Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h85LRR707950; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:27:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:27:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <F078EEE4D799064E95F003CFD9B4C7FC04B9775E@UMBE2K1> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Elsa Auerbach" <Elsa.Auerbach@umb.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9426] RE: Illiteracy X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 5261 Lines: 119 The following article (posted on another list) seems germane to this discussion. Elsa Auerbach From: Stephen Krashen To: multied-l@usc.edu Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 7:21 PM Subject: English Fever Now available at http://www.sdkrashen.com Dealing with English Fever Stephen Krashen Paper to be presented at the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching, Taipei, Taiwan, November, 2003 Abstract: There is no question that English is crucial in today's world, but the usual approaches to EFL, often based on popular folk- theories of language acquisition, are inefficient. Based on what is known about how language is acquired, age differences, literacy development and bilingual education, a different and less strenuous approach is recommended, featuring comprehensible input-based methodology, recreational reading, and a strong education in the primary language. This program need not begin in early childhood, and is intended to provide the EFL student with the tools to continue to improve in English after formal instruction has ended. > ---------- > From: kate.diggins > Reply To: nifl-esl@nifl.gov > Sent: Friday, September 5, 2003 4:30 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9424] RE: Illiteracy > > Thanks, Kevin! > > One of the things I'm enjoying so much since joining this list-serve is > finding out about the latest research. I appreciate your sharing that with > me. > > > > ---------- Original Message ----------- > From: Kevin Rocap <krocap@csulb.edu> > To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> > Sent: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 14:39:58 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9423] RE: Illiteracy > > > Dear Kate, > > > > Actually that is a piece of received wisdom that may need to be > > reassessed (not ignored or rejected as I think it makes good sense > > from a sociocultural point of view). > > > > Recent learning and brain research suggest, for instance, that kids > > can learn two language simultaneously and keep them straight > > (maintain code integrity, if you will); basically the different > > languages (with a small "l") are treated I suspect as Language (with > > a capital "L") resources by the child and there is no evidence, to > > my knowledge, that one is needed before the other can be introduced. > > > > Of course with regard to second language learners of English in the > > U.S. we have other sociocultural issues to take into account. Such > > as if we want the parents to be a strong positive influence on the > > child's life it is likely important to help maintain the strongest > > "mother tongue" linkages between parents and child (even as English > > is acquired as well). Also, we have the issue of dominant and > > subordinate languages > > (the fact that kids may be surrounded by English in the media, in > > society, etc., but based on their own first language likely have > > fewer opportunities to use and maintain that - language loss). > > Since, of course, we do have the benefit of research that > > demonstrates greater cognitive flexibility for children who know two > > or more languages it is important to design programs that promote > > additive rather than subtractive bilingualism (adding English, not > > losing L1). Also, it is likely that with regard to a child's > > *identity* formation (e.g., self-esteem, self-efficacy, etc.) I > > imagine that it is detrimental to not get early and high-quality > > validation of their home language use in the school environment. > > How is the child to make sense, for instance, of all "official" > > practices denying the value of their own parents' language? > > > > Also, I'd venture to say that your point may still hold for some > > issues like learning to read. While it seems from research to be > > true that a child can acquire two or more languages simultaneously > > > there may be something to be said for developing strength in reading > > in one language and then transferring the skill. Though we do know > > that it is helpful, even if a child is learning to read in English > > in school for parents to read to/with a child regardless of the > > language to learn certain reading strategies. So I'm afraid I don't > > know the current best answer in this regard. > > > > What I believe is true, Kate, is that IF a child has a rich first > > language that many of the skills of that language use are indeed > > transferable in the process of acquiring/developing another > > language. And I would venture to say that your statement holds true > > for *adults* who would benefit from having a rich first language, > > since they may not have the benefit of as malleable and formative a > > brain in later years in order to create all of the extra neural > > pathways for acquiring the new one. (but I don't know of specific > > brain research in this vein) > > > > In Peace, > > K. > > > > kate.diggins wrote: > > > > >On the other hand, childen need a rich first language. Without that, > there > > >would be a lack of cognitive "hooks", metaphorically speaking, on which > > >to "hang" second language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------- End of Original Message ------- > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:16:24 EST