15
to L2 learners is that children need to develop oral proficiency in L2 first before they can be
taught to read and write in their L2. In many elementary classrooms, it has been observed that
virtually no teaching of reading and writing in L2 occurs while oral and listening skills are
emphasized (e.g., Durgunoglu, 1998). The focus on oral language in the early elementary grades
is also evident in the basal reading materials that are commonly used in instruction (Garcia,
Montes, Janisch, Bouchereau, & Consalvi, 1993). Furthermore, oral language proficiency is
usually used as the main criterion for redesignating a student in transitional bilingual programs.
It might be counterintuitive to propose teaching reading to children who are not yet able
to speak the language, but the situation is somewhat different for children who are already literate
in their L1 or minimally have had some print exposure and literate experiences in L1. However,
research has not been able to determine the degree to which children need to be literate in their L1
before they can benefit from L2 reading instruction while they are developing L2 oral
proficiency. While oral proficiency does affect reading in any language, we do not know what
level of oral proficiency is needed before children can benefit from L2 reading instruction. What
we do know is that a single measure of oral proficiency by itself is not a sufficiently accurate
indicator of readiness to read in the target language (L2). Researchers have found that other
variables, such as phonological awareness and word recognition skills, are better predictors of
young children’s reading in either L1 or L2 (Durgunoglu et al., 1993; Geva, Wade-Woolley, &
Shany, 1993; Verhoeven, 1994). One possible reason is that it is difficult to measure accurately
young children’s receptive linguistic knowledge.
Model 2: Support L1 literacy while developing L2 skills
The second model grows out of the literature on language transfer and is often referred to
as the knowledge transfer model. It is believed that teaching children to read, write, and learn
content in L1 will help them develop cognitively, as they are developing L2 skills. Late exit
bilingual education programs normally adopt this approach. This model of instruction, like the
16
first, is still predicated on transitioning children to L2 eventually. The main difference is that
children’s content and conceptual knowledge is being developed through their dominant language
(L1) while they are in the process of acquiring their L2. The rationale for this is that providing
continuing instruction through students’ native language will ensure that they do not fall behind
their English-speaking peers in subject matter knowledge. Their English-speaking peers are in
fact continuously developing more language skills and acquiring new knowledge. It is believed
that once students develop English proficiency, concepts and skills learnt in L1 can be
transferred. However, Chamot and O’Malley (1996) point out that such transfer may not take
place automatically without instruction. Many programs place more emphasis on developing L2
oral proficiency than on L2 literacy skills. In fact, L2 oral proficiency is often used as the main or
only criterion for exiting a student. In this respect, this model resembles the first model described
above.
Model 3: Maintain L1 while developing L2 language and literacy
This model is also known as the interdependency model. In this model, most aptly
exemplified by the two-way immersion bilingual program, the emphasis is on maintaining L1
language and literacy skills while developing L2 skills. The underlying premise is that there is an
interdependent relationship between L1 and L2 language and literacy (Bernhardt & Kamil, 1995;
Cummins, 1979; Verhoeven, 1994). Instruction is given in both languages throughout the
program, with balanced bilingualism as the ultimate goal—that is, proficiency in both L1 and L2.
Some researchers (e.g., Cazabon, Nicoladis, & Lambert, 1998) have called this type of education
a case of additive bilingualism, as opposed to subtractive bilingualism, whereby children’s L1 is
gradually replaced by their L2, which is usually the dominant language of society. It is argued
that additive bilingualism leads to better academic achievement because it gives due recognition
to children’s native language and culture, and in so doing, strengthens their self-concept and
sense of achievement (see Lambert, 1974). The French immersion programs in Canada, where
17
English-speaking children are given instruction primarily in L2 (French), are normally
characterized as additive bilingualism. The reason is that the children’s L1, English, is the
dominant and prestige language of the wider society. Hence, it is in no danger of being replaced
by the L2. In one study of U.S. bilingual education (Thomas & Collier, 1997), the authors
concluded that two-way bilingual programs were more likely to lead to long-term academic
success than other types of bilingual programs. They analyzed the data for children from middle-
income and low-income homes separately, and found similar trends for both groups.
Model 4: Develop L2 literacy explicitly
This approach, a modified version of the interdependency model, mainly provides
explicit and systematic instruction in reading skills, and builds on children’s knowledge, bilingual
ability, and L1 literacy skills. Padron (1994) noted in a comparative study of reading instruction
in elementary schools with predominantly Hispanic/LEP students and other inner-city schools
that the major activities taking place in both settings were watching and listening. Passive
instruction in whole-class settings was observed in both settings; but in the predominantly
Hispanic/LEP schools, the students did more watching and listening than in the other inner-city
schools with ethnically diverse students. She also noted that students in the observed reading
classes did very little reading. An ethnographic (Valdes, 2001) study of middle-school bilingual
students learning English also noted that little reading took place during reading instruction.
What does systematic and explicit instruction mean? It means teaching by focusing on
those skills and knowledge that all children need in order to learn how to read, and to teach them
in meaningful contexts (Delpit, 1995). In addition to focused and contextualized instruction,
attention needs to be paid to the teaching and modeling of cross-linguistic strategies, such as
cognate recognition, translation, and code-switching. We know that these are skills that are
unique to bilinguals and that good bilingual readers use them (Jimenez, Garcia, et al., 1996). In
essence, instruction seeks to utilize students’ linguistic and literacy knowledge in L1 as resources
Dostları ilə paylaş: |