reading and adult english learners

8/10/2019 Reading and Adult English Learners

1/58

~ i , h }i~ d l

i i , i , ~ , ~ x


2/58


3/58

Reading and

dult English

Language Learners

A Review of the Research


4/58


5/58

R eading and

d u lt English

Lang uage Learners

Review of the Research

Mir iam Burt

Joy Kreeft Peyton

Rebecca

A d a m s

C ~ L

CENTER FOR APPLIED LINGUISTICS

NATIONAL CENTER FOR ESL LITERACY EDUCATION


6/58

C ~ C 2 0 0 3 b y th e Cen te r f or Ap p l i ed L in g u is t ic s

Al l r igh ts reserved . No par t o f th is paper may be reproduc ed , in any fo rm or by

any m eans, w i thou t perm iss ion in wr i t ing f rom the pub l isher. Al l inqu i r ies should

be addressed to Mir iam Bur t , Nat ional Center fo r ESL Li te racy Educat ion ,

C ent er fo r Appl ied Linguis tics , 4646 4 0 th St ree t NkV, W ashing ton , DC 20016-

1859 . Telephone 202-362-0700 .

Pr in ted in the Un i ted Sta tes o f Arner ica

Cop yedi t ing and proof read ing : Don ald Ranard and Am y Fi tch

Design , il lus tra t ion , and p roduct ion : Po t tm an Design

Cover design : Po t tman Design

The prepara t ion of th is paper was suppor ted by funding f rom the U.S.

De par tm ent o f Educa t ion (ED) , Off ice o f Vocational and Adul t Educat ion

( OVAL ), u n d e r Co n t r ac t No . E D - 0 0 - CO- 0 1 3 0 . T h e o p in io n s ex p r e ssed in th i s

repor t do n o t necessar i ly re f lec t the posi t ions o r po l ic ies o f ED.

R e c o m m e n d e d c i t a t i o n : Burt, M., Peyton, J. K., & Ada ms, R. (2003). Reading

and adM t English lang uag e learl:ers: A revie u o f the research. W ash in g to n , DC:

C ente r fo r Appl ied L inguis tics .

S E R I E S O N P R E P A R I N G A D U L T E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E L E A R N E RS F O R S U C C E S S

Ad uh ESL Instruction in the 21st Centuu ; by NCLE Staff

Preparing for Success: A Guide for Teaching Ad ult E nglish Lang uage Learners,

by B rigitte M arshall

Reading and Adult English Language Learners: A R eview o f the Research,

by M iriam Burt, Joy Kreeft Peyton, and Rebecca Adams


7/58

C o n t e n t s

A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

I n t r o d u c t i o n : E n g l is h L a n g u a g e L e a r n e r s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

B a c k g r o u n d a n d O v e r v i e w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

S E C T I O N 1 : F a c to r s I n f l u e n c i n g A d u l t L i t e r ac y D e v e l o p m e n t

in E n g li sh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

F i rs t L a n g u a g e L i t e r a c y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

E d u c a t i o n a l B a c k g r o u n d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6

S e c o n d L a n g u a g e P r o f i c i e n c y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7

V o c ab u la ry K n o w l e d g e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7

S y n ta c ti c P r o f i ci e nc y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0

L e a r n e r G o a l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0

S E C T I O N 2 : T h e P r o c e s s o f L e a r n i n g t o R e a d in a

S e c o n d L a n gu a g e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3

T h e o r i e s a n d R e s e a r c h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

M o d e l s o f R e a d in g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

B o t t om - u p m o d e ls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

T o p - do w n m o d e ls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

I n t er a c ti v e m o d e l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

L e a r n e r s' i n te r n a l m o d e l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5

R e a d in g S k il ls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5

P h o n o lo g i c al p r o c e ss i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5

V o c a b u la r y r e c o g ni t io n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6

S y n t ac t ic p r o c e ss i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7

S c h e m a a c ti v a ti n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7

I m p l i c a t io n s f o r P r a c t i c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8

M o d e l s o f R e a d in g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8

L e a rn e rs ' I n t er n a l R e a d i n g M o d e l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9

P h o n o l o g i c al P ro c e ss in g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9

V o c a b ul ar y R e c o g n i t io n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0


8/58

S y n ta c t ic P r o ce ss in g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1

S c h e m a A c ti va t i ng . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

C o n c l u s i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2

S E C T I O N 3 : R e a d i n g t o L e a r n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3

T h e o r y a n d R e s e a r c h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3

I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r P r a c t i c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6

S E C T I O N 4: S u m m a r y o f F in d i n g s a n d I m p l i c a t io n s f o r

P r a ct ic e a nd R e s ea r ch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7

P e r s o n a l F a c t o r s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7

E d u c a t i o n a l B a c k g r o u n d a n d F ir st L a n g u a g e L i te r a c y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7

S e c o n d L a n g u ag e P ro f i c ie n c y a n d Li te ra c y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 8

P u rp o s es f o r L i t er a cy L e a rn i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 8

T h e R e a d i n g P r o c e s s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9

I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r P r a c t i c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9

A r e a s f o r F u r t h e r R e s e a r c h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 0

R e f e r e n c e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3

F u r t h e r R e a d i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7

L i s t o f F i g u r e s

F I G U R E 1 F a c t o r s I n f l u e n c i n g L 2 L i t e r a c y D e v e l o p m e n t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

F I G U R E 2 T y p e s o f L 1 L i t e r a c y a n d E f f e c t s o n L 2 L i t e r a c y L e a r n i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3

F I G U R E 3 C o n s i d e r L 1 L i t e r a c y W h e n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5

F IG U R E 4 C o m p o n e n t s o f V o c a b u l a r y K n o w l e d g e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8

F I G U R E 5 U s e s f o r L i t e r a c y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1

F I G U R E 6 P h o n o l o g y T e a c h i n g S u g g e s t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9

F I G U R E 7 V o c a b u l a r y T e a c h i n g S u g g e s t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0

F I G U R E 8 S y n t a x T e a c h i n g S u g g e s t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1

F I G U R E 9 T e a c h i n g S u g g e s t i o n s t o B u i l d S c h e m a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2

F I G U R E 10 B e n e f i t s o f E x t e n s i v e R e a d i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5


9/58

r

Acknowledgments

This paper i s based on an annotated bibl iography of research on reading development for

adul ts learning Engl ish (Adams & Bur t , 2002) . For informat ion about the s tudies consul ted ,

s ee h t t p : / / w w w . c a l . o r g / n c l e / r e a d i n g b i b /

We are grateful to Joyce Campbel l , U.S Depar tment of Educat ion; JoAnn Crandal l ,

Universi ty of Maryland, Bal t imore County; Joan Givens, U.S . Depar tment of Educat ion;

Wil l iam Grabe, Nor thern Ar izona Universi ty ; Ursula Lord, U.S . Depar tment of Educat ion;

Mary Lovel l , U.S . Depar tment of Educat ion; Judi th Rance-Roney, Lehigh Universi ty ; Lynn

Spencer , U.S . D epa r tme nt of Educat ion; and John St rucker , Ha rvard University, for very

helpful cont r ibut ions to the developm ent of the b ibl iography and th is paper .

We would a lso like to acknowledge the cont r ibut ions of some 100 adul t ESL p ract it ioners ,

researchers , program administra tors , and U.S. Depar tm ent of Educat ion s taf f mem bers who

read and responded to an ear l ier version of th is paper a t the National Symposium on Adult

ESL Research and Practice

September 6 , 2001, a t the Ripley Center Smithsonian Museum,

Washington, DC . Thei r com men ts an d suggest ions were very helpful.

Finally, thanks are also due to Donald Ranard and Amy Fitch for their editorial skil ls.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v


10/58


11/58

I N T R O D U C T I O N

English Language Learners

in the United States

H

OW do adul t lea rners learn to read in Engl ish? W ha t are th e b est ways

to teach reading to th is populat ion? Over the past 20 years , a growing

number o f adu l t ESL educa to r s have sough t t he answer s t o t hese

quest ion s as they grapple wi th the chal lenges po sed b y an inc reasingly large

and diverse populat ion of adul ts in the Uni ted States learning Engl ish as a

second language (ESL) .

Accord ing to t he 2000 Census , more than 35 mi l l i on adu l t s a r e nonna t ive

speakers of Engl ish , and 9 mi l l ion adul ts do not speak Engl ish wel l or a t a l l

(U .S . C ensu s Bureau , 2001) . Th i s popu la t ion has becom e a s ign i f i can t pa r t

o f a d u l t e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e U . S . D e p a r t m e n t o f

Edu cat ion, 42% of adul ts (or more than 1 mi l l ion learners) enrol led in s ta te-

admin i s t e r ed , f ede ra l ly funded adu l t educa t ion p rograms a re en ro l led in ES L

classes (U .S . Depa r tmen t o f Educa t ion , 2002) .

Th i s pe r cen tage does no t i nc lude Eng l i sh l anguage l ea rne r s who a r e be ing

se rved wi th in o the r segme n t s o f t he pub l i c educa t iona l sys t em, such as adu l t

basic educat ion (ABE) and adul t secondary educat ion (ASE) c lasses. In addi -

t ion, adul t ESL services are provided through pr ivate language schools and

academic ins t i tu t ions and in p rograms sponsored by com mun i ty -based o rgan-

izat ions and large nat ional volunteer l i teracy organizat ions such as Laubach

Li t e racy and L i t e racy Volun tee rs o f Am er i ca ( combined in Oc tober 2002 in to

one organizat ion, ProLi teracy) . Laub ach Li teracy (2001) repor ted that in

1999-2000, approxima tely 77% of thei r m em ber programs provided ESL

inst ruct ion to adul t Engl ish language learners .

INTRODUCTION 3


12/58

T h e in c r ea se i n E n g l ish l an g u ag e le a r n e r s h a s b een acco m p an ied b y an

in c r ea se i n ad u l t s w i th l im i t ed l i t e r acy in E n g l i sh . T h e Na t io n a l Ad u l t

L i t e r acy Su r v ey ( NAL S) , co n d u c ted b e tween 1 9 8 9 an d 1 9 9 2 to s tu d y ad u l t s '

Engl ish l i te racy leve ls , found th a t 23% of the adu l t pop ula t ion s tud ied meas-

ured a t Level 1 : ab le to per form simple , ro u t ine tasks invo lv ing br ie f and

u n co m p l i ca t ed t ex ts an d d o cu m e n t s ( K i rsch , Ju n g eb lu t , J en k in s , & Ko l s tad ,

1993 , p . xiv) , whi le 27 .3% me asure d a t Level 2 : genera l ly ab le to loca te in for -

mat ion in tex t , make low- leve l in ferences using pr in ted mater ia ls , and in te-

g r a te e a s i l y i d en t i f i ab le p i ece s o f in f o r m a t io n , an d to p e r fo r m q u an t i t a t i v e

tasks tha t invo lve a s ing le opera t ion (pp . x iv -xv). Th ese f ind ings ind ica te tha t

m o r e t h an h a l f o f th e p o p u la t i o n s tu d i ed h ad lo w E n g l i sh l i t e racy ski ll s .

Fu r th e r m o r e , m o r e t h a n h a l f o f t h o se sco r in g a t L ev e ls 1 an d 2 we r e i rn m i -

g r an t ad u l ts , an d 6 4 % o f t h o se w i th a n a t iv e l an g u ag e o th e r t h an E n g l i sh

sco r ed a t L ev e l 1 . ' T h ese r e su l t s i n d i ca t e t h a t a m u ch h ig h e r p e r cen tag e o f

n o n n a t iv e E n g l i sh sp eak e r s t h an n a t iv e E n g l i sh sp eak e r s r ead E n g l i sh a t t h e

lowest levels of l i teracy.

T h e p o p u la t i o n o f n o n n a t iv e E n g l i sh sp eak e r s w h o a l so h av e lim i t ed l i t e r acy

sk i ll s i n m an y way s r e f le c t s t h e n a tu r e o f im m ig r a t io n in to t h e Un i t ed S t a t e s .

S in ce t h e m id - 1 9 7 0 s , m an y im m ig r an t s h av e co m e f r o m co u n t r i e s wh e r e a

la rge por t ion of the popula t ion does no t have access to l i te racy or where the

co m m o n ly sp o k en l an g u ag es a r e n o t wr i t t en ( Hu n t l ey , 1 9 9 2 ) . T h ese ch an g es

in im m ig r a t io n p a t t e r n s h av e in c r ea sed th e n eed f o r E n g l i sh l an g u ag e an d l it -

e r acy in s t r u c t io n f o r ad u l t s i n t h e Un i t ed S t a t e s .

Becau se ad u l t l e a r n e r s i n E SL l i t er acy p r o g r am s co m e f r o m d iv er se b ack -

grounds and have widely d i f fe r ing exper iences wi th l i te racy in the i r f i r s t lan-

guages , they have d i f fe ren t purposes fo r l i te racy learn ing . These d iverse pur -

p o se s sh o u ld b e co n s id e r ed in p r o g r am an d in s t r u c t io n a l p l an n in g .

Rec en t r ev i ews o f t he 1993 Nat ion a l Adu l t L i t e r acy Sur vey ( e. g ., M athe ws , 2001) po in t ou t tha t

the s tudy d id no t t : ind tha t 74 m i l l i on Am er i can adu l t s cou ld no t r ead a t a l l , a s was in i t i a l ly r epor t -

ed in t he med ia . I kl any o f tha t nu mb er hav e l imi t ed l i t e r acy s k i ll s t ha t i s , t hey a r e ab l e t o r ead at

a bas i c l eve l , f l o~ever , becaus e the i r l i t e r acy l eve l may no t mee t t he l eve l s r equ i r ed f o r e f f ec t ive

per f o r m ance o r p r on lo t ion in j obs i n t he U ni t ed S t a t es , t hey a re cons ider ed f u nc t iona l ly non l i t e r a t e .

4 H E ' l l ) I N( ; AND AI ) UL T E NG L I SH I . AN( ;L iA( ; I i L E AI~NE [4S


13/58

Background and Overview

"1

he purpose of thi s paper i s to give prac t i t ioners , graduate s tudents ,

r e sea rche rs , an d po l i cy make rs i n form a t i on about wha t i s known ab out

how adul t Engl i sh language learners l earn to read in Engl i sh, what types

of ac t ivi t i es fac i l i t a te thi s process , and what research s t i l l needs to be done .

Thi s pape r w as deve l oped f rom a sea rch of t he re sea rch l i t e rat ure on read i ng

deve l opm ent amon g adul t Engl i sh language l e arne rs i n t he U ni t ed S t a te s i n t he

l a st 20 yea rs (1980-2000) . A n anno t a t ed b i b l i ography of t h is r e sea rch (Adams

& Burt , 2002) inc ludes research pub l i shed in re fereed (peer-reviewed) journa ls ,

di sser ta t ions , the ERIC da tabase , the Mo dern Languag e Associa t ion da tabase ,

the Lingu is t ics and Lang uage Beh avior Abst rac t s da tabase , an d books . The

research in the b ibl iography focuses on the reading (and, w here app l icable , gen-

era l li t e racy) dev elopm ent of adul t s (aged 16 years and older) who are learning

Engl i sh and are be ing served in adul t educa t ion and col lege-based intensive

Engl i sh programs (IEP) ra th er than in seconda ry school programs. Studies have

been i nc l uded i f t hey repor t ou t comes re l a ted t o read i ng (and , whe re appl ica -

ble , genera l li t e racy) developm ent , d escr ipt ions of the ad ul t s par t ic ipa t ing, the

i n t e rven t i ons or s t udy s i t ua t i ons , and t he procedure s and ou t come measure s .

Th e inten t ion was to inc lud e s tudies tha t m et the fol lowing cr i te r ia : use of

expe r i ment a l o r quas i -expe r i ment a l me t hodol og i e s ba sed on va l i d compar i sons

betw een groups (wi th s ta ti s t ica l tes t s for s igni f icance) ; non- experim enta l meth-

ods tha t provide evidence when l i t t l e or no experimenta l da ta exis t ; and qual i -

ta t ive methods (descr ipt ive and prac t i t ioner research) based on a sound ana lyt -

ica l f ramework or non-experimenta l group compari sons (e .g. , comparing per-

formances of a s ingle group or individual , before and af te r a spec i f ic t eaching

intervent ion) . The major i ty of s tudies fa ll in the las t two ca tegories .

B A C K G R O U N D A N D O V E R V I E W 5


14/58

The bibl iography ident i f ies the reading research on adul t learners in non-

pos t secondary educa t ion se t t i ngs- - adu l t educa t ion p rograms , communi ty -

based programs, and w orkplace l i teracy programs. However , becau se o nly a

l imi t ed amoun t o f r e sea r ch has been conduc ted in t hese se t t i ngs and wi th

these learners , the b ibl iography (and th is synthesis) a lso includes s tudies that

were conducted in In tensive Engl ish Programs ( IEPs) . (See Adams & Burr ,

2002, for a d iscuss ion of the types of learners in these two types of programs.)

The f i r s t par t of th is paper descr ibes factors that need to be taken in to

account in l i teracy inst ruct ion for adul ts learning Engl ish- - learners ' levels of

l i teracy in the f i rs t language, levels o f oral prof ic iency in Engl ish , edu cat ion-

al backgrounds, and goals for learning Engl ish . Subsequent sect ions g ive an

overview of the reading process for secon d language learners; d iscuss the ben-

e f it s o f read ing for p romot ing second l anguage deve lopmen t ; and summ ar ize

research f indings, thei r impl icat ions for pract ice , and major areas in which

research i s needed.

Add i t iona l r e sea r ch shou ld be fo r thcoming . On Oc tober 2 , 2002 , The U .S .

D epa r tme nt of Educat ion , Off ice of Vocational and Adul t Ed ucat ion (OVAE);

t h e N a t i on a l I n s t it u t e o f C h i l d H e a l t h a n d H u m a n D e v e l o p m e n t ( N I C H D ) ;

and the Na t iona l I ns t i t u t e f o r L i t e r acy (NIFL) announced $18 .5 mi l l i on in

grant awards to s ix projects that wi l l s tudy the most ef fect ive methods and

approaches for teaching reading ski l l s to low- l i tera te adul ts (Nat ional

Inst i tu te for Literacy; 2002) Each of the projects wi ll use exper im ental or

quasi -exper imental research designs. These grants were awarded in response

to the nat ional push for educat ional reform, accountabi l i ty , and evidence-

based research to inform inst ruct ional pract ice for a l l learners . (For more

informat ion about th is in i t ia t ive a how i t af fects adul t learners , see Nat ional

Ins t i t u te o f Ch i ld H ea l th and H um an Deve lopm en t , 2002) . A l though none o f

the projects addresses Engl ish language learners speci f ical ly , i t i s assumed

that there wi l l be non-nat ive Engl ish speakers in the s tudies . This research

should help to move the f ie ld forward, and i t i s hoped that research s tudies

focused speci f ical ly on adul t Engl ish language learners wi ll fo llow. In the

mean t ime , we hope tha t t h i s documen t , wh ich d i scusses wha t i s known now

about adul t Engl ish language learners , wi l l be of use to the f ie ld .

6 I~E A I ) IN G A N D A I )U I ] I E N G L IS t l L A N G U A G E L E A RN E I~S


15/58

S E C T I O N

Factors Influencing Adult Literacy

Development in English

1

M

any f ac to r s in f luence the l i t e r acy deve lop men t o f adu l t s l ea rn ing

Eng l i s h and s hou ld be cons ide red in p lann ing in s t ruc t ion fo r them.

Thes e f ac to r s inc lude l ea rne r s ' :

ages;

mot iv at ions to read;

in s t ruc t iona l , l iv ing , and w ork ing env i ronmen ts ;

s oc iocu l tu ra l backgrounds ;

s oc ioeconom ic st a tus ; and

l ea rn ing ab i l i t i e s o r d i s ab i l i t i e s (N a t iona l Cen te r fo r ES L Li te r acy

Educa t ion , 1998; Wr ig ley & G uth , 1992) .

Th i s paper focus es on the f ac to r s tha t have r ece ived the mos t a t t en t ion in the

l i tera ture on learning to read in Engl ish as a second language: learners ' f i r s t

languag e (L1) l i teracy and t ran sfer f rom L1 to L2 (second language) l i teracy,

educa t iona l background , s econd l anguage p ro f i c i ency , and goa l s fo r l ea rn ing

Engl ish .

F I G U R E I

4 L1 l i teracy

, I, Ed uca t iona l backg round

aa L2 language and l i teracy

. Learner goa l s

F A C T O R S I N F L U E N C I N G A D U L T L I T E R A C Y D E V E L O P M E N T I N E N G L I S H 7


16/58

First Language Li teracy

In many adu l t ES L p rograms , dec i s ions abou t l ea rne r p lacemen t and in s t ruc -

t ional approaches are based on learners ' oral prof ic iency in Engl ish , the sec-

ond (or addi t ional) language. However , learners ' f i r s t language may also inf lu-

ence the types o f in s t ruc t ion tha t l ea rne r s need and the r a tes o f p rog ress they

are l ikely to ma ke (R obson, 1982; S trucker , 2002) .

H un t le y (1992) a rgues tha t the fo l low ing types o f L1 l i t e r acy background

s hou ld be cons ide red in adu l t ES L educa t ion :

preliterate, nonliterate, semilit-

erate,

and

non-Roman alphabet l i terate.

Birch (2002) adds to thes e types non-

alpa hab et l i tera te (See Birch , 2002, pp . 27-38, and Hu nt ley , 1992, for an

in-de pth d isc uss ion of thes e categor ies . ) Birch and others (H i l fer ty , 1996;

Strucker , 2002) add Roman alphabet literate.

Preliterate learners

come f rom cu l tu res w he re l i t e r acy i s unco mm on in eve ry -

day l i fe . This category includes learners whose nat ive language is not wr i t ten ,

has on ly r ecen t ly been w r i t t en , o r i s be ing deve loped . F o r example , mos t

Bantu people of Somalia are prel i tera te in their nat ive language, Af-Maay,

becaus e i t has on ly r ecen t ly been cod i f ied . The D inka peop le ( a r e fugee g roup

from the Sudan) are a lso prel i tera te , as a wr i t ten form for their language is in

the p roces s o f be ing deve loped. P re l i t e r a te Eng l i s h l anguage l ea rne r s o f t en

have had l i t t le or no exposure to wr i t ten text and may not be aware of the pur-

pos es o f l i te r acy in eve ryday li fe . The y need to be t augh t how w r i t t en l anguage

works . Tradi t ional ly , l i teracy ins t ruct ion for prel i tera te learners bui lds on their

oral language knowledge and is suppor ted by oral language act iv i t ies (Carrol l ,

1999; Hunt ley , 1992) . Prel i tera te learners should receive special ESL l i tera-

cy ins t ruc t ion, in addi t ion to oral ESL. Bec ause they general ly progress s low-

ly in l i te r acy and o the r l anguage in s t ruc t ion and r equ i r e r e t e ach ing o f s ki l ls

and conc epts (Robson, 1982; S trucker , 2002) , the y should be p laced in sep-

arate c lasses f rom l i tera te learners .

Nonliterate learners come f rom cu l tu res w here l i t e racy is ava i lab le , bu t they

have no t had s u f f i c i en t acces s to l i te r acy in s t ruc t ion , o f t en becau s e o f the i r

s oc ioeconomic s t a tus . F o r example , ma ny adu l t l ea rne r s f rom C en t r a l

A mer ica may no t know how to r ead o r w r i t e in the i r na t ive S pan i s h becaus e

o f d i s rup ted s choo l ing due to w ar and pover ty . A l though thes e l ea rne r s have

8 R E A D I N G A N D A D U L T E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E L E A R N E R S


17/58

n o t l e a r n e d t o r e a d , t h e y h a v e p r o b a b l y h a d s o m e e x p o s u r e t o w r i t t e n l a n -

g u a g e a n d t h u s m a y h a v e a g r e a t e r a w a r e n e s s o f t h e v a l u e a n d u s e s o f li te r a -

c y th a n p r e l i te r a t e l e a r n e r s ( D . R e d , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , J an u a ry ' 2 8 ,

2 0 0 2 ) . T e a c h e r s w h o w o r k w i t h t h e s e l e a r n e r s h a v e f o u n d t h a t t h e y m a y b e

re l uc t a n t t o d i s c l o se t he i r l i m i t e d l i t e ra c y ba c kground i n c l a s s , a nd i n s t ruc t i on

w i t h t h e m m a y p r o c e e d s lo w ly . H o w e v e r , th e y a r e o f t e n h i g h l y m o t i v a t e d t o

l e a rn . F o r p re l i t e ra t e a nd no n l i t e ra t e l e a rne r s , wr i t t e n m a t e r i a l s u se d a s t e a c h -

i n g a id s m a y h a v e l i m i t e d v a l u e . L e a r n e r s ' r e te n t i o n o f c la s s r o o m m a t e r i a l m a y

a l so be l i m i t e d i f t he y c a n no t u se e d uc a t i on a l te x t s a nd t a ke c l a s s no t e s fo r

la te r review.

Semiliterate learners usua l l y ha ve ha d a c c e s s t o l i t e ra c y i n t he i r na t i ve c u l t u re ,

b u t b e c a u s e o f t h e i r s o c i o e c o n o m i c s t a t u s o r e d u c a t i o n a l s i t u a ti o n , t h e y h a v e

no t a c h i e ve d a h i gh l e ve l o f l i t e ra c y i n t he i r na t i ve l a ngua ge . The se l e a rne r s

m a y ha ve l e f t s c hoo l a t a young a ge fo r e c onom i c o r po l i t i c a l r e a sons , a s wa s

t h e c a s e w i t h m a n y S o u t h e a s t A s i a n r e f u g e e s a n d C e n t r a l A m e r i c a n i m m i -

g ra n t s in t he 1970s a nd 1980s (H o l t , 1995 ; R a na rd

&: P f l e ge r, 1995) . R obson (1982) , i n a sm a l l s t udy o f

H m o n g l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h a t a r e f u g e e c a m p i n

T h a i l a n d , f o u n d t h a t e v e n a d u l t s w i t h m i n i m a l li te r -

a c y i n H m o n g a c q u i r e d E n g l i s h r e a d i n g s k i l l s m o r e

r a p i d l y t h a n t h o s e w h o h a d n o H m o n g l i t e r a c y .

S i m il ar ly , a s tu d y o f a d u l t H a i t ia n s l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h i n N e w Y o r k C i t y

(B ur t o f f , 1985) found t ha t t hose who re c e i ve d na t i ve l a ngua ge l i t e ra c y

i n s t r u c t i o n w h i l e l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h d e v e l o p e d g r e a t e r l i t e r a c y s k i l l s t h a n d i d

t h e E n g l i s h o n l y g r o u p , e v e n t h o u g h t h e t o t al n u m b e r o f in s t r u c t i o n a l h o u r s

f o r t h e E n g l i s h o n l y g ro u p a n d t h e n a t iv e l a n g u a g e l i t e ra c y a n d E n g l i s h

i n s t r u c t i o n g r o u p w a s e q u a l . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e r e w e r e o n l y 2 4 s t u d e n t s i n

B u r t o f f' s s tu d y , a c c u r a t e a t t e n d a n c e r e c o r d s w e r e n o t k e p t , t h e r e w a s n o c o n -

t ro l o n c u r r i c u l u m o r t e a c h e r d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e c l a s s e s c o m p a r e d w e r e o f d if -

f e r e n t s i ze s, a n d t h e 2 4 - w e e k s t u d y m a y h a v e b e e n t o o s h o r t t o d e t e c t a l as t-

i n g e f f e c t o f i n s t r u c t i o n o n l e a r n i n g . A l t h o u g h s t r o n g c o n c l u s i o n s c a n n o t b e

d r a w n f r o m t h e s e s t u d i e s , t h e y d o p o i n t t o t h e n e e d t o e x a m i n e t h e v a l u e o f

na t i ve l a ngua ge l i t e ra c y i n s t ruc t i on p r i o r t o o r a t t he s a m e t i m e a s t he l e a rn -

i ng o f E ng l i sh l i te ra c ) :

L e a r n e r s r e t e n t i o n o f c l a ss r o o m

m a t e r i a l m a y a l s o b e l i m i t e d i f t h e y

c a n n o t u s e e d u c a t i o n a l t e x t s a n d t a k e

c l a s s n o te s fo r l a te r r e v ie w .

F A ( T O RS IN F L U E N CIN G A I )U I . I I~ IT E R.~CY D E V E L O I}M E N T IN t :~N {;L ISH 9


18/58

Res earcher s a r e now iden t i fy ing s tuden t s w ho have been educ a ted p r imar ily

in the U n i ted S ta tes bu t w ho have charac te r i s t i c s s imi la r to thos e des c r ibed

above. Referred to as Gen erat io n 1 .5 learners , they have imm igrated to the

U ni ted S ta tes , w here they have a t t ended s choo l s and deve loped o ra l f luency

in Engl ish . However , they are not l i tera te in their nat ive language, and they

s t rugg le w i th r ead ing and w r i t ing in Eng l i s h . They may r emain in ES L c las s -

es th roughou t the i r pub l i c s choo l educa t ion and en te r ES L p rograms as

adul ts or need special a t tent ion in col lege programs (Harklau , Losey, &

Siegal, 1999).

As a resul t of previous fa i lures , man y semil i tera te , inclu ding generat io n 1 .5 ,

l ea rne r s may approach Eng l i s h l i t e r acy l ea rn ing w i th t r ep ida t ion . They need

to be g iven oppor tuni t ies to increase their ser f -conf idence in educat ional s i t -

uat ions a nd to develop pos i tive images of them selves as readers (Goldberg ,

1997; Strucker, 1997).

Pre l i te ra te , nonl i te ra te , and

semil i terate learners may have

high oral skills in English.

I t s hou ld be po in ted ou t tha t p r e l i t e r a te , non l i t e r a te , and s emi l i t e r a te l ea rn -

ers may ve~, wel l have h igh oral sk i lls in Engl ish . In addi t ion , these learners

m a y h a v e h a d p o s i t i v e e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h l e a r n i n g

th rough o ra l ES L ins t ruc t ion . F o r example , they m ay be

accus tomed to l ea rn ing th rough fo lk ta les , f ab les , and

o the r s to r i es tha t c on ta in mora l s and t each in g po in t s ( J.

Cranda l l , pe r s ona l communica t ion , J une 6 , 2002) . F o r

thes e r eas ons , p lac ing adu l t Eng l i s h l anguage l ea rne r s

in c lasses according to both their L1 l i teracy ski l ls and their oral Engl ish ski l ls

can faci l i ta te their learning.

F inal ly : some pre- , non- , and se mil i te ra te learners m ay have learning disabi li -

t ies that have not been diagnosed or addressed (Davidson & Strucker , 2003;

Schwa rz & Terr il l , 2000) . Te achers and program s taf f nee d to put in p lace

p rocedures to iden t i fy and m ee t the n eeds o f thes e l ea rne rs . (S ee S chw arz &

Terr i ll , 2000, for d iscuss ions of ways to ident i fy and w ork with learners with

learning disabi l i t ies . )

Learne r s w ho a re l i t e r a te in s ome w r i t ing s ys tem have the advan tage o f expe-

r i ence w i th dec ipher ing and as s ign ing mean ing to p r in t and us ing p r in t to

enhance the i r l ea rn ing . Thos e w ho a re

no nalphabet literate

read a language

1 0 R E A l ) I N ( ; A N D A I ) U L T E N G L I S I t L A N G U A G E L E A R N E R S


19/58

tha t i s w r i t t en logograph ica l l} ; s uch as Ch ines e and J apanes e . O ther l ea rne r s

may be l i t e r a te in a l anguage tha t u s es a non- Ro m an a lphabe t , s uch as Cyr il l ic

o r Tha i . Bo th g roups o f l ea rne r s have va luab le r e ad ing s k i ll s in th e f i r s t l an-

guage tha t they may be ab le to t r ans fe r to s econd l anguage r ead ing , bu t they

n e e d p r a c t i c e p r o c e s s i n g t h e s o u n d - t o - s y m b o l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s o f w r i t t e n

Eng l i s h (S t rucker , 2002) .

Learne r s f rom logograph ic languages w h o have l ea rned to r e ly on v i s ua l c lues

may t ry to r ead in Eng l i s h by mem or iz ing w h o le w ords . F o r exam ple , a s tudy

of 16 Rus s ian and 11 J apan es e l ea rne r s o f Eng l i s h in an in tens ive Eng l i s h p ro -

g ram ( IEP ) in a Can ad ia n un ive r s i ty and o f 16 Rus s ian l ea rne r s o f Eng l i s h in

a un ive r s i ty in I s rae l (Wade-W ool ley, 1999) foun d tha t the J apan es e l ea rne r s ,

w ho us e bo th a s y l l aba ry (kana) and a logograph ic (kan j i ) w r i t ing s ys tem,

r e l ie d m o r e o n E n g l i s h w o r d r e c o g n i t io n t h a n d i d t h e R u s s ia n l e a rn e r s , w h o

u s e a p h o n o l o g i c a l ly - b a s e d a l p h a b e t . B e c a u s e J a p a n e s e w r i t in g u s e s b o t h a

phono log ica l ly bas ed s y l laba ry and a s ys tem o f p ic tog raphs , i t i s more l ike ly

tha t J apan es e r eade r s do no t acces s w ords s o le ly f rom phono logy , bu t f rom

the i r know ledge o f o r thograph y as w e l l. The re fo re , the s e l ea rne r s a r e no t u s ed

t o f o c u s in g o n p h o n e m e - t o - s o u n d m a p p i n g i n r e a d i n g a n d a r e m o r e l i ke l y t o

de pe nd on s igh t r ecog n i t ion o f l e t t e r s eq uen ces ( \V ade-~vV oo lley , 1999) .

H ow ever , l ea rn ing to r ead by s igh t r ecog n i t ion is a s low p roces s , an d l ea rne r s

w h o d e p e n d o n i t to t h e e x c l u s io n o f p h o n o l o g ic a l st r a te g i e s w i ll n o t b e c o m e

pro f ic ien t r eader s (B i r ch , 2002) . To beco m e good r eader s in Eng l i s h , they

nee d to deve lop an a lphabe t i c s t r a t eg y - - tha t i s , be ab le to p roces s an a lpha-

bet ic scr ip t (p . 33) .

Learne r s w ho a re l i t e r a te in a l anguage w i th a non-Roman a lphabe t i c s c r ip t

have the advan tage o f an a lphabe t i c l i t e r acy background , bu t they may s t rug -

g l e t o f in d w o r d s i n t h e d i c t i o n a r y a n d m a y n e e d t i m e t o p r o c es s w r i t t e n m a t e -

r i a l s p res en ted in c l a s s becaus e the L1 o r thography i s d i f f e r en t f rom tha t o f

E n g l i s h . F o r e x a m p l e , N e p a l i s t u d e n t s , w h o s e S a n s k r i t - d e r i v e d l e t t e r s

des cend be low the l ines o f t ex t , may a t f i r s t a t t empt to d i r ec t the i r v i s ua l

a t t en t io n be low the l ines o f Eng l i s h t ex t w h ere on ly the t ai ls o f s om e

Eng l i s h l e t t e r s

g , j , p ,

and y ) a r e w r i t t en (S t rucker , 2002) . In add i t ion to

d i r ec t iona l i ty i s s ues ( the i r a lphabe t r eads r igh t to l ef t ; t he Rom an a lph abe t ,

l e f t to r igh t ), A rab ic s tud en t s l ea rn ing to r ead in E ng l i s h a r e l ike ly to have

prob le m s w i th vow els , w h ich a r e u s ua l ly no t w r i t t en ou t in eve ryday A rab ic

FACTORS INFLUENCING AI )ULT LITERACY DEVI :21 . OPMENT IN EN( ;LISH 11


20/58

w r i t ings (Ryan & M eara , 1991 ). S t r a teg ies tha t thes e l ea rne r s m ay have deve l -

oped to r ead A rab ic ( e .g . , p ro f i c i en t A rab ic and H ebre w read er s r e ly on con-

tex t to de te rmine w h ich vow el s ounds to a s s ign to w ords ) may no t w ork as

w e l l i n E n g l i s h r e a d i n g a n d s p e l l i n g , w h e r e v o w e l s m u s t b e a t t e n d e d t o

(B i r ch , 2002) .

M any adu l t ES L s tuden t s a r e l i t e r a te in a

Roman alphabetic langltage

(e.g.,

S pan i s h o r S e rbo Croa t i an ) . L ike thos e l i t e r a te in a non-Roman a lphabe t i c

s c r ip t o r in a logograph ic s c r ip t , t h es e l ea rne r s ha ve a l r eady deve lo ped r ead -

ing s k i l l s and fo rmed r ead ing behav io r s in the i r L1 , and they know tha t w r i t -

t e n l a n g u a g e c a n r e p r e s e n t s p e e c h . T h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d a n d l it e ra -

cy s ki ll s may be an im por tan t pa r t o f the i r s e l f - image . They c an s tudy t ex t s in

Eng l i s h , t ake no tes in ES L c las s es to lea rn ne w vocabu la ry o r s t ruc tu res , and

read ou t s ide o f c l as s . Y e t , a l thou gh the Eng l i s h a lpha be t w i l l be mo re f ami l i a r

t o t h e m t h a n t o o t h e r s w h o s e n a t i v e la n g u a g e d o e s n o t u s e t h e R o m a n a l p h a -

b e t , t h e y s t i l l n e e d t o l e a r n E n g l i s h s o u n d - s y m b o l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s b e f o r e

they a re ab le to r ead w e l l (H i l f e r ty , 1996 ; S t rucker , 2002) . Eng l i s h does no t

h a v e t h e s a m e l e v e l o f c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n s o u n d a n d w r i t t e n f o r m t h a t

occu r s in s ome o the r a lphabe t s , and l ea rne r s w ho a re u s ed to r ead ing a l an -

g u a g e s u c h a s S p a n i s h i n w h i c h t h e r e i s a o n e - t o - o n e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e

b e t w e e n s o u n d s a n d s y m b o l s w i ll fi n d t h e i rr e g u la r s o u n d - s y m b o l c o r r e s p o n -

dences in Eng l i s h t roub les ome. A t the s y l l ab ic l eve l , they w i l l need to l ea rn ,

f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t t h e c o m b i n a t i o n ough c a n b e p r o n o u n c e d a s i n tough a n d

rough

or as in

bought

a n d

sought.

T h e y a l s o n e e d t o l e ar n t h e m a n y p r o n u n c i -

a t ions o f vow els , inc lu d ing the i r s ounds in s t r e s s ed and uns t r e s s ed s y l l ab les .

In fact , a ll Eng l ish language learners , rega rdless of the type of L1 l i teracy in

t h e i r b a c k g r o u n d , n e e d d i r e c t t e a c h i n g i n t h e E n g l i s h s y m b o l s y s t e m a n d

E n g l i s h s o u n d - s y m b o l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s ( S t ru c k e r, 2 0 0 2 ) .

W hi le i t i s t r ue tha t l ea rne r s w ho a re l i t e r a te in ano the r l ang uage a r e l ike ly to

h a v e h a d m o r e p r e v i o u s e d u c a t i o n t h a t t h o s e w h o a r e n o t , o n e s h o u l d n o t

as s um e tha t p re l i t e r a te , non l i t e r a te , and s emi l i t e r a te l ea rne r s a r e incapa b le o f

abs t r ac t though t o r log ica l r eas on ing . F u r the rmore , mere in s t ruc t ion in r ead -

i n g d o e s n o t g u a r a n t e e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h o s e s k i ll s. A s S c r i b n e r a n d C o l e

( 1 9 7 8 ) c o n c l u d e d f r o m t h e i r s t u d y o f t h e V a i p e o p l e o f W e s t A f r i c a w h o

acqu i r ed l i t e r acy s k i l l s w i thou t educa t ion , l i t e r acy in s t ruc t ion does no t au to -

mat ica l ly fos te r ana ly t i c log ica l r eas on ing .

12 I :~EADING AND ADULT t :~NGLISt t LANGUA GE LEA RNERS


21/58

FIGURE 2

L1 Literacy and Effects on L2 Literacy Learninc

L1 Literacy

Ex p lanatio n Special Considerations

Preliterate

Nonl i tera te

Semi l i te ra te

Non a lphabe t l i t e ra te

Non-Roman a lphabe t

l i te ra te

Roman a lphabet

l i terate

L1 has no wr i t ten form

(e .g . , many Am er ican

ind igenous , A f r i can ,

Au st ra l ian , and Pacif ic

languages).

Learners had no access

to l i te racy inst ruct ion .

Learners had l im i ted

access to l i te racy

inst ruct ion .

Learners are ful ly

l i te ra te in a language

wr i t ten in a nona lpha-

be t ic scr ip t such as

Ch inese .

Learners are l i terate in

a langu age w r i t ten in a

non-Roman a lphabet

(e .g . , Arab ic, Greek,

Korean, Rus sian, Thai} .

Learners are ful ly

l i te ra te in a language

wr i t ten in a Roman

a lphabe t ic scr ip t (e .g . ,

French, German,

Croat ian , Span ish} .

T h e y kn o w t o r ea d

f rom le ft to r i g h t and

recogn ize le t ter shapes

and fonts.

Learners need expo-

sure to the purposes

and uses of l i teracy.

Learners may feel

s t i gma t i zed .

Learners may have had

nega t i ve expe r iences

with l i te racy learn ing.

Learners need inst ruc-

t ion in reading an

a lphabe t ic scr ip t and

in the sound -sy l lab le

co r respondences o f

Engl ish .

Learners need inst ruc-

t ion in the Roman

a lphabe t in o rde r to

t ransfer the ir L1 l i te racy

sk i l ls to Engl ish . Some

(e.g., readers of Arab ic)

wi l l need to learn to

read f rom le f t to r ight .

Learners need

inst ruct ion in the

spec i f i c le t te r - to - sound

and sound-sy l lab le

co r respondences o f

Engl ish .

F A C T O R S I N F L U E N C I N G A D U L T L I T E R A C Y D E V E L O P M E N T I N E N G L I S H 1 3


22/58

I t is genera l ly accepted tha t l eve l of l i t e racy in the L1 affec t s the l i t e racy ski ll s

tha t l earners can t ransfer f rom L1 to L2 reading (Grabe & Stol le r , 2002) .

Teachers need to know learners ' LI l i t e racy leve ls in order to make informed

decis ions about the reading ski l l s tha t they can he lp learners t ransfer to

Engl i sh and the reading s t ra tegies tha t they may need to teach in Engl i sh.

Even in cases in which there i s re la t ive ly high L1 l i t eracy, inc lud ing knowl-

edge about sound-sym bol cor re spon dence , c e r t a in sk i ll s may t rans fe r and o t h-

ers may not unless there i s di rec t ins t ruc t ion (Grabe & Stol le r , 2002; Hi l fe r ty,

1996; St rucker , 2002) . Hi l fe r ty (1996) , for example , looked a t the re la t ion-

ship of L2 decoding ski l l s to other reading and language subski l l s in the read-

i ng pe r form ance of 42 La t i no adul t Engl i sh l anguage l e a rne rs . An ana l ys is o f

t he S pani sh and Engl i sh l anguage and read i ng subsk il l s o f t he Spani sh speak-

ers show ed tha t the abi l i ty to deco de texts in Engl i sh acco un ted for 15% of

the subjec t s ' reading comprehension. Yet these learners , a l l prof ic ient readers

i n t he i r na ti ve Spani sh , w e re no t r e ce i v i ng d irec t i ns t ruc t i on i n sound-symb ol

cor resp on den ce in Engl i sh. From the resul t s of thi s study, H i l fe r ty posi ted

t h a t t h e r e l at i o n sh i p b e tw e e n E S L d e c o d i n g a n d r e a d in g c o m p r e h e n s i o n m a y

w e ll b e r e c i p r o c a l - - t h a t s t r e n g t h e n in g o n e p r o m o t e s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e

o t he r . For t ha t r e a son , she recommended i ns t ruc t i on i n Engl i sh decodi ng

even for prof ic ient L1 readers .

Some research indica tes tha t l earners a l so need to reach a threshold (or l eve l )

of knowl edge i n t he second l anguage ( l anguage -spec if i c knowl edge , Grabe

& Stolle r , 2002, p. 147) for posi t ive language t ransfer to oc cur (Carre l l , 1991 ;

Carson, Carre l l , Si lbers te in, & Kuehn, 1990) . Posi t ive language t ransfer

occurs when l e a rne rs a re ab l e t o use i n t he second l anguage t he me t acogni -

t ive knowl edge , o r knowl edge of how l anguage w orks , t ha t t hey l e a rned i n t he

f i rs t l anguage (Grabe & Stol le r , 2002) .

A s tudy by Carre l l (1991) seems to support thi s theory. Carre l l looked a t the

reading ski l l s in Engl i sh and Spanish of 75 na t ive Engl i sh speakers learning

Spani sh a t a un i ve rs it y i n t he U ni t ed S t a t es and 45 na t i ve Spani sh speake rs

learning Engl i sh a t an intensive Engl i sh program. She found tha t for the s tu-

dents l earning En gl i sh, fi rs t (Spanish ) l angu age reading abi l i ty was a more

i mpor t an t p red i c t or o f second l anguage read i ng sk i l l . For t he Spani sh l e a rn-

ers , second language pro f ic iency leve l was a more im por tant predic tor . Carre l l

I 4 . I ~ I : ;A I ) I N G A N D A I ) U L T E N G L I S t l h A N G U A G F I ~E A F ~ N I I ~S


23/58

su g g es t s t h a t b ecau se t h e E n g l i sh sk il l s o f t h e E S L s tu d en t s w e r e h ig h e r t h an

th e S p an i sh sk i l ls o f t h e n a t iv e E n g l i sh sp eak e r s , t h e E SL s tu d en t s we r e b e t -

t e r ab l e t o u se r ead in g s t r a t eg ie s f r o m th e i r n a t iv e Sp an i sh in r ead in g E n g l i sh .

Th e s tudy , however , was inconclus ive beca use o f i t s smal l s ize, d i f fe rences in

d i f f i cu lty lev e ls o f t h e r ead in g s i n E n g l i sh an d Sp an i sh , an d d i f f e r en ces i n L 1

an d L 2 l an g u ag e p r o f i c i en cy l eve l s o f th e two g ro u p s . F u r th e r m o r e , a s Ca r r e l l

ad m i t t ed , p a r t o f t h e d i f f e r en ce b e tw een th e two g r o up s co u ld b e a t t r i b u t ed

to t h e n a tu r e o f seco n d l an g u ag e l e a r n in g ( i n t h e ca se o f t h e E n g l i sh - l an g u ag e

lea r n e r s ) an d f o r e ig n l an g u ag e l e a r n in g ( i n t h e ca se o f t h e Sp an i sh - l an g u ag e

lea r n e r s ) . Mo r e r e sea r ch i s n eed ed in t h i s a r ea .

I n su m m ar y , i t s eem s th a t l e a r n e r s wh o a r e h ig h ly l i t e r a te i n t h e i r L 1 an d wh o

also have h igh leve ls o f L2 prof ic ien cy wi l l be m ore l ike ly to t ransfer the i r L1

read ing s t ra teg ies to L2 read ing ; learners wi th low leve ls o f L2 prof ic iency wi l l

n eed m o r e h e lp . W h en l ea r n e r s h av e r each ed th e p o in t t h a t t h e i r m e taco g n i -

t i v e k n o wled g e ( f r o m th e i r L 1 ) can su p p o r t t h e i r L 2 r ead in g , t h ey sh o u ld b e

t au g h t h o w to ap p ly t h a t k n o wled g e to r ead in g t a sk s . T h ey can b e a sk ed to

co n s id e r t h e i r p u r p o se s f o r r e ad in g, t h e way s t h ey d ea l w i th u n f am i l i a r vo cab -

u l a r y , an d wh a t t h ey d o wh en th ey d o n ' t u n d e r s t an d a t ex t , an d th ey can b e

t au g h t t o ap p ly t h e se s t r a t eg i e s i n t h e i r L 2 r ead in g . T each e r s sh o u ld n o t

assume tha t t ransfer o f l i te racy sk i l l s wi l l occur au tomat ica l ly . Direc t ins t ruc-

t ion in e f fec t ive read ing s t ra teg ies i s needed a t a l l l i te racy leve ls .

FIGURE 3

4 * a s s i g n i n g l e a r n e r s t o c l a s s e s : Non- l i terate learners may have d i f f icu l ty

us ing wr i t ing to re inforce what they learn ora l ly . They may learn less

rapid ly than other learners.

o

i m p l e m e n t i n g l e s s o n p l a n s :

Lessons that

i n v o l v e a l o t o f w r i t i n g e . g . ,

on the chalk board) w i l l be less com preh ensib le for non- l i terate learners.

*"

t e a c h i n g l i t e r a c y s k i l l s :

Learners can transfer the sk i l ls the y have f rom

L1 read ing to L2 read ing . However , the t rans fe r may no t a lways be

automat ic o r pos i ti ve . S ome add i t iona l read ing sk i ll s w i l l have to be

ta ugh t .

FACTORS INFLUENCI NG ADULT LITERACY DEVELOPM ENT IN ENGLISH 15


24/58

Educational Background

Learner s ' f i r s t l anguage l i t e r acy i s o f t en l inked to the i r educa t iona l exper i -

e n c e s . G r a b e a n d S t o l le r ( 20 0 2 ) i d e n t i f y e d u c a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d a s o n e o f

t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f a c to r s b e t w e e n L 1 a n d L 2 l i te r a c y le a r n e rs , n o t i n g t h a t L 2

lea rne r s b r ing the i r expec ta t ion s abou t l i t e r acy in s t ruc t ion f rom the L1 expe-

r i ence to the t a s k o f l ea rn ing to r ead in the L2 .

Learners wit h l imited or no l i teracy in their f irs t language

have l ike ly had l i tt l e

o r n o e x p e r i e n c e w i t h f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n . T h e s e l e a r n e rs m a y b e u n a c c u s -

tom ed to s i t t ing in des ks fo r long pe r iods o f t ime , l i s t en ing to a t eacher , and

i n t e r a c t i n g w i th o t h e r a d u l t s a s f e l lo w l e a rn e r s . M o s t o f t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e s m a y h a v e i n v o l v e d w a t c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g fr o m o t h e r s . T h e y o f t e n

h a v e n o t l e a r n e d s t u d y s k i l l s c o m m o n t o s t u d e n t s w i t h f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n .

Th e i r l ea rn ing w i l l p robab ly no t , the re fo re , mi r ro r tha t o f l ea rne r s w ho have

h a d m o r e e x p e r i e n c e w i t h f o rm a l e d u c a t i o n ( H a r d m a n , 1 9 9 9; H u n t l e y , 1 9 9 2 ;

Klassen & Burnaby, 1993) .

F o r thes e l ea rne r s e s pec ia l ly , l it e r acy in s t ruc t ion i s more l ike ly to be s ucces s -

fu l w h en i t i s pe rce ived as r e l evan t to the i r l ives and w h en they f ee l comfor t -

a b l e i n t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l s e t t i n g . S o m e d e s c r i p t i v e s t u d i e s s e e m t o s u p p o r t

th i s (H ardm an , 1999 ; K las s en & Burnaby , 1993; M iku lec ky 1992) . H ardm an ,

f o r e x a m p l e , f o u n d t h a t h i s s e m i l i t e r a te C a m b o d i a n a d u l t s t u d e n t s f e l t m o r e

c o m f o r t a b l e i n t h e c l a s s r o o m a n d h a d m o r e p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s a b o u t r e a d i n g

w h e n t h e y w e r e a l l o w e d to b r i n g t h e i r E n g l i s h - sp e a k i n g c h i ld r e n t o c l a s s t o

w o r k w i t h t h e m o n r e a d i n g t as k s.

Learners wh o are highly l i terate in their f irs t language

a re m ore l ike ly to have

h a d f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n i n t h a t l a n g u a g e . H o w e v e r , w h i l e t h e y h a v e v a s t

r es ources to d raw on in l ea rn ing to r ead in Eng l i s h , the i r p r io r educa t iona l

e x p e r i e n c e s m a y d i f f e r f r o m t h o s e t h e y h a v e i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

(Co ns tan t in o , 1995 ; Ts e , 1996a , 1996b) . Th ey may expec t a g rea t dea l o f

d i r e c t t e a c h i n g a n d t r a d i t io n a l a p p r o a c h e s t o l e a rn i n g , s u c h a s m e m o r i z i n g

v o c a b u l a ry l is ts a n d d o i n g m e c h a n i c a l e x e r c i se s , a n d t h e y m a y t e n d t o f o c u s

m o r e o n r e a d i n g a c c u r a c y t h a n o n r e a d i n g f l u e n c y . T h e y m a y b e n e f i t f r o m

1 6 R E A D I N G A N D A D U L T E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E L E A R N E R S


25/58

extensive or pleasure reading in E ngl ish to improve their reading f luency an d

to increase their exposure to English vocabulary (Coady, 1997; Tse, 1996a,

1996b). As with all adult learning, adults learning to read in English need to

know why they are engaged in specif ic act ivi t ies and what they can expect to

learn f rom them (Florez & Burt , 2001) .

lS e c o n d L a n g u a g e p ro fic ie n c y

Adult English language learners have varying levels of proficiency in English,

which m ay inf luence their reading speed and com prehension (Tan, Moore,

Dixon, & Nicholson, 1994). Several studies suggest that f irst language read-

ing abili ty is a less significant predictor of second language reading abili ty

than is second language proficiency, especially among lower proficiency learn-

ers (Alderson, 1984; Carrell , 1991; Tan et al . , 1994). As a result , the positive

influence of first language li teracy, as discussed above, may be limited by pro-

f iciency in the second language.

The fol lowing sect ions discuss two influent ial com pone nts of second lan-

guage prof ic iency- -vocabulary knowledge and syntac t i c p rof ic iency- -and

their role in learning to read.

Vo c a b u la ry K n ow l ed g e

One of the components of language prof iciency that has been shown to have

a s trong effect on reading comp rehension is vocabulary knowledge in the lan-

guage being read (Coady, 1997; Coady, Mgoto, Hubbard, Graney, &

Mokhtar i , 1993) . Other research sugges ts that vocabulary knowledge is

gained through extens ive and f requent reading (Cho & Krasben, 1994;

Con stantin o, 1995; Joe, 1998). This dual interaction is the basis of the

beginner 's paradox (Coady, 1997, p. 229): Learne rs need to read to gain

vocabulary knowledge, but they need vocabulary knowledge in order to read.

(Reading specialists , including Grabe and Stoller, 2002, and Laufer, 1997,

posi t that a minimum of 3,000 words is needed to be able to read independ-

ent ly in the second language.)

FACTORS INFLUENCI NG ADULT LITERACY DEVELOPME NT IN ENGLISH 17


26/58

FIGURE 4

o:o B r e a d th - -T he n um b e r o f wo r ds a l e ar n e r kn o ws o r the n u m b e r o f

con ten t a reas in wh ich a lea rner i s fami l i a r w i th the v ocabu la ry

o~ D e p t h - - T h e a m o u n t o f k n o w l e d g e a le a rn e r h a s a b o u t i n d i v id u a l w o r d s

i n c l ud i n g

Pho n o l o gy - -P r o n un c i a t i o n

O r t h o g r a p h y - - S p e l l i n g

M o r p h o l o g y :

Par ts o f speech (e . g . , nouns and ve rbs)

Pref ixes (e .g. , un-, re-) and suf f ixes (e .g. , -ab le , - ing)

Ho w p r e f i x e s a n d su f f i x e s cha n ge a wo r d ' s me a n i n g a n d u se

Syn ta x - -H o w the wo r d i s u se d i n se n te n ce s

C o n n o t a t i o n s - - A s s o c i a t e d m e a n i n g s

P o l y s e m y - - M u l t i p l e m e a n i n g s

Re g i s te r W ha t co nte x t s t he wo r d i s u se d in

Vocabulary knowledge i s more than knowledge of the basic meanings of

words . C om prehens ion i s a f fec t ed by bo th the b r ea d th - -o r s i ze- --o f a l earn -

e r ' s vocabu la ry and the dep th - -o r knowledge abou t t he p ronunc ia t ion and

spel l ing, morphological proper t ies , sy ntact ic proper t ies , conn otat ions, po lyse-

my (a word 's mul t ip le meanings) , and register (context and appropr ia teness)

(Qian , 1999). Similarly, intraw ord sensit ivity, th e reader 's ab il i ty to use bo th

phono log ica l and morpho log ica l i n fo rmat ion to p rocess and comprehend

words, af fects decoding a t the word level (Koda, 1999) . When invest igat ing

the e f f ec t s o f vocabu la ry knowledge on r ead ing deve lopm en t and he lp ing s tu -

dents augment thei r vocabulary , th is deta i led informat ion about vocabulary

knowledge i s useful .

There i s no consensus among r esea r chers and p r ac t i t i one rs on the e f f ec tive -

ness of word guessing and the use of b i l ingual d ic t ionar ies . Some advocate

that b i l ingual d ic t ionar ies not be used in ESL reading c lasses because learn-

ers need to be able to determine word meaning f rom context . Others argue

that in order to learn new words f rom a text , readers need to understand a t

least 95%-98% of the o ther words, and that readers cannot use contextual

cues t o guess a word ' s mean ing un less t hey know the mean ings o f t he cues

(Coady, 1997; Co ady et al ., 1993; Laufer, 1997). Furthe rm ore, w he n readers

are asked to read texts that are too di f f icul t , the resul t wi l l be f rust ra t ion



27/58

r a t h e r t h a n c o m p r e h e n s i o n . S i m p l y g u e s s in g w o r d m e a n i n g s w i ll n o t l e a d s tu -

d e n t s t o c o m p r e h e n s i o n i n m a n y c a s e s ( H a y n e s , 1 9 9 3; L a u f er , 1 9 9 7) .

Even i f r eader s under s tand a l l o f the w ords us ed in a t ex t , they migh t no t

u n d e r s t a n d t h e m i n a p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e x t . T h e y a l s o n e e d t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e

cu l tu ra l con tex t in w h ich a w ord appear s (Rance-Roney , 1997) . F o r example ,

t h e t e r m

tree house

m a y h a v e n o m e a n i n g fo r a r e a d e r w h o k n o w s w h a t t r e e s

a n d h o u s e s a r e b u t h a s n o e x p e r i e n c e w i t h c h i l d r e n m a k i n g p l a y h o u s e s in

t r ees , o r o f peo p le t r ea t ing t r ees a s hous e s in s om e w ay . (H ow w ou ld one l ive

in a pa lm t r ee? ) In th i s and o the r cas es , a mono l ingua l Eng l i s h d ic t ionary o r

e v e n a b i l in g u a l d ic t i o n a ry c o u l d b e u s e fu l . L e a r n e r s s h o u l d b e e n c o u r a g e d

f i r s t to u s e Eng l i s h d ic t ionar ies w i th examples and con tex tua l des c r ip t ions ,

and then , i f tha t f a i l s , t o look the w ord up in a b i l ingua l d ic t ionary . In s ome

ins tances , u s ing bo th d ic t ionar ies may be he lp fu l , w i th the l e a rne r ge t t ing a

s e n s e o f w h a t t h e w o r d l i t er a ll y a n d c o m m o n l y m e a n s f r o m t h e b i li n g u a l d i c -

t ionary and how i t i s u s ed in the t ex t f rom the Eng l i s h d ic tionary .

W h a t e v e r s t ra t e g y is u s e d t o i m p r o v e v o c a bu l a ry k n o w l e d g e , t e a c h e r g u i d a n c e

th rou gho u t the r ea d ing p roces s is impor tan t . I n a s mal l des c r ip t ive s tudy, C ho

and K ras hen (1994) found inc reas ed l ea rne r ga ins in vocabu la ry w i th ex ten -

s ive r ead ing . I t i s no t c l ea r , how ever , w he the r the ga ins w ou ld have been s o

d ramat ic i f the l ea rne r s had no t d i s cus s ed the books in the i r na t ive K orean

w i t h t h e r e s e a r c h e r / te a c h e r . I n a n o t h e r s m a l l d e s c ri p t iv e s t u d y ( C o n s t a n t i n o ,

1 9 9 5 ), l e a r n e r s k e p t j o u r n a l s o n w h a t t h e y r e a d a n d r e s p o n d e d t o q u e s t i o n s

a b o u t r e a d in g s . R e s e a r c h i s n e e d e d o n t h e t y p es o f g u i d a n c e , d i sc u s s i o n , a n d

o the r he lp tha t a r e needed fo r r ead ing - r e la ted l ea rn ing to occu r .

The need fo r inc reas ed vocabu la ry in the L2 can be addres s ed on s evera l l ev -

e l s . F i r s t , d i r ec t vocabu la ry in s t ruc t ion can be pa r t o f the ES L l i t e r acy cu r -

r i cu lum. I t can improve r ead ing com preh ens ion , e s pec ia l ly w hen i t i s g iven

befo re the t ex t is r ead (Coad~; 1997) . Com pute r - as s i s t e d vocabu la ry ac t iv i t i e s

may be pa r t i cu la rly he lp fu l , a s th ey a l low ind iv idua l i zed vocabu la ry l ea rn ing

(Brow n, 1993; Co ady et al ., 1993; Thuy, 1992) . Texts that re pea t voca bulary

a re mo re l ike ly to be co mp rehe ns ib le , e s pec ia l ly to l ea rne r s w i th low er

Eng l i s h l anguage p ro f i c i enc y (Cho 8 : K rashen , 1994) . A s tudy o f 85 l ea rne r s

in an IEP s e t t ing (Brow n , 1993) s ugges t s tha t vocabu la ry i t ems a re m ore l ike -

ly to b e l e a r n e d w h e n t h e y a r e k e y to t h e c o m p r e h e n s i o n o f a te x t.

FACTORS INFLUENCI N( ; ADULT LITERACY DEVELOPM ENT IN EN( ;LIS t t 19


28/58

S y n t a c t i c r o f i c i e n c y

W h i l e t h e r e l a t io n s h i p b e t w e e n s y n t a c t i c p r o f ic i e n c y a n d s e c o n d l a n g u ag e

r e a d i n g c o m p r e h e n s i o n i s l es s w e l l s t u d i e d t h a n t h a t o f v o c a b u la r y k n o w l -

e d g e , t h e r e i s a d e f i n i t e r e l a t io n s h i p b e t w e e n u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f

a l a n g u a g e a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g a w r i t t e n t ex t. S t u d e n t s w i t h g r e a t e r s y n ta c t i c

k n o w l e d g e a r e b e t t e r a b l e t o p r o c e s s t ex t a t t h e s e n t e n c e l e v e l a n d t o u s e t h i s

k n o w l e d g e t o m a k e i n f o r m e d d e c i s i o n s a b o u t t h e m e a n i n g o f a p a s sa g e

( G o l d b e r g , 1 9 9 7 ) . S t u d e n t s s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o w n h o w t o c o n n e c t f o r m

w i t h m e a n i n g a n d t o i d e n t i f y c u e s t h a t s i g n a l t h a t c o n n e c t i o n ( f o r e x a m p l e ,

u s e o f - e d t o fo r m a n a d j e c ti v e , a s in t h e e n r a g e d a ni m a l ) .

G r a m m a r l e a r n i n g s h o u l d b e i n t e g r a t e d w i t h r e a d i n g i n s tr u c t i o n t o r e i n fo r c e

g r a m m a r l e a r n i n g i ts e lf , t o i n c r e a s e r e a d i n g c o m p r e h e n s i o n , a n d t o p r o v i d e a

c o n t e x t f o r t h e e x a m i n a t i o n o f g r a m m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s . G r a m m a r i n w r i t t e n

t e x t ha s t h e a d v a n t a g e o f b e i n g f r oz e n o n t h e p a g e s o t h a t i t c a n b e e x a m i n e d

and ana lyzed , un l ike g rammar occu r r ing in conver s a t ion tha t f l i e s by qu ick ly

o r i s ha rd to hea r in the f low o f s peech . F o r example , the pas t t ens e marker

- e d i s h a r d t o h e a r w h e n a / t / s o u n d f o ll o w s i t (e .g .,

I w alk e d to sc ho o l ) .

T o h e l p

lea rne r s focus on g rammat ica l s t ruc tu res in t ex t s , t eacher s can po in t ou t s pe -

c i f ic s t ruc tu res in a r ead in g pas s age , choo s e pas s ages tha t h igh l igh t the g ram -

m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s t h a t s t u d e n t s a r e l e a r n i n g , a n d h a v e s t u d e n t s f i n d a n d

mark s pec i f i c g rammat ica l s t ruc tu res .

l L e a r n e r G o a l s

A du l t s l ea rn ing Eng l i s h have va ry ing nee ds fo r li te racy. S om e o f the m os t

c o m m o n a r e t o s u c c e e d a t w o r k , p a r t ic i p a t e i n t h e i r c h i l d r e n 's e d u c a t i o n , g a i n

U .S . c i t i z ens h ip , pa r t i c ipa te in co m m un i ty ac tiv i t ie s in Eng l i s h , and pu r s ue

f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n ( M a r s h al l , 2 0 0 2 ) . L e a r n e r s ' n e e d s f o r li t er a c y d e v e l o p m e n t

are refer red to as l i teracy goals or l i teracy purposes .

S om e lea rne r s may focus on improv ing the i r func t iona l l i te r acy in o rde r to

advance in the w orkp lace (M iku lecky , 1992). M a ny ca nno t adv ance in the i r j obs

o r r ece ive the job t r a in ing they nee d un t i l they have ach iev ed a func t iona l l eve l

o f Eng l i s h l it er acy : In ma ny cas es, a G ED (G enera l Edu ca t iona l D ev e lopm en t )

cer t i f icate may be req uired for job pr om otion (M ikulecky, 1992; S trucker , 1997).



29/58

FIGURE 5

O t h e r l e a r n e r s m a y w a n t t o

improve their l i teracy ski l ls to

: " Increased job success h e l p t h e i r c h i l d r e n i n s c h o o l

olo Invo lvemen t in ch i ld ren 's educa t ion (S h ana han , M ulh ern , &

4 Par t i c i pa tion in the com mu n i ty

R o d r i g u e z - B r o w n , 1 9 9 5 ) . T h e

~ . Con t inued educa t ion be l i e f tha t pa ren t s ' l i t e racy i s a

p red ic to r o f ch i ld ren ' s even tua l

l i te r a c y a t t a i n m e n t i s o n e o f t h e

reas ons beh ind the s uppor t fo r f ami ly l i t e r acy in U .S . D epar tmen t o f

Educa t ion l eg i s l a t ion (N a t iona l Cen te r fo r ES L Li te r acy Educa t ion , 2002) .

S i n c e m u c h o f s c h o o l - r e la t e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n i s c o n d u c t e d i n w r i t te n E n g l i s h ,

l imi ted E ng l i s h l i te r acy may l imi t pa ren t s ' i nvo lve me n t in the i r ch i ld ren ' s edu -

c a t i o n a n d t h e i r c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h t e a c h e r s, a d m i n i s tr a to r s , a n d c o u n s e lo r s .

F u r the rm ore , ad u l t s w ho a re no t l i t e ra te in Eng l i s h w i l l be un ab le to s ha re

Eng l i s h l i t e r acy w i th th e i r ch i ld ren o r he lp t he m lea rn En g l i s h vocabu la ry .

O t h e r c o m m o n l it e ra c y g o al s f o r a d u l t E S L s t u d e n t s c e n t e r a r o u n d c o m m u -

n i ty pa r t i c ipa t ion . Th es e goa l s inc lu de ach iev ing the s k i ll s to move s ucce s s -

f u ll y t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f b e c o m i n g a U . S . c i t i z e n , t o h a n d l e f i n a n c ia l

t ra n s a ct io n s , a n d t o k e e p i n f o rm e d a b o u t d e v e l o p m e n t s in t h e c o m m u n i t y

(K las s en & Burnaby , 1993 ; S t rucker , 1997) . A du l t ES L s tuden t s w ho w is h to

ga in c i t i z ens h ip in the U n i ted S ta tes need to pas s a w r i t t en t e s t on U .S . gov-

e r n m e n t a n d h is to ry . L i k e w i s e , a t e v e r y s t e p i n t h e r e s i d e n c y a n d c i t i z e n s h i p

p r o c e s s , l e a r n e r s n e e d t o h a v e t h e l i t e r a c y s k i l l s t o f i l l o u t f o r m s .

O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n v o l v e m e n t i n c o m m u n i t y a c t iv i ti e s a r e u s u a ll y a n n o u n c e d

t h r o u g h w r i t t e n c o m m u n i c a t i o n , m o s t o f t e n i n E n g l i s h . A d u l t s l e a r n i n g

E n g l i s h n e e d t o b e a b l e t o r e a d i n E n g l i s h to i n t e g r a t e i n t o a n d t a k e a n a c t iv e

r o l e i n s h a p i n g t h e i r c o m m u n i t i e s .

I n a d d i t i o n t o i n t e g r a t in g i n t o t h e E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t y , a d u l t s w h o

are l i t e r a te in Eng l i s h can s e rve as va luab le advo ca tes fo r the i r f ir s t l anguage

c o m m u n i t y to t h e l a r g e r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t y ( A u e r b a c h , 1 9 9 2) .

M o s t a d v o c a c y a c t iv i ti e s in t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t h a t r e a c h d e c i s i o n m a k e r s a r e

c o n d u c t e d i n E n g l i s h .

F ina l ly , many l ea rne r s w an t to improve the i r l i t e r acy s k i l l s to inc reas e the i r

o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o c o n t i n u e t h e i r e d u c a t i o n ( R a n c e - R o n e y , 1 9 9 5 ) . S o m e n e e d

F A C T O R S I N F L U E N C I N G A D U L T L I T E R A C Y D E V E L O P M E N T I N E N G L I S H 2 1


30/58

to ob ta in a h igh school equ iva lency degree ; o thers a re seek ing cer t i f ica t ion in

Engl ish o f degrees and sk i l l s they have in the i r na t ive language . St i l l o thers

n eed E n g l i sh r ead in g sk i l l s t o p a ss s t an d a r d i z ed t e s t s su ch a s t h e T es t o f

E n g l i sh a s a Fo r e ig n L an g u ag e ( T O E FL ) an d en r o l l in i n s t i t u t io n s o f h ig h e r

learn ing .

I t seem s l ike ly tha t u s ing mater ia ls re la ted to the spec i f ic goals o f learners w i l l

improve bo th the acqu is i t ion o f l i te racy sk i l l s re la ted to those goals and lan-

g u ag e acq u i s i t i o n in g en e r a l . I n d eed , i t h a s l o n g b een an a ssu m p t io n in ad u l t

ed u ca t io n in g en e r a l an d ad u l t E S L ed u ca t io n in p a r t i cu l a r t h a t l e a r n e r s l e a rn

b e t t e r wh en th e m a te r i a l t h ey s tu d y i s r e l ev an t t o t h e i r r e a l - l i f e n eed s an d

goals (Auerbac h , 1992 ; Knowles , 1984) . Unfor tunate l> ; there i s l i t t le research

on th is i ssue . In h is s tudy of Engl ish language learners in a workp lace l i te ra-

cy p r o g ram , Mik u leck y ( 1 9 9 2 ) f o u n d th a t p r o v id in g j o b - r e l a t ed l i t er acy

inst ruc t ion a t the workplace improved bo th acqu is i t ion o f l i te racy sk i l l s re la t -

ed to spec i f ic jobs and t ransfer o f the read ing sk i l l s acqu ired to o ther s i tua-

t ions . Genera l iz ing f rom th is s tudy , mater ia ls used in ins t ruc t ion should

m a tch th e g o a l s o f t h e l e a r n e r : Sch o o l - r e l a t ed in s t r u c t io n an d m a te r i a l s

shou ld be used wi th pare n ts in fami ly l i te racy programs, w orkp lace ins t ruc-

t ion and mater ia ls should be used wi th workers , and c iv ics- focused ins t ruc-

t i o n an d m a te r i a l s sh o u ld b e u sed in c i t i z en sh ip c l a s se s . T h e ch a l l en g e , o f

course , i s address ing learners ' in te res ts when a var ie ty o f goa ls fo r develop ing

l i t e racy a r e r ep r e sen ted in o n e c l a s s o r p r o g ram . Fu r th e r r e sea r ch i s n eed ed

in this area.

W h a tev e r t h e r ead in g g o al s o f l e a r n e rs , t e ach e r s sh o u ld h e lp t h em en j o y an d

tak e r e sp o n s ib i l i t y f o r t h e i r o wn l ea r n in g . T h i s c an b e d o n e b y en co u r ag in g

learners to seek oppor tun i t ies fo r l i te racy ac t iv i t ies ins ide and ou ts ide o f c lass ,

and to take no te o f the i r uses fo r l i te racy in the i r da i ly l ives , inc lud ing p leas-

ure read ing . H aving learners iden t i fy the i r spec i f ic li te racy goals ma in ta in s

th e i r i n t e r e s t an d m o t iv a t io n ( Co m in g s & Cu b an , 2 0 0 0 ; Co m in g s , Pa r e l l a , &

Sor icone , 2000) .

22 REAl ) IN( ; AND A I )ULT ENGLIS t t I ,AN( ;UA( ; IL LEARNERS


31/58

S E

The Process o f Learn ing to Read

i n a S e c o n d L a n gu a ge

h e q u es t io n o f wh a t i s i n vo lv ed in t h e p r o cess o f le a r n in g to r ead h a s

in t r igued cogni t ive sc ien t i s t s and psycholog is ts over the years . Excep t

f o r f u n c t io n a l M ag n e t i c R eso n an c e I m ag in g ( f MRI ) s tu d i es ( e.g ., L y o n

& Krasnegor , 1996 ; Lyon & Rumsey , 1996) , which are in the i r in fancy , we do

n o t a c tu a l ly see ev id en ce o f t h e r ead in g p r o cess a s i t o ccu r s . Resea r ch e r s h av e

u sed ev id en ce f r o m an a ly se s o f o r al r e ad in g , f r om e y e - m o v em en t s tu d i e s , an d

f rom learners ' r esponses on post - read ing ac t iv i t ies to in fer the p rocess tha t

o ccu r s i n t h e m in d a s t h e r ead e r t ak es i n wr i t t en i n f o r m a t io n .

T each e r s n eed to u n d e r s t an d th e r ead in g p r o cess i n o r d e r t o h e lp ad u l t

Engl ish learners develop read ing sk i l l s and s t ra teg ies , to eva lua te the e f fec-

t i v en ess o f p ed ag o g ica l t e ch n iq u es d e s ig n ed to b u i ld r ead in g p r o f ic i en cy, t o

im p lem en t t h o se t e ch n iq u es i n t h e i r i n s t r u c t io n , an d to u n d e r s t an d an d h e lp

learners who have read ing d i f f icu l t ies .

T h i s sec t io n su m m ar i z e s m o d e l s ( o r f r am ewo r k s ) t h a t h av e a t t em p ted to

d esc r ib e t h e r ead in g p r o cess . I t is f o ll o wed b y a d i scu ss io n o f t h e i n t e r n a l

m o d e l s t h a t l e a r n e r s w i th p r io r l i te r acy ex p e r i en ces m ay b r in g to t h e p r o cess .

I t t h en d e sc r ib e s t h e sp ec i f i c sk i l ls in v o lv ed in r ead in g . T h eo r i e s an d r e sea r ch

involv ing adu l t Engl ish learners in these a reas a re descr ibed f i r s t , fo l lowed by

im p l i ca t io n s f o r p r ac ti c e .

-' F u n c t i o n a l m a g n e t i c r e s o n a n c e i m a g i n g ( f M R I ) u s e s m a g n e t i c r e s o n a n c e t e c h n o l o g y t o v is u a l iz e

t h e w a y t h a t t h e b r a i n f u n c t i o n s . I t s h o w s c h a n g e s i n t h e c h e m i c a l c o m p o s i t i o n o f a r e a s o f t h e b r a i n

to f i nd ou t wha t t he b r a in i s do ing when ind iv idua l s pe r f o r m s pec i f i c t a s ks s uch as r ead ing a t ex t .

( See , f o r example , Gr egg , n . d . , f o r d i s cus s ion . )

T H E P R O C E S S O F L E A R N I N G TO R E A D IN A S E C O N D L A N G U A G E 2 3


32/58

T h e o r i e s a n d R e s e a r c h

M o d e ls o f R e ad i n g

Researcher s have a t t em pted to desc r ibe the r ead ing p rocess by us ing mode ls .

Th i s sec t ion d i scusses some o f t he more in f luen t i a l ones . These mode l s

descr ibe the reading process in general and are not speci f ic to the process of

how adul ts learn to read in a second language. However , understanding the

fundam en ta l na tu r e o f the r ead ing p rocess i s necessa ry to unde r s t and ing how

reading in E ngl ish i s learned.

B o t tom -u p m od e l s . Bo t tom-up mode l s f ocus on how r eaders ex t rac t i n fo r -

mat ion f rom texts- - f rom the page to the mind (See, for example , Segalowi tz ,

Poulsen, & Komoda, 1991.) These models descr ibe reading as a process of

gather ing visual informat ion f rom the text and synthe siz ing that informa t ion

th rough d i f f e r en t sys t ems in t he b r a in tha t i den t i f y t he l e t t e r s, m ap them on to

words (word recogni t ion) , and analyze words in c lauses and sentences ( syn-

tact ic parsing) . Thus, the reader bui lds meaning by f i r s t focusing on the

sma l lest uni ts of language, le t ters and sound s, and then mov ing to larger uni ts

of language (syl lables , words, phrases, and sentences) . In shor t , as S tanovich

& Stanovich (1999) argue, the abi l i ty to decode text by knowing how sound

is represented in pr in t i s cr it ical for success in learning to read.

T o p - d o w n m o d e l s . S o m e r e s ea r c he r s h av e a r g ue d th a t b o t to m - u p m o d e l s

do not account for observed reading phenomena. (See, for example , Coady,

1997 ; Eskey , 1997 ; Goo dm an , 1988 ; Hay nes , 1993 . ) For example ,

researchers con duc t ing misc ue analysis s tudies (analysis of the m istakes read-

ers make in oral reading) conclu ded that readers do n ot passively take in the

informat ion f rom the text , but ra ther are act ively involved in pred ict ing me an-

ing based on bo th cues f rom the t ex t ( i n f e r enc ing) and the i r background

knowledge.

In t e r a c t iv e m od e l s . Bo t tom-up mode l s desc r ibe the r eader a s a r riv ing a t

meaning by moving f rom le t ters to words to phrases and sentences and ar r iv-

ing a t meaning. Top-down mod els descr ibe the reader as der iv ing me aning

pr imar i ly f rom predict ions abou t the text and bac kgroun d knowledge.

Interact ive models posi t that both processes work together : Word recogni-

2 4 R E A D I N G A N D A D U L T E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E L E A RN E R S


33/58

t i o n - - t h e b o t t o m - u p a b il it y t o tu r n l e t t e r s i n t o s o u n d s - - i s i n f o r m e d b y t h e

t o p - d o w n s k il ls o f a p p l y in g b a c k g r o u n d k n o w l e d g e , i n f e r e n c in g , a n d p r e d i c t -

ing (S ee G rabe & S to l l e r , 2002 , pp . 31 -34 , fo r d i s cus s ion . ) G rabe and S to l l e r

a r g u e t h a t m o d i f i e d i n t e r a c ti v e m o d e l s a r e n e c e ss a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d r e a d i n g

c o m p r e h e n s i o n . T h e s e m o d e l s w i l l h i g h l i g h t t h e n u m b e r o f p r o c e s s e s t h a t

t a k e p la c e a s t h e r e a d e r d e c o d e s a n d c o m p r e h e n d s te x t. M a n y o f th e p r o c e s s -

e s t h a t f l u e n t r e a d e r s u s e a r e b o t t o m u p a n d a u t o m a t i c : W o r d r e c o g n i t i o n

invo lves ge t t ing in fo rm at ion f rom t he l e t t e r s , f rom phono logy , and f rom le t t e r

s h a p e s . E v e n u s i n g g r a m m a t i c a l k n o w l e d g e c a n b e a l m o s t a u t o m a t i c .

H o w e v e r w h e n a u t o m a t i c b o t t o m u p p r o c e s s e s a re n o t e n o u g h t o c o m p r e -

h e n d w h a t i t b e i n g r e ad , t o p d o w n p r o c e s s e s s u c h a s g e t ti n g m e a n i n g fr o m

con tex t and us ing s yn tax cues can be ac t iva ted . F o r L2 r eader s , w ho a re s e l -

d o m f l u e n t a n d f r e q u e n t l y d o n e e d t o a c ti v a te t o p - d o w n p r o c e s s e s , t h e m o d -

i f i ed in te r ac t ive mode l s eems to be qu i t e v iab le .

L e a r n e r s i n t e r n a l

m o d e l s . A d u l t E n g l i s h l a n g u ag e le a r n e rs w h o a re l it e r-

a te o r w h o have be en expos ed to l i t e racy may approach l i te r acy l ea rn ing w i th

t h e i r o w n , o f t e n s u b c o n s c i o u s , m o d e l s o f t h e r e a d i n g p r o c e s s , w h i c h m a y

af fec t the i r r ead ing behav io r s . Lea rne r s w ho have in te rna l i zed bo t tom-up ,

decod ing -bas ed p roces s es may focus

reading and adult english learners

Documents