individuals to say something about the pictures, The class then repeats the child's sentence. Student: The doll is little. (Group repeats the sentence.) Student: The tiger is big. Student: The baby is young. Student: The man is old. Teacher: Is the baby happy? Student: No, they're not. Teacher: No, it's not. Student: No, it's not. Teacher: Is the boy young or old? Student: The boy is young. Teacher: Very good, everybody, the boy is young. Group: The boy is young. The teacher has three students come to the front of the room. She has them all crouch down. Teacher: Are they short? Group: Yes, they are short Teacher: Ok, you three are going to say, "We are s h o rt." Students: We are short. Teacher: Are they short? Group: Yes, they are. They are short. The teacher continues this drill asking various individuals If they are short or tall. Teacher: Everyone please get out your I Like English books. First person in each row pass out I Like English books. What row is going to be firs t? Everybody on page 136 please. Please point to number one on page 136. Who can tell me, there are three, what? Student: Three sheep. Teacher continues the word drill using the pictures in the textbook. She asks the group what the characters in the pictures would say, i.e., You are short. Yes, we are short. When they have responded to all twelve pictures on the page the teacher Instructs the group to take out their pencils. She explains that she will say a sentence for each picture. The students must circle the appropriate item in the 9 6
picture, then write the word which she Indicates. For example, In number one there Is a picture of two people. The teacher says, "She's short." The children must circle the short girl and write the word "short". Teacher: Put your name on the top. I Just want to check quickly how you did. After I correct your I Like English. please pass them up "por fllas" (by rows) and take out your green notebooks. Teacher: I'm going to put a sentence on the board that I would like you to copy and you're going to draw a picture. The teacher writes: The girl is tal1. A student reads the sentence. Teacher: Please copy the sentence and draw a p ic tu re . Student: iQue es tall? Teacher: iRecuerdas en el "Simon Says"? Es grande, grande (gesturing). (Translat ion: Student: What is "tall"? Teacher: Remember in "Simon Says"? It's large, large (gesturing).) Teacher w rites: The boy is shor_t Teacher: Who can read this for me? A student reads the sentence and the class copies it and draws a picture. The teacher writes three more sentences: The woman is old. The dog is l i t t l e . The bal1 is big. Teacher: L et's have a quick review. Who can read number one? Student: The girl is tall. Teacher: Very good, who can go up to the board and draw a picture of a tall girl? They continue with this activity for about ten minutes, until the class must line up to go to physical education. 97
Teacher^s Perceptions Through Informal conversations and formal interviews with the teachers several shared concerns became evident. For example, all three firs t grade English teachers used Spanish with their students. They held conversations, gave explanations, and disciplined in Spanish. The teachers felt that it was important to make sure that the children understood what they were trying to communicate. As Paola explained: Sometimes there are special things like discipline problems or instructions that they can/t understand. Even if I explain them with movements or mime or other things, they, I think that they are not understanding me and so I prefer to say C11> out loud in Spanish.
The three English teachers also stated that more time should be spent on reading to the students. However, none of them seemed to be able to find the time on a regular basis. They were all worried about completing "the program", in other words, they all felt it was necessary to work on every page of every book in order to give the children all of the necessary information. This was a definite source of tension for the teachers and the students. The teachers were concerned about getting, or about being, behind and pressured the students to move at a fairly brisk pace 98
through the material. Time for reading a book of one's own choosing or writing for one's own pleasure was almost non-existent. Those students who were able to complete assignments quickly, perhaps 3-5 students in each class, had a few minutes of free time to read or w rite. Although all three teachers knew that time for free reading and free writing would be valuable and beneficial, they all also felt that taking the time to do so would be taking away from "the program". Rosario commented that:
Sometimes you don't have time for anything, I mean, you barely have time for your program, or whatever you have to do. I t 's not really that I do It (read to them) everyday or every three days, Just...m ore when I have spare time that I don't have anymore to do and I (think), ok, well, let's read something in English.
The teaching of reading and w riting was a major concern for the first grade teachers. They felt strongly that coupling the learning of written English with the learning of spoken English would not only reinforce the children's second language acquisition, but also give them a stronger base for learning in the later grades. Paola, who combined the teaching of reading and writing, felt that her students in recent years were doing better because of increased emphasis on writing. 99
We learned how to spell words In September and October and now we"re writing phrases, l i t t l e sentences, and they can even write a little story. Some years ago we weren't teaching them how to write sentences in firs t grade and I think th is change is, is better for them. They were going up to second grade and they weren't even able to write a description of a picture. Now they can say what color the things are, what they see, how many they see, things like that.
When asked what they would like to change about the English program, Immediate reactions focused on having more time, fewer interruptions, and fewer students. None of them wanted to cut out any of the m aterials; they saw all of the books and information as valuable and necessary. Their perceptions of the biggest obstacles to overcome were class size and lack of time to accomplish everything. Discipline was a continual problem in all of the grades for a variety of reasons. First of all, the class size, both the limited room space and the large amount of children, made it difficult for the teachers to be aware of everyone, all of the time. There was also a great difference in what was expected of the children in the Mexican program and English program. Traditional Mexican culture within the classroom dictates order and silence. The U.S. teachers working in the school and some of the Mexican teachers in the English program were a bit more lenient. They believed 100
that children need time to talk and to move around. This difference of opinion and classroom practice had two main consequences. First of all, the children who came to English class after recess were tired from being orderly and silent all morning. Second, the children recognized that the English teachers were more lenient and interpreted this as license to be less attentive and more playful. A third problem was created by the differences between the two programs. In Mexico a ch ild / s elementary grades follow her/him throughout school. A child whose grades are not good in elementary will have a difficult time entering a "good" junior high. The high student population in Mexico and the limited number of schools and teachers means that children do not automatically enter their neighborhood school. Because of th is, private schools are also extremely popular in Mexico. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that a student's grades in the Mexican program be above average. On the other hand, the grades for the English program are of no use in the greater school system. Although they are of Importance when the child is ready to enter the American School's Junior high, most students have no problem meeting the minimum requirements for entrance. For many students 101 the English classroom and curriculum were not taken as seriously as the Mexican classroom. Regardless of its problems, the American School had a reputation for being a fine academic institution. Many parents commented that they sent their children to the school not only for the English program, but also because the school offered an excellent education. The majority of the graduating sixth graders spoke English fairly well and had very good English reading and writing skills. Several students were able to study in the United States with minimal problems. All of the first grade teachers demonstrated through conversation and action in the classroom that they believed in the program and the value of teaching English as a second language. They expressed enjoyment at being able to watch the children's progress throughout the year as the students' understanding and language s k ills developed. As teachers their main concerns were for the children, the program, and discipline. 102
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDIES and DATA ANALYSIS
The present chapter will review the rationale for using case studies as a research methodology, explain the case study format, the diagnostic assessments and group activities and Include the actual six case study reports on the children. Following the case study reports, In Chapter VI, an analysis ofthe data will be given on the group as a whole.
Rationale for Using Case Studies Reviewing Graves' <1975) early study of the writing of young children, Petty (1976) comments that, “I think the most promising finding of the study was that the case-study method of research Is a most effective means for determining the variables that seem to bear upon a child's writing" (p.79). Through a case study approach Graves was able to Identify behaviors unique to each child, and also to recognize behaviors which were common to all of the children. The study of Individuals allows for greater understanding of the small d etails of a particular phenomenon. With Increased understanding of specifics, researchers
102 103 should be able to step back and look at the entire situation (the first grade, or the English program, or bilingual education in general) with a new perspective and greater insight. Through case studies th is researcher has found specific examples of young children's abilities to manipulate two languages at the same time. The nature of the research questions for this study dictated the use of case studies as a means for close scrutiny of second language learning in a school setting. The present study sought to answer the following questions:
1) What do these children know about language in general? 2) What do these children know about print in their first language? 3) What do these children know about print in their second language? 4) What can these children do with reading in both 1 anguages? 5) What can these children do with w riting in both languages? 6) How do the two languages Interact within reading and writing situations? The case study format along with observations of the subjects in small groups and in regular classrooms provided specific data about the language learning behaviors of several bilingual children. From this data, and the more general observations of a greater 104 number of children In the bilingual program, conclusions may be drawn regarding the second language learning process In this bilingual school.
The case studies in this chapter will be organized In the following manner:
1. Brief description of subject 2. Spanish diagnostic assessment analysis 3. English diagnostic assessments analysis 4. Sentence writing analysis 5. General observations and conclusions By giving a description of the subject and discussing abilities In her/his native language at the outset, the researcher hopes to establish a basis for understanding the subject's performance In English.
Within the case studies the researcher has made some comparisons to research done in Columbus, Ohio In 1985. The Reading Recovery Project CPinnell, et. a l , 1985) administered Clay's (1966) Reading and Writing Diagnostic Assessments with a random sample of first grade students from the Columbus Public Schools. These comparisons are made solely as a matter of interest. It Is interesting to note the different strengths of the two groups In native language assessments. The Columbus group's mean score on Letter Identification was nearly always higher than the American School 105
group* The American School students almost always wrote more words per minute on the Writing Vocabulary assessment than the Columbus group. No specific conclusions will be made at this time from these comparisons, however, it might be interesting at some future date to look more closely at the differences between the two groups.
Diagnostic Assessments and Group Sessions The diagnostic assessments were conducted in both Spanish and English on a one-to-one basis. In January the in itia l assessments were given completely in Spanish. The researcher wished to ascertain each subject's familiarity with print and ability to use w ritten language in a meaningful way in their native language. One week later the subjects were given the diagnostic assessments again, in English. Although the researcher used mostly Spanish for giving instructions and explanations, all m aterials presented were In English. Here again, the researcher wished to see if the subjects were able to use w ritten English in a meaningful way. In March, two months after the in itia l assessments, each subject went through the English assessments once more, using different texts for reading but following identical procedures. Although 106
this was not an Intervention or experimental study, the researcher was Interested In seeing If there was any change over the Investigative period. Group sessions were carried out In order to expose the subjects to written English In a variety of ways and to allow them the opportunity to use both oral and w ritten English. Through the group sessions the researcher was able to observe the subjects' response to literature In English In several ways: attention and interest to stories being read, recall and retelling of stories read on previous occasions, subjects' drawings about stories read, sentence writing about their drawings, and oral readings and re te llin g s of sto ries read on previous occasions. Each group session included the following:
1) a review of the book read at the previous session, 2) Introduction, reading and discussion of a new book, 3) time for drawing and sentence w riting, 4) oral reading of sentences written, oral translations Into Spanish, 5> oral reading by two subjects (Individually) of a book read at a previous session. During the group session the researcher used a combination of Spanish and English. Although the Intention was to expose the children to English as much as possible. It was not the researcher's intention to test the children's ab ility to comprehend an all 107
English situation. In order to Insure that the children understood what was expected the researcher used Spanish freely In explanations and Instructions. The researcher also used Spanish during book discussions to help give the children background information on the story, characters, and events In the book. Although words, phrases, and explanations of text were given In Spanish, the books were not actually translated Into Spanish for the children. They were read In English and English was also used to ask questions such as, "What is this?", "What are they doing?" In actuality, the researcher was able to use mostly English during book sharings with Group B, but Group A did not respond well to the same amount of English until almost the end of the Investigation period. In Group B the children also offered more of their own comments in English than In Group A. The following Is an excerpt from a review discussion of the book Alrolanes Researcher: What's the name of the book? Students: Airplanes Researcher: Airplanes, good, ok. What's th is thing here? Mel la: This Is a airplane. 108
Researcher t Right, this Is an airplane. ^Airplane, qu'e qulere declr? (Airplane, what does that mean?) Students* IAv1on! (Airplane!) Researcher: Right, 1s this a big airplane or a little one? Students* Big. Researcher: This one? Students* L ittle. Researcher * How many people can you put In this plane? (pointing to the small aircraft) Federico* Two. Students* Three. Researcher* How many people can you put in this airplane? Students* Clen. (One hundred)
This conversation was typical of the discussions with Group B. That Is not to say that no Spanish was used with this group. More Spanish was used during the discussion of a new book than In the review of a familiar book. However, less Spanish was used with Group B as a whole than with Group A. Among themselves the children always spoke Spanish. They would share English equivalents with each other, but no conversations or even phrases were used In English. In the entire first grade at the 109
American School (180 children) only three students were native English speakers. Those three children were also fluent speakers of Spanish. Therefore, there was no real need for any of the children to use English with their peers. English was for use with teachers and school work only. While they were drawing and w riting the students conversed with each other mostly about what they were drawing and writing. They would te ll each other what they were going to draw, ask each other how to say or how to spell various words, and make comments about each others'' Illustrations. It was mostly a quite time and the conversations were carried on in soft voices. It must be noted that there were times when some of the children would have preferred not to w rite. In the sample group there were youngsters who found the task of w riting a d iffic u lt one and would sometimes protest. The following is a conversation between Federico and the researcher where the researcher is trying to convince him that he can think of something to w rite on his own. The exchange also shows that one of the children had a difficult time believing that the researcher wanted him to "make up" something to write about. As the classroom descriptions have shown, they were accustomed to copying from the board and taking 110 dictation, but not "Inventing something" as they put it. (A translation follows the transcript.) Federico: Miss, ya esta. Researcher: Pero Federico, quiero un anunciado completo. Slempre me quieres dar nada mas una o dos palabras. Federico: Ay, es que, Miss, yo no puedo. Researcher: SI, puedes. Federico: No se que poner. Debra: Inventa algo. (Verdad, Miss? Teodoro: No, no, no se vale, jverdad, Miss? Mel la: jVerdad que si se puede lnventar? Researcher: SI se puede lnventar. Yo no quiero que esten coplando del llbro. Quiero que Uds. escrlben algo que quleren declr. Federico: SI escrlbo otra cosa? La casa esta arrlba del arb o l. (Se rlen todos) Researcher: Si tu quieres escrlblr eso, por me no hay problema.
Translation Federico: Miss, I t 's done. Researcher: But, Federico, I want a complete sentence. You always want to give me only one or two words. Federico: Oh, It's that, Miss, I can't. Researcher: Yes you can. Federico: I don't know what to put. Debra: Invent something, rig h t, Miss? I l l
Teodoro: No, no, that doesn't count, rig h t, Miss? Mel la: It's okay to Invent something. Isn 't it? Researcher: Yes, you can Invent something. I don't want you to be copying from the book. I want you to write what you want to say. Federico: If I write something else? The house is on top of the tree. (Laughter) Researcher: If you want to write that, that's no problem with me. Federico finally wrote a perfectly acceptable sentence, "The tree an huse Is on dl sen," (The tree and house Is on the sand), which he was able to read out loud and translate with no difficulty. Federico was not the only child who lacked confidence or found the writing trying. However, even those who fe lt th is way were able to write, to read their own writing, and to give a translation, interpretation, or explanation in Spanish about what they had w ritten. Three main factors Influenced the type of Interations going on between the researcher and the children. Due to the restrictions of time and the structured environment the researcher kept Interactions focused on the Immediate task. Also, the children's oral English was at a very early stage of development and not used for conversation. Another factor which restricted Interactions was the children's Intention to 112 complete the a c tiv itie s and be on their way. Although many of them appeared to enjoy the sessions, It was the end of the school day and they were anxious to go home. These factors helped to create a situation In which interactions were fairly limited In scope, topics centered on the task at hand, and Spanish was the dominant language used.
Storv Retel_Ll_n_qs In analyzing the children's story retellings, both as a group and as individuals, it f ir s t appears that much of what they were able to te ll came from the book illustrations. However, analysis of the language they used during their retellings reveals that there was much influence from the book text. Many of the retellings used language patterns and vocabulary found in the text. Those sto rie s which were w ritten with a list format, such as All Fal1 Down (Wlldsmlth, 1983), and The Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmlth, 1982) were retold using the same format, whereas, rete llin g s of the books w ritten in narrative form tended to be given in a more narrative style. During the retellings words and phrases from the book text were sometimes Incorporated Into the retellings. Roberto, when retelling The Is1 and (Wlldsmlth, 1983) specifically referred to the words "up" and "down", In English, although he was 113 relating the story In Spanish. He used these English words to explain what was happening In the story. Alina, In her re te llin g of The Baby (Burnlngham, 1974) picked up a phrase from the text which could not have been gotton from the illustrations alone. She said, (retelling In English), "de baby not play." The line of text from the book was, "He can't play with me, y e t." As will be seen in the Individual case study data, the children also used quite a bit of the text vocabulary and language patterns in their writings. They borrowed from the book text In order to write in English. This was not done through copying, the researcher did not make the book available during drawlng/wrltlng time. The children relyed on their own understanding of the text, what they knew about both English and Spanish, and what they had learned during all of the activity sessions. Vocabulary and sentence structure from one book was sometimes carried over to the writing about another book. The researcher does not deny that much comprehension was based on the Illustrations. However, this was not the only strategy available and used by the children. What they did learn from the Illustrations also helped to support their general language learning and English comprehension. Having 114 the Illustrations to refer to became another source of reference for learning and incorporating new vocabulary and language patterns Into their own repertoires.
The following case studies will show how each child responded to the diagnostic assessments, requests for retellings, and requests to write in English. The conclusions and findings of Chapter VI will give an overview of the children's language abilities as a group. Chapter VII will summarize what the children know about and what they can do with language, the Implications these findings have for teachers and researchers, and the researcher's recommendations. 115
Case Study Alina Baquero Alina was a petite, energetic, friendly girl. The youngest member of the sample group she had turned seven only one month prior to the beginning of the study. Alina usually preferred to run rather than walk. She came out of her regular class as quickly as possible and ran down the passageway to the library where the activ ity sessions were held. Part of the motivation to hurry may have been the snack she had tucked away in her book bag. Alina was always hungry and immediately pulled out a sandwich to eat while waiting for the others to arrive. Her sunny disposition was a pleasure to have in the group. Alina got along well with the other children and loved to Joke and play games with them. She also enjoyed participating in the sessions. Often one of the first to offer a retelling of the story being reviewed, Alina remembered the stories well. During the reivew of N1aht-tlme (Cowley, 1983) Alina gave this recap (translation follows transcriptions):
Y, este, y al11 en el cuento decla en donde dormlan los cochlnos que dormlan en la granja y los caballos tamblen y, este, y tambien, en el establo y, y, este, y, donde dormia el buho, en el arbol y en donde dormla la luna, en el clelo, y el, este...(end of narration) 116
Translation And, uhm, and there In the story it said where the pigs slept, that they slept on the farm and the horses, too, and, uhm, and also, in the stable, and, and, uhm, and, where the owl slept, in the tree, and where the moon slept, in the sky, and the, uhm...(end of narrat ion) Alina's retellings during session reviews were not always a sequential recounting of the story's events. On one occasion she gave a brief synopsis of what, to her, were the most Important events and therefore, the essence of the story. The group was reviewing Stop! (Cowley, 1982):
Researcher: £De qu6 se trataba? Alina: De un lechero que se estrellaba con un, un, este, como casa y que los gatos quedaron contentos. Researcher: £Por qu6? Alina: Porque, este, porque habia leche t irada. Translation Researcher: What was it (the story) about? Alina: About a milkman that crashed with a, a, uhm, like a house and that the cats were content. Researcher: Why? Alina: Because, uhm, because there was sp i1 led mllk. Alina did not usually raise her hand to offer equivalent meanings in English or Spanish for words or phrases found in the sto ries. She did, however, remember significant features of the stories from one session to the next, which can be seen in her retellings. Her Interest in the stories and motivation 117 to participate in the activity supported her understanding and ability to recall events.
The following table shows Alina's scores on all three diagnostic assessments as well as two Intermediary running records of oral reading.
TABLE 2
Alina Baquero Assessment Summary ASMT RR LTRS CAP WORD WPM DICT EN SP E/S S/E TENG Spl 97% 95% 19 92% 4 97% Engl 90% 76% 20 85% 3.2 59% 12% 88% 23% RR-A 84% RR-B 86% EnglI 95% 77% 19 95% 5.2 75% 18% 82% 39%
Spanish Assessment Alina did very well on the Spanish diagnostic assessments. She scored above 90% on all the assessments except the Concepts About Print (Clay, 1986) in which she had 19 out of 24, or 79%. For the running record of oral reading Alina read El Primer Paseo de Spot (Hill, 1981). Only two mlscues were made 118 in the oral reading. At one point the text reads, "iQu6 has encontrado?" (What have you found?) Alina first read, "£Qu6 has hecho?," then changed "hecho" to "ecotrado", still an incorrect response. Her first attempt was a substitution of a fam iliar and common phrase, "has hecho" (have done) for an less fam iliar phrase, "has encontrado" (have found). Alina realized her mlscue immediately and made a good approximation of an unfamiliar word. Alina read carefully and slowly. She hesitated several times and often began to read a word incorrectly, stopping to correct herself. She had no difficulty discussing the story and answering the researcher's questions. Alina was able to talk about the pictures, who the characters were and what they were doing. When asked to make Inferences such as, "Why did he say that?" (the fish said, "Don't fall in,") Alina responded without hesitation, "Para que no se sume," (So he won't sink.) On the CAP assessment Alina had no difficulties with general book handling. She was able to indicate the front of the book, where to begin reading, directionality, and word by word matching. She did have problems recognizing words which were deliberately misspelled or out of order within the constructed text and she was unsure o f‘what quotation marks were for. 119
When asked to find Individual words or letters Alina had no problems at a l 1. In the five minutes writing time Alina wrote 20 words, including the three words of her name, at a rate of 4 words per minute. She wrote without hesitation, pausing only a few seconds at a time to think of words to write. Her choice of words was quite unusual. She began, as many children did, with animals and school items. However, she then chose several words which none of the other subjects wrote:
carplntero carpenter 1echero mllkman c a l1ejon al 1 ey faroles lamps tubo pipes tuber la plumbing
With a score of 4 words per minute Alina wrote at about the same rate as the Columbus, Ohio group's rate of 3.8 words per minute. It is interesting to note that in spite of her proficiency and creativity in writing words, A lina's handwriting and spacing were quite irregular. Many young g irls in the American School are meticulous about their handwriting and the appearance of their papers. It seems that Alina was more interested in what she wanted to write than in how it looked. 120
Although Alina's dictation score was 97% she actually made only one spelling error, she wrote "suvlr14 for "subir" . The substitution of "v" for "b" Is extremely common In Spanish writing since the two letters denote virtually the same sound. Otherwise, Alina's sentence Is complete and correct, although without capital letters or periods.
Dictated sentence: Vlene el camion. Se para aqul para dejarme sublr. TABLE 3
Diagnostic Survey Scores Alina Baquero compared to Random Sample in Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment. LI CAP WD WPM DICT
Alina 95% 19 92% 4 97% Columbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81%
English Assessments Alina's scores show a definite trend towards improvement over the two month period. For the running records of oral reading the lowest scores are found on the two intermediary readings. In January Alina scored 90% accuracy reading Where's Spot (Hill, 1980). As she had done in Spanish, Alina read slowly and carefully, stumbling at times on pronunciation, but often able to self-co rrect. Although she made several mlscues most of them reflected an inability to pronounce unfamiliar words, such as, “hasn't", "inside", and "stairs". She did attempt to read every 122 word and was able to gain some sense of what was going on In spite of oral reading difficulties. When asked how to say certain words In Spanish Alina was correct most of the time, e.g. bed/cama, clock/reloj, door/puerta. The researcher asked for Spanish equivalents without Indicating the corresponding picture in order to determine If Alina was able to rely on her aural comprehension of the English words. On the final running records in March one needs to look beyond the accuracy scores in order to understand Alina's performance. When reading The Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmlth, 1982) Alina made two mlscues. She substituted “dog" for "goat", most likely confusing the sequence of animals by paying too much attention to the illustration at that moment. She also left out “Is" in the final sentence, "The cat is on the mat." However, the t i t l e of the book is "Cat on the Mat", Alina had read the title twice (cover and title page) before beginning the actual text. What she read for the final sentence, "The cat on the mat," was very close to what she had read as the book's title. Her score of 95%, although good, does not indicate how much she was attending to the text nor how much she actually understood. Alina's retelling, however, demonstrates strong comprehension: 123
Researchers iDe qu6 se trata el cuerjto? Alina: De que el gato estaba en una alfombra, yf ... vino un perro, despues vino una cabra, despues fu e ,... una vaca, y despues fue un elefante, y el gato les asustd con, con su maullara. Researcher; £Y por qu6 les asustb? Alina: Porque, este, querla el estar solo.
Translation Researcher: What was the story about? Alina: That the cat was on the rug, and... a dog came, then a goat came, then w ent...a cow, and then went an elephant, and the cat scared them with, with his meow. Researcher: And why did he scare them? Alina: Because, uhm, he wanted tobe alone.
Alina recalled the story event by event, an effective strategy for accessing information In one language and transferring it into the other. It is often easier to go step by step when recalling something than to give a one line summary of what happened. Alina was also able to account for the c a t's actions at the end of the story. She recognized his motivation as a desire for solitude, "Querla el estar solo," (He wanted to be alone.) Her ability to retell the story so completely confirms her ability to understand the English text. The second running record showed a low score of 75% accuracy (five mlscues out of 20 words). However, here again, A lina's overall comprehension was quite good. Her mlscues were mostly substitutions which either did not change the meaning of the text or were 124 directly related to the Illustrations. For example, the final page reads, "Hip, Hooray!", two completely unknown words for the firs t graders at the American School. Alina substituted, "His hlppopotamo" which, although It does not make much sense reflects what is going on In the story and the Illustrations. Her retelling also confirms that she was attending to the story and comprehending:
De que el leopardo, el chango y la cabra llegaron a una lsla, pero no era Is]a, porque era un hlppopotamo. Translation That the leopard, the monkey, and the goat arrived at an Island, but it wasnt an Island, because It was a hippopotamus.
Here Alina gave a brief synopsis instead of an event by event retelling. It Is clear that she did comprehend the story although she may not have understood every word (e.g. raft). The CAP assessment scores are almost the same for January and March. In fact, Alina missed one more item in March than she had In January. In spite of this extra error, she was able to follow successfully many more directions in English for the March assessment. Whereas in January the researcher needed to repeat In Spanish most of the instructions given in English, in March this was not necessary. Alina's strengths and 125 weakness on the CAP assessment matched exactly her performance on the Spanish CAP. She was unable to recognize deliberately misspelled words and words out of order. She had no difficulties with book handling, directionality, or locating specific words and letters. Alina was unable to complete the two dictations successfully. However, she did remember and write down correctly the firs t five words both in January and in March.
January Dictated sentences: The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on. Allna6 sentence: The bus Is coming it was tua chlr to wet o on The first five words are correct. Of the last seven words six have sounds which correspond to some sound in the words of the original sentence.
Alina's Dictated Sound word I.eK-t. Approximation was will w tua stop tah chir here lr to to to wet let et on on on
Two of the six words, "to" and "on" are written correctly. The other four show Alina's attempts to use the sounds she had heard to write words in English. 126
In March A lina's sentence showed the same attempt at writing down sounds which corresponded to what she had heard.
MaEfih Dictated sentence: I have a big dog at home. Allna6 sentence: I hav a big Dog ed Jown
The firs t five words demonstrate Alina/s comprehension of most of the sentence. The last two words demonstrate a very good ability to match letters and sounds. Using what she knew about Spanish orthography Alina put together two words which approximated the dictated English words. The sounds of "t" and "d" are often blurred in English Ce.g. saying budder for butter). The "J" in Spanish is very close to "h" In English. Pronounced as a native Spanish speaker would pronounce them "ed Jown" is very similar to "at home". Since Alina was unsure about the meaning of the words she heard, she focused on their sounds and was able to find close approximations. In both cases, Alina did not stop writing when she became unsure of what she had heard. She made an excellent effort to complete the sentences to the best of her ability. During the January writing vocabulary assessment Alina wrote 16 words in five minutes, 3.2 words per 127 minute, Including the three words of her name. She wrote the names of animals, foods, colors, and Items found In the school. In March she wrote significantly more words, 26 in all, 5.2 words per minute. Along with colors and foods, she also wrote words which came from the afterschool activity sessions (brother, baby, buttefly) and words which came from the vocabulary unit being taught in her English classroom (counter, phone, radio). In both assessments Alina's handwriting and spelling were very irregular, sometimes almost illeg ib le. She attempted some d iffic u lt word3, such as wastebasket which she wrote, “welsbasket" and butterfly, "bootherf1ei". Alina was willing to take risk s and try to write down words that she had in her oral vocabulary even when she was unsure of how they should be w ritten. Alina's English diagnostic assessments show a determined young girl, interested in learning English and not afraid to try and accomplish difficult tasks. They also showed an improvement in her comprehension of oral English over the two month period. During the January assessment session Alina spoke very little English; she read the English text and repeated a few words. The researcher spoke much more English, but most Instructions given in English were then repeated in Spanish. The total number of speech acts during the 128 session In January was 140, with 23% being In English. In March, however, the researcher's use of English Increased greatly, even though A lina's use of English Increased only slightly. The total number of speech acts in March was 137, the percentage of speech acts made In English was 39%. The researcher was able to give more Instructions In Engllsh wlthout having to repeat them in Spanish. Alina was able to follow the Instructions in English successfully, as can be seen by her upward trend In scores between January and March. Alina had a strong sense of what print was for and how it was used. She was comfortable with books and with writing. She appeared to have a sound foundation for learning English.
Sentence Writing During the two months of sessions Alina illu strate d and wrote eleven pieces, including a story of her own In English. The first piece Alina wrote was a response to the story Stop! (Cowley, 1982). She drew a milk truck and a cat (see Appendix F for w riting samples) and wrote:
estop girl estop polisman cral 1 (stop girl, stop policeman, crash) 129
The three exclamations are a variation of the exclamatory statements found In the story, e.g. "Stop! said the girl", and "Crash!" Alina's invented spellings will be discussed at length further on. However, It Is interesting to note at this point her spelling for "crash". Alina used the "11" from Spanish which has a soft, drawn out “J" sound, very close to the English "sh" (which Is not found in Spanish). What might be pronounced "cral" by a native English speaker looks like it should be pronounced “crajsh" to a first grade native Spanish speaker. The rest of Alina's pieces contain sentences which use the familiar subject/state-of-belng format, telling about the characters' colors, feelings, and locations.
A lina's illu stra tio n s were quite varied. Some were very colorful, some were done in single colors of pen or pencil. Some were extremely detailed, especially her illustration of the balancing animals in All Fa11 Down (Wlldsmlth, 1983), and some were sketchy. Alina put many smiling faces Into her drawings. She appeared to enjoy making the pictures, even though she often commented that they didn't turn out the way she had planned them. Alina's sentences were not always syntactically accurate. She often mixed up words or used Inappropriate words. Through her oral readings in 130
English and her subsequent translations Into Spanish, Alina was able to clarify her original Intentions. For instance, she wrote:
In the bebe Is the bed.
She read out loud exactly what she had written. Her translation Into Spanish, however, cleared up the confusion, "El beb6 est& adentro de la cama," (the baby Is In the bed). In one exception to her subject/state-of-belng sentences she wrote:
In dl esklt Is In the clauts (in the sky Is in the clouds) When reading this out loud Alina said, "In de sky In ay clouds." The word "ay" may correspond to the Spanish "hay", (there are). Alina may have been trying to say, "There are clouds In the sky." Her Spanish Interpretation Is more simple and direct, "El cielo con las nubes," (the sky with clouds). The story Alina wrote In English carries through a consistent theme from beginning to end. She had difficulty putting together the English constructions, but she had definite ideas about what she wanted to communicate.
Writing: The baby is fat no play ar not mi plei on the bed mi broder esllpin 131
Oral Reading: The baby Is fat No play are to play On the bed In brother sleeping Alina had the most trouble with the second sentence. It is not clear what she had In mind until she translated her writing into Spanish. Interestingly, in the translation the third sentence was changed.
Spanish Translation: El beb6 est£ gordo No puedo todavla Jugar con el Cuando est£ en la cama la meso (The baby is fat I can't play with him yet When he is in the bed I rock him) The second sentence, which was so difficult to interpret, is a variation of a sentence found in the book The Babv (BurnIngham, 1974). On one page the text reads, "He can't play with me yet." Alina read this book for one of her intermediary running records. It appears that this particular phrase, as well as the book's theme, impressed her. She remembered the existence of the line, although she had trouble reconstructing it in English. Alina's spelling relied heavily on Spanish orthography. In several instances she added an initial "e" to words which begin with "s", as is done in Spanish. She also used the soft "J" to represent "h"; (the "h" in Spanish is not pronounced at all and the 132
"J" sounds .Ike a voiced English "h"). A few examples of Alina's invented spellings follow:
estop stop esplder spider esky sky eslipln sleeping jelper helper
Alina's writings show that she was able to manipulate the English language In order to communicate a message. She was aware of and used English vocabulary, both familiar and new. In an effective and appropriate manner. Alina was capable of sustaining a theme in English through two or three sentences. She also used her native language to help her with the mechanics of writing In English (spelling) and with clarifying and communicating her Intended messages.
General Impressions Alina was attentive in her English classroom and eager to participate. She often had her hand raised to answer a question and was quick to complete the assigned tasks. Her relaxed and pleasant demeanor impressed the observer, she was comfortable and productive in the classroom setting. Alina was willing to take risks in order to get across her intended message. She experimented with form, structure, and spelling in an effort to 133
communicate. Alina was not afraid to make decisions, never asking what she should write or protesting the nature of the task. She began her drawings Immediately, hesitating only to find Interesting colors. In the same manner, Alina attacked her writing with vigor, pausing to consider the best way to say something, but never trying to avoid writing something down. Using her knowledge of the two languages effectively, Alina was successful in communicating through writing, drawing, talk, retellings, and rereadlngs. If she couldn't make herself understood in one way she tried another. Learning English appeared to be an enjoyable experience for Alina, and one in which she would continue to be successful. 134
Case Study Ivan Beyrute Ivan was a smiling, enthusiatlc young man. He was a good size seven year old, not heavy, but sturdy looking, with a more mature appearance than many other boys his age. Ivan always seemed to be happy with what he was doing. He enjoyed being with teachers as well as with other children. He was quick to run whereever he was going and willing to do errands for adults. Well liked by his classmates, Ivan was usually never alone or idle. He was always Involved in something, whether it be a soccer game, buying goldfish from the vendor in front of school, or Just commiserating about the day's events. Ivan enjoyed participating in the small group activities. He would often volunteer information and help with finding the meaning of words. He showed the same enthusiasm about reading out loud and explaining stories to the researcher. Through his ready participation Ivan demonstrated an interest in learning and using English. He was not the highest academic achiever, but he was one of the most enthusiastic. Ivan's eagerness to participate In the retellings which began the activity sessions sometimes led him to do a monologue, recapping almost the entire story. For 135 example, while reviewing the story Stopi (Cowley, 1982), Ivan offered this synopsis: De, de que el seftor (u n in telligible) el leche a los gatos, 61, no le puso el freno y el coche se empez6 a lr, y todos declan "Alto, alto" y no les hacla caso y hasta que choc6. Translation That, that the man (unintelligible) the milk to the cats, he, he dldn t put on the brake and the car started to go, and everybody said "Stop, stop" and he didn't notice them, and then It crashed. Although the retelling is extremely abbreviated, it does get across the main idea of the story: the milk truck rolled down the hill and everyone it passed yelled out "Stop! Stop!". This example is characteristic of all of Ivan's retellings. He was able to translate the main points of the stories into Spanish in order to relate them without much difficulty, whether he was understanding the main points through text or through picture cues. However, su b title s often eluded him. For instance, in the re te llin g of Stop! Ivan refers to the milkman giving the milk to the cats. In the actual sequence of events the cats come to drink the milk after the milk truck has crashed and broken the milk bottles. What impressed Ivan was the fact that the cats were drinking the milk and therefore this event became prominent in 136 his retelling. Ivan's retelling and reading strategies will be discussed more at length further on.
The following table shows Ivan's scores on all three diagnostic assessments as well as two intermediary running records of oral readings.
TABLE 4
Ivan Beyrute Assessment Summary ASMT RR LTRS CAP WD WPM DICT ENG SP E/S S/E TENG Sp. I 98% 93% 18 100% 4.4 88% Eng.I 85% 81% 19 65% 5.6 16% 8% 92% 15% RR-A 87% RR-B 89% Engl I 87% 85% 19 85% 4,4 38% 6% 94% 26%
Spanish Assessments During the diagnostic survey session Ivan appeared comfortable with the a c tiv itie s and and confident about his abilities. He was relaxed and smiling as usual. His behavior, as well as his scores, demonstrate a sound background of experience with printed materials. 13?
Ivan was comfortable handling books, reading from them, pointing things out, reading lists, and writing. While Ivan's running record score on the book El Primer Paseo de Spot Ivan: (reading) Aqul hay algulen trabajando. Researcher: £Y qu6 dice aqui? (pointing to the next page) Ivan: Tap, tap, tap Researcher: lY por qu6 lo dice? iQu^ encontr6? Ivan: Un p&jaro. Researcher: £Y por qu6 dice, "tap, tap, tap"? Ivan: Porque es p&jaro carpintero. Translat 1 on Ivan: (reading) Here is someone working. Researcher: And what does It say here? (pointing to the next page) Ivan: Tap, tap, tap. Researcher: And why does it say that? What did he find? Ivan: A bird? Researcher: And why does It say, 11 tap, tap, tap"? Ivan: Because I t 's a woodpecker. Ivan was able to use the picture in the book and his own knowledge of species of birds In order to 138 determine that this was a “pAJaro carpintero" or woodpecker. Putting all of this knowledge together it made sense for there to be words such as "tap, tap, tap" surrounding the bird in the tree. After a few pages Ivan began to volunteer Information and the researcher did not have to ask as many questions. He would tell about the pictures on his own, giving explanations about what the characters were and what they were doing. In a ll, Ivan demonstrated good reading ability and a clear understanding of the story. He used a variety of cues to help him gain access to meaning: text, pictures, and background knowledge. On the Concepts About Print (Clay, 1986) assessment Ivan scored 18 out of 24. He had no problem with book orientation, he knew how to handle a book, where the front was, where to read and in which direction. The items Ivan missed were mostly related to subtle changes In word order or deliberately misspelled words. Ivan did not attend to small d etails unless asked to do so, as in finding specific letters. In five minutes Ivan wrote 22 words, Including the four which comprise his name. He wrote carefully and hesitated only to think of more words to write. He did not ask for or seem to need any help in finding words to write down. All of his words are spelled correctly 139 and he used capital letters appropriately. The words Ivan chose came from his everyday experience, names of friends, clothing, colors, and school utensils. Looking at number of words per minute, Ivan/s score was 4.4 words per minute compared to the Columbus, Ohio sample group mean score of 3.8 words per minute. Ivan's dictation score was 30 out of a possible 34, or 88%. He misspelled one word, w riting "blene" for "viene" (come) and left out one word, "aquf" (here) so that the sentence became, "blene el camion se para para dejarme sublr," (the bus Is coming It stops to let me get on). By leaving out "aqul" Ivan made the sentence In Spanish a bit more awkward and less specific, but It certainly made sense and was grammatically correct. Ivan used no capitals or punctuation and did not separate the two sentences In any way. Ivan did quite well on the dictation and surpassed the Columbus, Ohio sample score of 81%. Ivan showed a clear understanding of the uses of print in his own language. He was able to access meaning from book text, recognize the uses and functions of p rin t, and write clearly and meaningfully on his own. Ivan was comfortable during the session and completed all of the a c tiv itie s easily and without distress. Ivan appeared very well prepared to tackle academic a c tiv itie s In school. Although not at the top 140
in his classes, Ivan was considered to be a good student and a hard worker.
TABLE 5
Diagnostic Survey Scores Ivan Beyrute compared to Random Sample in Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment. LI CAP WD WPM DICT Ivan 93% 16 100% 4.4 86% Columbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81%
English Assessments The difference in scores between Ivan's in itial English assessment in January and the final assessment in March is very slig h t. Actual improvement is seen only in two activities, the word list reading and the dictation. Even here, a great difference can only be found in the dictation, Ivan's initial score was 6 out of 37, or 16%. His final score was 14 out of 16, 87%. Ivan was able to remember and write down more the second time around, but he s till was unable to complete the sentence meaningfully. It is interesting to note that where his dictation In Spanish, although not 141 perfect, made sense and was grammatically correct, his representations of the English dictations were quite Inaccurate on both syntactic and semantic levels. In the first dictation, "The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on.", Ivan appears to be grasping at sounds rather than meaningful words. He wrote, "de pox it whit is in on," which is neither syntactically nor semantically appropriate, although it does approximate a few of the sounds from the original sentence. While working on the first English dictation Ivan seemed tense and uncomfortable with the situation. He required help in order to complete the task successfully and the researcher was not offering him that help. In the second dictation, "I have a big dog at home.", Ivan wrote more successfully, "I hav a big dog and houn." Here again, he was unable to complete the sentence in a meaningful way, however, he did understand the meaning of the firs t part of the sentence and used his understanding to write the familiar words. The drastic improvement from the firs t to the second assessment may be explained in two ways. First of all, the vocabulary in the second dictation consisted of words which were very fam iliar, "have", "big" and "dog". "Big" and "dog" are taught to the children in the preschool program and "have" Is taught 142 throughout the first grade year. In the first dictation the Initial sentence contains "bus" and "coming" which were not well known words at that point in the school year. Second, Ivan, as well as several other subjects, seemed overwhelmed by the amount of English the researcher asked them to hear, remember, and write down in the first dictation. The researcher, following Clay's (1986) instructions for administering the assessment, read through the entire "story" (two sentences) without stopping and then read through them again, albeit more slowly. There appeared to be too much information for Ivan to handle, whereas in the second dictation only one short sentence was read. A difference in the child's behavior was also noted during the second dictation. He was not as tense and unsure of what he was doing since there were fewer and more familiar words to deal with. Looking at Ivan's running records from January to March, not only his scores improved but his pronunciation and performance improved as well. The initial English running record used Where's Soot (Hill, 1980). Ivan read slowly, hesitating often. His pronunciation was not particularly good, although it was certainly understandable. He was able to answer the questions asked by the researcher but did not volunteer information as he had done during the Spanish 143
oral reading. When asked to do so Ivan was able to tran slate into Spanish various words from the text such as "bed", "under", and "rug". To help him with the translations Ivan used the pictures in the book as clues to meanings. During the oral reading the word "he" gave Ivan a d iffic u lt time. He substituted "de" twice De que, prlmero estaba la abeja encima de una mariposa y fueron asl muchos an 1males y despu6s, cuando toc6 la pelota, yo creo que al, que la foca corrl6 y se, todos cayeron. Translation That, f ir s t there was the bee on top of the b utterfly and there were many animals that way and then, when it touched the ball, I think that when, that the seal moved and everyone fe l1 . 144
Ivan's final English assessment oral readings were very smooth. He read easily and with lit tl e hesitation. His pronunciation was excellent in The Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmlth, 1982) although he did have a bit more trouble with The Island (Wlldsmlth, 1983). His retellings were typical of all of Ivan's formal and Informal (during group discussions) retellin g s, brief and to the point. He appeared comfortable during the readings and happy to retell what he had read. Most improvements in the oral readings from January to March were seen in Ivan's comfort with the task and pronunciat ion.
Ivan's score for the English language Concepts About Print (Clay, 1986) assessment were the same in both January and March. In fact, he missed the same items in the English assessment that he had missed in the Spanish assessment. As was mentioned earlier, Ivan had no trouble with general book and print knowledge. He did have difficulty finding out of place words or words which were deliberately misspelled. However, one definite improvement may be noted; during the final English assessment substantially more English was used by the researcher. In January the researcher used very little English to give instructions or explanations. Total English used for the entire assessment session 145 was only 15% of the total speech acts (177). In March the researcher used English for one third of the CAP assessment. The total percentage of English used during the entire assessment session was 26% <99 speech acts). Ivan's ability to recognize subtle deviations In text did not Improve, but his understanding of and ability to follow Instructions given In English did improve.
At firs t glance It appears as though during the writing vocabulary assessment Ivan wrote less In March then he had in January. However, If the four words of his name are subtracted from the January score (he was not asked to write his name in March) then that score becomes 24 compared to 22 In March. In either case, Ivan wrote 4.4 - 5.6 words per minute as compared to the Columbus, Ohio sample group mean score of 3.8 words per minute. Ivan's written vocabulary consisted of colors, numbers, foods, and Items found In school. He wrote with l i t t l e hesitation though without much enthusiasm. Although Ivan's handwriting was not poor, it did not appear that the act of putting words on paper was an enjoyable task for him. He appeared to struggle with the actual writing Itself, as If, having the words in his head he then had to work to get them onto the paper. 146
Sentence Writing Although actually w riting out words may have have been taxing for Ivan, drawing pictures appeared to be a pleasure. He drew large, easily Identifiable figures and used many bright colors for illustration. Ivan chose his themes from the events of the various sto rie s (see Appendix G for writing samples). Ivan would spend about ten minutes on his drawing and five minutes on w riting the accompanying sentence. During the f ir s t two weeks Ivan wrote one sentence per picture. Beginning on Febrary 16th he wrote two sentences per picture. All of his sentences were declarative, simply statin g what the characters were or what they were doing, or, as in the case of being hungry, what they were feeling. As in his drawings, Ivan's ideas for sentences came directly from the events of the stories. Five of his pieces had at least one sentence which told about someone^s 1eeping. All of the corresponding books dealt with sleep in some fashion, e.g. Old Tuatara (Cowley, 1983), Night-time (Cowley, 1983), and Good-nlaht. Owl 1 (Hutchins, 1973). Other sentences told about a plane flying, animals eating, a spider spinning a web, and a man holding an umbrella. All of Ivan's sentences made sense, although his constructions were not perfect. For instance, Ivan wrote, "de tuatara is not sleep," 147
which could mean "not asleep" or "not sleeping". The difference is a subtle one and the grammatical inaccuracy does not detract from Ivan's ability to communicate meaning. Following are further examples:
1) de pig is sleep (the pig is sleep) 2) stop is a stopleip (stop is a stoplight) 3) de belbi is slepp (the baby is sleep) Ivan's constructions began to improve and from mid-February to the end of the study most of his sentences were more conventional:
1) de machrun cober de man (the mushroom cover the man) 2) de baby is In de crib 3) de actipus is hongry (the octupus is hungry) 4) The spaider is on the web Ivan demonstrated a good command of English syntax for a first grade second language student. He understood how a rtic le s , verbs and nouns f it together in his native Spanish and was able to transfer this knowledge into English, which uses similar constructions in many situations. On two specific occasions Ivan's use of language was quite interesting. On February 9th the researcher read All Fal1 Down (Wlldsmlth, 1983). Ivan wrote, "de bee on In de buther flay." When he read the sentence out loud he read, "The bee is in the butterfly." It would seem that Ivan was trying to say that the bee was Inside of the butterfly. However, in Spanish "in" and 148
"on" may be denoted by the same word, "en". In translating what he had written into Spanish Ivan said, "La abeja est4 encima de la mariposa." "Encima de" means "on top of" in English. Therefore, Ivan actually went through two clarifications of his original writing when he firs t read the sentence out loud and then translated it into Spanish. From a written English sentence which did not make much sense Ivan read orally an English sentence which did make sense syntactically, though not semantically. He then translated the sentence into Spanish, making it more specific and thus clarifying his original meaning. On March 2nd the researcher read Leo the Late B1oomer (Kraus, 1971). Ivan wrote, "This is leo hungry leo ltt (eat) soup." Ivan knew that in English one uses the verb form "to be hungry", although in Spanish people normally say "to have hunger." Despite his unconventional word order, Ivan's first sentence made sense and was understandable. When he read the sentence out loud Ivan read it in exactly the way he had it written. However, when he translated the sentence into Spanish Ivan found that he had a problem. He either couldn't think of or did not want to use the conventional Spanish form "tener hambre", (to have hunger). Instead Ivan chose to make his sentence in Spanish match more closely to his sentence in English. 149
He therefore chose a correct, but less frequently used form, "estar hambrlento" (to be hungry). Ivan said, "Leo est£ hambrlento," (Leo is hungry). This sentence is syntactically and semantically correct, it is not, however, as commonly used in Ivan's community. It is Interesting to note that Ivan fe lt the need to manipulate his native language In such a way that both languages would make sense, at that moment, within his own mind. It is satisfying to see how a seven year old who has been working with a second language for under two years is able to use his knowledge about both of his languages in order to successfully make those manipulations. Invented spellings were found throughout Ivan's writings. He was not consistent and, in fact, would sometimes write a word conventionally one day and unconventionally another. For example, "sleep", was written conventionally two sessions in a row and then he wrote "slepp" during the next session. "Beibl" eventually became "baby" and "hongry" became "hungry". Along with Invented spellings of fam iliar words Ivan attempted to write several new words by sounding them out i 150
1) buther flay butterfly 2) machrun mushroom 3) actipus octopus 4) acopaney accompany 5) nombrela umbrel1 a
The above list of invented spellings are very close approximations to the conventional spellings. They demonstrate Ivan/s strong command of the English sound system and his willingness to attempt unfamiliar words.
General Impressions In his English classroom Ivan was quieter than one might expect of such an energetic boy. He was extremely respectful of his teachers and perhaps this sense of respect helped him to control his energy and sit quietly in class. Ivan liked to participate, raising his hand often, but did not shout out or jump up as many children did. He paid attention to the a c tiv itie s and was fairly organized with his books and utensils. Ivan/s teachers considered him an average to good student and they enjoyed having him in class. Ivan was not afraid to try. He had no trouble thinking of what to write and although the physical task of getting words onto paper was not his strong point, he enjoyed putting his ideas into print. He used familiar structures and familiar vocabulary in many instances. He also branched out, at times, 151 experimenting with more complex sentence structures and attempting some unfamiliar words. Ivan appeared to enjoy working in English; writing was an Inviting challenge. Although he loved to joke around and was always eager to run outside to play, he took the task of writing seriously and gave it his full concentration. Ivan was successful at orchestrating all the aspects of writing in both languages in order to communicate in English. 152
Case Study Federico Zamano Federico was a small, angle-faced boy full of energy and mischief. It was very hard for Federico to sit still, anywhere or anytime. He was more interested in moving about, playing Jokes, and getting h is friends' and the teachers' attention. While s ittin g in the group for story sharing, Federico would often find something to play with, a pencil box, a bag of cookies, or a toy. Not only was he distracted easily, he also distracted the group as well. His behavior in group sessions rejected his behavior in the regular classroom. He was not an easy student to handle. Although Federico was fairly bright, understood most of what went on and was able to complete assignments, his apparent lack of interest and attention made working with him difficult. When Federico did need help he did not always have the patience or interest to listen. In spite of the fact that Federico sometimes came to the sessions under protest, once he was sitting down and the sessions began he enjoyed particip atin g in the retellings and the book sharings. He was quick to offer his opinions, comments and equivalent meanings in English or Spanish. He also enjoyed retelling the stories; his retellings show that he was, indeed, paying attention and comprehending. For example, when 153 reviewing the f ir s t story, Stool (Cowley, 1982> Federico gave the following retelling:
Federico: De que, este, se choc6 con un, este, con un semaforo, y... Researcher: £Qu6 chocd? Federico: El camion. Y, entonces, los gatltos se pusieron felices pero el seflor no. Researcher: £Y por qu6 estaban felices los gatos? Federico: Porque habia caido la leche. El setlor se quedo tr is te porque se perdi6 su mercancla. Translation Federico: That, uhm, it crashed with the sto p !ig h t. Researcher: What crashed? Federico: The truck. And, then, the cats were happy but the man wasn't. Researcher: Why were the cats happy? Federico: Because there was sp illed milk. The man was sad because he lost his merchandise,
It was not that Federico was not interested , rather, that he had a d iffic u lt time s ittin g quietly and exhibiting "proper" student behavior. In spite of his tendency towards restlessness, Federico was able to listen to and comprehend the sto rie s, draw appropriate pictures, and write sentences about them.
The following table shows Federico's scores on all three diagnostic assessments as well as two intermediary running records of oral readings. 154
TABLE 6
Federico Zamano - Assessment Summary ASMT RR LTRS CAP WORD WPM DICT EN SP E/S S/E TENG Spl 100% 86% 16 100% 5.2 97% Enl 91% 78% 19 80% 3.4 41% 14% 47% 4% 3% 31% RR-A 61% RR-B 71% Enl I 92% 72% 19 70% 2.4 75% 6% 19% 43%
Span 19h Assessment Federico did very well on the Spanish diagnostic assessments. Not only did he score 100% accuracy on the oral reading of El Primer Paseo de Spot (Hill, 1981), he was able to talk about the story, the characters, and the events quite easily. When asked why Spot was tired at the end of the story Federico flipped through the book's pages from back to front and listed all of the things he saw on his walk. He read with little difficulty and although he hesitated on pronouncing a few words he was able to read them accurately. The CAP assessment appeared to be the most difficult task for Federico. He scored 16 out of 24 possible points. He was able to handle the book, to 155 show the front, where to begin reading and in which direction to read. Federico was unable to recognize the more subtle print deviations in the book. He did not notice altered line orders, misspelled words, or changes in word order. He was also unable to explain what a comma and quotation marks were for, nor did he know what to call them. Federico was able to find specific words or letters when asked to do so. He was familiar with the general concepts of first and last, words, letters, print vs. illustrations, and directionality. However, he was not focusing closely enough to distinguish deviations in conventional print. Federico's score on this assessment matched that of the Random Sample group of Columbus, Ohio. Most of his peers, however, did quite a b it b etter, scoring between 18 and 24 points. For the writing vocabulary assessment Federico wrote 26 words, including the three words of his name, at a rate of 5.2 words per minute. In the firs t line Federico wrote five words and separated them all with periods. He discontinued this with the next line of words. He wrote the names of numbers from one to eleven, the names of seven friends, and assorted items found at school and at home. He was inconsistent in his use of capital letters and he did not use margins on the sides of the paper. At one point Federico 156 stopped writing and was unable to think of more words. The researcher, following Clay's <1986) instructions, suggested various possibilities (things you like to eat, things you find in a kitchen, names of friends). In spite of this hesitation, he was able to write quite a few words, spelling most of them correctly. Federico's rate of writing surpassed the Columbus Sample group rate of 3.8 words per minute. However, Federico was s ti ll working out the use of writing conventions such as periods, capital letters, and spacing. Federico was able to complete the dictated sentences with only one spelling error. He remembered and wrote down in correct order, all of the words of the sentences. His only mistake was to write "degar" for "dejar". He was able to listen for the meaning in the sentences and reconstruct them in his own mind in order to write them down accurately. Here again, Federico used no capital letters, no periods and inconsistent spacing. He did use one comma between the last two words of the sentence. Along with the book reading and writing assessments, Federico was also able to read a list of words accurately. He demonstrated confidence and high abilities In handling print in his native language. Federico was familiar with books and print, able to 157 look for and find meaning in p rin t, and able to write on his own.
TABLE 7
Diagnostic Survey Scores Federico Zamano compared to Random Sample in Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment. LI CAP WORD WPM DICT Federico 86% 16 100% 5.2 97% Co1umbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81%
English Assessments The change in Federico's assessment scores between January and March were very inconsistent. On one assessment his score improved in March, he was able to be more accurate when writing the dictation sentence. His scores remained the same for the running record, 91% In January, 92% in March, and the CAP, 19 on both occasions. Federico's scores went down for three assessments, letter identification, 79.6% - 72%, the word list, 80% - 70%, and writing vocabulary, 5.2 WPM - 3.4 WPM. 158
In January Federico demonstrated a good ability to handle print in English. He read Where's Spot? (Hill, 1980) enthusiastically, talking about the illustrations as he went. He knew the English names for most of the animals and was able to answer questions easily. His CAP score improved over the Spanish CAP one week earlier. Federico was attending to the print much more closely, he found lines which were out of order and one word which was misspelled. He did have some trouble thinking of words to write for the writing assessment and several words were spelled unconventionally. However, he wrote 17 words on a variety of themes, colors, foods, and animals. Federico had a more difficult time with the dictation in January. He recognized or remembered only four words of the two sentences. Except for the phrase, "bus is earnin'1 the sentence Federico wrote Is not very clear. However, if one looks closely it is possible to see how Federico was writing down the sounds that he heard:
Dictated Sentences: The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on. Federico's Sentence: by bus Is camin 1st to les guen lets 159
In trying to write what he was hearing Federico condensed several word pairs into one word units, he also left out several words and added a word to the end of the sentence. The initial phrase, "by bus is camin," is easily identified as, "The bus is coming." The rest of the sentence must be broken into parts in order to be understood.
Federico's Original Wr i t ing Dictat ion ist it stop to to 1 es 1 et guen get on lets * <# th is word was recalled and then added onto the end of the sentence)
Federico was aware of several familiar sounds, although he was not able to recall them word for word. After the initial phrase he lost the meaning of the sentences and so was unable to use meaning to help him remember. He relyed on the next best alternative, familiar sounds. In this way Federico was able to complete the sentence, thus completing the assigned task. The two Intermediary running records gave Federico some difficulties with pronunciation. His first reading of L ittle Brother (Cowley, 1983) was even better than his second reading, The Babv (Burnlngham, 1974). Although the theme and vocabulary were 160 familiar, Federico had quite a few problems recognizing words and reading them accurately. His scores went from 71% on the first running record in February to 61% on the second in early March. When asked to retell the sto rie s Federico gave a good account of the f ir s t story, he understood the point of the book and remembered most of the events and characters. Researcher: £,Qu6 pas6 en el cuento? Federico: De que la, la mami tuvo un bebi. Researcher: £Y qu6 mis? Federico: Hicleron un pastel, un oso, luego, este, hlcieron una colcha para que se acostara el bebi. Researcher: iY cualis miembros de familia estaban a l11? Federico: El abuelito, la abuelita, el papi, la muchacha, y la h ija. Translation Researcher: What happened in the story? Federico: That the mother had a baby. Researcher: And what else? Federico: They made a cake, a bear, then, uhm, they made a blanket for the baby to lie on. Researcher: And what family members were there? Federico: The grandfather, the grandmother, the father, the girl, and the daughter.
After completing the second running record Federico was much more brief in his retelling.
Researcher: iDe qu6 se trata el cuento? Federico: Del, del bebi, de que el bebi esti durmlendo en la cuna. Researcher: lY ? Federico: Y a veces dice su hermano que no le gusta porque comen. Que crezca un poqulto. 161
Translation Researcher: What was the story about? Federico: About, about the baby, that the baby is sleeping in the crib. Researcher: And? Federico: And sometimes his brother says that he doesn't like him because he eats. That he should grow a l i t t l e .
However brief, the retelling does show that Federico understood the story and was able to recall some of the more subtle points.
The low scores on the March assessments may reflect the fact that Federico was tired of what he considered "extra work". As was mentioned earlier, Federico often found it difficult to come to the after school sessions, sit still to listen, and then have to think about writing a sentence. When school was over he was ready to be finished. Federico did well on the running record reading of Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmlth, 1982), 92%, the CAP, 19, and the dictation, 75%. These assessments demonstrated that he was able to understand and manipulate written language In English. His marked decrease in accuracy on the le tte r identification, word lis t, and w riting vocabulary may have been due to mental and/or physical fatigue or lack of Interest and boredom. In writing the dictation sentence Federico was more successful at using the same strategy he used In 162
January. He recognized, understood, and was able to write down the first part of the sentence with little trouble. The last two words he either didn't remember or didn't know, but he wrote close approximations to the sounds.
Dictated Sentence: I have a big dog at home. Federico's Sentence: Ay have a big dog et goung
By concentrating on familiar sounds Federico was able to write "AyH for "I", and "et goung" for "at home". He used the soft "g" to approximate the English "h" sound and he used "e" for the initial sound In "at" which is a common spelling strategy for the American School children learning English. Federico's choice of words for the writing vocabulary assessment was Interesting. He wrote several words which came from school vocabulary: English, name, February (spelled correctly), March, Spelling, Test, Study, and Books. His preoccupation with a school related theme may have been due to his negative feelings about the assessment session (or about an upcoming spelling test?). There was an improvement in the amount of English used and understood during the assessment sessions 163 between January and March. In January the total amount of English used was 31% of 182 speech acts. In March the total was 43% of 105 speech acts. Federico understood more English on a one to one basis with the researcher in March than he had in January. All together the assessments show a capable young boy who knew quite a lot about language and was able to comprehend and communicate in two languages. He was not always enthusiastic about the activities engaged in and this lack of Interest was reflected in various assessment scores.
Sentence Writing Federico began the group sessions in January with enthusiasm for the new activities. He quickly lost this enthusiasm when the activity became work for him. His f ir s t two pieces have detailed and colorful illustrations. In the first piece his writing shows Influence from the language of the book read that day, Stop 1 (Cowley, 1982). Federico wrote:
estop estop estop buss
When writing the second piece Federico used a final "s" on the third person verb conjugation which is very unusual for first grade children at the American School 164
He also used his own Invented spelling for "files" and the correct spelling for the animal's name:
old Tuatara likes fal
This attention to detail demonstrates that Federico was capable of using what he knew about English in order to write meaningful communications to accompany his illustrations. However, his motivation seemed to dissipate with the third session. He was at a loss for something to write and tried to convince the researcher that he could not write anything. He finally drew a sketch of a house with pencil and wrote:
The tree an huse Is on dl sen (The tree and house is on the sand.)
From then on Federico's drawings were less detailed and colorful. Most of his sentences followed the "someone is happy" format. The only exception, after the third week, was In his piece about Good-night. Owl! (Hutchins, 1972). Federico wrote:
The owl not slipee
Federico's translation: El buh6 no puede dormir. (The owl can't sleep.) 165
Although Federico's sentence format was fairly constant throughout his pieces, he did make good use of his knowledge of orthography in order to experiment with writing words. Most of his vocabulary came from the books which had been read that particular day. The following is a list of Federico's invented spellings:
FedericoS Convent ional S p el1ings Spe111ngs estop stop buss bus fal fly huse house san sand bu ter b u tte rfly tong trunk erpleln airplane acktupus OCtupU3 woodpeche woodpecker s iip e e si eep ompre1 a umbre11 a t lre t t lred
Many of the words In th is lis t were used infrequently, If at all, in the first grade year. Federico was able to remember the words well enough to write close approximations in his sentences. By using a familiar sentence format Federico may have allowed himself the freedom to experiment with vocabulary and spelling. His oral readings of the sentences and his translations corresponded exactly to his original writings. Federico did not attempt to negotiate meaning through rereadlngs or retellings. 166
General Impressions In the English classroom Federico had a difficult time paying attention to the teacher and the lessons. He was often playing with things on his desk, watching other boys, or talking with someone near him. When called upon to read from the board or answer a question he would sometimes need the Instructions repeated, although he was able to comply with the task. Federico did not usually volunteer to participate. His work was Inconsistent in the classroom as it had been for the diagnostic assessments and group activity session. Federico was able to do quite a bit of work in English, but he was not always interested or willing. He had a good ear for sounds and was able to make connections between what he heard and what he knew about both English and Spanish orthography. He comprehended the sto ries well and was able to talk about them, retell them, and write sentences about them. He remembered and used quite a bit of vocabulary from the stories during the two months. When he was willing to communicate through writing, Federico experimented with both sentence structure and spelling. He was able to orchestrate the various aspects of language in order to write meaningful sentences. Federico's future success in English will depend upon his willingness to work hard and pay attention. 167
It would be very easy for him to fall behind in the next two years. However he had a basic foundation in English which would allow him to not only catch up in the next year if he wished, but probably to surpass many of his peers. 166
Case Study Rodolfo Gonzalez Rodolfo was a pleasant boy who seemed to be happy most of the time. He had an easy smile and enjoyed participating In most activities. Rodolfo was average height for a seven year old boy, and quite slender. He was energetic and found sitting still a difficult task, especially after having been In his regular classroom all day. However, Rodolfo appeared to like learning English since he always came to the activity sessions promptly and showed enthusiasm for the books read during the sessions. He made sure he was sitting as close to the researcher as possible so that he could see the book well. He also was eager to offer his own opinions and interpretations about the stories being revelwed. Rodolfo's pronunciation was fairly good and he seemed to have a good level of understanding of written English. When his group was involved in reviewing the story from the previous session Rodolfo/s comments were brief, but accurate. When the researcher asked what the book was about Rodolfo would pick out one particular event which had happened, or which recapped in his mind, the essence of the story. For example, when reviewing the book The Babv (Burningham, 1974) Rodolfo offered the following synopsis: 169
Researcher: £De qu6 se trataba el 1lbro? Student: De un beb6. Researcher: De un beb6, £y qu6? Rodolfo: Que estaba cargando la mamA al beb£ y el nifto estaba cargando al gato. TransLatljan Researcher: What was the story about? Student: About a baby. Researcher: About a baby, and what else? Rodolfo: That the mama was carrying the baby and the boy was carrying the c a t.
When the researcher asked the group how different words or phrases were said in English Rodolfo was able to give the English equivalents easily. He did not, however, appear to be as confident in understanding spoken English. When the researcher would ask him a question in English Rodolfo was extremely reluctant to answer, in fact, he would most often remain silen t, waiting for the researcher to repeat the question in Spanish. The researcher was unable to determine whether this reluctance was from lack of confidence or lack of comprehension.
The following table shows Rodolfo's scores on all three diagnostic assessments, as well as two intermediary running records of oral reading. 170
TABLE 8
Rodolfo Gonzalez Assessment Summary ASMT RR LTRS CAP WORD WPM DICT ENG SP E/S S/E TENG Sp. I 98% 84% 20 100% 3.6 76% Eng. I 73% 68% 17 70% 1.6 30% 12% 87% 1% 18% RR-A 93% RR-B 93% Engl I 100% 83% 21 85% 2 32% 5% 92% 3% 18%
Span 1 sh._ Assessment Rodolfo read through El Primer Paseo de Spot (Hill, 1981) with little difficulty. The running record score shows 98% accuracy, In fact, Rodolfo made only one miscue, substituting "Stop" for "Spot" on one occasion. Rodolfo's manner of oral reading was rather slow, however. He read word-by-word giving li t tl e expression or fluidity to the reading. The only exception was when he read "Ten cuidado!" (Be careful!), In that instance he read in a more natural way, putting excitement into his voice. This was the only time the researcher was able to see that Rodolfo actually understood what he was reading. While reading Rodolfo focused on the print, and although his reading 171 comprehension was not In question, it did appear as though Rodolfo relied heavily on the pictures in order to answer the researcher's questions. During the Concepts About Print Dictated sentences: Vlene el camion. Se para aqul para dejarme subir. 172
Rodolfo's sentence: Viene el camion paro de Jar- me agul Translation Dictated sentences: The bus is coming. It stops here to let me get on. Rodolfo's sentence: The bus is coming it stopped leave me here
As one can see from the English translation, there is a confusion of tenses in Rodolfo's sentence. It begins in the present tense and ends in the past. There is an interesting occurance to note. Rodolofo wrote, "paro de jarme aqui". It is most likely that he Intended to write "par6" Cit stopped) and left out the accent (which he also left out In w riting "aqui"). Had Rodolfo written "para" (for, or in order to) the sentence would be perfectly acceptable syntactically although still a bit questionable semantically.
Viene el camion para dejarme aqui. (The bus Is coming in order to leave me here.)
Rodolfo made one of two errors in the writing of this particular word. He either left out the accent when he intention was to write "par6" (stopped) or he wrote a final "o" instead of "a" when his intention was to write "para" (in order to). In either case, Rodolfo 173
condensed the two sentences which were read to him, taking the essentials of each in order to make one, potentially meaningful sentence. For the writing vocabulary assessment Rodolfo was given five minutes to write as many words as possible. He was asked to first write his full name. Including the three words of his name, Rodolfo wrote 18 words and three le tte rs. After w riting his name he began to write single letters, "M", "S", "a". The researcher clarified that he needed to write complete words, not single le tte rs. He began doing so, but had a d iffic u lt time thinking of words to w rite. The f ir s t two words he wrote were "cer" (sic) and “e s ta r" , the two Spanish forms of "to be". After that he wrote names, items found in a kitchen, and animals. Rodolfo wrote at a rate of 3.6 words per minute, more slowly than most of his peers and a bit more slowly than the Columbus, Ohio group rate of 3.8 words per minute. Rodolfo appeared the least confident with this assessment. He seemed unsure of what he was supposed to do, as if he was not certain of exactly what it was the researcher wanted from him. He was much more comfortable with clearly defined tasks such as reading lists, reading text, or writing specific words. In all, Rodolfo demonstrated a good ability to handle print in his native language. He was able to 174
read lis ts of words and book text, handle books, and write, although without much confidence. His overall assessment was not outstanding. However, Rodolfo appeared to be an average to good student who would succeed in his regular classes without too much di fficu lty .
TABLE 9
Diagnostic Survey Score_s Rodolfo Gonzalez compared to Random Sample in Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment. LI CAP WORD WPM DICT Rodolfo 84% 20 100% 3.6 76% Columbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81%
English Assessment Rodolfo showed definite trends towards Improvement in his English assessment scores between January and March. On the running record, he had a score of 73% accuracy in January when he read Where's Spot (Hill, 1980). His reading was s tilte d , slow and word-by-word. He also had quite a bit of trouble with pronunciation. Although the oral reading was not particularly 175 accurate, Rodolfo appeared to enjoy the book and was able to answer questions by using the illu stratio n s to gain information. The two intermediate running records showed a great improvement in Rodolfo's oral reading ability and his pronunciation. Word accuracy Jumped from the initial 73% in January to 93% in both February and March. Although his reading continued to be a bit slow, it was not stilted and artificial sounding as in January. Rodolfo seemed to be able to read ahead a bit more instead of attacking each word as an individual en tity . His re te llin g was brief and singled out specific events in the story.
Researchers iPuedes declrme que pas6 en el cuento? Rodolfo: Que el beb6 estaba durmlendo en la cuna. Researcher: £Y que mis? Rodolfo: Y el nifio le estaba viendo.
Trflng)flt.LpJi Researcher: Can you tell me what happened in the story? Rodolfo: That the baby was sleeping in the crib. Researcher: And what else? Rodolfo: And the boy was watching him. Further improvement was seen in the final running record assessment on March 20th. Rodolfo read two books, The Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmith, 1982) and The Island J&nuflr-y. Dictated sentences: The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on. Rodolfo's sentence: the box is coming 177
Mflr.g.h Dictated sentence: I have a big dog at home. Rodolfo's sentence: I have a big dog and
In both instances one can see that Rodolfo was listening for words rather than merely concentrating on sounds. He was unable to hold in his memory the complete sentences, however, he did strive to write something which was meaningful and which corresponded to what he had heard. In the f ir s t example he approximated "bus" with "box". Although "bus" is one of the first grade vocabulary words, it is not seen or used very often. On the other hand, "box" is frequently used when referring to the box-like spaces in the student's workbooks. Therefore, "box" was a more familiar word to Rodolfo's ears. In the second example Rodolfo was able to hear and remember the dictated sentence accurately up until the final two words. His sentence makes sense both syntactically and semantically, however, it Is not complete. Here again, the phrase "at home" from the dictated sentence is not a familiar one. The first graders learn "house" but not "home". Rodolfo demonstrated competence with the words he knew fairly well. He had more difficulty when words were 178 unfamiliar or when there were too many words to remember. Rodolfo's written vocabulary was not a strong point in either the January or March assessments. In January he began by w riting his name, as requested, and proceeded to write a series of letters, as he had in the Spanish assessment. After the researcher reminded him that he needed to write complete words, he was able to think of only five words, all of them colors. Rodolfo was uncomfortable with the situation and was unable to follow the researcher's suggestions, e.g. "Can you think of names of animals, things in your house?" etc. His total number of words, including his name, was 8, or 1.6 words per minute. In March Rodolfo was not asked to write his name. He began by writing "I", then "gato" and "elefante" which are Spanish for "cat" and "elephant". He then wrote nine words in English and finished with "leon" (lion) in Spanish. The words he wrote were either colors or animals. Rodolfo again had difficulty In thinking of words to write. This time, however, he was able to take the researcher's suggestions. Excluding the three words in Spanish (which were very close to their English equivalents), Rodolfo wrote ten words, 2 words per minute. Considering Rodolfo's ability to understand the stories read during activity sessions and his 179 willingness to help translate words Into either language, It seems that his weakness in this area may have been more a function of lack of confidence than lack of knowledge. Rodolfo's scores on the final English diagnostic assessment approximated his scores on the Spanish diagnostic assessment. In both situations his overall performance demonstrates good academic a b ility . Rodolfo was interested in learning English and motivated to participate in the activity sessions.
Sentence Writing Rodolfo wrote thirteen pieces between the Initial activity session in January and the final session in March (see Appendix I for writing samples). He missed only one session in two months. For the f ir s t two weeks he wrote only one sentence per piece. Beginning on February 16th the researcher requested two sentences per piece. From then on Rodolfo wrote two sentences for every Illu stratio n . His pictures were colorful and detailed. He picked themes which reflected specific events in the story read during that session. Many of his characters were smiling and often he wrote that they were "happy". He spent approximately half of the given time drawing and the other half w riting his sentences. 180
The sentences in each piece are declarative. Rodolfo stated who the character was, and i t 's state of being, whether place, action or feeling. Every sentence which accompanied a drawing, except one, contained the verb " is1' . Rodolfo made up for the missing "is" in his translation of the sentence, "The Leo tengol," (tangled). When translating he said, "El leo est£ enredada," (The Leo tangled.) Following are a few examples of Rodolfo's sentences.
The gulr is on the bed The boy is on the wader The spider is on the web The fens (fence) is on the gras The boys is in the plane
Invented spellings were used freely. Rodolfo used invented spellings for several words which were part of the first grade vocabulary:
gulr girl wader water bl bee vi bee flay fly It is interesting to note Rodolfo's spellings for "bee". He spelled them exactly as they are pronounced in English using Spanish orthography. The sound for "i" in Spanish is the same as the double "e" in English, and the sound of "b" and "v" in Spanish are 181 almost indistinguishable. Therefore, "bee" in English and "bl" or "vi" in Spanish are pronounced the same. Rodolfo also attempted to write some words which were new to him. The firs t two words he requested from the researcher, the other two came from the books read that session.
sogen sewing tengol tangled ombre 1 a umbre11 a actuc octupus The Invented spellings relect Rodolfo's attempts to sound out the words to himself as he wrote. His spellings were close approximations to the conventional spellings. Deviations from the conventional spelling In English were caused both by how Rodolfo pronounced the word himself and what he knew about orthography in Spanish. For example, in writing the word "sewing" Rodolfo substituted a "g" for the "w". In Spanish "w" is not used. When It is found in English words, or words from other languages, native Spanish speakers use a soft Spanish "g" which is pronounced at the back of the mouth. For example. Instead of pronouncing "who" with the tongue away from the roof of the mouth, the Spanish speaker places the back of the tongue on the roof of the mouth, resulting in "guoo". Throughout the lnvestiatlon period Rodolfo consistently used a soft Spanish "g" when attempting to 182 pronounce words with "w", e.g. "where" he pronounced "guar", "who" was pronounced "guoo". When writing the word "umbrella" it probably did not occur to Rodolfo to use a double "1" since he knew that in Spanish "11" does not denote the English "1" as in ball, rather it stands for a “y" sound, as in "tortilla" Ctor-tee-ya). Here Rodolfo used what he knew about Spanish orthography to write an English spelling which made sense to him. In one Instance where the sentence Rodolfo wrote did not quite make sense, he was able to clarify his intended meaning through his translation. He wrote, "The plane is in the flay". When asked to read the sentence in English he read exactly what he had written and then translated its
The plane is In the flay El avion estA volando en el aire. (The plane is flying in the air.) Rodolfo/s translation into Spanish makes more sense than his original English sentence. Here he was able to use his native language to communicate what he had Intended to say rather than merely make a literal translation of what he wrote. Rodolfo's sentences make it clear that he had incorporated the subject/state-of-being structure in English Into his personal repertoire. He knew it well 183 and felt safe using that particular structure over and over. Even when writing a story In English, four out of five phrases in the story followed the same format. The one exception was the sentence, "This is your toes." It had nothing to do with the rest of the piece and the researcher Is at a loss to explain why Rodolfo inserted this sentence Che was also unable to explain
it's existence). Rodolfo was able to move back and forth between \4 the two languages easily. While working in English he would access information in Spanish which helped him to make sense of his immediate task. He seemed comfortable in doing so and only once did the researcher notice a conflict. When asked to retell, in Spanish, what he had written for his English story Rodolfo was unable to do so. He may have been overwhelmed by the amount of writing he was being asked to recall, or he may simply have been unable to remember what he had wanted to say. He may also have been unable to read the English meaning in his story as opposed to the words which he was able to decode. His "story" was not a consistent narrative but a series of phrases. There were also no illu stratio n s to help him remember what the story was about. In th is one instance Rodolfo could not make a connection between 184 what he had written in English and his ability to translate that into Spanish.
General Impressions Rodolfo worked well in the activity sessions, as he did in his own classroom. In both situations he was eager to participate, often raising his hand to answer a question or go up to the chalkboard to write. Although he liked to talk with his friends and was dlstractable, as seven year olds often are, Rodolfo was attentive to the teacher and the activity most of the time. He completed his work within the given time periods and was consistent about doing his homework and bringing it back to the teacher. The English classroom activities Rodolfo participated In focused on vocabulary learning, simple sentence structures, pronunciation, sight words and spelling. Rodolfo's performance in the activity sessions reflected this teaching methodology. He was confident with basic vocabulary, was able to read fairly well from lis ts and book text, and could write numerous variations on the same sentence structure. Rodolfo had learned to manipulate his new language in basic ways reminiscent of drill practice and workbook exercises. The observer must remember, however, that this consistent use of familiar vocabulary and sentence 185 structure Is an effective strategy for language learning. Rodolfo was experimenting with written language within his own parameters. For him there was enough risk taking involved in finding new variations on old themes. With time, increased confidence and increased vocabulary, Rodolfo will surely add to his writing repertoire. 186
Case Study Sonya Macias Sonya was an affectionate g irl, interested in the attention of her teachers. She always greeted her teachers in the hallways and most often came to give them a kiss as well. Sonya was not particularly talkative, but she smiled readily and was willing to participate in conversation. Although quiet, Sonya was proud to introduce her younger sister and her mother to the researcher. Sonya's English skills were not particularly strong, and although she enjoyed being with the other students, listening to the stories, and drawing pictures, she did not appear as comfortable as other children in the group. During group activity sessions Sonya was happy to sit and listen to the other children review the story from the previous session. She rarely volunteered, but was able to answer when asked a direct question. She never attempted to retell a story on her own during the group reviews, even when asked to do so. While the new book was being discussed and read Sonya was also very quiet. If a choral reading was being done the researcher needed to coax Sonya into participating. Sonya did not set herself apart from the group, on the contrary, she made sure she sat as close as possible to the researcher during book 187 sharings and always had someone to talk with while drawing and writing. She was much less vivacious than some of the other children, however, and less w illing to offer her own ideas. When it was time to draw, Sonya began her illustrations immediately. She enjoyed talking to her friends while she drew. They discussed what they were drawing, events of the day, and what they were going to do that evening. Sometimes she would discuss what she was writing, asking another student for words and spellings. Sonya never asked the researcher for a specific word or spelling In English. Sonya's retellings of intermediary running records were quite brief. She would offer a one sentence answer which summed up, for her, the essence of the story. The researcher asked her questions to draw out more information, which Sonya was able to give. The following dialogue occured after her oral reading of Herman the Helper (Kraus, 1974>:
Researcher: iDe qu6 se trata el cuento? Sonya: Del fondo del mar. Researcher; Del fondo del mar, £y qu6 pas6? Sonya: Que, el pulpo chiquito que ayuda a todos. Researcher £A qulen los ayud6? Sonya: A los dem&s animates. Translation Researcher: What is the story about? Sonya: The bottom of the sea. 188
Researcher: The bottom of the sea. And what happened? Sonya: That the little octopus helped everybody. Researcher: Who did he help? Sonya: The other animals. Although Sonya's abbreviated synopsis is accurate, her need to be prompted for every statement is quite a contrast from many of the rete llin g s of her peers. Several other children retold stories by listing all the events and/or characters they could remember. Sonya did not do this until the final English assessment in March. In th is instance, however, she gave only the barest essentials.
The following table shows Sonya's scores on all three diagnostic assessments as well as two intermediary running records of oral readings.
TABLE 10
Sonya Macias- Assessment Summary
ASMT RR LI CAP WORD WPM DICT ENG SP E/S S/E TENG Spl 81% 89% 18 77% 3 91% Enl 81% 70% 16 65% 2.8 43% 3% 28% 18% RR-A 48% RR-B 42% Enl I 97% 72% 20 65% 5.8 67% 1% 28% 17% 189
Spanish Assessment The Spanish Diagnostic Assessments show that Sonya had a good understanding of print In her native language. Although reading out loud gave her some difficulty, Sonya was able to handle and discuss a book, write words on her own, and copy from dictation. Her oral reading of El Primer Paseo de Spot single words and le tte rs with no trouble. She was familiar and comfortable with the more general concepts of reading, such as directionality, illustrations vs. text, and le tte rs, words, and sentences. In th is she was very much like her peers and the Random Sample group from Columbus, Ohio. When asked to write as many words as she could think of in five minutes, Sonya wrote 15 words including the four words of her name, at a rate of 3 words per minute. She chose words which came from the classroom and personal apparel. She wrote slowly, with good spacing and readable handwriting. Two words were misspelled, in both she used "s" for "z" t 14pis (pencil) should be written laplz and pisarron (blackboard) should be pizarr6n. One English word was also w ritten, "buses". Sonya seemed relaxed while she wrote, she took her time and did not appear to have problems thinking of what to write. Sonya's writing of the dictated sentences was quite complete. She wrote every word in the correct order. Sonya was able to listen to the meaning of the sentences being dictated rather than listening for individual sounds. Although no punctuation was used and three words were misspelled her sentence is a word for word copy of the dictated sentences. 192
Dictated Sentences: Vlene el camion. Se para aqui para dejarme subir. Sonya/s Sentence: biene et camion separa qui para dejarme suvir Sonya was able to handle print In her native language fairly well. She knew what books were for, how to read orally (though she did have some problems there), how to write and listen for meaning. In an individualized situation Sonya was able to successfully complete the diagnostic assessments. Her classroom performances were not always th is good. In a classroom situation she was dlstractable and did not always pay attention. She would often neglect to finish assignments and usually did not let the teacher know when there was something she did not understand.
Table 11
Piaanpgtli.c_g.uc.v-g.y Scores Sonya Macias compared to Random Sample in Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment.
LI CAP WORD WPM DICT Sonya 89% 18 77% 3 91% Columbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81% 193
English Assessment The English Diagnostic Assessments in January and March show a definite trend towards improvement in three areas: oral reading, CAP, writing vocabulary The books used for the intermediary oral readings, Good-night. Owl?. (Hutchins, 1973) and Herman the Helper (Kraus, 1974) were much too d iffic u lt for Sonya. Her accuracy scores, 48% and 42% respectively, re 1 feet the problems she had with unfamiliar words. Although she knew what the stories were about since they had been read and discussed in e a rlie r group sessions, she was unable to successfully read them out loud. The books used for the individual assessments were more within her reach. Sonya scored 81% on the Initial running record of Where's Soot? (Hill, 1980). This time she had no trouble at all with Spot's name. Her miscues had more to do with pronouncing unfamiliar words. She was able to discuss the book with the researcher and gave many equivalents, in both Spanish and English, for vocabulary. For example, if the illu stra tio n showed a bear the researcher would ask what the animal was. If Sonya answered in Spanish the researcher would ask her how to say that in English. Most of the time she was able to do so. In March Sonya read two books, Cat on the Mat (Wildsmlth, 1982) and The Island. (Wildsmlth, 1983). i94
She only made one miscue in the firs t story, saying "sont" for "sat". Sonya read through the text easily and smoothly. She appeared to enjoy the illustrations of the animals and was able to recall them all in her retelling. She retold the story by listing the animals which came to s it on the mat and saying that they frightened the cat and then they left. By listing the animals in order Sonya was using an effective strategy for accessing Information from one language in order to retell it in another language. Reading The Island was a bit more d iffic u lt. Her score of 80% shows that she had problems again with pronunciation. The words leopard, goat, and island were unfamiliar and Sonya was unable to pronounce them correctly. Her retellin g , however, confirms that she did understand the story. She was quite reluctant to do a retelling, initially saying that she didn't Know what had happened. Continued questioning by the researcher resulted in the following retelling:
Researcher: Bien, y £de qu6 se trata este? Sonya: Que..., no me acuerdo. Researcher: £No?, bueno. £Qu6 fueron unos de los animales? Sonya: Pajaro, leopardo, chango, y un hlpopotamo. Researcher: iY en dond6 se encontraron? Sonya: Porque ibamos, lban en una balsa y se pus— , y dejaron abandonada la balsa,y quedo el, quedo sola la balsa, y se subleron al hipopotamo. Researcher: iVes? Si sabes. 195
Translation Researcher: Good, and what was this about? Sonya: T h a t..., I don't remember. Researcher: No? Okay, what were some of the animals? Sonya: Bird, leopard, monkey, and a hippopotamus. Researcher: And where were they? Sonya: Because we were going, they were going on a raft and they put— , and they left the raft abandoned, and it stayed, the raft was alone, and they got on a hippopotamus. Researcher: See, you do know. Sonya's retelling demonstrates that she understood most, if not all, of the story in spite of her pronunciation problems. She did not look at the illustrations to retell the story, although she probably remembered them. It is doubtless that the picture cues aided in her understanding of the story. However, the use of picture cues was an effective strategy for accessing meaning and supporting the learning of English for these children. It is easy to assume that an Inability to read out loud means the reader is not comprehending. In this case Sonya was comprehending, although unsure of herself, she was able to give an adequate account of what happened. It would certainly be worthwhile to give Sonya some extra help in reading in English, both silently and orally. An increase in proficiency with English vocabulary would Increase her self-confidence as we 11. 196
Sonya's CAP assessments were very similar to the same assessment In Spanish. She was able to show where to begin and continue reading, and she was able to find Individual letters and words when asked to. In the English assessment in January Sonya was unable to find lines of text which were out of order, explain a comma, and Isolate one or two words. She successfully completed these tasks In March and her score went from 16 out of 24 In January to 20 out of 24 In March. There was li t t l e increase In her understanding of oral English, in fact the overall use of English during the entire assessment session went down between January (17.8%) and March (16.5%). Both of Sonya's writing scores Increased in the two months. In January Sonya wrote only a few words at a rate of 2.8 words per minute. In March, however, she fille d the page with words, used some interesting invented spellings, and chose vocabulary which reflected a variety of themes. Sonya wrote about school items, musical instruments, colors, and food. She took the risk to write some unusual words and used what she knew about orthography in Spanish in order to spell them. 197
Sonya/ s Convent 1onal Spel1Ings Spe111ngs gu i do11 window hwi te whi te 11 es yes 1 reiser eraser
The English "w" often gives the students at the American School problems. Sonya wrote window the way it sounded to her and the way she pronounced it, with the soft "gu" sound. For "white" she used "h" as the initial letter, which she knew has a soft, breathy sound in English. Her spelling for "yes" also reflects her own pronunciation "Jes", as well as the common spelling confusion in Spanish of "11" and "y". The final word, "ireiser" is a phonetic rendition of "eraser" using Spanish orthography. The "i" in Spanish Is pronounced "ee", the vowel pair "ei" in Spanish, as in "reir" (laugh), has a very similar sound to the "a" in eraser. Therefore, Sonya wrote "ee-ray-ser" using Span Ish spe111ng ru 1es . This writing vocabulary assessment shows the observer a confidence Sonya did not often display. She wrote boldly, fillin g the page with large, well spaced words. She wrote steadily for five minutes and completed almost six words per minute, more than many of her peers and much more than the Columbus, Ohio random sample rate of 3.8 words per minute. She also 198 was willing to take the risk of writing unusual words not necessarily found In her English classroom vocabulary, such a3 "window" and "eraser". Sonya's teachers would do well to capitalize upon her writing ability in order to increase her confidence and performance in other areas. The percentage scores on the dictation assessment show an increase between January and March. Sonya actually made quite a good effort in the January assessment. In January she was able to write the first sentence, "The bus is coming", fairly accurately; she wrote, "Tha bus is camin." For the second sentence Sonya was not able to get the meaning of the sentence and so she listened for sounds. There is no sense to what she wrote and only a few letters actually correspond to what was dictated. However, an attempt was made to finish the task.
Dictated Sentence: The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on.
Sonya's Sentence: Tha bus Is camin is et tu 11 t In March Sonya wrote a meaningful sentence of similar length to her first sentence In January. She 199 actually made two attempts to make sure the sentence was correct.
Dictated Sentence: I have a big dog at home.
Sonya's Sentence: I havblg dog I have big dog.
After having written the first sentence Sonya realized that “have" was incorrect and "big" was not well placed. She rewrote the sentence, complete with a period at the end. Perhaps her concern over the accuracy of this first part caused her to miss the last two words of the dictated sentence, “at home". Sonya has demonstrated with these two dictation assessments that she was able to gain some meaning from oral English. Interestingly enough, this usually was one of her weak areas. Sonya's overall performances on the English diagnostic assessments show a student who was trying hard to reconcile what she knew about Spanish, pronunciation, orthography, and vocabulary, with what she was learning about English. It would be easy at first glance to evaluate Sonya as an average student with not particularly good prospects for being successful in English. Her comprehension of oral 200
English was poor, her pronunciation was poor, and her oral reading skills were not very accurate. However, Sonya was continually thinking about what she was doing and trying hard to succeed. She did show progress In the two months time and did surprisingly well in some areas.
Sentence Writing When Sonya began drawing and writing in January her pictures were colorful and detailed. She spent a long time on the Illu stratio n s and seemed to be enjoying herself. Towards the middle of February Sonya's enthusiasm appeared to wane. She used fewer colors and eventually drew only with pencil. She also used less detail. Her sentences did not become much worse, or much better, perhaps the novelty of having time to draw wore off after a few weeks. Most of Sonya's sentences followed the familiar subject/state-of-being format. Her themes included being hungry, happy, flying, sleeping, and even being grey. However, she had two interesting alternatives to this sentence structure. Sonya's second piece was about the iguana, "Old Tuatara" (Cowley, 1983>. She drew a picture of the Iguana catching a fly and wrote, "I has some esmogs." When she read the sentence out loud Sonya changed "has" to "have", reading, "I have 201 some esmogs," <"esmogs" was Sonya's interpretation of "moscas", flys in Spanish). She ventured to try a more complicated sentence structure and was successful. On February 18th Sonya once again attempted to write a more unusual sentence. After reading a book about airplanes Sonya wrote:
the a 1 pi on ys in dy escay (the airplane is in the sky)
(Comments will be made on the invented spellings further on.) A simple statement, yes, but also a deviation from the more familiar structure. Prepositional phrases were not often used by the sample group. Sonya read the sentence out loud as it was written, however, her translation into Spanish reverts back to the fam iliar sentence format, "El avion est& volando," (the airplane is flying). Perhaps this is what she had intended to write in the first place, or perhaps she was more comfortable with this translation. In any case, Sonya was willing to attempt alternative sentence structures, although most of her sentences followed the familiar format. Sonya used quite a bit of vocabulary from the stories read during the group sessions. She Incorporated into her w ritings words from various 202 sessions. For example ( lis t is w ritten with conventional spellings):
fly airplane sky spider boat baby stop asleep hungry Sonya demonstrated on various occasions that she was learning about the words through exposure and use. When she initially wrote the word "fly" she used a Spanish-like spelling, "esmogs". Two weeks later she wrote “fly" again, this time coming closer to the English spelling, "fray". Sonya also made a change to the word "baby" when she wrote used the word at two different times. When she first wrote the word she wrote "byby", two weeks later she wrote "beyby". Although the second occurences of both words were s t i l l unconventional spellings, one can see that Sonya was becoming more aware of the English conventions of w riting. Through repeated exposure to these words in meaningful contexts Sonya had several opportunities to see, hear, and experiment with them. Her Invented spellings show that she was aware of and attempting to manipulate the rules of spelling in both languages. 203
Sonya's Convent ional Spel1ings Spe11i ngs estop stop est ip asleep jongry hungry alplon airplane spalder sp i der gree grey
As many other children did, Sonya sometimes renegotiated the meanings of her sentences through her oral readings and translations. For one Illustration she wrote, "may fray", read, "My flay," and translated, "La abeja est& volando," (the bee is flying). Through the translation perhaps Sonya was able to communicate her original intention. For her final piece Sonya wrote, "the boat is gree". One might assume that she Intended to write "green", however, Sonya read, "The boat is green— grey," and translated, “El bote es gris." In fact, the boat in her drawing was grey. Sonya used some effective strategies to communicate her messages in English. She used what she knew about sentence structure, orthography, people and things in order to write meaningful sentences. She was able to negotiate meanings through rereadlngs and translations. Although not the most proficient w riter, Sonya was w illing to try. Only one of her pieces contained more than one sentence, even though the researcher had requested two sentences after the middle 204 of February. Sonya was not overly confident of her a b ilitie s , she was, however, able to demonstrate that she could write in English and could probably learn to write even better.
General Conclusions In the English classroom Sonya appeared to become lost easily. She would begin each lesson with Interest, head up and eyes on the teacher. As the lessons proceeded, however, Sonya's attention would be diverted by other children, things in her desk, and her own imagination. She was often unable to follow the teacher's instructions and therefore unable to complete assignments. Her failure to finish a task was not always caught by the teacher right away. Sonya never asked for help, but often put her notebooks away as if she had finished. Unless the notebooks were reviewed later her lack of comprehension would go undetected. With 37 students in the class it was difficult for the teacher to check every child's work consistently. Unfortunately Sonya was already behind many of her fellow classmate in the middle of her first grade year. Her lack of confidence, lack of oral comprehension and limited speaking vocabulary were great hindrances to her success in the classroom. It is very possible that 205 help would not be forthcoming until the following year when she would become eligible for the afternoon computer vocabulary classes Case Study Debra Cartero Debra was an enthusiastic seven year old girl with a penchant for play rather than dressing up. Although her hair was long, it was almost always in two braids which allowed her to move about quite freely. Debra enjoyed being with people. She was ready to participate in most any activity with either adults or other children. She was always happy to come to both individual and group sessions. Ready for anything, Debra would be the first one to sit in the designated sharing corner. She loved to be able to turn on the tape recorder and made sure she sat close enough to be heard. Debra participated in the readings and retellings with no prompting from the researcher. She could always be counted on for a comment, an interpretation, or a reading. Debra enjoyed reading books in both English and Spanish and often pulled books out of the library shelves to read while waiting for the sessions to begin. She was also very attentive and listened closely when her teachers and other adults spoke in English. Although Debra/s pronunciation of English was not particularly accurate, she was more than willing to read out loud or try her hand at saying something in English. She had little trouble giving Spanish 20? equivalents for English words and remembered vocabulary and story events from one session to the next. Debra often wrote more than one sentence to accompany her drawings. She was willing to attempt sentences more difficult than the typical "She is happy." For Instance: 1) And end other (another) he like the cake 2) Peterkln some a friends (Peterkin has some friends.) 3) And the Hurman is Friend, everyone (And Herman is everyone's friend.) Debra's weak area appeared to be retelling the sto ries she had read (retellin g s were done in Spanish). Sometimes she would attempt to rete ll the text, in Spanish, word for word. It was d iffic u lt for her to distance herself from the literal text in order to give a summary of the plot and/or motivations behind actions. This event-by-event rete llin g may have been a strategy for accessing information in English In order to retell it in Spanish. For example, when retelling The Cat on the Mat (Wildsmlth, 1982) Debra tried to list, in order, the animals who came to sit on the mat:
Que era un gato que..lleg6 (al)... tapete. Y, luego vino un elefante que tamblen lleg6...al tapete. Y vino un perro, tamblen llegd al tapete. Y v in o ... 208
Translation There was a cat who came to the mat. And then came an elephant that also got to the mat. And (then) came a dog that also got to the mat. And (then) cdrnG • * • Although Debra did say that all the animals except the cat left the mat, (without prompts) she was unable to explain why they had left. She never mentioned the crowded conditions on the mat or the fact that the cat became angry. When retelling The Island (Wildsmlth, 1983) and Nlaht-t ime (Cowley, 1983) Debra also gave sketchy accounts of events. She seemed to miss the underlying theme of the stories, concentrating instead on being able to recal1 Important events.
The following table shows Debra's scores on all three diagnostic assessments as well as two Intermediary running records of oral readings. 209
TABLE 12
Debra Cartero Assessment Summary ASMT RR LI CAP WORD WPM DICT ENG SP E/S S/E TENG
Spl 100% 88% 24 100% 6.2 76% — — — — — Enl 97% 88% 21 100% 7 49% 16% 80% 3% 17% RR-A 98% RR-B 98% EnlI 100% 80% 23 80% 5.8 35% 13% 86% - 61%
Spanish Assessment The reading/writing assessment In Spanish shows that Debra was very familiar with print and books. She was a confident reader and writer. The book chosen for the running record assessment El Primer Paseo de Soot. (Spot's First Walk. Hill, 1981) was enjoyable although not challenging reading. Debra read easily and fluently, with no mlscues and one Immediate self-correction. During the on-golng discussion about the book Debra was able to talk about the characters and events easily. Through this discussion Debra demonstrated her comprehension of the story. 210
Debra read through the alphabet In Spanish quickly and without many mistakes. Although she confused the names of a few letters she demonstrated familiarity with the concept of letters and certainly was able to name most of them easily. On the Concepts About Print (Clay, 1986) Debra scored perfectly (24/24). She was able to attend to book format, details of print, and pictures simultaneously. She found eight words which were either deliberately misspelled or out of order, knew the names for the punctuation marks, and was able to isolate Individual words and letters. Debra obviously knew what print and books were for, how to use them, where to begin and continue reading, and In which direction to read. She also showed the ability to read a series of words In list form, with a score of 100%. In five minutes Debra wrote 31 words for the writing vocabulary assessment, this included the four words which comprise her name. There was no hesitation to begin nor were there any long pauses while Debra wrote. She wrote with good spacing between the words, used appropriate capitals and all conventional spellings. Debra's written vocabulary focused on home, family, friends, and school. She wrote 6.2 words per minute. The Columbus, Ohio group was given 10 minutes to write and their mean score was 38.12, or 3.8 211 words per minute. In half the writing time Debra wrote almost the same number of words which gave her a superior words-per-minute score. On the dictation Debra had a score of 26 out of 34, or 76%. This compares to 81% for the students in Columbus. It is interesting to note that although Debra's dictation was not 100 percent correct, it was a complete sentence which made sense. The sentences dictated by the researcher were close translations of Clay/ s (1986) English dictations.
Clay's Dictation: The bus is coming. It will stop here to let me get on. Spanish Translated Dictation: Viene el camion. Se para aqui para dejarme su b lr. Debra wrote the firs t three words as they were dictated but ended up consolidating the two sentences Into one.
Blene el camion para sublrme aqui. (The bus is coming so I (may) get on here. )
Debra used what she remembered in a creative way. She did not remember the reflexive verb “dejarme" (to let me) but she did remember that there was a reflexive verb present. Knowing that "sublr" (to get up) can be made reflexive Debra substituted "sublrme" (I get up) 212 and put "aqui" Chere) at the end of the sentence. The sentence Is a bit awkward, but It certainly makes sense. Except for m isspelling the f ir s t word <"blene" should be "vlene") all of the other words are spelled correctly. In reconstructing the dictated sentences Debra looked for meaning, she was not merely listening for sounds or only for words but was attending to the message of the dictation. This is confirmed by the fact that everything she wrote was a complete word, no partials or Isolated sounds, and what she did write was a complete, logical sentence. In all, Debra demonstrated a good ability to deal with print on a surface level: reading out loud, understanding conventions, writing lists of words, and copying from dictation. She appeared ready and willing to handle school related a c tiv itie s and academic skills. This conclusion was supported by her teachers who described her as a very good student in both the Spanish and English programs. 213
TABLE 13
Pi agnostic Survey Scores Debra Cartero compared to Random Sample In Columbus, Ohio. Native Language Assessment. LI CAP WD WPM PICT Debra 86% 24 100% 6.2 76% Columbus 96% 16 93% 3.8 81%
English Assessments Debra's English Diagnostic Assessments showed a tendency towards Improvement in three main areas between January and March. Her running record scores went from 97% accuracy at the Initial English assessment in January to 98% for both intermediary running records, to 100% for the final English assessments. This is not a statistically significant change, however it is a movement towards more accuracy. Although, as mentioned before, her ability to relate plot and theme were not strong, her understanding of vocabulary seemed to be more than adequate. Debra had no trouble relating the names of characters and recalling events In her native language. 214
Her retellings of The Cat on the Mat (Wlldsmith, 1982> and The Island (Wlldsmith, 1983) were, again, literal translations of the sequence of events. The Island Que iba 6), un leopardo, un, una chiva, y un, un mono. Y, este, y se treparon a una como lanchlta. Y se fueron a la lsla. Y cuando se subleron a todos a la isla se estaban viendo. Y no era isla, er un, este, un rinoceronte, un hipopotamo. Y, este, y ya se iba y el hipopotamo les llev6 a la o rllla . Translation That there was the, a leopard, a, a goat, and a, a monkey. And, uhm, they climbed onto a, like, a little boat. And they went to the island. And when they all got on the island they were looking. And it wasn't an island, uhm, a, mmm, rhinoceros, a hippopotamus. And, uhm, and then they went and the hippopotamus took them to the edge.
The score for Concepts About Print also improved slig h tly . In January Debra scored 21, missing a word order change, a deliberately misspelled word, and the function or name for quotation marks. In March, however, she scored 23, only missing the word order change. This improvement may be attributable to more attention to detail, more comfort with English text, or Increased familiarity with the task. The latter, however, is questionable since a full two months had passed since the initial CAP assessments. As in Spanish, Debra was thoroughly familiar with printed 215
English, she was confident and well able to handle a variety of print related tasks. Although Debra's use of English during the assessment decreased from 16.6% to 13.6% between the first and second English assessments there Is a marked Increase In the total amount of English used. When the researcher's use of English Is combined with Debra's one finds that only 17% of all talk done during the assessment was In English In January. In March a full 61% of the talk was In English. This was not merely a function of the researcher having said everything in English and then repeating It in Spanish. On the contrary, In January there were 189 speech acts during the English assessment. In March there were only 103. The total number of speech acts, in fact, decreased while the total number of English speech acts increased. This indicates a definite increase in Debra's understanding of English and her ability to follow directions given in English.
Sentence .Wr.lt.lng There appeared to be an improvement in Debra's w riting ab ility over the two months (see Appendix K for w riting samples). During the f ir s t two weeks of activity sessions Debra only wrote one short sentence per piece. Her vocabulary was limited to words which 216 were already fam iliar to her or which came from the book read that day. For example* in her f ir s t piece of writing Debra wrote:
tStop! iStop! policeman (Stop! Girl Stop boy CRASH
This piece of writing is a very close approximation to the actual text of the book, Stop! , a convention of written Spanish. In her next piece Debra again used the book's construction complete with quotation marks: "Asleep" said the flay . Beginning with the fifth session, during the third week, Debra Increased her writing. This particular piece was quite long since she attempted to retell the entire sequence. Within the piece Debra used a Spanish construction to tell how the animals were on top of one 217 another. She wrote "is In the" instead of "is on the". The two, "in" and "on", may be interpreted as interchangeable in Spanish since the same word, "en," can be used for both. However, in th is case a more specific usage in Spanish would be "enclma de", or "on top of". Interestingly enough, when translating what she had written, Debra used the more specific Spanish form consistently, "La abeja est& encima de la marlposa ..." (The bee is on top of the butterfly). Except for the piece w ritten on February 12th, which was again short, all the subsequent pieces contained more writing than the first four. Debra continued to use vocabulary from the books within her writing. Even without referring to dates and titles it is not difficult to discern which story she was writing about. She continued to use Spanish constructions occasionally, such ass It Don't like to the Baby (No le gusta al bebe). However, her translations did not always match her writing, "A mi no me gusta Jugar con el, con el bebe," (I dont like to play with him, with the baby). As we will see with other students' w ritings, and as Dyson and Geneshi (Dyson 1981, Dyson & Geneshi 1982) have pointed out in working with early writers, when telling an adult what they have written, children will sometimes f ill In information which they have not written down. 218
On February 25th and 26th the researcher asked the children in each group to write a story in English about whatever they wished (see Explanation of Activities). Diana wrote a simple story entitled "The Babys". Although there was no plot, she was able to decide on a certain number of characters and write descriptions about each one. For example, she wrote:
The Babys The Babys are happy. And one baby are Tired And end other (another) he like the cake. And the other she like some cookies.
The final piece, on March 19th, showed a decided Improvement in Debra's use of English. In a previous writing Debra wrote "is fly" when referring to airplanes. In this piece she used the correct construction "Is flying". She also used two words which did not come from th is or any of the other books read, "bicause" and "angry". In reviewing the audiotape transcripts no instance of either word Is >found being used in any of the discussions during the two months. None of Debra's peers used either word in their writings that day. Other possibilities are numerous since, as was mentioned ea rlie r, Debra did enjoy reading books In both languages. Along with increased vocabulary, Debra's final piece showed an ability to write about more than 219 surface features. Instead of a simple description Debra made an Inference about two characters' feelings.
the girl is angry blcause her balloon is flaying and he is Angry.
Referring to the two people she has drawn, Debra successfully communicates to the reader how they feel about what the wind has done to their belongings. Her translation supports her English writing and clarifies that the other person Is a man:
La nlfia est& enojada porque su globo est& volando y el hombre est& enojado. (The girl is angry because her balloon Is flying and the man Is angry.) General Impressions In the English classroom Debra showed the same enthusiasm and good nature that was seen during activity sessions. She was well organized, prompt, attentive and pleasant. She enjoyed good relationships with her peers and had an abundance of friends. While completing her assignments Debra worked carefully and neatly. She followed directions well and always seemed to finish on time and with few problems. She was anxious to participate In activities which Involved reading something from the chalkboard or going up to write on the board. Although her pronunciation was not 220 perfect and the teacher sometimes helped her, Debra did not seem embarrassed or lnlhibited. As the detailed description of the classroom environments show, neither the English curriculum nor the Spanish curriculum encouraged story writing, free reading, and story retelling. In Debra's retellings she focused on surface elements such as vocabulary, sequence of events, and her own oral reading skills. Very little opportunity was given in either classroom for the children to practice higher level cognitive thinking skills. Making inferences and Interpretations were not built into the dally activities, nor was there any modeling for these skills by the teachers. Classroom activities in the English program focused on surface features, what words meant in English and how they were spelled and pronounced. A ctivities in the Spanish classroom Involved copying from dictation, copying from the board, and fillin g in blanks in workbooks. In light of this, it is understandable that Debra's retellings were so surface oriented. It is unfortunate to note that although she was very good at what she did in school, she was not provided with opportunities to use what she knew in order to make inferences, interpretations and Judgements. CHAPTER VI FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
As teachers and administrators we are concerned with finding the most effective way to teach children about reading and writing. In doing so, we often overestimate their abilities for accuracy in small details, clear handwriting, correct spelling, consistent punctuation, and fluent oral reading. When children fall to work up to our standards we begin searching for explanations and better methods. Perhaps we should try to reexamine our goals and their appropriateness for this age level. While focusing on surface accuracies we often overlook, and underestimate, young children's abilities to manipulate, negotiate, and make sense of language, both w ritten and oral, in sophisticated ways. Given the opportunity, children will experiment, using everything they know about language: they Joke, they tease, they scheme, plot and plan, they can be wonderful impressionists and imaginative storytellers. In looking at what children can do we find they are very accomplished language users who are still
221 2 2 2 struggling with understanding and being able to use the conventions of language which adults hold so dear. Beyond planning and refining their messages, a difficult task for us as adults, children deal with memory, muscle control, spelling, and most critically, the whole concept of how written and oral language relate in our writing system. (Geneshi and Dyson, 1984, p. 224> The children at the American School are working towards competency not only In their native Spanish, but also in their second language, English. They struggled with Intentions, audience, the conventions of handwriting, spelling, structure, etc, and muscle control, memory, and teacher's scrutiny, just as monolingual children do. They also are working to understand and manipulate the relationships of oral and written language in two languages. Clay (1975) makes two important points about young children's writing which apply to the second language learner's situation. She states that, "...creative efforts suggest that the child Is reaching out towards the principles of written language..." (p.15). The case studies of first grade writers have shown that, Indeed, their creative efforts reflect a stretching process, the search for ways to communicate effectively in English. Clay also suggests that, "As the child learns to write there is a rich intermingling of language learning across levels," (p. 19) (letters, 223
words, and word groups). Again, one can see that these children used what they knew on one level to support themselves on another level. The familiar sentence structure which they could use over and over allowed them to experiment with new words and new spellings. Familiar words and themes often gave them a foundation for experimenting with new sentence structures. They continually built upon and reinforced their own learning; and this reinforcement and growth in language abilities was taking place across both languages. Although some students progressed more rapidly and with more enthusiasm than others, progress was being made all of the time. Because of the short duration of this study the students' assessments and writings did not always show great changes between January and March. However, experience with the upper grades showed clearly that the American School students were Improving their language cap ab ilities continually. There was evidence to show that when the children tried out new structures they often made more errors than usual, or one might say, wrote in a less conventional manner. For example, A lina's attempt to reconstruct the complex sentence, "He can't play with me yet" (BurnIngham, 1974), resulted In, "no pley ar not ml plel" (no play are not me play). Sonya's longest sentence contained unconventional spellings for 224 words she usually spelled correctly, "the alplon ys In dy escay," Oral Reading Mlscues An analysis of the quality of mlscues made during the various oral readings reveals two main strategies used by the children, substitution of known words, and sounding-out attempts at pronuncI at 1 on. During the Spanish oral readings at the beginning of the study, only one subject had difficulty reading the material. It appeared as though many of the words in the text of El Primer Paseo de Soot (H ill, 1981) were new to Sonya. She attempted to sound them out (unsuccessfully) or substitute fam iliar words which were close to the text in meaning and language structure, such as "trabajo" (work) for "trabajando" (working). Two other subjects had mlscues In which they used substitutions, three had no mlscues at all, and three made self-correct ions. During the English oral readings the students used sounding-out strategies of unfamiliar words most of the time. The resulting mlscues were non-words but very close to the text both graphically and phonetically. For example, the word "behind" posed a problem for many of the subjects. The pronunciations given often used the Spanish pronunciations of "1" (ee) and "e" (eh). The children's versions included: beheend, beh-hind, bhlnd, and beh-lnd. The word "leopard" was pronounced "lopard", "laht", and "lee-o-pard" (which Is close to the Spanish pronunciation). The children also used substitutions of known English words where they were able to recognize a familiar word but not access the actual text form. "Sleeps" was read as "sleeping", "hasn't" as "has", and "carriage" became "car" and "carry". There were very few Instances of omissions and self-corrections in the English oral readings. The students were quite concerned with reading every word as accurately as possible. Their main focus was on the grapho-phonlc correspondence rather than constructing a meaningful sentence. Even when they substituted alternative forms of familiar words (e.g. sleeping for sleep) the goal 2 2 6 was to produce a word as close to the original text as possible. There were no instances of regressions or children realizing that they had, earlier on, made a miscue which changed the meaning of the text. There are two possible explanations for the children's focus on accurate oral production of text. First of all, the subjects were all at a very early stage in their English language development. Their main concern at this point was with acquisition and production of individual words. Unfamiliar words within a text demanded a disproportionate amount of attention and detracted from their ability to follow the flow of a text. Also, they were less familiar with how written English should sound than more experienced, older students. A sentence read as "The baby sleeping in the crib" did not strike them as ungrammatical. Their a b ilitie s to distinguish between "sleeps" and "sleeping" were still undeveloped. Another explanation involves the teaching methods used In the language program. Oral reading in the English classes in first grade was a vehicle used to help the children with their pronunciation. The subjects were used to reading out loud in order to work on pronunciation and receive feedback from the teacher. Oral reading experiences in these classrooms was not necessarily tied to comprehension of sentence 227 structures and stories. Taking into account the level of English development and the classroom teaching practices, it was not surprising that the quality of mlscues made by the subjects Involved the construction of close grapho-phonic approximations to the text or substitutions of familiar, alternative forms of the words.
Wr11 i no Analvsls Newman's <1984) categories for holistic analysis of young children's writing allows the observer to see what the children know about language in general as well as about writing itself. The following section will look at the children's use of language using Newman's four categories: intention, organization, experimentation, and orchestration. IntentJjon The children's drawings and writings were in response to a direct request from the researcher: Draw a picture about the book and write about your picture. However, it was clear from their talk and their products that they had definite intentions in regards to the task. Not only did they Intend to write about their pictures and to write for the researcher, they also intended to write wlth each other, sharing the process of decision making and producing through talk 228 and gesture. As the description of the group sessions pointed out, the children negotiated what they were going to draw and write through their discussions with each other. They shared Ideas and pencils freely, often taking the time to look at one another's pieces while working on their own. The children's intentions Included completing the task, using their English, and communicating a written message about their drawings. It was obvious that the children understood the difference between spoken and written language. Their writing always sounded like writing, not like speech. In the few cases where the writing indicated someone speaking, the speech was marked in one way or another, either with quotation marks Cor some approximation) or cartoon style speech balloons. Oral language was used in discussion with one another and the teacher, written language was used in writing. In every piece of writing the children's sentences supported, extended and explained their illustrations, confirming their Intention to communicate something to th eir audience.
OrganIzatIon The assessments and writing samples show that the subjects had a very strong sense of organization of text. Knowledge about the organization of printed 229 materials was readily transfered from Spanish to English. They all expected text to be read and written from left to right, except in special cases, such as lists. They understood the concepts of word boundaries and sentences and used that understanding appropriately. Most of the time when the children wrote two sentences each sentence was on a different line. Often sentences began with capital letters and ended with periods. Only one word was found divided between two lines. That was a compound word, divided between the two words: buther-fiay. These understandings were found in both languages. There was no blurring of the relationship between illustrations and print. The children knew that text was for reading and illu stratio n s were for looking at. Every child at every session drew her/his picture before writing. Every child also wrote something which was legible and meaningful with every picture when coupled with their oral discussion. These children were learning to understand the principles of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics and how to apply them to create meaningful communications. They were also learning that meaning is negotiable and that through oral language they were able to clarify original Intentions. At this point, the oral language was a necessary accompaniment to the reading/writing 230 behavior, much as Dyson (1982) has found with similar age children. How the children organized their papers depended on the Individual child. No one set up their papers in the same way every time. During the firs t two or three weeks the students usually made boarders to set off their names and the date, as they were accustomed to doing in their regular classes. However, they eventually understood that the researcher only required that their name and the date be on the paper somewhere. Many children began to write their names in different places, and most of them stopped drawing the boarders. Text was written in a variety of places and drawings were not always in the center of the page. Writing was sometimes at the very top of the page or the very bottom, above the Illustration or below. Some children chose to write their sentences to the side of the Illustration. This gave them less space and so they would use several lines to write one sentence. There was no discernible pattern to the spacial organization of the pieces. Experlmentat ion Some of the subjects were more willing to take risks with new structures and new vocabulary than others. However, by the very fact that they all took pen to paper, they were all experimenters with 231 language. The observer was able to see this experimentation through the Invented spellings, the Inventive syntactic structures, and children's active search for new words. They learned to play with and manipulate the various aspects of their new language, both oral and written. Through their talk while involved in writing and drawing the children negotiated meanings, made decisions about content and structure, and gave support to one another. During the book-sharings they experimented with ora] language by trying to find equivalent meanings in both languages and once in a while giving explanations or descriptions 1n Engl 1sh . The students used what they knew about both Spanish and English throughout the activity sessions. In order to find equivalent meanings to vocabulary they drew upon their knowledge of vocabulary in both languages. When reviewing the illustrations in the books, the researcher would sometimes identify an item in Spanish and ask for the English name, sometimes the reverse. The students would offer their Ideas and comments In both languages, helping each other to come up with an equivalent meaning. In their writing, the students drew on their knowledge of sentence structure, orthography, and vocabulary in both languages in order to experiment 232 with writing In English. Their Invented spellings were partlculary creative since they often sounded out English words using Spanish pronunciations and then wrote down what they heard with Spanish spellings. For this reason the data Includes such examples as, Juat (what), lldur (little), Jelper (helper), and machrun (mushroom). Writing for a first grader is a gamble, one never knows quite how something is going to come out or how an adult will react to it. Writing for children in a bilingual program Is even more of a gamble since they must write In a language they are only beginning to understand and may have seen very l i t t l e of in their environment. Many of the children relied upon familiar sentence structures and familiar vocabulary In order to give themselves a foundation for experimentation. For this reason a few children's sentences consisted only of variations on "The boy Is happy," as was also true of the Columbus, Ohio sample group. Although this was true for some children, it was also true that many of them tried alternatives quite often. There was stretching and growing going on within the lim its the children set for themselves. Orchestration The orchestration of the various aspects of both oral and w ritten language Is a complex and challenging 233 task. The subjects of this study demonstrated the ab ility to use their knowledge of phonology, graphics, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics in both Spanish and English. In regards to oral language, they made appropriate decisions about what to say, when, and to whom. Their talk with the researcher was not the same as their talk with each other. They did not tease the researcher, or play games with her as they did with each other. They tried to speak English with the researcher when they felt they could, something they never did with each other. The case studies also show that the subjects were able to use their available language resources in order to make decisions about how to effectively communicate through writing in English. They were able to renegotiate those decisions when rereading their own writing and then translating what they had w ritten into Spanish. Though some pieces were more complex than others and some were more conventional than others, the subjects demonstrated the ability to use effective strateg ies in order to access and create meaning in English. Those strateg ies included the use of familiar sentence structures (the boy is happy), familiar vocabulary (boy, pig, is, happy, eating), literal, event-by-event retellings of stories, and clarification 234
of Intentions through rereading their own writings in both English and Spanish. The students were able to assess situations and make decisions about what they were going to say and how they were going to say it in light of the pragmatics of the situation. When the researcher asked them to help her read a part of a story no one sang and no one read in Spanish Calthough some did stay sile n t). When they were asked to write about their pictures no one wrote a list and no one wrote a letter. They all wrote descriptive sentences about their illustrations. They decided that this was the appropriate thing to do given what they knew about teacher requests, drawings, and their accompanying sentences. Borrowing and Improvising In addition to Newman's categories, a fifth category emerged from the data which has also been Identified by Burton (1985), that of borrowing and improvising. The children borrowed freely from the text of the books read to them. They used concepts, story lines, characters, vocabulary, punctuation, and language structures. However, Instead of merely imitating the text, the children improvised, manipulating the text to their own ends and creating their own meanings. Although the situation and the vocabulary came directly from the book, the following 235 sentence was Ivan' s own creation, "de tuatara Is not sleep." The same can be said for Federico' s writing after a book sharing of Good-night. Owli (Hutchins, 1973), "The woodpeche is rat-a rat-a rat-a, The owl not siipee" (The woodpecker is rat-a, rat-a, rat-a. The owl not sleepy). These are only two examples of many which demonstrate the children's creative use of borrowed text. Through improvising upon the language examples which were immediately available, i.e ., the text of the book read at that session, the children were able to personalize the writing experience while completing the requested task (write about the story). Their manipulation of the language available to them was another confirmation of their abilities to use what they knew about language in order to carry out their intentions. They knew that language was a tool for communication. They also knew that they could manipulate language to their own ends. As the writing samples show, borrowing and improvising were standard procedure.
Contextual Influences The analysis of language in this study, both oral and written, shows that the children were greatly Influenced by their surrounding context. The 236 vocabulary they used In both speaking and writing reflected the vocabulary they had been exposed to in both their classrooms and the group activ ities with the researcher. The manner in which they used their knowledge of both Spanish and English bore a direct relationship to what they learned at home and at school. Edelsky (1983) found that the writings of elementary school children in the bilingual program she studied were also Influenced by contextual features such as teacher beliefs, materials used In the classroom, and topics offered for writing. She also noted that the children's writing developed, "through internal and individual processes of hypothesis creating/testing and schema development/tapping" (p .135). Although there are similarities across the writings of the subjects of this case study, the differences among them confirm that these Individual processes are indeed going on. Each child created her/his own hypothesis about what was supposed to happen in English and each child tested out that hypothesis In her/his own way. At the same time, although they all drew on common experiences by virtue of being In the same classrooms and In the same culture, they also each had their own personal store of resources, experiences, and schemata. Thus, we can 237
account for the variety of responses among the children. Edelsky's <1983) analysis included a focus on the segmentation strategies and punctuation usage of her subjects. She found many unconventional segmentations in the writing of her subjects and concluded that such segmentation, "is often related to syntactic categorizations" (p.136) created by the children themselves. Unconventional segmentations were not found in the writing samples of this study. The children used conventional word spaces throughout their writings. This may have been a function of the situation since the children were writing In response to the researcher's request and the writings consisted of short, descriptive sentences. Edelsky points out that her data consisted of many types of writing for each child which were completed as part of regular classroom work. Another explanation may be that both language programs at the American School dealt with writing on a regular basis. The children wrote, In one form or another, everyday. They copied sentences from the board which they constructed as a group or which the teacher had copied out from one of their workbooks. Accuracy In w riting was especially valued in the Spanish program, teachers checked for good handwriting, 238
spelling, and spacing. Therefore, In both programs the children were given models of conventional segmentation and were expected to follow them. It Is interesting to note that they were also given models of conventional spelling as well, but they did not always follow these conventions In either language. Perhaps segementatI on was an easier convention to take on than conventional spelling at this stage in their development. Punctuation was used quite creatively by the subjects in Edelsky's <1983) study. She concluded that the students were basing their use of punctuation on, "lexicon, syntax, and text (units of 1anguage)...also ...on lines and pages" (p .154). Surprisingly, the American School group used almost no punctuation. They infrequently and Irregularly used capital letters to begin sentences and periods to end sentences. No commas were ever used in any piece of w riting. Debra was the only subject to use punctuation with any regularity. She often, though not always, used capitals and periods. She also used quotation marks once, and she used exclamation points in the Spanish mode them could not name or explain what commas and quotation marks were for in either the Spanish or English version. This may have been due to the fact that In both the Spanish and English firs t grade programs little attention was given to the teaching of commas and quotation marks In relation to other forms of punctuation, such as periods and capital letters. Also, the children were not exposed, In either Spanish or English, to many written materials which made use of quotation marks.
Spel1ing Data In a review of some of the psycho1ingulstic features of children's spelling acquisition in their native language, Zutel1 <1978) notes that children "begin by using the most obvious aspect of the speaking-writing Interaction, the relationships between sounds and letters" (p.845). The data on the subjects' spelling strategies show that the same was true for these bilingual children. The resources which they were able to draw upon were more varied since these children had the sound systems and orthography of two languages available to them. Their spellings show a definite use of their own pronunciations along with their knowledge of letter/sound correspondence In negotiating the written form of what they intended to 240 say. For example, many of the children pronounced English words which begin with "s" using Spanish pronunciation, "es", such as "estop", "esky", and "espider". When putting these words onto paper they were written with the Initial "e" as well. Along with the initial "s" vs. initial "es", the children used their Spanish influenced pronunciations to spell a variety of English words. Five main categories were Identified. "TV'Th11 vs. "D" The English "t" and "th" sounds were often represented with "d". In Spanish, the "t" sound is softer than In English and actually has more of a "d" sound. Therefore, some children wrote "the" as "de" (or "di", for "the" with a long vowel sound"), "brother" became "broder", and "water" was written "wader" (which is how most of the midwestern U.S English teachers pronounced it). "Sh" vs. "Ch" The "sh" sound is not a part of the Spanish sound system and many beginning English speakers substitute the more familiar "ch" sound. This was apparent in spellings such as "chort" (short), "wach" (wash), and machrun (mushroom). At least one of the children was aware that "sh" exists in English and an attempt was made to use it resulting In "coush" for "couch". 241
11 H" vs, "J" In Spanish the letter "h" Is not pronounced, the name "Hernandez" would be said "ernandez". The Spanish "J" Is pronounced as a voiced English "h", with the back of the tongue touching the back of the roof of the mouth. When the children pronounced English words which began with "h" they often used the Spanish "J" pronounclatIon. This was sometimes reflected In their writing, "helper" was written "Jelper" and "hungry" became "Jongry". Interestingly, the word "happy", which was used quite often, was familiar enough that It was always written with an initial "h". 11W" vs. "G" The letter "w" Is not used in Spanish (except for foreign names, such as "Wool worth's">. The closest sound in Spanish Is a soft, back of the throat "g". In their writings some of the children used "g" to represent the English "w" sound. For example, "sewing" was written "aogen", "window" was written "guldoll" (with a final "11" to represent the final "w"), and "water" was once written as "gader". Vowel Sounds English vowel sounds were often represented with the Spanish sound equivalent. The vowel sound found in the word "chair" matches the Spanish sound for "e" (pronounced "eh"), therefore, "chair" was sometimes 242 written as "cher". The English long "e" matches the Spanish "1", and so "the" with a long vowel sound was often written as "dl", "bee" was written "bi", and "sleeping" became "sllplng". The sound of "1" as In "I" and "fly" required two 1etter-sounds to be represented. The children used "a" to represent the "ah" sound and "y" to represent a long "e", putting them together the children were able to construct "ahee" for the English words "I", "fly", and "my". Spanish rules for spelling dominated when the children were working on new words, words for which the English and Spanish pronunciations were close, or where the English letter or sound did not exist in Spanish. The children's limited exposure to written English and their early skill levels accounted for th is heavy reliance on Spanish pronunciation and orthography. The subjects were in the beginning stages of English acquisition and used what was most familiar to them, their own pronunciations and their knowledge of Spanish spelling rules. This may also account for the lack of developmental change seen in spelling strategies during the study, along with the fact that the study was of relatively short duration. The children's spelling strategies show that they were actively involved in working through the simllarltes and differences between the two languages. 243
Although many Invented spellings did occur, much of their writing used conventional English spellings, confirming that they were, indeed, paying attention to and learning from English print in a variety of situations. Just as children do when learning to spell In their native language, these children used their own pronunciations and their knowledge of le tte rs and letter/sound correspondences (In both languages) to negotiate spellings in English. As Zutel1 (1978) points out, learning to spell Is like learning to speak, in that it "demands...the active, systematic, and progressive formulation and testing of rules and strategies'1 (p. 847).
During the period of Investigation very few developmental changes were seen In the children's English abilities and use of strategies. Although some children appeared to use or understand more oral English and some children's written syntax Improved, no changes occured which could be considered significant, except in the area of vocabulary. There was a definite trend towards increase in vocabulary and the consistent use of vocabulary which came from the books read. Few other changes could be seen, however, In their spelling, use of syntax, and use of alternative sentence structures. 244
It was not the Intention of this study to Intervene In order to create change. This fact, along with the short duration of the study and the brief amount of time the researcher spent with the subjects each week, helps to explain the lack of developmental data. A review of the data shows that this group of children was able to make intelligent and often sophisticated decisions about language. Though their decisions may have resulted In unconventional grammar or spelling, they were able to pull together what they knew about language, both oral and written, in both Spanish and English, In order to successfully respond to literature in English. Although it may not always have been easy, these first graders were able to communicate through both speech and writing in a second 1anguage. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We learn by using language, by talking and by writing; learning Is an act of creation which makes and shapes the world of the learner. CTorbe, 1986, p .136)
The children of the American School are immersed in an environment in which the use of two languages Is the natural course of events. They see both languages used for schooling, for business, and for pleasure. They do not concern themselves with increased flexibility in thinking skills or awareness of diverse cultures, or added possibilities for success In the future; although there are many within the school system who believe that these are some of the benefits of bilingual education. The children are learning, learning about language, learning about communication, and learning about themselves. This research study has focused on the process these first grade children go through in the use of both Spanish and English. The study intended to explore and describe what the children were able to do with reading and writing experiences in both languages. 245 246
It also looked at the classroom environment In which the children were involved and at the Influence of classroom practices on the children's learning. The present study was not Intended to be experimental. On the contrary, the researcher was Interested In exploring the children's knowledge about language within the existing school environment. The reading and writing activities used by the researcher were conducted in order to gain access to the children's use of language, concepts, and strategies. Within the restricted framework of this study the children were able to use the written language of literature during reading and writing experiences. The researcher found that the children used the language from the books to which they were exposed both orally and in writing. The children remembered stories across sessions, used vocabulary and concepts from the books, and sometimes incorporated written language conventions and structures from the books Into their own writing. Although Increases in the use of English and the use of English conventions may have been slig h t, they did exist. Even during such a structured and brief period as this study entailed, the regular use of literature In reading and writing activities influenced the children's use of language within the activity sessions. Given the kind of reading and writing 247 experiences going on in the classrooms, (oral readings of one or two sentences at a time and copying from the chalkboard) the researcher was unable to find any use of the new language structures In classroom work. However, the recommendations given at the end of this chapter are based on the belief that a bilingual program which uses literatu re in reading and writing experiences on a regular basis would be able to capitalize upon children's abilities to use the language of literatu re (in both languages) to enhance their language development.
This final chapter will summarize the findings of the data analysis In regards to the original research questions. It will also state the implications of these findings for teaching and research. The researcher will then offer recommendations for bilingual programs based on the research findings.
Summary of Findings What the children knew about language The case studies demonstrate that these first graders knew quite a bit about their native language, Spanish, and their new language, English. They knew that through both the oral and written modes of either language they were able to communicate messages, recall 248
information, create amusement, and make connections between languages, books, and people. They knew that English and Spanish have differences and similarities, some more confusing than others. At seven years old they knew that many people speak languages other than their native Spanish (a concept many seven year olds from monolingual communities do not grasp) and they knew that they had the ability to learn, understand and use a language other than the one they used at home. The American School children understood that there are different types of language for different situations. In either the oral or written modes, there Is a particular way to communicate with friends which is not necessarily appropriate for communicating with teachers and parents. In this Mexican community the children were taught to speak respectfully to their teachers and, although they loved to share personal experiences, there was not the familiarity that one finds among friends of the same age. On the other hand, the children joked around with their physical education teachers in a way they did not with their classroom teachers. This had become an accepted practice, but here too, there was a boundary over which the children did not cross; insolence and other forms of disrespect were not tolerated. 249
Indirectly the children learned that English was for academic purposes, used In the classroom with English teachers. The children did not speak to each other In English unless required to do so by their classroom teacher. Although most of them knew that English would be of practical use "someday", that day seemed very far off and unreal, especially in first grade. There was almost no one in the school who did not speak Spanish to some degree and so the need for using English outside of classroom work was nonexistent.
What the children knew.about print In Spanish and English The subjects of this study knew that there are differences and distinct purposes for oral language, written language, and illustrations. They expected print to carry meaning and they expected their own w riting to follow the patterns for written language rather than oral language. All of the children were familiar with print In Spanish, they all knew how to read and write and how to use the conventions of direction, words, and sentences. The children were familiar with and able to use a variety of forms of written language as well. They read from story books, Informational books, first grade textbooks, and comic books in both languages. They 250 were also able to write sentences, personal notes, lis ts , Individual words, and captions. They never confused illustrations with text, their own or those produced by professionals. Text was always for reading and writing, illu stratio n s were always for drawing or looking at. Of the original twelve subjects, only one child demonstrated an understanding that speech within writing required special conventions. On two occasions she used those conventions to mark off written speech in her pieces. Once she used quotations marks and once she used cartoon style speech balloons. What they knew about print In Spanish they also knew about print in English. The more general concepts of directionality, letter forms, words, sentences, and usage transferred easily from their native to their new language. Difficulties which they encountered related to lack of vocabulary, conventional spellings, and Insecurities about oral production of English. The children had no problems grasping the idea that items as familiar to them as "si lias" (chairs) and "mesas" (tables) had other names in another language. For many of them the learning of new vocabulary was a challenging game which they enjoyed playing. 251
What the children could do with reading In Spanish and EnglIsh Five of the six case study children read in Spanish with no difficulties. Mlscues encountered In the oral reading during the diagnostic assessments were often self-corrected. Those which were not corrected matched the original text closely for sound and graphic quality rather than meaning. Many of the children used sounding out strateg ies when unsure of words; they were usually able to recognize the word In this manner. The one child who had difficulties In oral reading appeared unfamiliar with much of the written vocabulary. She, too, sounded out most of the time. However, she was unable to make appropriate connections between what she was sounding out and what was written on the page. None of the children appeared to use the illustrations for guidance in their reading, although they did refer to them when discussing the story. Through this discussion and the answering of questions the students demonstrated that they were comprehending the story, not merely reading the words. Most of the children seemed to enjoy reading on their own. They often checked out library books to take home and would take books off the shelves to read while waiting for the activity sessions to begin. Most of what they chose to read on their own was in Spanish. 252
As was mentioned earlier, the general concepts about print transfered easily from Spanish to English. All of the children knew how to handle an English book, where to read and in which direction. Mlscues in the English oral readings were caused by unfamiliarity with particular vocabulary and concepts in the texts. Most of the children struggled with the same words and th eir concepts: inside, behind, stairs, leopard, goat, island. These words were not part of the firs t grade English vocabulary, therefore the children had no previous experience with them. More familiar words such as articles, conjunctions, "is", "what", "where", and fam iliar nouns gave the students l i t t l e trouble. The most common word analysis strategy used in the English oral readings was sounding out the words. However, this strategy was less successful for English than it had been in Spanish. Through discussion of illu stra tio n s, text, and story line the children were able tp comprehend the English stories. Although much of the discussion was carried out In Spanish, the students did remember new English vocabulary from session to session. They were happy to listen to the stories read in English and enjoyed looking at the books for themselves later on. 253
What the children could do .v.l_th writing In Spanish and English All of the children were able to write their names, the date, lists of words, write what was dictated to them, copy from the board, and write sentences in Spanish. They used writing mostly to complete school assignments. A few children wrote notes to each other. However, in first grade this was not a common practice. The children used sounding out procedures when writing in Spanish to help them spell words. They often substituted letters which made sim ilar sounds in Spanish such as "11" and "y", "s" and "c", "v" and "b". Most of the children did not use Spanish accents In their writing. When they did use them it was with very fam iliar words such as mama and papa. Their writing in English used the same general conventions as their writing in Spanish. They wrote left to right, spaced their words, used capital letters and periods irregularly and almost no other punctuation. The sentences they wrote were short, descriptive, and generally based on the same sentence structure, subject/state of being, e.g., the boy is happy, the pig is sleeping. Through the use of familiar sentence structure the children were able to experiment with new vocabulary and new spellings. As 254
in Spanish, they sounded out the words as they wrote them and based their spellings on both Spanish and English pronunciations and orthography as they understood them. Through the case studies one can see that the children were remembering English words and syntactic structures found in the stories and using them In their writing. They often incorporated words remembered from one story into the pieces written about a different story. The children were able to take information from English text and manipulate it for their own purposes; they were able to write using English constructions and English vocabulary. As a result of the classroom practices used at the American School, the children's resources for reading and writing were limited. They learned the language structures and vocabulary which they were exposed to, however, since vocabulary and structure was controlled and since no time was given for free writing or reading, the children did not experiment with new vocabulary and new structures within the classroom setting. On the other hand, the writings from the research activity sessions shows that the children were learning new vocabulary and new sentence structures from the literature being read to them. They experimented with these new words and structures, attempting to incorporate them into their personal language repertoire. Although their attempts were not always conventional, there was a stretching and growing process going on which leads to further development and understanding with time.
Influence of the school program on the children's use of both languages The Mexican/Spanish language program followed the
•* * *■ dictates of the Mexican Department of Education in regards to the teaching of content. Along with content, the Mexican teachers in both programs also passed on cultural values, tried to Instill good working habits, and influenced the children's concepts of what reading and writing are all about. From the Mexican teachers the children learned that there are proper procedures for organizing one's time and one's work. They learned that good reading means clear pronunciation as well as comprehension of content and good writing Includes neat handwriting, good spacing, and accurate spelling. In the English language program the students learned that English is to be used for reading, writing, speaking, and listening, with both Mexican and U.S. English teachers. They learned that there are books, music, and games in English which they were able 256 to use and enjoy. The children discovered that they were capable of acquiring this new language and that much of what they knew about Spanish could be applied to English as well. The teaching methods used in the two language programs were similar in many respects. They both used workbooks which Included cut and paste, fill In the blanks, and circling activities. Vocabulary was controlled in both programs and sentence structures used were fairly simple. Both programs relied heavily on textbooks, although most of the teachers read to the * **■ » students or took them to the library occasionally. Both programs required the children to copy text from the chalkboard into their notebooks. Both programs had the children sitting at their desks for seatwork during most of the time in class. The students learned to use the given vocabulary and commonly used sentence structures quite well. Their reading abilities and written products in both languages reflected the resources which were available In their classrooms. Oral readings were smooth and without many difficulties as long as the text used familiar vocabulary and concepts. Along the same lines, their writing used familiar sentence structures and spelling of fam iliar words was quite accurate. The 257 sounding out strategy used in both reading and writing was a direct result of classroom teaching.
Interaction of LI and L2 As was mentioned earlier, the children brought many of their concepts about language from their native Spanish to English. Their ideas about how language works, what it is for, and the proper way to speak in different situations all transfered from one language to the other. Since Spanish and English are based upon similar alphabets, contain many cognates, and follow similar, though not identical, grammatical patterns, the children were able to transfer their knowledge about the mechanics of Spanish to the mechanics of English with relatively minor inaccuracies and confusions. The students also used what they knew about accessing meaning and accurate word spellings and pronunciations In Spanish when they read and wrote in English. They used Identical strategies for comprehending text and stories and for oral readings in the two languages. Sounding out words for both oral readings and writing was the most common strategy used by all of the children in both languages. Using the illu stra tio n s in books to help with discussion about the stories was also used by all of the children In 2 5 6 both languages. And the rules of pronunciation and spelling in Spanish were used liberally when writing in EnglIsh. The children's knowledge of how language works and the conventions of Spanish gave them a foundation on which to build their growing knowledge of English. Instead of Interference from one language to another, there appeared to be a sharing of concepts and a building of concepts and information back and forth. It is true that one can point to examples or instances in production of English In which knowledge of Spanish played a major role. However, experience with students in the upper grades at the American School demonstrates that over time and with more opportunities to use English, the children are able to develop generalizations that Incorporate more and more of the conventions and idiosyncracies of English.
Implications for Teaching and Research The data and data analysis show that first grade children at this school are able to take on and use a second language through their elementary school program. The study also reveals that it takes time, multiple opportunities to use and see English, and patience for the children to understand and produce all of the conventions of the new language. These findings 259 may have Implications for the teachers of bilingual and second language learning students. 1) Foundation of concepts. Young children are able to understand and apply many of the conventions of a new language. The early elementary grades is a good place to begin second language learning as long as the children are learning basic language and academic concepts in their native language. When children have the basic language and academic concepts in their own language these are used as a foundation for learning In the second language. 2) Time for learning. It takes a great deal of time, exposure, and opportunities to read and write in the target language for young children to understand and learn to use the more subtle conventions of a second language. There is much that children learn and know about both their first and second languages before they master conventions and rules In oral reading and w riting. 3> Reading and Writing. Along with learning new oral vocabulary, young children are able to learn to read and write in a new language through book experiences in that language. The use of printed text and writing activities act as language manlpulatlves, clarifying the use of new vocabulary and allowing the students the opportunity to experience language in a 260
variety of media. Experimentation with print also provides the children with a way of negotiating the conventions and meanings of the new language on their own. 4) Influence of classroom materials. The materials and activities used in the classroom Influences what the children learn and what they produce. When the students are given materials with controlled vocabulary and sentence structure their available resources for reading and writing are restricted. Young children are able to take on for their own use the wider vocabularies and more complex sentence structures found in real literature (as opposed to basal readers and textbooks). This is as true for second language learners as it Is for native speakers.
5) Reading literature in a second language. The type of text used In a classroom becomes the model for children's concept learning, reading, and written products. Reading ch ildren's literatu re out loud in the target language, rather than exclusive use of basal texts, provides the children with excellent models of written language. They are able to hear what natural written language (as opposed to contrived materials) sounds like. They are also able to develop their aural 261
comprehension skills when read to regularly. Book sharing and discussions help to build vocabulary and language concepts. Exposure to the more complex sentence structures and the wider range of vocabulary and concepts 6 ) Influence of classroom activities. When classroom activities are based on copying from the board and filling in blanks children learn to copy from
J the board and fill in blanks. However, when children are exposed to a variety of language styles and given the opportunity to write on their own they will experiment with those styles, learn from their experimentation, and incorporate the new knowledge into their personal language repertoire. When they are given the time and opportunity to read on their own they will choose from a wide variety of reading materials and will adopt ideas from1those materials for their own personal use. 7) Interaction between LI and L2. Concepts about language in general and the conventions of a language in particular are transferred between a child's native and second language. Children use the rules that they know of both languages in order to create meaning In 262 both languages. This Interaction Is not necessarily a negative Interference, In fact, children build upon the concepts they already know well, and learn through a process of hypothesis, trial, confirmation, and revision. It may be possible that the negative 1ntereference problems found In bilingual situations In the United States are a function of sociological factors. When children are caught between two communities which do not support each other their learning may, indeed, suffer.
There Is a definite need for more research In the area of bilingual education. Documentation of the continued development of these firs t graders in the American School would further our understanding of the process these children are going through In becoming bilingual. How will their conceptualizations and use of language change over time? How will their performance In reading, writing, and speaking change In the two languages? It would also be helpful to explore other aspects of bilingual education. For example, how would the children in this, or another, bilingual program respond to a literature-based, whole language curriculum that operates throughout the year rather than only for two months? How do Mexican children In a different 263 community, a different socio-economic level, or a different language community (Spanish and one of the ancient Indian languages), respond to bilingual programs? How do Mexican/American children In the United States respond In bilingual programs such as the one at the American School? The possibilities for research are numerous and continued investigations in the field will increase our understanding of how children learn languages, both their first and their second.
Recommendations The following recommendations are based on the research findings of this investigation. The recommendations concern: l) teacher's attitudes towards children's learning; 2 ) the teacher's use of literatu re and opportunities for students' free reading time; 3) the opportunities for free writing time for students in the classroom; and 4) possibilities for teacher assessment of children's abilities and progress. It is easy for adults to look at children's creations and see how they deviate from the adult standards of performance. It is more difficult to look at their products and see a reflection of what they know, what they can do, and how they are learning. In order to foster an environment of growth and 264 exploration teachers need to take this second viewpoint, especially in second language education. If we stress accuracy, control vocabulary to "make things easier", and impose conventions Instead of encouraging communication and exploration we limit the resources which are made available to the children. We also limit their experimentation and learning through language. We may insure what we teach, but we may not anticipate the breadth of what they could learn. If, instead, teachers will look upon inaccuracies in reading, writing and speech as moments of learning, evidence of growth and stretching, then they free the students to make mistakes without fear of reprisals. This freedom allows the children to take risks, reflect on their products, try again, and reach higher. The role of the teacher becomes one of guide and facilitator rather than merely grade-glver. The second recommendation has to do with reading to the children and providing them with time to read for themselves. In only nine weeks, with sessions only twice a week, the children of this study picked up and used vocabulary, sentence structures, and story Ideas from the literature read to them. Through the use of literature on a dally basis in the classroom young children can be exposed to a wealth of vocabulary and a wide variety of language styles. Teachers in bilingual 265
programs should make the oral reading of good children's literature a regular and essential part of the curriculum instead of a luxury "when there's enough time". Giving the children time to read on their own provides them with the opportunity to reread books read by the teacher, use reading behaviors by themselves and with each other, and, to paraphrase Smith (1982), learn to read by reading. Along with emphasis on reading, emphasis within the curriculum on writing is also essential. However, it must be understood that there is a great difference between having children copy from the chalkboard and fill in blanks and giving them opportunities to write on their own about what they wish. The children in this study were limited during the activity sessions by time and choice of topic (the researcher specifically asked them to draw and write about the story read that day). In spite of these restrictions they were able to choose what they would say, how they would say it, and allowed to experiment with print in order to communicate their own messages. A language program which provides time for exploration and experimentation with print permits the children to make use of what they are learning in a concrete manner. Time for writing on one's own also encourages attention to the details of print (Clay, 1982). In order to get the 266 print down on the paper the children must think about the sound/symbol correspondence, how to shape lette rs, word order, and word meaning. One cannot glide over writing as one can do with reading. This attention to detail also reinforces what children are learning about language and p rin t, in any language. We must not overlook the fact that time for writing on one's own also allows the children to express themselves creatively in a personal manner; an important aspect of learning In any language and at any age. The final recommendation concerns the ongoing assessment of ch ildren's language a b ilitie s and their progress over time. When children are writing on a daily basis there is an abundance of material available for the teacher to review and evaluate. Looking at every piece for every child, everyday, becomes an overwhelming burden. However, if the teacher were to keep one or two pieces a week, over a period of six, ten or fifteen weeks it would be possible to see how each child's understanding of language has changed. One can also see how the materials and activities used in the classroom influence what the children are writing about and how they are using and learning the language to which they are being exposed. It must be remembered that a ch ild 's w riting is not Just a sample of writing ability, it Is also a 267 reflection of what the child knows about language, how she/he is able to orchestrate that knowledge, and can also reveal much about the child's reading a b ilitie s
» through oral reading and discussion of her/his own work. Reviewing children's work for general concepts, rather than attempting to correct all of the unconventional language, permits the classroom teacher to reflect upon her own teaching methods as well as gain a perspective on the children's abilities and progress.
In conclusion, this study has shown that first grade children in the bilingual program of the American School were able to use their knowledge of language In general and their knowledge of Spanish language conventions to help them learn and use English in reading and writing activities. It is the opinion of this researcher that these children were successful learners, that they had great potential for further learning, and that the bilingual program was generally supportive of the acquisition of two languages in the early grades. APPENDIX A TRANSLATION OF DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENTS INTO SPANISH
267 2 6 8
Translation into Spanish of Assessments of Print and Writing From: The Earlv Detection of Reading Difficulties Marie M. Clay Helnemann, 1985 ed.
Ident1ficaci 6 n de Letras (Letter Identiflcation, pg. 23) Para introducir el trabajo: - £Qu6 son estas? - iPuedes encontrar algunas que tu conoces? EnsenaHdo cada letra: - iQu 6 es esto? Si el nlho no responde: Use una o m 6 s de estas preguntas y trate de evitar prejuiclo hacia uno u otro. <*,Sabes el nombre de la letra? - £Qu6 sonido tlene? iSabes una palabra que empleza con este son 1 do? Ensenahdo otra letra: iY esto, qu6 es? 269
Hoja de Ident1f 1cac16n de Letras en EspaTlol
A F K P LL Z
B H 0 J U CH
C Y L Q M H
DNS X I
E G R V T
a f k P II z b h o J u ch
c y 1 q m ft d n s x i
e g r v t 270
Ex£men de Palabras (Word Tests, pg. 31) Admln1str a c 16n : Plde que el nlfio lea una de las llstas de las palabras. Ayude con la palabra del ejemplo si es necessarlo, nunca lo cuente en la ca11f 1cac16n. No auyde con las otras palabras y no use la llsta para la ensefianza.
#Note: One list will be constructed from the following lis ts and/or from words encountered frequently In the Mexican first grade readers.
Llsta A Llsta B Llsta C ejemp1o ejempIo eJ emp1o con dl Jo por
yo ver padre madre Y ven 1 r son e 1 para aqul a r r 1ba a ml como tu gr 1 to en escue 1 a soy donde f u 6 por favor Sr . tener coche 1 r nosotros n ITIos grande e I I os ayuda de jar 1 1 sto no encIma esto tambi 6 n 1 ejos muchachos 271
Un ex&men del vocabu t ar 1 o e g c r ) to Admln i s tr a c ! 6 n : Quiero ver cuantas palabras puedes escrlbir. ^Puedes e sc rib ir tu nombre? SI neceslta auyda despu 6 s, suglera nombres de amigos y parientes, cosas que le gusta hacer, anlmales, cosas en la casa o cocina, cosas en que se puede montar, cosas que puede comer, e t c . . . . 272
Prueba. de Dlctaclftn (Dictation Test) Dlgas Voy a leerte un cuentlto. Cuando termlno de leer voy a leerlo otra vez muy despacio para que tu puedas e sc rib ir las palabras del cuento. Algunas de las palabras son dlficiles. Dilas despacito a ti mismo y plensa en como las pudieras escrlbir.
Vlene el caml 6 n. Se para aqui para dejar me subir. 273
Translation of Teacher^ Script for "Stones" pg. 6 Lea el texto. Diga: Enseflame la prlmera parte de la orac 1 bn. Enseflame la bltima parte. Enseflame la parte de abajo del I lbro. (No menclone que el dlbujo e s t 6 al rev6 s .)
pg. 8 Diga: £D6 nde empiezo? t,Por dbnde si go? iY luego a d 6 nde voy?
pg.10 Diga: i0u6 tlene de maI 6 sta parte? (Lea i. nmedi atamente la llnea de abajo y despubs la llnea de arriba. tig serlale.) pg. 12 Diga: £D6 nde empiezo a leer? £(3u6 errores tlene 6sta pAgina? (Seflale la p6 gina, no el texto. Lea el texto despaclo como si estuvlera escrlto correctamente.> pg. 13 Diga: ^Qu6 errores tlene 6 sta p6 glna? (Seflale la p6 glna, qq el texto.) (Lea el texto despaclo como si estuvlera escrlto correctamente.) 274 pg. 14 Diga: £Qu6 errores tlene la escrltura de 6 sta p&glna? CLea el texto despaclo como si estuvlera escrlto correctamente.) Diga: iPara qu£ es 6 sto? (Seflale el ? con el dedo o con un 16plz.) pg. 16 Lea el texto. Diga: iPara qu6 es 6 sto? (Seflale el punto, la coma, las com lllas.)
Diga: Encuentre una letra como 6 sta. (Seflale la 'G', la 'E; la 'AO pg. 18 Diga: Enseflame la palabra 'quei 'fu 6 ; 'ya^ 'no( pg. 20 Diga: Esta llnea dice "La pledra rod 6 por el cerro." Guiero que muevas las tarjetas enclma de la llnea asl hasta que solo veas una letra. (Demuestre el movimlento de las ta rje ta s pero no haga el ejerclc io .) Diga: Enseflame: dos letras, 3 6 I0 una palabra, dos palabras, la prlmera letra de una palabra, la dltlma letra de una pa 1abra, una maydscula 275
Translation of 11 St on eg11 (Clay, 197 ?) text In.tQ S&anlgh^. Title: Pledras pg. 2 Subi el cerro mlrando hacla arrlba y hacla abajo. pg. 4 VI un p^jaro en e! Arbol y piedras en el suelo. p g . '6 Patl6 una piedra grande. Rod6 para acci y para all&. pg. 8 (Puesto al reves) La empuj6 y la empuj6 una y otra vez. pg. 10 y la patl6 muy fuerte. Hlce mi pie para atras pg. 12 Entonces me de puse puntlllas y me quede mlrando. pg. 13 La piedra rod6 por ees cerro chocando pro aqui y rop all A. iSe pararla ne la Jare? 1 0 contlnuarla hasta la curva? pg. 14 ^Rodarla eas piedra hasta la acas con el locumplo? £0 sequlr£ hasta las lorfes que son am arlllas? pg. 16 Entonces grits, "Alto, alto. Gran Piedra porque el agua est& hondo." pg. 18 Slgulo la piedra hasta que cay6 al charco. Corrf r^pidamente. Y todo lo que vl fue el agua, verde y calmada. Y que l£stlma, ya no habla piedra. pg. 20 La piedra rod6 por e) cerro. APPENDIX B QUESTIONS FOR TEACHER INTERVIEW
276 277
Teacher Interview
The following is a lis t of the questions which the researcher asked each first grade teacher during individual Interviews.
1. How long have you been teaching? 2. How long have you taught at the Coleglo? 3. How long have you taught English? 4. What do you especially like about teaching English? 5. What are some of the more difficult or frustrating aspects of teaching English? 6. What can you as a teacher do to help the children 1 earn Engl 1sh? 7. What do the students need to do to learn English? 8. How do the children respond to the double curr i cuIum? 9. Why do you teach reading and writing in first grade? 10. Why do you use (or not use) Spanish in the c 1assroom? 11. What would you like to change about what you teach? Would you add anything or take anything away? 12. Do you use different group levels for reading or any other activity? 13. What do you do d iffe ren tly for the high, medium and low ability children? 14. What do you think the school should do for/with the children having problems? 278
15. How do you teaching reading? Why do you teach It that way? 16. How do you teach writing? Why do you teach It that way? 17. Do you read stories to the class? How often do you read to them? 18. What do the children know when they come to you In September? 19. What do you want the children to know or to be able to do by June?
2 0 . Do you think they are well prepared to start learning English when they come to you in September? APPENDIX C LETTER SENT TO PARENTS WITH TRANSLATION
279 PunCucion coLeqio ameRiCAno
Ip pnpro rtf 19(37
fHm»dpf Padr(*» rtf Familial
Oil i s I pr amof inuifar a alounns niflos rip prlmpr atto a p arflrlpar pn tinas arllvfrtadPS f<;parUI»5. Mrs, Sa I? v Na (ha n son -Mp lia p s t a r A d I r I g I pnrto pi nmpo rtp ipaa'tra? parMrI pan(ps rtf Ohio Pfafp Unluarsl(v qitp pstarin an al coIpoIo diirantp los mpsps rtp anarn v fpbrpro. La Sra. Mafhpnson-MpiI a famblpn fu p marsfra pn nnpstrn rnlaolo rtn r a n ( p rriatro ados. Gita ahora quisfpra Iraba.lar non nn orupo rtp rtlP7 niftns clp prlmur ado par a Ilpvar a n h p unas actluirtartps Hp 1prfura-escrItura . Gstas acHuldades PsfarAn a n I up I rtp nup5*rp? alumnos rtp pr imerp, v romp 1pmpn(arAn su frabajo rtf cla*p. MO son rlasps r pmortialas, slnn rta anr I qti I C t m I «n *o, v p=M Inullacfo rualqulpr aliimno rtp primpr atlo qua qulsipra partlrlpar.
Las ctasas fprSn sin costor v ?p rpynlran rta ltd? a 7(00-- o S p a inmr-diatamontp rtpspui's rta la sal Ma, o al I on p p v ml<*rcnlps o pl mar(ps v Iiipup*. OstPrtPS tsndrlan qnp rrrorjrr a SUS hljos prinlnalmnntp a las 7 : on m la pntrnrta principal. ?«rl i mu v r p c C'n« nrt I p qu« p I n I fin t r i I g i un ■lunrh* pspprI»1mpntp nntrlM vn pn pstns dias para qup aguanfp un rsto mSs antas rtf compr,
SI ffpnp lnfprp= pn qtip su hlin p arH rlp p pn rstas clasps, por favor II pn p la formlta aba,in v Pntrtfgirolp pn la fil r (* rr I rtn rtp Prlmarla a mA s Iar dar pl lunps (7 rtp enprn. las Clapps PmpP7arSn pl martas ?0 rtp pnpro v rnnl i nuar (n liasla p I )iisup< rtp mar70.
Gracias por su atpnrlrtn.
______JI______
Di.l i pro qilP mi h i i o' * ______- _ . ______.... par Mr i pn m las rla srs pcpprialrs ron lire. Sallv Na Ihrnsnn-lip I I a .
Hor arIn p rp frrid n s ______I hops v mldrrolps
______martas v Iu p i '» s
Nom br p clp I p a rtrp t______
Tp Ip fono i FIrmat 281
Translation of Letter Sent to Parents
Dear Parents of Families: We would like to Invite a few children of first grade to participate In some special activities. Mrs. Sally Nathenson-MeJ1 a will be directing the group of student p articipant teachers from Ohio State University which will be In the school during the months of January and February. Mrs. Nathenson-Mej1 a was also a teacher In our school for four years. She would now like to work with a group of 10 children from first grade in order to carry out some reading and writing activities. These activities will be at the level of our first grade students and will complement their classroom work. These are not remedial classes, rath er, enrichment, and any student from first grade Is invited who wishes to participate. The classes will be without cost and will meet from 1:45 to 2:30-- In other words, Immediately after school le ts out, eith er Monday and Wednesday, or Tuesday and Thursday. You will have to pick up your children punctually at 2:30 at the main entrance. It Is recommended that the child bring a nutritious snack on those days so he can last awhile before dinner. If you are Interested In having your child participate In these classes, please fill out the form below and turn It In to the office of Primary no later than Monday the 19th of January. The classes will begin on Tuesday, January 20th and will continue until Thursday the 26th of March. Thank you for your attention, Sandy Olmas APPENDIX D SAMPLE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTION WITH FIRST GRADE TEACHER
282 283
Interview with P.J. March 17, 1987 R: That's quite a difference. Do you like this better than Centro Linguistico? PJ: Yes, because I have more contact with students now, I know them better. There I teach one group once a week or twice a week. R: What do you especially like about teaching Engllsh? PJ: Everything, I like hearing children, how they start learning, how they try to say more and more things in English even its a difficult language for them, the sounds and the vowels and everything is different. They try hard and I like hearing them. R: Have you taught other grades besides first grade? PJ: Second grade, some years ago, second grade. I like their writing, in first grade I'm using that to see what they write. Sometimes they mix everything but they are trying to communicate something, part of their feelings. And there are some things that they find are like in Spanish and they try to get a good writing, a report or something. R: What are some of the more difficult or frustrating aspects of teaching English? PJ: Sometimes the big groups. Well here in school they aren't very big, but when I taught English to big groups, having 60 or 70 children in the same group its very frustrating to see that you can't ask everybody, everyone, no? You just ask part of the group to read or part of the group to work In chant drills or description of pictures or whatever you are doing, and part of the group Just listens and there Is very lit tle part icipat ion. R: What about here in the American School? PJ: Here In the American School, well, some of them are not Interested in English. They show you that when they are very little, they come here Just because their parents want them to study Engllsh so we have to catch their attention doing lots of things. R: That's a challenge, too, isn't It? 285
P J: Um-huh (affirm) and you feel very frustrated when, even though you do lots of things they don't listen to what you say. Frustrating. R: WHat do you feel like you as a teacher can do to help the children learn English? PJ: Well, when I give a normal class I try to help everyone, all at the same time, but when I find that certain children have more probelms I try to get their , to tell them to tell me, no? what happens to them or what their problems are, if I am being very rude or if they feel that I am not explaining them correctly. So I try to talk with them, to have a little bit more communication with them. And, uh, well I can teach them lots of things as good habits or bing quiet or neat in their, all what they do, their work, to be responsible of their work, th eir homework. Those are things that help, no?, and that helps them with their Spanish class. R: Yes, that helps in everying. What do the students need to do in order to learn English? P J: First of all they have to like English, no?, they have to be willing to learn something. If they are interested they learn a lot. Even though maybe they have difficutles, no?, as in pronunciatiol;n, because some children can't pronounce everything right, or they have probelems with their tongue or with their mouth or with their ears they can't hear correctly. They try and that helps them a lot. They have to pay a lot of attention, that's very important. If they are playing with things or Just talking with their classmates they can't listen and wouldn't be, they won't be able to learn everying. And they have to participate. I am always telling them to participate, to raise their hands, to ask me, for them to talk, to say what they think or they see. In firs t grade, everybody has to talk in English and has to say something at least during the day because If they just come and sit they won't learn anything. R: Why do you think its important to teach reading and writing in firs t grade? P J: They have a good memory so sometimes they memorize the words just as sight words and I think that as soon 286 as they start writing and reading in English its going to be more easy or its going to be easier for them to learn things in the second or third grades. Right now my cl ass...my students are writing very well, no?, comparing them with other children I have other years. We learned how to spell words in September and October and now we're writing phrases, little sentences, and they can even write their, a 1itt1e... story. Some years ago we weren't teaching them how to write sentences in first grade and I think this change is, is better for them. They were going up to second grade and they weren't even able to write a description of a picture. Now they can say what color the things are, what they see, how many they see, things like that. R: How do you think the children respond to the double curriculum? Having to learn all the Spanish content and having to learn all the English content? PJ: They are all very smart children, some of them, very few of them are having problems with the double program. I think everyone is able if they are responsible, if they have a little help of their parents, if they divide their time in the afternoon doing English and Spanish homework and everying goes find. Just those kids who spend the whole afternoon watching t.v ., they are playing with other things, they find everying difficult, they never finish homework, they're always having notes from teachers, bad reports. But I think everyone is having the opportunity to learn both languages at the same time and it isn 't very much. R: So you think that if the children are motivated and w illing to put In a balanced amount of time with both programs that they should be able to do pretty we 1 1 ? PJ: Yes, th a t's no problem. Just those children who have special problems in their own language, in Spanish, they are not going to be able to finish a good year...In this school. So we are asking them to think of something different, no? A one program school. R: Tell me why you use Spanish in your classroom? PJ: Sometimes there are special things like discipline problems or instructions that they can't understand. Even if I explain them with movements or mime or other 287 things, they, I think that they are not understanding me and so I prefer them to say out loud In Spanish. Sometimes its like a way to know that they are understanding me because they don't have much English to explain the Engllsh...so If I say "What's this? But tell me in English," they are going to be quiet, so I prefer them to tell me In Spanish. Sometimes they just nod their heads or shake their heads or they say "no" and "yes", but I am not understanding If they catch what I say. R: What would you like to change about what you teach? To add or take away? PJ: Well, we have lots of ac tiv itie s here and the probe 1m is that sometimes we don't have the children for a very long time and we are beginning something and ...reading or writing, and then we have to leave and then we have to get back, and the attention Is not the same because they were out half and hour or so. So, when they come back their motivation Is not the same. Sometimes they have, we have interruptions of people that come in and out, and that's something that bothers us a lot at the school. But we can't avoid all those things. R: What about the program? The actual things that you teach. Would you change any of that? PJ: I think everything is ok. We've done lots of m aterial, no? We;ve made the spelling program, I think th a t's working ok, the reading books were books, were made by the same first grade students last year, so they understand everything. I think everything works ok. R: Do you have reading group levels or do you have group levels at all with the children? PJ: No, no in first grade. I just have two almost native speakers, whose mothers are American and they, of course, read better than everyone else. And sometimes I use them as my helpers, no?, and they read sto ries to the ones who finish f irs t, or they do some other activity. But we don't have that. R: How do you decide if a child is having problems? 288
PJ: In reading, or...? R: In anything. PJ: Well, at first we observe them a lot, you know, September, October, after we give November grades if the child seems to have maturity problems, or language problems, something like that, we tell the psychologist (unintelligible) then she makes some tests, she gives some tests to them and if something comes out she tells (unintelligible) he has problems with pronunciation or something like that. Then she tells us to observe him more. Then a fte r two more observations we sta rt talking with parents. Sometimes we talk with parents since the beginning of the year. And that tells a lot about the child, no? How he passed kindergarten. And then, well, the notes show everything, no? Svery exam I give him, everything I ask him to do. If the child is always last when he brings the work back, if the child never finishes the work on the right time, or the time everybody, everybody finishes, or if the child, eh, I don't know, never participates, never raises his hand, all those are like little signs that tell that the kid's not doing very well, no? So we start talking with, parents until we are finished talking, no? He needs a tutor or someone to work in the afternoon. R: Since you do reading with the whole group at once, is there anything special that you do for the children that you know are having a harder time? PJ: They come with me if I have a special time during the day when everyone is, I don't know, coloring or cutting or something like that, I ask them to come to my desk and I read them and they repeat after me and they read alone and try to practice a l i t t l e b it more. If there's time because of course we're always hurry with the time. R: Do you think that there's anything else the school should be doing for the children who are having problems? PJ: I know that they are practicing their vocabulary in the afternoons with the computer, but not first graders, I think that the second graders to sixth graders. One of my students was going to that program, was going to take the program during the afternoons and 289
I think its helping her but perhaps they should have the opportunity, no?, to go for the first grade. And in school they were planning something for the advanced children, not for the poor children, who were the lowest, you know, in the classrooms, perhaps they should do something. The problem Is that if they leave the classroom and they take special remedial work, they will lose everything come in the classroom and are going to be, perhaps, worse for that. R: Yes, that is always a problem. How do you teach reading? P J: Sometimes, well this children read a li t t l e bit of English when they come into first grade, no? They read words. First we start with sight words, the vocabulary they start writing and the vocabulary they know, no? Then we start writing little sentences or small sentences, or phrases. They pass up to the blackboard and they write sentences and they repeat them, they circle difficult words.
Rj So you s ta rt doing that right away in September? PJ: Right away. R: Have them-writing things down? PJ: Sometimes the first phrases they write are just descriptions, no?, of what they do. And we use every material for that model, I Like Engllsh book, the lesson pages, we use the pictures and posters we have in the classroom and right away in September they s ta rt writing sentences about what they see and, until we get our reading books and we s ta rt with_short sto ries about (uni nte 11). R: Do you like that method of teaching reading or would you like to change that? Are you happy with the way you teach it? PJ: Its similar to what they, what we use in Spanish. Its almost the same way they learn to read in Spanish. So I think Its, its worked, its working. R: So you, if I were to ask you how you teach w riting would you really tell me the same things, that you s ta rt them out in September writing the things they 290
know. You try to incorporate reading and writing at the same time? P J: Yes, at the same time. R: What do you want the children to know by June? Not all the little details, but in general, what would you like them to be able, how far would you like them to get by June? PJ: In conversation, speaking I would like them to be able to ask certain questions about the elementary things, no?, like using the principle verbs, have, was, be. They're, right now they're having problems with the auxiliars, do, does, is and are, and they sometimes use the wrong ones. But perhaps that by June they will be able to Cunintell.) right, to use the question words, what, when, where correctly, no? To learn the more vocabulary they are able to know, because that's going to be very useful for them in second grade. To read, not very fluently, but to read a little bit. To write, I don't know, little phrases, not long compositions, because they sometimes have a lot of Imagination but they don't know exactly all the words they need and all the vocabulary. But to write some phrases, I don't know five, six phrases about something they want to, or they see, that they see a picture. I think that's enought for first grade. R: What do they know when they come to you in September? PJ: They know a lot of vocabulary. They speak, no, they say rhymes, l i t t l e rhymes, l i t t l e songs, and they know almost all the vocabulary they, 1 earn in first grade, they know it in September. (Unintell), and colors, numbers and all that. R: Do you think that they're well prepared, when they come to you in September, do you think that they're well prepared to learn English? PJ: Yes, some of them are a little bit lost, no? If sometimes because they did a kindergarten in another school and they have a different program. But those who come from the American school they are well prepared. 291
R: Do you read stories to the class, not from their reading books, but other things. Why and about how often? PJ: Yes, I always read them a story when I have enough time. I always read a story to the ones who finish first. Always when I give a work there are fifteen, twenty boys who finish always on time. And they are the ones who come to my desk and I put them around me and I read them a storybook. I have a set of scholastic books that I bought and I used to change the story every twice of a week or every week, or sometimes over at the library, no? We have a set of books from the 1ibrary, no? R: Why do you read to them? PJ: They enjoy stories, and I think they're understanding more and more as I read. And I enjoy reading to them, we have a nice time. Sometimes they choose the books they want to hear because they , they attract their attention and they want to know about it, so I read what they want. APPENDIX E SAMPLE SET OF DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENTS
291 292
'Spa-vtsk DIAGNOSTIC SUMMARY SHEET
Kamo: . ____ Date: Blrehdate: V RR Teacher: ______Classroom Teacher: ______
District/School: ______SUMMARY OF RUNNING RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC RATE TEXT TITLES ERROR
1 . E a s y d C"IJ i m t f l r i r o
3 . H a r d ______J j _ X 1 : Directional Movement ______ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cues used and cues neglected
Inatr. Hard
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
LETTER IDENTIFICATION y: tV'Tiur n //** S : /( /ra S
CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT fSTOSES. SAND) f) f. J , >.
I* :l OHIO WORD TEST (I^IST A, LIST B. LIST C)
t AT 15 WRITING VOCABULARY 5 Ai..i«/es d 1 c i at ion 'a. a. !•. n jijr} /t/? A//OY17 {k,v £ J (ivt 1/i l J - r.>1 ' ' , , • 1 r „r ‘ ‘ . 1 ’ 1 )2»< - i'“l •If 3?- Rev <0/ 21/061 293
TEST #6 Highest Level at 901 RUNNING RECORD OF TEXT READING or above Level Acc
Data: /l£'7~ Q 8 ?
Naaet J ^ V £ ( f ) School: Racordar: ______Classrooa Teacher:
Score on thla text: Level: Acc. £/Cim\J \' fVirt’ de SC
iX ( / l / ' V
i ' t / 294
TEST g J TEST SCORE: ~ CONCEPTS ABOUT PRtMT SCORE SHEET L L i—LIL Date: I ~ I ~ Scones: t i f ^ r g S Sand: ______
Name: L( /"to School: - u Recorder: ______Classroom Teacher: *Uaa the acripc when administering chls test. PAGE SCORE ITEH COMMENT Cover 1. Front of book
2/3 2. Print contains message
4/3 ts 3. Where to start y 4. Which wax Co 8° 5. Return sweep to left 6. Word by word matching
6 7. First and last concept
7 o 3. Bottom of picture
8/9 9. Begin 'The' (Sand) or 'I'- LS' (Scones) bottom line, top § OR turn book
10/11 o 10. Line order altered 12/13 « 11. Left page before right O 12. One change In word order O 13. One change In letter order
14/15 0 14. One change In letter order hr 15. Meaning of 7 II * M 1 | / i| / »
16/17 / 16. Meaning of full stop r ' 17. Meaning of coma 0 IB. Meaning of quotation marks nr m’ y 19. Locate M m H h (Sand) OR T t B b (Stones)
18/19 20. Reversible words was, no
20 21. One letter: two letters V 22. One word: two words It 23. First and last letter of word Is 24. Capital letter 295
- i i y . t S S K z rtfAl■/*!. S , u / y H O JU a e S - j fJ c Q<■•'! M
y y D X I
X s G R ' v i L y ) T
s y y *■// 6 f P /, £»' ^r y s / y s b h 0 j u a c / \
a / / / ("■ L S' ^ ^r/i£L c y I q m
/ i/ Is i i «i/ d n s X i
Vy f 'y iL e g r V t 6 296
TEST it> WRITING VOCABULARY TEST SHEET TEST SCORE! 771 Data. I C 'ty ro S 7
»*■•* _ UliCyt'ui'Z-' School: ___ Recorder: ______Classrooo Teacher: (Fold heading tinder before child uses sheer)
Hvxmber-to Herr^a , csZOa->.,\ Z-dr - 7 ^ p ^ ° .. h , o l d PvoSo.d'ra ano mcKonix fsofto. «-^\el(X. + i. PdT^ p\dm^ldp'^ Lddfd Ci-i^ 297 298
fK ihsk * I DIAGNWTIC SUMMARY SHEET
Rim : Z C \jo n /Jfry'f'i.f h i Dace: / * 5 7 Blrthdata: V-/ RR Teacher: Classroom Teacher:
Dlacrlct/School: ______SUMMARY OF RUNNINC RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC RATE TEXT TITLES ERROR 1. Eaay ______J j ___ •O 2. laser. (c-c/7 KS- t I; 3. Bard ______1: Directional Movement __ ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cuss used and cues neglecCed Eaay Inacr. Hard
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
LETTER IDENTIFICATION " / ^ J - /tHcTi fcbJUX) 'g' Sjuf tli f 6 rr ^ CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT (STONES ^SANDp
'? 26 OHIO WORD TEST ( LIST B, LIST C)
/ 20 WRITING VOCABULARY f ^ / ,,,,/ r i DICTATION (( a ) B. C. D, E) tuzm* - *f oi^rif* sol'1*' G» 37 Rev (v/21/061 2 9 9
TEST *3 TEST SCORE: CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT SCORE SHEET / 24
Oats: y ^ ^ Scones: Ssnd: /
Naas: 1 1 S f^.'yt 1-1 School: c/ Recorder: Classroom Teacher: *Usa che script when administering this test. PAGE SCORE HEM COMMENT Cover X 1. Front of book 2/3 2. Print contains message
4/3 1/ , 3. Where to start t/- 4. Which way to go ✓ 5. Return sweep to left t / 6. Word by word matching
6 t / 7. First and last concept
7 l / 3. Bottom of picture 8/9 9. Begin ’The' (Sand) or 'I* / (Scones) bottom line) cop t OR curn book
10/11 10. Line order altered ✓ 12/13 l / 11. Left page before right 0 12. One change In word order ' tJiltUjC cj/n /'prli'/f a /* ''’pO 0 13. One change In letter order C(t*' ' rrtr\
14/15 t> 14. One change In letter order 15. Meaning of 7
16/17 •J 16. Meaning of full stop 17. Meaning of coma 0 t^r' ,.18. Meaning of quotation marks S t( *' /in ' f hi'r / ** .A 19. Locate M m H h (Sand) OR T c B b (Stones)
18/19 / y 20. Reversible words was. no /:i./ 'In /••<«/' Ui ho ■ \f uirl tvtt • 1,1 r .ttiti'y 20 21. One letter: two letters 22. One word: two words *Sr/is yut drar hi'ffrl’'. 0 0 23. First and last letter of word X 24. Capital letter 300
TEST #6 Highest Level at 90* RUNNING RECORD OF TEXT READING or above Level Acc $s~
Date : / ~ *=2 9 S ?
Name:. X \ ) 0 <) i K y t i ^ K , School: Recorder: Classroom Teacher:
Score on thla Cext: Acc. (c (■ U’f'tylj.___ y <■')') 01'ti
s ^ J jt Iw&k* y ✓ y y i / ✓ / t / v hvt\"vl
,S It* 301
TEST #1 LETTER IDENTIFICATION SCORE SHEET TEST SCORE: /5 <•
Date: /- 2 9-
(feme: l ' \ C k i i l l i : School: U Recorder: Classroom Tchr: *' /e ir a s , - ^eZ/er-i.
A s Word I.R. A s Word I.R. Confusions: A I/ d F I/ f 1 K / k P y P U i S w 1^ Letters Unknown: z X z X t / 6 b i y H y h 0 s 0 J — J — U / u Comment; a y !.! ... ■1 ... . C y c y 1 T X Y i* L y 1 y q K k M s m ~l y 0 y d y Recording: H y n y Alphabet name response: s y s y Checkmark X y X y i/ Letter sound response: [ 1 y Checkmark £ y e 1 A 6 — R child gives R y r y IR Ircorrect response: V V y Record what the child T y ti ^ says Q I
TOTALS 302
TEST #2 OHIO WORD TEST SCORE SHEET TEST SCORE: tJsa any one list of words / 20 Date: ___/-
Name: ___ I /;V y i I t l i School: Recorder: Classroom Tchri ‘Record Incorrect Response* Checkmark Correct Response
LIST A LIST B LIST C Practice Hards */ can In see
and ran big the 'S d e It to
pretty ^ said ride has * her him down*' find for
where we you a fte r tf they th is
le t S live may
here " ^ away In
am S are a t
t t i s r e ^ ^ no with
over put some
l i t t l e i / took make
did i / . do eat
what who an
them then walk
one play red
like / again now U could § * '* give from
y « / saw have * Use only one list (see testing guide) 303
WRITING VOCABULARY TEST SHEET TEST own*.^COftC» Date: / 7
None: -I D r~T ' ) f ^ t Lf ( C _ » School: Recorder: Classroom Teacher: (Fold heading under before child uses sheer) ru
T h e cikr bW« whit-?., re a bU<- K p l r H e btronj -y e* . . nen P«r.o\ o rx t 1 w0 fhrte t re fc batter PCM v \ ( 1 . .neb ovo.'n^t t^n desK H b \ e 304
TEST 15 TEST SCORE: isP / 3 7 DICTATION TEST SHEET Dace: /-.??-S?
Naaa: T ’-kJ*'* * I A •* y/c / _____. School: Recorder: ______Claeeroon Teacher: _ Circle Forw Ueed ^A*) B, C, D or E): (Fold heading under before child tiece iheet)
o * itvv'hit' i i i h o r\ 305
DAILY RUNNING RECURD
Name: Date:
RR Teacher: SUMMARY OF RUNNING RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC r TE TEXT TITLES ERROR
1. Easy ______X 1 :
2. Instr. A H F o K 1-'& j OA ?*/?
J. Hard ______X I Directional Movement __ ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cue* ueed and cuei neglected Eaay tnstr. Hard
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
CUES USEl Page Title and Level 7/ SC E SC
/
J
i
&
t * a l ’ , r i r . t f 4' I") — 7 306
DAILY RUNNING RECORD
Names jC vA an £>(?VY <' D a t e : 3 J 1P
RR T e a c h e r :
SUMHARY OF RUNNING RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC r TE TEXT T IT L E S ERROR
1. Easy i r Z/{r~~-li _____ % 1:
2. Inatr. f /&■ 5 %/(_r. I;______%?< ? I i: O 3. Hard ______Is_ II i
Directional M ovem ent ___
ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cues used and cues neglected Easy ______
L n s c r .
H a rd
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
t . i CUES USEI Page Title and Level E SC
\T 307
^ (: /I? /<$£*- D IAG N O STIC SUMMARY SHEET
Name: ^ ^ Dace: 3 «?P~ J 7 Birchdace:
RH Teacher: ______Classroom Teacher: ______
Diaerlce/School: ______SUHMARY OF RUNNING RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC RATE TEXT TITLES ERROR
1. E a s y C tl / C n / (< t, h i j 7 „ 1: /< r i Z 1: 2. loser. 7 /f J- s Id n d______V ‘I / 3 1: j ?, j X l : 3. Bard ______I: I I :
D irectional M o v e m e n t ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cues used and cues neglected
E a s y ______
I n s c r . ______
H a r d ______
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
LETTER IDENTIFICATION
V ft 54 CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT (STONESl SAND)
fV ______IZ OHIO WORD TEST (LIST A.‘.LIST B; LIST C)
t 2 0 WRITING VOCABULARY DICTATION (A. B. C. D. E)
42 “-'a "
f- * '>■ ' . 37 ftav (e/ii/asi 308
TEST >3 TEST SCORE: CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT SCORE SHEET JlJJLi
Dace : , ?/h 1 c /l? , /
Name School:
Recorder: ______Classroom Teacher: *Uae Che ecrlpc when administering this test. PAGE SCORE ITEM COMMENT Cover y' I. Front of book / n s\ 2/3 * ''T. Print contains message hr- 4/3 - 3. Where to start "■■O • 1 ^4. Which way to go n i 5- Return sweep to left •; 4 ks6. Word by word matching 6 7. First and last concept SC' 7 y 9. Bottom of picture 14/13 v' 14. One change In letter order ) i ‘ ■ S 13. Meaning of ? 16/17 16. Meaning of full stop i 17. Meaning of coesna ;:r. r* 18. Meaning of quotation narks i s 19. locate M o H h (Sand) OR T t B b (Stones)
18/19 y 20. Reversible words was, no
20 V 21. One letter: two letters \s" 22. One word: two words [.V 23. First and last letter of s word :\p, 1 24. Capital letter 309
i ’r"~- ■ Lesion No, DAILY RUNNING RECORD
Naas: ______ZZ^-U^I Dace tfoZ ? i d J2 7. /? % ?
RR Teacher: ______SUMMARY OF RUNNING RECORD LEVEL RUNNING WORDS ERROR RATE ACCURACY SC R TE TEXT TITLES ERROR
1. Easy * * ¥ !i______x it 2. Instr. 1 Tsla^J J // 3 I: S'/t ^ T 11
3. Hard ]_r______X 1: Directional Kovemenc ANALYSIS OF ERRORS Cues used and cues neglected E*ay ______Instr. Hard ______
CROSS CHECKING ON CUES
CUES USE) Page Title and Level lit 7 s f a v t / 2 SC E SC
tS- • r ' i t' ' 1 /' l l*" • t"' fV
/ yJ 310
i - ■- Thai »t TEST SCORE: 1 '■ LETTER IDENTIFICATIOH SCORE SHEET J/6 tit*
Data: J& rct J?. /?S7
H a m a : X\ja^ BeyrulC, S c h o o l : ~ r r
R e c o r d e r : Classroom Tchr: ' /
A S Word I.R. A S Word I.R a Confusions:
A C F f K k £
P u / P i W l / w 1 L etters Unknown: Z z (•' * B b (/ S H h %> 0 1. ’ , 0 v ' ------J J U tr ' u t ■ Comment: a t c I-' c » t / I Y y L ✓ ' i q V q I M * o 1 fc 0 *' d Recording: t- N V n t Alphabet name response: S s 1 C h e c k m a r k X X I Letter sound response: L t t 1 1 1 C h e c k m a r k E i U tr e I MiORD Record Che word the — G 8 child Rives R V r I t IR Ircorrect response: i' i V V Record whet the child /> T 1/ t L s a y s
0
TOTALS 311
TEST #2 OHIO WORD TEST SCORE SHEET TEst SCORE! Ui« any one Use of uords n /20 Date! t / l P a r c L A7./ ? $ ? «•*•» ______s c h o o l:------Recorder! ______Classroom Tchrt ______♦Record Incorrect Responses Checkmark Correct Response
LIST A LIST B LIST C
Practice * Words can in see
and ran •' big
the i t i - '' to
pretty said ride
has her I him
down find I'- fo r
where we t you
a fte r they th is
le t live r ^ e may
here away L I n
am are a t
there no \ ■’* with
over put l some
/ l i t t l e look k' * make
did do « eat
what who an ,T v/ l them then s ' walk
one play I-'' red
like again /> j could give / lt /r' from yes saw X have * Use only one lis t (sea tssClng guide) 312
i>--.tT TEST ffr TEST SCORE: WRITING VOCABULART TEST SHEET Daeat J?atc£ A?, '/9^7
»#»•!_ zpuan geyruf^ ------school* — Recorder! Claasroon Teacher: * (Fold heading under before child uses sheer)
c_cxr W\\ Vi u> V o ' o \-c & X\s ^ o\ r yn
Vicro (*\ <^e-£-> ^
5L. \K^ Vv e q \ kva \ o -< ( k ?
V OV^. ^ V- V \ Y'-e3.*z~ \ Vt(-?JL
I r cl V4 \\ ^ l r ^ h © r V 1 c_v\? \ 313
•i' v< r~ TEST #3 TEST SCORE:
DICTATION TEST SHEET
D«t«>, cl. / <7 'i ? '7
Nome: _ ’X v a . t ' 1 G e y f L A ^ ______School: ______Recorder: ______Cleaerooo Teacher: Circle Form Used (A, B, C, D or E): (Fold heading under before child uaes sheet)
Kosy (\ b (oj ^oa V ' ' c ~ v K .r\ APPENDIX F WRITING SAMPLES FROM ALINA
314 f i \irex O.ojJ^TO
U A--'’"
q v a U
FIGURE 1 ALINA'S WRITING SAMPLE a w
a
b e
^ s2v ^ '"c SftMPLE ^ bw If f,,.
h oOV\ ° v \ p t IVv-e i D~ea Y & ^ a h\) K m h\ra&pr P k i
f f h r , *
f i g u r e a * " " • • * m w APPENDIX G WRITING SAMPLES FROM IVAN
318 319
iCuan .Eayrctk— ^ WcrT"£r^
& *. B.tx'C. d < l \ E T .
< K T u a W < v 'i ^°V ^U "V
FIGURE 4 I VAN' S WRITING SAMPLE 320
B w . t^ e .y fo i A'-
<\ ^ ^ ^ r. 7 . '-1 J “ -" -'o • o n ' n de_ t> w.\ ^ eY~ d e b e. C. F \ o. 'i
/
FIGURE 5 IVAN'S WRITING SAMPLE 321
C / C *-'■ 6 . u l.
K r c< 2-/r" 1 ’
T h /s 15 l^o ^wrvg ry
f o •• v W b° p
FIGURE 6 I VAN'' S WRITING SAMPLE APPENDIX H WRITING SAMPLES FROM FEDERICO
322 323
Federico Z^'nono
Si »*••*» lS sF V* O ■'’ ^St T.I ? V:.t V:.t y&?iUf.nA *.iV vF7rr±n
FIGURE 7 FEDERICO'S WRITING SAMPLE I
324
13 I I t'6 V 0 K I — F-vit\-o rjc Q.7 I' •'c ------• / / : ' A ......
010 Iqq ■fei
FIGURE 8 FEDERICO'S WRITING SAMPLE 325
Toriucirv. % J 9 , . \ 9 % ?
FIGURE 9 FEDERICO'S WRITING SAMPLE fcdenco £ <*(' <«.t' i o The * o
~T^e o'N ''l0 ^' s ^'Pee -[Vie be* is happy •
FIGURE 10 FEDERICO'S WRITING SAMPLE APPENDIX I WRITING SAMPLES FROM RODOLFO
327 328
Hodolfio Gonzalez. F
\ \ k - V w i 1 3 de ^e'-"';;' J i . i
•' r» '* ‘ <
in The p(d^e ,5> 1 fM x TVi* boys is w
FIGURE 11 RODOLFO''S WRITING SAMPLE 329
(2odolfv (jon'zalez* f _ . VP f >' d Vu9^d d^"'Febr^^o I Q 8 ? , Tin ^ ^ h\ ytH (X15 ArnVncOs is d !odp py friol^ A ^ f \ dWelf^ j$ 0 h Vidppy T~in i ^ •. r y . io?<> TVie A Wi m a ) *tne R<^ bh^ *,5 h^ y tln^ 6 h c o p y is OnV^ypy*
FIGURE 12 RODOLFO'S WRITING SAMPLE 330
(L&doffc Cr cnzalez. P:.,- 7 ' V u > w ' . v 1 i - i .• 3 4 o’7 '
~jti 9 IS i Vi I‘Ip P 1 t'V’ni
TV)^ V ^ O T € f t g o (
FIGURE 13 RODOLFO*'S WRITING SAMPLE APPENDIX J WRITING SAMPLES FROM SONYA
331 332
2 S c( e 'n eV' o d
'I 2 j v/i o 3 j
FIGURE 14 SONYA'S WRITING SAMPLE f r q y So nyFIGURE 15 SONYA'S WRITING SAMPLE " "> e F e b „ , r ^ r o
f
f h « i ' piot, yf iv\
^ v
FIGURE 16 334 SONYA'S WRITING SAMPLE 3 3 5
f h b o o \ v g r e e
W/a
FIGURE 17 SONYA'S WRITING SAMPLE APPENDIX K WRITING SAMPLES FROM DEBRA
3 3 6 Qzbra. Car-k.ro
' ' °P - f ° * i c e m o o a | O c ^°Pl G v r l S>VoFIGURE 18 DEBRA'S WRITING SAMPLE Debra. Ccirlero
J S i h s h J S K / ______KW FAtt- p ow v
"fW fe d ^ w Vv,o V \y ■I'l;- Qo?
^ tV)o \?iQiot>\\ ~ i \\ e 'ScvVdu /& u; "/j-)2 £pf\l ls 1/7 LcoILAV f h ',1 6X > w r;‘
FIGURE 19 DEBRA'S WRITING SAMPLE Debra Carkro AW; 'Who,
I HE & / i © y
THt />0y '=> riy' Qcafhor -Tk fe M e ft, Qby
FIGURE 20 DEBRA'S WRITING SAMPLE 340
|“V/nr/Tv. C cirjc^o —
TV,© l^ftbys. «:e - . Voppy.
Plni cvq bofey Qtf2. Pofc £'od oi^er be \\ke YYie igtfcar t.»»i.
FIGURE 21 DEBRA'S WRITING SAMPLE 341
^ Ocbnjx. C a r t e l c
_fAcS5T<±P> VQAVca \ ° ^ n +U <^-\ ^ o.oo^’yL bicctoseUse W U co^ ^ o^xi Ve. ^ Qyrm
r
FIGURE 22 DEBRA''S WRITING SAMPLE APPENDIX L BOOKS USED DURING ACTIVITY SESSIONS (IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)
342 343
BOOKS USED DURING ACTIVITY SESSIONS (Listed In Order Used)
El_Prlmer Paseo de Spot. Eric Hill G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1981 Where's Soot?. Eric Hill G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1980 S to p !. Joy Cowley, 111. David Cowe Short I and Pub. Ltd., The Story Box, 1982 Old T uatara. Joy Cowley, III. Clare Bowes Ready to Read, School Publications Branch Dept, of Ed., Wellington, 1983 N1ght-tIme. Joy Cowley, III. Isabel Lowe Shortland Publications Ltd., The Story Box, 1983 L ittle B rother. Joy Cowley, 111. Jo Davies Shortland Publications Ltd., The Story Box, 1983 A11 Fal1 Down. Brian Wildsmith Oxford University Press, 1983 PeterkIn's Wet Walk. Emille Boon Random House, 1984 The Babv. John Burn Ingham Thomas Y. Crowe 1 Co., 1974 AlrPlanes. Byron Barton Thomas Y. Crowell, 1986 Herman the Helper. Robert Kraus, III. Jose Aruego, Arlane Dewey Windmill Books, Inc., 1974 Leo the Late Bloomer. Robert Kraus, 111. Jose Aruego Windmill Books and E.P. Dutton, 1971 Good-night. Owl!. Pat Hutchins The Bodley Head, 1973 The Very Busy Spider. Eric Carle Philomel Books, 1984
The Wlnd_Blew. Pat Hutchins The Bodley Head, 1974 Caiman the Hat. Brian Wlldsmlth Oxford University Press, 1982 The Island. Brian Wlldsmlth Oxford University Press, 1983 Matthew Likes to Read. Jan Grainger 111. Les]ey Moyes Ready to Read, School Publications Branch, Dept, of Ed., Wellington, 1983 APPENDIX M SAMPLE WORKBOOK PAGES
345 346
I red 1 #*- WrifinqS/review »'s/a»'e
If is ch se I f . v/ellow.
T h ey are ^ They dre t>r ov/sin.^y
T h e y o r e ^ ------They vjK,|e . TaJT
•=<*.
FIGURE 23 SAMPLE FROM VOWEL SOUNDS WORKBOOK 347
\ i : THe. Human B oqy.
TVye Human Body ^O n -VW K ead are •Hie. H a‘» r an d +1* $ ice
On \W tace. are 4 wo e^e^ one nose, a mouVH Cola*" rl a tWm a n d dujo ck sek s.
In dke mouHn ar2 s dW VeeVin .
FIGURE 24 SAMPLE FROM VE CAN READ, WE -CAN WRITE WORKBOOK 348
LIST OF REFERENCES
Ammon, P. (1985). Helping children learn to write in English as a second language: Some observations and some hypotheses. In: S. W. Freedman, (Ed.) The Acquisition of Written Language: Response and Revision. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corp. Applebee, A. N. (1978). The Child/ s Concept of Storv: Aaes Two to Seventeen. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Barnes, D. (1975). From Communication to Curriculum. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, Ltd. ______.; Britton, J.; and Torbe, M. (1986). Language the Learner and the School. Middlesex: Penguin Books, Ltd. 3rd Edition. Barrera, R. (1981). Reading in Spanish: Insights from children's miscues. In: S. Hudelson, (Ed.). Learning to Read in Different Languages. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1-9. Barton, B. (1986). Alrolanes. New York: Thomas Y. Crowe 11. Birnbaum, J. (1986). Reflective thought: The connection between reading and writing. In. B. Peterson (Ed.) Converoencies: Transactions in Reading and W riting. Urbana, IL .: NCTE. Bogden, R. C.; Blklen, S. K. (1982). Qual1 tat 1ve Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Boon, E. (1984). Peterkln/ s Wet Walk. New York: Random House. Britton, J. (1970). Language and Learning. Allen Land. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: The Penguin Press. 349
______<1982). Prospect and Retrospect. London: Heinemann Educational Books. Brown, G. <1977). Development of story in children's reading and w riting. Theory Into P ractice. XVI, 5, 357-362. Burn Ingham, J. <1974). The Babv. New York: Thomas Y. Crowei1 Company. Burton, F. R. <1985) The Reading-Writing Connection: A One Year Teacher-as-Reasearcher Study of Third-Fourth Grade Writers and Their Literary Experiences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbus, Oh.:The Ohio State University. Carl, E. <1984). The Very Busy Spider. New York: Philomel Books. Cazden, C ., John, V., Hymes, D. <1972). Functions of Language in the Classroom. New York:Teachers Col 1ege P ress. Chomsky, N. <1965). Aspects of a Theory of Syntax Cambridge: MIT Press. Chukovsky, K. <1971). From Two to Five. Translated and edited by Miriam Morton. Berkely: University of California Press. Clarke, M. <1981). Reading in Spanish and English: Evidence from adult ESL students. In: S. Hudelson, Cowley, J. 111. by Jo Davies. (1983). Little Brother. Auckland: Shortland Publishers, Ltd., The Story Box. ______. 111. by Isabel Lowe. <1983). N1ght-Tlme. Auckland: Shortland Publishers, Ltd., The Story Box. ______. 111. by Clare Bowes. (1983). Old Tuatara. Wellington, New Zealand: Ready to Read School Publications Branch, Department Education. ______. 111. by David Cowe. < 1982). Stop! Auckland: Shorthand Publishers, Ltd., The Story Box. Cummins, J. (1981). B1literacy, language, proficiency, and education programs. In: J. Edwards, (Ed.) The Social Psychology of Reading. In stitu te of Modern Language, Inc., Vol. 1, 1981, 131-146. Dato, D.P. (1970). American Children's Acquisition of Spanish Syntax in the Madrid Environment. Preliminary Edition. U.S. Office of Education, Institute of International Studies. Ed 053631. DeFord, D.E. (1980). Young children and their writing. Theory Into P ractice. XIX, 3. ______. (1981). Literacy: Reading, writing and other essentials. Language A rts. 58, 6, September, 652-658. ______. (1985). Validating the construct of theoretical orientation in reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly. XX, 3. ______. (1986). Classroom contexts for literacy learning. In: T. Raphael (Ed.) The Contexts of School Based Literacy. New York:Random House. 163-180. Diebold, A.R. (1968). The consequences of early bilingualism in cognitive development and personality Formation. In: E. Norbeck, D. Price-WiI 1iams & W. McCord (Eds.) The Study of Personality: An Interdisciplinary Appraisal. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968. 351
Donmoyer, R. <1987). Why case studies? Reflections on Hord and H all's three images. Curriculum Images. 17, 1, 91-102. Dor, A. K. <1975). Early Bilingualism and Verbal Flexlbi1i tv. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Columbus:The Ohio State University. Dulay, H. C.; Burt M. K. <1974). Natural sequences in child second language learning. Language Learning. 24, 37-53. Dyson, A. H. <1982). The emergence of visible language: Interrelationships between drawing and early writing. Visible Language. 16, 4, 360-381. Eckhoff, B. <1984). How reading affects chi Iren's w riting. In: J. Jensen ______.; Goodman Y. <1978). Reading of American Children Whose Language Is a Stable Rural Dialect of English or a Language Other than English. Hickman, J. <1980). Children's Response to Literature: What Happens In the Classroom. Language A rts. 57, 5, May. Hill, E. <1980). "Where's Spot? New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. ______. <1981). El Primer Paseo de Spot. New York: G. P. Putnams's Sons. Huck, C. S.; Hepler, S.; Hickman, J. <1987). Children's Literature In the Elementary School. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Hudelson, S. <1981). An Investigation of the oral reading behaviors of native Spanish speakers reading in Spanish. In: S. Hudelson, ______. C1974). 111. Jose Aruego, Ariane Dewey. Herman the Helper. New York: Windmill Books, Inc. Lambert, W. E; Tucker, G. R. <1972). Billngual Education of Children: __ The-SiL,—Lambent ExcerIment• Rowley, MA.: Newbury House. Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York:Wlley. Manuel, H. T. <1965). Spanish Speaking Children of the Southwest: _Education_and the Public Welfare. Austin: University of Texas. McClure, A. <1985). Children's Responses to Poetry In a Supportive Literary Context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbus: The Ohio State Un1verslty. McDermott, R. <1974). Achieving school failu re. In: G. Splndler, Oxford—Carpenter, R.; Pol, L.j Lopez, D.j Stupp, P.; Gendell, M.; Peng, S.; (1984). Demograph1c Projections of Non-English Language Background and Llmlted_Engl1sh Proficient Persons In the United States to the Year 2000 By State. Age, and Language Group. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Pela, A. A. (1975). Special feature on bilingual education: An overview. Today's Education. 64 (Jan/Feb.), 771-73. Petty, W. (1978). The writing of young children. In: C. Cooper & L. O'Dell, (Eds.). Research On Composing. Urbana, 111: NCTE, Urbana 111. Press, 73-78, Piaget, J. (1959). Language and Thought of the Child. Translated by Marjorie Gabaln. London: Rout ledge & Kegan Paul, 1926, Third Edition, revised and en1arged. Pinnel, G. S.; Short, K.; Lyons, A.; Young, P. (1986). The Reading Recovery Project in Columbus. Ohio. Columbus: The Ohio State University. Read, C. (1981). Writing is not the Inverse of reading for young children. In: C. H. Frederkson & J. F. Dorn1nic (Eds.) Writing: The Nature. Development and Teaching of Written Communication. Erlbaum. Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The Reader, the Text. The Poem: The Transactional Theory of th_e_Llterarv Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Rubin, S.; Gardner, H. (1977). Once Upon A Time: The Development of Sensitivity to Storv Structure. Harvard Project Zero and Psychology Service. Boston, MA: Boston Veterans Administration Hosp i tal. Sanders, D. (1985). Classroom lecture notes. Columbus: The Ohio State University. Savi11e-Troike, M. (1984). What real 1v matters in second language learning for academic achievement? TESOL Quarterly. 18, 2, June, 199-219. 356
Shank!In, N. (1982). Relating reading and writing: Developing a transactional theory of the writing process. Monograph In Language and Reading Studies, no. 5. Sharp, D. (1973). Language In B1 UnguaL. Commun 11ies. London: Arnold Ltd. Skutnabb-Kangas, T .; Toukomma, P. (1976). Teach 1ng Migrant Children's Mother Tongue and Learning the Language of the Host Country. Helsinki: The Finnish National Commission for UNESCO. Smith, F. (1982). Understanding Reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sulzby, E .; Teale, W. (1985). Writing development In early childhood. Educational Horizons. Fall, 64. Troike, R. C. (1981). Synthesis of research on bilingual education. Education Leadership. March. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Translated by Hanfmann 8. Vakar. Cambridge, MA.: M.I.T. Press. New York: John Wiley. Wildsmith, B. (1982). Cat On the Mat. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ______. (1983a). All Fa 11 Down. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ______. (1983b). The Island. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wode, H. (1978). Developmental principles in N aturalistic L2 Acquisition. in: E. Hatch, (Ed.) Second Language Acoulsitlon: A Book of Readings. Rowley, Ma.: Newbury House. Wong-Fi1lmore, L. (1976). The Second Time Around: Cognitive and Social Strategies in Second Language A cguisltion. Stanford, CT: Ph.D. D issertation. Zutel1, J. (1978). Some psycholingulstic perspectives on children's spelling. Language A rts. 55, 7, October, 844-850.
