachers viewed them (Adams & Anderson 1982; J. Bankman, personal communication, February 2, 1989). And all children, according to Sutherland (1986), enjoy stories with action or conflict, and are not interested in stories that provide dull information in a pretense of dialogue. After recognzing their own preferences, teachers should also acknowledge student preferences. Reading the books that children request shows respect for the children and their needs as well as value for their choices. As Arbuthnot in the classic third edition of Children and Books (1964) reminds readers, children's needs include the need to achieve and be recognized, the need to feel secure, the need for change, and the need for aesthetic satisfaction. Children feel secure and recognized when their choices are honored. Linguistic factors The linguistic structures presented in the text are also important to consider in choosing a book for ESL students. For example, teachers should be aware of sounds in the book which may be difficult for the children to pronounce. The teacher, however, need not deselect a book because the sounds are possibly difficult for a child. In fact,

ESL children and children 's literature

237

just the opposite may be the best procedure. When difficult sounds are encountered early, rather than avoided, children have more opportunities for practice. In general, the book's syntax should show common sentence structures (e.g., statements, questions, and commands). In other words, teachers should avoid selecting stories which use British English or an overwhelming number of sentences with unfamiliar structure or unusual phrasing. Because conjunctions such as although, and yet, if, or so, that, thus, where, which, and while are difficult for second language learners to comprehend, it is pedagogically sound to delay reading stories with a high concentration of these structures until the children have enough language to understand some of them, so that the teacher does not get bogged down during the story hour providing extralinguistic support for these structures in addition to all the other assistance given to help students understand the logic of the story. Familiar vocabulary is critical to the child's understanding of, enjoyment of, and success with a book. Sutherland (1986), in speaking about books for all children, says, "The vocabulary need not be rigidly controlled, but it should not include so many terms that the reader is discouraged". Surprisingly, word frequency is not the most important factor a determine whether a student will recognize a word or not; meaningfulness is equally important (Graves, Boettcher, Peacock, & Ryder 1980). As a rule of thumb, at least 60 percent of the words in the book should be known to the child. Because this ratio of familiar to unfamiliar words may be very difficult to achieve early in the term, it is important for the teacher to read about topics which deal with the here and now, or topics which are illustrated in the text.

Pedagogical factors In addition to linguistic factors, pedagogical considerations, such as helping the ESL child achieve in the classroom, are also important. Take, for example, success with understanding of the text. Because background knowledge is important for this kind of understanding (Carrell & Eisterhold 1983), one way to help ESL children succeed is to choose topics that are equally familiar or unfamiliar to all children in the class. Teachers and researchers have found, in general, that differences in amount of material that children retain depends on how much they know about a topic. In some interesting counterintuitive research results addressing the relationship between specific

238

Elizabeth Whalley

amounts of familiarity with the topic and facility of recall, Lipson (1984) has shown that children with partial knowledge about a topic do less well on recall of a passage on that topic than the same children do when the text is totally unfamiliar. In fact, children recall text about a topic that is totally unfamiliar as well as they do a text about a topic that is very familiar. Thus, amount of familiarity with the topic is not necessarily a criterion for using or rejecting a text, though it is a relevant consideration in terms of developing realistic expectations for student success with the text. Although Lipson's results may lead one to assume that it is best to work with either totally unfamiliar or very familiar texts, teachers are rarely in a position to do this. What seems an optimal strategy, then, is for teachers to assess how familiar students are with a topic in order to anticipate their success with the text. One way teachers can learn about an ESL child's knowledge about a topic is to interview classmates and siblings or work similarly with a translator. Observation of the child's activities will provide useful information about the child's interests and preferences. What does the child draw? What toys does the child choose? Answers to these questions will give the teacher some idea about the interests and background knowledge of the child. Another way to help the ESL child achieve is to choose predictable books (Heald-Taylor 1987; Hough, Nurss, & Enright 1986; Rhodes 1981; Whalley 1982). These books enable children to anticipate and thus predict "what will come next". Ease of predictability depends on sound (rhymes and repeated rhythms), syntax (refrains and repeated patterns), and sense (logical sequences, useful illustrations and traditional narrative structure). Predictable books, with sufficient repetition of sounds and syntax allowing youngsters to "read" along with the teacher, are particularly encouraging to ESL children. ESL children can then experience the same satisfaction that Rhodes describes in one classroom incident. When reading The Little Red Hen, she came to the part where the Red Hen asks, "Who will cut the wheat?" and asked the children if they could guess what happens next. One youngster, Bradley, predicted correctly that the cat, dog, and mouse would say, "Not I" and that Red Hen would say, "Then I will". When Rhodes queried Bradley about how he knew the right answer, he responded, "I just listen and the book tells me". Predictable books, then, support, favor, and reconfirm the child's knowledge of the world and of language, and choosing predictable

ESL children and children 's literature

239

books insures that students will quickly become comfortable with a text. Once students are comfortable with the text, the teacher can then use the text as a basis for other language activities, especially listening activities. One of the best kinds of follow-up activities are those which employ Every-Student Response Techniques (ESRT), techniques which, as the name suggests, elicit responses from each child for each question (Hopkins 1979). With ESRT techniques, all children respond simultaneously to teachers' oral questions. Teachers can facilitate the responses by providing each child with a set of manipulative materials for the day's lesson. Such materials may, for instance, consist of sets of cards which are held together by a key ring. One set may be two cards, one with yes written on it and the other with no. Other sets of cards might have all the letters of the alphabet, just the consonants, just the vowels, or the numerals from one to ten. Happy and sad faces, items of clothing, means of transportation, or stick figures illustrating various action verbs are other possibilities. When the teacher asks a question, all students answer the question by showing the card with the appropriate answer. (Of course the ESL students might have to look at a classmate's cards to get the right answer but, more importantly, the ESL students are able to participate with their classmates). Every-student response techniques, however, should be used for teaching, not for testing. In a test situation, teachers are concerned with the level of achievement of individual students. With ESRT techniques the teacher is interested in the involvement of each student and the camaraderie which gets built up when youngsters participate in the same exercises together. Certainly the more often youngsters participate, the greater the likelihood that they are learning.

A sample book Just as no book can meet the needs of all readers, there is no perfect book for ESL students. Barbara Bottner's There Was Nobody There, however, is one example of an excellent choice for ESL students in grades K-3. Here is the text: I woke up one night There was nobody there. I reached for the light.

240

Elizabeth Whalley

I fell over a chair. I moved all the plants. There was nobody there. I wore Papa's pants. They're his favorite pair. I made myself tea. There was nobody there. I shipped out to sea I had waves in my hair. Soon the boat docked in Spain. There was nobody there. I got right on a train. Without paying the fare. I fell down a deep hole. There was nobody there. I was at the North Pole. Just me and my bear. Then I rode a balloon Not a bird anywhere. I arrived at the moon. There was nobody there. I cried all alone. "Doesn't anyone care?" Then Mama came home "I was just out somewhere" "But you weren't all alone. Your papa was there".1

How the story meets the criteria This short book meets all the criteria for a book which will be advantageous for ESL children as well as for native speakers. Social factors. Because the story deals with aspects of childhood common to all children, it has few cultural limitations. It deals with the fear of waking up and being alone, or just being left alone. ("I cried all alone. 'Doesn't anyone care?'") This fear is characteristic of children in a new school, and is all the more understandable for chilren in a new culture. Moreover, the story deals with parts of the world outside the United States (Spain, the North Pole, the moon). Finally,

ESL children and children 's literature

241

the comfort of a treasured toy (the bear) is depicted as are the childhood games of making tea and wearing parents' clothes. Linguistic factors. The initial TH in "there" is difficult for most nonnative speakers to pronounce, so the book gives them much exposure to a difficult sound. Also, the vocabulary is relatively easy to comprehend because most of the nouns have associated pictures. There are no idioms, unusual syntax, or troublesome conjunctions. Finally, except for two lines ("They're his favorite pair" and "Doesn't anyone care?"), the story is told in the simple past tense, so the child does not have to understand more than one tense. Pedagogical factors. The story is predictable, so it allows the students to feel successful. The title phrase, "there was nobody there", is repeated six times in this story of only 30 lines. By the third repetition, children can usually predict the rest of this sentence after hearing the first word or two. Also, the story lends itself wonderfully well to every student response techniques because it is easy for teachers to create questions about the sounds (What is the beginning sound of bearl What is the beginning sound of balloonl) and the vocabulary (How did she go to Spain? What clothes of her father's did she put on?). Using the story in the classroom Here is one lesson plan for using the story in a class of ESL students. (1) The teacher can begin by relating the story to the children's previous experience: Ask the children if they've awakened and found themselves alone. Hand-drawn stick figures of pictures cut out of a magazine of a child alone and a child in a group could be used to illustrate the word alone. ESL children with little language ability will not necessarily be able to respond immediately to the question about being alone, but the illustrations will help. (2) Next the teacher can ask the children to describe how it feels to be alone. Depending on their language strength, some ESL children may be able to respond to this question. This is a good time to have some children tell about an experience of being alone. (3) Then the teacher can read the story, encouraging children to join in the refrain "there was nobody there". Reading the story a second time will allow the students to feel that they are now listening to a familiar text, and some may join in with even more lines than they did on the first reading.

242

Elizabeth Whalley

(4) If the youngsters are not too restless, every-child response techniques can be used the same day. For example, a teacher might pass out the YES/NO cards and ask children, "Do night and light rhyme?"; "Do pants and plants rhyme"? The teacher could also ask, "Did the child ride a train?" and "Did the child ride a plane?" If the children have happy/sad face cards, the teacher can ask how the little girl felt when she woke up alone or when she saw her mother. (5) As an extension activity, the children can draw a picture of the room that they sleep in. The teacher can help them label bed, chair, light, and any other significant items in their room they wish to label. When searching for books which meet the criteria, a favorite author is a good place to start. Once one book of an author has been shown to be appropriate, it is quite likely that other books by the same author will meet the criteria. Mentioning the author to the children is important, even with ESL youngsters who have limited vocabularies. The children can begin thinking at an early age about who wrote the book and can learn about the authors they love. Of course, writing to the author is a wonderful activity. Most authors will respond, especially if a class picture is enclosed.

Book selection criteria: Checklist The following checklist is helpful as a guide for examining potential predictable books: Social/Psychological Factors Does the book. . . (1) deal with a topic of interest to children? (2) show congruence with the cultural context of the reading situation? (3) fit into your plan to have some balance of stories dealing with collectivism/individuality? (4) reflect a positive attitude toward any ethnic group which is represented? (5) appeal to you? Linguistic Factors Does the book. . . (1) provide sounds which you would like the children to practice? (2) show mainly common sentence structures? (3) have more familiar words than unfamiliar words?

ESL children and children 's literature

243

(4) deal with the here and now, and/or provide illustrations for concepts described or words used in the text? Pedagogical Factors Does the book.. . (1) have predictable rhymes and repeated rhythms? (2) have predictable refrains and repeated patterns? (3) have predictable vocabulary? (4) have logical sequences? (5) have traditional narrative structure? (6) have useful illustrations? (7) deal with a topic which is completely new to the child? (8) deal with a topic which the child has partial knowledge about? (9) deal with a totally familiar topic? (10) have content which can be used for every-pupil-response?

Conclusion In sum, teachers can facilitate their ESL students' pleasure during story-time by reading aloud to all the children predictable books and books in which the illustrations enhance the understanding of the story. By providing a book in which the language is not overwhelming, and one in which the content supports the children's knowledge of the world, the children will feel comfortable during the story time. Using every-student response techniques will increase the children's sense of security and help fulfill the children's need to achieve. New books contribute to the children's need for change, and the books themselves can help sate the need for aesthetic satisfaction. Note 1. Reprinted by permission of the author.

References Adams, P.J., and P.L. Anderson 1982 A comparison of teachers' and Mexican-American children's perceptions of the children's competence. Reading Teacher, 36, 8-13.

244

Elizabeth Whalley

Arbuthnot, M.H. 1964 Children and books. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Arbuthnot, M.H., and Z. Sutherland 1986 Children and books. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Booklist, 84 1987 Chicago: American Library Association. Bottner, B. 1978 There was nobody there. New York: Macmillan. Carrell, P., and J.C. Eisterhold 1983 Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 553-573. Council on Interracial Books for Children 1976 Human values in children's books. New York: Council on Interracial Books for Children. Dixon, B. 1977 Catching them while they are young: Vol. 1. Sex. race and class in children's fiction. London, U.K.: Pluto. Fishman, A.R. 1987 Literacy and cultural contest: A lesson from the Amish. Language Arts, 64, 842-854. Graves, M., J.A. Boettcher, J.L. Peacock and R. Ryder 1980 Word frequency as a predictor of students' reading vocabularies. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12,117-127. Heald-Taylor, G. 1981 Predictable literature selections and activities for language arts instruction. The Reading Teacher, 41, 6-12. Hopkins, C.J. 1979 Using every-pupil response techniques in reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 33,173-175. Hough, R.A., J.R. Nurss and D.S. Enright 1986 Story reading with limited English speaking children in the regular classroom. The Reading Teacher, 39, 510-514. Lipson,M.Y. 1984 Some unexpected issues in prior knowledge and comprehension. Reading Teacher, 37, 760-764. Moustafa, M. 1987 Comprehensible input PLUS the language experience approach: A longterm perspective. The Reading Teacher, 41, 276-386. Oldham, B.E. 1981 Selection the greatest responsibility. School Librarian, 29, 6-11. Oppenheim, J., B. Brenner and B.D. Boegehold 1986 Choosing books for kids. New York: Ballantine Books. Peterson, M.L. 1982 Mexican-American children: What do they prefer to read? Reading World, 22,129-131. Rhodes, L.K. 1981 I can read! Predictable books for reading and writing instruction. Reading Teacher, 34, 511-518.

ESL children and children 's literature

245

Shannon,?. 1986 Hidden within the pages: A study of social perspective in young children's favorite books. Reading Teacher, 39, 656-663. Sutherland, Z. 1986 Best in children's books: The University of Chicago guide to children's literature 1979-1984. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Veatch, J., and R.B. Cooter 1986 The effect of teacher selection on reading achievement. Language Arts, 63, 364-368. Whalley, E. 1982 Children's literature and ESL children. Paper presented at the 16th Annual TESOL Convention, Honolulu, Hawaii, May 1982. Zipes, J. 1976 Political plays for children. St. Louis, MO: Telos.

Cooperative principles, computers, and classroom language Robert A. DeVillar Introduction The use of small groups as a means to more effectively engage students in purposeful communication and thereby enhance their educational opportunities is a concept historically articulated within U.S. educational philosophy. Dewey (1916), for example, advocated using small groups to connect language to the shared experiences of students and to avoid dependence upon the instructional practice of teachers telling students about experiences: That education is not an affair of "telling" and being told, but an active and constructive process, is a principle almost as generally violated in practice as conceded in theory . . . Not that the use of language as an educational resource should lessen; but that its use should be more vital and fruitful by having its normal connection with shared activities . . . with the instrumentalities of cooperative or joint activity. (Dewey 1916:38)

While small group activities in the use of language development have been gathering momentum since the 1930s (Brumfit 1984:71), researchers (e.g., Gaies 1983) have expressed concerns that opportunities for second language development are not necessarily enhanced by simply rearranging students into small groups, even dyads. Within a bilingual setting, for example, both Milk (1980) and Neves (1984) found that small group work might actually constrain second language acquisition due in large part to two factors: first, the formal (i.e., teacher-formed) or informal (i.e., student-formed) grouping comprised of matched language proficiency levels (e.g., native speakers with native speakers, non-English proficient speakers with non-English proficient speakers); second, a laissez-faire methodological approach on the part of the instructors toward second language contact and development among students of differing (English and Spanish) proficiency levels within the content area classroom. Milk's findings did indicate that small group environments not only produced more talk but more on-

248

Robert A. DeVillar

topic talk than did the whole-class setting. Nevertheless, students within the different proficiency levels did not interact with one another due to the strategy of grouping by proficiency level, and talk within the target language in all groups was evaluated as minimal. This research tends to support the idea that small groupings may enhance, relative to the whole-class setting, natural-type language interaction opportunities, but do not necessarily facilitate the instructional process (i.e., teaching particular aspects of a language in a structured format) or produce dramatically different amounts of second language talk. More importantly, such research demonstrates that small groupings, by themselves, will not facilitate target language interaction between learners at different language proficiency levels.

Beyond grouping: Structured integrative practices There remains a need to integrate alternative instructional practices beyond that of the small group, particularly within regular and bilingual classroom settings, which encourage and facilitate meaningful verbal interaction in the target language among first and second language speakers alike. This need is, moreover, especially great for those language minority students identified as needing to achieve contextreduced proficiency (see Cummins 1981) in the target language. An alternative instructional practice has recently been identified which appears to enhance verbal interaction in the target language among speakers having differing language proficiency levels, within both the formal second language classroom and, perhaps more importantly, the content-area setting: cooperative learning. Cooperative learning principles in second language contexts Small group learning, especially in dyads, can be important to language learning mainly because it can provide, although only under certain conditions, increased opportunities for talk to occur and consequently for more practice in the target language. Research regarding the role of talk in the target language suggests that greater quantity of talk leads to greater proficiency (e.g., Larsen-Freeman 1985). As noted above, however, talk does not occur between and among peers of different language proficiency levels solely based on grouping arrangements.

Cooperative principles, computers, and classroom language

249

It appears, then, that for talk to occur between and among speakers of different target language proficiency levels, the small group strategy must be complemented by other supporting strategies. Currently, there is a growing trend which favors small group and pair work within the regular classroom setting, particularly in elementary schools (e.g., Cohen 1986; Kagan 1986, 1988; Johnson et αϊ. 1984; Slavin 1983). The settings are generally described, formally or informally, as cooperative, and are fundamentally characterized by students working together in small groups or in pairs on a common instructional task or program (Slavin 1983).

Cooperative learning: Essential elements Johnson et al. (1984) have summarized the four primary characteristics of an ideal cooperative learning setting as: (1) training in interpersonal and small group skills, (2) individual accountability for mastering the assigned material, (3) face-to-face interaction, and (4) positive interdependence. In contrast to the unstructured practice of placing students within small groups, which regularly results in unrealized instructional expectations, social and verbal interactions among all participants, regardless of their social status or level of academic or language proficiency, are generally facilitated through the communicative structure provided by these four characteristics. The element of positive interdependence is especially important to talk among the participants as it requires that each participant have a definite role in the activity to ensure that the completion of the task actively involves all group members. There appears to be little evidence of formal cooperative learning principles applied in toto within a second language learning setting or within a subject-matter learning setting comprised of speakers having different target language proficiency levels where language interaction between and among speakers target was measured. (The EFL study by Bejarano [1987] is a notable exception.) Particular cooperative learning principles, however, have been found to support target language input within native-speaker/non-native-speaker (NSNNS) and non-native-speaker/non-native-speaker (NNS-NNS) groupings. The key elements of face-to-face interaction and positive interdependence, for example, have been identified and incorporated by second language researchers investigating opportunities for sustained talk

250

Robert A. DeVillar

between combinations of native-speakers and non-native-speakers, primarily within ESL (adult) classrooms. In his 1980 study, for example, Long found that significant amounts of speech production among dyad participants occurred where both native speakers and non-native speakers had information to contribute to the task. Together, the cooperative elements of face-to-face interaction and positive interdependence are characteristic of what Long (1980) describes as a two-way task. Where only the native speaker had information to impart (i.e., a one-way task), the learner did not have the opportunity to negotiate the conversation by providing verbal feedback to the native speaker. Follow-up studies by Long (1981, 1983) and others (e.g., Doughty and Pica 1984; Gass and Varonis 1985) have corroborated that talk among dyad participants occurs more within the two-way task design than within the oneway task. The difference between the full cooperative and partially-cooperative models, aside from the two-way task lacking two of the four elements stated earlier, is mainly one of relative focus rather than kind. Cooperative learning, for example, is generally concerned with structuring a learning environment where students, whatever their particular range of performance, cultural, or other selected characteristics, can work together (rather than against one another) in order to enable every student to engage actively in the learning process, thereby improving their outcome opportunities. The tasks and roles are structured so that training, monitoring, and evaluation are part of the learning sequence (Johnson et al, 1984), and outcomes generally include noncognitive (e.g., Slavin 1983), as well as cognitive measures (e.g., Johnson et al. 1981). The two-way task, on the other hand, is generally concerned with establishing a social interaction setting where, as a means to tangibly elicit verbal performance in the target language on a sustained basis by both speakers, participants have a definite role in the proposed exchange together with exclusive, but partial, information required to complete the task assigned to their team (Long 1981, 1983). Measurement generally reflects the (a) relative degree of second language input opportunities (especially in the form of target language modifications by a speaker to his or her partner), (b) quantitative performance in the target language, and (c) variations within groupings (usually dyads) comprised of native- and non-native speakers in their various combinations (e.g., Long 1980, 1981, 1983; Doughty

Cooperative principles, computers, and classroom language

251

and Pica 1984; Gass and Varonis 1985). Language modification is considered especially important to second language acquisition opportunities within the classroom as it is used as an indicator of comprehensible input, i.e., as language that is accessible to, yet slightly higher than, the learner's level of proficiency (Krashen 1980).

Cooperative principles as second language facilitators: Linguistic and interactional adjustments The incorporation of key principles (i.e., face-to-face interactions and positive interdependence) from within the cooperative learning model described above has been especially useful in enabling second language researchers to gather more extensive data and identify patterns relative to the nature of target language modifications produced by both native- (NS) and non-native-speaker (NNS) groupings (especially dyads), including groupings comprised solely of non-native-speakers. Native speakers of a language generally modify their language performance with respect to the perceived target language proficiency of their interlocutor (e.g., see reviews by Hatch [1983] and Long [1983]). Such modifications are commonly referred to as foreigner talk (Ferguson 1975; Long 1983) or alternately, when referring specifically to the classroom content, as teacher talk (e.g., Henzl 1973; Larsen-Freeman 1985). Modifications in the target language produced by less than fully proficient non-native speakers generally fall under the rubric of interlanguage (Selinker 1972; see also Long and Porter 1985 for review). As indicated earlier, modifying one's language use, especially on the part of native speakers, is generally considered a means of providing the target language learner with comprehensible input, the only type of linguistic input considered by some researchers to lead to increased proficiency in the target language (Krashen 1982). Thus, original concerns regarding modifications to the phonology, morphology, syntax, and vocabulary in the speech of the proficient (usually native) speaker to their less proficient (second language) interlocutor (Gaies 1983), have recently been refined to include the notion of interaction modifications (e.g., Long 1980, 1981), a discourse strategy utilized by interlocutors as a means to sustain a conversation. Examples of discourse modifications include confirmation checks, comprehension checks, repetitions, rephrasing, and questioning (see Long and Sato 1983). The interlocutors, then, are engaged in a communicative process in

252

Robert A. DeVillar

which, to greater or lesser degrees, the language input (i.e., meaning) is negotiated between them for the sake of sustained comprehension (e.g., Ellis 1985 ;Tarone 1981). The two-way task: Beyond the university ESL setting Second language researchers (e.g., Long 1980; Long et al. 1976; Gass and Varonis 1985; Pica and Doughty 1984; Porter 1983; Varonis and Gass 1985) have investigated modification (both linguistic and interactional) and meaning negotiation involving native- and nonnative-speakers of a target language. Their findings generally support those of Milk (1980) that small groups, especially dyads, are more effective than the teacher-fronted, whole-group classroom setting in generating and negotiating talk in the target language. This language, however, does differ in important ways from conditions present in traditional elementary classroom settings, which include the regular classroom, bilingual classroom, and ESL classroom (see DeVillar 1987 and 1990). Subjects, for example, are generally adult, university undergraduates or graduates, typically from the middle class socioeconomic stratum or above, who are standard speakers of their first language. University second language settings generally attempt to simulate contents immediately external to the classroom (e.g., conversations one might have at a restaurant, a bank, a hospital, etc.) or imaginary events which present survival dilemmas involving crucial moral decisions by two or more interlocutors (e.g., Porter 1983). On occasion, two speakers of equal or unequal target language proficiency are placed together in a room, with a tape recorder, and asked to speak to each other for a predetermined length of time in a free-form fashion (i.e., topic is not specified). Regardless of the type of stimulus-context investigated, the subjects' target language proficiency level is generally intermediate or above. Thus, the topics, tasks, subjects, and target language proficiency levels generally present within university ESL settings do not reflect conditions prevailing within the natural classroom settings of elementary schools, where children with a broad range of target language proficiency levels are fundamentally responsible for learning a particular content area (e.g., reading, writing, math, science, social science) within the context of a heterogeneous classroom (Enright and McCloskey 1985).

Cooperative principles, compu ten, and classroom language

253

Second language use and cooperative learning in the K-12 heterogeneous setting A methodological structure designed to actively engage all students in the learning process, regardless of content area, is needed if the communicative language learning model is to be effectively implemented within the heterogeneous K-12 setting. Research investigating the effects of cooperative learning principles on second language use within this setting is, as stated earlier, relatively scant. Three recent studies (Bejarano 1987; DeVillar 1987; Edfelt 1989), however, have addressed second language use (in terms of listening skills, quantity and quality of language use) among peers within a communicative language learning context in which cooperative principles were applied. Each researcher investigated students at a different grade level (seventh, sixth and fifth, respectively), utilizing research designs which incorporated, to greater or lesser degrees, essential elements associated with the Johnson et al. (1984) cooperative model cited earlier. The findings regarding the various aspects of second language use which they investigated are summarized below. Cooperation & EFL opportunities: An experimental study Bejarano (1987) found that EFL seventh grade Israeli students exposed to cooperative learning contexts experienced greater improvement in their listening comprehension and total achievement test scores than did their peers in traditional whole-class EFL settings. Her research provides a clear example of how cooperative learning methods can be effectively integrated into the communicative language learning framework to significantly enhance both communication among second language students and particular second language performance results. Nevertheless, for purposes of generalizing these findings to a wider audience, Bejarano's research appears more adapted to students following the immersion model of education (see Lambert 1984) than to language minority students from less-privileged socioeconomic circumstances. The conditions of homogeneity, for example, among the subjects in terms of (1) general school achievement and (2) first language (i.e., Hebrew) are significantly different from conditions found within U.S. elementary and secondary classrooms where groups of language

254

Robert A. DeVillar

minority students are expected to successfully interact with native English speaking teachers (see Schinke-Llano 1983) and students (see Milk 1980; Neves 1984). Computers, cooperative learning and second language use Computers have generally been found to promote social and verbal interaction among students, whether through formal design or serendipity and regardless of grouping intent (i.e., small group or individualized instruction) (e.g., Becker 1984/85; Hawkins 1984; Hawkins, Sheingold, Gearhart and Berger 1982; Hess and Ford 1985; Muller and Perlmuter 1984). A cooperative structure within a computer instructional setting, moreover, can significantly improve students' cognitive performance over that of students working independently at the computer (Johnson, Johnson and Stanne 1985). Investigaors (e.g., Schubert 1984 cited in Lieberman 1985), however, have also found evidence within computerassisted settings which supports findings within traditional instructional settings (e.g., Schinke-Liano 1983) that teachers interact differentially vis-a-vis minority students. Specifically, teachers tended to encourage white (male) students while discouraging and creating obstacles for minorities and females (reported in Lieberman 1985). Thus, in the heterogeneous (e.g., ethnolinguistically- and/or gender-diverse) computer instructional setting, as in the traditional classroom, there appears to be a demonstrated need for alternative instructional methods, such as cooperative learning, which will enable all students to benefit from learning activities.

1. Communication, cooperation and computers There is substantial evidence that a cooperative setting will increase the second language production of students within the K-12 heterogeneous setting (e.g., DeVillar, 1987, 1990; Edfelt, 1989). Evidence appears especially strong when one compares second language production within the latter environment to the opportunities available to students within whole-class or informally structured small group contents. The question now becomes to what degree is this cooperative learning, computer-assisted instructional setting a communicative one? Edfelt (1989) found, for example, that much of the discourse between partners, regardless of their respective ESL levels, could not be comprehended without considering the presence of the computer

Cooperative principles, computers, and classroom language

255

(i.e., screen, keyboard) as a significant element within the interaction. Students' discourse, then, may appear ungrammatical, incoherent, or disconnected to a teacher, resource teacher, aide, or researcher unless the computer's influential role is understood. Graphics which simulate actions, for example, can have the effect of interrupting utterances, shifting topics, or modifying discourse pace. Also, discourse between partners will not depend solely upon a previous utterance by one of the partners but can also depend, for example, on a question posed by the computer. Thus, discourse patterns appear to be a result not of a dyadic relationship but of a triadic interaction context where the computer organizes the conversation, determines topic and topic shift, as well as sequencing. Consequently, the presence of face-to-face interaction, a fundamental cooperative element, within this context is questionable. The interaction context appears rather to be characterized by a sideto-side arrangement where partners are mutually oriented toward the computer. As Scheflen (cited in Edfelt, 1989) notes, only the former provides opportunities for interaction between participants. Within a cooperative context, then, especially where computers are actively present, there remains a need to understand how the elements comprising the setting can work toward natural communication and, conversely, how they can constrain communication and promote communicative artifice. 2. Status-inequity, computers and cooperative settings The phenomenon of status-inequity between peers appears to loom large within the heterogeneous cooperative context and to be intimately linked to the degree and quality of communication between participants. Edfelt (1989) convincingly demonstrates, through the use of abundant dialogue examples, that the ability to carry out cooperatively assigned tasks equitably remains difficult where the partners are at different language proficiency levels. Barriers to effective implementation of cooperative learning principles were especially evident at the Monolingual English-Non English Proficient (ME-NEP) dyad level, but also extended to Spanish-speaking dyads having different English Language Proficiency (ELP) levels. However, an array of contextual variables needs investigating before it can be stated that status-inequity will occur whenever students of different ability levels are grouped together. The following discussion illustrates how con-

256

Robert A. DeVillar

textual variables such as software application, task assignment, training, and role designation may affect the degree of cooperation between mixed-ability partners and, hence, the degree and quality of their shared communication. Software application. In Edfelt's study, The Oregon Trail, a program simulating a covered-wagon trek from St. Louis, Missouri, to the Oregon territory during the mid-19th century, was used. Players made decisions regarding life-sustaining and life-threatening events which occurred throughout their simulated travels. The decisions, however, as the situations themselves, became formulaic upon repeated interactions (and not necessarily prior to the completion of a total program cycle). The simulation's ability, then, to elicit active and natural interaction between ELP-diverse partners appeared limited. Results of this limitation were expressed in various, but communicatively related ways, including: (a) establishment of dominant-subordinate roles (driven apparently by superior ELP level), prevalent within all mixed dyad levels where the NEP was present, but especially so between the ME and NEP speakers; (b) a very low production of oral negotiation routines; and (c) a substantial generation of rehearsed language between the dyad members. Conditions for second language input and output are less than optimal within this particular context. DeVillar's (1987) study, in contrast, used what could be called a word-processing application modified for student-centered learning within the classroom (i.e., Bank Street Writer). The students, as in Edfelt's case, had prior familiarity with the package and used it exclusively during the course of the study. The fundamental difference between the two programs is that The Oregon Trail is simulation oriented while Bank Street Writer (BSW) is application oriented. The application oriented package guided students in terms of their goal (e.g., topic, number of paragraphs) but left the control of the process in the hands of the students. Thus, the screen, at the point of writing, was blank and the text which was to be entered a function of the conversational interaction between each dyad member. There were strong indicators that communication of a more natural type had resulted within this software context. The NEP speaker, for example, produced 57 percent of his total words in English, spoke more English with the native English speaker than with any other partner, and generated more simple sentences with this same partner than with any other speaker. Moreover, dyads as a whole produced a higher percentage of words in the form of simple and complex sentences (59%) than

Cooperative principles, computers, and classroom language

257

fragments (39%) or isolated subordinate clauses (2%). Thus, the kind of software program may influence the degree to which the dyad context is communicative. An application which requires the members to create their own product may be more conducive to the oral production of natural language and the negotiation of meaning than a simulation which can quickly become a known quantity and elicit predictable responses. Task and role interdependence. The degree of interdependence between the dyad members in the two computer-based studies differed. DeVillar's methodology, for example, called for task and resource interdependence between partners. Task interdependence was achieved by having one interlocutor responsible for all keyboard-related operations and the other for all screen-related activities (partners would switch tasks at the halfway point of each 20-minute session). Each member's role in terms of task, then, was clearly defined: one could enter information only after (a) the other had read the screen text and (b) the options relative to the text to be entered had been discussed between them. Edfelt's methodology appears to have had the students alternate use of the keyboard after each turn. This latter design neither established distinctive roles between partners nor allowed one partner to actively engage in a particular task for a sustained period of time, two factors which may have influenced the communicative nature of the relationship. Formal training. The degree to which students were trained in cooperative learning must also be considered as exerting a degree of influence on the communicativeness of the dyad context. A two-day training session (i.e., Edfelt, 1989) or a 15-minute introduction (i.e., DeVillar, 1987) is unlikely to be effective unless the partners are monitored over a specified period of time in order to reinforce cooperative practices and discourage competitive or egocentric behaviors. In summary, cooperativeness, as communicativeness, appears less likely to result when (a) exposure has been slight to formal cooperative learning principles, (b) dyad members are unlikely learning partners, (c) project tasks are redundant, relying on fixed formats and formulaic responses, and (d) roles are ambiguous. If these four elements were replaced with their logical counterparts, that is, more extensive formal training and monitoring, familiarity among students with respect to heterogeneous paired groupings, creative tasks, and concrete roles, then a stronger communicative environment, one not significantly burdened by the issue of status-inequity, could predictably result.

258

Robert A. DeVillar

The computer and its attendant software, in combination with cooperative learning principles, provide all students, regardless of English language proficiency level, greater opportunities for peer communication than are available within the traditional classroom setting. Yet quality and quantity of communication across different English language proficiency levels remain a salient issue. Further research, especially of a long-term nature, within this alternative setting would assist us in understanding the complexity of this issue and in generating meaningful communicative alternatives for all students within the heterogeneous classroom.

References Becker, H.J. 1984/85 School uses of microcomputers: Report #6 from a National Survey. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, vol. iv (2), 42-49. Bejarano, Y. 1987 A cooperative small-group methodology in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (3), 483-504. Brumfit, C. 1984 Communicative methodology in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cohen, E.G. 1986 Designing groupwork, strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Cummins, J. 1981 The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In Office of Bilingual Bicultural Education (ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework. Los Angeles, California: Evaluation, dissemination and Assessment Center (California State University), 349. DeVillar, R.A. 1987 Variation in the language use of peer dyads within a bilingual, cooperative, computer-assisted instructional setting. Unpublihsed doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. 1990 Second language use within the non-traditional classroom: Computers, cooperative learning, and bilingualism. In R. Jacobson and C. Faltis (eds.), Language distribution issues in bilingual schooling. London: Multilingual Matters, 133-159. Dewey, J. 1916 Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press (1966 edition, 1 Oth printing).

Cooperative principles, compu ten, and classroom language

259

Doughty, C., and T. Pica 1984 Small group work in the ESL classroom: Does it facilitate language acquisition? Paper presented at TESOL 1984. Houston, Texas. Edfelt.N. 1989 Computer assisted second language acquisition: The oral discourse of children at the computer in a cooperative learning context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Stanford University. Ellis, R. 1985 Teacher-pupil interaction in second language development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, 69-85. Enright, D.S., and M.L. McCloskey 1985 Yes, talking!: Organizing the classroom to promote second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (3), 431-453. Ferguson, C. 1975 Towards a characterization of English foreigner talk. Anthropological Linguistics, 17,1-14. Gaies, S. 1983 Learner feedback: An exploratory study of its role in the second language classroom. In Seliger, H.W. and Long, M.H. (eds.), classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers. Gass, S.M., and E.M. Varonis 1985 Task variation and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning. In Gass, S.M. and C. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, 149-161. Hatch, E. 1983 Forward. In Wolfson, N. and Judd, E. (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, ix-xviii. Hawkins, J. 1984 The interpretation of LOGO in practice. Technical Report, Center for Children and Technology, Bank Street Collete of Education. Hawkins, J., K. Sheingold, M. Gearhart and B. Berger 1982 Microcomputers in schools: Impact on the social life in elementary classrooms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, vol. 3, 361-373. Henzl, V. 1973 Linguistic register of foreign language instruction. Language Learning, vol. 23(l),207-222. Hess, R.D., and M.E. Ford 1985 Effects of microcomputer use in kindergarten on students' social behavior and academic performance. Report prepared for the International Business Machines Corporation. Stanford, California. Johnson, D.W., G. Maruyama, R.T. Johnson, D. Nelson and L. Skon 1981 Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analyas. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.

260

Robert A. DeVillar

Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, E. Holubec Johnson and P. Roy 1984 Circles of learning, cooperation in the classroom. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson and M. Stanne 1985 Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, December, vol. 77 (6), 668-677. Kagan, S. 1986 Cooperative learning and sociocultural factors in schooling. In Bilingual Education Office, California State Department of Education (ed.), Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students. Los Angeles, California: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, 231-298. Krashen, S. 1982 Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Lambert, W.E. 1984 An overview of issues in immersion education. In California State Department of Education (ed.), Studies on immersion education, A collection for United States educators. Sacramento, California: California State Department of Education. Larsen-Freeman, D. 1985 State of the art on input in second language acquisition. In Gass, S.M. and Madden, C. (eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, 433-444. Lieberman, D. 1985 Research on children and microcomputers: A review of utilization and effects studies. In Chen, M. and Paisley, W. (eds.), Children and microcomputers. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 59-83. Long, M.H. 1980 Input, interaction and second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles. 1981 Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In Winitz, H. (ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379,250-278. 1983 Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 5 (2), 177-193. Long, M.H., L. Adams, M. McLean and F. Castanos 1976 Doing things with words — Verbal interaction in lockstep and small group classroom situations. In Fanselow, J. and Crymes, R. (eds.), On TESOL 76. Washington, D.C.: TESOL. Long M.H., and P. Porter 1985 Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 207-228. Long, M.H., and C. Sato 1983 Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of teachers' questions. In Seliger, H.W. and Long, M.H. (eds.), Classroom oriented

Cooperative principles, compu ters, and classroom language

261

research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers; 268-285. Milk, R.D. 1980 Variations in language use patterns across different group settings in two bilingual second grade classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Muller, A.A., and M. Perlmutter 1984 Preschool children's problem-solving interactions at computers and jigsaw puzzles. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Center for Research in Human Learning at the University of Minnesota. Neves, H.A. 1984 Talking in the classroom and second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Porter, P. 1983 Variations in the conversations of adult learners of English as a function of the proficiency level of the participants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Schinke-Llano, L.A. 1983 Foreigner talk in content classroom. In Seliger, H.W. and Long, M.H. (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, 146-164. Selinker, L. 1972 Interlanguage. In Richards, J.C. (ed.), Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition. London: Longman. Slavin, R.E. 1983 Non-cognitive outcomes of cooperative learning. In Levine, J.M. and Wang, M.C. (eds.), Teacher and student perceptions: Implications for learning. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 341-35. Tarone, E. 1981 Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. TESOL Quarterly, 15 (3), 285-295. Varonis, E.M., and S. Gass 1985 Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6 (1), 71-90.

Part IV Bilingual education for language minority students

Introduction

These chapters discuss a range of pedagogical and linguistic concerns related to one specific context, that of providing bilingual education for language minority students in the U.S.A. The nature of teacher training appropriate to support bilingual instruction is analyzed by Robert Milk, who traces the movement from a purely competencybased approach to one that integrates findings from more current research, and by Eleanor Thonis, who describes the skills and beliefs characteristic of effective teachers. Both chapters emphasize that teacher training must address scientific and humanistic issues in tandem to prepare teachers adequately for work in language minority settings. The question of the role of vernacular language varieties in the bilingual classroom is examined by Frances Morales. She notes the simultaneous importance of developing student skills in the standard language while maximizing students' ability to comprehend instruction, a goal which demands that teachers and teaching materials take vernacular varieties into account. Jose Hernandez reviews particular uses of language in teaching techniques designed to promote use of cognitive and interactive strategies for language minority students. The two chapters that close this section offer case studies of program innovations planned to improve bilingual instruction. Barbara Merino and Consuelo Coughran present a model for designing and evaluating an approach to curriculum that integrates subject areas, while Cynthia Prince shows how qualitative evaluation can be used on a state-wide level to provide instructional information valuable for both policymakers and practitioners concerned with bilingual education.

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction Robert D. Milk Introduction Recent research on effective schooling for Hispanic students (Garcia 1987; Garcia et al. 1988), combined with earlier findings on effective instructional practices in bilingual classrooms (Tikunoff 1983) provide fairly clear and concrete directives on the kind of learning environment that needs to be created in order for limited English proficient pupils to flourish in their early years of formal education. For teacher educators, however, the question that remains unanswered is what kinds of university-based preparation can provide the most thorough and complete basis for fulfilling the roles implied by this research. Indeed, it is even possible that some of the principles underlying current approaches to preparation of bilingual and ESL teachers (principles which pre-date the current research) may be based on assumptions that are no longer valid. Classroom teachers and teacher educators do not always agree on how teacher preparation programs should be organized, but there is one observation frequently made which perhaps can provide a common point of reference, and that is: "Teachers generally teach the way that they were taught". Drawing from this maxim, it appears evident that teacher education programs should, in some sense, mirror the ideal that they wish to portray to their participants — the kind of process that teacher trainees are involved in through their preparation should reflect in meaningful ways the kind of process that we wish for them to initiate in their classrooms when they begin to teach. This chapter explores the connection between "effective bilingual instruction", as depicted by contemporary research, and the kind of teacher preparation process that this research seems to imply. First, some of the key research on effective bilingual instruction is summarized, then general issues related to teacher education are explored. The implications of these issues for relevant teacher preparation in bilingual education are then examined, with the core focus being

268

Robert D. Milk

on the following question: How can we best prepare effective bilingual teachers for effective bilingual instruction?

Effective bilingual instruction A distinction needs to be made at the outset between effective bilingual schools and effective instructional practices. Clearly, the former provides a more all-encompassing focus, and includes critical considerations that relate to the total system affecting a child's education. In their research examining effective bilingual schools, Carter and Chatfield (1986) heavily emphasize the importance of processes that generate an overall school climate supportive of positive student outcomes, as opposed to discrete attributes that might be individually identified and pursued. Among the characteristics that these authors stress are included: positive leadership, strong academic orientation, wellfunctioning methods, high staff expectations, and good staff morale (Carter and Chatfield 1986:205). Research focusing on effective instructional practices emphasizes aspects of schooling that are under more direct control of the individual classroom teacher. In a very real sense, effective instruction is never fully separate from the kinds of considerations included under effective schools, for a teacher's effectiveness is always affected (either negatively or positively) by the quality of leadership, type of instructional support, and nature of the social climate that permeates the school. Teacher preparation programs clearly do need to create an awareness among teachers regarding the importance of a positive school climate, as well as a sense of responsibility within teachers for promoting, through whatever means available, the kind of overall social climate that will enhance educational outcomes. Within this chapter, the focus will be specifically on effective instructional practices and on the means through which teacher education programs can foster and encourage these kinds of practices among bilingual teachers. The first national study to focus specifically on effective bilingual instructional practices is the well-known Significant Bilingual Instructional Features study (Tikunoff 1985). In this study (SBIF), observational data were collected from the classrooms of 58 effective bilingual teachers at six different sites in the nation, and commonalities related to instructional practices were identified. Among the features identified were two that relate to the communi-

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction

269

cation and organization of instruction, and that are features commonly mentioned in the effective teaching literature for non-bilingual classes: (a) teachers display "active teaching" behaviors, and (b) teachers clearly specify task outcomes and consistently communicate high expectations to the students. Subsequent reviews of the SBIF study have suggested that there may be some limitations, particularly for language minority children, in the kind of classroom organization described in much of the research on effective teaching (cf. Cazden 1984). Of more direct relevance to our concerns in this chapter are those instructional features that are unique to bilingual education. The SBIF study identifies three: (a) use of both the native language and English for instruction, (b) integrating devlopment of the second language with on-going instruction in the content areas, and (c) drawing on the students' cultural background to mediate learning. A more recent study focusing on effective schooling for Hispanic children examines the classroom practices of seven exceptionally successful teachers, based both on nominations as well as on standardized test results. Garcia (1988) summarizes five key findings drawn from the extensive data base, which includes participant observation, interviews, and videotapes. First, the intellectual level of the curriculum in these classrooms was of the highest order. Students were generally participating in activities and tasks that demanded both creativity and a high degree of cognitive involvement on their parts. Second, teachers emphasized the importance of substance and content in teaching, and de-emphasized mastery of specific skills. The emphasis throughout was on comprehension and on meaning, and students were continuously examining, in a conscious manner, their use of language and their thinking. Third, these classrooms were characterized by a diversity of instructional activity. Instruction took place in many ways, and reading and writing were typically integrated as part of a broader activity. Assessments generally took place in the context of actual learning activities. A fourth finding was that these effective teachers strongly encouraged students to make use of their personal experiences for learning purposes, setting up lessons in a way that led students to draw connections between home or community experiences and the academic lessons. Finally, these teachers worked actively to obtain autonomy in making curricular decisions within their classrooms, and created support networks for implementation of their general approach to instruction.

270

Robert D. Milk

The five generalizations summarized by Garcia clearly emphasize broad processes that characterize the kind of teaching and learning that was recorded by the data. None of the five findings can be easily translated into a specific teaching skill or teacher competency such as might be needed in drawing up a list of teacher competencies for teacher training or for competency-based assessments. This observation will be useful below when we consider ways in which findings from instructional practices research might be directly connected to teacher preparation in bilingual education.

Issues in teacher education Within teacher education, the literature of rcent years has stressed certain themes that may provide guidance in conceptualizing a slightly different approach to bilingual teacher preparation, something which may be required in order to prepare educators for the kinds of roles described by Garcia (1988). In this section, three themes that appear particularly relevant for preparing teachers who will be involved in some aspect of language education are identified and briefly discussed. One clear theme that emerges from contemporary discussions on preparation of teachers for mainstream education is that programs need to achieve greater integration of theory and practice. This theme is also prevalent in the language teaching literature (Alatis, Stern & Strevens 1983). In part, this goal can be accomplished through the development of methods courses that stress the interrelationship of theory and practice, but a consensus has developed supporting the need to incorporate experiential activities, including clinical supervision, demonstration, and field-based activities to supplement coursework and seminars (Mellgren, Walker & Lange 1988; Celce-Murcia 1983; McGroarty & Galvan 1985; Clark & Milk 1984). A second theme that emerges from the literature is that teachers who are dealing with language and culture need to be incuclated with a research perspective that will encourage them to be curious, to ask relevant questions about what is happening in the classroom, to observe closely with purpose, and to develop a heightened awareness about what is occurring around them. Brumfit (1983:70) argues that developing reflective teachers will enhance their performance: "Our understanding of language, of language learning, and of social interaction . . can only benefit from awareness of what happens in language

Preparing teachers for effec five bilingual instruction

271

classrooms". Involving future teachers in observational research, it is argued, trains them to engage in the kind of thoughtful analysis that can lead to productive self-study and insightful self-evaluation (Mellgren, Walker & Lange 1988). A third theme that has become particularly prevalent in the 1980s, and which serves to balance off the kind of systematic analysis called for by a "research perspective", is that skillful teaching requires a great deal of intuition, and that this quality needs to be carefully nurtured among teacher trainees, not stifled. Ultimately, successful teaching requires successful interaction with "real learners", and the personal, human response that must occur between teacher and learner ultimately relies just as heavily on reflective intuition as it does on careful analysis of classroom processes. In sum, effective teaching is a "matter of intuition as well as of scientific analysis" (Brown 1983:56), and ways must be sought to encourage this quality among teachers in training. In a very real sense, these last two themes recall a recurring debate within teacher education, which revolves around the question of whether teaching is best seen as a science or as an art. As in most dichotomies, this one undoubtedly oversimplifies the substantive differences in philosophical approach to teacher education that are implied. Nevertheless, it is instructive to examine the implications for training when teaching is approached from a posture of "teaching as science" vs. a posture of "teaching as art". It would seem that efforts in the 1960s to identify specific teaching behaviors associated with successful learning that could then be focused on during teacher training were inspired by a strong orientation toward establishing a scientific basis for conceptualizing instruction. Efforts to empirically validate the significance of specific teacher behaviors were not entirely successful. Politzer (1970) was one of only a few researchers in the area of language teaching who used observational data to attempt to distinguish "good" vs. "bad" language teaching behaviors (Allwright 1988). His findings were not conclusive, but the interpretations he drew from the data are quite interesting and worth citing directly (Politzer 1970:41-43): I should, therefore, like to suggest that there are probably very few teaching behaviors or devices which can be classified as intrinsically "bad" or "good". Ultimately, most teaching activities undertaken by a language teacher in a language class have probably some value; but each activity is subject to what might be called a principle of economics. Each activity consumes a limited

272

Robert D. Milk

resource — namely time. Thus the value of each activity depends on the value of other activities which might be substituted for it at a given moment . . . (The) choice of devices and the optimal frequency of a device are the matter of individual judgment by the teacher. The 'good' teacher is the one who can make the right judgment as to what teaching device is the most valuable at any given moment. Good language teaching is an 'art'. (Emphasis added)

What is remarkable about this citation is that an empirical study drawing from data based on a language teaching approach strongly influenced by behaviorist learning theory (i.e., audiolingualism), and tied into a teacher education approach which was also behaviorally oriented (i.e., micro teaching sessions focusing on one specific teaching skill at a time), should end up with an interpretation that is so clearly reflective of a fundamentally different conception of teaching. In retrospect, it appears that Politzer was a good bit ahead of his time, for his remarks came at a time when competency-based training programs for second language teachers and, later, for bilingual educators were just beginning to be developed and implemented. This historical background is important, for a good portion of energies and efforts in bilingual education teacher preparation have been directed at precisely specifying the exact competencies expected of fully prepared bilingual teachers. These efforts have been useful because they have helped identify what should properly be the focus of teacher educators in this area of specialization, and the precise systematization of a body of knowledge associated with bilingual teaching has helped to legitimize teacher preparation programs within universities. Nevertheless, the question that now needs to be addressed, given the kinds of research findings summarized above, is to what extent the teacher training experience that has grown out of competency-based programs is adequate in preparing teachers for the kind of instructional practices demanded by current research.

Developments in bilingual teacher training Given the relatively short history of certificate programs in bilingual education (less than 15 years in most cases), remarkable advances have been made in teacher training for bilingual education. The first challenge confronted by teacher educators was to identify the kinds of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are needed by bilingual teachers in order to effectively fulfill their job (Center for Applied Linguistics

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction

273

1974; Blanco 1977). The second challenge was to figure out how best to achieve teacher competency in each of these areas. Institutional responses to this need varied tremendously (Binkley et al. 1981), but it is clear that the demand for teachers qualified to teach in bilingual settings led to the creation of new courses as well as, in many cases, implementation of innovative approaches to teacher preparation (cf. Sutman, Sandstrom & Shoemaker 1979). From the beginning, certain areas of knowledge seemed to gain consensus as constituting essential background for bilingual teaching. Linguistics, with its various applications, came to play an important role in most training programs. In some cases, overemphasis on linguistic theory at the expense of other areas of knowledge (for example, culture) may have created some imbalance. The critical need for different components of a bilingual training program to maintain their interrelatedness is a point aptly made by Politzer (1978:14): Linguistics is important insofar as it contributes to other components of the Bilingual Education preparation: teaching methodology, cultural understanding, knowledge of the language of the target group. In the preparation of the bilingual educator all of these components must support and reinforce each other. Just as the collapse of one wall will lead to the collapse of an entire building, so the neglect or absence of one of the elements in the bilingual teachers' preparation may make the other elements useless. Teachers whose knowledge of linguistics, psychology, sociology is not matched by a knowledge of culture of the pupils dominant language and cultural background, and by empathy with the community in which the pupil lives, are not likely to make a very significant contribution to the goals of bilingual/cross cultural education. (Author's emphasis)

One of the greatest challenges for bilingual teacher training has been to achieve a true sense of interrelatedness, given institutional realities within universities. It is not uncommon for teacher preparation in bilingual education to draw from as many as four different departments within a university (typically, Education, Foreign Languages, Linguistics, and English). Despite the exciting potential for interdisciplinary studies that this poses, the institutional blocks for meaningful collaboration across disciplines often make it difficult to pursue this alternative. In the absence of close collaboration, the different components of a bilingual training program can remain disconnected from one another, leaving the burden for integrating the various elements of the program wholly on the shoulders of the student.

274

Robert D. Milk

The folly of maintaining these artificial barriers between different components of a training program is particularly evident when one considers recent trends in classroom practice toward integration of ESL and content area instruction (Milk 1985). McKeon (1985) has found a significant amount of overlap in teacher education standards in bilingual education, ESL, and foreign languages, and also found common research themes across the three areas. In a similar vein, Collier (1985:85) argues that the kind of coursework needed by "bilingual and ESL teachers working in the public schools is similar in many ways, and "bilingual and ESL staff can benefit most from an integrated approach to training". One very clear contemporary development in bilingual teacher training, therefore, appears to be a strong trend toward interrelating more strongly the different components of the training program, and, simultaneously, integrating more fully the training received by bilingual teachers with that received by other specialists who will also be working with language minority children. A second contemporary development relates to the critical need for bilingual teachers to possess solid proficiency in the LEP child's native language. Although this has been an ongoing concern within bilingual teacher training (Merino & Faltis 1986; Johnson 1985), recent research confirms the importance of this consideration. Cazden (1984), drawing on research by Romero (1982), speculates that one of the reasons that bilingual teachers often switch to English in the course of a lesson may be inadequate proficiency in the language of instruction. In her words: "Teaching in a language requires more than a tourist's knowledge. Richness of vocabulary and clarity of expression are essential" (Cazden 1984:16). Saville-Troike, drawing on her own research, argues that LEP students need to accomplish much more than communication skills in English in order to succeed in school — they must develop academic competence which primarily means "conceptual knowledge and schemata in such curricular areas as mathematics, science, social studies, and history" (1985:115). For ESL specialists this means that, in order to contribute to their students' academic competence, they must themselves be knowledgeable in the areas of the curriculum with which they will be dealing. For bilingual specialists, who will be offering lessons in the child's non-English language, this means that they must be proficient in "academic language" (including specialized vocabulary) associated with instruction in those content

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction

27 5

areas. The importance of bilingual teachers possessing solid proficiency in the non-English language used for instruction is confirmed in one study conducted among Hispanic children in California, where the teachers' knowledge of Spanish was found to be positively correlated with student achievement outcomes (Merino, Politzer & Ramirez 1979). A third contemporary development involves experimentation with alternative modes of classroom organization and innovative approaches to student motivation, including cooperative learning within small groups. The benefits of cooperative learning for developing prosocial behavior (Cohen 1986) as well as for improvement in achievement outcomes among minority students (Johnson & Johnson 1979) have led to a great deal of interest in this approach to learning. Additionally, the positive effects that groupwork can have on both quantity and quality of language production is drawing greater attention to this mode of classroom organization for the purposes of enhancing the second language acquisition process within classroom settings (Long and Porter 1985).

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction Based on the historical development of bilingual teacher training outlined above, it is accurate to state that initial stages involved specification of the kinds of competencies required for bilingual teaching. Elaboration of bilingual teacher competencies, therefore, was an important first step toward development of state teacher certification in bilingual education as well as institutionalization of bilingual teacher training programs within universities. Contemporary developments within bilingual education, however, are beginning to stress the kind of process that must take place within classrooms in order for superior results to be achieved. The findings from effective instruction research reported by Garcia are framed in terms of dynamic processes that are taking place within the classroom, as opposed to specific skills manifested by each effective teacher. There is no doubt that the effective teachers possess certain skills that could be explicitly described. But the point is that the key to understanding why these teachers achieved outstanding results lies not so much in listing the kinds of behaviors they were engaged in while teaching, as in understanding at a deeper level the kinds of

276

RobertD. Milk

learning processes that were occurring at all times within those classrooms. The key question for bilingual teacher educators, therefore, becomes, "How can we prepare teachers that are able to engage their students in this type of learning experience?". The answer, at least in part, must be, "by engaging them in a similar process themselves during some phase of their teacher training". There are many possible ways that such a process can be initiated during a teacher training program, but one of the most direct vehicles for accomplishing this goal is to develop a course within which trainees themselves become directly engaged in the desired process. An experimental course of this nature was developed in 1987 at one institution in Texas, and preliminary evaluation results are promising (Milk 1988). Students in this course — who are involved essentially in a Spanish immersion experience — spend most of their time engaged in small group problem-solving tasks drawn from the bilingual curriculum in math, science, and social studies. A cooperative learning approach is followed, and students possessing high and low proficiency in Spanish are deliberately grouped together. Students specializing in ESL are encouraged to enroll in the class, along with bilingual education specialists (for whom the course was originally designed). Course participants are involved in a great deal of role-playing, either as students working through the learning activities, or else as teachers designing and implementing appropriate cooperative learning tasks. From this brief description of the course, it can be seen how the three "contemporary developments in bilingual teacher training" summarized in the previous section are each reflected in the design of the course. First, there is a strong interrelationship sought between ESL and bilingual education methodology, as well as between second language acquisition and native language development. This is reflected both within the actual process that the students are engaged in, which includes the attainment of language proficiency goals through the means of content area instruction, as well as through the inclusion of both ESL and bilingual specialists within the same course. Second, the importance of a strong proficiency base in the academic Spanish used for instruction is effectively demonstrated to course participants as they attempt to solve content area-based problems through Spanish. Bilingual trainees come to appreciate the importance of mastering a broad range of specialized vocabulary for each of the content areas they will be teaching, and also come to appreciate, when they play

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction

277

the role of student, the importance of "academic language" for developing concepts in each of the subject areas. Likewise, ESL trainees who are less than fully proficient in Spanish come to appreciate the difficulties that LEP students in the schools experience when they are forced to deal with content area material in their weaker language. Third, the course directly models the tremendous potential of alternative modes to classroom organization, including cooperative learning within a context of heterogeneous small groups. In addition, students become experientially involved in a number of the major thrusts suggested by the research for effective bilingual instruction, including cognitively demanding lessons, emphasis on comprehension and meaning, and the integration of reading and writing development into broader learning activities (Garcia 1988). There are undoubtedly many other possible avenues for bilingual teacher training to begin to reflect, through its own strategies and procedures, the kind of instructional process that appears to be conducive to superior results in the classroom. The point here is not to imply that there may be some prototypical course that can best achieve the goal suggested by the title to this chapter, but rather to stress that the time has come in bilingual teacher training to supplement competency-based goals developed in isolated courses with a carefully articulated process that models more completely the type of effective bilingual instruction described by contemporary research. References Alatis, J., H. Stern and P. Strevens (eds.) 1983 Applied linguistics and the preparation of second language teachers: Toward a rationale. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1983. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. All wright, D. 1988 Observation in the language classroom. New York: Longman. Binkley, J., D. Johnson, B. Stewart, R. Abrica-Carrasco, H. Nava and B. Thorpe 1981 A study of teacher training programs in bilingual education. Volume I: Program descriptions. RMC Report No. UR474. Mountain View, CA: RMC Research Corporation. Blanco, G. 1977 Competencies needed by bilingual education teachers. Educational Leadership, 35 (2), 123-127. Brown, H.D. 1983 From ivory tower to real world: A search for relevance. In J. Alatis,

278

Robert D. Milk H. Stern & P. Strevens (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1983 (pp. 53-58). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Brumfit, C. 1983 The integration of theory and practice. In J. Alatis, H. Stern & P. Strevens (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1983 (pp. 59-73). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Carter, T., and M. Chatfield 1986 Effective bilingual schools: Implications for policy and practice. American Journal of Education, 95 (1), 200-234. Cazden,C. 1984 Effective instructional practices in bilingual education. Report submitted to National Institute of Education. ERIC ED 249 768 Celce-Murcia, M. 1983 Problem solving: A bridge builder between theory and practice. In J. Alatis, H. Stern & P. Strevens (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1983 (pp. 97-105). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Center for Applied Linguistics 1974 Guidelines for the preparation and certification of teachers of bilingual/ bicultural education. Arlington, VA: CAL. Clark, E., and R. Milk 1984 Training bilingual teachers: A look at the Title VII graduate in the field. NABE Journal, 8 (1), 41 -53. Cohen, E. 1986 Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Collier, V. 1985 University models for ESL and bilingual teacher training. Issues in English Language development, 81-90. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Garcia,E. 1987 Effective schooling for language minority students. Focus, No. 1. Wheaton, MD: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. 1988 Effective schools for Hispanic children: Making the connection. Keynote address at the annual meeting of the San Antonio Area Association for Bilingual Education, San Antonio, Texas, March 5. Garcia, E., B. Flores, L. Moll, A. Prieto and S. Zucker 1988 Effective schools for Hispanics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 6. Johnson, D.M. 1985 Results of a national survey of graduates of bilingual education programs. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (1), 59-77. Johnson, D.W., and R.T. Johnson 1979 Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49, 51-70.

Preparing teachers for effective bilingual instruction

279

Long, M., and P. Porter 1985 Group work, interlanguage talk and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 207-228. McGroarty, M., and J. Galvan 1985 Culture as an issue in second language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed.), Beyond basics: Issues and research in TESOL, 81-95. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. McKeon, D. 1985 Some common components in training bilingual, ESL, foreign language, and mainstream teachers, issues in English Language development, 97-106. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Mellgren, M., C. Walker and D. Lange 1988 The preparation of second language teachers through post-baccalaureate education. Foreign Language Annals, 21,121 -129. Merino, B., R. Politzer and A. Ramirez 1979 The relationship of teachers' Spanish proficiency to pupils' achievement. NABE Journal, 3, 21-37. Merino, B., and C. Faltis 1986 Spanish for Special Purposes: Communication strategies for teachers in bilingual education. Foreign Language Annals, 19 (1), 4346. Milk, R. 1985 The changing role of ESL in bilingual education. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (4), 657-672. Milk.R. 1988 Integrating language and content in bilingual education: An experimental course for preparing teachers of LEP children. Paper presented at the Seventeenth Annual Conference of the National Association for Bilingual Education in Houston, Texas, April 28. Politzer, R. 1970 Some reflections on "good" and "bad" language teaching behaviors. Language Learning, 20 (1), 31 -43. 1978 Some reflections on the role of linguistics in the preparation of bilingual/cross-cultural teachers. Bilingual Education Paper Series, Volume 1, Number 12. ERIC ED 161 274 Romero, M. 1982 Language use in bilingual classrooms. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City. Saville-Troike.M. 1985 Training teachers to develop the academic competence of LEP students. Issues in English Language development, 115-119. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghous for Bilingual Education. Sutman, F., E. Sandstrom and F. Shoemaker 1979 Educating personnel for bilingual settings: Present and future. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. ERIC ED 165 961

280

Robert D. Milk

Tikunoff, W. 1983 Significant bilingual instructional features study. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory. 1985 Applying significant bilingual instructional features in the classroom. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

Eleanor W. Thonis Introduction Educators agree unanimously that a competent teacher is a critical factor in learning. Next to the blessings of good parents, a good teacher is thought to be the most significant influence in the lives of students. While everyone accepts this premise, not everyone is in harmonious accord with the many perceptions of who is competent and what is good. The intent of this chapter is to review the several issues concerning the general competencies of teachers of language minority students and to consider the specific skills necessary for effective teaching. Some of the questions to be addressed are these: Who should teach? How are teachers recruited and selected? What do teachers need to know! What do teachers need to know how to do? What do teachers need to believe! What competencies are especially needed by teachers of English as a second language? How do the competencies of elementary teachers differ from those of the secondary teachers? Who are the good teachers?

Who should teach? Teachers in the elementary and secondary schools should be men and women who enjoy young people and take pleasure in helping them learn. During the school years, nearly one third of children's waking hours are spent in the company of teachers who contribute, not only to students' academic achievement, but also to their development and well-being. A teacher should be representative of the society in which the children are living and growing. Persons who share the values cherished by the community should teach students by example and by precept those attitudes and behaviors of importance to society. The individual who would aspire to teaching should be intelligent,

282

Eleanor W. Thonis

not merely bright, but intellectual, curious, searching, reflective, and thoughtful. There is a tendency to view intelligence as a unitary trait referring solely to brain power or to scholarly accomplishments. Actually, human intelligence is manifest in a number of ways — in sensitivity, compassion, intuition, and empathy. Intelligence may also be seen in the gifted awareness of how things work and how details are put together — the mechanical abilities and the organizational skills. A teacher is expected to fill many roles and to assume many responsibilities. Teachers are sources of knowledge, judges of performance, supporters of egos, objects of affection, leaders of groups, parent surrogates, targets for hostility, friends, and protectors. These are but a few of the expectations students may have of their teachers. For these reasons, the question "Who should teach?" is one that resists a single response or simple description. Teachers are individuals, and each one possesses distinctive and unique talents for teaching or for other professional tasks. In classrooms where language minority children are enrolled, the teacher should be an able person, well-educated in the content to be taught, and professionally prepared to teach. In short, the language minority students need a teacher with the same personal and professional qualifications of any teacher who is assigned to teach in any language. Such teachers are readily identified as possessing many, if not all, of these characteristics: — — — — — —

a genuine interest in youth an enthusiasm forlearning an ability to express affectionate regard a commitment to all students a respect for parents a capacity for organization an openness to change

In addition, teachers who work with students from diverse languages should possess these qualities: — — — — — —

an awareness of cultural differences a recognition of language diversity a knowledge of second language acquisition theory an understanding of the students' realities a sensitivity to the values of families a knowledge of the history and heritage of the group

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

283

a recognition of strengths and potential of all students a willingness to modify and adapt instruction as needed a solid grasp of curriculum imperatives for students learning in a second language

How are teachers recruited and selected? Young people think about entering the teaching profession for different reasons and at different ages. There is the third or fourth grade student who collects the younger children in the neighborhood and assumes the role of teacher. In the play school activities, the mannerisms of teachers and the routine of the classes which the child-teacher has, herself, experienced are evident. Often, this early interest in teaching continues, approved and encouraged by parents. For many teachers in the profession today, their lifelong love of teaching began in childhood. These individuals needed no recruitment to teaching. They knew all along that they wanted to teach, and they went about the serious business of preparing themselves to do so. There are persons whose natural idealism for making the world a better place has drawn them to education. They want to devote their energies to helping others learn. They find genuine satisfaction in working with youth. This discovery may occur informally during the high school years as they study with friends or engage in peer counseling. They may also be more formally invited to consider teaching as a career in social situations, such as future teachers clubs, or in scholarship opportunities offered by professional associations. These recruits for teaching make their decisions early and continue to follow their chosen careers. A number of men and women come to the teaching profession through an interest in a specific subject. They may have done very well in history, mathematics or art; and they consider teaching as a way of continuing in a field of study for which they have such delight and enthusiasm, while at the same time, they can earn a living. A few young people grow in affection and respect for a special teacher and, in their admiration, identify with both the beloved teacher and the subject taught. Some teacher candidates have followed a parent or a relative into teaching, perhaps, at first, to gain approval, but ultimately embracing the profession as their own personal goal. Such persons needed little persuasion or recruitment.

284

Eleanor W. Thonis

A significant number of individuals have entered teaching by default. They may have started out to become professionals in other fields — law, medicine, engineering, music, but then have changed their aspirations when faced with the realities of educational costs, length of preparation time, difficulties of admission requirements or numerous other personal frustrations. Many of these recruits have made excellent teachers. They have found pleasure in the company of the young and have enjoyed the camaraderie of their colleagues. Depending upon the depth of their preparation and competence in their previous fields of endeavor, they have brought to teaching rich backgrounds of knowledge and skill. Some candidates are recruited for the profession purely by chance. They spend time in the courses for general education credit and move through the undergraduate years as students with undeclared majors. They may drift accidentally into the departments of education and discover the wonder and excitement of teaching. They may have opportunities to observe or to work with children and youth. Their classes open up new vistas on child development and human behavior. They become intrigued with the idea of teaching as a respected occupation or with the chance to relive the glories of their own school triumphs. They may have many reasons for continuing their teacher preparation and their entrance into a profession which they had not previously explored. A few teachers have completed another chosen career in industry or in the military and have made the choice in mid-life. A large number have become competent, enthusiastic teachers who have made substantial contributions to the profession. The recruitment of teachers, then, is not a simple, precisely defined process which draws upon one identified group of individuals at a designated time in their lives. Prospective teachers come to teaching from various sources, for different reasons, and at all ages. Regardless of when and where potential teachers are found, the profession must continue in its efforts to attract the best and the brightest. At the entry level, the personal qualities are especially important in classrooms where minority language students are enrolled. Among these are the character and temperament traits of good teachers in general, and the additional specific requirements of language skills, cultural awareness, and sensitivity to differences. When the personal attributes are clearly present among future teachers, the professional expertise may be added with confidence. It is difficult, if not impossible, for most of the personal characteristics to be taught or learned. For this reason,

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

285

the admission of teacher candidates who are either self-recruited or recruited by others should include thoughtful screening in terms of their personal qualifications as worthy prospects. Selectivity at the very beginning of teacher preparation is likely to result in an increase of more promising teacher applicants and a decrease of candidates who may not serve the profession or the students well.

What do teachers need to know? Teachers need to know the subject or subjects which they are presenting to their students. For example, a teacher of fifth grade mathematics must know the computational skills, the concepts, and the mathematical principles which are basic to the program of instruction. While it is unlikely that the teacher will need to draw upon content from college algebra to teach at the fifth grade level, the more knowledge the teacher has about mathematics, the more confident and effective the teacher can be. The teacher of any subject should understand the prerequisite knowledge and skills as well as the content demands beyond the assigned grade. In this manner, the teacher may provide enabling material for students who may need such support, and may offer advanced activities for students who may be ready to move on. Teachers who have the responsibility for teaching English must know the English language — its phonology, morphology, syntax, grammar, vocabulary, and semantic systems. If they are to teach students who are not native to English, teachers need to know about second language acquisition theory and methods. They also need to know the essential differences between first language acquisition and second language learning. Teachers should know the basic linguistic principles that form the framework from which activities, methods, and materials are derived. They should know that there are various advantages and disadvantages associated with all methods and materials. Knowledge of the social and cultural settings in which the students are living and growing should be an important part of teacher education. To the extent possible, teachers should also have opportunities to know about the literature, history, art, and music of the students' heritage. Teachers should have strong academic preparation in human growth and development. Minimally, teachers who are responsible for planning and providing instruction for language minority students should know the following:

286

— — — —

Eleanor W. Thonis

timetable of normal growth and development basic principles of learning subject matter of the grade level of levels materials and criteria for their selection methods suitable for assigned students knowledge of the social-cultural context of the school

What do teachers need to know how to do? Teachers may have enjoyed excellent academic preparation and may have full knowledge of the students and the subject matter. However, knowing their students and the content areas will not be enough for teachers to be effective. They also need to know how to do many things in order to organize appropriate instruction. They should know how to maintain an orderly classroom in which teaching and learning can take place. Teachers often have to provide for a range of language differences and achievement levels, so they need to manage several groups of students within a single classroom. They must know how to create interest and enthusiasm for the lessons; they must know how to present the lessons; and they must know how to guide the students' practice. In addition, in order to adjust the pace of teaching, teachers should know how to assess students' progress and how to vary their teaching strategies accordingly. At least, teachers should know how to do the following: — — — — — — — — —

identify students' language strengths and needs organize appropriate levels of instruction maintain an orderly, businesslike classroom provide for a range of language and achievement differences manage several groups within a single classroom create interest and enthusiasm for learning present appropriate lessons and guide practice monitor students' progress vary strategies and pace of instruction

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

287

What do teachers need to believe? Teachers who know subject matter and who know how to deliver relevant instruction must add to their knowledge and skills certain convictions that reflect accepted values outside the school community. They should believe that courtesy and consideration of others are essential to the well-being of all students. Teachers should have a sense of fairness and justice which applies to everyone. Though there are recognized differences in the students' rates of learning and their levels of achievement, teachers should hold firmly to the belief that all students are capable of learning. Further, they must convey this belief to the students. Teachers should have confidence in their own abilities and must nurture self-confidence in their students. It is important for teachers to have a sense of humor and to respond appropriately to the challenges expected in classrooms comprised of students from diverse cultures. The diversities should be seen as a refreshing source of new experiences for the entire class and a means of enlarging the students' perspectives of the world around them. Teachers should recognize the importance of creating a classroom climate in which every individual is a vital member with rights and responsibilities. Teachers have the obligation to build a safe, secure setting which fosters optimum conditions for learning. Effective teachers believe in values of — — — — — —

courtesy and consideration of others fairness and justice applied equitably potential learning abilities of all students self-confidence and self-esteem sense of humor and perspective responsibilities and rights of the group safety and security in the classroom

What are the competencies especially needed by teachers of English as a second language? Teachers of English as a second language vary greatly in their professional and personal backgrounds. They may be classified broadly into three groups. The first group consists of teachers who speak only English. These individuals apply their language training and

288

Eleanor W. Thonis

their enthusiasm for teaching English, while serving as good language models. They use their knowledge and skill to help students acquire oral proficiency in English. Ordinarily, they do not concern themselves with written English — reading, spelling, or writing. The literacy skills are offered in developmental reading classes of phonics, spelling, written expression, and other dimensions of the language arts curriculum. Often, the classroom teacher or reading specialists provide instruction. The materials and methods are likely to be the very same as those designed for native speakers of English. Competent teachers do try to adjust the levels of difficulty, the allotment of time, or the rate of presentation, but the presence of English-speaking students in the group generally demands efficent coverage of basic materials at a rapid pace. There are few opportunities for the ESL teacher and the reading teacher to communicate and consider the extent to which ihe two programs may be mutually supportive or separately divisive. Speakers of other languages may find themselves trapped in simultaneous programs of English acquisition and English literacy which are completely incompatible. Such students may be struggling to cope with the conventions of written language before they have acquired the oral referents necessary for comprehension. For these reasons, the teacher of English a second language should have a clear understanding of the relationships which exist between speech and print, and the possible pitfalls that the second language reader may encounter. The teacher should know what constitutes a reasonable scope and sequence of skills and be realistic about the place of written connected discourse in the design of lessons. A second group of ESL teachers may be described as teachers who speak English and one or more other languages with some proficiency. Their other languages, however, may not be the language of the students assigned to their classes. Many fluent speakers of Spanish or German are the ESL teachers for students whose primary language is Thai, Korean, or Vietnamese. These teachers have had personal, first-hand experiences in learning a second language. They are able to generalize from their experiences and help students avoid many difficulties. They are often more empathic and sensitive to the students' loneliness and insecurity in unfamiliar surroundings. They, too, emphasize receptive and expressive oral language and are likely to leave the teaching of reading and writing to classroom teachers. Again, the students are caught between the demands of developing fluency and literacy.

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

289

The third group of ESL teachers is competent in the native language of the students and in English. They are in a strong position to identify the difficulties inherent in English for speakers of a specific native language. They are able to organize instruction to minimize language interference and to maximize the transfer of native language skills to English. They, too, have stressed programs of oral English and have left the teaching of written language to others. The three groups of ESL teachers, in a variety of different programs and approaches, discover that their instruction shares one common outcome — a less than satisfactory development of written language skills. Of course, some teachers have been successful for some students. Many teachers and students alike, however, have suffered frustration and failure. Competence in the teaching of English as a second language should include knowledge and skill to deliver instruction in both the oral and written dimensions of English. Among the proficiencies ESL teachers should possess are these: — knowledge of linguistic principles — understanding of theories of language acquisition — recognition of similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition - awareness of available materials, their advantages and disadvantages — experience in a variety of methods, including natural language, total physical response, and other communicative-based approaches — skill in the assessment of students, including administration of tests, interpretation of test results, and use of obtained data — knowledge of the nature of the reading task in first and second languages — awareness of the specific strategies for promoting skills in word recognition, comprehension, and study habits — judgment in organizing instruction to accommodate students' stages of language development — understanding of the interdependence among language skills as needed to offer an integrated language arts program — skill in management of the routine of the classroom to keep learning alive and growing — appreciation of social, cultural, and linguistic diversity ESL teachers are a wonderfully diverse group of individuals. There are great differences in their professional preparation, their personal teaching styles, their classroom experience, and their educational

290

Eleanor W. Thonis

philosophies. They share one loss. Rarely do they enjoy the delight of bringing together in one program a full language arts curriculum which integrates — listening, speaking, reading, handwriting, spelling, literature, and creative writing.

How do the competencies of elementary teachers differ from those of secondary teachers? Elementary school teachers are usually considered specialists in children. Their professional education and first-hand experience have prepared them to understand the developmental nature of students. They bring to teaching knowledge of children's social, emotional, and intellectual needs. Elementary teachers are generally thought to be generalists in subject matter. They are expected to teach the basic skills subjects — reading, writing, spelling, language, and mathematics. In addition, they are responsible for teaching social science, science, health, safety, and any number of other content areas included in the curriculum for students in the elementary school. During the early grades especially, teachers are concerned with the feelings and attitudes of their students. Every effort is made to help children respond positively to the demands of the school. Teachers often function as parent surrogates, as counselors, and as confidantes. Although achievement in basic subjects is of great significance, major emphasis is on the child rather than on the subject. Teacher competence is often measured in terms of student interest and enjoyment of school. Teachers in the secondary school are specialists in subject matter. They are expected to have broad knowledge and skill in particular content areas. Each of the subjects is placed in a separate department which is responsible for the organization and delivery of the content to the students. There may be some differentiation in the course objectives for students who are in a college preparatory track and for those who are in a vocational program. The primary objective of teachers in both, however, is the acquisition of knowledge and skill in the subject. Students who may find themselves in difficulty may be referred out of the class to other school personnel who deal with matters of absenteeism, discipline, failure, and dropout. Secondary teachers are generalists in people, and they depend largely upon other professionals in students' affairs beyond their own teaching specialties.

Competencies for teachers of language minority students

291

In the teaching of English as a second language at the elementary and at the secondary level, competent teachers should address the personal-social and the intellectual needs of the students who are newcomers. In the early grades, teachers must add to their knowledge of children an increased understanding of the goals, materials, and methods of the teaching of English language and literacy. In the senior and junior high schools, teachers must extend their second language and literacy skills to concerns for students' feelings and comfort in the classroom. The ESL classrooms may no longer be seen as the place where listening and speaking are the only activities. The ESL teacher possesses the background and training in language to be very effective as the teacher of reading in a second language. The preparation and introduction to the written forms of English can be built on the oral language proficiencies as established in lessons and practice. The connections which exist between speech and print become more evident as students recognize and acquire the conventions of the English writing system applied to that which they have heard and said. Competent ESL teachers, then, are those who have put together oral and written English within a context of concern for the students' emotional well-being and the knowledge of both language and literacy.

Who are the good teachers? To ask the question: Who is good! is like asking Who is beautifutt Goodness and beauty are in the eye of the beholder. The good teachers are scholars who seek to know more and more about the miracle of language and the wonder of literacy. They are the teachers who hold enduring convictions that language minority students can learn to listen, speak, read, and write English well. Good teachers know, too, that different materials and methods may be necessary for some students; and they are not locked into one single approach for everyone. Good teachers seek to discover the cultural and linguistic differences among the students. They view this diversity as a source of pleasure and enrichment for all students in their classes. Good teachers are sensitive to the feelings of bewilderment which newcomers to a strange country may experience. These teachers expend every effort to lower the students' anxieties and to create a sense of sanctuary in the class. Good teachers have clearly defined expectations for their students and translate these purposes into well-organized, purposeful instruc-

292

Eleanor W. Thonis

tion. Good teachers forge a strong bond between the home and the school by recognizing the importance of the parents - their heritage and their language — in the lives of students. Good teachers know and believe that language minority students who are to thrive and learn in an English-speaking country must be fluent and literate in English at the highest level of which they are capable. To the extent possible, they are teachers who reach out to the community for available resources to help the students and their families adjust to their new realities. Good teachers recognize the challenge to prepare students for global citizenship and perceive their multi-ethnic, multilingual classrooms as microcosms of the larger international world. A competent, caring, knowledgeable teacher is a good teacher. Works Consulted Frymier, Jack 1987 "Bureaucracy and the Neutering of Teachers". Phi Delta Kappan, September, 1987, pp. 9-14. Hirsch, E.D. 1987 Cultural Literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Office of Bilingual Education 1981 Schooling for Language Minority Students: A Theoretical Framework. Sacramento: State Department of Education. Mortimore, Peter and Pam Sammons 1987 "New Evidence on Effective Elementary Schools". Educational Leadership, Volume 45, Number 1, September, 1987, pp. 4-8. Wisniewski, Richard 1986 "The Ideal Professor of Education". Phi Delta Kappan, December, 1986, pp. 288-292. Woodring, Paul 1987 "Too Bright to be a Teacher"Ί Phi Delta Kappan, April, 1987, pp. 617618.

The role of Spanish language varieties in the bilingual classroom Frances Morales Introduction Chicano students in bilingual classrooms bring with them a range of oral Spanish language varieties influenced by such factors as language varieties spoken at home and in the community, geographic location, years of residing and attending school in the United States, language preference for media consumption, and the co-existence of English and Spanish in the United States. The more the students' vernacular variety approximates the "standard variety", the more prestige it will carry and the more accepted it will be in bilingual classrooms. Educators and researchers continue to ask themselves: What should the role of the various Spanish language varieties be in the classroom? To what extent do students' attitudes toward the different varieties of Spanish influence learning, particularly in the language arts? When and how should the standard variety be introduced? This paper will examine arguments for the use of certain Spanish language varieties in the bilingual classroom and attitudes held by educators and students towards these varieties. It will also review research studies that have investigated the influence of the students' vernacular variety in the classroom, and conclude with classroom recommendations. The paper will limit itself to Spanish language varieties spoken by Chicano/ Mexicano students in the United States.

Standard and vernacular Spanish The terms used in this paper will be the standard variety of Spanish (or standard Spanish, for short) and the vernacular variety of Spanish (or vernacular Spanish). The sociolinguistic concept variety is preferred in order to avoid the judgmental designations that are part of dialect and language.

294

Frances Morales

The standard variety of a language is one that "stands for the nation as a whole and for its most exalted institutions of government, education, and high culture in general" (Fishman 1975:31). In this paper, the standard variety of Spanish refers to what Gaarder (1977) calls the "world standard". It is a variety of Spanish used by educated adult speakers from the various Spanish-speaking countries in formal situations (e.g., a university lecture, political speech) and the variety used in literary texts. A preference for a standard or formal Spanish register is usually a preference for the formal written standard Spanish which is characterized by some type of official language policy. Penalosa (1980) and Sanchez (1983) recognize the problem of identifying formal varieties of standard Spanish for Chicano speakers and acknowledge the influence of the mass media on the standard variety. Sanchez (1983:101) describes standard Spanish for Chicanes as follows: "the standard Mexican Spanish spoken by middle-class Mexican radio announcers and professionals who have immigrated to the United States. More specifically it is the Spanish spoken by educated individuals who have received formal instruction in the Spanish language, where Spanish has been the medium of instruction". The vernacular variety of a language refers to the spoken realization of a language in informal situations (e.g., at home, with friends) and carries with it a lower social status, particularly when spoken by relatively uneducated people. The vernacular variety lacks standardization, "the codification and acceptance, within a community of users, of a formal set of norms defining 'correct usage' " (Stewart 1968, cited in Fishman 1975:24). A preference for vernacular (also known as colloquial or popular) Spanish is usually a preference for the informal variety of Spanish not generally found in written standard Spanish, and not subject to an official language policy. Sanchez (1983:135) further subdivides popular Spanish into urban and rural codes (both of which can be further subdivided) and claims that many urbanized Chicanos who were originally from rural areas speak both urban and rural codes. In this paper, the vernacular variety of Spanish includes informal standard Spanish and nonstandard Spanish generally spoken by relatively uneducated speakers in informal situations.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

295

Characteristics of Southwest vernacular Spanish The vernacular variety of Spanish in the Southwest is characterized by phonological and morphological features which deviate from the standard variety and by numerous lexical items and verbs that have been borrowed or influenced by the English language. Scholars (e.g., Valdes 1988; Sanchez 1983) researching Chicano Spanish varieties are quick to point out that Chicano varieties have many characteristics in common with varieties in Mexico and Latin America with the exception that Chicano Spanish has a higher degree of incorporation of English loanwords. Penalosa (1980) states that the English influence on Spanish, particularly on the lexicon, is a distinguishing feature of Southwest Spanish. Two other sources of non-standard lexical items in vernacular Spanish are archaisms, lexical items that no longer exist in the standard varieties (e.g., asina for asv 'like this'; muncho for mucho 'much, a lot of; and truje for trajo 'brought'); and regionalisms, words with origins in non-Castilian dialects (e.g., molcajete for mortero 'mortar'; and cuates for gemelos 'twins'). This scholar describes the English influence on Chicano Spanish lexicon as (1) borrowings from English through varying degrees of incorporation into Spanish; and (2) alterations on the meaning of Spanish words due to the semantic influence of English words. Examples of the English influence on the Spanish lexicon are listed below. These examples are taken from Sanchez (1983), Hernandez (1980), and Penalosa (1980): English influence Phonetic adaptations suera 'sweater' marqueta 'market' Morphological adaptations chainear 'shine' mapear 'mop' Semantic extensions (false cognates) libreria 'bookstore' for biblioteca (library) conferencia 'lecture' for reunion (conference) Loan translations competition 'competition' for competencia telefon 'telephone' for teUfono

296

Frances Morales

Semantic restrictions pescuezo being used for both animal and human neck (cuello) patas 'animal legs' and piernas 'human legs' distinction not kept Caiques tener un buen tiempo 'to have a good time' for divertirse correr para una oficina 'to run for office' for ser candidato In this paper, calo, a variety of Spanish distinguished by its unique lexical items and used mainly by young Chicano males for in-group interaction (Penalosa 1980), will not be included in the term vernacular Spanish. Calo would probably not be used in the classroom by either teachers or students or elicited in a testing situation. Ornstein-Galicia (1987:359) states that calo used to have a highly stigmatized status but that this variety "has been upwardly mobile, serving as a source for much of the lexicon of the informal registers of Mexican and Southwest Spanish, adding dimensions of chic, daring, and boldness". It is important to emphasize that standard and vernacular varieties are characterized by variability and that they overlap with each other (Burling 1973). It is also crucial to note that Chicano speakers do not use solely standard or nonstandard Spanish but instead use a higher proportion of one variety or the other. Much research is still needed on Chicano speech varieties as "unified linguistic systems containing both standard and nonstandard forms" (Penalosa 1980:78).

Opposing views regarding vernacular Spanish in the language arts Some educators have attributed Chicano students' low achievement in language arts to a language problem. Chicanos have often been described as "alingual", speaking an inferior variety of Spanish, and being slow to learn because of their bilingualism. Manuel, (1965: 117) states: Most Spanish-speaking children of the Southwest know neither English nor Spanish well. Generally speaking, their home language is a poor grade of Spanish. Even the fund of ideas which words express is limited. In their homes they lack the opportunity and stimulus to develop the concepts which other children normally develop.

More recently, other scholars have argued against the assumption that vernacular Spanish speakers are verbally deprived. Garcia (1975),

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

297

for example, claims that Chicano Spanish-speaking students, like many other lower- and middle-class children, control a fully developed grammatical system (if not two) by the time they enter school. He adds that Chicano children may be limited in their English language skills but that their native language "is and continues to be a useful form of communication for them" (1975:71). Garcia urges teachers to recognize that language forms are arbitrary and that one variety is equally valid and effective as another in spite of its social status. Carter and Segura (1979:95) note: "the belief that Chicanos are nonverbal or alingual is rapidly disappearing. Unfortunately, the local Chicano vernacular is still rejected in schools, and the fight for its legitimacy continues". Conflicting points of view have emerged regarding the Spanish variety, standard or vernacular, to be used in instruction and in textbooks for bilingual classrooms. Gaarder (1977), a proponent of the standard variety of Spanish, affirms that an individual or student needs to expand his language in order to think and carry on a discussion in a wider range of topics and settings in an elaborate manner. Gaarder states that if a vernacular Spanish norm is accepted then the schools would have no need for instruction in language and writing since a student's language is to be accepted as produced. Students often encounter different varieties of standard Spanish in their classroom materials. Among the materials found in bilingual education classrooms today are numerous textbooks from other Spanish-speaking countries (e.g., Spain, Puerto Rico, Mexico) and numerous translations into Spanish of existing English texts. Some educators have argued that the variety of Spanish that appears in imported materials is one that does not reflect the different varieties of Spanish spoken in the United States. Blanco explains some of the lexical differences in the foreign materials encountered by children of the Southwest: "Foreign materials used words like habichuelas for the child's familiar frijoles, colmado for tienda, and chiringa for papalote orhuila" (1978:475). Schon (1978) also argues in favor of using a standard-stressing curriculum, including books imported from other Spanish-speaking countries since, she says, "The statement, 'Chicano children do not understand Castilian', only means that many Chicano, Puerto Rican, and other Spanish-speaking children in the U.S. grow up culturally deprived, and thus do not speak Spanish or appreciate their own culture" (1978:122).

298

Frances Morales

Provision of more neutral materials is feasible. Keller (1976) claims that national Spanish textbooks valid for all Spanish-speakers can be easily developed if regional vocabulary is excluded and, instead, lexicon that is used throughout the Spanish-speaking countries, for example, rodilla, aire, tierra, and mama, is incorporated. Keller (1976) believes that the vernacular should not be downgraded in school; however, the vernacular should not be used for classroom instruction such as in reading and writing. This scholar would consider using the vernacular "under circumscribed conditions" such as in transitional bidialectal education, in grades kindergarten through second, and in non-academic activities such as in gym, cafeteria, and after-school activities. According to Adler (1979), education programs that have directed their efforts to changing the speech of vernacular speakers have not succeeded in their goal. Instead, it is believed that such an approach has had detrimental effects on vernacular speakers' self-concept and has led them to reject school. Adler recommends a bidialectal approach with language instruction in the dialect and the standard variety when designing teaching strategies for linguistically different students. This scholar contends that "it is the theoretical framework of bidialectalism that provides the best alternative in devising teaching strategies for culturally different children" (1979: 125). Elias-Olivares (1976), Garcia (1975), and Hernandez-Chavez (1973), on the other hand, advocate instruction in the vernacular variety since it is the most common and the most effective means of communication in the community. Hernandez-Chavez claims that if schools insist on providing instruction in the standard variety, resentment may arise towards vernacular Spanish, its speakers, and the Chicano culture as a whole. Carter and Segura (1979) state that inflexible school practices such as the demand for standard Spanish only and irrelevant curriculum are correlated and harmful to Chicano children's school success. These scholars suggest that educators try to adjust the instruction to match the students' language level instead of trying to mold students to fit the textbooks. Carter and Segura (1979) report that reading materials constructed through the language experience approach have been found by teachers to be of high interest to students and produce good results. In the language experience approach, children are encouraged to talk and write about their experiences using their own vernacular.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

299

Language attitudes Student attitudes The study of language attitudes has become an area of great interest to scholars concerned with language learning and language teaching. In their classic work, Gardner and Lambert (1972) stressed the importance of an integrative motive in facilitating language learning, stating that "The learner, we argue, must be willing to identify with members of another ethnolinguistic group and to take on very subtle aspects of their behavior, including their distinctive style of speech and their language" (1972:135). More recently, Clement and Kruidenier (1983) have pointed out that it is not always essential for students to have an integrative orientation to learn a second language effectively. What students must have is a strong positive attitude which may be instrumental, integrative, or created by other factors such as student ethnicity, the target language involved, and the circumstances of learning the second language. For the most part, studies on language attitudes have addressed issues related to language choice, language usage, and societal evaluations of language varieties. Few studies have focused directly on students' language attitudes and their relationship to academic achievement, particularly in a bidialectal or bilingual setting. Furthermore, few studies have investigated students' attitudes toward their own vernacular variety. Tang (1971) studied the effectiveness of using students' native language and of using only English in the teaching of reading in a second language (English). The results of the study showed that those students who viewed their native language (Cantonese) and culture positively benefited the most from reading instruction when their native language was used, such as in the translation of English words and in oral summaries of the reading passages. Students who had negative attitudes toward their native language benefited the most from a reading program where only English was used. Mathewson (1974) investigated the effect that a positive attitude toward a dialect had on comprehension. Among the findings reported by Mathewson is that in the listening mode, Black children liked and comprehended the Black English version of folktales better than the standard English. Mathewson concludes that a favorable attitude toward a dialect increases comprehension.

300

Frances Morales

Another study which focuses on language attitudes in a bidialectal setting was carried out by Politzer and Hoover (1976). These researchers used a matched guise test to investigate teacher and student language attitudes in two school sites: Harlem, New York City and Ravenswood School District, in northern California. Teachers and students in both sites judged the speakers of standard Black English as more likely to achieve in school than the speakers of vernacular Black English. For the Harlem students, the scores on the achievement and acceptability dimensions were related to the students' ability to produce standard Black English, to their grades in reading, and to relative reading gains. Ravenswood students' attitudinal scores on these two dimensions were related only to the students' ability to discriminate between standard Black English and vernacular Black English. Lewis (1979) found that pupils' attitudes toward Black English were correlated with their high or low scores on stories in vernacular Black English. Subjects dominant in vernacular Black English who held high Black language attitudes performed equally as well as the standard English dominance groups on half of the tests. This finding suggests that positive attitudes toward Black English often predict achievement on materials appearing in vernacular Black English. However, Lewis states that pupils' positive attitudes toward a second dialect are not reliable predictors of performance in that dialect, as is the case when learning a foreign or second language. Lewis reports that students' attitudes toward Black language predict high or low performance on vernacular Black English materials, but students' negative attitudes toward Black language do not predict high performance on standard English materials (1979:87). Parental and community language attitudes Ramirez III, et al. (1977) affirm that language attitudes are a significant variable in bilingual education programs, particularly the students' and teachers' attitudes toward the varieties used in the classroom and the community's attitudes toward both languages. Penalosa (1980) states that often Chicano children are made to feel ashamed because their Spanish sounds different from that of their teachers or from what appears in textbooks. As a consequence, Chicano students believe that the Spanish they learned at home is not "good" Spanish and that their parents are uneducated and illiterate. Hernandez (1980) investigated Chicano parents' language attitudes in Sacramento, California.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

301

Hernandez reports that Chicano parents and community members did not hold unfavorable attitudes toward the vernacular variety, Southwest Spanish. This scholar found that particular linguistic items from certain linguistic categories (e.g., syntax, loan translations, regionalisms, and loan extensions) were rated favorably by all respondents. Furthermore, parents and community members approved of these linguistic categories for use in a bilingual classroom. Thus, Hernandez concludes that speakers of Southwest Spanish do not reject their vernacular as a medium of instruction nor do they desire to replace it. Critical to the consideration of including vernacular Spanish in the language arts curriculum is the community's attitudes towards this variety. While the results in some studies (e.g., Morales 1982) support the use of vernacular Spanish lexicon for instructional purposes, the adult Spanish-speaking community may reject its use in the classroom. Scholars (e.g., Penalosa 1980; Fishman 1979) have recommended that community attitudes toward the marked language variety and the standard variety be assessed in order to determine their appropirateness for classroom instruction. Hernandez (1980) reports that parents and community members in the Chicano community in Sacramento, California value Southwest Spanish for informal domains, and certain linguistic items that appear more standard are accepted for both informal and formal domains, including the school. Hernandez also reports more favorable attitudes for certain linguistic items (items in the categories of syntax, regionalisms, loan translations, and loan extensions) by Mexicanos than by Chicanos and Mexican Americans. She thus observes: "In view of the fact that a majority of children receiving bilingual instruction are recent immigrants, it is important to note that the parents of the children in this study accepted Southwest Spanish much more readily than was expected" (1980:134). Since the students with schooling in Mexico in the Morales (1982) study also performed better on the comprehension tests that were in vernacular Spanish as opposed to standard Spanish, and given Hernandez' (1980) finding that Mexican parents seem to accept certain linguistic items of vernacular Spanish for classroom purposes, it would appear that Mexican parents would support vernacular Spanish for classroom instruction. Thus, it seems appropriate to recommend the use of vernacular Spanish in the language arts curriculum when instructing Mexican children in bilingual classrooms.

302

Frances Morales

Chicano parents and community members also accept certain linguistic items of vernacular Spanish for classroom purposes, but to a lesser degree than Mexican parents. Hernandez (1980:133) attributes this finding to (1) the separate functions allocated for English and Spanish and their respective varieties; (2) the perceived "nonstandardness" of certain linguistic items (the Chicano group was college-educated and had come in contact with standard textbook Spanish); (3) the English derivation of certain linguistic items; and (4) access to certain varieties by speakers within the Chicano community. Thus, Chicano parents, especially those who are college educated, may hesitate to have their children taught in vernacular Spanish even though their children may perform better when a vernacular variety is used. Educators would need to assess Chicano parents' attitudes towards vernacular and standard Spanish before proceeding to instruct Chicano students in their vernacular Spanish. Fishman (1979) recommends that teachers should first of all understand the vernacular varieties of the students so that the latter can be understood and assisted. Fishman also urges educators to foster respect among students for the vernacular varieties found in the classroom while awaiting to consult with and assess the community's language attitudes (1979: 463).

How do language attitudes affect Chicano students' school performance? Language attitudes and their relationship to second language and second dialect learning have recently gained the interest of researchers and educators. There is evidence concerning the relation between students' language attitudes and academic performance in Spanish/ English bilingual school settings. Politzer and Ramirez (1973) found that Mexican American students in a bilingual school, in contrast with Mexican American students in a monolingual school, rated Spanish higher than hispanized English and standard English. Mexican American students' greater appreciation of Spanish was attributed to their participation in a bilingual instructional program. In another study, Ramirez, Arce-Torres, and Politzer (1976) investigated teachers' and students' language attitudes in a bilingual setting and their relationship to student achievement in the language arts, specifically in reading and English. These researchers reported

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

303

that students' negative attitudes toward hispanized English and cadeswitching was positively related to academic performance. The more the students discriminated against hispanicized English, the higher was their grade in reading. The more the students downgraded codeswitching in comparison to standard English, the higher they performed on achievement measures. Vernacular dominant Spanish-speaking students' attitudes toward their vernacular variety and standard Spanish may play an important role in their achievement in bilingual instructional programs. For example, students with positive attitudes toward their vernacular variety may perform better on materials utilizing vernacular Spanish. Morales (1982) also examined the relationship between students' language attitudes and their achievement in listening comprehension tests. The global hypothesis tested was that language attitudes had an effect on vernacular dominant Spanish-speaking students' ability to comprehend Spanish. This hypothesis was not supported in the study. A correlation analysis between the criterion measure of listening and the attitude measure showed that language attitudes did not predict achievement on the treatments in vernacular Spanish or standard Spanish, although knowledge of the vernacular was linked with achievement in listening. This suggests that both attitude toward and proficiency in the language variety in question may affect achievement.

Issues in school performance of Chicano students Chicanos and other low-income minority students continue to experience disproportionate low school achievement and attainment. In 1980 the National Center for Education Statistics reported that nine-year-old Hispanic students were 10 percentage points below the national average in reading while Anglo students were two percentage points above the national average for their age group (Brown, et al. 1980:222). Although this appraisal shows a more favorable assessment for Hispanics and reveals a decrease in the gap between Hispanics and Anglos than what had been reported in the previous decade, the relative position of Anglos and Hispanics remains unchanged. A recent report by the Achievement Council (1988) states that Black and Hispanic students in California are about six months behind their Anglo peers academically in the primary grades. This gap con-

304

Frances Morales

tinues to increase through junior high and by the time students reach the twelfth grade (if they are fortunate enough to remain in school this long), they are performing at the level of Anglo students who enter the ninth grade. The same report also claims that dropout rates increased for all groups, including Anglos. Numerous explanations for the failure of traditional American education to serve ethnic and linguistic minority students have been advanced and solutions based on these explanations carried out. One of the explanations proposed for students' low achievement is the lack of congruency between the home and the school (Diaz, Moll, and Mehan 1986). It is assumed that part of the minority students' lack of success is due to the schools' failure to recognize as assets the learners' language and culture. Educational programs which incorporate minority students' linguistic and cultural background as instructional vehicles have been widely advocated. Bilingual/bicultural education programs best exemplify the federal and state efforts to bring about educational equity to language minority students. Educators in charge of implementing bilingual instructional programs for Spanish-speaking students, the largest recipients of bilingual education, face serious pedagogical questions. One crucial issue centers on which Spanish language varieties to use in the classroom. Penalosa (1980) states that arguments in favor of teaching students in their own language and according to their cultural background imply that for Chicano students, instruction should be in the varieties of Spanish, English, and mixed languages of the barrio. Even though Spanish is used in bilingual classrooms, the negative attitudes that existed towards it prior to its official endorsement as a medium of instruction continue to be present. The extent to which Chicano students experience school success in general, and in language arts, in particular, may depend in part on the degree to which their home language and culture are adequately represented in the schools' curriculum. Given the low status that has historically been attributed to the Spanish language in the schools, Chicano students' view towards their own vernacular variety may also influence their achievement when Spanish is used as a medium of instruction, in literacy development, and in curriculum materials. Students who are taught through the standard variety of their language alone may not only experience negative feelings toward their own vernacular variety, but their academic progress may be hindered as well. Students may associate their poor academic performance with their use of the vernacular

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

305

variety (Lewis 1979:89). However, little specific information in this area is available yet. Researchers have generally emphasized linguistic minority students' attitudes towards a second language, usually a more prestigious language, and have neglected to investigate students' attitudes toward their own vernacular, the less prestigious language variety.

Differences in language varieties and academic achievement Several hypotheses dealing specifically with the relationship between differences in language varieties and academic achievement have been advanced. The first hypothesis, advanced in the 1960s, was a language deficit one which stated that a lack of adequate language stimuli in the first years of a child led to a deficit in speech. Consequently, the children lacked the cognitive development which would support successful performance in the classroom. This hypothesis was followed by a language difference hypothesis which stated that the "disadvantaged" child's speech was not deficient but only different from the school language and that of textbooks. Proponents of the hypothesis claimed that the school's rejection of the child's culture and language had resulted in students' low academic achievement (Adler 1980). The following five different approaches have been advanced to deal with vernacular language varieties in the classroom: a) teaching the standard variety to facilitate reading (Bereiter & Engleman 1966); b) allowing a dialect rendering of traditional texts (Goodman 1965); c) neutralization of features in reading texts (Shuy 1969, 1972; Wolfram 1970); d) the incorporation of nonstandard features into reading texts (Baratz 1969; Stewart 1969); and e) the use of the language experience approach (Somervill 1975). According to Somervill (1975), limited research exists on these approaches with respect to Black English and reading. To the knowledge of the author, these approaches are just beginning to be investigated with respect to vernacular Spanish and the language arts.

306

Frances Morales

Listening comprehension Students spend the great majority of their time in school listening to the teacher. Thus it is critical to see whether or not students who speak a vernacular variety completely understand teacher speech, which is often the standard form. It is also important to see whether vernacular speaking students understand materials presented orally but which are written in the standard variety. Listening comprehension, the understanding of the meaning of a text presented orally, has been referred to as the "neglected" language art since teachers spend little or no time in listening instruction (Bracken 1971). Dallman et al. (1978) concur that listening has received little emphasis in the schools. Listening, however and its relationship to other language arts activities has been an area of interest to researchers for the past four decades. Durrell (1969) claims that competence in both listening and reading comprehension is an index of language learning potential. This researcher also suggests that in the early grades "listening comprehension may be used as an index of pupils' growth in basic reading skills" (1969:455). Studies which investigate the listening and reading comprehension of vernacular language speakers have been mostly restricted to Black English speakers. Two such studies present conflicting evidence in regards to comprehension in an oral and written mode. Somervill and Jacobs (1972) presented stories to forty first-grade Black children who were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: reading in standard English, reading in dialect, listening to standard English, and listening to dialect. These researchers report greater comprehension of spoken standard English and greater comprehension of written English. However, Mathewson (1974) investigated the listening and reading comprehension of forty-eight third-grade students, half of whom were Black and the other half of different ethnicities. This scholar found that Black children preferred the listening mode and comprehended better when listening than when reading. In the listening mode, Black children liked and comprehended the Black English version of folktales better than the Standard English version. Lewis (1979) studied the effect of race, speech variety dominance, and grade on the oral comprehension of Black and Anglo elementary school children. The treatments in the study consisted of four types of stories varied according to language variety (Black vernacular English, and standard English) and cultural content (Black cultural content,

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

307

and neutral cultural content). This researcher reports that Anglo students scored the highest in the four kinds of treatments. Subjects dominant in Black standard English as well as subjects dominant in Black vernacular English performed slightly, but not significantly, better on the treatments in standard English that on the ones in Black vernacular English. Lewis concludes that differences between Black vernacular English and standard English do not produce problems related to listening comprehension by Black vernacular English speakers. In regards to the grade level of students, Lewis reports that fourth and sixth graders performed significantly better than second-grade students. There is a paucity of research on the listening and reading comprehension by Chicano students in monolingual English classrooms in general, and in bilingual classrooms in particular. Evans (1978-1979) examined the language comprehension by third- and sixth-grade Chicano and Anglo subjects on stories presented in an oral and written form. No differences were found in student performance according to mode of presentation. Evans states that Chicano and Anglo subjects performed in a similar pattern, except on inference measures. Unlike other research findings, male subjects in this study performed higher than female subjects. Differences in comprehension are also reported according to grade, with sixth-grade subjects performing better than third graders. Lastra de Suärez (1975) studied the comprehension and speech of Chicano children in Los Angeles using an interview approach. The researcher reports that elementary school children (in grades kindergarten through fourth) understood Mexican Spanish, even though in a few instances their passive understanding of academic vocabulary was limited. For example, children did not understand such words as tarea, matemäticas, and geografia. From this research, Lastra de Suärez concludes that special textbooks are not necessary with regards to language. This scholar does recommend, however, that bilingual teachers be knowledgeable about the differences between vernacular and standard Spanish. Cohen (1979) also compared elementary students' performance on three tests (the Inter-American Listening Comprehension, the Moreno Speaking Test, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) and found that their performance was considerably lower on the English version than on the Spanish version. This researcher talks about the recurrent phenomenon of "lower-than-expected performance on Spanish language tests" and attributes it to several factors, among

308

Frances Morales

them "a desire to do better in English due to an attitude that English is more prestigious . . . and the fact that in all three cases, the Spanish version was a direct translation from the English test, with its cultural and cognitive biases" (1979:247). Several scholars (e.g., Penalosa 1980; and Fishman 1979) have stated that vernacular and standard Spanish varieties are mutually comprehensible to the adult Spanish speakers in the Southwest, and that the main difference between the two varieties lies in the high prestige attributed to the standard variety. Is this generalization true for vernacular dominant Spanish-speaking students in the elementary schools? What are the consequences for student achievement when vernacular Spanish speakers are taught through a standard-stressing curriculum? Research studies addressing these issues are nearly nonexistent to the knowledge of the author. Morales (1982) examined the extent to which vernacular Spanish, especially the lexicon, and Chicano culture content are desirable in the language arts curriculum. The principal hypothesis tested was that content, whether Chicano or neutral content, and language variety, whether it is vernacular or standard Spanish, would have an effect on vernacular dominant Spanish-speaking students' ability to comprehend oral discourse. Forty subjects with continuous schooling in the United States were selected from the third- and fifth-grades, and twenty subjects with previous schooling in Mexico were selected from the third-grade. All the subjects in the study were participants in Spanish/English bilingual programs. Students responded to four different listening comprehension tests. Each of the tests was composed of particular combination of language variety (vernacular or standard Spanish) and cultural content (Chicano or neutral content). Analysis of variance indicated that language variety had a significant independent effect on student comprehension while there was no evidence that content made any difference on student performance. This study suggests that the language variety used in the classroom has greater bearing on student comprehension than does curricular content. Further investigation in the area of listening comprehension which takes into account both learner characteristics and text factors is needed in order to develop educational programs, materials, and assessment measures that are appropriate to the students' language and cultural background.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

309

Conclusions Is there a role for vernacular varieties of Spanish in bilingual classrooms? If so, what is it, and what are the implications for classroom instruction? The results of the Morales (1982) study indicate that the language variety (standard or vernacular) of the lexicon in the stories was significant to students' achievement in the listening comprehension tests. Students performed significantly better on the stories with vernacular Spanish than on the stories with standard Spanish. This finding lends support to the use of vernacular Spanish lexicon as a medium of instruction for many vernacular dominant Spanish speakers. It also indicates that for elementary school children with dominance in vernacular Spanish, the lexical differences between vernacular and standard Spanish are sufficiently large to affect their performance on listening comprehension tests. In order to ensure student achievement in the language arts, educators should pay close attention to the language variety used in the classroom and in curriculum materials. At the present time, most textbooks being used in bilingual classrooms do not reflect the students' vernacular variety. The linguistic items used in the Morales (1982) study were limited to the lexicon, the linguistic category that most obviously distinguishes vernacular Spanish from standard Spanish. It is noteworthy that this linguistic category caused differences in student achievement on the listening comprehension tests. The axiom that students understand best the language variety that is closer to theirs was supported in this study. The students' vernacular Spanish lexicon does merit a legitimate place in academic instruction. The acceptance of the vernacular variety in students' writing is also crucial to their development as writers, to increasing students' confidence in writing, and to allowing them to develop their thinking skills. In an Arizona bilingual program in which Edelsky was consulting, one of the goals was for teachers to "value appropriate, effective verbal strategies over meager but standard dialect utterances" (1986:4). Speakers of non-standard dialects were viewed as having language strengths and were encouraged to use both local and standard dialects. The students' writings in vernacular Spanish which Edelsky examined showed the "use of varied vocabulary, complex syntax, and a move toward stylistic sophistication" (1986:54). This scholar concludes that students' bilingualism increased their options for meaning even if the students spoke varieties which were non-standard.

310

Frances Morales

The role of Spanish-speaking students' vernacular varieties is also starting to be examined in whole language classrooms where students write about topics of their own choosing and participate in writers' workshops which involve taking turns to read to their peers and listen to their comments. Teachers have to give careful consideration as to when it is most appropriate to introduce students to standard variants when vernacular variants are found in their written pieces. Issues associated with Spanish language varieties are not restricted to bilingual elementary classrooms but are being addressed by those teaching Spanish to native speakers of Spanish at the secondary and college levels. Many Spanish teachers have been exposed only to the standard variety and view this as the only legitimate or "real" Spanish variety (Garcia-Moya 1981). These groups of teachers will tend to favor language eradication with replacement by the standard variety as opposed to promoting in their classrooms an appreciation of differences in language varieties or even using a bidialectal approach (Valdes 1981). Floyd (1981) proposes that teachers of Spanish speakers help foster positive attitudes for students' home variety as well as for the varieties learned in the classroom. Sanchez (1981) suggests that native speakers of Spanish use their vernacular variety when interacting with family and community members instead of replacing it with the standard variety. Chicano/Mexicano students bring with them a wide range of Spanish language varieties which include non-standard variants found in the students' homes and communities but which are legitimate forms of communication. It is crucial that educators treat these varieties with respect, especially when students use them in their interactions with peers and teachers as well as in their writings. There is some evidence that the use of vernacular Spanish as a medium of instruction, particularly in language arts, facilitates learning for vernacular speakers. It is also important that students be able to function in situations where the standard variety may predominate. Therefore, students should be introduced to standard variants, not with the goal of downgrading the students' speech or replacing it with the standard but, instead, of expanding the students' linguistic reportoire. Educators need to advocate for students' language rights, for the students themselves may not yet be skilled in speaking up for what is right-fully theirs or may already feel that their vernacular variety is inferior to standard Spanish.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

311

References Adler, S. 1979

Poverty children and their language: Implications for teaching and treating. New York: Grune & Stratton, Inc.

Baratz, J.C. 1969 Teaching reading in an urban Negro school system. In J.C. Baratz and R.W. Shuy, eds., Teaching Black children to read (pp. 92-116). Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Bereiter, C., and S. Engelman 1966 Teaching disadvantaged children in the pre-school. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Blanco, G.M. 1978 The implementation of bilingual/bicultural education programs in the United States. In B. Spolsky and R.L. Cooper, eds., Case studies in bilingual education (pp. 454-499). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers. Bracken, O.K. 1971 Listening skills and experiences related to reading. In N.B. Smith, ed., Reading methods and teacher improvement (pp. 59-66). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Brown, G.H., N.L. Rosen, S.T. Hill and M.A. Olivas 1980 The condition of education for Hispanic Americans. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. Burling, R. 1973 English in Black and White. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc. Carter, T.P., and R.D. Segura 1979 Mexican Americans in school: A decade of change. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. Cloment, R., and B.C. Kruidenier 1983 Orientations in second language acquisition: I. The effects of ethnicity, milieu, and target language on their emergence. In Language Learning, 33 (3): 273-291. Cohen, A.D. 1979 Bilingual education for a bilingual community: Some insights gained from research. In R.V. Padilla, ed., Ethnoperspectives in bilingual education research, Volume I: Bilingual education and public policy in the United States (pp. 245-259). Ypsilanti, Michigan: Eastern Michigan University, Department of Foreign Languages and Bilingual Studies. Dallman, M., R.L. Rouch, L.Y.C., Char, and J J. DeBoer 1978 The teaching of reading (5th Edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Diaz, S., L.C. Moll, and H. Mehan 1986 Sociocultural resources in instruction: A context-specific approach. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language

312

Frances Morales

minority students. Los Angeles: California State University, Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center. Durrell, D.D. 1969 Listening comprehension versus reading comprehension. In Journal of Reading, 12(6): 455460. Edelsky, C. 1986 Writing in a bilingual program: Habia una vez. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Elias-Olivares, L.E. 1976 Ways of speaking in a Chicano community: A socio-linguistic approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Austin, Texas: The University of Texas. Evans B.D. 1978A study of what Chicano and Anglo children remember about the 1979 stories they read and hear (Abstracted). Reading Research Quarterly 14 (2): 272-276. Fishman, J.A. 1975 Sociolinguistics: A brief introduction. (4th Printing). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. 1979 Standard versus dialect in bilingual education: An old problem in a new context. In H.T. Trueba and C. Barnett-Mizrahi, eds., Bilingual multicultural education and the professional: From theory to practice (pp. 454-466). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Floyd, M.B. 1981 Language variation in southwest Spanish and its relation to pedagogical issues. In G. Valdos, A.G. Lozano, and R. Garcia-Moya, eds., Teaching Spanish to the Hispanic bilingual: Issues, aims, and methods. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Gaarder, A.B. 1977 Bilingual schooling and the survival of Spanish in the United States. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Garcia, E. 1975 Chicano Spanish dialects and education. In E. Hernändez-Chdvez et al., eds., El lenguafe de los Chicanos: Regional and social characteristics of language used by Mexican Americans (pp. 70-76). Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Garcia-Moya, R. 1981 Teaching Spanish to Spanish speakers: Some considerations for the preparation of teachers. In G. Valde's, A.G. Lozano, and R. GarciaMoya, eds., Teaching Spanish to the Hispanic bilingual: Issues, aims, and methods (pp. 59-65). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Gardner, R.C., and W.E. Lambert 1972 Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Goodman, K.S. 1965 Dialect barriers to reading comprehension. Elementary English 42: 853-860.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

313

Haycock, K., and S.M. Navarro 1988 Unfinished business: Fulfilling our children's promise. A report from the Achievement Council. Oakland: The Achievement Council. Hernandez, I.C. 1980 Chicano parents' and community members attitudes toward southwest Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Hernandez-Chavez, E. 1973 The home language of Chicanos as a medium of instruction. In M.P. Douglass, ed., Oaremont Reading Conference, Thirty-Seventh Yearbook, 28-36. Keller, G.D. 1976 Constructing valid goals for bilingual and bidialectal education: The role of the applied linguist and the bilingual educator. In G.D. Keller et al., eds., Bilingualism in the bicentennial and beyond (pp. 17-37). New York: Bilingual Press. Lastra de Suärez, Y. 1975 El habla y la educacion de los ninos de origen Mexicano en Los Angeles. In E. Hernandez-Chavez et al., eds., El Lenguagje de los Chicanos: Regional and social characteristics used by Mexican Americans (pp. 6169). Arlington, VA.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Lewis, S.A.R. 1979 Factors affecting the oral comprehension of Black elementary school children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Manuel, H.T. 1965 Spanish-Speaking children of the Southwest: Their education and the public welfare. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. Mathewson, G.G. 1974 Relationship between ethnic group attitudes toward dialect and comprehension of dialect folktales. The Journal of Educational Research, 68(1): 15-18,35. Morales, M.F. 1982 Vernacular Spanish and Chicano culture content in the language arts curriculum for bilingual education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Penalosa, F. 1980 Chicano sociolinguistics: A brief introduction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Politzer, R.L., and M. Hoover 1976 Teachers' and pupils' attitudes toward Black English speech varieties and Black pupils' achievement (R & D Memorandum No. 145). Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching. Politzer, R.L., and A.G. Ramirez 1973b Judging personality from speech: A pilot study of the effects of bilingual education on attitudes toward ethnic groups (R & D Memorandum No. 106). Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching.

314

Frances Mordes

Ornstein-Galicia, J.L. 1987 Chicano calo: Description and review of a border variety. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 8 (4): 359-373. Ramirez, A.G., E. Arce-Torres, and R.L. Politzer 1973 Language attitudes and the achievement of bilingual pupils (R & D Memorandum No. 146). Stanford, CA: Center for Educational Research at Stanford. Ramirez, III, M.,etal. 1977 Spanish-English bilingual education in the U.S.: Current issues, resources, and research priorities. Bilingual education series5. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Sanchez, R. 1981 Spanish for native speakers at the university: Suggestions. In G. Valdes, A.G. Lozano, and R. Garcia-Moya, eds., Teaching Spanish to the Hispanic bilingual: Issues, aims, and methods (pp. 91-99). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. 1983 Chicano discourse: Socio-historic perspectives. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Schon, I. 1978 A bicultural heritage: Themes for the exploration of Mexican and Mexican-American culture in books for children and adolescents. New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Shuy, R.W. 1969 A linguistic background for developing beginning reading materials for Black children. In J.C. Baratz and R.W. Shuy, eds., Teaching Black Children to Read (pp. 117-137). Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. 1972 Speech differences and teaching strategies: How different is enough? In R.E. Hodges and E.H. Rudorf, eds., Language and Learning to Read (pp. 55-72). Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin. Somervill, M.A. 1975 Dialect and reading: A review of alternative solutions. Review of Educational Research, 45 (2): 247-262. Somervill, M.A., and J.F. Jacobs 1972 The use of dialect in reading materials for Black inner-city children. The Negro Educational Review, 23 (1): 13-23. Stewart, W.A. 1969 On the use of Negro dialect in the teaching of reading. In J.C. Baratz and R.W. Shuy, eds., Teaching Black children to read (pp. 156-219). Washington. D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Tang, B. 1971 A psycholinguistic study of the relations between children's ethnic linguistic attitudes and the effectiveness of methods used in second language reading instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.

Varieties of Spanish language in the bilingual classroom

315

Valdes, G. 1988 The language situation of Mexican Americans. In S.L. McKay and S.C. Wong, eds., Language diversity: Problem or resource? A social and educational perspective on language minorities in the United States (pp. 111-139). New York: Newbury House Publishers. Wolfram, W. 1970 Sociolinguistic alternatives in teaching reading to nonstandard speakers. Reading Research Quarterly 6:9-33.

Getting to higher ground: The development of thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students Jose Salvador Hernandez Introduction The development of thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students has not been a part of their educational experience. Rather, the educational history of these students has been overwhelmingly concerned with the remediation of problems and deficits that these students supposedly bring to school. This kind of perspective seriously underestimates the intellectual and academic potential of these students. In response to this view an instructional perspective is offered which focuses on student potential and discusses ideas pertinent to the development of thinking skills. This chapter presents, 1) a theoretical orientation which emphasizes interactional factors necessary for learning thinking skills, and 2) a brief overview of some instructional approaches which have shown to be effective with Spanish-speaking students. What is called for is a switch from deficit-remediation teaching to the pro-active development of student potential. There is no shortage of publications that call attention to the decline of thinking skills among our nation's youth (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1988; National Assessment of Educational Progress 1981; National Commission of Excellence in Education 1983). For Spanish-speaking students this lack of school type thinking skills is manifested by depressed school achievement (Arias 1986), the highest dropout rates in the country (Rumberger 1987), and an illiteracy rate substantially higher than for white and black populations (National Council of La Raza 1988). For all students, the educational basics of the future must clearly go beyond the "three r's" of a nostalgic past. As the National Science Board Commission on Pre-College Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology stated in its report, Educating Americans for the 21st Century:

318

Josa Salvador Hernandez

We must return to basics, but the basics of the 21st century are not only reading, writing, and arithmetic. They include communication and higher problemsolving skills, and scientific and technological literacy-the thinking tools that allow us to understand the technological world around us.

Yet, the reasoning skills needed now and in the future are part of a larger purpose. Our most fundamental educational and democratic ideologies are based on the premise of providing access and opportunity for every student in order to develop their fullest potential. Nickerson (1987) captured this more essential need to teach thinking, arguing that "We want students to become good thinkers because thinking is at the heart of what it means to be human; to fail to develop one's potential in this regard is to preclude the full expression of one's humanity. Thinking well is a means to many ends, but it is an end in itself" (1987:32). Thinking skills instruction must be part of the instructional agenda for Spanish-speaking and all language minority students. But the proposition of developing the thinking skills of Spanish-speaking students calls into to question the notion that only some students can benefit from thinking skills instruction. As Resnick (1987:7) points out: It is new to take seriously the aspiration of making thinking and problem solving a regular part of a school program for all of the population, even minorities, even non-English speakers, even the poor. It is a new challenge to develop educational programs that assume that all individuals, not just the elite, can become competent thinkers.

This is quite a challenge that will involve the active participation of educators, community representatives, policy experts, and students all with different interests and points of view. But in order to approach this problem we must begin with some understanding of what is meant by thinking skills.

One view of thinking skills As with most complex constructs there is no single definition of what constitutes thinking skills. The perspectives, models, and thinking skills programs tend to become confusing and at times seem mutually exclusive. However, Sternberg (1987a, 1987b) has proposed a useful model which categorizes thinking skills into three kinds of components:

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking studen ts

319

1) executive processes (metacomponents), 2) nonexecutive performance processes (performance components), and 3) nonexecutive learning processes (knowledge-acquisition components). These components illustrate three areas of learning that Spanish-speaking students greatly need assistance in. First, the metacomponents or executive processes can be thought of as conscious knowledge about one's own thinking and control of that thinking (metacognition). These executive processes are used to plan, monitor and evaluate one's thinking (Sternberg 1987b). We can refer to executive processes in two dimensions: knowledge and control of self and knowledge and control of processes (cited in Marzano et al. 1989). Knowledge and control of self refers to the dispositions and attitudes toward learning and knowing i.e. commitment, persistance, attention. On the other hand, knowledge and control of processes refers to the identification and definition of a problem, formulating criteria for judging possible answers, selecting strategies to solve that problem, and monitoring the solution and the processes. These metacomponents are essential for organizing thinking, assessing problems, selecting strategies, and monitoring performance and making adjustments in the process. Secondly, performance components are the processes that actually carry out the thinking that the metacomponents have directed, e.g., solving a problem, making decisions, deducing, making value judgments, inferring relations, applying previously inferred relations to new stimuli, and seeing similarities and differences. These processes are the means for carrying out the plans and strategies selected by the metacomponent. Thirdly, the knowledge-acquisition components are used to learn how to think about our thinking and acquire the necessary knowledge to carry out a particular task or performance process. These acquisition processes include: figuring out meanings from context, asking and answering questions for clarification, analysis and synthesis, concept formation, comprehension, and principle formation. These processes focus on the acquisition of knowledge needed by the performance and executive processes. So that thinking skills is not simply a'collection of discrete operations but a series of relationships within and between the various components. The three components are not exhaustive of the many models, programs, and definitions found in the literature (Chance 1986; Costa 1985; Ruggiero 1988). But they do provide a starting point for discussing problems and concerns about the development of thinking

320

Joso Salvador Hernandez

skills for Spanish-speaking students. Of major concern is the fact that Spanish-speaking students do not receive the kind of instruction that fosters the kind of thinking skills just described. The question then becomes, how do we begin to address this problem? That is, how do we begin to provide Spanish-speaking students with the kind of thinking skills instruction that will foster the development of their metacognitive, knowledge-acquisition and performance skills? First, a shift is needed in the theoretical perspectives which have guided much of our instructional interventions and perceptions about Spanish-speaking students. All too often we underestimate the learning potential of these students and design programs that do not take advantage of that potential. Secondly, what are some instructional efforts which have shown potential use in the development of thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students? Can these promising practices provide some knowledge for improving the curricular and instructional approaches for educating Spanish-speaking students?

A shift to higher ground A shift in theoretical focus requires that we perceive the positive attributes and not underestimate the academic potential of the language minority student (LMS). Theoretical explanations and instructional services have systematically underestimated the academic potential of Spanish-speaking students and failed to provide meaningful instruction (Carrasco 1981; Diaz, Moll & Mehan 1986; Moll & Diaz 1985). A shift must be made from an over-reliance on low-level skills instruction to a higher ground where such students can attain the cognitive academic skills required for successful completion of a secondary education and provide access to higher education. As Levin has stated, "Ultimately, we must treat 'at-risk' students in the same way we treat all gifted and talented students; in short, we must accelerate, not remediate their education" (Levin 1989:6). However, instructional practices will not be successful unless there is a significant change in perspective about how to teach Spanishspeaking students. There must be a conscious shift of focus from remedial and compensatory practices to approaches for guiding Spanish-speaking students to higher intellectual ground. In this regard, Vygotsky's theory for the development of higher psychological functions (1978) offers a unique perspective for the development of

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students

321

thinking skills with Spanish-speaking and other language minority students. It is toward such a shift that we now turn.

A Vygotskian perspective The suggested shift in perspective is based on the theoretical foundations of the Russian socio-historical psychologist Lev. S. Vygotsky (1978, 1986) who lived until 1934. This perspective has more recently been elaborated by American scholars such as Langer (1987), Tharp and Gallimore (1988), Trueba (1988), and Wertsch (1985, 1981) among others. A central tenet of the Vygotskian perspective is the importance of the relationship between social context and intellectual development. Humans in any culture cannot escape being social beings or influencing, through their social interaction, the social environments in which they function (Moll 1989). Vygotsky expressed this relationship between social activity and individual learning in the general law of cultural development. For Vygotsky (1978), higher psychological functions (like learning) appear " . . . twice or on two planes. First on the social plane then on the psychological plane" (1978:163). That is, social interactions, such as those between a mother and child or a teacher and a student, generate knowledge between the participants on how to perform specific tasks or processes. As the child or student becomes more competent in the required tasks and processes, the greater the probability that what was learned in social interaction will become part of the child or students' repertoire of skills. Thus, through social interaction individuals are able to learn skills and processes which were presented, modeled, or taught by capable others. In such social situations humans use psychological tools to mediate their interactions between themselves, and the social and physical world e.g., verbal behavior, writing and reading. Of importance for the development of thinking skills is the social characteristic of these tools. As Moll and Diaz (1987:196) elaborate, They are primarily a means of communicating with others: that is, tools are used in the service of social interaction and communication. Ultimately, they are used to mediate our interactions with self, as we internalize their use and they become part of our behavioral repertoire.

When language minority students are taught basic communication skills in their second language, then that is what they will learn and

322

Jose Salvador Hernandez

internalize as part of their behavior repertoire. On the other hand, when teaching contexts also focus on the development of thinking skills, students will internalize communication as a tool for comprehension, problem-solving, inquiry, decision-making, and composition. The path to intellectual development also depends on how students interact with adults or peers in specific-problem solving environments. That is, children first learn to perform the behaviors needed to complete a given task (e.g., reading, writing) with the guidance and direction of an adult or more capable peer before they can complete the task independently. Pedagogically, then, how social environments are organized will be critical to the development of thinking skills (Resnick 1987;Duran 1988). Zones of proximal development For Vygotsky (1978, 1986) the connection between what is presented on the social plane (school work) and individual psychological action (learning) is expressed through the concept of a zone of proximal development (ZPD). The ZPD is defined as ". . . the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky 1978:86). The actual developmental level may be thought of as individual performance on a test or some other "static" measure. It is what students can do by themselves. In contrast, at the level of potential or proximal development are the skills and behaviors that students exhibit in the process of developing and maturing through interaction with others (Moll & Diaz 1987). For Vygotsky, instruction should be directed at behaviors in the process of developing, toward the students' future potential, not at what they have already mastered. As students are able to master the behaviors and skills of potential development, then this level becomes the starting point for actual (self) development: a process of self to other, other to self, self to other, etc. Thus, in collaborative activity teachers may see the potential skills and behavior that students are not able to do by themselves but whose potential can be observed, developed, and actualized. The teacher's role is to create and support social activities that guide students to master behaviors that are in advance of what they can do independently, so that, "children internalize and transform the

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students

323

kind of help they receive from others and eventually use these same means of guidance to direct their own subsequent-problem-solving behaviors" (Moll & Diaz 1985). Teachers who develop and support social activities that focus on thinking skills will guide students to use those skills in subsequent problem situations. These theoretical notions have instructional implications for how and what level of skills should be taught to language minority students. The concept of ZPD emphasizes four instructional factors relevant for the development of thinking skills among Spanish-speaking students: 1) that teaching and learning take place in social contexts between adults and children or between children and more capable peers; 2) that learning occurs best at a level of development ahead of the student's present state of knowledge through an interactional process; 3) that the kind and type of skills that teachers emphasize for development will be what is internalized; and 4) that language is seen as a mediational tool for the development of higher psychological functions. Thus, instructional approaches which incorporate some of the above factors would seem to offer some potential for developing thinking skills with Spanish-speaking students.

Promising practices What follows is a brief overview of some promising instructional practices which have certain features consistent with the Vygotskian perspective. The three general approaches are not remedial but aim to guide Spanish-speaking students to higher ground. These instructional approaches have a strong cognitive skills focus, a strong awareness of the importance of social context and interaction, and do not underestimate the intellectual potential of their students.

Cooperative Math and Science In response to the remediation and cultural deficit models of teaching used with Spanish-speaking students, developmental psychologist Edward De Avila and his colleagues (De Avila, Cohen, & Intili 1981) have developed math and science activities which promote the thinking skills of these students. This particular program is called Finding Out/ Descubrimiento (FO/D) and has been most effective with students in grades 2-5. However, a word of caution is warranted since this

324

Jos£ Salvador Hernandez

approach requires extensive teacher and school staff preparation. Simply purchasing the materials without the prerequisite training will only insure improper implementation. The materials contain over a hundred illustrated Spanish/English activity cards containing instructions for each activity, work sheets for every student, and the manipulative materials to carry out the task. The activities are organized around seventeen themes e.g., measurebalance and structures, probability and estimation, magnetism, electricity, and heat, typical themes in elementary science classes. Through a heterogeneous, cooperative-grouping approach students are actively involved in the processes of discovering science concepts. It is through the interactive nature of the lessons that students with different language proficiencies share knowledge and communicate for the purpose of completing the tasks. The math and science concepts are presented many times so that students can understand these concepts in a variety of situations. That is, concepts, principles, solutions, and insights are not directly taught but "abstracted from experience" (Cohen, De Avila, Navarete & Lotan 1988). In this regard thinking skills are used to complete the various tasks. There are four basic steps used to complete tasks: Step 1: Gather information When students engage in an activity, they gather information about the process required to complete the task by reading and studying the task cards and the materials. Step 2: Hypothesize Students guess, estimate, predict, and make inferences about the activity or a particular problem in the activity. Step 3: Test Students experiment, examine, measure, and evaluate the activity or a particular problem in the activity. Step 4: Describe and apply Students illustrate, explain, and generalize what they have learned from their observations both by talking and by writing about what they have learned. (Cohen et al, 1988) The FO/D approach to complex instruction utilizes cooperative interaction in heterogeneous groupings with bilingual materials as students learn essential concepts in math and science. The training

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking studen ts

325

and implementation strategies are too extensive to cover here but an idea of the grouping strategies may be obtained from Cohen's (1986) monograph. The FO/D approach has extensive an research foundation and is now commercially available. Metacognitive strategies approach: Reciprocal teaching Recent work in cognitive strategy instruction (Jones, Palincsar, Ogle & Carr 1987) has also focused attention beyond cognitive skills themselves to the metacognitive. Marzano et al. (1988) define metacognition as "being aware of our thinking as we perform specific tasks and then using this awareness to control what we are doing" (p. 9). For Spanish-speaking students the metacognitive aspects of learning to comprehend text in either the primary or the second language are often not developed. It is important that Spanish-speaking students be aware of their comprehension efforts and use that awareness to control the process of comprehension. One approach that has been successful in developing metacognitive awareness and control with less able readers and recently with bilingual students is the concept of reciprocal-teaching. Of particular interest is the work of Palincsar and Brown (1984), Padron (1986), and Hernandez (1988). The work of Palincsar and Brown (1984) and Palincsar (1987a, 1987b) have been particularly instructive in the development of a reciprocal-teaching approach focusing on reading comprehension and monitoring strategies. A key feature of the reciprocal-teaching approach is that the teacher models and uses the behaviors and strategies e.g., questioning, summarizing, predicting in the social context of reading instruction. The students are thus able to see and hear the comprehension strategies that the teacher wants them to learn. As students are guided in the use of the various comprehension strategies, they begin to assume more and more of the responsibility and role initially modeled by the teacher. Over time, the instructional focus shifts from teacher-centered to student-centered learning. What has been explicitly modeled by the teacher and performed by the student forms the basis for the internalization of strategies by the learner. Thus, reading from a Vygotskian perspective (as an activity) in the zone of proximal development is a system of social and cultural interactions established between a guiding adult and the developing student.

326

Josa Salvador Hernandez

Padron (1986) was one of the first researchers to investigate the cognitive strategies Hispanic bilingual students use as they read in their second language. She was able to determine that bilingual students used less and more passive strategies than monolingual English readers. However, when bilingual fourth and fifth grade students participated in strategy training, they outperformed students in the control group on measures of English reading comprehension. That is, bilingual students instructed to use cognitive strategies performed better than the control group. So that, even though bilingual students used fewer and more passive strategies, they were also able to improve their reading comprehension through a reciprocal-teaching (strategy-learning) approach using English. In a related study Hernandez (1988) examined if strategy instruction through the primary language would show improvement in reading comprehension, and whether the students could use the strategies while attempting to read second language text. A modified reciprocalteaching approach was utilized to teach students question generating, summarizing, and predicting strategies. This study differed from previous studies in that the native language was used as the medium of instruction, strategy use with the second language was examined, and changes were incorporated into the traditional reciprocal-teaching methodology. The instructional approach was modified to include a schemaactivation component. At the beginning of each reading lesson the instructor would begin the session by initiating discussion with the students about the major topic in the days lesson e.g., vacations, bikes, horses. This was done to activate background experiences prior to reading the text as suggested by Calfee et al. (1981). After the schema-activation experience was completed, the instructional sequence would begin with teacher modeling or one of the students assuming the role of group leader as in the traditional reciprocalteaching model. Results of this initial study indicated significant differences (p < .01) between pre-post comprehension measures. The observed difference suggests that over the intervention period the students were able to increase their Spanish reading comprehension when assessed with text explicit, text implicit and script implicit questions (Pearson & Johnson 1978). Transcript analysis also revealed that all of the students were able to utilize the strategies they had learned in Spanish when they attempted to read in English. That is, when asked to provide

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students

327

summaries or generate questions about an English language story, the students did so even when they could not decode all of the text. What these initial studies suggest is that cognitive strategies instruction with Spanish-speaking students may be potentially beneficial. The potential benefit may be due to the increased social interaction, increased student control, and greater focus on comprehension strategies rather than skills remediation approaches.

Culturally appropriate instruction Another research focus which employs a Vygotskian framework is best exemplified by the work of the Kamehameha Early Education Program (KEEP) in Hawaii and the work of Moll and Diaz with Spanishspeaking students (see e.g., Au 1980; Moll & Diaz 1987). Both of these efforts have utilized ethnographic information to develop culturally relevant instructional activities. KEEP is an outgrowth of research and development efforts started in the 1960s "designed to find ways of improving the school performance of educationally 'at-risk' Hawaiian children and using these results to help public schools better serve this population" (Calfee et al. 1981:1). The research basis for the program came from a multidisciplinary effort which included anthropologists, psychologists, linguists, sociologist, and educators. One of the most important findings from the research (for purposes of this discussion) was the elaboration of a stylized speech event called "talk-story". In the students' communities, "talk-story" is a culturally appropriate way for adults and children to tell stories. A story is told (narrated) by more than one person, and the "speech of the narrator is also overlapped by audience responses", (Calfee et al. 1981:29). This kind of narrative speech style is very different from classroom practices that require students to raise their hands or wait to be called on in order to participate. The use of the "talk-story" format with reading lessons did not originally occur at the initiation of the program developers. When the decision had been made to focus on direct instruction of comprehension with small groups, the students began to use the overlapping turn structure used in "talk-story". The introduction of "talk-story" and the willingness of teachers to relax their turn-taking control made this strategy part of the instructional approach. KEEP utilizes this culturally appropriate speech event as part of their E-T-R reading lesson sequence. E means that student experiences

328

Josa Salvador Hernandez

relative to the story content in the text be discussed prior to reading. It is during this experience phase of the sequence that "talk-story" is used to bring students' experiences to the forefront. During the T part of the sequence, the text is read and then related to the student's experiences during the R phase of the sequence. The success of the KEEP reading program has been attributed, in part, to the culturally appropriate lesson structure and the change in focus from phonics instruction to comprehension. But reading instruction has not been the only area of focus utilizing culturally appropriate instructional approaches. In San Diego, California, a culturally congruent approach was also developed to assist Spanish-speaking students with their writing skills. As part of a larger literacy study (Trueba, Moll & Diaz 1982) in a bilingual community, Moll and Diaz (1987) report on how they were able to turn "community ethnographic data into usable information for classroom practice" (p. 193). Writing was viewed as a means of communication and as a means for intellectual development. To accomplish this purpose, the researchers developed a series of writing modules that would provide community-based knowledge for writing instruction with junior high students. From their extensive ethnographic data the researchers found that parents, students and other community members expressed concern with social issues in the community e.g. youth gangs, unemployment, immigration, the need to learn English etc. From these findings it became apparent that the use of social issues as topics for writing would be an appropriate direction to follow. Teacher training seminars and the use of the writing module activities were central to the teacher training component of the study. In the seminars teachers were guided through pre-writing procedures, writing about community topics, e.g., low riders, immigration and analysis and revision of text. Once the teachers started implementing module activities in class, they were able to see significant changes in the writing of their students. One of the most dramatic examples came from a teacher who initiated a writing activity around the topic of "violence". At first the students seemed hesitant to express their feelings and ideas. But when the teacher made reference to the killing of her instructional aide two months earlier, student responses changed to an outpouring of feelings and emotions about violence. As the teacher wrote in her journal "Many wrote frantically to pour it out" (cited in Moll & Diaz

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students

329

1987). A sample of one student's writing will serve to illustrate the difference between using socially relevant topics and school designated topics. I never had a violent life. But one thing did happen, that effected my very bad. A couple of years ago. I found out my Uncle and Aunt had a divorce. My Aunt got the kids. Candy and Tammy where their names. My Aunt went into singing Country. She got pretty good, but she wasn't no Crystal Gale. She had a affair with her chauffeur. After it was over she was going to get married to another man. The chauffeur was still in love with her, so he stabbed her. When I found out I flipped out. It was so creepy . .. (Moll & Diaz 1987:208)

The story continues with a description of how the woman's children were happy that their mother had died and how the writer felt confused but happy to be alive. In contrast prior to writing this account of violence the same student wrote on a school approved topic, junk food. Yes, I think school should be allowed to sell junk food. They don't have a lot of junk food in the first place. Junk food tastes good and feels you up when your hungry. It really wouldn't do any good if they stopped selling it. Because they would bring it to school from home. Plus the school gets the profit from it. (Moll & Diaz 1987:209)

Differences can be found between the first and second writing samples in the amount of writing, greater coherence and organization. But more significantly is the student's use of writing "to make connections between real world events and themselves" (Moll & Diaz 1987: 209). Bringing community-based knowledge into the writing process is one way to make schooling more academically relevant for all language minority students. What KEEP and the work in San Diego illustrate is the successful use of culturally based information for use in reading and writing activities with language minority students. Both of these student populations have not been considered capable of improving their academic performance by more traditional methods. But when a different perspective about the student's potential is employed and more appropriate instructional activities are designed, these students have been shown to be capable of reaching higher ground.

330

Jose Salvador Hernandez

Closing comments Throughout this chapter an effort has been made to convey the need to develop the cognitive-academic thinking skills of Spanish-speaking students in particular and all language minority students in general. The waste and cost in human potential is too great a price to pay for neglecting the development of these students. Even though there may not be total agreement on what constitutes thinking skills across or within disciplines, some frameworks such as those of Sternberg (1987b) and Marzano et al. (1988), the FO/D program and the other approaches discussed are starting points for change. It was suggested that the perspectives of Vygotsky and his proponents and some of the more recent instructional efforts provide challenging promises for tunring the academic underachievement of these students into positive results. This is still an area where much work remains to be done. The task of assisting LMS to develop their cognitive-academic potential may be facilitated by keeping certain points in mind. First, one must beware of the systematic underestimation of student potential based on inadequate assessment practices and beliefs. Second, instruction ahead of the student's current level of development appears to be more challenging and pro-active than remediation. Thirdly, the social-interactive basis for cognitive development forms the foundation for the skills students will internalize. What students are exposed to is what they may learn; what they are not exposed to they will never know. Lastly, the cultural and linguistic appropriateness of school instruction must be understood and implemented in greater detail. Making schooling part of the students' world is essential if they are to succeed there. Some of the instructional approaches now are being developed promise to guide language minority students to higher intellectual ground.

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking studen ts

331

References Arias, M.B. 1986 The context of education for Hispanic students: An overview. American Journal of Education, 95, (1), 26-57. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1988 Educational Leadership, Alexandria, VA (April, 1988). Au, K.H. 1980 Participation structures in a reading lesson with Hawaiian children: Analysis of a culturally appropriate instructional event. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 77,91-115. Calfee, R.C., C.B. Cazden, R.P. Duran, M.P. Griffin, M. Martus and H. Willis 1981 Designing reading instruction for cultural minorities: The case of the Kamehameha early education program. Report. Professor Courtney B. Cazden: Harvard Graduate School of Education, Appian Way, Cambridge, Mass. 02138 Carrasco,R. 1981 Expanded awareness of student performance: A case study in applied ethnographic monitoring in a bilingual classroom. In H. Trueba, G. Gutherie, & K. Au (eds.), Culture and the bilingual classroom: Stuides in classroom ethnography. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers. Chance P. 1986 Thinking in the classroom. New York, N.Y.: Teachers College,

Columbia University. Cohen, E. 1986 Designing group-work: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press. Cohen, E., E. De Avila, C. Navarete and R. Lotan 1988 Finding out/descubrimiento implementation manual. Stanford, CA.: Stanford University Program for Complex Instruction. School of Education. Costa, A.L. (ed.) 1985 Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. De Avila, E., E. Cohen and J. Intili 1981 Improving cognition: A multi-cultural approach. Final Report to NIE, NIE Grant #G-78, MICA Project, February 1981. Diaz, S., L. Moll and H. Mehan 1986 Sociocultural resources in instruction: A context-specific approach. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp. 187-230). Los Angeles, CA.: Evaluation, dissemination and assessment center, California State University, Los Angeles. Duran, R.P. 1988 Learning and assisted performance. In Presseisen, B.Z. (ed.), At-risk students and thinking: Perspectives from research. National Education Association and Research for Better Schools.

332

Jos£ Salvador Hernandez

Hernandez, J.S. 1988 A reciprocal-teaching approach: Metacomprehension reading strategies for non-English proficient students. Final report: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Project. Jones, B.F., A.S. Palincsar, D.S. Ogle and E.G. Carr 1987 Strategic teaching and learning: Cognitive instruction in the content areas.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Langer, J. 1987 Language, literacy, and culture: Issues of society and schooling. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing, Inc. Levin, H. 1989 Pilot programs test the theory: 'Accelerate, don't remediate' at-risk students. Stanford Observer (January 1989) 25, (3):6-7. Stanford Newsservice. Marzano, RJ., R.S. Brandt, C.S. Hughes, B.F. Jones, B.Z. Presseisen,S.C. Rankin and C. Suhor 1988 Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and curriculum development. Moll, L.C. 1989 Teaching second-language students: A Vygotskian perspective. In D. Johnson & D. Roen (eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: Longman. Moll, L.C., and R. Diaz 1987 Teaching writing as communication: The use of ethnographic findings in classroom practice. In Bloome, D. (ed.), Literacy and schooling, (pp. 193-221). Norwood, N.J.: Alex Publishing Co. Moll.L.C., and E.Diaz 1985 Ethnographic pedagogy: Promoting effective bilingual instruction. In E.E. Garcia, & R.V. Padilla, (eds.), Advances in bilingual education research (pp. 127-149). Tucson, AZ.: University of Arizona Press. National Assessment of Education Progress 1981 Reading thinking and writing, the 1979-80 National Assessment of Reading and Literature. Denver, Colorado. National Commission of Excellence in Education 1983 A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, D.C. National Council of La Raza 1988 Literacy in the Hispanic community. Washington, D.C.: Policy Analysis Center. Nickerson, R.S. 1987 Why teach thinking? In Baron, J.B. & Sternberg, RJ. (eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 27-37). New York: W.H. Freeman and Co.

Thinking skills for Spanish-speaking students

333

Padron,Y.N. 1986 Training limited-English proficient students to use cognitive reading strategies. Paper presented at the thirty-fifth annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Austin, TX, December 1986. Palincsar, A.S. 1987a Collaborating for collaborative learning of text comprehension. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association: Washington, D.C., April 1987. 1987b Reciprocal Teaching: Field Evaluations in Remedial Reading and Content-Area Reading. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association: Washington, D.C., April 1987. Palincsar, A., and A. Brown 1984 Reciprocal teaching of comprehension of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 7,117-175. Pearson, P.D., and D.D. Johnson 1978 Teaching reading comprehension. Holt Rinehart and Winston. Resnick, L. 1987 Education and learning to think. Pittsburgh: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh. Ruggiero, V.R. 1988 The art of thinking (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Rumberger, R.W. 1987 High school dropouts: A review of issues and evidence. Review of Educational Research, 57, (2) ;101 -21. Sternberg R.J. 1987a Teaching intelligence: The application of cognitive psychology to the improvement of intellectual skills. In J.B. Baron & R.J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Tfieory and practice (pp. 182-218). New York: W.H. Freeman and Co. 1987b Questions and answers about the nature and teaching of thinking skills. In J.B. Baron & R.J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 251-259). New York: W.H. Freeman and Co. Trueba, H., L.C. Moll and S. Diaz 1982 Improving the functional writing skills of bilingual secondary school students (contract No. 400-81-0023). Washington D.C.: National Institute of Education, Trueba, H.T. (ed.) 1987 Success or failure?: Learning & the language minority student. Cambridge, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers. Vygotsky, L.S. 1978 Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, and E. Souberman (eds.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1986 Thought and language (rev. ed.) (A. Kozulin, ed.). Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

334

Jose Salvador Hernandez

Wertsch,J.V.(ed.) 1981 The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. White Plains, N.Y.: Sharpe. 1985 Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students: Insights from a case study of curriculum development

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran Introduction Recent calls for reform of the educational system in the United States have focused on the teaching profesion, especially on improved teacher preparation stricter enforcement of standards, and more realistic testing of teacher knowledge (Passow 1984; The Holmes Group 1986). The so-called professionalization of the teacher invokes as well greater autonomy for teachers, giving them more opportunities to use their professional judgment in designing and modifying curriculum. Within second language education, a similar dissatisfaction with the status quo has developed. There has been, for example, a gradual disenchantment with the simplistic evaluation of programmatic options for educating language minority students (Willig 1985). There has also been a re-discovery that the best way to find out what works best lies with thoughtful analyses of the learner being educated at home (Hernandez-Chavez & Curtiss 1982) and most especially in the classroom interacting with peers (Cohen, Intili & DeAvila 1982) and with the teacher (Politzer 1980). As in mainstream education, however, the classroom teacher has emerged as the key individual. The perception that one method (Diller 1978; Hammerly 1985) or one program will translate to automatic student achievement and second language acquisition is no longer viable. Second language learning is perceived as a complex process, influenced by individual differences in ability, attitude, language use, previous experience, learning style and many other factors.

336

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Lesson design in second language instruction: A brief history In the heyday of euphoria for the audio-lingual method, Brooks (1964), one of its strongest advocates, wrote of the need to "teach language as communication" a premise which is on the surface still very much in line with current thought on effective second language teaching practices (Terrell 1982; Krashen 1981). However, as he further outlined his position it became clear that the context in which language was to be presented was so narrowly prescribed that it limited the chances that real communication could take place in the classroom: "The new technique is to model for the student all the new behavior patterns he is to learn". With these words, Brooks presented a grammatical syllabus that followed a tightly prescribed set of procedures. Once the audio lingual method had been well articulated and disseminated, teacher-focused research often emphasized manipulation of the standard techniques within the method, the most effective place for grammatical generalization within the pattern drill, the need for memorization of the dialogue, and so on (Politzer 1972:151). There developed, however, a growing realization that pedagogy, research and linguistic theory could probably not deliver a "general truth about language teaching" but rather that these could provide "a battery of possible procedures from which to choose in addressing the needs of the learner" (Politzer 1972:152). Thus the pendulum began to swing back to giving teachers' greater autonomy in lesson design and delivery. The growing dissatisfaction with the audio-lingual method based both on systematic research (Smith 1970), theoretical analysis (Rivers 1964) and teacher feedback, created a vacuum in which second language teachers were faced with an ever mounting array of choices. In terms of method, advocates of new methods focused first on cognitive code learning (Chastain 1971) and then on a quickly expanding array of other "new" methods. Many of these were, of course, not that new, but rather crafty permutations of old approaches refinished and, perhaps more importantly, marketed by enthusiastic advocates who invariably promised more than could be realistically delivered (See Blair 1982; Rivers 1981; Krashen 1982; Richards & Rodgers 1986 for additional reviews). Some of these advocates and their associates could be quite specific about what teachers should do in

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

337

the classroom on a day-to-day basis. Asher, for example, (1982) outlines detailed lesson plans using his Total Physical Response Approach (TPR). Others, however, made their method a mystery puzzle which could only be solved by attending expensive workshops at not always convenient locations (Suggestopedia - Lozanov 1978). Second language teachers invariably found these methods a rich source for introspection about what they do, but difficult to implement on a daily basis, in a consistent fashion. Moreover, empirically based research on how these methods operated in the classroom has been and continues to be extremely limited (Long 1983). Even well researched new methods, TPR, for example, compared students schooled with the treatment to those receiving whatever methods were in place in the classrooms willing to participate as controls. Teacher behavior in the process of implementing the TPR method, for example, has yet to be systematically investigated. Moreover, very little of the research addressed the issue of aptitude/attitude treatment interaction (see Politzer 1981). As most experienced second language teachers know, students are not all alike, but come with different needs, abilities and attitudes toward second language acquisition. How a method might fluctuate in effectiveness with different kinds of teachers and students as observed in the classroom has been much neglected over the years.

Lesson design and the instruction of language minority children The question of method has been less of a focus on research in second language education of children, particularly with respect to language minority students. There has been a tendency rather to emphasize the manipulation of programmatic alternatives, usually with the same unwillingness to look at what happens inside the classroom. With a few exceptions (Politzer 1980; Ramirez, Yuen, Ramey & Merino 1985), research in this area has assumed that the only question of importance is what particular program is in place, "bilingual" or "immersion" or "Foreign Language Learning in the Elementary School (F.L.E.S.)", without very clear definitions about what these programs mean in terms of how teachers structure lessons. Even when the implementation of instruction is researched, the question becomes how often the two languages are used (Legarreta 1979) and not so

338

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

much what techniques or teacher behaviors are effective within these programs. In the few instances that research studies have attempted to link specific second language teaching behaviors to achievement (Politzer 1981; Ramirez & Stromquist 1979), the link has been established through correlational approaches and not manipulated through quasi-experimental designed studies. In summary, teachers faced with the constant dilemma of knowing what to do on Monday are forced to make ad hoc decisions about the specifics of lesson content and how to teach it. Thus, a question many teachers would like to have addressed is the following one: What specific principles does theoretical and classroom research offer me as guidance in designing lessons? It is precisely this question we address in the following sections.

Identifying principles from theoretical research Recently, there has been a return to advocating a "natural" or "communicative" approach, reminiscent of earlier proposals for maximizing success in second language. Most of these more recent proposals advocate intensive use of the target language in contextualized settings. By way of illustration of how researchers communicate with teachers, we will briefly review two contrasting attempts to relate second language acquisition theory to teaching practices: Steve Krashen's theory of input and its corollaries, sometimes labelled "acquisitionist theory" (Hammerly 1985), and Brown's Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (1980). With the goal of regaining teachers' confidence in theory, Krashen (1982) presents a matrix of criteria to be used in judging the adequacy of methods of second language teaching viewed from the framework of his theory of input. First, the teacher should review the degree to which a lesson meets requirements for optimal comprehensible input. In lay terms, the question becomes how much of what students are exposed to will be understandable. Secondly, a method or lesson should be reviewed for its success in providing material which is interesting and relevant to the students. Thirdly, teachers should ask whether the input is grammatically sequenced or dictated by an interest in communication. The more grammar drives the curriculum, the less natural or communicative it will be. Correspondingly, the more error correction emphasizes linguistic accuracy rather than truth value,

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

339

the more artificial the curriculum will be. Fourthly, is there a sufficient amount of the input?; i.e., do a majority of the students understand most of the lesson? Fifth, is the "socio-affective filter" lowered. Krashen has operationally defined this filter in terms of provisions made to motivate the students by providing them with a warm, supportive environment loaded with stimulating material, all of which help to reduce the students inhibitions. Finally, are students provided with tools of conversational management as an integral part of the lesson? Krashen's framework provides a useful starting point from which to review competing methods of second language acquisition. Teachers, however, need to remember that the framework reflects Krashen's own theory and may minimize the role of other competing hypotheses. Thus, for example, Swain's (1983) notions about "comprehensible output" would modify the framework and evaluation of second language teaching methods proposed by Krashen. Swain emphasizes the role "comprehensible output" plays in providing opportunities for the learner to speak or show understanding and to thus test hypotheses, moving from purely semantic processing to grammatical processing. A method such as Asher's Total Physical Response, which Krashen accepts as providing many opportunities for comprehensible input, only provides one type of comprehensible output, non-verbal physical responses, in the beginning stages. The opportunities for comprehensible output are thus relatively limited. Krashen (1982), of course, should not be overly faulted for not addressing other theories. His approach, however, may be particularly helpful to a beginner teacher who is trying to make some sense of how method and research can translate to classroom practice. In Principles, Brown assumes greater autonomy for the teacher. He expects, in short, that after gaining an understanding of "the multiplicity of variables which affect second language acquisition" teachers must develop their own theory of second language acquisition and apply it in their own experience. Generating a personal theory allows teachers to focus on the context of their own teaching situation. Ultimately a theory must be able to explain new data generated from a specific situation, and in this sense every teacher is a researcher. But where to now? Generating a theory to most of us sounds too awesome a process to engage in. Moreover, our teaching situation is, in fact, hardly a real laboratory; rather, it is a setting fraught with sociolinguistic constraints which offer us a limited set of parameters in which we must operate. However, as teachers, we can consciously

340

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

select those principles which seem particularly appropriate for our situation. In other words, we can use language learning principles to guide our lesson design.

A case study of curriculum development Recently, we were involved in just such an effort to develop curriculum while working with teachers and administrative staff at two elementary school districts serving limited English proficiency children in California (Coughran & Merino 1986). The curriculum, known as BICOMP, is a science-based, interdisciplinary curriculum which integrates science, art, literature, math and computer activities into one of several basic themes, ranging from "Discovering the environment through the senses", at the kindergarten level to "Measuring and predicting weather" at the fifth grade. A brief outline of the process used to develop BICOMP will serve as a prototype for theory-based curriculum design for language minority students and as a means of illustrating the process of lesson design in concrete terms. In the process of working in teacher training with several school districts over many years, and based on our review of curricula available, we had arrived at the consensus that one of the most serious curricular needs we faced was in the science area. Science materials for language minority children were either translations of English texts (Holt 1981, for example) or designed for Spanish speaking children in Spanish speaking countries (Ray 1975). After a review of research on second language acquisition and through discussion with teachers and staff, we identified a set of principles which we felt should guide the development of the curriculum. Identifying principles for lesson design In selecting the principles our strategy was to provide a blueprint for the design of every lesson. Principles had to be research-based in second language theory, as well as capable of addressing the needs of teaching science to language minority children. Each principle was operationally defined to facilitate monitoring of lesson development. Figure 1 outlines the principles and how we operationalized them.

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students Principle 1. Use of contextualized language Based on Krashen's theory of comprehensible input, this principle required that every lesson present target vocabulary, explanations and directions with the aid of at least two of the following: pictures, drawings, and the objects themselves in combination with modeling by the teacher, with the use of appropriate gestures. Principles 2. Active student participation in high interest lessons Based on Swain's theory of comprehensible output and Krashen's socioaffective filter, this principle required that every lesson provide opportunities for students to participate in the lesson through physical, as well as verbal responses in experiences with a high interest level. These students' responses must be overt to facilitate comprehension checks by the teachers. Principle 3. Problem solving activities, through joint negotiation Based on Long's theory of "negotiation of interaction", this principle required that every lesson give students the opportunity to solve a problem through discussion in pairs or small groups. Principle 4. Hierarchical presentation of concepts Based again on Krashen's theory of comprehensible input, and designed to address the linguistic needs of children with a wide range of ability, this principle required that all lessons progress from the simplest concept to the most complex. Principle 5. Recycling of concepts Also based on Krashen's theory of comprehensible input, this principle was an integral part of each individual lesson but also transcended it, for it required that central concepts be represented in a variety of modalities throughout the science lessons as well as in the spin-off lessons in art, math and literature and in the computer component. Thus after studying the causes of wind in a science lesson, students constructed a whirligig in an art lesson, exploring how this rotating paper toy reacted to wind. Moreover, it dictated that periodic review be systematic, providing structured review at the beginning of the lesson based on the previous day's lesson, as well as closure at the end of it, with a summary elicited from the students or provided by the teacher, and in addition a structured review activity every two weeks, which was designed to integrate basic concepts learned throughout that time. Principle 6. Cooperative grouping of limited and fluent English speaking students Based on research by Kagan (1986) on cooperative learning and by Johnson & Johnson (1982) and others on the importance of peers in facilitating L2 acquisition, this principle required that group work be organized to include limited and fluent English speaking children working together. Figure 1. Principles guiding lesson design of BICOMP science curriculum

341

342

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

In reviewing the appropriateness of a principle for inclusion, we considered the local situation within the school districts which service large numbers of language minority children, both in bilingual, selfcontained classrooms and in individualized, small group instruction. Moreover, within the bilingual program the curriculum was implemented in the context of two program models: alternate day, where one language takes precedence one day, switching roles the next day; and the concurrent translation model where both languages are used throughout the lesson. The science lessons were presented bilingually, while spin-off lessons in math, art and literature were conducted in English as were the computer assisted lessons. Developing criteria for lesson design In a large curriculum development effort, where many individuals are involved in writing the curriculum, it is essential to devise a mechanism for monitoring adherence to the outlined treatment or principles guiding the curriculum. In the BICOMP project our approach involved two strategies. First we developed a prototype sequence of scripted lessons, which was designed to serve as a guide both in format and content to all the curriculum writers. For teachers working on their own, this strategy can be an equally useful process because it forces the articulation of an operationalized definition of the treatment in concrete terms. Our second strategy was to devise a series of operationalized checklists by which to review each lesson. All lessons were reviewed by the administrative staff and the teachers at pilot and implementation school sites at all possible stages of development, prior, during and after implementation. Whenever lessons were judged out of compliance with the treatment, they were revised or eliminated as necessary. Designing lessons The approach used in lesson design involved several major steps prior to the actual scripting of lessons. Steps included: review of the state science framework, needs assessment with the teachers, review of science curricula as well as teacher idea books, development of a framework and scope and sequence for the curriculum, development of lesson ideas, preliminary write-up, staff review and editing. The revision process was a continuous one, taking place at several stages,

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

343

but particularly after teacher review and implementation. Both university and school site consultants were involved at each step of the process. The teachers who were involved in implementation also participated in the preliminary screening for lesson ideas as well as in the lesson review and in some cases contributed to the writing of lessons themselves. No process may be more essential in lesson design than the needs assessment which precedes it. Recent research on individual differences in second language acquisition (Diller 1981) reinforces the importance that needs assessment has been given traditionally in education. Most of this research has focused on adolescents and adults, and particularly with regard to certain traits; aptitude (Carroll 1981), motivation (Lambert & Gardner 1975), intelligence (Genesee 1976), and to some degree on student preferences for lesson content and approach (Blanche 1985). With school-age children, research on individual differences has focused primarily on social style or personality traits (WongFillmore 1976; Strong 1983), as well as on the role of language proficiency in the first language on the acquisition of the second (Cummins 1981; Merino & Lyons 1987). In the BICOMP project, all students were assessed in terms of oral proficiency in order to classify students as having either limited or fluent proficiency in English and Spanish. Based on these classifications students were placed in groups so that limited and fluent proficient students would be integrated. Applying criteria for review of lesson ideas Review of lesson ideas was a critical step in the development of the BICOMP curriculum. Science lessons were developed to address a specific science concept that was embedded within a weekly theme. One cycle of lessons, for example, centered around "Causes of Wind". Lower order concepts considered in these lessons included "air takes up space", "hot air rises", and so on. In evaluating ideas for lessons, we focused on the lessons' adherence to the principles as well as on practical questions such as the safety, expense and availability of materials necessary for lesson implementation. A checklist was developed to insure that this review was systematic. Thus, when a lesson idea was proposed, we considered whether it could provide students with opportunities to engage to joint problem solving in a group, whether the lesson would facilitate the students opportunities for ouptput, and so on.

344

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Using criteria for lesson development Curriculum writers were also provided with a detailed checklist to consider in the actual development of lessons. This checklist, similar in some respect to the Lesson Idea Review, was more detailed in order to monitor the scripting of each lesson. The criteria included in this checklist focused on the principles, more concretely specified, as well as the materials and the format. Here we were concerned that when instructions were given to students, for example, that visuals or manipulatives were used. The principal problems we ran into in this phase of the curriculum development centered on the complexity of the language used to give instructions, failure to use concrete referents sufficiently, and inadequate use of recycling of concepts as the lesson progressed. With some curriculum writers who had less experience working with language minority students, this represented a continuous process of retraining to seize opportunities for second language development as integral constituents of the lesson. For example, the very distribution of equipment and materials for a science experiment is an opportunity for second language learning which could be ignored or exploited. Checking to make sure that all groups had the necessary materials could be accomplished by a visual check by the teacher or it could be an opportunity for students to hear the vocabulary in context, if the teacher or group leader checked to make sure that all materials were in place orally. Naturally, the review of the lessons was not wholly dependent on the checklists, but was also edited by both staff and participating teachers for clarity and thoroughness. An additional shorter checklist was developed for the teachers implementing the lessons to fill out. It is essential to incorporate independent review of curriculum because of the inherent danger of slowly deviating from the articulated treatment as the curriculum unfolds. Teachers developing curriculum on their own should enlist a cooperating colleague who can implement or at least review lessons for their adherence to the articulated treatment. Recognizing what are appropriate adjustments and what are deviations that substantially alter the intent of the curriculum may not always be an easy task. For example, in the beginning stages of curriculum development for BICOMP, as we discussed the importance of the use of visuals, several teachers wanted to use filmstrips for every lesson to illustrate the concept of the day. However, in considering this medium, we realized that students have very little active

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

345

involvement with the material when viewing a film-strip. The decision was then made that the use of film-strips was only appropriate as a supplementary activity, which should be used occasionally to reinforce or bring closure to concepts which the students had been learning in lessons which had already actively involved them. Observing curriculum implementation In a research project, observation of curriculum implementation of a treatment is essential. In the BICOMP project, we were concerned with the implementation of the bilingual program model which the teachers had articulated as their base treatment as well as with the implementation of the BICOMP curriculum. To address these two demands, two observation systems were set up. The first focused on the nature of language use of teachers and students as the curriculum was implemented. This instrument based on time line coding (Merino, Legarreta & Coughran 1983), observed for the use of certain categories of behaviors within a set time period. This approach required moderate training as well as the establishment of interrater reliability. Key categories were selected to determine, for example, if teachers were focusing on form or content. Thus, one behavior which we tabulated was the use of display or referential questions; that is, question which focus on material known to all participants and used to display knowledge or questions which genuinely communicate (See Figure 2.) The second observation instrument addressed the implementation of the curriculum, specifically adhrerence to the principles outlined above. This instrument used a rating approach on a Likert scale, where adherence to the principles and lesson specifications is rated along a three point scale, in which each point of the scale has been operationally defined. This approach was easier to use in some ways but still required some training through joint viewing of lessons until a consensus was reached among raters. Consistency in implementing a lesson as specified is naturally most important when the effectiveness of a particular method is being measured. When first developing curriculum, deviations from the lesson may signal areas which need refinement in the treatment. Once the curriculum has been piloted, however, and a treatment is in place, deviations need to be monitored very carefully. For teacher/researchers, it is essential that a pilot period be included, when adjustments can be explored more freely. It then becomes necessary to document these modifications through the

346

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Teacher

Grade

District

BICOMP week #

Dav #

Title of Lesson

Date

Time B egin

Time End

Lesson Beg inning

Lesson Middle

Lesson Ending

E

S

Time

Comments

E

S

Time

Comments

Legend Teacher Behaviors * * * * * * *

Student Behaviors

Explaining =E * Repetition Commands =C * Reply Expected Question Referential = QF * Rely Free Question Display = QD * Initiation Modeling =M Feedback =F D for disciplinary may be added to any behavior category Example: "I wnat everybody to stop talking" = CD

=R = RE = RF =I

Figure 2. Project BICOMP LANGUAGE USE OBSERVATION INSTRUMENT

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

347

use of a log or diary as well as periodic observation by a colleague. During the piloting of BICOMP, which was conducted in another district not used for implementation, piloting teachers were asked to keep a lesson log as a means of reporting on their feedback on each lesson, immediately after they had implemented it. Lessons were also observed periodically by staff members. (See Figures 3 and 4.) An ethnographic approach was also used in the observation of BICOMP lessons. We will now describe one lesson in some detail to illustrate more specifically how a lesson was taught in practice. The lesson "Gliders in the Wind" is the last science lesson the third grade BICOMP curriculum and is part of a series of lessons in which the students have been exploring "Working with weather". The students have by now studied weather in general, wind direction and wind speed, rain, and the revolving earth and sun. The goal of the lesson is to have students make a paper glider and learn how changing the form of the glider affects how it moves through the air. (See Figure 5 for part of the record of a sample lesson.) The students were captivated from the beginning of the lesson. There were plentiful opportunities for all children to participate, verbally if they wished, but also non-verbally by modeling the experience of going through a strong wind, by voting for their hypothesis on the paper experiment, by following directions on how to make the glider. There were as well ample opportunities for the students to interact with each other, helping the members of their group to make the glider as well as testing them outside and figuring out how to win contests. The input to the students was heavily contextualized, through gestures, modeling, the use of the paper, and language which was designed to be rich in redundancy. The teacher, for example, said: "First, we're going to fold the paper in half. Hold the paper like this . . ." (holding the paper up so that the short sections were on the top and bottom). "Now, fold it in half. Did everybody fold the paper in half? Let me see. Hold up your papers. Good. Now we'll go to step two".

348

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Teacher

Grade

Bicomp Week # 1.

Day #

2

3

2

3

2

3

The students seem interested in the lesson. 1

6.

3

The teacher checked often to make sure most of the students understood the concepts being taught. 1

5.

2

The teacher seemed well prepared to teach the lesson. 1

4.

Observer.

The objective of the lesson was clearly stated. 1

3.

Title of Lesson

The level of difficulty of the lesson seemed appropriate for all students in class (LEP, FEP). 1

2.

District.

2

3

The students actively participated in the lesson. 1

2

3

7.

The teacher contextualized the lesson by using visual objects or other concrete examples from the students experiences. 1 2 3

8.

The lesson was taught as specified. 1

2

3

Comments:. BICOMP Staff Only Please check model used: * preview/review in English . lesson in Spanish * preview/review in Spanish lesson in English * concurrent instruction * lesson in English

Figure 3. Observation instrument for BICOMP lessons

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

349

The level of difficulty of the lesson seemed appropriate for all students in class (LEP, FEP). (3) 80-100% of students are able to carry out the tasks required by the lesson. Evidence to consider in making this judgment would include following directions, using the equipment as specified, asking appropriate questions, completing the task assigned. (2) 40-60% of students (1) 0.20% of students The objective of the lesson was clearly stated. (3) Teacher makes a clear statement of the lesson objective as scripted in the curriculum. Statement of the objective could be followed by clarification as triggered by student questions. (2) The lesson objectives are stated but not clarified to the level of the students or are poorly stated. (1) Lesson objectives are not stated. The teacher seemed well prepared to teach the lesson. (3) Lesson concepts are clearly presented. The materials are organized and in place. The teacher seems familiar with lesson content and has foreseen possible pitfalls. (2) Lesson concepts are not always clearly presented. Not all materials are in place. Teacher does not seem to be completely familiar with lesson content and has some difficulty when the lesson takes an unexpected turn. (1) Lesson concepts are not clearly presented. Many materials are not available. Teacher seems unfamiliar with lesson content and experiences considerable difficulty when lesson takes an unexpected turn. The teacher checked often to make sure most of the students understood the concepts being taught. (3) Comprehension checks are frequent. Evidence to justify this rating might include: teacher's monitor students understanding by scanning the class, asking appropriate questions. (2) Comprehension checks are not so frequent. (1) Comprehension checks rarely occur. The students seem interested in the lesson. (3) Evidence that would justify this rating includes 80-100% of students are on task. 80-100% of students conversation is lesson related. 80-100% of students demonstrate excitement or interest. (2) 40-80%. (1) 0-20%. The students actively participated in the lesson. (3) Evidence to justify this rating would include 80-100% of students asked questions, successfully complete tasks, are physically engaged in the completion of assigned tasks. (2) 40-60%. (1) 0-20%.

350

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

1. The teacher contextualized the lesson by using visual objects or other concrete examples from the students experiences. (3) Evidence to justify this rating would include 80-100% of teacher instructions, demonstrations are contextualized. (2) 40-60%. (1) 0-20%. 8. The lesson was tough t as specified. (3) Evidence that would justify this rating includes all parts of the lesson are covered. Materials are used as specified. (2) Some parts of the lesson are covered. Some materials are used as specified. (1) Many parts of the lesson are not covered. Many materials are not used as specified. Figure 4. Observation instrument for BICOMP lessons Directions for scoring

Judging effectiveness Determining whether a particular type of treatment, method or or technique is working and isolating those elements that are effective is at the root of much school-related research. It is not our purpose here, to outline all possible approaches to program and curriculum evaluation. The literature is rich with many such references (Cronbach et al. 1980; Brandt 1981). Rather, it is our intent to focus on the approach we used to evaluate the BICOMP curriculum within the constraints of a program in operation and to outline approaches to the evaluation of classroom curriculum that are practical for classroom teachers. Classic quasi-experimental designs in evaluation research typically call for the selection of a control group from an adjoining district which is comparable along specified parameters, typically socioeconomic status, socio-linguistic characteristics of the community and school-related variables such as classroom size, and teacher characteristics. In selecting comparable sites, only a few global variables can be considered, nonetheless, comparability across communities and schools is often compromised, particularly in dealing with limited English proficient students whose cultural and educational background can vary greatly (Hernandez-Chavez 1984). Morever, schools themselves manipulate a considerable array of variables consciously or un-

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

351

Students are organized as a whole class for the beginning demonstration but then divide into integrated groups for the construction of the glider. Since it is English day in the alternate day model school, the teacher begins by giving a brief overview of the goal of the lesson in Spanish. She then begins a dialogue with the students about their experiences with strong winds, stimulating with gestures what it is like to move in a very strong wind and asking the students to do likewise. She then holds up a piece of paper spread out and another one like the first one in every way except that it is all crumpled up and she asks the students to guess which one will fall on tne floor first. Students contribute their ideas individually and she then asks the class to vote on their hypotheses, asking for a show of hands for the two alternatives. "How many think this paper (pointing to the crumpled up one) will fall first? Raise your hands". She then conducts the experiment and asks for reasons why the crumpled up paper would fall first, helping the students to come to the scientific explanation. The teacher then begins to build the glider with the students. The students are reminded to help each other follow the directions. The students assigned the role of getting supplies for their group, are reminded to do so (paper, in this case) and the teacher begins the demonstration. She holds up the paper and asks all the students to hold up their paper, the same way that she is holding it. She then gives directions to the students, step by step. "Fold your paper in half. Like this," (as she models what she means with the paper.) The teacher and students continue step by step until the paper glider is completed. The teacher verifies that each step is followed by all the students, reminding students to help each other and circulating around the room to verify that all the children complete the task. The teacher then cuts of the point of the glider for safety reasons and the students go outside to test and race their gliders. Outside in their groups, the children work to win as many of the contests as they can. Which one stayed in the air the longest? Which one went the greatest distance? Which one the shortest distance? They then return to discuss the contests and the best method of flying them as well as possible modifications in the design, in preparation for the next day's activities. They conclude, with a review of what they accomplished that day, what they learned and what they will be doing the next day. This latter part of the lesson or synopsis is conducted in Spanish. Figure 5. Gliders in the "Wind" - sample BICOMP lesson

352

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

consciously in the method of delivery of instruction, particularly with regard to language use in the classroom (Wong-Fillmore & Valadez 1986). A more robust design involves the use of students from different years but from the same schools and grade levels as controls and experimental groups. Thus, the effectiveness of the BICOMP curriculum was tested through a comparison of students' performance on Year I, when only computer instruction and the base bilingual program were in operation; i.e. the control year, compared with the performance of similar students, from the same schools and grades in Year II and III when the BICOMP curriculum was implemented. Students' scores were adjusted for pre-test scores, grade, language classification, years in program and attendance, using general linear models procedure (Searle 1971). Special education students were excluded from the analyses. Analyses were conducted at two sites: at Washington Unified where an alternate day preview/review bilingual program is in effect and at Woodland, where a concurrent translation bilingual program is in operation. Analyses indicate that at Washington Unified, there was a positive effect in achievement in favor of the BICOMP curriculum at several grades and that this effect reached significance in the following instances: at the third, fourth and sixth grades in English reading as well as with reclassified limited English proficiency students and monolingual English speaking students at all grades; at the third and sixth grades in English Math; at the third and sixth in English language; and at the sixth grade in Spanish math and reading. A similar, though less pronounced, effect was evident in Woodland, where fifth grade students performed significantly better in English reading when instructed with BICOMP. Two negative results were reported in the language sub-test of the CTBS. One appeared in year II at the fourth grade, alternate day model, and one in year III at the sixth grade in the concurrent model. Since the focus of the curriculum is not on mastering language rules, but in fostering communication and enriching the students' achievement generally, these effects could be due to reduced instructional time in this area. However, since at other grades these adverse effects were not recorded, these results could be attributed to chance variation. Criterion referenced tests administered on a pre/post-test basis to measure gains made in scientific knowledge and vocabulary showed significant gains at the third, fifth and sixth grades in the alternate day model and at the fifth and sixth grades in the concurrent model (See Merino 1986).

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

353

While it may not always be possible to involve a whole school in testing the effectiveness of a curriculum through this process/product approach, certainly an individual classroom teacher could over a span of three years gather data systematically in order to establish the effect of a particular technique or curriculum, gathering baseline data the first year, testing the treatment on the second year, and replicating the treatment on the third year, to verify if the effect can be reproduced with a new group of students. However, while this process/product approach to testing the effect of a curriculum is generally the type of information which funding agencies prefer to see, it is not where the test of effectiveness should end. As Cronbach (1963) has pointed out, process studies which relate performance to the attainment of more immediate learning goals should be the focus of curriculum evaluation. Thus, a practical and theoretically defensible design for the teacher/researcher should focus on process/process effects of the technique or curriculum as it is being implemented. The research question then becomes, does the use of a highly "structured" technique, for example, "jigsaw" for group work, result in a significiant increase in student oral use of language compared with more open ended, less structured group work. In evaluating the effectiveness of the BICOMP curriculum, we looked at a variety of process indicators to establish the nature of its effectiveness. Teachers and students both rated the lessons through questionnaires and interviews. We observed how teachers and students interacted as the science and spin-off lessons were implemented. In addition, we observed how limited and fluent English speakers interacted when they were working at the computer (Merino et al. 1988). Through this multi-faceted approach, we were better able to determine how and why lessons were effective. In conclusion, second language teachers today realize that there are no simple answers to the question "What should I teach Monday?". The variety in the classrooms and communities in which they teach dictate caution in whole-scale application of existing "successful" approaches. However, theoretical and applied research can suggest new directions, strategies and indeed "treatments" which are worth trying. These must be tested carefully and systematically by the classroom teacher. Within bilingual and foreign language programs, teachers vary a great deal in the amount of use of the languages of instruction, whether in programs for language minority students (Ramirez & Merino, 1990) or in foreign language classrooms (Moskowitz 1976). They

354

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

also vary a great deal in their use of questions types (Long & Sato 1983) and the degree to which they integrate limited English proficient students with fluent English speakers (Schinke-Llano 1983). The critical question is: Are these and other variations conscious, pedagogical decisions? If we teachers want the autonomy of academic freedom in the classroom, we have to make decisions about how we teach on the basis of thoughtful analysis of how to best accelerate students' learning. Simply put, we must have reasons for what we do. References Asher, J. 1982 Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher's guidebook. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions. Blanche, P. 1985 The relationships between self-assessment and other measures of proficiency in the case of adult foreign language learners. Unpublished Master's thesis. University of California, Davis. Blair ,R.W.(ed.) 1982 Innovative approaches to language teaching. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Brandt, R.S. 1981 Applied strategies for curriculum evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Brown, H.D. 1980 Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Brooks, N. 1964 Language and language learning. New York: Harcourt Brace & World. Carroll ,J. 1981 Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In K. Diller (ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83-118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Chastain, K. 1971 The development of modern language skills: Theory to practice. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development. Cohen E., J. Intili and E. De Avila 1982 Learning science in bilingual classrooms: Interaction and social status. Final report to the National Science Foundation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Coughran, C., B.J. Merino and J. Hoskins 1983-86 Project BICOMP: Bilingual integrated project. West Sacramento, CA: Washington Unified.

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

355

Cronbach, LJ. 1963 Evaluation for course improvement. Teacher College Record, 64, 672-683. Cronbach, L.J., S.R. Ambron, S.M. Dornbusch, R.D. Hess, R.C. Hornick, D.C. Philips, D.F. Walker and S.S. Weiner 1980 Toward reform of program evaluation. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass Publishers. Cummins, J. 1981 The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California State Department of Education (ed.) Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 3-50). Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University. Diller, K. 1978 The language teaching controversy. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Dffler,K.(ed.) 1981 Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Genesee, F. 1976 The role of intelligence in second language learning. Language Learning, 26, 267-280. Hammerly, H. 1985 An integrated theory of language teaching and its practical consequences. Blaine, WA: Second Language Publications. Hernandez-Chavez, E., and J. Curtiss 1982 The graphic sense hypothesis or "You can't read firecrackers". Berkeley, CA: Institute de Lengua Υ Cultura. Hernandez-Chavez, E. 1984 The inadequacy of English immersion education as an educational approach for language minority students in the United States. In California State Department of Education (ed.), Studies on immersion education: A collection for United States educators (pp. 144-183). Sacramento: California State Department of Education. The Holmes Group 1986 Tomorrow's teachers. East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group. Krashen, S. 1981 Bilingual education and second language acquisition theory. In California State Department of Education (ed.) Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 51-82). Los Angeles: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University. 1982 Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York, NY: Pergamon Press. Lambert, W., and R. Gardner 1975 Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.

356

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Legarreta, D. 1979 The effects of program models on language acquisition by Spanish speaking children. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 521-534. Long, M. 1983 Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141. Long, M., and C. Sato 1983 Classroom foreigner talk discourse: forms and functions of teachers' questions. In H. Seliger, & M. Long (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 268-286). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Lozanov, G. 1978 Suggestology and outlines of suggestopedy. New York: Gordon and Breach. Merino, B.J. 1986 Title VIIBICOMP Demonstration Project Evaluation. West Sacramento: Washington Unified School District. Merino, B J., and J. Lyons 1987 The problem of exit criteria in second language learners: California as a case study. A.M.A.E. Journal, 11,1-25. Merino, B J., C. Coughran, D. Legarreta and J. Hoskins 1988 The use of computers by Chicano and Anglo girls and boys at different levels of English proficiency. Paper presented at the 2nd Research Conference of the University of California's Council of Women's Programs, Davis, CA, April 1988. Merino, B J., D. Legarreta and C. Coughran 1983 Protocols for Bicomp observation instruments. West Sacramento, CA: Washington Unified School District. Moskowitz, G. 1976 Classroom interaction of outstanding foreign language teachers. Foreign Language Annals, 9, 135-143. Passow, A.H. 1984 Reforming schools in the Nineteen Eighties: A critical review of the National Reports. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education, Teachers College, Columbia University. Politzer, R. 1972 Linguistics and applied linguistics: Aims and methods. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development. 1980 Foreign language teaching and bilingual education: Research implications. Foreign Language Annals, 13 (3), 291-300. 1981 Effective language teaching. In J. Alatis, H. Altman & P. Alatis, The second language classroom: Directions for the 1980s (pp. 21-36). New York: Oxford University Press. Ramirez, A., and N. Stromquist 1979 ESL methodology and student language learning in bilingual elementary schools. TESOL Quarterly, 13,145-158.

Lesson design for teachers of language minority students

357

Ramirez, J.D., S.D. Yuen, D.R. Ramey and B. Merino 1985 First year report: longitudinal study of immersion programs for language-minority children. Mountain View, CA: SRA Technologies, Inc. Ramirez, D., and B. Merino 1990 Classroom talk in English Immersion: Early-exit and Late-exit transitional bilingual education programs. In R. Jacobson & C. Faltis (eds.), Language distribution issues in bilingual schooling, (pp. 61-103). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters, Ltd. Ray, L. 1975 Ciencias: Estudios de la naturaleza. Madrid, Spain: Cultural CentroAmericana. Richards, J.C., and T. Rodgers 1986 Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. London: Cambridge University Press. Rivers, W. 1964 The psychologist and the foreign language teacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1981 Teaching foreign-language skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Schinke-Llano, L. 1983 Foreigner talk in content classrooms. In H. Seliger & M. Long (eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 146148). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Searle.S.R. 1971 Linear Models. New York, NY: Wiley. Smith, P. 1970 A comparison of the cognitive and audiolingual approaches to foreign language instruction: The Pennsylvania Foreign Language Project. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development. Strong, M. 1983 Social styles and the second language acquisition of Spanish-speaking kindergarteners. TESOL Quarterly, 17,241-258. Swain, M. 1983 Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. Paper presented at the 10th University of Michigan Conference on Applied Linguistics, Ann Arbor, MI. Terrell, T. 1982 The natural approach to language teaching: an update. Modem Language Journal, 61,324-336. Willig, A. 1985 A meta-analysis of selective studies on the effectiveness of bilingual education. Review of Educational Research, 55, 269-317. Wong-Fillmore, L. 1976 The second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

358

Barbara J. Merino and Consuelo C. Coughran

Wong-Fillmore, L., and C. Valadez 1986 Teaching bilingual learners. In M. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research in teaching. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.

Using qualitative research to shape policy and promote effective practice in bilingual education: The case of Connecticut

Cynthia D. Prince Introduction This paper presents a model of qualitative research which has been used to evaluate the curricular, instructional, and administrative components of bilingual education programs in Connecticut. It discusses how qualitative methods of inquiry can help educators improve programs by providing constructive feedback on program strengths and weaknesses. The evaluation approach used is based on Eisner's model of Educational Criticism, in which the evaluator uses the techniques of art criticism to appraise program quality. The ways in which the results of these studies have affected educational policy and practice at the state and local levels are discussed. Educators seeking to improve instructional programs for language minority children acknowledge a growing need to develop systematic ways to study classroom processes and provide constructive feedback to teachers. Too often the primary form of feedback teachers receive is a summary of student test scores at the end of the year. By themselves, these outcome measures fail to provide the kind of evaluative information teachers most often seek - information which will help them improve instruction. Qualitative methods of inquiry which entail the systematic observation of daily classroom life are ideally suited for this purpose, yet qualitative methods have seldom been used to evaluate bilingual education programs. The reason why this is true is largely a result of the volatile political climate in which the programs operate. During the past few years bilingual education has been subject to increasing scrutiny by taxpayers, legislators, and policymakers demanding quantifiable proof that bilingual education is not only teaching students English, but teaching English faster and better than alternative educational treatments such as structured immersion or English

360

Cynthia D. Prince

as a Second Language. Statistically significant gains on language proficiency tests and standardized English achievement tests have become the primary means by which proof of program success is established, and in many programs, evaluation has become synonymous with testing. Such a narrow approach to evaluation, which is preoccupied with justifying the existence of bilingual education, is of little use to practitioners. It strays from evaluation's most important function, which is to provide constructive criticism that will help educators improve the quality of programs. If this trend is to be reversed, complementary methods of evaluation must be designed which can provide a rich base of knowledge to help educators and policymakers understand the complex relationships between student achievement, classroom practice, and the myriad linguistic, cultural, and social factors beyond a school's control which impact the educational success of limited English proficient students. As Eisner (1985:5-6) has pointed out, "If we want to understand why we get what we get from our schools, we need to pay attention not simply to the score, but to the ways in which the game is played". Understanding the ways in which the game is played in its bilingual education programs is of primary concern to the Connecticut State Department of Education. In Connecticut both the Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education are firmly committed to the continuation of the state's bilingual education programs. Their support enables the Connecticut State Department of Education to pursue a more advanced agenda where the central evaluation question is not, "Is bilingual education worthy of continued funding?", but "What aspects of the programs seem to be working best, so that they can be replicated and supported in other schools?". This dramatically different focus allows the State Department of Education and local school districts to use limited resources in more productive ways, namely, to make programs better. How Connecticut has used qualitative approaches to evaluate its bilingual education programs and to improve educational policy and practice is the focus of this paper. The following sections discuss why this type of research would be of value to a state department of education, and how the results have been used at the state and local levels.

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

361

Evaluating bilingual education programs in Connecticut Bilingual education programs have existed in Connecticut since 1977. Approximately 12,000 students in Grades K-12 receive state-required bilingual education services each year. Twelve of the state's 165 school districts operate bilingual education programs, though nearly threefourths of the students attend school in either Hartford, Bridgeport, or New Haven, Connecticut's three largest cities. Over 90% of the students in the programs speak Spanish and are of Puerto Rican descent. The remainder are native speakers of Portuguese, Cambodian, Laotian, Vietnamese, Polish, Italian, and Haitian Creole. Movement between school districts and between Puerto Rico and Connecticut is common. Nearly one out of every five bilingual education students in the state is considered transient, and during a given year, roughly 15% of the program students attend less than 90 days of school (Prince 1987, 1988b). During the first seven years that the state required districts to operate bilingual education programs, districts conducted their own evaluations, using a variety of evaluation approaches. In 1984, the State Department of Education established formal evaluation guidelines, and the first statewide evaluation was conducted during the 1984-1985 school year. The main purpose in conducting a statewide evaluation was to monitor student acquisition of basic skills and oral English proficiency. This information was to be provided to state officials to determine whether program participants were acquiring English skills successfully. In keeping with this monitoring role, the original evaluation design was primarily summative, emphasizing student outcomes. It was also primarily quantitative, depending heavily on the analysis of student gains in reading, language arts, mathematics, and oral English proficiency. Information was collected on the number of students exiting the programs, the amount of daily native language instruction students received, and the length of time students had been in the programs. This approach typifies most evaluations performed in the area of bilingual education, but it contains five inherent weaknesses. First, the emphasis on program outcomes excludes process information which could explain why some programs produce greater academic gains than others. Second, the approach gives very little information on the participants who are being evaluated, the contexts in which the programs operate, or the types of implementation problems faced

362

Cynthia D. Prince

by the programs, which Willig (1985) emphasizes must be documented whenever one attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of a program. Third, the aggregation of test results across districts tends to blur important distinctions between and among programs, which may wash out positive program effects. Fourth, the evaluation is designed to measure only one year's progress between pre- and posttesting, whereas researchers such as Troike (1978:9) suggest that bilingual instruction may have cumulative effects which are not shown by "short-term, one-year-at-a-time evaluations". Finally, program effectiveness is measured primarily by standardized achievement tests which have been normed only on native English-speaking populations. These weaknesses are not uncommon, as Hakuta (1985:1) has pointed out: "Most evaluations only tell us whether programs work or do not work, rather than why they may or may not work". Explaining why programs work requires a different type of approach which focuses on program processes, which looks at measures of success other than test scores, and which documents the context in which the programs operate. To fill this need, the Connecticut State Department of Education implemented a qualitative research study of bilingual reading and writing instruction in three elementary schools in 1985-1986 (Prince 1988a). Each of the schools was chosen from a different school district, and was nominated by the district's bilingual education director as an example of a particularly effective program. In all, six first-grade and five second-grade Spanish/English bilingual classes were included. The purpose of the study was to identify effective characteristics, program designs, and instructional strategies which contribute to student success in reading and writing. In 1987-1988, a second qualitative study was conducted in one elementary school and one junior high school in two different districts (Shannon, forthcoming). The purpose of the second study was to examine the nature of the instructional programs offered to former bilingual education students during their first year of transition to all-English classrooms. The study focused specifically on the extent to which the all-English curriculum, the ways in which teachers implemented the curriculum, and the school climates allowed a smooth transition between programs. Eight to ten students in their first year of all-English instruction were followed in each school. All of the students had previously been enrolled in a Spanish/English bilingual program, and had exited at the end of 3rd, 4th, or 5th grade.

(Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

363

Both of these studies were based on a model of evaluation which was ethnographic in intent, meaning that they involved months of observations and interviews in a small number of classrooms in order to describe and interpret the ways in which the programs operated. However, the studies differed from traditional ethnographies in that their ultimate aim was not simply to understand programs, but to improve them (see Wolcott 1987). In this respect, the evaluation model used was much closer to Eisner's model of Educational Criticism (1977, 1979, 1981), which is described in the following section.

Connecticut's qualitative evaluation model In Eisner's model of Educational Criticism, the way in which an educational evaluator appraises the quality of an educational program is similar to the way in which critics of the arts appraise a painting or a dramatic performance. The critic's task is to help others who are less perceptive see significant patterns and qualities within the work which they might otherwise miss. The critic does this in three ways: by describing what is seen, by employing theory to interpret and understand what is seen, and by appraising the significance of what is seen according to a grounded set of values. Eisner (1979) compares the educational critic to a conductor guiding a symphony orchestra through rehearsals. During practice the conductor compares the way each piece of music is played to a schema of the music that he or she already holds. The conductor's job is to listen with a trained ear and provide corrective feedback when discrepancies exist between the actual performance and the schema, so that the members of the orchestra can improve their performance. In order to provide corrective feedback to teachers, an educational evaluator must also have a schema of good educational practice. The schema helps the evaluator determine what is important to look for as indicators of program effectiveness, and provides a basis for judging the quality of the classroom activities and teaching methods under observation. The evaluator can then make specific recommendations when components of the educational program deviate from his or her standards. The evaluation schema, or framework, developed for each of the qualitative studies performed in Connecticut covered three areas of inquiry: Curriculum, Instruction, and Program Administration. The

364

Cynthia D. Prince

evaluation questions which comprised each framework were adapted from general evaluation questions developed for bilingual education programs by Cohen (1980), and by Spencer and Valencia (1982). The purpose of the frameworks was to focus the evaluator's attention on patterns of interaction within classrooms which the research literature suggested were educationally significant, so that feedback given to teachers would be grounded in educational theory. For example, in Prince's (1988a) qualitative study of reading and writing instruction, judgments of effective instructional practices were based on a theoretical model drawn from the research literature in second language acquisition and reading instruction. The purpose of the model was to explain the relationship between primary language development and academic achievement in order to build an argument for literacy instruction in the native language. The argument was based on the work of Cummins (198la), who has proposed that literacyrelated language proficiency skills in all languages share a Common Underlying Proficiency, meaning that experience with any language can promote development of the proficiency underlying another. When cognitively demanding communication skills (such as comprehending text or writing an essay) have been well-developed in the first language and children have developed a certain minimum, or threshold, level of proficiency in the second language, skills learned in the first language will successfully transfer to the second. Thus, a bilingual program which teaches students to read well in Spanish can actually help the eventual acquisition of English reading skills. On the basis of this theoretical model, an effective bilingual education program for elementary level Spanish-speaking students in Connecticut was expected to follow five principles: (1) The program would provide initial literacy instruction in Spanish. (2) While students were learning to read and write in Spanish, the program would provide oral instruction in English as a Second Language. (3) When students had become fluent readers of Spanish and they had become orally proficient in English (usually after about two or three years), the program would introduce English reading. (4) The program would continue to develop Spanish reading skills even after students had begun to read in English. (5) Students would be allowed to remain in the bilingual program for several years in order to develop threshold levels of biliteracy.

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

365

How closely the instructional programs under study matched this schema of effective literacy instruction provided a grounding for many of the evaluator's questions, such as: - In which language did the students begin reading? Primary language? English? Both simultaneously? What was the rationale for this decision? — How much time is allocated for reading and writing instruction in the native language? In English? — On what bases are decisions made to transition students from native language reading instruction to English reading instruction? A similar theoretical model was developed for Shannon's (forthcoming) study of the transitional process between bilingual education and all-English programs. One of Shannon's central questions was how teachers nurtured former bilingual education students' developing English skills in ways which would enable them to succeed in the allEnglish school program. This question is important because research substantiates that most children can not possibly achieve a level of English proficiency equivalent to that of a native speaker by the time they leave a bilingual education program in Connecticut, since their length of enrollment in the programs is relatively brief. In 1986-1987, for example, students exiting Connecticut's bilingual education programs spent an average of 3.6 years in the programs; more than half had spent three years or less (Prince 1988b). Cummins' (1981b) research suggests, however, that most children require two to three years on the average just to acquire face-to-face communication skills in a second language, whereas an average of five to seven years is needed for students to approach commonly accepted age/ grade norms in English academic skills. What these findings suggest is that English language acquisition is far from complete at the time students exit the bilingual education programs. Rather, students continue to develop the more cognitively demanding aspects of English language proficiency for years after they have entered the all-English program. These research findings formed the basis for many of the evaluation questions Shannon attempted to answer during the course of her study, such as: — How do teachers expand limited English proficient students' developing English vocabulary and syntax? Is English language development integrated with instruction in academic skills?

366

Cynthia D. Prince

— What kinds of academic and linguistic expectations do all-English classroom teachers hold for students who enter their classrooms from the bilingual education programs? Are these expectations realistic for non-native English speakers? Do these expectations match those of the bilingual education program teachers? — How are instructional objectives set for limited English proficient students? Do these objectives differ from those set for the students' native English-speaking classmates? In each of the studies the evaluator used a combination of research methods to answer these evaluation questions. Methods included observing classrooms, interviewing teachers, students, and administrators, photographing the school settings, collecting samples of student work, and reviewing curricular materials and district policies. The following section explains how and why these methods were used.

Methods of inquiry In each of the studies, data collection lasted from four to six months. During this time the evaluator spent two to four days per month in each participating school. The majority of this time was spent observing classroom instruction and taking field notes. Repeated observations of the same classroom over extended periods of time enabled the evaluator to determine whether the events and interactions sampled were representative of daily classroom life. This process served to increase the reliability of the conclusions drawn by the evaluator. The use of multiple data sources and methods also helped increase the reliability of the evaluation findings. Conclusions were supported by comparing data obtained from different sources (e.g., interviews with a teacher and a principal), or obtained by different methods (e.g., a classroom observation in addition to a sample of student work). This process of validating pieces of evidence against each other to corroborate one's conclusions is known as triangulation, and is an essential part of naturalistic inquiry. Consider the following example which shows how data were triangulated to build a convincing case that corrective action was needed. One of the basic curricular questions in Prince's (1988a) reading and writing study was whether ample materials and resources were available for reading and writing instruction. The initial method used to answer this question was classroom observations. The evaluator

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

367

first looked for evidence such as whether each student had his or her own textbook; whether the textbooks were up-to-date and in good condition; whether the language of the textbook matched the language in which the subject was taught; and whether the school library carried books in students' native languages as well as in English. During classroom observations in one of the schools, a recurrent pattern appeared in two first-grade classrooms which warranted closer attention. Every day the blackboards in these classrooms were literally covered with the entire day's reading assignments, including complete instructions, sample items, illustrations, and questions. Students copied the assignments from the board onto their own papers each day while the teacher worked with students in other reading groups. This practice resulted in an inordinate amount of instructional time spent copying from the board, and little time spent on literacy activities which have been shown to increase reading achievement and motivation, such as reading aloud to children and allowing time for sustained silent reading (Anderson et al. 1985). A second method of inquiry, informal interviews, was then employed to probe the rationale behind this practice. According to the teachers, the simple explanation for the daily board work was that they did not have sufficient books and curricular materials, especially in Spanish. By writing assignments on the board, they were able to make scarce materials last longer. The lack of Spanish materials was further corroborated during informal interviews with the school librarian, who revealed that the library had only two dozen Spanish books in a school which housed close to two hundred limited English proficient students. This represented less than 1% of the total library holdings, even though the bilingual student population made up 16% of the school's enrollment. Since the librarian did not speak Spanish and did not have Spanish materials, students from the bilingual program usually spent library period filling out English worksheets about library skills or watching English films. Additional data collected to support the interview findings and on-site observations were samples of the library worksheets that students completed, plus photographs of the blackboards covered with student assignments and photographs of the limited selection of Spanish library books. Throughout data collection, field notes were reviewed and analyzed to identify emerging themes in the data (such as the lack of curricular materials), and to see how closely the programs matched the evaluator's

368

Cynthia D. Prince

schema of an effective bilingual program. When data collection was completed, field notes were reduced and organized around the themes of Curriculum, Instruction, and Program Administration. A final report was then prepared and presented to the State Board of Education. The report presented the theoretical model used to determine effective instructional practices, the evaluation questions developed from the model, the methods used to collect qualitative data, and procedural information such as how the schools were selected. The report then presented contextual information on the schools and program participants, and described how each program operated. Finally, the report summarized program strengths and weaknesses, and offered specific recommendations for improvement to teachers, administrators, and staff from the State Department of Education's Bilingual Education and Equity Unit. The remainder of this paper is devoted to a discussion of the effects that these studies have had on educational policy and practice. At this writing, data collection for Shannon's (forthcoming) study of mainstreaming from bilingual programs has just been completed and the final evaluation report is in progress. Since complete results of her study are not yet available, this section is devoted chiefly to the impact that the first qualitative study of reading and writing instruction (Prince 1988a) has made at the state and local levels.

The impact of qualitative evaluation on policy and practice The original purpose in conducting qualitative studies of bilingual education programs was to provide formative feedback to practitioners which would help them improve their own programs. Thus, the first measure of impact was whether the individual teachers and administrators who participated in the studies actually utilized the evaluation findings. Some of the specific recommendations made to participants in the reading and writing study were to: — delay the introduction of English reading until students had sufficient time to develop strong literacy skills in their native language; — increase the amount of instructional time devoted to silent reading, reading aloud to children, and creative writing, while decreasing the amount of time spent on worksheets and copying exercises;

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

369

— purchase additional Spanish library books and create small classroom libraries to encourage leisure reading; - train librarians to use more oral language enrichment activities such as dramatic storytelling and puppetry, which would increase students' oral English skills and their desire to read; — increase support for native language literacy skills by displaying Spanish stories written by bilingual program students throughout the school, not just in the bilingual classrooms; — revise the reading and writing curricula in the bilingual program to match the district's all-English curricula more closely in scope and sequence. Teachers were also encouraged to continue a number of excellent instructional practices observed during classroom visits which successfully promoted literacy skill development, such as: — encouraging children to practice reading to each other; — using reading time to expand vocabulary in the native language and in English; - relating stories to children's own experiences; — arranging visits from local librarians to help students apply for library cards; - participating in the federal Reading Is Fundamental program, which provides free books in Spanish and English for children to keep; — participating in districtwide English and Spanish spelling bees; — giving students a variety of interesting writing assignments, such as letters, journals, and class books. Follow-up visits to the schools and discussions with the principals and bilingual directors indicated that a number of the recommendations had been implemented immediately. One of the schools which had previously had no trace of non-English languages in the hallways created a large bulletin board near the main office which was reserved for student work in Spanish. The bilingual director in one of the districts worked with staff from the State Department of Education and the district's purchasing department to see that equitable numbers of Spanish books were ordered for school libraries the following year. Two of the districts commenced work on curriculum alignment, so that the reading and writing curricula in their bilingual programs and in the all-English programs covered the same scope and sequence of skills. One district also began revising the teachers' curriculum guide so that it was of manageable length and matched the materials teachers

370

Cynthia D. Prince

actually used in their classrooms. Teacher training sessions were held to share results of the studies so that practitioners understood the theoretical rationale for delaying English reading, emphasizing oral English development, and building strong literacy skills in the native language. The qualitative studies were intended to do more than provide feedback just to those directly involved in the studies, however. The focus of each study was to identify aspects of programs which were working well so that they could be replicated and supported in other schools. Thus, it was important to show educators in other schools how the evaluation findings also applied to them. A set of worksheets based on the evaluation questions from the reading and writing study was created for this purpose (see Appendix A). The worksheets were designed to train bilingual education directors, principals, and teachers to use the same approach in order to evaluate the quality of their own programs. The worksheets included the same type of questions in Curriculum, Instruction, and Administration that the evaluator had attempted to answer in the sample schools, such as "Is sufficient time spent on creative writing as opposed to filling out worksheets and copying from the board?", and "What kind of library activities are provided to help students become better readers?". The State's Bilingual Education and Equity Unit sponsored training sessions for teams from each district, consisting of bilingual directors, principals, and central office staff, to help them use the evaluation model to identify their own areas of need. In addition to these training sessions, staff from the Bilingual Education and Equity Unit increased technical assistance to districts in the area of curriculum development, as recommended in the evaluation report. This recommendation was based on the fact that students served in Connecticut's bilingual education programs frequently move between schools, between districts, and between Puerto Rico and the mainland United States. Consequently, it is important that districts develop effective means of tracking transient students and develop common core curricula to be used throughout the districts so that students who move from school to school will not miss essential areas of instruction. The Bilingual Education and Equity Unit responded to the recommendation in several ways. First, staff began coordinating a computerized student-tracking system intended to speed the transfer of student records between school systems. Second, week-long summer

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

371

institutes were offered to assist teachers and administrators in bilingual education programs to develop curriculum plans and materials. And third, a curriculum assessment project was initiated to compare the centralized curriculum used in Puerto Rico with the curricula used in several Connecticut districts which enroll large numbers of highly mobile Puerto Rican students. The primary goal of this project was to develop a useful reference document which teachers and administrators could use to determine what incoming students were likely to have covered during their previous schooling. This information would enable educators to make more accurate placement decisions and adjust their curricula more effectively to meet the needs of new arrivals. Perhaps the most important effect of the qualitative research was that it dramatically increased policymakers' understanding of the complexities involved in planning educational programs for highly mobile limited English proficient students. Previous summative evaluations had not considered the effects of factors such as limited resources, overcrowded classrooms, program isolation, poverty, and constant student movement on achievement outcomes. Nor had the summative evaluations presented a model of effective instructional practice based on research evidence from other bilingual education programs. These types of information have served as effective tools in helping decision makers understand complex issues such as the length of time required to learn a second language, so that more informed policy can be set at the state and local levels.

Conclusions The model of qualitative research described in this paper has clearly driven educational reform in positive ways in Connecticut. Reactions to the first qualitative study of reading and writing instruction were so positive that qualitative methods of inquiry have become a permanent part of Connecticut's bilingual education evaluation design. A second study of mainstreaming from bilingual programs has just been completed, and a third study of English as a Second Language instruction in two high school bilingual education programs is scheduled to begin during the 1988-1989 school year. This alternative approach has proven to be extremely valuable not only in understanding, but improving, educational programs for language minority children in Connecticut.

372

Cynthia D. Prince

dl

^~ χι η

W ·Ή 0)

^ 01

O

C C U

0 O 3 W O, o

U « W 01 O) O) P-i Di DS

ω Η g

φ C

t—1

φ

E

H O

H

αύ

C

O O

01

s u

CO H

(Λ

tti §

O

4->

o H

C 0

u

*« » n fc

w

PM 5,

H O Da H 4J 'pH 1-1 O

0 0 4-lcflC raXI'pH

U

M bO C

•pH

•O C

o u

«H

IJL,

B O

^|

· X l C c d B • ^ ο ι 3 φ UP-H ΧΙΕ 3 4-lcdt-H cd'H (ΛίϊΰεΐΗ

O 3 E O 1 H cd O 3 0) φ .H p—1 1-1 ΧΙ1 4J1-I 3Φ41-1 UXl'pH E 3 . ^ E u c cd l - i 3 C ^ 1H l-iC^-'pX, Min 3 C O'pH O Φ W C d iHx; p—ΐ φ ε (X4-1 ΦΧΙ,> XlcO'rHO Φ ΐ ϊ 4 J Φ 4 J O χΙΟ bOO4-l 4Jp-H ϋ ΐ ^ φ

34J.H

B

ο

o

C

Ο

"H

4-* 4H

Ό C c

c^· cn

r" φ ,—| C U Ε ι-Ι O4-ICO'H . H C d C O ^ p i U l c

4-»E Π)

Ο)

w

O cd .*", U-l 3 P^ U O Ό 3 PJ U ^ 01 -P-IOO p—I V j p - H C COl-JrH(D 3 3 O 3 ΟΟΟ4-, in ι-ΗϋΊφ -.Η·Γ-ΙΧ;·Ο ( £ | ρ —I 4 J C O O c d φ ρ ^ Ο X I W O 0 1 - Ρ ι P* p—l

Ό

φ

00 cd C .H

w w

ο Ι U U

Η

ο-

>ί>~,«1

Τ

φ C 3 Ή Τ 3 B , - H l - l l

C°·· 3 Φ H

υ φ υ ΐ φ

C4JC04-J

«H 4-) p—l 4-3 P—l Φ

Ή

ο 3 > φ O 0) •'—1 >tH l—1 J3C4-I Ο ^ φ --ι Ό E O c o 3 l-i p - H C M 3 -pH ο ΙΗ · Η Φ Ο U u l iHCdul 3 Φ Φ O-HTJ

Β ω Ε 3 L j ^ > p—1 O "H >-, 3 * 4 Η 4 - ) ι—1 P-H Ή Β Φ 3 ι ^ ι φ ' ρ —]4-( H 4 J X I W . 3 « o w Op>^ Φ οιχίϋ Φ Ο Ο x J O O c d 3 4 J C O J W Ή W P C C

Φ Ο Ϊ Η Ϊ Η

p—1

O l d ' P —) 1 H

0 1 - 1 0 3 O O· U-l U

o o Qn

o •oC cd

O)

υ C

φ ^ f? Ul "ζί cd

Φ Ε Λ φ φ

ο φ χ ΐ φ Q4-JSXI

c >·, υ >,

Xl

•O

Qualitative research and effective bilingual education

373

Φ ^ 1/1 ·—' C Ο Μ H Φ CL,

XI (Λ Ή φ 0] ο C >-ι Ο 3 Ο, Ο U1 Μ Φ Φ ΟΙ Οί

α Φ

C

»Η r—l

φ Ε Η

EH O M Oi ΙΛ M O

C Φ CO

O

o

SB O M

Η Φ .0

Bi

Ο

O

4J

C

g

Ο

Ή 4-1

υ

α ζ 4J Ο

Ι-Η

Ι

Ο

ω

.1-1

Ο .1-1

gυ

φ C ο

0-,

υ Φ ο

ο ο

Φ bO Vj

ο

0

-

φ Ο Φ Q

3

C 0 0 C Q V!

Ό

Ρκ tt.

U

C O

4-> C

CX cn

W V-J Φ φ VI DO

C Ό C .Η

Ι

ο

• r-t

&μ

ε

0 μ 4-1

U W

3:

(Λ

t/l C

O 4_)

W

Ο

0)

3

CX

O

ifl

4-J ·ι-Ι O V - ι φ Φ C»Oi-i

O j ^ f O 3 b03

i-*

^-(

"

^ I~H C •Hco-r-i

ι—t

O

Ό ) 0)^-1 bO t

id ,d b r—( t-^ bO 3 O C · ^ C

OO f ·τ-ί ί Φ Ό (α 1J €0 r-H φ

C

ο)

ci ο ΐ) φ WV-IT-)>

Ή PJ Ή ι—( φ υ b £ V-i id C O t d C

to '«"i

o CD cd ^ ^ΐ »^

,£ Ο

Φ ·>-ΐ U-l W 3 Ο 3tiQ «

d) D ί-J ^ Ul 4J Φ Μ

3 ΤΙ Ή

Φ J-i

Ο Ό 4-J 3

>r-i

O

•ο

Cd

φ

, £ 4 - > 4JO) l

φ

Μ^ )-JOI-i

T)

4-1

X W bO bfl M p

φ

φ 00 ^ Ο φ Ο

LJ f^ φ φ -ι-) p» 4J 4J Cd •H C .Π ·—ι O Φ 00 4J

o· r;

t/i -H ^1 bO

w c

4-ί |jLj C

cd C Φ C ^

φ Ό ·Η

60 S 3

Cfl >fH £

c(0 Oα, uW Ό cd r-) ι—) Φ

φ

α* v-) v-j >

Οί

Ε ^-| O •-HO 0>(Di—lV-t ^^Ctdift 4-J 4-1 ^ [/) 4-J CO Ο Ο Ο ι~^ Q 4 J C d O

4-J ι—1 C 1 d'Htfl Φ ϋ ^ Ο Φ ,£·ι-ΐ4_>Μ 4-J V-( C tO l-( Ή Ο Ο D Cd V-J Q U E t X

t^ CO u ^ i r H «i-ihOcd rCC*>-i 5 >r ^ J-' ι—' Ή C *H C l-H J3 «f-4

·«-! C C Ο Ό O D t d O J O O fl>,Cc/iO Vw 4-J V-i 3 4-J 4-1 C O C t-H «i-l X -r-l

^J (Λ ^ i-H Φ U 0 •ι-ι Ό CM 4J

Γ-

OO

CT>

O r-1

i-^ ι—ί

OJ rH

Ο

C et)

4-1 CO ^H C r-t

Cd

C

C 3

•r-t

φ

bO

W ,*^ p> φ H U) 1) ^

•a ν

374

Cynthia D. Prince

0) /-v rD

M

ΙΛ ·ιΗ φ ^-" ) CJ C C U

O O 3

w α ο

U M M φ Οι φ OH Q OS

W

S2a

Φ

C

•Η ι—I Φ

Β

EH

o

Ή

H

B! H W

c

rJ

O

o

cd Η Φ

33 U U

Ο

o

C

EH

0 •Η 4J

U O

υ

Z

H U h-l

ai H cn

•Η Ο

j U

o co

•J

μι

φ

Οι

CJ

^

C Ο ^——

Φ

i

S-ι O Φ O φ a

Ο

4J

- 3 C Ο 0 C

φ

bO )_l

o z p

Γ-Ι

d) AJ

PH

W

bO C

•H

TJ

ί U

c •H u. E

O rJ

M-J EH U W

s (Λ

W

C O

•H 4J VI Φ

3 CX

>-, W O o·· !u cfl W O r —i c f l i - i o O c O i D t b O d r ^ u c c

Otio

.^3

f l j C i— < f— l ^Ήιη O T-H ^ Q ) rH*i-i(U^> i—1 ^

(fl

00 p f l i—1

> -1-1

OJiJX ( U W O J - * M X 0)O i->iJHt4-J,Q

C O4-J O J C ' w o C Ό -^ ..-j 3 EDi ^ C n J O W ) .H VJ r-l ι—l tfl O d J i—1 Φ Ε Ο ^ · " - ^-(

QJ

VH|

OJ

Sr*.

C

rti X

0

Ή

T3 t n O C e C c a ocfl

o

.ccv

W U l W O i UlOJ-Htifl V] Ή ι—1 (fl td i— 1 t) D t—


V - i > E O J O O J_j }_j y 43Q.OJ Ή

QJ

cd

S

φ

-rJ

l

X

Wl ^^

C

rJ

CL|

rJ

cd O

rJ

C P. ΤΗ 'r-l O l—1 Cd 4-1

οιω Όα.*τ3 C Ή 3 o» .r^ *J u tfl ^ί·ΗΙΟ}^ > Φ i_) ..-t p. T? OJ 4-i i—1 Cfl O

o

3

C

QJ 5-i l 4-JtdU O C

Γ^

o

cd o x;

X U Ό cd in I

1

3 Φ Φ

ο χ: χ: 4J

CJ

. H C 01 COO 4-1 C U L O ' H - 4 J tO 4-1 tO φ C (0 Μ ι—1 Φ 6 0 Ο 0 1 Μ f > C 3 4 - 1 3 • Η ·Η Ό 4J φ 60 4-1 φ φ C •Η ι-Ι C O M i - H ^ 4 J 3 t O W C 3«Λ! φ ι - Ι β Ο Ε Ο O 3 C O O

4J60 O C ·ι-Ι·ιΗ Μ 4-1 4-1 ·Η W M ·ι-Ι3 "Ο φ φ >

4-Ιφι-ΗΜ

4J4J

3 Λ Ό Μ φ (0 CO M4-lCi-Hi-l < ! Ο · Η Ο Ο

ΙΟΦ φ 4-1 O4-I Ο Φ

ι—ι

CN

to to ·Η οι η

tfl >-, O 01 -H > ,-1 cuo _rH

•O

C •1-1 U. E O μ

u χ

i

u C O

-H J_)

H

M cd Γ-Ι υ Ι-Η cd 3 C

Ή

>^

43

43 0)

O

C l J c d C c d 4 - >

C Ε C"

ο Ό

Ο

ui

cd μ cd Φ3

4->

4J

o c c 4-1 φ 0) ΌΌ ω 3 3 C 4J 4-> «rH en οι ι—ι \ 3 χ 4-> Φ

Ή φ μ 4 ^

43 4-1

W cd

«ΐ ι—Ι

Ο

cd w Γ-Ι Φ ο ι ΰ ο μ ο ι—ι to

ι—Ι

4J

PH i-i T3 υ -H

ω ' φ i-i μ ι-ι cd cd μ μ ο cd

ι—ι Ό

Co0 W

43 4->

"-ic

cd o

Ι-!

01 ·Η

Ο)

4->

4->

C ·Η

Ή

l

μ Μ-ι χφ Ο υ >-, cd 4J 4-> Ή

Χ ι—ι Ό ^^ μ υ

bO 3 4J cd

C/l{34J(3p>

ω

ΙΛ

φ μ

φ

' ι—Ι τ-ι φ Ο C 00

φ

(η ' Ό cd φ.-ιμ3 Or-iO4Jc

0

3 cd

G 3 0.

O E M « M O C 4 - ) coc χ ο μ 4J4-lφcd >α. φ

C

Ή

1—Ι

φ

Φ "Η

ι—Ι 4-ί Ό

43cdC ι—ι cd C cd Φ Κ Φ Φ C O X 4 O.1-I4J U114-I

« J C φ

D,

4-1

μ ^ Ε Ό ΦΟ·Η3

Χ

>-,

υ

> φ . Η PH T34JU Ε « οχο· Φα.4Jw C d ' r H j

μ

T3· φ Τ3 4J φ

cd

cd Ό

-1-I4J

3

C

Ή

Χ

1-4 Τ3

ΤΗ .Η

x«i-ibo> 3·^ Cd O ι-ι.Η-μ Φ Ε Φ υωρ,μο ·ι-ι ι ία ω ία ο· t f l b O

ί> »—I

μ

ι—ι

t—I p ,

4-J ι—Ι

U]

*· Ο* cd 4-1

i-l Φ ΐΛ·»-ΐϋΐμ L>3pLo)

Φ Λ · Λ C οι tiO χ ^ Φ μ·υτ3·Ό

P.43-HP, Ε Χ Φ Ο Μ 4 J 4 J C 1

i - Ι Ο Φ Φ 3 COH-I^'-4J4J ·Η C C W Ο Τ 3 « Ο Ο >

4J O4J αϊ Ι-Η ·Η c

Ο 4 Λ Φ

φ φ μ . Η ί —ι Ρ π ςL,τ5Φ4Jcdω «.HJicd4J,J

Qcd4-ll/l.H

Ε Φ « Φ-Η4-) μcdcd^-ι < E O

4JocdO c d χ i-i 3 χ o Φ 4 J 5 ι η μ Μ

>cd Φ θ Φ 3 τ 3 μ μ μ ρ , Ό β ο ,

0

ε

c

δ- il ΐ 1§

E >, Λ

*>

Ιo 1

•o

,

(*«l

|

g

E

CO

^

'5

ofiaitl itlilli O W α. Γ < *

Τ5 S 5

JS

n

o o W

3 U •3

3 v>

ce

3

a

'S >> .cex

No use of vernacular

ο

υ

•8 -^ n

°llJj ii

's 's « r 's 8

nein • · · ?r

u

• Habitual aspect (I be going to the stoi - 1 go habitually) • Copula deletion - (SI pretty)

u

Controls Standard, but variable use

ε

βο lΒ s·§ -£·£ s

IH

8 S?Ji ? 11*1 h 'S S-8.S|(S5»

W

£< to

iliiitf aiilc^l * « «

'S v M

3 U

1 u

Variable use

S S gif'i

Variable use

Phonology

§ ·=· a 8 'S" a ΗΈ8 S '1

«rf

Favored genres

3 ο

O

rvi

sο

·3§

Wi

t^l

Little use of Black styl·

i§

>

cular Black English (va ard "Public" Black Eng: ird English (midwesten

H

^—*

oo o c C Oa O

υ efl

no sett

**^

VI

Value held by m

*

S

e ί8·

469

W

n ΙΛ

W co

CO V)

aa go n w

!> CO

0

470

Mary Rhodes Hoover

The theory and structure of the method is related to the style aspect of the ethnography (see "Style"). The method concentrates on the audience participation or relational learning style that has been identified as successful in teaching bidialectal students (Cureton 1979; Milliard 1976; Hale-Benson 1986; Shade 1982). The method uses a group approach, a type of controlled composition that involves much writing and rewriting. Students write a group paper — developing the topic, the points to be developed, the introduction, body, and conclusion — as a group. After writing several group papers, which serve as models, the students are confident enough to produce individual papers. They read their papers out loud to a partner or tutor, in order to clearly hear the patterns of standard English that they must acquire in order to become bidialectal, i.e., proficient in both varieties of their language — vernacular and standard Black language (Taylor 1971), and to analyze good and poor passages with the group. "Structure" has also been identified as a bidialectal learning style (Hoover 1982; Hoover, Politzer and Lewis 1979). Students must utilize the drill often associated with foreign language methodology in mastering third person singular and other patterns with conjugation recitations — done in cheerleader type chants - and other drill-type exercises. This approach is necessary to fill the gaps created by twelve years of "journal writing" as a substitute for organized composition instruction. The grammar (Black Standard Grammar) is always taught in the context of the rule-governed nature of Black language, Black literature, and an organizational process (1-2-3) based on Black culture. Genres of interest to Blacks are another aspect of the ethnography used in the method. Scanlon and Scanlon (1979), Bartlett (1932), and Phillips (1975), have demonstrated that students comprehend better when the format is familiar. Reading materials for the students, therefore, contain the written genres and themes most prevalently used by Blacks, which are the narrative (autobiography, etc.), the persuasive lecture (either in the form of written speeches or essays), and the parable (Malcolm X Speaks [Breitman, 1966:172]). The latter is used as one of the texts because it is written in a popular genre (written speeches) and contains many parables e.g., Ten men can be sitting at a table eating, you know, and I can come sit down where they're dining. They're dining; I've got a plate in

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

471

front of me, but nothing is on it ... I'm not a diner until you let me dine. Just because you're in this country doesn't make you an American. (See other genres, p. 344.) The topic or theme is a critical aspect of the ethnography of communication (Hymes 1972). The Method stresses motivating themes such as affirmation or a vindicationist perspective (Drake 1987) on Black culture. (See Gates [1988] on the need for inclusion of these themes in the general curriculum.) Students are led to understand, through numerous examples, that they come from a culture that is organized, so it is easy for them to acquire this organization. The fact that students potentially have this organizational skill is important for they have been led to believe by the media that they are products of a culture where "anything goes". Some examples of this organization in the culture are Malcolm X's "Ballots or Bullets" speech in which he outlines the problems of Black people in three categories — economic, political, and social. B.B. King's "Why I Sing The Blues" is used as an example of organization and use of specifics. King doesn't generalize about why he sings the blues. He states, specifically, that he first got the blues "when they brought him over on a ship — men were standing over me and a lot of 'em had whips". He also cites poor education facilities and unrequited love as other reasons for singing the blues. The method also utilizes the music and rhythm channel of Black communication as part of the "Affirmation" theme to explain vocabulary used in writing. In Ellison's (1952) invisible Man, the protagonist muses that "it" [music] may be the only true history . . . " since most Black activity is invisible and "outside history". For example, the word "paranoia" was made clear to a recent class by using the lyrics of a rhythm and blues song "I Always Feel Like Somebody's Watching Me" by Rockwell. Students immediately understood the meaning of the term "bourgeoisie" when reminded of a classic rhythm and blues song sung by Gladys Knight and the Pips called "Bougie, Bougie" (Bouzhie, Bouzhie). Original chants, popular in Black culture, are also used in the method. An example of a chant used most effectively in teaching the 3rd person singular "s" is as follows: Put the s, put the s, put the s on the he and the she and the it.

472

Mary Rhodes Hoover

This chant follows the introduction of conjugations that students must memorize. The ethnography, in addition to forming the basis for the theory and structure of the method, is also the foundation of the content of the student manual. The ethnography is the subject of the first two weeks of class, the topic of the first paper, and an on-going issue of interest. The discussion of the chart is motivating because the students, who have often been exposed to a plethora of programs that were supposed to provide skills but failed, are informed that they are ^sing a method that has proven successful in teaching students to swiftly acquire composition skills. A few selected examples of some of the items on the grid will be given. Grammar/Sy n tax/Morphology 1. Copula deletion. This characteristic is also found in Bantu languages (Dalby 1971; Smitherman 1977). Example: "She pretty". 2. Use of the habitual aspect rather than past or present tense. West African verbs often use the continuative aspect (Dalby, 1971; Baugh 1983). Example: "I be going to the store". Phonology 1. Absence of final consonants. According to Smith (1984), these consonants are not "deleted" or simplified; they were never there. Most African languages have few final consonants because of a consonant-vowel syllabic structure (Turner 1969; Smith 1984). Examples: "impac" (impact) "po" (poor). 2. Substitution of "f" for "th". There is no "th" in most West African languages (Turner 1969). Vocabulary I Lexicon \. Direct loan words from Africa, e.g., yam (Vass 1979; Dalby, 1971). 2. Use of inversion (double meanings), e.g., "bad" meaning "good" (Holt 1972). In tona tion/Stress Use of intonation patterns in Black speech that are not speech. Black speech, for example, tends to have a tone; Black preachers and orators, particularly, have of highs and lows in their voices than White speakers Westbrook 1974; Vaughn-Cooke 1972).

found in White wider range of a wider range (Tarone 1973;

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

473

Non Verbal Patterns Black nonverbal behavior (Black proxemics, kinescis, chronemics, oculesics) has been described by Cooke (1972), and Taylor (1975). One example of Black proxemics is that Black people have an optional conversational stance. Whereas most people engaged in conversation use a face to face approach, Black people often have a side-by-side stance in conversations, particularly those involving a "hit-on" (conversation in which a man tries to attract a woman, or vice-versa). Synonyms for "hitting-on" a person are "talking to" or "rapping with".

Style "Call and Response" is a style feature used by most Black rhetors, particularly ministers and other orators. It has West African roots. The "Call and Response" technique ensures that there is participation in the speaking act. The minister/orator leaves spaces in his/her speech for audience responses, e.g., "Amen", "Right on". There are 500 such spaces filled with responses in the Malcolm X record "Ballots or Bullets". This feature and other style features are described by Smitherman (1977), Smith (1975), Taylor (1986) and Labov (1972). Another characteristic style of the persuasive Black speaker is the use of repetition. Malcolm X used it; Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture) uses it as the following passages demonstrate. Malcolm X: What you and I need to do is learn to forget our differences. When we come together, we don't come together as Baptists or Methodists. You don't catch hell because you're a Methodist or Baptist, you don't catch hell because you're a Democrat or a Republican, you don't catch hell because you're a Mason or an Elk, and you sure don't catch hell because you're an American; because if you were an American, you wouldn't catch hell. You catch hell because you're a black man. You catch hell, all of us catch hell, for the same reason. (Breitman 1966:62) Kwame Ture: Let us move down and talk about organizing as a concept. We have the masses and the bourgeoisie in our community of Black people. The bourgeoisie is very, very minute inside our community. We have to bring them home for many reasons. We must bring them home because they have technical skills that must be used for the benefit of their people, not for the benefit of this country that

474

Mary Rhodes Hoover

is against their people. We've got to bring them home. The way to bring our people home is by using patience, love, brotherhood, and unity — not force — love, patience, brotherhood and unity. (Carmichael 1971:119) Genres Every culture has its favorite genres. Philips (1975) found, for example, that when VISTA workers in a Native American community recorded stories for later reading, they met with resistance because community sociolinguistic rules decreed that stories were delivered orally and not in written form. The proverb has been found to be a frequent and preferred genre throughout the African diaspora, and highly tied to intelligence (Daniel 1977). It is used for a number of purposes — preventing fights, introducing speeches, teaching the young, and revealing the brilliance of the speaker. Such proverbs as "The Lord don't like ugly", "What goes around comes around" can obviously be used for all the above purposes. Poetry (February 1988:119) and drama are favorite genres, as well. Music lyrics (Allen 1989) and folklore usage (Gates 1984) are also popular genres. Topics /Themes Freire (1973) has long attributed his success in teaching peasants in Brazil to his preparation before teaching - surveying the community to determine its generative themes, or the ideas that motivate a community. Some motivating themes are "Affirmation", previously mentioned, and "Duality": One ever feels his two-ness — an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideas in one dark body. (Dubois 1961)

"Survival", as seen in the popularity of the Trickster figure (Brown 1973); "Egalitarianism", as seen in the irreverence of Black folklore (Gates 1984); and "Protest", as seen in the prominence of the "Bad/ Crazy Negro" (Breitman 1966:145), are also popular themes. Sociolinguistic Rules/A ttitudes These rules vary across the African diaspora. In some parts of Africa and the Carribean, for example, where the speakers of Creole languages are in the majority, e.g., Sierra Leone, Creole languages are used in all domains — as mediums of instruction, for business and for government. In the United States, however, where Ebonics speakers are in

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

475

a minority, sociolinguistic rules appear to indicate that the language is seen primarily as an oral one to be used in informal situations not to be eradicated as some have assumed. In one study (Hoover 1978b), parents indicated that they would not want to eradicate the dialect because there are some things that are only expressed in the vernacular, e.g. "The Lord don't like ugly" — already mentioned — if translated might be glossed as "The Lord disapproves of mischievous behavior", which takes away the starkness and rhythm of the original. That the dialect is thought of as primarily oral is seen in the finding that Black children, when asked to read Vernacular Black English, often translate the material back to standard (Nichols 1977). Table 2 illustrates the complexity of community sociolinguistic rules as they apply to appropriate domains (Fishman and Greenfield 1968), channels, and contexts (Hymes 1972). Those surveyed accept Vernacular Black English in the listening and speaking channels; they accept Vernacular Black English in the home and some community contexts, but generally not in the schools; they accept Vernacular Black English in informal settings, but seldom in formal ones. Eightyfive percent (85%) of the informants accept another Black speech variety — Standard Black English in all domains, channels and contexts, however. Table 2. Sociolinguistic rules for Vernacular Black English domain Home

Community

Channel

Informal

Formal

Listening Speaking Reading Writing

+ + NA

+ + -

+Accepted

Informal

—Rejected

+ + NA

Formal + = -

School Informal = =

Formal -

= Close to acceptance

From Hoover (1978b)

Other examples of community sociolinguistic rules are that nonnative speakers of Ebonics are encouraged to study Ebonics (particularly if they are teachers who must interact with Ebonics speakers), but should not speak it (Hoover 1978b); non-native speakers must never use terminology associated with the etiquette of racism, e.g., "boy" "you people" (Bosmajian 1974).

47 6

Mary Rh odes Hoover

Speech Acts Speech acts such as sounding, the dozens, rapping, and loud-talking have been described (Mitchell-Kernan 1971; Smitherman 1977). One that is frequently used and exemplifies the African/African American love of drama and irreverence is "marking". Marking (mocking) is a situation in which one person imitates another person's highly devalued speech to the great amusement of the other person(s) who shares the "marker's" attitudes. The speaker usually assumes the other person's entire dramatic persona, e.g., the person's intonation and pitch (often an affected falsetto), the person's phonology (often an imitation of a New England type accent or a general "Talking Proper" register), and the person's gestures (highly stylized and posturing). The entire drama is introduced by a narrative explaining the setting, the participants, and any other pertinent details to describe the hilariously inappropriate speech of the "markee". Successful pedagogies/methodologies for teaching bidialectal students should be endorsed by all scholars interested in the language of Black Americans, for successful approaches to teaching demonstrate that Black children are capable of learning — that it is not "unreasonable to expect a Black child to read . . ."as some scholars have asserted (Johnson 1970). Secondly, these methods should be endorsed because they demonstrate that the Black community has the intelligence to do its own language planning. (Black intelligence and need for self determination are often not respected by scholars.) In spite of Fishman's (1972) warning that "nationalist language planning reveals a pervasive abhorrence of foreign influence", many non-native speakers of Black language attempted to do language planning for the Black community, advocating dialect readers (Baratz and Shuy 1969). When Blacks rejected the readers, they were accused of being "white oriented and middle class" (Stewart 1970) and "militant non-linguists [who] try to distort the issue of Negro dialect . . . in order to use it as a phony ploy in political confrontations" (Stewart 1969). Yet subsequent investigation revealed a complex set of sociolinguistic rules regarding who, where, and in what way language was used (Hoover 1978b). These were similar to rules in other language communities, e.g., Spanishspeaking (Fishman 1968), Guyanese-speaking (Rickford 1985). Blacks preferred another variety of Black language — Standard Black Language — in school settings, and Vernacular Black Language in informal settings.

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

477

In a similar demonstration of intelligence and complexity, the methodology described here is a unique approach to language instruction, using the vernacular code and entire ethnography, not as medium of instruction, but as motivation to acquire standard Black language. Successful methodologies should also be endorsed for humanitarian reasons. A human being should not have to go through the pain of literacy acquisition such as Blacks have had to endure. For example, Malcolm X memorized the entire dictionary while incarcerated in order to improve his literacy skills. He would memorize for 59 minutes, then turn off the lights when the guard went by; then read another 59 minutes, often averaging only 2 to 3 hours of sleep per night (Haley & Malcom X 1964). Frederick Douglass (1960) gave breadcrumbs to little White boys to teach him to read. And Richard Wright (1937) had to endure the "ethics of living Jim Crow" to read books in the segregated libraries of Memphis. Looking as unscholarly as possible, hat in hand, Wright would write notes to the librarian as if they were from a White person, stating, "Give this nigger boy the following books". No one should have to endure this type of pain when research reveals how simple it is to teach anyone how to read. Successful methodologies should be endorsed by linguists and educators as one way not only to help people to avoid the pain of illiteracy and to avoid stereotypical views of their language, but also to help make literacy accessible. Making literacy accessible (Fishman 1972:56) does not concern educators in the U.S.A. as much as it does in France, where teachers endorsed a new orthography to simplify acquiring literacy in France in order to eliminate class differences (Greenhouse 1988). If those who are seriously interested in the language and literacy of Black and other bidialectal students banded together to eradicate illiteracy by encouraging the use of effective techniques, they could shatter the current paradigm, and be of assistance to bidialectal students not only educationally but also economically. Making literacy acceptable is one way to break out of the devastating race-class-caste cycle that Ogbu (1978) so graphically describes.

478

Mary Rhodes Hoover

Notes 1. Ebonics: A term for Black English coined by Ernie X. Smith (1975). 2. Bidialectal: Exposed to two dialects, e.g., "standard" English and another, more private language, e.g. Black Language (Ebonics). 3. Nationalism (Black): A vindicationist, corrective, or positive perspective on Black Americans designed to counteract deficiency and exotic notions of Blacks. The perspective was aptly described as "The Defense of the Negro Against Vicious Assaults," an objective of the American Negro Academy, co-founded by W.E.B. DuBois(in Drake 1987: xvii).

References Allen, Harry 1989 "From def jams to cold lampin', rap music is our music"! Essence, Vol. 19, No. 12 (April, 1989). Baratz, Joan 1969 "A bidialectal task for determining language proficiency in economically disadvantaged Negro children". Child Development, (1969), 889-901. Baratz, J., and R. Shuy 1969 Teaching Black children to read. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Bartlett, F.C. 1932 Remembering. Cambridge: The University Press. Bartley, D., and R. Politzer 1972 Practice-centered teacher training: Standard English for speakers of nonstandarddialects. Montreal, Canada: Marcel Didier, Ltd. Baugh,John 1983 Black street speech. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. Bosmajian, E. 1974 The language of oppression. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press. Brasch, Ila and Brasch, Milton 1974 A comprehensive annotated bibliography of American Black English. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Breitman, G. 1966 Malcolm XSpeaks. New York: Grove Press. Brown, Sterling 1933 "Negro character as seen by White authors". Journal of Negro Education II, January, 1933. 1973 "Backgrounds of folklore in Negro literature", Mother Wit from the laughing barrel, ed. A. Dundes (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Inc., 1973). Carmichael, S. 1971 Stokely speaks. NY: Random House.

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

479

Cazden, Courtney and D. Dickinson 1981 "Language in education: Standardization versus cultural pluralism". Language in the U.S.A. Ed. by C. Ferguson and S. Heath, New York: Cambridge University Press. Cecil, Nancy 1988 "Black dialect and academic sucess: A study of teacher expectations". Reading Improvement,Vol. 25, No. 1, 34-38. Cooke, Benjamin 1972 "Nonverbal communication among Afro-Americans: An initial classification", in T. Kochman (ed.), Rappin' and stylin' out. . . Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 32-64. Cureton, George 1978 "Using a Black learning style", Reading Teacher, 31,751-756. Dalby, D. 1972 "The African element in American English", Rappin and stylin Out, ed. by T. Kochman. Urban: University of Illinois Press, 177-186. Daniel, J. 1972 "Towards an ethnography of Afro-American proverbial usage", Black Lines, (Winter, 1972), 3-12. Delone,R. 1979 Small futures. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. DeStefano.J. 1973 Language, society, and education. Worthington, Ohio: Charles A. Jones. Douglass, Frederick 1960 Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass. Ed. by B. Quarles. Cambridge : Bellnap Press. Drake, St. Clair 1987 Black folk here and there Vol. I. Los Angeles: University of California Center for Afro-American Studies. DuBois, W.E.B. 1961 Souls of Black folk. New York: Fawcett. Ellison, R. 1952 The invisible man. New York: Signet. February, Vernon 1988 And bid him sing: Essays in literature and cultural dominance. London: Kegan Paul International. Feigenbaum,!. 1970 "The use of nonstandard English in the teaching of standard: Contrast and comparison". Teaching standard English in the inner city, ed. by R. Fasold and R. Shuy. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Fishman, Joshua 1968 Bilingualism in the Barrio. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education. 1972 Language and nationalism: Two integrative essays. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.

480

Mary Rhodes Hoover

Fishman, Joshua and Lawrence Greenfield 1968 "Situational measures of language use in relation to person, place and topic among Puerto Rican bilinguals", Buingualism in the Barrio, ed. by J. Fishman et al. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education. Fiske, E. 1977 "Colleges are bolstering courses designed to improve writing ability". New York Times, February 7,1977, p. 1. Flesch, R. 1981 Why Johnny still can't read. New York: Harper & Row. Freire, Paulo 1970 Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press. Gates, Hen./ Louis 1984 "The Blackness of Blackness: A critique of the sign and the signifying monkey". Black literature and literary theory. New York: Methuen, 285-322. 1988 "On the rhetoric of racism in the profession". Literature, language and politics. Ed. Betty Craige. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Greenhouse, Steven 1988 "French now debate language barriers". New York Times, December 28,1988,p.1. Guthrie, John T., S. Jay Samuels, V. Martuza, M. Seifert, S.J. Tyler and G. Edwall 1976 "Study of the locus and nature of reading problems in the elementary school". Final Report for National Institute of Education. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Hale-Benson, Janice 1986 Black children. Baltimore: John Hopkins. Haley, Alex and Malcolm X 1964 Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York: Grove Press. Harris, Ron 1989 "Black youth: Assertive new pride", Los Angeles Times, March 12, 1989. Billiard, A.G. 1976 Alternatives to I.Q. testing: An approach to the identification of gifted "minority" children. Final Report to the California State Department of Education, Special Education Support Unit. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 146 009). Sacramento: California State Department of Education. 1987 "Ideology of I.Q." The Negro Educational Review, Vol. 38, Nos. 2-3 (April-July 1987). Holt, Grace 1972 "Inversion in Black communication", Rappin' and stylin' out, ed. by T. Kochman. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press. 1976 et al Bridge. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Miflin. Hoover, Mary R. 1978a "Characteristics of Black schools at grade level: A description", Reading Teacher, Vol. 31, No. 7 (April, 1978), pp. 756-762.

Teaching composition to bidialectal students 1978b

481

"Community attitudes toward Black English". Language in Society, Vol. 7, No. 1 (April, 1978), pp. 65-87. 1978c "Book review: Black English: A seminar". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Vol. 7, No. 4. 1982 "A culturally appropriate approach to teaching basic (and other) critical communication skills to Black college students". Negro Educational Review 33,14-27. 1984 "Teacher competency tests as educational genocide for Blacks: The Florida Teacher Certification Examination", Negro Educational Review, Vol. 34, No. 1. 1986 The one two three method: A writing process for bidialectal students. Edina, Mn: Bellwether Press. Hoover, Mary R., and Fabian, Marsha 1979 Patterns for reading. Belmont, C A: Star Pub. Hoover, Mary R., and R.L. Politzer 1981 "A culturally appropriate composition assessment: The Nairobi Method", Variations in writing: Functional and linguistic-cultural differences, ed. by M. Whiteman. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hoover, Mary R., Robert, Politzer and Brown, Dwight 1973 "An experiment in teaching reading to bidialectal kindergarten children". Stanford, California: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching. Hoover, Mary R., Robert Politzer and Shirley Lewis 1979 "A semi-foreign language approach to teaching reading to bidialectal children", in R. Shafer, (ed.), Applied linguistics and reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. in press "Black English tests for students". In Handbook of tests and measurements for Black populations, ed. Reginald Jones. Hoover, Mary R., Robert Politzer and Orlando Taylor 1987 "Bias in reading tests for Black language speakers: A sociolinguistic perspective". The Negro Educational Review, Vol. 38, Nos. 2-3 (AprilJuly, 1987). Hymes, Dell 1972 "Toward ethnographies of communication: The analysis of communicative events", Language and social context, ed. by P. Giglioli. Baltimore, Md.: Penguin Books. Johnson, Ken 1970 "When should Standard English be taught to speakers of nonstandard Negro dialect"? Language Learning, 20, No. 1 (June 1970), 27. Knox, Faye 1983 "Using Swahili to teach reading to African American students", Stanford, California, Stanford University Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Kolln, M. 1981 "Closing the books on alchemy", College Composition and Communication, Vol. 32, No. 2 (May, 1981) pp. 139-151.

482

Mary Rhodes Hoover

Kozol, J. 1985 Illiterate America. New York: New American Library. Kühn, Thomas

1971

Structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Labov, W. 1972 "The logic of nonstandard English". Language in the inner city. Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lester, Julius 1973 Black folk tales. New York, Grove Press. Lewis, Shirley 1980 "Factors affecting the oral comprehension of Black elementary school children". Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Stanford University: Stanford School of Education. 1981 "Practical aspects of teaching composition to bidialectal students: The Nariobi Method", Variations in writing: Functional and linguisticcultural difference, ed. by M. Whiteman. Hillsdale, N.J.,: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lewis, Shirley and Mary R. Hoover 1979 "Teacher training workshops on Black English". Stanford, California: Center for Educational Research at Stanford. Lin,S. 1975 Pattern practice in the teaching of standard to students with a nonstandard dialect. New York: Columbia University Teachers College Press. Lindenmeyer, O. 1970 Black history: Lost, stolen, or strayed. New York: Avon. Mitchell-Kernan, Claudia 1971 Language behavior in a Black urban community. Berkeley: Language Behavior Research Laboratory, February, 1971. Mittleman, Les. 1985 "Memo on end-of-semester exams". Long Beach, California: Department of Enlgish, December 9, 1985. National Alliance of Black School Educators, Inc. 1984 Saving The African American child. A Report of the NABSE Task Force on Black Academic and Cultural Excellence, Washington, D.C., November, 1984. Nichols, Patricia 1977 "A Sociolinguistic perspective on reading and Black children". Language Arts, LIV, 2 (February, 1977), 150-157. Ogbu, John 1978 Minority education and caste. New York: Academic Press. Philips, S. 1975 "Literacy as a mode of communication on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation". Foundations of language development: A multi-disciplinary approach. Vol. 2, Ed. by E. Lenneberg and E. Lenneberg. New York: Academic Press, pp. 367-382.

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

483

Piestrup, A. 1973 Black dialect interference and accommodation of reading instruction in first grade. Berkeley, California: Language Behavior Research Laboratory. Politzer, Robert, Mary R. Hoover and Shirley Lewis in press "Black English teacher attitude measures", Handbook of tests and measurements for Black populations, ed. Reginald Jones. Politzer, Robert and Mary R. Hoover 1974a "A test of proficiency in Black standard and nonstandard speech.: TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 8, #1, 27-35. 1974b "On the use of attitude variables in research in the teaching of a second dialect" IRAL, Vol. XII/1. Reed,C. 1972 "Adapting TESL approaches to the teaching of written Standard English as a second dialect to speakers of American Black English Vernacular", paper presented at T.E.S.O.L. Convention, Washington, D.C., 1972. Rickford, John R. 1985 "Language attitudes in a creole continuum" Language of Inequality Ed. Nessa Wolfson and Joan Manes. Berlin: Mouton. Saville-Troike, Muriel 1982 The ethnography of communications. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Scanlon, T., and A. Scanlon 1979 Literacy as cultural exchange: An Athabaskan case study. LaJolla, CA: Laboratory for Comparative Human Cognition, University of California, San Diego. Shade, B. 1982 "Afro-American cognitive style: A variable in school success?" Review of Educational Research, 52, 219-244. Shaughnessy,Mina 1977 Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford University Press. Sheils, M. 1975 "Why Johnny can't write". Newsweek. December 8,1975, pp. 58-65. Shor, Ira and Freire, Paulo 1987 A pedagogy for liberation. South Hadley, Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey Publishers. Smith, Ernest X. 1975 "Ebonics: A case history", Ebonics: The true language of Black folks. St. Louis, MO: Robert L. Williams. 1984 On the question of stigmata or stigmatized features in Afro-American speech. Pomona, California: Institute of Ebonics. Smitherman,G. 1977 Talkin 'and testifyin'. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Miflin. Stewart, W. 1969 "Negro dialect in the teaching of reading", Teaching Black children to read, ed. by J. Baratz and R. Shuy. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.

484

Mary Rhodes Hoover

1970 Tang, B. 1971

"Sociopolitical issues in the linguistic treatment of Negro dialect, 20th Annual Round Table, ed. by J. Alatis. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press, pp. 215-223. A psycholinguistic study of the relations between children's ethnic linguistic attitudes and the effectiveness of methods used in second language reading instruction. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford, California.

Tarone, E. 1973 "Aspects of intonation in Black English". American Speech, Spring/ Summer, 1973. Taylor, Orlando 1971 "Response to social dialects and the field of speech". Socio-linguistics: A cross disciplinary perspective. Washington, D.C., Center for Applied Linguistics. 1973 "Teachers' attitudes toward Black and Nonstandard English as measured by the language attitude scale", in Language Attitudes, R. Shuy and R. Fasold, (eds.), Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Taylor, Orlando and Maryon Matsuda 1988 "Storytelling and classroom discrimination", Discourse and discrimination. Eds. G. Smitherman and T.A. Van Dijk. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press. Taylor, Orlando and P. Stoller 1975 "A model for the analysis of offensive Black-White communication behavior". Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. Toynbee, Arnold 1947 A study of history, London: Oxford University Press. Turner, L. 1969 Africanisms in the Gullah dialect. New York: Arno Press. VanGeel, T. 1974 "Does the constitution establish a right to an education"? School Review, 82,293-326. Vaughn-Cooke, A. 1972 "The Black preaching style", Language and Linguistics Working Paper #5, ed. by W. Riley and D. Smith. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 28-29. Vass, W. 1979 The Bantu-speaking heritage of the U.S., Los Angeles, Ca.: University of California Center for Afro-American Studies. Weber, George 1970 Inner-city children can learn to read. Washington, D.C.: Council for Basic Education. Westbrook,C. 1974 "The dual linguistic heritage of Afro-Americans". Unpublished Masters' Thesis.

Teaching composition to bidialectal students

485

Woodson, C.G. 1933 The miseducation of the Negro. Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers. Wright, Richard 1937 "The ethics of living Jim Crow", Uncle Tom's Children. New York: Harper and Row. 1966 Native son, New York: Harper and Row. 1974 "Black English", Language in Society, ed. by Dell Hymes. Vol. 4, pp. 185-256.

Home and school contexts for language development: The experience of two Mexican-American preschoolers Lucinda Pease-Alvarez Introduction Over the course of the last 15 years many researchers and theorists interested in language and cognitive development have turned their attention to the language learning experience of young children. Researchers who have studied the language input available to mainstream children have uncovered considerable evidence in support of Bruner's claim that "language is not encountered willy-nilly by the child," but instead involves "two [or more] people negotiating" (1983:39). In middle class homes, parents generally support children's language learning endeavors by engaging them in conversation and by accommodating their own talk in a variety of ways. They elicit clarifications and elaborations, expand and extend children's utterances, and regularly engage children in predictable conversational routines (Brown & Bellugi 1964; Ratner & Bruner 1977; Ninio & Bruner 1977; Snow 1977;Cazden 1979; Scollon & Scollon 1981; Snow 1983). Recently, evidence from ethnographic research has presented a very different picture of the language learning milieu available to nonmainstream populations both here and abroad (Schieffelin 1979; Miller 1982; Ochs 1982; Heath 1983). For example, Schieffelin (1979) and Ochs (1982) have reported on patterns of language socialization in nonwestern societies which contrast with those of mainstream children in western societies. The language experiences of the children they studied included a heavy reliance on peer interactions. Adult talk to children was characterized by the use of nonaccomodative discourse patterns (e.g., modelling, directives, infrequent use of expansions and questions). Miller and Heath have also found that some working-class black parents rely on the same kinds of nonaccomodative discourse patterns when talking to their children.

48 8

Lucinda Pease-A Ivarez

Other researchers have examined ways minority children enter into collaborative interactions with members of their speech communities. For example, Boggs (1985) found that some Hawaiian children jointly construct narratives by completing and elaborating one another's utterances. Similarly, Phillips (1972) found that groups of Warm Springs Indian children build upon one another's utterances as they talked together in community encounters. She has also discussed how these native patterns of interaction contrasted with the way conversation was accomplished in formal classroom settings. Heath's (1983) ethnography on how language is learned by white and black children from two working class communities in the South has also led to some interesting comparisons. Like other language minority populations, black children were found to engage in storytelling encounters that involved a variety of speakers. Also, black parents seldom used questions, particularly known-answer questions, in conversations with children. Both of these interaction patterns differed markedly from the mainstream patterns of talk that were expected at school. Despite a concern for the language learning environment of children from nonwestern societies or from some minority working-class populations, few researchers have carefully examined the language interaction patterns that surround and involve Chicano/Latino children at home and in school. This gap in the research is particularly striking when considering the kind of schooling that many of these students receive. Teachers and administrators seldom consider the home experiences of Chicano/Latino children when planning and implementing instructional programs. Instead, these children attend schools where teaching practices and assessment procedures reflect the language experiences of mainstream children (Heath 1986). Moreover, many teachers rely on invalid assumptions about the way Chicano/Latino students use language in their homes. Unfortunately, these assumptions can have detrimental consequences (e.g., low teacher expectations, inappropriate assessment procedures). In this study, I provide an ethnographic description of the language environment of two Mexican-American children at home and in school. Specifically, I report in detail on a recurring discourse device termed contingent query and show how adults used this device when conversing with Jennifer and Nestor, the two children I studied. I conclude with a brief discussion on how this study relates to other research and to classroom practice.

Home and school contexts for language development

489

This study draws from ethnographic research methods used to study children's language development. The main goal is to collect language samples in "recurring and familiar contexts, interacting with those people with whom children are regularly involved" (Schieffelin & Ochs 1986:21). To achieve this goal, I identified and described the important recurring language interactions which involved Jennifer and N6stor both in the home and at school. Monthly recordings lasting from three to five hours in each setting yielded a total of 30 hours of language data per child over the course of a five-month period. Because an understanding of what went on at school would be facilitated by actual participation in classroom activities, I worked at the children's preschool, La Escuelita, as a volunteer aide during the nine months that I was involved in field work. From the end of September to mid-December, I spent approximately two to three days a week at La Escuelita. During that time I got to know the three teachers, students, staff, parents and classroom routine. My participation in weekly staff meetings, parent-teacher conferences, and monthly parent meetings also helped me understand the pedagogical stance of the program. The school day was organized around a series of events and activities rather than skills. Direct instruction in a particular skill (e.g., cutting, matching colors, identifying shapes) was almost always done in the context of a larger activity such as making a collage or weaving a placemat. Because play was considered the most suitable context for learning, occasions for play dominated. Consequently, children spent much of the school day interacting with one another while they played with a wide assortment of games, toys and manipulatives and in the context of their own dramatic play (e.g., house, chase games, weddings). The teachers fostered free choice and independence by making sure that children had many opportunities to choose the activities that they would pursue. Once recording began (from February to June), I continued to work at La Escuelita on an almost daily basis. On days when the children were recorded, I adopted the role of an observer, noting relevant information about the extra-linguistic aspect of the talk which involved Nfestor or Jennifer. Because I was not present during most of the home recording sessions, I relied on parental accounts of the contexts surrounding these sessions.1 This study focuses on one major discourse pattern which the two children and their adult interlocutors used at home and in school.

490

Luanda Pease-AIvarez

I identified this discourse sequence as a recurring pattern which adults used with children in the two socialization settings. The sequence allows adults to query children about information contained in previous utterances. Garvey (1977) first labelled these questions or queries contingent queries (CQs) because their use was contingent upon a previous utterance which contained information that was either vague or incomplete. Although contingent queries have been described in numerous studies on child language development (Brown 1968; Holzman 1972;Moerk 1972;Corsaro 1977; Garvey 1977, 1979; Cherry 1979a, 1979b), I did not come to the study planning to describe contingent queries. Rather, as I became increasingly familiar with the data, especially through listening repeatedly to recordings and by studying the transcripts of those recordings, I discovered that contingent queries prevailed in both settings.

Nestor and Jennifer at home and in school As a number of sociolinguists and ethnographers have demonstrated (e.g., Labov 1972; Hymes 1972; Gumperz 1983; Heath 1983, 1986), context has a profound impact on language use. The following account provides a broad overview of the verbal and nonverbal contexts for language learning available to Nestor and Jennifer. In addition to providing a more complete picture of the children and their families, this overview helps to set the scene for the detailed analysis of contingent queries which follows. Nestor and Jennifer shared a number of characteristics common to the majority of four-year-olds enrolled at La Escuelita, a bilingual preschool located in the San Francisco Bay Area. Their parents were Mexican born, having immigrated to this county as young adults. Both fathers were regularly employed in service-related jobs. Jennifer's father, Gabriel, worked as a cook, while Nestor's father, Arturo, had a job as a tree pruner. Both fathers met their wives during regular trips to their home towns in Mexico. Spanish was the language used almost exclusively in and around their homes. Despite a common language and cultural heritage, Nestor and Jennifer were two distinct individuals. Jennifer, the more outgoing of the two, spent her time at home and in school dashing from one activity to another. An almost incessant stream of chatter accompanied her constant activity. Each morning her mother urged her through the

Home and school con texts for language development

491

routine activities of dressing, eating, and cleaning before she boarded the school bus. After school, Jennifer participated in another chain of routine events which included eating lunch, entertaining her baby brother, playing with toys, drawing or playing with play dough, watching a series of telenovelas (soap operas) and Spanish language sitcoms, and picking up her toys. The time that she spent with her parents and younger brother provided her with many opportunities to initiate conversations. While eating lunch they often talked about the people and objects which they observed through the window that overlooked their kitchen table. On other occasions their attention focused on events, people, or objects which were not part of their immediate surroundings. Sometimes these conversations centered on events or experiences that Jennifer had not witnessed. For example, Jennifer initiated the following exchange by asking her father, Gabriel, whether or not there are eggs at the restaurant where he worked. Jennifer: lEn trabajo hay huevost (Are there eggs at (your) work?) Gabriel: Ah. Jennifer: Tengo muchos ο poquitos. iCudndo hay, poquito ο son muchos^. (I have many or a few. When there are, are they few or many?) Gabriel: Llevan de a muchos. (They bring a lot.) Jennifer: Okay..ί Viene mucha gentel (Okay. Do a lot of people come?) Gabriel: Oooh mucha. (Ooh a lot.) At other times their talk focused on Jennifer's brother, Gabrielito. Cooing, mock reprimands, and expressions of endearment said in highpitched voices accompanied diapering and feeding. Parents often enlisted Jennifer's aide by making requests for diapers, towels, and baby clothes. Similarly, her mother, Maria, who was an energetic and efficient housekeeper, routinely asked Jennifer to help with housekeeping chores. Occasionally Jennifer challenged her mother's directives, offering explanations for not complying with her mother's wishes (e.g., Estoy muy cansada 'I'm very tired', Pero se van acabar los monitos 'But the cartoons will be over').

49 2

Luanda Pease-Α Ivarez

Jennifer had no problems adjusting to La Escuelita. Unlike many of her classmates, tears never marked her arrival at the beginning of the school year. She began each day enthusiastically, skipping and chatting her way into the classroom. Once seated, she would begin talking, usually recounting an event that had transpired on the bus, to whoever would listen. She was a favorite among the teachers who took pleasure in her outgoing nature and were amused by her candid opinions and propensity for teasing. Jennifer took full advantage of the wide range of activities that were available to all students at La Escuelita. She moved freely around the classroom and outside area, often participating in the full range of projects which were available. She talked easily and at length with students and teachers and was responsible for initiating many of the conversations in which she was involved. Unlike most of the other Spanish-speaking children at La Escuelita, Jennifer would initiate and pursue conversations with the only two monolingual Englishspeaking girls. Teachers took time to talk with Jennifer. They often engaged Jennifer in brief verbal exchanges as they guided her through an instructional activity. For example, the teacher's directions in the following conversation helped Jennifer through the task of drawing a bunny. Teacher: IPor quo no dibujas una solita? No mas poner dos orejas asiy. . . (Why don't you draw one by yourself. Just put two ears like this and.. .) Jennifer: Es que no s£ hacerlo. (It's that I don't know how to make it.) Teacher: Empiezas con un drculo para la cabeza. [Jennifer begins to draw a second circle] No un circulo. Dos orejas grandes. [Jennifer draws orejas or ears on top of her circle] (Begin with a circle for the head. No one circle. Two big ears.) Despite Jennifer's gregarious inclinations during small group exchanges, she was attentive and silent during group time. She adhered to the turntaking conventions which operated during circle time. She seldom interrupted or offered a comment without raising her hand. During storytelling time, she listened to her teachers with her eyes transfixed on the illustrations which accompanied the stories that

Home and school con tex ts for language developmen t

493

they read aloud to the students. Once the teacher finished reading, Jennifer would ask questions or comment on the events and characters in the story. Like Jennifer, Nestor's time at home was characterized by a sequence of routine events (e.g., eating lunch, washing dishes, playing with toy farm animals, watching t.v.). Nestor's mother, Rosa, was usually present while he pursued these activities. During lunch, they often talked about N6stor's school day. Almost without fail, Rosa would initiate and pursue these exchanges with questions about individuals or specific events. For example, she began the following lunch-time conversation by asking Nestor about a classmate's dancing abilities. Prior to this conversation, Rosa and Nfestor had talked about the dancing that routinely went on at La Escuelita. Rosa: Hijo, este Ronnie, oque tal es para bailarl (Son, what kind of dancer is Ronnie?) Nestor:No so. (I don't know.) Rosa: tEs buenol (Is he good?) Nestor: tQuien es έΐ? Pues, yo no me recuerdo [si] estaba bailando. (Who's he? Well, I don't remember if he was dancing.) Rosa: Ohnol N&stOTlAh ah. . . Rosa: IQuion bailabal (Who danced?) Nfestor: Maria, Ricardo. Yo, Demis. (Maria, Ricardo. Me, Demis.) Rosa: iNinal N6stor:M«a y Jennifer, y Di. . . (Nina and Jennifer. And Di. . . Rosa: Diana. . .. Another conversational routine centered on the popsicles that they purchased from the paletero or popsicle vendor on most afternoons. During these routines N6stor and Rosa discussed the activity of the paletero, the quality of his wares, or a request for a paleta. In the following exchange, they described the popsicles they were eating. N6stor:£s el mon mi mimon. sta muy buena. Sabe a durazno. (It's lemon my lemon. It's very good. It tastes like peach.)

494

Luanda Pease-Alvarez

Rosa: oA durazno ? Mmm. (Like peach? Mmm.) Nestor: J Verdad que sabe a durazno! (Does it really taste like peach?) Rosa: Que buen sabor. (What a good flavor.) During the first few weeks of the school year, Rosa often accompanied Nestor to school. Together they would board the bus to school and Rosa would spend the entire day at school usually no more than a few feet away from her son. At first, Nfestor cried on the days that his mother could not go to school with him. Elena, one of the Mexicanorigin teacher aides, usually spent five or ten minutes hugging and reassuring Nestor on those days. The crying episodes ended once Nostor made friends with Demis and Alejandro. Although the teachers were concerned about N6stor's initial response to school, they considered him to be a very competent four-yearold. Unlike other four-year-olds, Nestor was able to use scissors and hold a pencil or crayon in a conventional way. He knew the names for colors, shapes, and foods. He was courteous and seldom had problems following the classroom routine and adhering to rules and conventions. He was the biggest and probably the strongest child enrolled in the program. He easily engaged in a number of activities which many of the other children were hesitant to try (e.g., climbing ladders and trees, sliding down poles, climbing to the top of the jungle gym). Like Jennifer, N6stor was usually very attentive during circle times. However, he did not always participate in the instructional activities which were available to the students during other times of the school day. Nor did he spend much time conversing with his teachers. Instead, he spent most of the school day playing with either Alejandro or Demis in the block area or outside. Teachers often coaxed Nostor away from his play so that he would participate in special projects (e.g., making Mother's Day presents, decorating Valentines' Day cupcakes).

Contingent queries The analysis of contingent queries proceeded on two levels. The micro level of analysis describes the contingent queries themselves in terms of their forms and functions. On a macro level, the analysis includes

Home and school con tex ts for language developmen t

495

a description of the larger verbal and nonverbal contexts surrounding contingent queries. Contextual information includes the activities of the adults and subjects, whether or not conversations containing contingent queries centered on present or nonpresent referents, and the identity of the person who initiated the conversations that contained contingent queries. This two-tiered approach to describing contingent queries and their larger contexts served as the basis for making comparisions across settings and subjects.

Functions and forms of contingent queries I defined functions of contingent queries in terms of the responses they elicited and how these responses related to the children's previous utterances. Using these criteria, I identified two discourse functions served by adult contingent queries: clarification requests and elaboration requests. Clarification requests focus and maintain a child's attention on his previous utterance by eliciting repetitions, reformulations (or paraphrases), and confirmations of those utterances. Examples of these kinds of queries include the following: Jennifer: Esta va por Gabrielito. (This one is for Gabrielito.) Maria: CudH Repetition request. (Which?) Jennifer: Esta. (This one.) Jennifer: 'ama. La. . . la television no se dejan v er. (Mama. The television doesn't let them see.) Maria: Comol Reformulation request. (What?) Jennifer: La television de nosotros no sirve. (The television of ours doesn't work.) Jennifer: Este estd malo. (referring to food on her plate) (This is bad.) Teacher: lEsta malol Confirmation request. (It's bad?) Jennifers:^. (Yes.)

496

Luanda Pease-Alvarez

Responses to elaboration requests provided new information about a child's previous utterances. Some responses filled out propositions by specifying the antecedent conditions underlying a proposition (e.g., reasons, origins, previous events). In the following example, the, teacher's elaboration request elicited the reason underlying Jennifer's previous proposition. Jennifer: Quiero uno de östos. [points to magic marker] (I want one of these.) Teacher: Donde estän los otrosl Elaboration request. (Where are the other ones?) Jennifer: nose. (I don't know.) Responses to other elaboration requests provided information about the referent of a noun phrase contained in the child's previous utterance. Responses to these requests included attributes, names, functions, evaluatory remarks or opinions, and definitions. In the following exchange, Jennifer provides additional information about the doll she had referred to in a previous utterance. Jennifer: Yo tengo una muneca. (I have a doll.) Teacher: Qua mas puedes decir de la muneca! Elaboration request. (What else can you say about the doll?) Jennifer: . . . tiene un vestido. (. . . she has a dress.) Most contingent queries took the form of yes/no questions or whquestions. Inverted subject-aux construction characterized most English yes/no questions, whereas most Spanish yes/no questions followed the same word order for declarative sentences. Yes/no questions also included Spanish and English sentence fragments as well as whole sentences said with rising intonation. This category also included declarative sentences followed by tag words (e.g., no?, si?/yes?, verdad? /true?, cierto?/right?). The words what/quo, who/quien, where/donde, why/por que, or how/como began most wh-questions. Most of these question forms ended with terminal falling juncture (falling intonation). Many wh-questions, particularly those eliciting repetitions or reformulations, consisted of a single pronominal form said with rising intonation.

Home and school contexts for language development

497

Distribution of contingent query functions and forms Despite the differences in the language experiences of the two children at home and in school, adults in both settings repeatedly asked the children to clarify and elaborate on their previous utterances. However, as shown in the tables below, parents used more contingent queries than teachers. This difference was particularly striking in the case of Nestor, who had access to more than five times as many contingent queries at home than at school. Table 1. Distribution of contingent queries for each child in each setting Nestor

Jennifer Contingent query functions

School

Home

School

Home

Elaboration requests

63 (55%)

43 (43%)

12(52%)

60(46%)

Clarification requests

51(45%)

56(57%)

11(48%)

71(54%)

114

99

23

131

Total

When we look at contingent query functions in each setting, we find that teachers used more elaboration requests than clarification requests with Jennifer. They used an almost equal number of these two request types with Nfestor. Both Jennifer's parents and Nfestor's mother favored clarification requests in the home setting. Unlike the two mothers, Jennifer's father used more elaboration requests than clarification requests. The majority of contingent queries that Jennifer's parents used took the form of wh-questions. Similarly, teachers' contingent queries were usually wh-questions. Only Nestor's mother used a predominance of yes/no questions. Frequently Rosa's yes/no questions were repetitions or reformulations of Nfestor's utterances. Home contexts for contingent queries Most home conversations containing contingent queries were part of one-to-one interactions between parent and children. The majority of these contingent queries occurred in the context of conversations about objects, people, or events which were tied to the participants'

498

Lucinda Pease-Alvarez

immediate time frame. Certain ongoing activities were linked to exchanges that contained parental contingent queries (e.g., eating, doing chores, watching TV). For example, Jennifer's mother, Maria, often used contingent queries, especially clarification requests, when urging Jennifer to pick up her toys. Maria:

Necesito que te quites el cajoncillo. Eso no lo quiero ahi. (I need you to pick up the little box. I don't want it there.) Jennifer: Ay\ Maria: Rdpido! Rdpido! A horita. (Fast! Fast! right now.) Jennifer: 'toy cansada. Ah no no no no. Estoy cansada. (I'm tired. Ah no no no no. I'm tired.) Maria: Ah pobrecita. tNo lo va a llevarl (Ah poor thing. You're not going to take it?) Jennifer: Estoy muy cansada. (I'm very tired.) Nestor and his mother routinely participated in conversations which referred to Nestor's past experiences. These conversations most often focused on events at school. As was the case in the following exchange, Rosa initiated these conversations. Rosa: Nestor: Rosa: Nestor:

oTu almuero 'horal (Your lunch today?) Caldo. . . caldo con verdurita. (Broth . . . broth with vegetables.) I Caldo de pollol (Chicken broth?) Uh huh. Υ con leche y eso no mas. (Uh huh. And with milk and that's all.)

Jennifer, rather than her parents, was the one to initiate conversations that centered on the exchange of information. Most of these conversations were linked to events, objects, or people in her immediate surroundings. For example, the longest sequence containing contingent queries referred to a globe that routinely appears on the Spanishlanguage TV station during station breaks. Jennifer: Una bola. IPor que . . . Esta yendo una bola bien grandel (A ball. Why . . . is a big ball revolving?) Gabriel: Mmml

Home and school contexts for language development

499

Jennifer: 'std yendo bola bien grande en osa. (A big ball is revolving on that.) Gabriel: iQuienl (Who?) Jennifer: En esa bola. (On that ball.) Gabriel: tNosotros estamos ahi en esa bolal (Are we there on that ball?) Jennifer: Si. (Yes.) Gabriel: 0 Donde — 'onde donde estd la bolal (Where — where where is the ball?) Jennifer: Ay, toda la gente tiene una bola en su casa. Todos los lados. Υ nosotros tambion. (All the people have a ball in their house. Everywhere. And we do too.) Gabirel: ίΥ tu estabas viviondose en esta bolal (And were you living on this ball?) Jennifer: Si, toda la gente vive en esta bola. (Yes, all the people live on this ball.) Gabriel: tQuion dice! (Who says?) Jennifer: Yoyo'horita. (I do now.) Gabriel: IPor que hizo asil (Why did it go like that?) Jennifer: iQue dice en esa? (What does it say in that?) Gabriel: IComo se llama esa bolal (What is the name of that ball?) Jennifer: Telajamay [nonsense word] Gabriel: oComo se llama la bola esa donde estamos nosotrosl (What's the name of that ball where we are?) Jennifer: No s . Ey, triangle. (I don't know. Ey, triangle.) Gabriel: Es tierra. (It's the Earth.) Jennifer: No. Gabriel: Esa bola se llama tierra. (That ball is called Earth.)

500

Lucinda Pease-A Ivarez

Gabriel's contributions to this dialogue reveal an instructional stance. He uses contingent queries to assess Jennifer's knowledge of the globe and the planet it represents. In addition, some of his questions and comments provide Jennifer with information about the globe (e.g., Nosotros estamos ahi en esa bolal 'Are we on that ball?', Υ tu estabas viviendose en esta bolal 'And you were living on this ball?', Esa bola se llama tierra. 'This ball is called Earth'). School contexts for contingent queries Teachers used contingent queries most often in the context of oneto-one or small group interactions. Sometimes teachers used contingent queries as they helped Jennifer through an instructional task (e.g., story dictation, art project). In contrast, this kind of scaffolding did not characterize the teachers' interactions with N6stor. This finding is not particularly surprising given Nestor's tendency to avoid these kinds of instructional encounters. Sharing time represented the one recurring instructional event when all the children at La Escuelita had access to contingent queries. Although the children chose the event or object to discuss in front of the entire class, sharing time was constrained by a fairly predictable structure. Teachers routinely began sharing time episodes by calling on a child. The child responded with the name of an object he or she had brought from home or with a brief description of a past event. The teacher's subsequent elaboration requests focused on the object or event. When a child strayed from the topic at hand or talked too much, the teacher usually ended the exchange or redirected the child's attention. For example in the following episode, Jennifer's anecdote about her aunt and her doll (Mi tia etla echo agua a la teta ... Υ dio leche a mi nuneca ...) was cut short by her teacher's subsequent elaboration request. Teacher: Jennifer. Jennifer: Yo tengo una muneca. Tengo una muneca. .. (I have a doll. I have a doll.) Teacher: tQue mds puede decir de la munecal (What else can you say about the doll?) Jennifer: No mas. Si, tiene vestido. (Nothing else. Yes, she has a dress.)

Home and school con tex ts for language developmen t

501

Teacher: Oh. Υ iqt hace la munecal (Oh. And what does the doll do?) Jennifer: Se mea. (She pees.) Teacher: Oh. Jennifer: Si . . . Mi tia ella echo agua a la teta. . . Υ dio leche a mi muneca. . . (Yes. . . My aunt she put water in the baby bottle. . . And she gave milk to my doll.) Teacher: Okay. Jennifer, iquien te . . . quien te la compro la muneca! (Okay. Jennifer, who. . . who bought you the doll?) Jennifer: Miabuelito. (My grandpa.) Conversations centered on nonpresent referents were usually part of informal spontaneous interactions between children and teachers. Elena, one of the two Spanish speaking aides, was the teacher who most often used contingent queries to pursue Nfestor's and Jennifer's utterances during these interactions. During lunch, N6stor initiated one of these interactions by commenting on an impending war. Nostor: Van (hacer) guerra hoy. Sabes que van hacer una bomba. Mira. (They are going to make a war today. You know that they are going to make a bomb. Look. . .) Child 1: Va explotar la bomba. (A bomb is going to explode.) Nostor: Si, pero nosotros no queremos porque explota la casa. (Yes, but we don't want it because it will blow up the house.) Elena: I Va a explo tar hoy! (Is it going to explode today?) Nestor: Si, una bomba una bomba llena de (?) να explotar a la casa. (Yes, a bomb a bomb full of (?) is going to blow up the house.) Elena: No, yo creo que . . . (No I think that. . .) Child 2: A'. (Yes.) Nestor: Verdad que si. (Isn't is so?) Elena: iQuiin dijo aso! (Who said that?)

502

Lucinda Pease-Alvarez

Nostor: Nadie. (No one.) Child 2: Ah, entonces leyeron en las noticias. (Ah, then they read it in the news.) The most interesting sequence in the database centered on a description of nonpresent entities and events. During this sequence, Elena used a total of 18 contingent queries to sustain a dialogue with Jennifer that lasted more than 45 turns. Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena: Jennifer: Elena:

iMiraste cartoons cuando 'staba dormida alii Jennifer! (Did you watch cartoons when you were asleep over there Jennifer?) Mmm. Yo pense que yo tenia una caja de juguetes, (Mmm. I thought that I had a box of toys.) iSonaste que tu tenis una caja de juguetesl (You dreamt that you had a box of toys?) Si. (Yes.) Υ Lqut estaba en la caja de juguetes? iQu£ habial (And what was in the box of toys? What did it have?) Yo yo que yo.. . trastisitos. (I I that I ... dishes.) Trastisitos. (Dishes.) Yo lo pensa y lo peme que tenia una monstruo. (I thought and I thought that it had a monster.) Wn monstruol (A monster?) Si, dejuguete. (Yes, a toy one.) ί Υ que habia ahi de juguetesl (And what toys were there?) Lalaropita. (The the clothes.) IRopita para la ninal (Clothes for the girl?) No. Para munecas. (No. For dolls.) tRopita para la munecal (Clothes for the doll?)

Home and school con tex ts for language developmen t

5 03

Jennifer: Saturnina. Elena: Oh. I Y estabas contenta! (Oh. And were you happy?) Jennifer: Ey ey no. Elena: No no estabas contenta con. . . (No no you weren't happy with. . .) Jennifer: Si, si esta. Siyo. . . (Yes, yes it is. Yes I. . .) Elena: OSi estabas contenta cuando sonaste eso! (Yes you were happy when you dreamt that?) Jennifer: Si. (Yes.) Elena: (Yes?) Jennifer: Si. Yo me tenia esta muneca. (Yes. I had this doll.) Elena : I Tenias esta muneca? (You had this doll?) Jennifer: Uh huh. Elena : iDuerm e con tigo alia ? (Does she sleep with you there?) Jennifer: No. Yo me duermo en la cama chiquitita. (No. I sleep in the little bed.) Elena: iEn la cama chiquitita! (In the little bed?) Jennifer: Delnino. (Of the boy.) Elena : ί Υ el nino donde durmio ? (And the boy, where did he sleep?) Jennifer: Υ Gabriel Gabriel va a dormir en la hamaca. Υ el de Gabriel hice vuelta. (And Gabriel Gabriel is going to sleep in the hammock. And I turned Gabriel's over). Elena: LLa cama qua! (The bed what?) Jennifer: The cama hamaca. (The bed hammock.) Elena: Hamaca. LQue cosa es una hamaca! (Hammock. What is a hammock?)

504

Lucinda Pease-Alvarez

Jennifer: Una hamaca donde se pasea. (A hammock where you swing.) Elena: Oh. Una hamaca donde se pasea. (Oh. A hammock where you swing.) Jennifer: Ya no me sirve uno. Me gusta que me pasea. (Now it doesn't work for me. I like to swing.) Elena: iPor quel (Why?) Jennifer: Porque no. . . Hay de hay de Gabrielito. (Because n o . . . There is there is Gabrielito's.) Elena: όJennifer crees que soy muy grande tener la hamaca o muy chiquitat (Jennifer, do you think I'm too big to have a hammock or too little?) Jennifer: Chiquitita. (Little.) Elena: Oh lestd chiquita la hamacal (Oh the hammock is little?) Jennifer: Si — no. Yo no me sirve. (Yes — no. It doesn't work for me.) Elena: Ay tu hamaca. . . (child interrupts) The length of this conversation may, in part, be due to the extralinguistic context in which it was embedded. Both Elena and Jennnifer were free to focus their undivided attention on this conversation because they were not involved in any other activity. Also, unlike the topically constrained talk that characterized some of their other conversations (e.g., sharing time exchanges), they did not focus on a single topic. Instead, Elena and Jennifer were both responsible for initiating and pursuing a series of loosely related subtopics. For example, Elena got Jennifer to discuss her attitude toward her dream after she used several elaboration requests to get Jennifer to describe the object that she had dreamt about. Furthermore, Elena followed Jennifer's lead when Jennifer moved the conversation away from a description of her dream to a description of her doll and later to a description of her sleeping arrangements at home. In both cases Elena's elaboration requests succeeded in getting Jennifer to pursue to new topics that Jennifer had initiated.

Home and school con texts for language development

5 05

Discussion Despite differences in the language learning environments available to both subjects at home and school, adults in both settings repeatedly asked subjects to clarify and elaborate on their previous utterances. These contingent queries, defined in terms of the response that they evoked, occurred more often when subjects engaged in verbal interactions with their parents at home than with their teachers at school. This difference was particularly striking in the case of Nestor, who had access to more than five times as many contingent queries at home than at school. A number of factors may have contributed to the differences in the way contingent queries were distributed across settings and children. Perhaps Jennifer's aggressive manner, humorous approach to interaction with teachers and outgoing nature helped her gain access to teachers' contingent queries. In contrast, Nostor may have been less able and less interested in approaching teachers. The free choice approach to instructional activities may have also contributed to the children's differential access to teachers. Jennifer often chose to pursue instructional activities that involved her with teachers, whereas Nestor usually chose to spend his time with his two best friends. Finally, teachers may have talked more with Jennifer because she was a girl and viewed as a more competent and willing conversation partner than Nestor.

Relevance of this study Recent research in language education is concerned with connecting features of adult dialogue with children to models of language (including literacy) instruction. Building on Bruner's notion of instructional scaffolding, Cazden (1979) touches upon some ways adults could assist discourse development in classroom settings. Ideally, it seems to me, one would hope to find opportunities for children to practice a growing range of discourse functions — explaining, narrating, instructing, etc. — first in situations in which a scaffold or model of some appropriate kind is available, and then gradually with less and less help. (Cazden 1979:22).

5 06

Lucinda Pease-A Ivarez

Langer and Applebee (in press) draw upon both Bruner's and Vygotsgy's notions of the role social interaction, particularly adultchild interaction, plays in language and cognitive development in their definition of instructional scaffolding — the beginning of a theoretical model for effective literacy instruction. One important compoent of this model, collaboration, refers to some of the adult accommodations characteristic of parent-child interaction (e.g., modelling, extension, rephrasing, questioning, praise, and correction) that are used to accomplish specific tasks rather than to evaluate a student's performance. Perhaps the most fruitful way of utilizing the findings from this study is to consider how some of the language experiences referred to here could be part of what regularly goes on in the classroom. For example, teachers may want to build upon Rosa's and Elena's example and take time to initiate and extend conversations with children that focus on past events. As was the case for Rosa, prior knowledge about the child's experiences may help teachers know what kinds of questions to ask when inititating these kinds of conversations. Similarly, teachers may discover that some topics are more likely to engage a child in lengthy conversations than others. Also teachers may want to consider Elena's approach of following Jennifer's lead in the conversation described previously. Although this technique may not result in a conversation that focuses on a single topic, it may be one way to engage children in an extended dialogue. Finally, teachers may want to plan times during the day when children talk at length with one another about events at home and in school. I would like to conclude by commenting on how this study relates to other research. Miller (1982) and Heath (1984) describe how the ways of speaking available to minority children differ from those available to middle-class children. Heath suggests that the contrasting socialization patterns in different communities account for these differences. The absence or infrequent use of certain adult accommodations in minority communities (e.g., questions, expansions, clarification and elaboration requests ) has been attributed to a view of childraising that contrasts with middle-class parents' tendency to adapt to the child's situation. Studies which deeply explore the contexts of language socialization in family and community settings have shown that in some cultures, adults do not see infants of their community as conversational partners, nor do adults believe they have to teach directly or model speech for their children to learn to talk. (Heath 1984:260)

Home and school con texts for language development

5 07

The working-class Latino parents that I studied accommodated their speech (i.e., used contingent queries) when talking with their children. This finding suggests that the difference Heath refers to in the lines quoted above may not hold for working-class Latino parents. Perhaps family interaction patterns in middle-class homes and in Latino homes differ in other ways. Or, perhaps factors other than ethnicity (e.g., class orientation, birth order, age, number of siblings ) contribute to a more complete explanation of the way talk is accomplished in the home. Research that addresses these issues should help us build upon and refine existing theories about how sociocultural factors contribute to the language learning experiences of Chicano/Latino children. Notes 1. Both of Jennifer's parents and Nostor's mother agreed to be recorded. No recordings were made while Nostor's father, Arturo, was at home since he did not want to participate in the recording sessions.

References Boggs, S. 1985

Speaking, relating, and learning: A study of Hawaiian children at home and at school. Norwood, N.J.: Ab lex.

Brown, R. 1968 The development of wh questions in child speech. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 7,279-290. Brown, R., and U. Bellugi 1964 Three processes in the acquisition of syntax. Harvard Education Review. 34,133-151. Bruner, J.S. 1983 Child's talk: Learning to use language. New York: W. W. Norton. Cazden, C. 1979 Peekaboo as an instructional model: Discourse development at home and school. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development. 17, 1-19. Cherry, L.J. 1979a A sociocognitive approach to language development and its implications for education. In O.K. Garnica and M.L. King (eds.), Language, children and society (pp. 115-134). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

5 08

Lucinda Pease-A Ivarez

1979b

The role of adult's requests for clarification in the language development of children. In R.O. Freedle (ed.), Discourse processing: A multidisciplinary approach, II, (pp. 273-286). Norwood, N.J.: Ab lex. Corsaro, W.A. 1977 The clarification request as a feature of adult interactive styles with young children. Language in Society. 6,183-207. Garvey,C. 1977 The contingent query: A dependent act in conversation. M. Lewis and L. Rosenblum (eds.), Interaction, conversation, and the development of language: The origin of behavior (pp. 63-93). New York: Wiley. 1979 Contingent queries and their relations in discourse. In E. Ochs and B.B. Schieffelin (eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 363-369). New York: Academic Press. Gumperz, J.J. 1983 Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heath, S.B. 1983 Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1984 Linguistics and education. Annual Review of Anthropology. 13. 251-274. 1986 Sociocultural contexts of language development. In California State Department of Education (eds.), Beyond language (pp. 143-187). Los Angeles, California: Evaluation, Dissemination Center, Calfornia State University, Los Angeles. Holzman, M. 1972 The use of interrogative forms in the verbal interaction of three mothers and their children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1(4), 311-336. Hymes, D.H. 1972 Models of the interaction of language and social life. In J J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 25-71). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Labov, W. 1972 Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Langer, J.A. and A.N. Applebee in press Literacy development and literacy instruction: Toward a reconceptualization. In E. Rothkopf (ed.), Review of research in education. American Educational Research Association. Miller, P.J. 1982 Amy, Wendy, and Beth: Language learning in South Baltimore. Austin: University of Texas Press. Möerk, E. 1972 Principles of interaction in language learning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 18 (3), 229-257. Ninio, A., and J.S. Brunei 1977 The achievement and antecedents of labelling. Journal of Child Language, 5,1-15.

Home and school contexts for language development

509

Ochs, E. 1982 Talking to children in western Samoa. Language in Society, 4, 77-104. Philips, S.U. 1972 Participation structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children. In C. Cazden, D.H. Hymes, and V. Johns (eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. 370-394). New York: Teachers College Press. Ratner, N., and J.S. Bruner 1977 Games, social exchange and the acquisition of language. Journal of Child Language, 5,391401. Schieffelin, B.B. 1979 Getting it together: An ethnographic approach to the study of the development of communicative competence. In E. Ochs and B. B. Schieffelin (eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 73-111). New York: Academic Press. Schieffelin, B.B., and E. Ochs 1986 Language socialization. The Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 163-191. Scollon, R., and S. Scollon 1981 Narrative, literacy, and face in interethnic communication. Norwood, N.J.: Ab lex. Snow, C.E. 1977 Mothers' speech research: From input to interaction. In C.E. Snow and C.A. Ferguson (eds.), Talking to children (pp. 31-49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1983 Literacy and language: Relationships during the preschool years. Harvard Educational Review, 53 (2). 165-189.

Relating experience and text: Socially constituted reading activity* Concha Delgado-Gaitan

Introduction Educational problems related to the literacy skills of linguistic minority children have generated much research in the area of sociocultural influences on learning, particularly the contextual and interactional factors in inferring meaning from text. Researchers concerned with text comprehension have moved ethnographic approaches into the forefront of literacy research (Au & Jordan 1981; Au & Kawakami 1984; Diaz, Moll & Mehan 1986; Erickson 1984;Gilmore 1983; Heath 1983; Moll & Diaz 1987; Scheffelin & Cochran-Smith 1984; Scollon & Scollon 1984; Tannen 1982; Tharp & Gallimore 1988; Trueba 1984). Central to this research is the meaning of literacy acquisition as a phenomenon taking place in specific social and cultural environments by means of social interaction (Tharp & Gallimore, in press). Social interactions provide the principal vehicle by which learning and development occur. Children's cognitive skills develop according to the level and amount of interaction with adults or peers in learning environments of which classroom literacy activities are a part. According to Tharp and Gallimore (1988), children's learning is measured by the distance between their ability to perform a task independently and the level attained with the assistance of more knowledgeable others. This constitutes Vygotsky's (1978) notion of the zone of proximal development which requires teacher involvement in order to provide children with the appropriate practice to move them through their respective zone, a perspective also advanced by Diaz, Moll, and Mehan (1986), Moll and Diaz (1987), Tharp and Gallimore (1988), Erickson (1982), Scribner and Cole (1981), and Wertsch (1985). Children internalize what they learn from the adult or peer and are then able to perform independently in their problem-solving tasks. Text-related content and the means to deal with it are thus learned through socially constructed behavior in which the teacher, each

512

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

student and peers, have definite roles (Cook-Gumperz 1986; Erickson 1984). This study supports the theoretical premise that the learning is socially constructed through meaningful interaction. Teacher interaction with the Spanish-speaking novice readers in this third-grade classroom shows how Spanish-speaking students respond to the teacher's instructional strategies in their effort to comprehend their reading text. In this study, "novice" refers to students who are beginning readers, and does not necessarily imply "low" ability. It is the researcher's contention that students exhibit high or low reading performance not as a result of static traits of fixed intelligence; rather they perform according to the level of expectations and the level and quality of teacher interaction in a socially constituted activity. The teacher, however, has labeled the novice readers as "low" readers in contrast with high readers who, according to the teacher, are "better" readers.

The study Classroom literacy activities provided the primary unit of analysis and thus an explanation for the term "literacy" is required. This term is useless unless we clarify its significance to the people who use it. In this study, the focus is on text comprehension in relation to the children's sociocultural experience of literacy and the way children appear competent in the social context in which their reading ability is evaluated. This definition emerged as the study progressed and the categories were identified. Three major questions guided the research: 1) How are daily classroom reading lessons organized in the novice reading group? 2) What conditions constrain or enhance student participation in the reading lesson? 3) What conditions change novice students' performance in literacy activities?

Literacy in Mrs. Cota's third-grade Mrs. Cota's third grade class in Marina School was selected as the research site. In this bilingual class, the students were placed in high and low Spanish-speaking reading groups. On the first day of school,

Relating experience and text in reading activity

513

Mrs. Cota assessed all of her students according to their reading ability in order to place them in a group with other students of similar ability. Students remained in those same groups through the school year. The advanced reading groups scored at a mean of 79% on the Spanish Comprehensive Tests of Basic Skills, while the mean score for the low readers was 30% and those students relegated to the low reading groups read at least one full year below their respective grade level. Of particular concern to Mrs. Cota were the Spanish-speaking novice readers. Mrs. Cota believed that the seven Spanish speaking students in the novice reading group did not comprehend the text they read. She also believed that they were behind in reading since they had not yet learned to read well in Spanish and they still had to transition to English reading. The teacher's behavior toward the novice group conformed with her belief that these students had to be treated "very strictly" because that was the best way for them to "catch-up" with the skills of advanced readers. Method The principal unit of analysis was the classroom reading lesson. Over a three month period, observations of the low-reading group were conducted three times during their reading lesson. Fieldnotes, audio and video recording were used to collect data. Teacher and student interviews were also collected. Following the micro-ethnographic observations and interviews, an intervention was designed to implement a literacy activity based on the premise of the "Experience-Text-Relationship" (ETR), reading lesson, an alternative structure for learning to comprehend text. The ETR literacy technique designed in the Kamehameha Early Education Program (KEEP) (Au 1979) provided a context in which Hawaiian students who were traditionally low in reading skills could utilize their native experience as a basis for discussing the reading text stories. The intervention in reading was initially implemented by me; later I trained the teacher to conduct the experimental lesson based on the ETR approach. Methodologically, the concept of intervening in the setting as part of ethnographic data collection has been discussed by Trueba (1979) and Moll and Diaz (1987) as an ethnographic pedagogy. Essentially, ethnographic research leads to specific experimental practices such

514

Concha Delgado-Gaitän

as the introduction of the ETR method which in turn redirect ethnographic inquiry by clarifying areas for additional data collection. The classroom literacy activity data will be discussed in two major categories, the structure and organization of the reading lesson and the content interaction between the teacher and the students.

The daily reading lesson The teacher typically used the "round robin reading circle" for reading instruction. Mrs. Cota called the students to sit around the table for reading in their textbooks and written tasks in their workbooks. Reading lessons were conducted in Spanish because students were limited English speakers. The teacher stood facing the students to tell them that they would be talking about the "point of the story". Before the story was discussed, the teacher flashed cards with the new words to the students and called on different students individually to read a word. Following this initial exercise, the teacher asked the students to read and answer two specific questions which related to the point of the story. The students read individually and silently. The teacher allowed a twenty-minute period for the students to read the assigned number of pages. Before the teacher even began to ask questions, the students often raised their hands to volunteer an answer as if they were going to ask a question. The teacher usually ignored the hands; sometimes she reminded the students that no questions had been asked and to please lower their hands. The teacher then posed questions about the reading. The following example is one lesson presented by Mrs. Cota to the novice group. It illustrates that the students may not have understood the question posed by the teacher. When called upon to respond, students called out an answer, attempting to demonstrate knowledge. The teacher, however, viewed their answers as incorrect, and considered them as evidence of a comprehension problem. Text 1 [Seven students sat in their reading group. The teacher spent the first fifteen minutes of the lesson drilling the students on new vocabulary words to be found in the story. First she flashed each word to the

Relating experience and text in reading activity

515

entire group and told them to repeat it after her. New words included, cerca 'near', montana 'mountain', and encontro 'came across'. After several rounds of repeating the words as a group, the teacher flashed a card to each student around the table and they repeated the word. Then, she asked each student to go up to the board; she dictated each word and they wrote it. If they misspelled it, she asked the group to help them spell it correctly. As instructed by the teacher, the students began to read their story about the coyote and the mountain. The teacher then asked questions about the fable they had read.] T: iPor donde andaba el coyote tan simpdtico que era pero tan s-os-p-e-c-h-o-s-ol (Said the teacher in a low, deep voice and she squinted her eyes to convey suspicion.) (Where was the coyote wandering? He was so charming but so s-u-s-p-i-c-i-o-u-s.) [All hands wave enthusiastically, and T. calls on student B.] B: iPor la montana! (By the mountain?) T: Pues cerca de la montana. iVerdad? ΪΎ, qua hacia el Coyote ese dial (Well near the mountain. Right? And what was the coyote doing on that day?) [All hands wave enthusiastically, and T. calls on S.] S: tBuscando comida! (Looking for food?) T: Si, y oquo so encontro! (Yes, and what did she find?) [All hands wave enthusiastically, and T. calls on students G.] Group: Wn lobo! (A wolf?) T: No, no es lobo. t Es, qua? i,Que es! (No, it's not a wolf. It's a what, what is it?) G: iYo se, yo so, yo se\ (I know, I know, I know!) T: Mario. M: Es una zorra. (It's a fox.) T: Si una zorra. ί Υ que queria hacer la zorra! (Yes, it's a fox and what did the fox want to do?) [All hands wave anxiously, and T. calls on G.]

516

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

G: Queria comer. (It wanted to eat.) T: No. ΐ,Ομϊέη sabel (No. Who knows?) [All hands wave anxiously, and T. calls on H.] H: No quena dejarse del coyotel (It didn't want to give in to the coyote?) T: No. A ver, iquien seacuerdal (No, let's see who remembers?) [All hands wave anxiously, and T. calls on M. Another student, B. puts his hand down and opens his book to a page and reads it silently while the others are anxiously trying to answer a question.] M: ί Queria comerse al coyote! (It wanted to eat the coyote?) T: No, ustedes no estdn pensando. Piemen en que quena hacer la zorra antes de encontrarse con el coyote. (No, you're not thinking. Think about what the fox was doing before he ran into the coyote.) Group: [All hands go up anxiously.) ΙΥο 5έ, yo se, yo $έ\ (I know, I know, I know!) [And the teacher calls on student B, who meanwhile has been leafing through his book looking for the section to which the T. referred in her question.] B: La zorra iba caminando cerca de la montana pensando como iba a conseguir el ramo de uvas que veia en los altos de la montana. (The fox was walking near the mountain thinking about how he was going to get a bunch of grapes that was hanging from the mountain.) T: Exacto. Muy bien eso iba pensando la zorra. (Exactly. Very good, that's what the fox was thinking.) [The teacher spent about half an hour on this part of the discussion which represented the first one-forth of the fable. She then stopped and told the students that they would continue on the following day. She assigned workbook exercises in which the students to match a word in the story with the correct meaning.] Mrs. Cota's questions to the students emphasized surface structure, not meaning. The teacher initially allowed for turn taking so that most of the students were getting a chance to respond to one of her

Relating experience and text in reading activity

517

questions. The pattern changed when she noticed that the students did not remember exactly what the fox wanted to do before meeting up with the coyote. She began looking for a student who she thought might have a correct response. When the teacher asked tQuionsabel 'Who knows?' the students recognized that the teacher was searching for a specific point and their hands waved enthusiastically. At that point the students were prepared to answer the teacher's question with any fact that they recalled about the story. The students' behavior showed that their goal was the need to please the teacher not to comprehend text. This explains why the students' statements were framed as questions, expressing uncertainty that their answers matched the questions. Student B realized that he could find the answer in the book. Thus, while the teacher searched for someone to answer, he re-read the section that answered the question, displaying appropriate strategic behavior. He did not rely on his memory to guess at the answer. Nevertheless, the teacher either missed or ignored that part where student B re-read the section in the story. The teacher's questions were based on recall only, not inference, which did not encourage interaction among the students or between the teacher and the students. Her questions largely ignored the students' previous knowledge (Au & Kawakami 1984). The teacher concerned herself with the students getting all parts of the story correct. She believed that the most effective way of testing comprehension meant asking direct "right and wrong" questions which all students were expected to answer easily. The teacher's goal of getting precise answers to her questions actually interfered with her clarification questions. For example, she asked AQu£ queria hacer la zoraz? 'What did the fox want to do?' She then rejected two answers by G. and H. which were correct, according to the story, but did not refer to the exact place in the story that she had in mind. Furthermore, she failed to clarify exactly what part of the story she was referring to until M. said, IQueria comerse al coyote! 'It wanted to eat the coyote?' It occurred to her that the students might be guessing, and it was then that she re-framed her question and gave them more clues about where the fox was before meeting up with the coyote. One of the important things to notice is that the group spent an inordinate amount of time constructing these small details of only one-fourth of the fable without any discussion as to the meaning of these facts.

518

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

Text I shows that this teacher equated comprehension with memorization and memorization with learning. She concentrated on getting the students to recall the storyline in sequence. She assumed that children had to be drilled on vocabulary words before they could understand the text and that comprehension comprised a list of facts linked together. Her assumptions reflect the notion of one correct meaning of text, not various socially constructed meanings largely based on sociocultural experience which children bring into the reading lesson. Her emphasis on memorization created difficulties. Some students memorize better than others. Possibly what we see here is that those students who do not memorize as quickly learn differently, but the fact that they may not memorize as quickly as others does not qualify them as slow learners. It should be noted that despite the insistence on a single route to comprehension, the teacher's interaction style conveyed a sincere and pleasant attitude toward the children. The students responded well to her strict but kind manner. She teased during the lesson by exaggerating a character. Clearly she was interested in helping the students leam. Effective teaching of comprehension — Phase I: Redefining comprehension Hawaiian children's low comprehension and reading achievement demanded reorganization of reading lessons in the KEEP classrooms (Au 1979; Au & Jordan 1981). The major innovation stressed the importance of learning comprehension by building linkages between the students' experience and new information in the text (Brown et al. 1983; Calfee et al. 1981; Flavell et αϊ. 1981; Griffin & Cole 1984). The traditional lesson presented by Mrs. Cota had three phases, a drill on vocabulary, an introduction to the reading, and a discussion about the story. The KEEP lessons fundamentally increased the role of discussion before and after reading. KEEP referred to the lesson as a three-fold model, Experience, Text, and Relationship (ETR). Elements of the KEEP ETR program include: (a) the cultural compatibility through the use of the Hawaiian "talk story" discourse; (b) the use of previous experience as a basis for understanding text; and (c) teacher/student questioning strategies at interaction based on the Vygotskian notion of assisted performance.

Relating experience and text in reading activity

519

These comprehension strategies have enhanced the reading performance of Hawaiian students (Au & Kawakami 1984; Calfee et al. 1981; Tharp & Gallimore 1988). This model became the basis for the ethnographic pedagogy which I carried out in this third grade class with Spanish-speaking students. After intensive observation of Mrs. Cota's third-grade literacy lessons, it became apparent that the novice Spanish-speaking students needed a great deal of special attention. Mrs. Cota asked me if I could work with these students to help them during the school day. I constructed a plan for developing comprehension based on the analysis of the observational data and the ETR model by working with each student individually. This took the form of a pedagogy designed to examine the problem of comprehension as perceived by the teacher. The sessions alternated in two different formats. In one format, the students read a story which they had not read previously from their assigned book. In the second one, they read from a book of their choice. In each case the procedure was as follows. The students were asked if they had previous knowledge about the subject. In most cases, they did. This led to an open discussion between the researcher and the student with the child taking the lead in the discussion. I assisted them in organizing the content into a sequence they understood. They answered questions about their own version of the story pertaining to "characters", "sequence of events", "analysis", "interpretation", "feelings", "opinions", and "predictions". In answer to the question, "What was the most important part of this story to you?" the students consistently shared a part of emotional significance to them. For example, one student's personal story was about his mischievous dog in Mexico and a series of comical events involving his dog. By describing these events, the student lessened the hurt he felt at leaving his dog, a treasured companion, behind in Mexico. During the literacy activity, the pace was usually fast and lively as the students regaled me with their stories. Following these questions, the students were asked to read the story either in the text or library book; they were reminded that this was also a story like the one they had just told me about a similar topic. They read it silently and were asked to request assistance on any words they did not know or on any part they did not understand. Students frequently asked for help on words but not on comprehending any part of the story. After reading the story, they re-told it in their own words. Most of the time the students were able to relate the story in proper order with

5 20

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

the correct characters as they appeared in the text. Using the students' cues, I proceeded to ask more analytical questions about the story and related it to the characters. For example, questions were asked that made the students look at how one character related to another or how one part of the story related to another, i.e. "What part of the story was funniest to you?" The students made comparisons and contrasts and expressed freely their opinions and beliefs about the stories they read. Except for some more analytical questions such as, "How would another pet like a cat behave differently than your dog?" little prompting or probing was ever necessary in this part of the session. In more advanced sessions, toward the end of the school year, I asked the students to write their personal stories instead of telling them to me orally. I reviewed their stories with them in a format similar to their oral stories. This process required longer periods of time and often required more than one session. The students began to understand that their written stories were just like those in the books. For example, one student commented, Yo so este fin del cuento en mi libro — Es como el cuento que escribi aqui. (He pointed to his journal). Ί know where the ending is in the story in my book. It's like the one in the story I wrote'. This helped them to demystify the stories in the textbook and to begin seeing how it was possible for them to put their own words in some form that made sense. The students were expected to form complete sentences as much as possible such that when they re-read their own story, it would read smoothly. The students included words from the text that they found difficult even though these words were never listed as potential new items in the text. The words that the students found difficult were often not the same ones that the textbook writers envisioned and included in the "new vocabulary word list" in the story. In summary, the experience phase included four principal elements: 1. It introduced meaning to the students' reading through exploring their own experience. 2. Students reconstructed the structure of a textbook story after they learned how to reconstruct their own story verbally. Through appropriate prompts from the researcher, this relationship could be characterized by a triangle showing connections between the student, a more competent other and the text.

Relating experience and text in reading activity

521

3. Students discussed formal relationships between experience and the text to amplify understanding of text-related features of the story such as characters, storyline, and meaning of story. 4. As they had done for their personal stories, students answered analytical questions about the textbook stories and determined their overall meanings. Reconfiguring the reading group — Phase II Group reading comprehension lessons were devised by the researcher based on three factors found to be significant in the individual sessions with the students. These features included (a) maximizing teacher/ student interaction; (b) utilizing students' personal experience to reconstruct the sequence of text; and (c) generating comparative relationships between text and personal experience to construct high level analytical questions. The approach varied somewhat from the Experience Text Relationship (ETR) process conducted by Au and Kawakami (1984). That is, I did not move the students from their experience to the text and then draw relationships between the two. Rather, I first listened to the students' experiences; then we discussed the relationship to the text; and then, they read the text. This approach had, however, the Vygotskian theoretical perspective in common. The following is an example of a group reading lesson within the framework of the ethnographic pedagogy. [Seven children sat and listened to the story read orally by the researcher. The story dealt with animals that performed in the circus and a special type of animal found by a little boy, who trained an ant to dance.] R: t Quo es un circo! (What's a circus?) SI: ΪΑ donde va uno a ver animates! (Where one goes to see animals?) T: oQuienes de ustedes han ido al circo! (Who has been to the circus?) Group: / Yo full i Yo fui \ (I went! I went!) T: Si, pues parece que algunos de ustedes han ido lal circo) y otros todavia no tienen esa oportunidad pero ojala una vez pueden ir. Los que no han ido al circo personalmente, pueden saber mucho

522

Concha Delgado-Gait n

del circo porque a la mejor conocen a alguien que fue al circo ο han visto un circo en libros ο la television. (Yes, well it looks like some of you have been [to the circus] and others have not yet had that opportunity but hopefully you'll be able to do so. The ones who have not been to the circus personally, you may know a great deal about the circus because you may know someone who has been to a circus or maybe you've seen one in books or on television. S2: Si, yo vi un circo grandote en un cine. (Yes I saw a big circus in a movie.) Τ: iCuales animales se encuen tran? (Which animals do you find?) S2: Songrandes. (They're big.) S3: Hay elefantes y changos, y caballos y muchos otros. (There are elephants and monkeys and horses and lots of others.) T: d,Qua piensan los demds sobre lo que dice S3? tCuales otros animales se encuen tran en el circo? Me gustaria que tambien se hablaran uno con otro. For ejemplo, S2 puede dirijir sus comentarios a S3 no solo tienen que dirijirse a mi. (What do the rest of you think about what S3 said? Which animals do you find in the circus? I would like you to talk to each other too. For example, S2 can ask questions or make comments directly to S3 not just to me.) S4: [Looked at the teacher then at looked at S3] Yo creo que hay otros animales en el circo como una vez yo vi unos leones y tigres. (I think that there are other animals in the circus like one time I saw some lions and tigers.) [The lesson continued until the researcher had discussed what roles the circus animals performed and what the boy in the story found in the circus that was difficult from what was typically found there. The lesson exemplified here began with a group activity that posed a question which the group collectively had to negotiate and discuss. The researcher's question forced them to think about a personal experience. "Have you ever been to the circus? Some of you have and others have not". The message was that if you had not been to the circus, there were other ways to know about it. It was then possible to participate in the discussion because they had many sources of knowledge.

Relating experience and text in reading activity

523

Following a brief discussion among the students, they shared their findings and were then told to read their story silently. The task was to find out what unusual animal the boy in the story had found in the circus. The students were also reminded that they could assist each other with unfamiliar words and with any parts that were difficult for them. The students were left alone to read with each other for awhile. When the students were through with the short story, the focus of the discussion was determined by the students' interest. The researcher provided a sequence of questions to the students which were framed according to their previous comments. An effort was made to have the students use the facts they recalled about the text to arrive at a higher level analysis about the text. The following is an account of a part of the literacy event. T ex 12 CD: tSe sorprendieron por algo que paso en el cuentol (Were you surprised by any part of the story?) SI: iYose!\Yose\ (I know! I know!) S2: Las hormigas. (The ants.) S3: Brincaban y bailaban. Que curiosas. (They jumped and danced, how cute.) S4: Υ habia osos tambion, grandotes. (And there were bears too, big ones.) CD: IYpor que es raro ver a hormiguitas en un circol (Why is it strange to see ants in a circus?) [Pause for a few seconds and then the hands went up.] S3: tPor qua son chiquitas. (Because they are small.) CD: l Por que es tan raro que las hormiguitas chiquitas bauend (Why is it so strange that the small ants dance?) S I : Por que bailaban y casi nunca se ven hormiguitas bailando. (Because you never see ants dancing.) CD: Entoncesicomo es que habia hormiguitas en este circol (Then how did the ants get in the circus?) S2: Yo se, es que a unos ninos los llevaron alii y les enseharon a bailor. (I know, the children took them there and taught them to dance.)

524

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

CD: Creen ustedes que es possible ensenar a las hormiguitas bailarl (Do you think it's possible to teach ants to dance?) [The students continued to interact with the adult and with each other. With the exception of two factual questions, the rest were more open ended interpretive level questions.] The attempt was to focus less on isolated facts of the story and to make the students interact with each other and the teacher at a level that allowed them to use the interactive context, their cultural knowledge, and their interpretive skills to comprehend text. The questions illustrated a responsive teaching approach based on a conversational exchange that built on the students' proceeding utterances. Transformation of reading comprehension lesson Four major points of contrast emerged between the ethnographic pedagogy process and the instructional observations of the teacher completed prior to the training on the ethnographic pedagogy procedure: l . I n the traditional literacy event, the teacher interacted with one individual student at a time. In contrast, the variation of the Experience-Text-Relationship approach provided a context in which all students encouraged to participate not only with teachers but also with peers. It encouraged students to listen to each other because discussion was based on students' comments. 2. The intent of the questions about the text also differed. In the traditional approach, the teacher generally tested for recall while the scaffolding approach to inquiry had as its purpose a comprehension process that combined existing knowledge with new knowledge from text to achieve a synthesis. 3. The types of questions differed in that the traditional approach to comprehension often limited the level of questions to memorization, whereas the scaffolding approach relied on comments generated by use of advance cognitive organizers to respond to questions about the text. 4. The use of literacy tools (listening, reading, writing) in the traditional approach is restricted primarily to individualized reading with minimal writing done often only in workbooks. The sociocultural literacy process integrated listening, reading and writing for the purpose of understanding the synthesis between previous and new knowledge.

Relating experience and text in reading activity

525

Discussion about the students' experience as it related to their assigned text affected their knowledge acquisition level. The students relegated to a "low" reading group were only low from the standpoint that they had not been taught how to read meaningfully. The ethnographic pedagogy transformed the inequity in the instructional practices to opportunities in the structional process in two specific ways. First, students became meaningfully engaged in literacy activities when there was a relationship made between their personal knowledge and the written text. This suggests that these students learn experientially. Second, the organization of interaction provided the students the opportunity to interact meaningfully with the teacher and peers. This occurred when the teacher tailored the questions to the students' comments and built on the level of difficulty which accommodated their cognitive development. This interactive context demonstrated that learning occurred in social interaction with others who were knowledgeable and can mediate the process. Scholars hold that literacy is best learned when such interaction relates to real life (Tharp & Gallimore 1988; Vygotsky 1978; Wertsch 1985). In order for children to make sense of text, they must be provided with the opportunity to use their sociocultural experience to interact with the text, as they were in the interventions described here.

Conclusion and implications The processes of acquiring literacy and sociocultural knowledge are intimately related. When the teacher isolated the text from the student's experience, the lesson created a skewed representation of the student's ability. In this study, students demonstrated increased comprehension when the social setting was varied and reorganized. Their comprehension was enhanced when the interactive context in which they were engaged built new knowledge from previous experience. This study illustrated a pedagogical approach based on an interactive theory of reading comprehension. Its primary claim is that both the ability to comprehend text and the very content of literacy are learned through socially constructed behavior, not through rehearsal of facts isolated from the reader's own experience. This claim, implies that educators need to look beyond conveniently packaged reading

5 26

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

programs that reduce reading to simplistic, mechanistic decoding techniques and consider how children's experiences relate to their literacy acquisition. Additional research is crucial in the area of literacy and Spanishspeaking Mexican students. This study uncovered the need to look beyond just the language issues in teaching literacy. Educators must begin to maximize literacy acquisition through changing patterns of teacher/student interaction as well as interaction between peers. Micro-ethnographic methods combined with a design for more adaptive pedagogy can provide vehicle to understand how children learn reading comprehension.

Note *I am especially grateful to Roberto Rueda for his comments on an earlier version of this paper and to the editors of this book for their assistance.

References Au,K.H. 1979

Using the experience-text-relationship method with minority children. The Reading Teacher, 32, 677-679. Au, K.H., and C. Jordan 1981 Teaching reading to Hawaiian children: Finding a culturally appropriate solution. In H.T. Trueba, G.P. Guthrie, & K.H. Au (eds.), Culture in the bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography (pp. 139-152)'. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Au, K.H., and A. Kawakami 1984 Vygotskian perspective on discussion process in small-group reading lessons. In P.L. Peterson, L.C. Wilkinson, & M. Hallinan (eds.), The social context of instruction: Group organization and group processes (pp. 209-225). New York: Academic Press. Briggs, P., and G. Underwood 1982 Phonological coding in good and poor readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 34,93-112. Brown, A.L., J.D. Bransford, R.A. Ferrara and J.C. Campione 1983 Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J.H. Flavell & E.M. Markman (eds.), Handbook of child pscyhology: Vol. 3, Cognitive development (4th ed.) (pp. 77-166). New York: Wiley & Sons. Calfee, R.C., and D.C. Piontkowski 1981 The reading diary: Acquisition of decoding. Reading Research Quarterly, 16,346-376.

Relating experience and text in reading activity

527

Calfee, R.C., C.B. Cazden, RP. Duran, M. Griffin, M. Martus and H.D. Willis 1981 Designing reading instructions for cultural minorities: The case of the Kamehameha Early Education Program. Report on the KEEP rogram. Honolulu, H.I. Carpenter, P.A., and M.A. Just 1986 Cognitive process in reading. In Reading comprehension from research to practice (pp. 11-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Cook-Gumperz, J. 1986 The social construction of literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delgado-Gaitan,C. in press Adult literacy: New directions for Mexican immigrants. In S. Goldman & H.T. Trueba (eds.), Becoming literate in English as a second language: Advances in research and theory. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Diaz, E., L. Moll and H. Mehan 1986 Sociocultural resources in instruction: A context-specific approach. In California State Department Bilingual Education Office (ed.), Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp. 187-230). Los Angeles, CA.: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center. Erickson, F. 1984 School literacy, reasoning, and civility: An anthropologist's perspective. Review of Educational Research, 54, 525-546. Flavell, J.H., J.R. Speer, F.L. Green and D.L. August 1981 The development of comprehension monitoring and knowledge about communication. (No. 192). Monograph of the Society of Research in Child Development, 46. Gflmore,P. 1983 Spelling Mississippi: Recontextualizing a literacy related speech event. Anthropology and Education (Quarterly, 14,235-255. Griffin, P., and M. Cole 1984 Current activity for the future: The zo-ped. In B. Rogoff & J. Wertsch (eds.), Children 's learning in zone of proximal development (pp. 45-64). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc. Heath, S.B. 1983 Ways with words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Moll, L., and S. Diaz 1987 Change as a goal of educational research. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 300-311. Schieffelin, B., and C. Cochran-Smith 1984 Learning to read culturally: Literacy before schooling. In H. Goelman A. Oberg & F. Smith (eds.), A wakening to literacy (pp. 3-23). London: Heinemann Educational Books. Scollon, R., and S. Scollon 1984 "Looking it up and boiling it down!" Abstracts in Athbaskan children's story retellings. In D. Tannen, (ed.). Coherence in Spoken and written discourse (pp. 173-195). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.

528

Concha Delgado-Gaitan

Tannen, D. (ed.) 1982 Spoken and wirtten language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Tharp, G.R., and R. Gallimore 1988 Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Trueba,H.T. 1979 Ethnographic research in bilingual education. Proceedings of the workshop on language policy (pp. 65-69), University of Illinois, Division of Applied Linguistics. 1984 The forms, functions and values of literacy: Reading for survival. NABE Journal, 9,21-39. Vygotsky, L.S. 1978 Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Weisner, T., and R. Gallimore 1985 The convergence of ecocultural and activity theory. Paper read at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. December, 1985.

Recasting frames: Latino parent involvement Maria E. Torres-Guzman Introduction A number of inferences have been drawn about programs of parental participation in lower-working class and minority communities.1 Much of what is written about parental participation is based on invidious comparison between white middle class and lower-working class and minority parental behavior. These comparisons are driven by preconceived notions of which participation behaviors are most important to students' school success. Consequently, empirical evidence confirms the general lay impression that parents in lower working class and minority communities have low participation rates and that this indicates they do not care about their children's education. This paper presents a case study of parent involvement in an alternative high school located in one of the poorest Latino barrios in a large East Coast metropolis. The paper will focus on the "invisibility" of certain important forms of parental involvement2 which are made visible when naturally-formed parental networks are examined. I propose that these networks are meaningful modes of involvement within the context of the home-school relationships established by this school. Finally, the case will shed light on the limits of using a schema for parental participation derived from the behaviors of middle class parents. Specifically, I argue that the schema of middle class parent involvement fails to take into account the linguistic and cultural environment of the school as this frames for parents, students, and teachers, the home-school interaction that occurs.

Prevailing discourse regarding parent involvement and education The literature is clear that parental involvement correlates positively with-school achievement.3 This literature presumes that parents who communicate the importance of schooling to their children will find

530

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

their children more invested in educational activities and likely to experience successful academic achievement and school attainment levels. Parents demonstrate they care about the educational process by talking with their children about schooling and/or, more explicitly, by participating in school-related activities.4 The literature also supports a corollary proposition which is the inverse of the previous assertion. This proposition states that parents who do not talk to their children, who do not create conducive learning environments for their children, and/or who do not participate in school-related activities are implicitly communicating to the children that they do not care about their education. Research studies have shown that middle class parents have positive attitudes toward involvement and generally participate in the education of their children at moderate levels (Stallworth 1982; Melvin et al. 1983). They also exert influence on schools and engage in extensive school/community networking (IRE 1981). It is generally believed that minority and working class parents are not interested in school and that they rarely attend school-sponsored activities. This belief is partially substantiated by numerous accounts of school efforts that have not been very successful in attracting non-middle class parents. Factors identified as barriers to their involvement include language and cultural differences, lack of child care, lack of transportation, and lack of knowledge as to how to help their children. In comparison with to working class and minority groups, the white middle class levels of parental involvement are higher, the networking is more extensive, and the influence on the school is more visible. One would assume from the literature on parent involvement that participation rates of middle class parents would be high. This is true only in relative terms. When middle class parents are asked to describe their most frequently assumed roles in the education of their children, they mention tutoring their own children at home (helping out with homework) and school-wide or classroom activities that directly involve the children (helping the child sell raffle tickets or candy to the neighbors, attending class plays or accompanying children on field trips, attending parent-teacher conferences, etc.) or that indirectly provide school support (Melvin et al. 1983). The participation rates among these parents in formal decision-making bodies is low (Stallworth 1982). There has been an erosion in the confidence of the middle class in educational institutions over the years. Picchiotti (1969) has suggested that when parents are relatively happy with the

Latino parent involvement in schooling

531

programs, they feel no need to intervene formally in the day-to-day affairs of the school. This inference still resonates as a reasonable explanation for the low participation rates in governance activities.5 It may be that only when parents lose that relative confidence in the teacher, a school program, or administrator, and want to express it, that the number of parents appearing at school board meetings, school council meetings, or the like, increases.

Limitations of the decontextualized behavior parent involvement schema The schema of middle class parental involvement, as reported in the literature, focuses on specific desirable behaviors of parents and treats these behaviors analytically in a decontextualized way. Among the desirable behaviors cited are: attending school council meetings, attending parent teacher conferences, organizing school activities such as school tours, producing a PTA bulletin, etc. The rate of participation is a binary quantitative measure of the presence or absence of activity. The unit of analysis is the parent rather than the extended family, the parent-child dyad, or the home-school relationship. Studies of parental involvement have ignored the interactive nature of parental involvement. They examine what parents do or don't do; they do not investigate how the parents respond to what is occurring in school or how the school defines its boundaries. The studies do not show how the parents' interpretation of what happens in schools is intertwined with how they behave toward schools. These studies rarely consider the school's contribution to the kinds and amounts of the parent-school interaction that may occur, i.e. how school personnel interpret what the parent/community can contribute and then define the home-school relationships and organize school initiated activities in accordance with that interpretation. Thus, the studies of parent involvement show involvement behavior as decontextualized. The studies on parent involvement are not explicit about the social relationships that occur. Scholars appear to presume that the interpretive frame brought into the relationship is a positive one, i.e. that all parents and communities approach schools with the assumption that they are institutions organized to ensure that their students will become competent adults who are capable of surviving in and contributing to the mainstream society to which they belong.

532

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

This posture ignores that schools can be seen as structured to achieve other systemic social goals (Bowles & Gintis 1976) or even have competing or multiple social goals (Giroux 1983). The extant model ignores the possibility of a frame of social conflict which can result in the alienation of parents from schools. Parents may, in fact, understand schools as institutions organized to sustain social inequalities and discrimination (Ogbu 1981). When this occurs, a logical role parents can play in the education of their children is to help them be successful at school failure, or stated in other words, parents can help their children develop alternative competencies of survival. This points to another limitation of the middle class schema; it is value laden. The schema is not inclusive of the view that parents can play a role in helping children make sense of the negative experiences they face in schools as positive. Parental participation aimed at academic and social success, as defined by the mainstream society we live in, is viewed as the only positive involvement, while parental involvement in helping children survive and be competent in alternative worlds is not. Recasting the frame Most of the studies that have contextualized parent involvement have documented the social conflict between the dominant white middle class school system and working class and minority communities; the majority are accounts of alienation from schools. But this is not the total picture; there is diversity in home-school relationships among working class and minority populations. In a study that examines differences between Latino caste-like minorities, i.e. Puerto Rican and Mexican Americans, and recent immigrants, Suarez-Orosco (1987) proposes that Latino caste-like minorities operate under, and reflect in their world view, aspects of the "genre of depreciation": People know and are affected by the knowledge that they have been systematically depreciated for generations. Such "remembrances of things past," continued depreciation, and contemporaneous barriers to upward socio-economic mobility permeate how people view their "place" in society and the role of schooling for their future. (Suarez-Orosco 1987:161)

The sense of powerlessness which results from the systematic oppression experienced by caste-like minority populations is manifested

Latino parent involvement in schooling

533

in the feelings of alienation from school. Suarez-Orozco contrasts Romo's (1984) findings of a study of Chicano families in Texas with those of the recent Central American Latino immigrants. Romo (1984) found that the Chicano families were the group most alienated from the school. In contrast, Suarez-Orozco finds that the new Central American Latino immigrants who fled from the tragic misery and destruction of war are embued with hope of better opportunities in the United States that were not as readily available in their homeland. They perceive success in school as a prerequisite or concomitant to helping the less fortunate at home. The perspective of the parents among these recent immigrants was that in the U.S. their children would be educated, would learn English, and, ultimately, get a good job. "They strongly believe that through study and hard work they can and will get ahead in this country" (Suarez-Orosco 1987:166). Suarez-Orozco's distinction between caste-minority and recent immigrants is important in that it demonstrates that while both populations lived in similar conditions of poverty,6 faith in the system's ability to "equalize" the opportunities for the caste-minority was tinted by the community perceptions of historically embedded and extant societal power relationships. Extending the logic that what parents communicate, verbally and non-verbally, to the child is embedded in a broader belief system that is intrinsically connected with broader social and economic issues of power relationships suggests that home-school relationships are not solely determined by the socioeconomic status of the family or group. Another way of proposing this is that home-school relationships exist within a frame of social conflict, i.e. that the parent perceives the school to be working against the best interest of the child and in favor of maintenance of the status quo.7 When this is the case, involvement as defined by the school is not likely to occur. Instead, the kind of implicit participation of parents in the creation of school failure that Ogbu talks about is likely to occur. For schools to expect higher rates of participation or a change in the nature of participation with the establishment of a parent involvement program without recasting the frame is highly unreasonable. While the social relationships established in the broader sociopolitical sphere may be framing the home-school relationships, at the local level and in the short run, experiences of home-school relationships where social conflict is not constitutive may provide information about ways in which this relationship can be transformed.

534

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

Few studies have been reported and little is known about how the refraining of the home-school relationship may affect parental involvement. Using the experience of Esperanza High School, I will report on a case of reframing of home-school relationships and show that the school personnel were intuitively guided by their understandings of the child-parent, parent-school, and community-school dynamics within a cultural context. Building on their cultural knowledge and operating on the assumption that parents cared about their children's education, the school personnel recognized the potential areas of miscommunication between parents and their children regarding the role of schooling. Both their understanding of child development as well as cultural knowledge served to create a positive frame for the homeschool relationship and an environment in which parents could be involved in a "natural" way. The Esperanza High School was housed in a unique organizational cultural setting which made the reframing possible. I would further argue that parental involvement was not significantly different from what is found elsewhere among other groups. While Esperanza High School cannot claim to be a model of parent involvement, it was an example of a culturally congruent school community with naturally emerging home-school relationships.

The experience of parent involvement at Esperanza High Esperanza High School is an alternative educational program housed in a community-based-organization (CBO) in a poverty stricken Puerto Rican/Latino barrio in New York City. The CBO is known in the neighborhood for providing comprehensive services in the areas of health and fitness, the arts, education, career development, social services, and community ecology to approximately 200 youth on a weekly basis. It is more importantly known for its advocacy work for youth and community empowerment.8 The school began in February of 1987. It was studied during the second year which was the first full academic year in the life of the school.9 The school's goals have been to promote bilingualism, biculturalism, and create leadership for community development. Many of the students were limited English proficient, over-aged, and born in the United States. For the majority of these students, Esperanza High was perceived as the last hope in a long string of disappointing and alienating educational experiences.

Latino parent involvement in schooling

535

Esperanza High discourse on parent involvement During the initial discussions about parent involvement, Esperanza High teachers expressed the urgent need to work with the parents of the youth so that messages to the students from the parents would not conflict with those of the school. The staff perceived the conflicting messages as centered on the value of a high school education. On the one hand, the staff felt that parents embraced Esperanza High as a place that represented hope for their children and viewed the teachers as second parents to which they entrusted their sons and daughters. Parents come here and they entrust their darlings to me. "Aqui lo tienes. Mira ver si puedes ayudarme con el". [Here he is. See if you can help me with him.] Sometimes they tell their parents, "Voy con la missi". [I'm going with the teacher.] And, the parents give them permission to go "con el chispo ese" [with that little bit]. (Fieldnotes from meeting 9/10/87)

Some of those same parents, however, when confronted with issues of survival, discouraged their sons and daughters from attending school. The staff felt that some parents perceived the students to be wasting their time in school instead of participating in the workforce and helping the family financially. The Esperanza High and the CBO staff understood that they needed to create alternatives for the students that would cushion the impact of the social and economic conditions the family faced, i.e. poverty, parents on drugs, parents attempting suicide, etc. A lot of them deal with a lot of social problems, they have to deal with poverty . . . they have to deal with loneliness, so on and so forth . . . A lot of their parents are dealing . . . with their own lives, they have to deal with their own shit... (Interview of CBO staff member, 2/18/88)

Thus, an operating assumption was that from time to time parents were incapable of creating supportive environments in the home and the parents became adversaries to the growth of the young person. Yet, a concurrent assumption was that parents did care about their children. Parents are willing . . . if they can help their young person, it may be a horrible dynamic going on, and they may not be able to communicate and they may not be even talking to each other, the student and/or the young person and the parent, but when you speak to that young [person], to that parent, they're receptive, and somehow whether they're alcoholics, whether they're child abusers, whether they're whatever, they're willing to hear and somehow they

536

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

want to maintain that contact with that young person. And, they want to somehow overcome what difficulties and conflicts they're having at home. They may not know how to do it. They may . . be in this session for an hour and be receptive and do crying. . . They may not know how to do it. And they may leave this room and not talk to that young person, but their interest is still there. (Interview, 3/10/88)

The relationship of the youth to their families was relatively clear, in spite of the rhetoric about the importance of parents in the life of the youth. After a few months of observation, the involvement of parents, as presented in the research literature, was still invisble. A parent-teacher conference had been organized where a handful of parents showed up; parents were invited to the CBO public activities and holiday events (e.g., A Christamas Party and the celebration of Dia de los Reyes (Epiphany]), but very few attended. Instead, there was evidence of school staff behaviors that kept the parents at a distance in order to protect the students. During a student strike in late fall (12/3/87), for example, the teachers made no effort to involve parents. On the contrary, one of the teachers indicated that calling parents could trigger in the parents the feeling that the students were wasting their time by going to school. This teacher felt, and other CBO staff concurred, that it was better to deal with the issues raised by the young people during the strike as part of the relationship between them and the students. Confronted with this picture of parent involvement at Esperanza High and wanting to make sense of what was happening, we turned to the participants for an explanation. A series of interviews with the CBO staff, school personnel, and the students provided additional information as to how parent involvement was conceptualized. An implicit organizational framework of involving parents was discovered and can be summarized in the following way. The youth were the heart of the CBO activities; the activities were client-centered. The client was defined as the young person. What this meant was that prior to involving the home, a judgment was made about its appropriateness after consulting with the young person. This did not mean that the CBO staff abdicated its responsibility to the whims of the young people, but that the youth were included in the decision-making. While meeting the needs of the young person through agency services (i.e. health, education, and cultural activities), the CBO staff members strove to establish a relationship of respect and trust; respect for the young person and trust in the adults. A mutual relationship

Latino parent involvement in schooling

537

became central to creating bridges with the young person's parents. The following description captures the CBO's perspective. . . . the parents are still very essential in the further growth and development of that young person . . . now we have parent involvement through the school, through the parents groups . . . and we ... strongly advocate its component . . . Always giving the priority and never losing the focus that foe young person is the main reason why we want to involve the parent. So that we have to have the consent of that young person. We have to [be] perceptive and sensitive enough that . . . if it's not good for the young person, . . . then the parent cannot be part of that communication. So it's a very, very sensitive balance . . . (Interview with administrator, 3/10/88; my emphasis)

In other words, rather than elicit the parents' support for the child who is having problems in school, the CBO staff first considered the extent to which the home was a part of the problem and to what extent bringing in the parent would be a hindrance to the development of the young person. Since self-help is part of the CBO's philosophy, supporting the youth in resolving problems on their own was important. Yet, while understanding the centrality of the youth's perspective, the family was not negated. The family was viewed as an intrinsic aspect of the young person's life. . . . it's hard work because you want to support that young person and at the same time you know that . . . the complete support of that young person is not looking at just the education . . . [it] is looking at the family unit and the family component that's ultimately going to support them throughout their life. So when you decided to separate services to the young person from those provided to the family, you're doing a disservice to that young person. (Interview with administrator, 3/10/88)

There was still another component. The CBO envisions bringing together the students, their parents, and the community-at-large on issues of community development. The CBO has modeled this involvement by participating in various community efforts which included struggles centered around education with the local school district, police brutality, and school board elections, etc. Thus, the CBO viewed parent involvement as encompassing more than a one-to-one parentchild relationship; it intricately interwove the process of growth and empowerment for youth with community development. The implicit framing of the social relationships established between parent and child as well as between parents and school was manifested as respect, trust, mutuality, and commitment.

538

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

In the school, three aspects of the participants' views were most informative: (a) the centrality of the parent-child relationship in promoting other forms of involvement; (b) the significance of the integration of the stage of development of the child and cultural traditions of parent-child relationship; and (c) the aim of community development. Much of what was defined as parent involvement was similar to that found in the literature. What the pattern of behaviors of parents meant to those involved, nonetheless, was different from what would have been anticipated. The following are descriptions of what the relationships looked like for the participants. For the purpose of this analysis, three categories of relationships were identified: participation of parents with their children, home-school communication patterns, and parental involvement in community development.

Parent-child relationships A relatively wide range of interactions were identified as a result of conversations with students. Most parents participated with their children by assuming the role of moral and emotional support, similar to what Delgado-Gaitän found in a study of Mexican-American parents (1986). Some Esperanza High students reported that parents were involved on a daily basis with their education. For example, one student's mother called in on a daily basis or followed the student to the school in order to ensure that he attended. Involvement consisted of the parent, usually the mother, asking the student about attendance or about homework. How students characterized the on-going conversation with parents about schooling ranged from "harassment" to companerismo 'companionship'. Some talked about their parents "getting on their back" because of school absences, homework, or tardiness. An area of tension and miscommunication between parents and students, for example, was homework. Whether homework was given or not, some parents expected the students to show evidence of their seriousness about school by bringing home and doing schoolwork. The students who faced this situation felt their parents did not know what to expect and that, as a result, there was an intensification of conflicts between them. At the parent-teacher conference held in the fall, questions about schooling from the parents turned into a discussion about homework. The teacher chairing the meeting explained the school's philosophy.

Latino paren t involvemen t in schooling

539

The homework questions during the parent/teacher conference and the students' accounts suggested a miscommunication. While the parents perceived that seriousness entailed doing homework and that focusing on looking for evidence of school work in the home demonstrated that they cared about their children, the students felt the persistence to be a lack of understanding of what was expected of them by the school; therefore, these parental behaviors were uncalled for or "harassment" rather than supportive. Some students reported that their parents did not ask them for homework, but instead waited for the end of semester grades. At the other extreme were students who described a close relationship with their mothers. Interviewer: How do you relate to your parents? Student: Well to tell you the truth me and my mother, we're very close. We share a lot of things. An, if I have a problem, I'll tell her about it and when she has a problem she will tell me about it. We stick together a lot. . . Interviewer: Does your mother ask you about your school or your homework? Student: Yes, she does. . . Most of the time I tell her what topic takes place. . .

Usually these were students who lived in single parent households and whose mother had returned to school. These students reported organized study periods which they shared with their mothers where they would both sit at the table to do their individual assignments. The range of relationships from very close to almost non-existent, from "too much" in a negative direction to an unusual amount of companionship. The types of relationships were made visible in the stories students told. A few students also described a very solitary existence, with little, if any, contact with parents or any adult outside the school environment. Either the student or the parents came home late and the opportunity to exchange more than a mere perfunctory hello on a daily basis did not exist.

Home-school relationships At Experanza High the staff were aware of the realities of students' home lives. One reason for this is that the staff organized their social lives in a way that brought them into contact with the students outside the classroom and with the parents in the community. One of the teachers had grown up and still lived in the neighborhood. Repeatedly, this teacher mentioned knowing what it meant to live in the neighborhood as an adolescent. The teacher knew some of the

540

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

students' parents fairly well. Telephoning the parents, going over for supper, or accompanying the family to a service agency were reported by the teacher and confirmed in the student interviews. In fact, the closeness of this relationship between the teacher and parents was interpreted as "too much" by some of the students. A few verbalized feelings of discomfort about some topics that became part of the conversation between the teacher and their parents because, as a result, their parents became privy to situations that students would have preferred to keep private. [Teacher's name] calls my house a lot. she has this habit . . . she comes here to my house and talks to my mother and eats whatever and then little by little says things in reference to what I do in school. Good and bad things. . . 1 hate it. 1 understand she wants to do good for me but its not for her to judge what she thinks is right for me. . . (Student Interview, 3/24/88)

In spite of these feelings, students seemed to respect the relationships of the adults around them and they managed to negotiate relationships that were generally comfortable for them. For example, one of the students reported having an unspoken agreement as to how far the teacher was allowed into her personal life and she felt the teacher respected this. Interviewer: How about for you? Does the school reach out to your family? Student: They wanted to but I always said not to relate to my father. I'm nineteen. I'm in this world by myself. Interviewer: Independent? Student: Yes . . . That's it. Nobody has to know my business and I am old enough to do what I got to do.

While each student's home situation was considered individually when decisions regarding home-school communication were made, for the most part the teachers acknowledged the need to maintain contact with parents as a way of eliciting emotional and moral support for the student. There was more success in informal, interpersonal contact with the parents than in more formal, visible ways. For example, very few of the parents showed up for the parent/teacher conference held during the first semester or to the Christmas party even though the teachers and the students encouraged the parents to attend. When researchers visited parents in their homes,10 however, many expressed their gratitude for the work of Esperanza High and stated that they

Latino parent involvement in schooling

541

would be willing to attend or send a representative on their behalf to meetings which would help the school.11 Of course, there were varying degrees of willingness. Interviewer: Estas dispuesta a ayudarl (Are you willing to help?) Parent:Puedo tratar porque tengo ninos chicos. (I can try. I have small children.)

In this case the mother had small children which she felt were a future to fight for but also a hindrance to involvement. Other parents were working and thought it would be difficult to attend. Nonetheless, according to the interviewer's fieldnotes, the conditions of the barrio were a source of worry for the parents and they felt the school was a source of light for them and their children. Estan muy agradecidos de hoher encontrado festa organizacion] para beneficio de su hijo. No tienen palabras para expresar su agradecimiento. (The parents were pleased to have found an organization that would benefite their children. Words did not adequately express their gratitude) (Parent Interviewer fieldnotes, 7/88)

Parent-broader community relationships Parents of students at Esperanza High did not connect to the CBO community involvement activities in overt ways. Ecology became a focus of community involvement for both the school and the CBO. The Toxic Avengers were students who came together around environmental issues in the community as a result of the environmental science curriculum at Esperanza High. While their ultimate goal was to focus on a toxic waste disposal facility in the community, during their first year they began to practice understanding community organization, chemistry, politics, biology, etc., by targeting a chemical lot four blocks away from the school. They put pressure on the company that stored toxic waste in barrels on the lot to clean it up. In recounting the events in an interview with a newspaper reporter, one of the Esperanza High Toxic Avengers talked about her conversations with her mother regarding the community work. She said her mother was supportive and felt that the environmental science work in the community addressed issues of social justice. In various meetings and interviews, the teacher of the environmental science curriculum made explicit how parents would be important in the politics of community involvement around environmental issues. A toxic waste

542

Maria E. Tones-Guzman

plant was located in the community; for the youth to advance the work begun in the environmental science class, the parents were important allies and the most important support base. While organizing parents had not occurred formally, the students were already eliciting support by conversing with their parents about the school work they were involved in. An informal support network centered around the work of the Toxic Avengers was discovered accidentally. One day in March a young elementary school child was introduced to me as a CBO staff member's son. I began a conversation with the child on environmental health issues. He talked to me at length about the formation of an elementary school Toxic Avengers club12 at his school. The Young Toxic Avengers were planning to take some samples of waste near their school playground. The boy's enthusiasm and clarity on the issues led to a conversation with the mother. It was in the mother's response that the parent networks created by younger children as a means for involving parents were made visible. The mother indicated that in an attempt to secure permission for the child's friend to stay after school to do Young Toxic Avenger work, the son had to explain the objectives of the group to his friend's mother. Because the friend's mother did not know English, the CBO staff member got on the phone and explained to the parent who the Toxic Avengers were and their objectives. This event revealed that many of the Esperanza staff are community members. Their histories in the community and networks of friends, families, and acquaintances kept information flowing from school to community to school to children.

Rethinking parental involvement The parental involvement found at Esperanza High, from the perspective of the schema presented in the literature, would appear to be in keeping with what has been found in the past in minority working class communities. The rate of participation is low at parent meetings and the Christmas events. Nonetheless, there is another way to explain the parents' behavior. Much of the parental involvement that occurred was moral and emotional support rather than direct instruction, goverance, or even financial support. Parental involvement of this type can easily go unnoticed. At Esperanza High the parents' role was to look after

Latino puren t involvemen t in schooling

5 43

their children with respect to school attendance and homework; teachers and parents met at social occasions in the community, outside the school. Parents were generally informed of what was happening in the school and the community through their children, and they believed the school was organized to benefit their children. This type of "invisible" behavior is no different than what is generally expected in the regular high schools. In other words, when looking at how parents were involved in Esperanza High from a different set of assumptions, they appear to be active. For example, similar to the parental involvement reported in other high schools, while there was a range of involvement from nothing to "too much" between parents and their children, the role parents can play was constrained by the stage of adolescent development. Thus, parental involvement was not as visible as during earlychildhood. Second, the "invisible" involvement of parents in the education of their children (the moral, emotional, and financial support and the informal networking) sustained the formal parental involvement behaviors. In other words, it is from the network of parents and because of the relatively positive framing of the relationship between parents and schools that "leaders" among parents naturally emerged, became representatives in more formal school activities, and established relatively non-adversarial relationships. Third, the linguistic and cultural congruency between home and school and the mission of the school were important in establishing the frame parents use to relate to the school. When these assumptions are taken into account, the level and nature as well as meaningfulness of parental involvement at Esperanza High are more evident.

Parent involvement during adolescence At Esperanza High the parental involvement was as invisible as one would expect at the high school level. A number of studies report that the higher the grade level of the children, the more likely there will be a decrease in the visible forms of parent involvement (McKinney 1978; Epstein 1986). By the time a student reaches high school, a shift in the process of decision-making about the student's education has occurred. It is during adolescence that children assert independence13 from their parents in the most dramatic way; the youth generally prefer the lessening of parent involvement as was the case of the young girl who negotiated the teacher initiative with her father

544

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

because she felt "she was alone in this world". The parent responds by deferring more to the child and, concurrently, the student .exercises more control over his/her own as well as the parents' participation in the school environment. Parents become more peripheral and thus are more often engaged in supportive roles (providing guidance and emotional, financial and moral support) rather than the more visible roles assumed in primary grades (tutors, members of ΡΤΛ and advisory councils, etc.). At the high school level it is very unlikely to find parents as involved in as many facets of school activity as at the elementary level. For elementary school children to ensure participation in activities, they must draw the significant adults in their lives into the organizing of activities. For example, the way in which the parents of the elementary school Young Toxic Avengers initiated school-related conversation would not have been as likely to occur among parents of the Esperanza High School students. At a high school level the young person will, for example, elicit moral support as was the case in the Toxic Avenger's account of the conversation with her parents about the toxic and hazardous waste in the community. When the child was at the elementary level it was possible, if the parent knew English, to sit down and help with homework. At the high school level the instances of this type of interaction decrease. It is more likely that the parents and children would engage in conversation about homework, as was evident in Esperanza High, rather than being jointly involved in the actual doing.

Parental networks Informal parent networks serve to organize the students, parents, teachers and other staff in a set of activities which bond them together. These activities provide a sense of purpose and a support structure to connect the different actors to one another and to the school environment. The middle class parent enjoys opportunities for creating informal, natural home-school networks given the congruency between this population's and the school's broad sense of mission, language, and culture. Their networks are usually embodied in the form of sustained informal interaction between the teacher and the parent. Whether it occurs during the arrival or leaving school periods at the elementary level, conversation about the school, the curriculum, and about factors at home which may affect the students are likely to occur periodically.

Latino parent involvement in schooling

545

Although both teachers and parents have unspoken agreements about when direct talk about both social as well as academic progress should occur (social behavior may be discussed more freely in informal conversation while academic talk is relegated to a parent/teacher conference or curriculum night except when there is an academic "problem"), an expressed parental concern during informal talk is usually explored seriously. Most of the time problems are not posed as if in an adversarial relationship (Lightfoot 1978). The discussions are undertaken and an assumption made is that parents are open to explore the causes of academic difficulties, including looking at what is happening at home. At the high school level the parent-teacher conversation continues but in an even more subtle fashion. The role of the parent is less of a mediator between the school and the child. At this point the child is more in the position to mediate for him/herself and the parent assumes the role of support for the child. At Esperanza High the parents' main source of information about the school is the student. A secondary line of information comes through other parents. Parent-teacher conversation is the least frequent source of information for patents,and that occurs most often in informal events. This makes invisible much of the contact and information exchange between the school and the home. In other words, on a day-to-day basis there appeared to be implicit understandings of what role each party had to play. The parents and teachers shared in the confidence that the institution was organized to act in the best interest of the child. In interviews parents seemed confident that the teachers had the best interests of the student at heart. There were also mechanisms for resolving problems when they emerged. In this sense, confidence in the institution did not differ from that found among mainstream parents with institutions organized to serve mainstream populations. Esperanza High was housed in a Latino community based organization perceived by the community to advocate for the community youth and for community development. The community was Latino and the teachers were, in majority, Latino. Not only was the staff ethnically identifiable as Latino, but the mission of the school was congruent with some of the community values and expectations, — especially those of respeto 'respect', carino 'caring/loving', familia 'family', 14 and the dignity and celebration of the language, culture, and history of the community. Esperanza High was established with the specific goals of developing community

546

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

leaders, of promoting bilingualism/biculturalism, and of creating educational alternatives for Hispanic children experiencing school failure. The goals themselves embodied a posture between home and community that differed from most mainstream high schools. Thus, it was not only that the environment of the school was Latino; the school was also explicitly organized to serve the community by integrating its language and culture as ways of validating and promoting the development of the students, the parents, and the community. Many of the students and parents had experienced schools within their district as alienating environments in which school routines and conventional organization of instruction replicated in microcosm the conflicts and struggles found in the broader society. Because of this contrast between the experience of Esperanza High and previous schooling experiences, many parents implicitly felt confident enough to "entrust their darlings" to the school even though the parents were unable to articulate the school's mission explicitly. Concretely, parents felt confident in raising issues with the teachers because of the access provided by a common language, Spanish, which was both a school medium of communication and a shared symbol of identity and co-membership.

Summary In conclusion, the decontextualized behavior schema of parent involvement is limited. It focuses on the frequency of participation in specified behaviors associated with academic achievement, but it ignores the meaningfulness of the behaviors of parents from the parents' point of view. The "invisibility" of many specific interactions between the parents and children, as well as the school and community-at-large, are brought forth in the description. The goal was not to present an exemplary model of parent involvement, but a realistic picture of what occurs. The case demonstrated that while everyday ordinary, "unnoticed" activity in this school was not much different from any other school, the framing of the home-school relationship gave it a meaning often ignored.

Latino parent involvement in schooling

547

Notes 1. Parent refers to the primary caretaker. 2. Involvement can mean any number of things: from giving the individual child emotional and moral support to participating in elections and in governance within the school. In between there are the parent activities involving direct instructional roles as well as those which are financially supporitve of the school. A review of the literature on parent involvement and education includes discourse on who benefits from these activities. Benefit is not confined to the child through a direct relationship with a parent. The parents themselves benefit as their personal capacities are enhanced through the process of participation. The school, as an institution, also benefits, as it receives support from parents who assume ownership of the schooling process as a result of their closer working relationship, as does the community which benefits from the school's increased responsiveness to their needs when the parents, teachers, and administrators begin to talk the same language. the same language. 3. The evidence to support the proposed relationship is substantial. A review of the literature on parent involvement over the last two decades (SRI 1973; Gordon et αϊ. 1979; Henderson 1981; Tyler 1981; Herman & Yeh, 1982; Moles 1982; Robbins & Dingier 1982; Smith & Nerenburg 1982; Keesling 1983; Epstein 1986) provides evidence of a strong relationship between active involvement of parents and student academic performance. The relationship was found to hold when looking at specific areas such as preschool parent tutoring (Gilmer 1969; McCarthy 1968; Levenstein 1969; and Karnes et al. 1975), language achievement (Watson, 1972), student reading levels (Jackson 1974; Spencer 1978; Tyler 1981), and math scores (Jackson 1974). Various studies have found similar relationships between Latino parent involvement and educational achievement (Fernandez 1973; Cervantes, Baca & Torres 1979; Cadena-Munoz et al. 1982; Garcia et al. 1986). 4. While this assertion has widespread appeal among administrators, teachers, and the community-at-large, the evidence marshalled in its favor is not as convincing. At most, a "blaming the victim" posture and the inverse logic of correlational studies which show that parent involvement is associated with school achievement are used to support this assertion. Two strands of research, nonetheless, have shown that parents play a role in the negative framing of schooling for their children. See the Office of Hispanic Education of the Michigan State Department of Education's (1984) study on Hispanic School Dropouts, and Ogbu (1974). The 1984 Michigan study concluded that one of the most important contributing factors to the high Hispanic dropout rate was the lack of "parental interest or involvement in a child's schooling". While Ogbu (1974) also argued that the value of school is communicated by the parent, he does not make the assumption, as the Michigan study does, that the lack of parent talk about school-related activities with their children is indicative of their lack of interest in the education of their children. Ogbu makes a more complex argument

548

5. 6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

which proposes that parents participate in creating school failure by communicating to their children, implicitly, that schools fail many minority children and, thus, education does not work for them. Ogbu describes the communication of negative parental experiences with schools in daily talk (as in "Well, when I was in school. . .") and proposes that recounting negative and failure experiences helps both the parent and child make sense of the difficulties children face in school. In this way the parent is supportive of the child (not necessarily blaming the child) while at the same time transmitting knowledge of about the structure of society and their place within it (i.e. how systematic discrimination occurs across generations). Wimpelberg (1982) found no connection between parental satisfaction and participation measures, but Herman and Yeh (1982) found that perceptions of influence were related to satisfaction. In describing the salient characteristics of dropouts, both the income of the family and the educational background of the parents are significant factors. Barro (1984) found that twenty-two percent of students from low-income families as opposed to seven percent of those from high-income families drop-out of school. Additionally, students whose parents never completed high school were found about twice as likely as other students to drop out. Numerous other studies show a strong dynamic between parental involvement, poverty, and school failure (Rumberger 1981; Steinberg et al. 1984; Brown, Rosen, Hill & Olivas 1986). Fernandez and Shu (1988) found that poverty and dropping out functions a bit differently among Latinos. Among middle class Latinos, the leaving school behaviors are still more severe than the white middle class counterpart. Erickson (1987) discusses institutional legitimacy and trust as important in framing face-to-face encounters between school staff and students and their parents. The CBO has been involved in advocacy work around issues of education including a legal case of segregation of Latino children, school board elections, representation of Latinos on the city-wide school board, police brutality, educating the community on teen pregnancy, and AIDs education. The data collected and analyzed herein came from a larger ethnographic study which documented the process of implementation of the alternative high school and was organized in the form of a research collaborative that included a university-based team and the CBO/Esperanza High staff. Parental involvement was, nonetheless, an important aspect of the study. Data from over 100 observations of classrooms, meetings, and commurity events as well as 75 formal and numerous informal interviews conducted throughout the year with the CBO staff, the Esperanza High School teachers, students, and parents served to bring together the different pieces of the story. It is not the intention of this paper to provide the entire story, but to present certain aspects that might illuminate some of the shortcomings of the national discussion on parent involvement in general and Latino parent involvement in particular. 21 out of 26 households were visited at least once.

Latino parent involvement in schooling

549

11. It can be argued here that parents were responding in ways that they perceived were expected. Unfortunately, this was an area we were unable to follow-up during the year and a half of fieldwork. 12. The Young Toxic Avengers were a group of elementary school children who organized themselves as an afterschool group around the Esperanza High School Toxic Avenger's activities. 13. While one can argue that parental separation still continues and can be even more pyschologically dramatic during later stages of adulthood, I refer here to the more concentrated and overt attempts of adolescents to gain independence while also going from the stage of childhood to young adult-hood. 14. Carrasco (1984) discusses respeto and carino within the context of the classroom or "e/ segundo hogar" 'the second family'. The concept of famitia emerged from discussions, observations, and interviews with the CBO and school staff in which the student and staff organizational participation patterns were viewed as paralleling that of family relationships.

References Barro, S.M. 1984 The incidence of dropping out: A descriptive analysis. Washington, D.C.: Unpublished paper, 8MB Economic Research, Inc. Bowles, S., and H. Gintis 1976 Schooling in capitalist America. New York: Basic Books. Brown, G., N. Rosen, S. Hill and M. Olivas 1980 The condition of education for Hispanic Americans. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. Cadena-Munoz, R., and J.W. Keesling 1982 Parents and federal education programs, Volume 4: Title ΥΙΓ Santa Monica, CA: Systems Development Corporation. Carrasco, R.L. 1984 Collective engagement in the 'segundo hogar': A microethnography of engagement in a bilingual first grade classroom. Cambridge, MA: Unpublished Dissertation, Harvard University. Cervantes, H.T., L.M. Baca and D.S. Torres 1979 Community involvement in bilingual education: The bilingual educator as parent trainer. NABE Journal 3(1): 73-82. Delgado-Gait n, C. 1986 Parent perceptions of schools. In Trueba, H.T. (ed.), Success or Failure. 131-155. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. Epstein, J. 1986 Parent involvement. What research says to administrators. Education in Urban Society. 19(2): 119-136. Erickson, F. 1987 Transformation and school success: The politics and culture of educational achievement. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 18 (4): 335-356.

550

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

Fernandez, I. 1973 Parent involvement in bilingual education. Paper presented to the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Pre-convention Workshop. Boston, MA. Garcia, E.E., M. Baca and M. Guerra-Willekens 1986 Parents in bilingual classrooms. NABE Journal 11 (1): 47-60. Gilmer, B.B. 1969 Intra-family diffusion of selected cognitive skills as a function of eudcational stimulation. DARCEE Papers and Reports 3 (1). Nashville: Peabody College. Giroux, H. 1983 Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey, Inc. Gordon, IJ.,et al. 1979 Aspects of parent involvement in the parent education Follow Through Program. Washington, D.C.: DHEW. Henderson, A. 1981 Parent participation-student achievement: The evidence grows. NCCE Occational Papers. Columbia, MD: National Committee for Citizens in Education. Herman J.L., and JP. Yeh 1982 Some effects of parent involvement in schools. Los Angeles: California University, Center for the Study of Evaluation. Hispanic Policy Development Corporation 1984 Moving up to better education and better jobs: Volume II. Washington, D.C. Institute of Responsive Education 1981 A study of citizen's organizations. Citizen participation in educational decision-making. Boston, MA. Jackson, AM. et al. 1974 Plan, polish, promote and practice: A school volunteer program. Florida Educational Research and Development Council. Karnes, M.B. and R. R. Zehrback 1975 Parental attitudes and education in the culture of poverty. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 8 (2), 44-53. Keesling, J.W. 1983 Parents and federal education programs: Preliminary findings from the study of parental involvement. Santa Monica, CA: Systems Development Corporation. Laosa,L. 1982 School, occupation, culture, and family: The impact of parental schooling on the parent-child relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology 74 (6): 791-827. Levenstein,P. 1969 Cognitive growth in preschoolers through stimulation of verbal interaction with mother. New York: Paper presented at 46th Annual Meeting of the American Orthopsychiatric Association.

Latino paren t involvemen t in sch ooling

5 51

Lightfoot, S.L. 1978 Worlds apart: Relationships between families and schools. New York: Basic Books, Inc. McCarthey, J.L. 1968 Changing parent attitudes and improving language and intellectual abilities of culturally disadvantaged 4-year-old children through parent involvement. Unpublished dissertation, Indiana University at Bloomington, 1968. McKinney, J. 1978 Study of parent involvement in early childhood programs. Philadelphia School District, PA: Office of Research and Evaluation. Melvin, J. etal. 1983 Parent involvement in education project (PIEP). Final interim report. Austin, TX: SWEDL. Moles, O. 1982 Synthesis of recent research on parent participation in children's education. Educational Leadership 40 (2): 44-47. Office of Hispanic Education, Michigan Department of Education 1984 Hispanic school dropouts and Hispanic student performance in the MEAP tests. Ogbu, J. 1974 The next generation: An ethnography of education in an urban neighborhood. New York: Academic Press. 1981 Origins of human competence: A cultural-ecological perspective. Child Development 52:413429. 1983 Minority status and schooling in a plural society. Comparative Education Review, 27 (2): 168-190. Picchiotti, N. 1969 Community involvement in the bilingual center. Chicago, IL: Paper presented at the Third Annual TESOL Convention. Rumberger, W. 1983 Dropping out of high school: The influence of race, sex, and family background. American Educational Research Journal 20 (2): 199-220. Smith, A.G., and S. Nerenburg 1982 Parent and federal education programs. Volume 5: Follow Through. The study of parental involvement. Santa Monica, CA: Systems Development Corporation. Stallworth, J.T. 1982 Identifying barriers to parent involvement in the schools. A survey of educators. New York, NY: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association. Stanford Research Institute 1973 Parent involvement in compensatory education programs. Menlo Park, CA. Steinberg, L., P.L. Blinde and K.S. Chan 1984 Dropping out among language minority youth. Review of Educational Research 54(1): 113-132.

552

Maria E. Torres-Guzman

Suarez-Orozco, M.M. 1987 Towards a psychosocial understanding of Hispanic adaptation to American schooling. In Trueba, H.T. (eds.), Success or failure. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Taylor, D., and D.S. Strickland in press Learning from families: Implications for educators and policy. Tyler, R.W. 1981 Parent involvement in curriculum decision-making: Critique and comment. Boston, MA: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Watson, K.I. 1972 The 'going places' classroom: A community involvement program of action learning for elementary students. Research Monograph No. 23. Gainesville, FL: Gainesville Florida University. Wimpelberg, P.K. 1982 Redefining lay participation in education politics: Parental activity at the levels of school and classroom. New York, NY.: Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association.

Author Index Abu Hanifa, 8, 9 Achievement Council, 303 Adler, S., 298, 305 Alatis,J.,270 Alderson,J.,389,392,394 Alexander, L.G., 134 Alien,!.,474 Allen, J.P.B., 136,137, 138 Allen, R., 418 Allwright,D.,271 Anderson, R.,454 Anderson, R.,etal., 367 Anthony, E., 118 Applebee, A., 506 Arce-Torres, E., 302 Arens, K., 125 Arias, B., 317 Aristotle, 13, 14 Asher,J., 337,339 Aslin, M., 455 Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 317 Au, K.H.,511,513,518,519,521 Auerbach,E.R., 136 Baca, L., 547n. Bachman, L., 392 Baker, R., 384 Banks, A.S., 21,22,23 BaratzJ.,465,476,305 Bartlett,F.,470 Bartley, D., 465 Baugh,J.,472 Bejarano,Y.,249,253 Bellugi, U., 487 Belasco, S., 57 Bereiter, C., 305 Beretta, A., 103 Berlowitz, M., 444 Bettelheim, B., 454 Blair, R., 336 Blake, I., 453 Blanche, P., 343

Blanco, G., 273 Bloome,D.,459 Blount,B.,453 Boggs, S., 488 Bosco, F., 55,71-83 Bottner, B., 239-240 Bowles, S., 532 Bracken, D., 306 Brandt, R., 350 Breen,M.,71,141-142, 143,146 Brill, H., 397 Brinkly,J.,efa/.,273 Breitman, G., 470, 473, 474 Brooks, F., 88 Brooks, N.,336 Brown, A., 325 Brown, A.L., ef c/., 518 Brown, D., 465 Brown, G., 548n. Brown, G.,etal., 303 Brown, H.D., 271,338, 339 Brown, J.S., 443 Brown,?., 160 Brown, R., 487,499 Brown, S., 474 Bruce, C., 454 Brugmann, K., 6 Brumfit, CJ., 133, 143, 193,270 Bruner,!., 487,506 Burling, R., 296 Byrd,P., 151 Cadena-Munoz, R., et α/., 547η. Calestro,P.,444 Calfee, R.,e/a/., 326, 327, 518, 519 Canale,M., 103,135,394,395,396 Candlin,C., 141-142, 143 Carrasco, R., 320 Carre, C., 387 Carroll,!.,343 Carter,!., 269, 297,298 Cazden, C., 269,274,467, 487, 505 Center for Applied Linguistics, 272

554

Author Index

Cervantes, Α., 547η. Chamot,A.,139,140,145 Chance,?., 319 Chastain,K.,336 Chatfield,M.,268 Chaudron, C., 108,191,195,196 Chavez-Oiler, M., et al., 392 Cherry, L., 490 Chomsky, N., 6,63,64 Christian, D., 445 Clark, E., 270 Clark, J.L., 146 Clement, R., 299 Clymer, T., 455 Cochran-Smith, M., 446, 511 Cohen, A.D., 275, 307, 381, 383-403, 386,388,393,398,399,404η. Cohen, E.G., 215, 217-220, 323, 324, 335,364 Cole, M., 518 Collier, V., 274 Condon, J.C., 153 Confucius, 156 Cook-Gumperz, J., 445, 512 Cooke, B., 473 Corsaro, W., 490 Costa, A., 319 Coughran, C., 335-358, 340, 345 Coulthard,R.M., 198 Crandall,J., 136 Cronbach, L., 350,353 Cruickshank, S., 455 Cummings, T.F., 57, 61, 62,63 Cummins,!., 343,364, 365 Cureton,G.,465,470 Curran,C., 122,162 Curtiss,J.,335 Dalby, D., 472 Dallman, M., etal.,306 Danesi,M.,81 Daniel,!., 475 Davis,!., 455 DeAvila, E., 323,324,335 Delgado-Gaitan, C., 441, 511 -528, 538 DeLone, R., 465

DeStefano, !., 441, 443464, 444, 447,

448,452,456,465 DeStefano,!., etal, 445,447,448,449 DeVillar.R., 171, 247'-261,256-257 Dewey,!., 247 Diaz, S., 304, 320, 321, 322, 323, 327, 328,329,511,513 Dickinson, D., 467 Diller, K., 335,343 Dionysius Thrax, 12 DiPietro,R.,55,71-83,74,76 Dollerup, C.,etal.,3S6 Donatian, 11,12 Dore,!.,453 Dorsey-Gaines, C., 453 Doughty, C., 176, 177 Douglass, F., 477 Drake, S.C., 471,478η. Dur n, R., 322 Durand,H.,444 D rr, W., 455 Durrell,D.,306 Ebbinghaus, H.,391 Edelsky,C.,210,211,309 Eder, D., 445 Edfelt,N.,254,255,256 Eisner, E., 360,363 Elias-Olivares,L.,298 Ellison, R., 471 Ely, C.M., 114,184-185 Engleman, S., 305 Enright, D.S., 173, 183-184, 204, 209232,211 Epstein,!., 543,547η. Erickson,F.,447,511,512,548n. Esper, E.A., 6 Evans, B., 307 Everetts, E., 455 Fabian, M., 465 Faltis,CJ., 114,274 Fanselow,!., 196 Fathman,A.,55,117-128,129 February, V., 475 Feigenbaum, I., 465

Author Index Ferguson, C.A., 31,410, 418, 453 Fernandez, I., 547η. Ferrura,J., 388 Fine,!., 388 Finocchiaro,M., 193 Fishman, A.,235 Fishman, J.A., 3, 21-29, 23, 294, 301, 302,308,475,476,477 Fiske, E.,466 Flavell,!.,effl/.,5l8 Flesch,R.,465 Floyd, M., 310 Franson, A., 397 Freire,P.,466,467,474 Fries, C., 133 Frymier,J.,292 Gackenback,D.,455 Gallimore.R., 321, 511,519, 525 Galvan,!., 155,270 Garcia, E., 276, 269, 296, 270, 275, 277,297,298 Garcia, E., et al., 267, 547n. Garcia-Moya, R., 310 Gardner, A., 294, 297 Gardner, R., 184,185,299,343 Garvey, C., 490 Gates, H., 471,474 Gayle,G., I l l Genesee.F., 139,212,343 Gillespie-Hayes, A., 447 Gilmer, Β., 547η. Gillmore, P., 511 Gintis, H., 532 Giroux.H., 532 Glasman, H., 388 Goffman, E.,60,160 Goldstein, L, 179,181, 182 Goldziher,!., 15 Goodman, K., 305 Gordon, l.,etal., 547n. Graham, K., 459 Grandcolas, B.,72,198 Green,!., 459 Greenberg,!.H.,3,5-19,17 Greenfield, L., 475 Greenhouse, S., 477

555

Griffin, P., 518 Grimm,!., 5 Grognet,A.G., 136 Grotjahn, R., 393 Gumperz, !.,447,490 Guthrie,!., 465 Hakuta,K.,362 Hale-Benson,!., 470 Haley, A., 477 Hall, R.A.,7,14 Hall, W., 453 Halliday,M.A.K., 61, 445,449,455 Hammerly,H., 335,338 Hanzeli,V., 139 Harris, R., 468 Hasan, R., 444,449,455 Hatch, E., 72 Heap,!.,459 Heath, S.B., 446, 487, 488, 490, 506, 507,511 Henderson, Α., 547η. Henning, G., 384, 394, 396,403η. Herman,!., 547η., 548η. Hernandez, H., 198, 199 Hernandez, I., 295, 300, 301, 302 Hernandez, !.S., 265, 317-334, 325, 326 Hernandez-Chavez, E., 298, 335, 350 Herodian, 11 Hill, A., 444 Hill, S., 548n. Billiard, A., 465,470 Hinofotis, F., 423 Hirsch, E.D., 292 Holdaway, D., 454 Holmes Group, 335 Holt, G., 465,472 Holzman, M., 490 Hoover, M.R., 300, 441, 465-485, 465, 467,468,470,475,476 Hosenfeld, C.,115n. Howatt,A.P.R., 129 Hutchinson,!., 139, 145 Hu,C., 160,161 Hymes, D., 197,467, 471,475,490

556

Author Index

Lee, J., 103 Lee,H-S.,72 Legarreta, D., 109, 337,345 Leontiev, A.A., 55,61,63 LePere,J.,455 Leu, D., 387 Jackson, Α., 547η. Levenstein, P., 547n. Jacobs, U.,etal., 383 Levenston,E.,efe/.,392 Jacobs, J., 306 Levin, H., 320 Jespersen.O., 55 Levinson, S., 160 Johns, A., 155 Johnson, D.M., 114, 115n., 171, 173- Lewis, S., 110, 300, 305, 306, 307, 465,468,470 190,212,214,274 Lightfoot,S., 545 Johnson, D.W., 225, 249,275, 341 Lin, S., 465 Johnson, K., 130,135, 143 Lindenmeyer, O., 468 Johnson, R., 225, 249,275,341 Liskin-Gasparro, J., 395, 396 Jones, B.F., 325 Littlewood, W., 201,203 Jones, R., 396, 423 Long, M.H.,64,113,144-145,204,214, Jordan, C., 511,518 251,275,337,341,354 Lotan,R., 324 Kagan,S.,213,226n., 341 Low, G., 385,395,396,403η. Kantor, R., 444,452,456 Lowe, P., 409 Kaplan, R., 153 Lozanov, G., 121,337 Karnes, M., etal., 541 n. Lukmani, Y., 389 Kawakami, A., 511, 517, 519, 521 Lyons, J., 343 Keesling, J., 547n. Keller, G., 298 Mackinson-Smyth, J., 177 Klein-Braley,C.,392 Madsen,H., 394 Kinginger,C., 55,85-106 Malamah-Thomas, A., 192 Knop,C.K., 112 Knox, F., 465 Malcolm X., 477 Kochman, R., 447 Maley, A.,153 Kolln,M.,466 Malik, 7,9 Manuel, H., 296 Kozol,J., 465 Markham, P., 392 Kramsch,C., 61,87,204 Martin, E.M., 158 Krashen, S., 7 1 , 7 2 , 7 9 , 121, 139, 175, Martinet, A., 3,31-38 176,211,336,338,339,341 Marzano, R., et al., 319, 330 Kruidenier, B., 299 Mathewson,G.,299,306 K hn, T., 465 McCarthey,J., 547n. McCloskey,M.L.,204,211 Labov,W.,473,490 McConnell,G.,4,21-29 Lado,R., 133 McCoy, C., 443 Lambert, W., 299, 347 McGroarty, M., 55, 107-116, 113, 124, Lange, D., 270, 271 129,152,154,270,423 Langer, J., 321,506 McKay, S.L., 131 Larson, J., 394 McKinney, J., 543 Lastra de Su rez, Y., 307 McKeon, D., 274 Laufer, B., 390 Ibn-Hazm,9 Ilyin, D., 425, 428 Institute of Responsive Education, 530 Intili,J., 321,335

Author Index McLaughlin, B., 63 McLeod, B., 63 McTear,M., 193 Meagher, R., 394 Mehan, H., 214, 304,320, 448, 511 Meldman, M., 381, 423438, 425,436 Mellgren,M.,270,271 Melvin, J.,efß/.,530 Mencius, 156 Merino, B., 265, 274, 275, 335-358, 337,340,343,345,352,353 Milk, R.D., 110, 247, 265, 267-280, 270,274,276 Miller,?., 487,506 Mitchell-Kernan,C.,476 Mittleman,L., 467 Moerk,E.,490 Moles, O., 547n. Moll, L., 304, 320, 321, 322, 323, 327, 328,329,511,513 Montaigne, M., 66 Morain, G., 153 Morales, F., 265, 293-315, 301, 303, 308,309 Morgan, M., 125 Morgenstern, D., 65 Morrow, K., 385 Mortimore, P., 292 Moskowitz, G., 196,353 Mueller, M., 64 National Assessment of Educational Progress, 317 National Association of Black School Educators, 465 National Commission on Excellence in Education, 317, 443 National Council of La Raza, 317 Navarrete,C.,324 Nerenburg.S., 547n. Nerenz,A.G., 112 Neves, A., 247 Nevo, N., 400 Nichols, P., 475 Nickerson, R., 318 Ninio, A., 487 Nuttall, C., 388

557

Oakeshott,M.,453 Ochs,E.,487,489 Office of Bilingual Schooling, 292 Office of Hispanic Education, 547n. Ogbu, J., 445, 446,465, 477, 532, 533, 547n. Oller, J.W., Jr., 57,392 Olivas,M.,548n. Omaggio,A.,202,203 0'Malley,J.M., 140,145,402 Ornstein-Galicia, J., 296 Padron.Y., 325,326 Palincsar, A., 325 Passow, A., 335 Pease-Alvarez, L., 441,487-509 Penalosa, F., 294, 295, 296, 300, 301, 304,308 Pepinsky, H., 444 Peyton, J.K., 177 Philips, S., 214,470, 475,447,488 Phillips,!., 454 Pica, T., 176,177,204 Picchiotti,N.,530 Pikulski,J.,455 Politzer, R.L., 63, 64, 110, 111, 114, 117, 124, 125, 152, 154, 155, 163, 173, 174, 175, 176, 179, 182, 186, 271, 272, 273, 275, 300, 302, 336, 337,338,403,427,465,470 Porter, J., 444, 447 Porter, P.A., 56, 113, 129-158, 204, 214,251,275 Powers, D., 423 Prabhu,N.S., 142, 143-144 Prince, C., 265, 359-378, 361, 362, 364,365,366 Protagoras, 13,14 Psichari,!., 410 Pugh, A., 386 Quintilian 10,12,13,14 Raatz.U., 392,393 Ramey, D., 337 Ramirez, A.G., 108, 110, 171, 191207,278,302,337,338,353

558

Author Index

Ramirez, M., Ill, et al., 300 Ratner, N., 487 Reed, C., 465 Resnick,L.,318,322 Richards, J.C., 118,129,130, 131,312, 336 Rickford,!., 476 Rivers, W., 55, 57-69, 336 Robinson,!., 56, 151-168 Rodgers, T., 118, 129, 130, 131, 132, 336 Roll, C., 423 Romero, M., 274 Romo,R., 533 Rosen, N.,548n. Rosenbaum-Cohen,P., 388 Rossman, T., 63 Ruggiero.V., 319 Rumberger, R., 317 Sammons, P., 292 Sanchez, R., 294, 295,310 Sanders, T., 444 Sandstrom, E., 273 Sarig, G., 399,403η. Sato, C., 64,354 Savignon, S., 55, 85-106,103,112 Saville-Troike, M., 178, 179, 180, 182, 274,467 Scanlon, A., 470 Scanion, T., 470 Scarcella,R.,75 Scheeler, S., 3,39-51 Schieffelin, B., 487, 489, 511 Schinke-Llano, L., 354 Schon, I., 297 Scollon, R., 487,511 Scollon,S.,487,511 Searle.S., 352 Segura,R.,297,298 Seliger, H.W., 65 Selinker.L, 139 Seneca, 66 Sextus Empiricus, 14,15 Shade, B., 470 Shannon, S., 362, 365 Shaughnessy, M., 465

Shiels,M.,467 Shoemaker, F., 273 Shohamy,E.,390,419,427 Shor, I., 466 Shuman, A., 444 Shuy, R., 305, 476 Siebenborn, E., 10,11 Sinclair,!., 198 Smith, Α., 547η. Smith, E.X., 472, 473,478η. Smith, F., 336 Smitherman, G., 445, 447, 472, 473, 476 Smucker,G.,416 Snow, C., 487 Solano, F.R., 3, 21-29,22,23 Somervill,M.,305,306 Soulo-Susbielles,N.,72,198 Spencer, M., 364 Stallworth,!., 530 Stanford Research Institute, 547n. Stansfield,C.,423 Steinberg, C., 454 Stern, H.H., 129,130,131,270 Sternberg, R., 318,319,330 Stewart, W., 294, 305,476 Strevens, P., 270 Strickland,D.,446 Stromquist,N.P., 108,338 Strong, M., 343 Suarez-Orosco, M., 532, 533 Sutman, F., 273 Sutton-Smith, B., 209,210 Swaffar,!., 111,112,125 Swain, M., 103, 135, 214, 339, 341, 394,395 Tang, B., 299,465 Tannen, D., 448,511 Tarone,E.,139,472 Taylor, D., 446, 457 Taylor, O., 465, 470, 473 Terrell, T., 121,139,336 Textor,R.B.,21,22,23 Tharp.R., 321, 511,519, 525 Thompson, S., 72 Thonis, E., 265,282-292

Author Index Tikunoff, W., 267,268 Torres, D., 547η. Torres-Guzman, Μ., 441, 529-552 Toynbee, Α., 468 Troike, R., 362 Trueba,H.,321,328,511,513 Tung, P., 393 Turner, L., 472 Tyler, R., 547η. Underbill, Ν., 385 Valadez, C., 352 Valdes, G., 295 Valdman,A.,381,409418,416,418 Valencia, A., 364 vanEk,J.A., 134 Van Geel, T., 465 van Lier, L., 203 VanPatten, B., 72 Varro, 10,11,12,13 Vass, W., 472 Vaughn-Cooke, A., 472 Venezky, R., 455 von Savigny, K., 5 Vygotsky, L.S., 73,320,321,322,506, 511,518,525 Walker, C., 270,271 Waters, A., 139,145 Watkins, V., 443 Watson, Κ., 547η. Weade, R., 459

559

Weber, G., 465 Weil, G., 16 Weir, R., 453 Weiss, B., 455 Weiss, L., 111,114 Weller,!., 447 Wells, G., 445,454, 459 Wertsch,J., 321 Westbrook,C., 472 Whalley,E., 171,233-245 White, L., 72 Widdowson, H., 133 Wilkins,D. A., 133,134 Willig, A., 335,362 Wimpelberg, P., 548n. Wisniewski, R., 292 Wolcott,H., 363 Wolfram, W., 305,445 Wong Fillmore, L., 109, 110, 212,214, 343,352 Woodring, P., 292 Woods, A., 384 Woodson, C., 465 Wright, R., 467,477 Yalden.J., 136,137,138 Yeh,J.,547n., 548n. Young, R., 176,177,204 Yuen, S., 337 Zelan, K., 454 Zinair, S., 454 Zolotow, Z., 455 Zupnik,Y.,390,398,399

Subject Index academic culture, 151,154,163,164 academic culture shock, 151,156,157 Accommodation Theory, 125 ACTFL Oral Proficiency Scale, 410, 415,419n.,420n. as inappropriate for diglossic situation, 419 affective factors in second language learning, 184 affective learning tasks, 159 affective understanding of culture, 164 African-Americans, contributions to language, 468 see also Black English, Ebonics alternative instructional practices, 248 American structuralism, 6 Am ish literacy, 235 Analogist s, 12-13, 16 analogy as basis of linguistic rules, 6 Analogy (Qiyas) in Islamic jurisprudence, 7,8-11 analytic competence, 216 Anomalists, 12-13,16 anthropology of education, 163 Appalachian students, 444,446, 447 views of education, 447 factors contributing to literacy failure of, 457-459 audio learning, 159 Audiolingual Method, 118,119 see also language teaching methods authentic language and literacy activities, 210,211 authority in Islamic jurisprudence, 8-11 automatic processes, 64 barbarism in language use, 14 basal readers, discourse in, 455457 anomalous discourse in, 457 Bertrand, Jean-Jacques, 43, 44 BICOMP (Bilingual Integrated Computer-Assisted Science Curriculum) curriculum model, 340-353

bidialectal proficiency, 465 bidialectal students in Black English vernacular and standard English, 465485, 467 in standard and vernacular Spanish, 298,306-307 bilingual classes (French-English), 43 bilingual classroom processes, 275 bilingual classroom settings, 248, 262270 bilingual education programs, 107, 353, 359 evaluation of, 360, 361 qualitative recommendations for, 368-369 bilingual instruction, effective, 268 features of, 269 relationship with ESL, 276 bilingual preschool education, 490 bilingual teacher education, 270,272 components of, 273 role of linguistics in, 273 Black English, 181,465485 see also African-Americans, Ebonics Black English speaking students, 465 Black English vernacular, 447 Black language and culture, 467 call and response, 473 genres, 474 nonverbal behaviors, 469,473 sociolinguistic rules, 467, 469 speech acts, 476 standard grammar in Black English, 470 topics/themes 474 Black students, 443,444,446,457459 factors contributing to literacy failure of, 457459 see also African-American students, Black English Bourassa, Robert, 44,45 British English, 237

562

Subject Index

C-test, 391-393 teachers' and students' uses comsee language tests pared, 455 castelike minority groups, 446, 532, in basal readers and children's 533 stories, 457 459 compared with recent immigrants, cohesion analysis, 455,456,459 533 collectivism as cultural value, 235 causal modeling, 184 common underlying proficiency, 364 Chicano/Latino children, 488 communication, 57, 58,59, 60,65,205, learning experiences of, 490-494, 225 507 communication, reciprocal, 61 see also Spanish-speaking students communication styles, American and Chicano students, 293, 303, 307 Korean compared, 160 attitudes towards language varie- communication units, 98 ties, 299,300 communicative approaches, 58 see also language attitudes, Spansee also Communicative Language ish-speaking students Teaching, language teaching children's literature, 171,333 methods communicative artifice, 255 China, education in, 156 communicative competence, 48, 73, classroom activities, 113 103,104,129,436 classroom atmosphere, 121 classroom-based research, 171,173,192 communicative interaction, 186 Communicative Language Teaching (as classroom context, 88 specific method), 120 classroom discourse, 182,194,196, 197, communicative language teaching (as 200 general approach), 129, 138, 145, see also classroom language, discourse, discourse analysis 200,202 classroom interaction, 171, 176-178, see also innovative methods, lang192,198,204 uage teaching methods classroom language, 192,195,197 communicative repertoire, 417 classroom literacy activities, 512 communicative syllabus design, 131 classroom literacy lessons and literacy see also syllabus attainment, 444 communicative use of a second langclassroom materials, 220 uage, 111 classroom observation, 367 community-based knowledge and writclassroom procedures, 202 ing instruction, 328, 329 classroom processes, 111 Community Language Learning, 120, classroom techniques, 108 200 cloze test, 391-393 seefl/soCurran,C. see language tests Comprehension Approach, 200 code-switching, 99,101 comprehension-based approaches, 111 Cognitive Academic Language Learning see also innovative methods, SugApproach (CALLA), 139-140,145 gestopedia, Total Physical Rescognitive code approach, 118 ponse, Asher, J. see also language teaching methods comprehensible input 71, 72, 79, 251, cognitive learning tasks, 159 338 and output, 339,341 cognitive understanding of culture, 164 computer-adaptive testing, 393-394 cohesive devices in discourse, 451,452

Subject Index see language tests computer instruction, 171 computer network, 177 computer use, affective communication during, 255-257 computers as promoters of interaction, 254-255 Confucian, orthodoxy, 156 Consensus (Ijimä') in Islamic jurisprudence, 7,8-11 content-based instruction in a second language, 124 contextualized contrast, 183 contexts for language learning, verbal and nonverbal, 490 contingent query, 487-509 as discourse device, 490 as clarification request, 495 as elaboration request, 495,496 as instructional scaffold, 505-506 distribution of, 497 in home contexts, 497-500 in school contexts, 500 control of language, 61, 62, 64 controlled processes, 64 conversation, 85,102 cooperating groups, 73, 225 see also cooperative learning, small groups, group work cooperative learning, 124, 201, 148, 253,254,324,353 see also cooperating groups, group work, E. Cohen, S. Kagan cooperative learning in lesson design, 341,342 cooperative/small group learning, 213, 215,222,225 critical thinking, 215, 226 cross-cultural communication, 153 cross-polity linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity, 26 see also linguistic homogeneity/ heterogeneity, J.A. Fishman, F.R. Solano culture, Indochinese, 235 culture, Japanese, 235 cultural conflict, 235

563

curriculum development, 130,437 curriculum development principles for lesson design, 340,341 judging effectiveness, 350-353 needs assessment in, 343 observing implementation, 345350 decreolization continuum, 412 and sociolinguistic continuum, 417 descriptivism in linguistics, 3, 5 diachronic change, 3, 31-38 see also synchro nie change dialogue as written discourse, 453 between teacher and students, 448 construction, 90 in basal readers, 454 in the home, 453 rules related to literacy learning, 452 diglossia (la diglossie), 31,410,418 discomfort in the foreign language classroom, 184-185 discourse, 72 see also classroom discourse discourse analysis, 111,171 discourse-based acquisition theories, 175 discourse categories, 194,197 discourse as dialogue, 448 discourse management, 86,102 discourse modification in peer interaction, 251 discourse, oral and written related to literacy attainment, 448, 453 rules in literacy frames, 449 see dialogue in the home, 453 discourse pattern, 203,204 discourse processes in second language classrooms, 196 see also classroom discourse Discourse Theory, 125 discussion, 97 distributivere, 181 direct instruction, 108 Direct Method, 118, 119

564

Subject Index

see also language teaching methods directed conversation, 89 dyads, 247,256

familiar/unfamiliar texts, 238 Finding Out/Descubrimiento, 323-325, 330 first language use, 177 foreign language classroom, 184 foreign language education, 107,112 foreign language methodology and bidialectal speakers, 470 foreign language programs, 353 foreigner talk, 251 formal accuracy, 102 Francization in Quebec, 46,47 of vernacular speech (francisation du patois), 32 Franco-Provencal speech varieties (parlers franco-provengaux), 32,35 Franco-Savoyard border (frontiere franco-savoyarde), 37 French Canadian nationalism, 42 see also Quebec nationalism French Immersion education, 48 French, use of (I'usage dufrangais), 38

East Asians, 158,160,161 East Asian educational systems, 156 Ebonics, 467,469, 475 see also Black English Ebonics-speaking students, 465, 475, 476 see also Black students ecological validity, 185 educational criticism, Eisner's model of, 363 effective bilingual education programs, principles of, 364 see also bilingual education effective language teaching, 109,338 empowerment, youth and community, 534 English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction, 107 relationship with bilingual education, 276 Gendron, Jean-Louis, 43 ESL children, 233,234 Gendron Report, 44 ethnographic pedagogy, 513 in a group reading lesson, 521 generalizations about teaching, 179 compared with traditional teach- goal orientation, 76 ing, 524 Grammar-Translation Method, 118 ethnographic research on language desee also language teaching methods velopment, 182,489 group work, 89, 204 ethnography of Black communications, see also cooperative learning, pair 465,467,469 work, small group work ethnography of literacy, 466 grouping strategies, 113 ethnolinguistic group membership and literacy, 444 Haiti, linguistic situation of, 411 evaluation findings and triangulation, use of French and Haitian creole 366 in, 411,416 Every-Student Response Techniques Haitian creole, 411414 (ESRT), 239, 242,242,243 and code-switching into French, Experience-Text-Relationship(ETR) 414 as approach to reading, 327-328 heterogeneous classroom, 258 in reading lesson, 513, 519,521 high form of language in diglossia (une forme linguistique haute), 31 face, concept of, 160-162 historical linguistics, 17 face-to-face interaction, 249, 255 holistic approach to skills developments, 125 false analogy, 6

Subject Index

565

home-school relationships, 533 within frame of social conflict, 534,539-541,546

knowledge of language, 61,62,64 Koran, 7,8 Korea, education in, 156

identification with Blacks, 181 illocutionary force, 77,78 individualism as cultural value, 235 innovative methodologies, 117,120,122 see also communicative language teaching, language teaching methods Input Hypothesis, 71 input theories, 175 instructional adaptations, 183 instructional approach, 130 instructional design, 130 instructional discourse as input, 211, 212,214,216,220 instructional procedure, 130 intake, 79 integration of language and content instruction, 274 see also content-based second language instruction interactional analysis, 197 interactional skills related to literacy, 448 interactive approaches to second language teaching, 55, 65, 66, 73, 81, 110,124 interactive communication, 61 interactive frames, 79,80 interactive methods, 124 see also interactive approaches to second language teaching interactive situations, 58,183,204 interactional competence ,214,216,224 interactions between students, 113,114 interethnic awareness, 216 interlanguage,251 international teaching assistants, 154 interviews as a method of inquiry, 367 intrapersonal cognitive use of language, 180

Language Acquisition Device (LAD), 71 language artifact, 77 language as process and product, 191, 205 language attitudes and academic achievement, 299, 302-303 integrative and instrumental, 299 parental and community, 300-302 toward Black English, 300 language change, planned vs. natural, 47 language contact, 181 language education policy in Quebec, 39 language instruction, 107 see also language teaching methods language learning, theories of, 178 language lesson as speech situation, 193 language minority students, 323, 330, 337,353,359,371 see also Black students, Chicano students language outcomes, 111 language performance, evaluation of, 437 language planning, corpus and status, 42, 48 language policy, 39 language policy in Quebec, 3,39-51 language proficiency levels, of students, 247,248 language proficiency, linguistic and communicative, 383 language proficiency for teachers, 274, 277 language proficiency testing in diglossic situations, 414 problems with, 419 language teaching approaches, 200 see also language teaching methods language teaching methods audiolingual, 118, 119,336 cognitive code, 118 Communicative Language Teaching, 120

Kamehameha Early Education Program (KEEP), 327, 329, 513, 518

5 66

Subject Index

Community Language Learning, 120 Direct Method, 118,119 Natural Approach, 120 see also Terrell,!. Silent Way, 120,122,159 Suggestopedia, 120,337 see also Lozanov, G. Total physical Response (TPR), 120,337,339 see also Asher, J. language tests, 379438 achievement tests, 383-384 c-test, 391-393 cloze test 391-393 computer adaptive tests, 393 communicative tests of reading comprehension, 394-397 mixed language formats, 390 language use opportunities, 113 language varieties, vernacular, 31-38, 293-315,409 language use, "underground," 182 learner communication, 88,121,123 learner discourse, 89,92 see also classroom discourse learner interactions, 87 learner role, 121 learning strategies, 180 Lesage, Jean, 42 lesson design for second language instruction, 336-337,340 and language learning principles, 339,340 and teaching language minority students, 337,338 linguistic competence, 436 linguistic evolution (revolution linguistique), 34 linguistic homogeneity/heterogeneity, 3, 21-27 see also cross-polity linguistic homogeneity/hetergeneity linguistic interaction, 59, 60, 63, 65,72, 77 linguistic prescriptivism, 3,5,16 linguistic structures in text, 236

listening comprehension and language variety, 306-308 literacy acquisition and sociocultural knowledge, 525 literacy learning materials, 444,457 literacy problems of ethnolinguistic minority groups, 443,459 literary criticism, 182 low form of language in diglossia (une

forme linguistique basse), 31 mainstream culture, 235,446 McGill Fran^ais demonstration, 43 meaningfulness of peer interaction, 209212 mediating process paradigm, 179 metalinguistic awareness, 180 minority students and collaborative interaction, 488 mismatch between cohesion patterns of basal readers and dialogue, 459 monitor, 72 Montreal, 40,43,44 motivating nature of peer interaction, 212-213 multicultural classroom, 216 multicultural nature of peer interaction, 216 multidimensionality of peer interaction, 214-216 of roles in scenario, 76 multiplicative nature of peer interaction, 213-214 native language use in second language classrooms, 81 native-like proficiency, 73 Natural Approach, 120 see also Terrell, T. naturalistic observations, 183 negative concord, 181 negotiated interaction, 176 negotiation of meaning, 89, 103, 177, 257 non-linguistic communication, 59 nonverbal interaction, 181

Subject Index norm of cooperation, 225 nunchi, 158 Nurse Rating Scale, 429 see oral language tests official language (la langue offlcielle), 31 official language policy in school language instruction, 294 in Quebec, 39-51 one-way task, 250 see also two-way task oral communication, 119 oral language tests assessment phase in development, 423,424,426 construction of, 424, 426 interview for, 427 Nurse Rating Scale, 428 scoring system for, 427 Supervisor Rating Scale, 428 validation phase of, 424,426 see also language tests oral participation, 184 output, 71,79 see also comprehensible input and output pair work, 76, 85 see also cooperative learning, dyads, small group work parent and community relationships, 541 -542 parental involvement, interactive nature of, 531,532 parental involvement and school achievement during adolescence, 543-544 for middle class parents. 529, 530, 532 for minority and working class parents, 530,531 parental networks, function of, 544 parental participation with children, 538 Parti quebacois, 40,45,46 passive learning, 157

5 67

pedagogical factors in text selection, 237-239 pedagogical norms, 418,419 criteria for, 418 peer interaction, 171, 209, 211, 215, 217,218,221,222,224,225,226 peer tutoring, 213 performance rules, 63 personal nature of second language learning, 173,186 phonetic innovations (innovations), 35 political border (frontiere d'etat} as marker of sound change, 34, 38 positive interdependence, 249 see also cooperative learning predictable books, 238 see also text, predictability of private speech, 178 proficiency-oriented approach, 202 psychodrama, 74,75 qualitative program evaluation, 368 qualitative methods in second language research, 171, 182, 183, 359, 362,363,364 quantitative methods in second language research, 171,182,184, Quebec, demonstrations in, 43 French unilingualism in, 43,44,45 immigrants in, 41, 42,43,44, 48 Indians in, 45 Inuit in, 45 industrialization of, 41 nationalism in, 42,43 official languages of, 43 schools, Catholic and Protestant, in, 44 Quiet Revolution, 41 reading comprehension and experience phase of lesson, 520 as assisted performance, 518 as interactive theory, 525 procedure used to assess, 519

568

Subject Index

reading for meaning taxonomies of comprehension skills, 389 types of meaning, 388 reading lesson, typical, 514 clarification questions in, 518 testing comprehension in, 517 reading skills higher-order skills, 389 miscues, 387 oral reading, 387 scanning, 386 searching, 386 skimming, 386 reasoning (ratio) as determiner of linguistic rules, 12 reciprocal teaching 325-326 and Spanish-speaking students,326 regular classroom setting, 249, 258 religious regulation of language, 3,39-51 repair strategies in conversation, 99,100, 101 risktaking in the language classroom, 184-185 role play, 74 roles in peer interaction, 221-222 roles in scenarios, 74,75,78 Roman Catholic Church as regulator of language, 40,41 roots of jurisprudence, Islamic, 7 see also Analogy,Consensus, Tradition rote learning, 156 scenario, 71,74,75,76,80,81 schema activation, 326 schemata, 7 5,77 school environments, Latino, 546 see also bilingual education, Spanish-speaking students second language acquisition, 86, 103 see also second language development, learning second language development, 213, 247 second language research humanities orientation in, 183 social science orientation in, 183

second language skills, 122 second language teaching, 53-168 see also language teaching methods second language acquisition theories, 175 selecting teachers for language minority students, 283-285 self-esteem, 236 secular regulation of language, 3 shared context for communication, 59 sharing information, 90 sheltered Engish, 139 silent period, 178 Silent Way, 120,122,159 see also language teaching methods situational contextual frames, 76,78 skills-based approaches, 111 small groups, 247 see also cooperative learning sociability in the language classroom, 184-185 social context, 179 social factors in second language learning, 184 see also social learning social learning, 173,186 social psychological factors in second language learning, 182 sociodrama, 74, 75 sociolinguistic research, 181,182 solecism in language use, 14 Spanish language, as medium of school communication, 546 Spanish language varieties, 293-315 calo, 296 in bilingual classroom, 304, 310 Southwest vernacular varieties, 295,296,301,308 standard language, 293, 294, 308 standard in textbook materials, 297,298 varieties in the classroom, 293 vernacular varieties, 294, 309 Spanish-speaking children in school, 512 reading groups for, 512,513 Spanish-speaking students, 317 methods of teaching, 320 promising practices, 323-329

Subject Index see also Chicano students, Vygotskian perspectives speech situations, 103 standard English, 181 status inequity in classroom, 255-257 stereotyping, 153, 236 structuralism in linguistics, 6 structure as a bidialectal learning style, 470 student-centered classroom, 234 student characteristics that influence peer interaction, 223 student diversity, 222 Suggestopedia, 120 see also language teaching methods, Lozanov, G. Supervisor Rating Scale, 428 see oral language tests syllabus design, 56,129, 130 syllabus types, 129-150 combination, 135-137 competency-based, 136 content-based, 138-140,145 language-based, 132,145 linguistic-based, 133 non-language-based, 140-145 procedural, 142-143 process, 141-142,145 task-based, 142-145,145,146 notional/functional 134-135 synchronic change in language, 3 see also diachronic change talk-story, 3 27 target language varieties, 181 task-based materials, 144 task variation in second language classroom, 55, 89, 144, 217, 220 teacher-centered research, 144,174 teacher-directed work, 102,234 teacher competencies in linguistically diverse classrooms, 281-283, 291-292; teacher knowledge, 285-286; ESL teachers, 287-289; differences between primary and secondary teachers, 290-291

569

teacher education, 270 for bilingual teachers, 272 see bilingual teacher education teacher effectiveness, 107,112,113 teacher questions, 157 see also classroom discourse teacher role, 121 teaching bidialectal students, 470-477 teaching techniques, 118,123 teacher talk, 251 see classroom discourse teacher training, 152 test ing, 239, 379438 see also language testing test-taking strategies, 398-402 testing reading comprehension communicative tests of, 394, 397 methods of, 386-397 test validity, types of, 385-386 text, predictability of, 283,343 thinking skills metacognitive and performance components, 319 and Spanish-speaking students, 317 tie domination in discourse, 449-450 topic shift, 72 Total Physical Response (TPR), 120,200 see also Asher, J. Tradition (Hadith) in Islamic jurisprudence, 7,8 transactional frames, 76,79 turn taking, 72 turn-taking rules, 191 two-way task, 250, 252 see also one-way task uniformitarianism in linguistics, 6 usage in language (usus) as basis of linguistic rules, 12 Variable Competence Model, 125 variation in target language, 181 verbal interaction in language classrooms, 191,197 see also classroom discourse vernacular bilingualism (le bilinguisme patoissant), 31

570

Subject Index

vernacular varieties of French (yemaculaires), 38 Victoria Charter, 44 visual learning, 159 vocabulary, familiar in text, 236,241 Vygotskian perspective, 321-323, 325, 511,521 and promising practicies, 323-325 and social interaction, 321 and Zone of Proximal Development, 322

whole-class setting, 248 writing apprehension, 185 written conversation, 177 Zone of Proximal Development, 322, 325,511 and interactional factors in, 323 see Vygotskian perspective