Literacy is more than just English class, but unfortunately many people believe that to be so. Even when one may incorporate all of the elements learned from English class into another class, it is not seen as literacy although it should be. The expectation is simple, I go to English class for that stuff, I go to Math for Math stuff, Science for Science Stuff, etc. But what we have learned is that all that stuff can be thought of similarly as text. Like other subjects, foreign language can also be seen as 'similar' to english in the context of literacy. But even though it may be seen as similar, students tend to experience those similar teaching styles as learning that other stuff. Instead of building from and reinforcing what is known, second language acquisition can sometimes be lackadaisical and easily forgotten. This is not the proper way to teach anything, let alone language.
Now I should not have said 'properly' because there is no proper
way to teach language. There are many theories, studies, and information collected on the matter, but what is known is that there should be a healthy combination of teaching styles in order to aid in language acquisition.
ALM: Not the 'proper' way of teaching Language
So how do we expect students to learn the subject we are trying to teach them if they cannot understand what they are reading and writing?
Pyramid of L2 Reading Comprehension
Well, with language I believe it to be a little bit more confusing. We need to make sure the students are not only reading blindly, while being phonologically correct, but understanding the meaning behind what is being sounded out. That should include the understanding of the first language in proficiency and literacy. We cannot expect students to be proficient and literate in the second language if they are not proficient and literate in their first language. I read a study in which Merrill Swain looked at Basque students studying Spanish in which she concluded that literacy in the heritage, or first, language was key in second or third language acquisition.
Some people look at language understanding as simple translation of text. But even when you translate the text, do you truly understand the meaning behind it? This is where we must work together as educators in order to help students understand what exactly is meant to be understood in the subject we are teaching. There are similarities somewhere, and students will appreciate the help and connections between subjects. One thing I learned is that everyone looks at something differently, depending on the way their mind has been trained. A scientist will look at it as a scientists, a philosopher as a philosopher, etc. But what about our students? If they are not shown how to understand the text then it is just that, a text. There is hidden meaning behind it, but students need to be taught how to decipher it all.
Source:
Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Rowen, N. and Hart, D. (1990). The Role of Mother Tongue Literacy in
Third Language Learning. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 3(1), 65-81.
Felipe, I think I asked a similar question after you posted to Cheryl's blog, but it seems appropriate here: You mention that for students to learn a second language they must have good literacy proficiency in their first. Can you comment to how literacy is affected in both languages when a student is raised as bilingual from birth? Is literacy hindered in either language as a function of learning both simultaneously? It is improved? Unaffected? These may be questions for Steve, but your post makes me wonder about them.
Additionally, how can I help an ELL student with literacy in my discipline? For instance, if a person is raised with e.g. Spanish as his or her primary language, is science literacy in his or her primary language necessary for science literacy in English? I know that sometimes students don't learn more advanced subject-specific literacy in their first languages, because it was not previously necessarily either academically or for home life.
I had a Spanish teacher in high-schol, Sr. Sliwicki (awesome teacher), who always stated that his course goals for us were to strive towards fluency. It was my junior year when Sr. Sliwicki started bringing out Spanish language literature, which he asked for us to analyze critically. Reading and analyzing Neruda in Spanish was one of the hardest things our class had done.
Even though we all saw ourselves as being somewhat fluent, Sr. Sliwicki did not, and this is why he brought out the literature. Fluency, to him, was not being able to speak and write in a language. It was about being able to think and think about thinking in that language. With each language having their own nuances, it would have been a disservice to Pablo to read "Juegas Todos los Dias", translate it, analyze it, and then translate my analysis. The poem, being originally composed in Spanish, would lose some of its meaning. My analysis would be incomplete, and in English or Spanish, would not do the assignment justice.
I think you're getting at the same thing, Flip. We are fluent in our first languages because we learned to read, write, and think in them. We had nothing to "translate." Second language acquisition is difficult because we HAVE to utilize our first language as a base. We compare and contrast between them. If our primary language is something we aren't fluent in, how can we ever hope to be fluent in a second?
I would like to add that being proficient in an L1 has been proven to show high levels in proficiency when introducing a second language as reading comprehension strategies used in the L1 are transferred over when learning the second language. The problem that many students face, and that schools don't address, is the lack of instruction in a student's L1. Many districts still don't invest on improving a student's L1 proficiency, through dual language/ bilingual programs, because there is no immediate result. As schools' funding is based on taking standardized tests, many school opt to have immersion programs, which result in students being illiterate in both languages as neither language is ever fully developed.
I'm a huge advocate for dual language/ dual literacy programs!!
Felipe, I think I asked a similar question after you posted to Cheryl's blog, but it seems appropriate here: You mention that for students to learn a second language they must have good literacy proficiency in their first. Can you comment to how literacy is affected in both languages when a student is raised as bilingual from birth? Is literacy hindered in either language as a function of learning both simultaneously? It is improved? Unaffected? These may be questions for Steve, but your post makes me wonder about them.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, how can I help an ELL student with literacy in my discipline? For instance, if a person is raised with e.g. Spanish as his or her primary language, is science literacy in his or her primary language necessary for science literacy in English? I know that sometimes students don't learn more advanced subject-specific literacy in their first languages, because it was not previously necessarily either academically or for home life.
I had a Spanish teacher in high-schol, Sr. Sliwicki (awesome teacher), who always stated that his course goals for us were to strive towards fluency. It was my junior year when Sr. Sliwicki started bringing out Spanish language literature, which he asked for us to analyze critically. Reading and analyzing Neruda in Spanish was one of the hardest things our class had done.
ReplyDeleteEven though we all saw ourselves as being somewhat fluent, Sr. Sliwicki did not, and this is why he brought out the literature. Fluency, to him, was not being able to speak and write in a language. It was about being able to think and think about thinking in that language. With each language having their own nuances, it would have been a disservice to Pablo to read "Juegas Todos los Dias", translate it, analyze it, and then translate my analysis. The poem, being originally composed in Spanish, would lose some of its meaning. My analysis would be incomplete, and in English or Spanish, would not do the assignment justice.
I think you're getting at the same thing, Flip. We are fluent in our first languages because we learned to read, write, and think in them. We had nothing to "translate." Second language acquisition is difficult because we HAVE to utilize our first language as a base. We compare and contrast between them. If our primary language is something we aren't fluent in, how can we ever hope to be fluent in a second?
I commented on something similar in Myra's post.
ReplyDeleteI would like to add that being proficient in an L1 has been proven to show high levels in proficiency when introducing a second language as reading comprehension strategies used in the L1 are transferred over when learning the second language. The problem that many students face, and that schools don't address, is the lack of instruction in a student's L1. Many districts still don't invest on improving a student's L1 proficiency, through dual language/ bilingual programs, because there is no immediate result. As schools' funding is based on taking standardized tests, many school opt to have immersion programs, which result in students being illiterate in both languages as neither language is ever fully developed.
I'm a huge advocate for dual language/ dual literacy programs!!