24
talking about literacy; learning about code and other skills; writing/reading and meaning-making;
and the creation of successful social interactions among students and between students and text
(Perez, 1993). In general, the teachers felt that the one factor contributing to the children’s
success was their own expectation that the children develop specific “skills” (Perez, 1993). Perez
concluded that the integration of skills and meaning-based approaches was important for
prospective teacher education. Other approaches that have been successful in preservice education
include integrated reading and writing programs (e.g., Hao & Hartley-Forsyth, 1993), family
literacy programs (e.g., Liu, 1996), and the language experience approach.
The Future of L2 Reading Research and Instruction
The issues in L2 reading and instruction are highly complex in terms of cognitive
processing as well as sociocultural considerations. Some earlier reviews of the literature on ESL
reading instruction concluded that learning to read in L2 is much like learning to read in L1, with
many of the processes transferable from the first to the second language. While it is true that
many of the cognitive processes are shared in L1 and L2 reading, a key finding that has emerged
in the present review is that transfer does not take place automatically, at least not for many
struggling L2 readers. A body of research is being accumulated on specific areas of transfer, such
as metalinguistic and phonological awareness. These studies investigated a range of different
native and second languages (e.g., Turkish–Dutch, Cantonese–English, English–French, and
Spanish–English). Some research has been conducted on vocabulary transfer strategies, such as
cognate searching. Obviously, there is a continuing need for research in vocabulary and
vocabulary acquisition.
A critically neglected research issue is the role of instruction in facilitating the transfer of
knowledge, skills, and strategies from L1 to L2. Currently, the research base in this area is
uneven, involving only a handful of studies with small populations of students, which makes it
difficult to draw strong conclusions about instruction. Another area where we do not have much
25
systematic research is the developmental aspect of L2 reading. There is substantially more
research on older students and adults learning to read in a second language, usually in the foreign-
language classroom context, but there are far fewer studies on school-age L2 students in bilingual
education, ESL, or mainstream classrooms. Despite the fact that researchers always find a need
for more research, this is clearly a case where there is a need to fund more research projects to
answer the remaining important questions.
Fortunately, L2 research has become a federal research priority. Research initiatives
sponsored by the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development are now
investigating many aspects of early reading instruction for second-language students. The
Institute for Education Sciences is funding a project (the National Literacy Panel) to synthesize
the extant literacy research base with language minority children in a systematic manner. These
efforts are ongoing and hold great promise.
Research is also needed to investigate the uses of computer technologies for L2 reading
instruction. Much progress has been made in the use of computers as an aid to improve teaching
of L1 reading. Work in L2 reading computer-assisted teaching should follow. Bernhardt (in press)
has suggested the need for assessing vocabulary use in L2 reading assisted by computerized
dictionaries. Such an assessment is clearly an area that could have immediate practical
applications. Given the central importance of vocabulary in learning to read, both in L1 and L2,
we endorse this call.
Finally, the importance of teacher preparation in L2 reading instruction needs to be
emphasized because much of the research on teacher education currently does not address this
topic. Moreover, ongoing professional development of teachers dealing with L2 learners tends to
be done on an informal basis. Thus, there is great potential for expanding teacher education
programs that deal systematically with the literacy needs of L2 learners. There is also a
compelling need to address the problems revealed in Bernhardt’s (1994) work described above.
There is a critical need to improve the content of teacher manuals and textbooks, so that current
26
research on L2 reading and methods can be widely disseminated. Teacher manuals and methods
textbooks need to draw on a growing database of research that addresses both the cognitive and
social aspects of L2 reading development. Teachers are and will remain the key to successful
change in schools.
The future needs in L2 reading are substantial. Researchers need to look to practitioners
for promising interventions, and practitioners need to work with researchers to verify the
effectiveness of those programs.
27
REFERENCES
Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem?
In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language. London:
Longman.
Aloki, E. M. (1993). Turning the page: Asian Pacific American children’s literature. In V. J.
Harris (Ed.), Teaching multicultural literature in grades K–8 (pp. 109–135). Norwood,
MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1996). Linking reading comprehension instruction to language
development for language-minority students. Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 295–309.
Arnberg, L. N., & Arnberg, P. W. (1992). Language awareness and language separation in the
young bilingual child. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 475–
500). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Au, K. H. (2000). A multicultural perspective on policies for improving literacy achievement:
Equity and excellence. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.),
Handbook of reading research, (Vol. 3, pp. 835–851). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Au, K. H., & Kawakami, A. J. (1994). Cultural congruence in instruction. In E. R. Hollins, J. E.
King, & W. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge
base (pp. 5–23). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language minority children: A
research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, empirical and
classroom perspectives. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Bernhardt, E. B. (1994). A content analysis of reading methods texts: What are we told about the
nonnative speaker of English? Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(2), 159–189.
Bernhardt, E. B. (2000). Second-language reading as a case study of reading scholarship in the
20
th
century. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.) Handbook of
reading research, (Vol. 3, pp. 813–834). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bernhardt, E. B. (in press). New Directions in Research: Literacy in a multilingual world.
Reading Research Quarterly.
Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading:
Consolidating the linguistic threshold and linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied
Linguistics, 16(1), 15–34.
Bialystok, E. (1997). Effects of bilingualism and biliteracy on children’s emerging concepts of
print. Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 429–440.
Bialystok, E. (2001). Metalinguistic aspects of bilingual processing. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 169–181.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |