Hi, Camaron Eileen (I wasn't sure on the name - please tell us more) 
 
Thanks, so much for your thoughtful reading of the reports and your
insightful comments. We'll take one question at a time in order to keep
reading manageable for the busy readers out there. 
 
We did see positive effects on both oral language and literacy in
classrooms where teachers used the native language occasionally to
clarify or explain. In these classes students also occasionally used L1
in pair or group work to help each other understand a tasks or to get
the point across. 
 
We did not see instances where the teacher invited students to write in
the native language and then translate what they had written in English
so the study is silent on this approach.  Here, however are my own
thoughts on this approach. 
 
1.	Teaching students to learn to read and write in the native
language is a promising approach for a number of reasons: 
*        It is easier to understand sound/symbol relationships in a
known language than in a new language. 
*        Meta-cognitive strategies, such as asking questions about
language or explaining what one can and cannot do with language and
identifying where one's difficulties lie are difficult to apply in a new
language. 
*        We know that strong literacy skills in L1 transfer to L2
literacy (but not immediately or directly, some mediation is still
necessary)
*        You only learn to read once - and once you have "broken the
code" , that is your mind has understood that there is a relationship
between oral language and print (sound/symbol correspondences).
*        Once you have developed phonemic awareness and once you have
learned to decode in L1, you don't have to learn it again when you move
to another language (you do have to learn how the new language works,
but the hard work of understanding the nature and function of print has
been done.) 
 
For the most part (and for funding reasons) in our field, native
language literacy classes are taught in parallel with ESL classes
focused on communication skills, though it is rare to find beginning ESL
classes that are solely or even primarily focused on developing English
speaking and listening skills and where the teacher does not rely on
print (e.g., writing on the board; using a textbook or hand-outs with
written text) 
 
More on translation in a bit 
 
 
________________________________

From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Cameron Eileen
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 12:40 AM
To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Subject: [SpecialTopics 260] Three Questions Regarding Research Articles
andRelated Topics in ESOL Instruction
 
1. In the article "National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and
Literacy: A Conversation With FOB... What Works for Adult ESL Students,"
it states that ESL students are better able to learn and understand
English when the teacher or instructor of ESL is bilingual, in which
case, the instructor can speak the students' native language or
languages in order to clarify the students' understanding to further
construct meaning.  This statement is also made in the article "Real
World Research: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research for
Adult ESL."  However, if a teacher or instructor is not bilingual, and
they want to improve ESL students' written proficiency levels, should
the instructor who is fluent only in English be encouraged to permit his
or her ESL students to first write an essay or paragraph, depending upon
the written assignment, within the student's own native language and
then work closely with the student to translate that writing into
English?  Is this a recommended form of instruction?  For one thing,
allowing ESL students to write within their native languages helps the
instructor familiarize themselves with languages that may be foreign to
them.  This can also help the student translate and interpret their own
native language and correspond their thoughts and ideas within a
contextualized English language.  This can permit ESL students to
demonstrate writing that displays clearer contextualized meanings.  It
also allows ESL students to demonstrate a complexity of thoughts and
ideas as well as express critical, analytical thinking skills within
written English, especially those ESL students who struggle with written
English in terms of writing incoherent sentences or clauses, or students
who write mere phrases or simple sentences with incorrect word choice
and improper use of grammar.  The article, "Real World Research," states
"English learners who, for example, have good higher order reading
strategies in their own language cannot call on those strategies to help
them understand English texts until their understanding of English
vocabulary and syntax are good enough to understand basic sentences and
expressions."  Can this same principle be applied to ESL students'
written English? 
 
2. The article "Real World Research: Combining Qualitative and
Quantitative Research for Adult ESL" briefly refers to the codings of a
running record.  A running record that is incorporated in the teaching
of standard American English and literacy within elementary schools in
this country is used in a way that teachers can determine a student's
reading abilities and potentialities through close observation of a
student's reading processes.  Before a running record can be
implemented, the teacher or instructor first must decipher the probable
reading level of a particular student.  For instance, the teacher must
select a book that the student will easily be able to read along with
selecting two other books that may be more challenging to this same
student.  Students must read 50 words within each of the three books.
To correspond the running record in accordance with the student's
reading, the teacher must listen closely and observe, paying strict
attention to the student's substitution or replacement of words,
repetition of words, omission of words, pronunciation and/or
mispronunciation of words, and number of self-corrections the student
makes during their reading.  Once the student is finished reading 50
words within all three selected books, the teacher must add up all of
the student's errors.  The book in which the student made no less than
five errors is selected for appropriate reading in terms of a
substantiated reading level since it presents more of a challenge.
However, a book in which a student makes more than five errors is
considered too difficult for the student to read or comprehend.  I
brought this up because in a standard English or literacy class in
grades K-12, a student can be placed within a specific reading level or
group and is given reading material in accordance with that particular
reading or grade level, as it pertains to a balanced literacy model in
adherence with the curricular standards of a running record.  Students
are given reading material that is slightly more challenging in order to
assist these students in mastering the English language.  Once students
have mastered the English language and have acquired appropriate English
reading skills, they will be able to read books that are several reading
or grade levels above their current reading performance level.  Can a
running record such as the one I have previousy described be applied
within an adult literacy program for ESL students?  Instead of using
grocery store fliers, electricity bills, and immigration documents, can
literature be incorporated in an adult literacy program for ESL
students?
 
3. In the research study discussed in the article "Instruction,
Language, and Literacy: What Works Study for Adult ESL Literacy
Students, the BEST Oral Interview was incorporated in measuring
listening comprehension, communication, and fluency.  In the footnote of
that same research study, it states that the BEST Oral Interview also
includes measures of pronunciation and a reading and writing score which
were not used in the study.  I would actually like to know more about
those measures of pronunciation, reading, and writing, and how they are
assessed in determining a student's perfomance level.  Recently, I
completed a training session for both print-based and the
computer-adaptive BEST PLUS software program which measures the same
items that were measured in the research study 1)listening
comprehension, 2) language complexity or fluency, and 3) communication.
When I completed the training session in BEST PLUS there was no mention
of scoring for pronunciation, reading, or writing.  Also, I wanted to
know if these measurements had been included in your research study,
would it have any effect on the students' performance levels
quantitatively? Also would it have any statistical significance
whatsoever in this particular research study if these variables had been
taken into consideration when the BEST Oral Interview was administered?

  
________________________________

Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A
<http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTE
wOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&s
id=396546091>  for great tips from Yahoo! Answers
<http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTFvbGNhMGE3BF9TAzM5NjU0NTE
wOARfcwMzOTY1NDUxMDMEc2VjA21haWxfdGFnbGluZQRzbGsDbWFpbF90YWcx?link=ask&s
id=396546091>  users.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20070409/affb52eb/attachment.html