Hello Heide,

Thanks for your replies to the questions posed so far.  I hope we will 
have lots more questions from subscribers to this discussion, including 
follow-up questions and comments. I have a bunch of questions that 
you'll find below, mostly my own, but also some that people have sent me 
to post.  I have organized the questions by article rather than by topic 
area, but please feel free to address them in any order that makes sense 
to you and over the course of the week if you like. They are addressed 
to both you and Larry.

Here are the questions:

   1.  From your perspectives, what are the most important and
      interesting findings of the study?
   2. In the Real World Research article, you write "Indeed, scientific
      research combined with professional wisdom is the definition of
      "evidence-based research" put forth by the research branch of the
      U.S. Department of Education.[1] <#_ftn1>  Does the U.S.
      Department of Education have a definition of "professional wisdom"
      specifically, "professional wisdom in adult literacy education"?
      Do you have a definition that _you_ prefer?
   3. In the Real World Research article you write "we found that the
      teachers in our study we[re] not trained in teaching literacy. 
      They were mostly using the materials and methods that they would
      normally use in regular ESL classes aimed at more literate
      students." From your experience is this typical of adult ESL/ESOL
      practice in the U.S., and if so, what needs to be done about it?
   4. Do you know of ESL/ESOL studies (completed or planned) which
      (will) look at how students acquire literacy (or language)
      learning from experiences outside of class?
   5. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "It is worth noting
      that we found only two studies [ of the 17 studies of literacy
      interventions] that used adult ESL students ....Thus, the effects
      of literacy interventions on literacy and language development
      among adult ESL learners lacks a research base ...." Are you aware
      of any other efforts that are planned to address this lack of
      research on ESL literacy?
   6. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "Given that adult
      immigrants and refugees come to classes to learn the skills needed
      in the community and at work, and given that only a few hours of
      classes are offered in a week, an approach that connects classroom
      learning with the community and encourages language and literacy
      use outside of school shows a great deal of promise." You have
      given some examples in the article. Can you review those here and
       give additional examples of how ESL/ESOL teachers could connect
      classroom learning with the community to use language and literacy
      outside of school?
   7. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "Video, or
      multimedia containing video, shows particular promise for language
      instruction, since language and content are presented in a variety
      of modalities (visual, auditory, text based) that reinforce each
      other. As such, they offer an immediate context for language
      learning that is not print dependent and allows for varied inputs
      in terms of language variation (regional accents and foreign
      dialects), as well as variation in the speed of discourse, thus
      allowing for increases in listening comprehension and
      understanding of the pronunciation of American English. In
      addition, skill and drill software" Could you elaborate? Can you
      give us some examples of effective and creative uses of video or
      multimedia used for language and literacy learning?
   8. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "Since distance
      learning is often problematic for non-traditional learners with
      low levels of skills and little experience with technology, a
      model that integrates multimedia with classroom teaching might
      have greater success than distance learning models, at least for
      students at the very beginning levels of English proficiency. Such
      a model could also include language learning tasks designed to
      help students learn on their own from TV, video, and film, thereby
      possibly increasing both language skills and language awareness.
      We find this an option worth considering." Are you - or is anyone
      - aware of work being done to help students learn on their own
      from TV, video and film?
   9. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "The results of
      studies that look at the relationship between strategy-based
      teaching and reading comprehension look promising, as do the
      studies that have examined the effects of extended reading on
      general reading skills and vocabulary acquisition in particular.
      This latter approach has been successful with both L1 and L2
      readers (Day and Bamford, 1998; Pilgreen and Krashen, 1993).
       However, both approaches assume at least an intermediate level of
      English proficiency." Can you elaborate on the relationship
      between strategy-based teaching and reading comprehension? What is
      strategy-based teaching?
  10. In the Real World Research article, you wrote "Case studies of
      individual programs that use technology creatively and show high
      rates of success in terms of student outcomes can help provide
      explanations as to why technology might be worth considering in
      research and practice. The Socorro Family Literacy Program near El
      Paso on the U.S.-Mexico border, for example, has adopted a model
      that asks learners to work in teams and create projects with
      technologies such as PowerPoint or video.[2] <#_ftn2>  Each year
      the students are part of a showcase where they present their
      finished projects to an English speaking audience consisting of
      other students, parents, school administrators and community
      members such as social workers and officials from the Workforce
      Board. Investigations into the effect of innovative approaches to
      technology integration can offer insights into what it takes to
      engage learners and help us see the difference in learning that
      occurs when adult literacy is used for real world purposes beyond
      the classroom. " Can you tell us more about the Socorro Family
      Literacy Program model?
  11. A key recommendation laid out in the Real World Research article
      is this: "A direct literacy teaching intervention we envision
      would target skills and strategies found to be effective in the
      teaching of reading and writing, such as creating phonemic
      awareness, developing fluency or automaticity, modeling
      comprehension strategies, increasing vocabulary, and fostering
      writing skills.The point of such an intervention would not be to
      change teaching to a phonics based approach (and make ESL teachers
      "phonicators") but to find ways to integrate the teaching of basic
      literacy skills into an ESL curriculum so that non-literate or low
      literate students get a chance to develop the skills that they
      have not had the chance to attain in their first language. An
      intervention study of this sort would then allow us to see whether
      an overt focus on underlying skills associated with reading and
      writing will facilitate the literacy acquisition process." The
      questions is, can this be done now within existing, limited
      intensity ESL/ESOL programs, or do you think this requires
      expanding the hours of instruction?
  12. You have proposed testing this hypothesis: "An instructional
      program that combines native language literacy and the teaching of
      oral communication skills in English will increase both the
      literacy and language skills of adults who are not literate in
      their native language. Use of the native language as part of ESL
      instruction is likely to aid students in the cognitive processing
      of new information and might result in greater gains in literacy
      as well."  This appears to be bucking the trend of eliminating
      bilingual education.  Has this been a politically controversial
      part of your study?
  13. In the Tilberg presentation, you write "Class Variables. The only
      class variable related to growth in basic reading skills was the
      length of the scheduled hours per week of class meeting time. 
      Students in classes with longer scheduled hours showed less growth
      than students in classes with fewer scheduled hours.  Other things
      being equal, including students' attendance and persistence, the
      longer the class's weekly scheduled meeting hours, the slower the
      rate of students' learning in basic reading skills."  However,
      later you write "The scheduled length of class in hours per week
      was also related to positive growth in reading comprehension. 
      Students in class with more scheduled hours per week had more
      growth in reading comprehension". Could you comment on the meaning
      of these two findings?  What exactly does "longer scheduled hours"
      mean, and given that it is positively related to growth in basic
      reading skills, but negatively related to reading comprehension,
      how should this variable be treated in the design of ESL/ESOL
      class schedules?
  14. In the Tilberg presentation, you write "We also looked at whether
      teacher background and training had an effect on adult ESL
      literacy student learning.  We found that no teacher variables
      were related to any of the student outcome measures used in the
      study.  However, the 38 teachers in the study were relatively
      homogeneous.  They were generally new, inexperienced teachers and
      although well credentialed, had little training or professional
      development in teaching adult ESL or ESL literacy.  "  Can you
      tell us why there was not a more hetereogeneous sample of
      teachers, and what differences you think that that might have made
      in the study?


------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] <#_ftnref1> Whitehurst, G. (2002).  Evidence-Based Education.  U.S. 
Department of Education.

[2] <#_ftnref2> For a fuller description see Wrigley, H. S. 
(forthcoming).  Research in Action: Teachers, Projects and High End 
Technologies, Texas Center for the Advancement of Adult Literacy and 
Learning.

David J. Rosen
Special Topics Discussion Moderator
djrosen at comcast.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20070410/60d94647/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: djrosen.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20070410/60d94647/attachment.vcf