UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The boat people : descriptive analysis of a program for teaching English as a foreign language Bardal, Nancy J. 1981

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 B37.pdf [ 3.12MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0078249.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0078249-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0078249-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0078249-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0078249-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0078249-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0078249-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0078249-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0078249.ris

Full Text

THE BOAT PEOPLE: DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF A PROGRAM FOR TEACHING ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE by NANCY J . BARDAL B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1971 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE EDUCATION) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 1981 © Nancy J . B a r d a l , 1981 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be gran t e d by the head o f my department o r by h i s o r her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f ^-^^/^U^s &!>L>C&TSO/>J The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date QCTOGBX? /<5~> / 9 S7 DE-6 (2/79) ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s study was to d e s c r i b e an i n n o v a t i v e E.F.L. Program in McCauley School i n Edmonton, A l b e r t a , which appeared to provide the b a s i c reading s k i l l s and l e a r n i n g experiences needed to help E.F.L. students to i n t e g r a t e i n t o the r e g u l a r classroom. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s study sought to gather d e s c r i p t i v e data about the program by monitoring the progress of 83 students, mainly Vietnamese boat people, e n r o l l e d in the program between September, 1980 and June, 1981. Through the use of teacher and student q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and i n t e r v i e w s , examination of c u r r i c u l u m schedules and i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s and the use of v a r i o u s formal and i n f o r m a l measures, t h i s study attempted to answer the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : 1. Who are the students i n v o l v e d i n the program and what are t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l and language backgrounds? 2. Who are the teachers i n the program and what are t h e i r q u a l i f i c a t ions? 3. How are the students s e l e c t e d and assigned to the v a r i o u s program l e v e l s ? 4. What i s the c u r r i c u l u m o r g a n i z a t i o n of the program? 5. How i s the reading component of the c u r r i c u l u m organized in terms of i n s t r u c t i o n a l time, content, resources and methodology? 6. How i s the program evaluated? 7. Is the program e f f e c t i v e , i . e . , are there demonstrable gains i n students' reading a b i l i t y ? The f i n d i n g s of the study seem to i n d i c a t e that the McCauley program . i n an e f f e c t i v e model f o r responding to the need f o r s p e c i a l programs i n E.F.L. Students appeared to have made about a year's growth i n reading and. s p e l l i n g s k i l l s . However, because of the developmental nature of the McCauley program, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to i s o l a t e s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e s to draw c o n c l u s i o n s at to which components of the program are c o n t r i b u t i n g most to the program's success. I t i s e q u a l l y d i f f i c u l t to g e n e r a l i z e the f i n d i n g s of the present d e s c r i p t i v e study to other p o p u l a t i o n s . THESIS SUPERVISOR Table of Contents L i s t of Tables i v L i s t of F i g u r e s . ...v CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM 1 A. I n t r o d u c t i o n .1 B. R a t i o n a l e f o r the Study ....1 C. Background to the Study ..2 D. Purpose of the Study ....3 E. D e f i n i t i o n of Terms ...5 F. Assumptions and L i m i t a t i o n s of the Study 6 G. Th e s i s O u t l i n e 6 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ..8 A . Overview 8 B. E x i s t i n g S t u d i e s 8 C. Summary 18 CHAPTER THREE: PROCEDURES 19 A. Overview 19 B. Research Methodology 19 C. C o l l e c t i o n and Recording of Data 19 D. D i s p l a y and Treatment 22 E. Summary 24 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 25 A. E.F.L. Program O r g a n i z a t i o n 25 i v " " 1 . Overview 25 2. S t a f f .25 B. Demographics 31 1 . S t a f f . .31 2. Students ...31 C. The Reading Program ..33 1. Reading Time 33 2. Reading Approaches ..34 3. Reading S k i l l s ......36 4. M a t e r i a l s 38 5. E v a l u a t i o n Procedures ..39 6. Program R e s u l t s 40 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...44 A. Overview 44 B. Conclus i o n s ..44 C. Summary and Recommendations f o r Furth e r Study 51 BIBLIOGRAPHY 53 L i s t of Tables Table 1: E. F. L. Teacher Assignments . ..........27 Table 2: Student Movement During Program ......28 Table 3: Length of Time Student i s Program .29 Table 4: Student Time A l l o c a t i o n s f o r Subjects ...30 Table 5: Percent of Core Subject Time and Hours per Week Spent i n Reading I n s t r u c t i o n 35 Table 6: Percent of Reading I n s t r u c t i o n Time Spent Being Taught Reading by V a r i o u s Approaches ...35 Table 7: Percent of Reading I n s t r u c t i o n Time Devoted to Reading S k i l l s 37 Table 8: P r e - t e s t and P o s t - t e s t R e s u l t s 41 F i g u r e 1: McCauley E.F.L. Program O r g a n i z a t i o n v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A p p r e c i a t i o n i s expressed to Dr. Robert Chester, my a d v i s o r , f o r h i s c o n t i n u a l advice and support, and to Drs. George Labercane and C l i f f Pennock f o r t h e i r generous a s s i s t a n c e i n the completion of t h i s study. My thanks a l s o to the f a c u l t y and s t a f f of McCauley School, without whose coo p e r a t i o n t h i s study c o u l d not have been c a r r i e d out. $SIGNOFF 1 CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM A. I n t r o d u c t i o n The i n i t i a l chapter presents the problem i n v e s t i g a t e d in t h i s study. Beginning with the r a t i o n a l e behind t h i s r e s e a r c h , the need f o r a d d i t i o n a l i n q u i r y i n t o . E.F.L. ( E n g l i s h as a Foreign Language) i s a t t e s t e d to by the lack of p r e v i o u s research and by h i s t o r i c a l changes i n the p o p u l a t i o n served by such programs. This problem i s then presented a g a i n s t the background of c u r r e n t E.F.L. programs. In e x p l a i n i n g the purpose of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i t s goal i s d e f i n e d , with a statement of the questions to be answered by i t . Terms used i n the study are d e f i n e d . L i m i t a t i o n s and assumptions are l i s t e d . The chapter concludes with an o u t l i n e of the remainder of the t h e s i s . B. R a t i o n a l e For The Study The need f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n t o the te a c h i n g of E.F.L. i s well-documented. As p o i n t e d out by Gradman (1978), Peck (1977) and Summers (1979), l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e on t e a c h i n g reading to students who speak l i t t l e or no E n g l i s h . Reading programs s p e c i f i c a l l y designed f o r refugee/immigrant students are c l e a r l y r e q u i r e d (Ashworth, 1979; E b e l , 1980). As Ebel (1980) a l s o noted, E.F.L. reading i n s t r u c t i o n has undergone s e v e r a l changes during the past f o r t y y e ars. Since the 1940's the E.F.L. p o p u l a t i o n has changed from being predominantly a d u l t s with upper socio-economic backgrounds to c h i l d r e n from a wide v a r i e t y of backgrounds. Thus, a d u l t 2 l e a r n i n g s t r a t e g i e s employed i n the past are no longer a p p l i c a b l e . A d d i t i o n a l l y , i n s t u c t i o n a l methods have s h i f t e d from being p u r e l y a u d i o l i n g u a l to programs i n t r o d u c i n g reading and w r i t i n g simultaneously with or s h o r t l y a f t e r the i n t r o d u c t i o n of a u r a l / o r a l language. Teacher t r a i n i n g m a t e r i a l s are few, with only four books p r e s e n t i n g adequate i n f o r m a t i o n . Research in the more general f i e l d of E.F.L. l e a r n i n g i s a l s o s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d . A survey of 20 p e r i o d i c a l s p u b l i s h e d between 1961 and 1968 y i e l d e d only 17 E.F.L. a r t i c l e s that c o u l d be c a t e g o r i z e d as s c i e n t i f i c i n format and approach to r e s e a r c h ( M o r r i s r o e , 1972). A survey of a r t i c l e s i n the J o u r n a l of  Reading (1957 to 1977) showed that no a r t i c l e s on E.F.L. were p u b l i s h e d i n volumes 1 to 7 (1957 to 1963), only 0.5% of the a r t i c l e s in volumes 8 to 14 (1964 to 1971) concerned E.F.L. and a r t i c l e s on E.F.L. c o n s t i t u t e d a mere 1% of volumes 15 to 20 (1972 to 1977). Thus, as Peck (1977) notes, the r e s e a r c h s i t u a t i o n i n E.F.L. reading i s wide open at t h i s time; the need for f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i s obvious. C. Background To The Study Research i n t o program development f o r E.F.L. students has p a r t i c u l a r s i g n i f i c a n c e c u r r e n t l y s i n c e , d u r i n g the past decade, the i n s t a b i l i t y of a number of governments i n underdeveloped c o u n t r i e s has r e s u l t e d i n l a r g e numbers of immigrant refugees being accepted i n t o Canada (Miles-Herman, 1980). Concern has been expressed by n a t i v e Canadians about the a s s i m i l a t i o n of these refugees (Government of Canada, 1979). E n g l i s h language programs are c o n t i n u i n g to be developed to a i d the a c c u l t u r a t i o n 3 process of immigrants of a l l ages (Government of Canada, 1979). Canada Employment and Immigration f i g u r e s up to 1980 show that the p r o p o r t i o n of non-English speaking c h i l d r e n aged four to nineteen years has r i s e n , while the p r o p o r t i o n of E n g l i s h speaking c h i l d r e n has d e c l i n e d over the past decade ( M i l e s -Herman, 1980). T h i s group of immigrants presents an e d u c a t i o n a l dilemma unique i n Canadian h i s t o r y and one which cannot r e l y e n t i r e l y on American experience f o r i t s s o l u t i o n (Ashworth, 1979). The Canada Employment and Immigration Commission s t a t e d in a newsletter ( J u l y , 1979) that the Indochinese Refugee movement was the second l a r g e s t movement of refugees since the end of World War I I . In that same year, school boards began to supply s p e c i a l language t r a i n i n g f o r many of these a r r i v i n g refugees (Government of Canada, 1979). The development of programs to meet Canadian needs has been slow (Ashworth, 1979). An E d u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Columbia (E.R.I.B.C.) r e p o r t w r i t t e n in 1980 s t a t e d that the p lanning and execution of E.F.L. programs i n that province was haphazard, with no r o u t i n e procedures o p e r a t i n g . It i s hoped that w i t h i n t h i s decade the teaching of E.F.L. reading w i l l have been p l a c e d on a much more systematic b a s i s than i t has been i n the past ( U l j i n , 1980). D. Purpose Of The Study T h i s study was designed to d e s c r i b e an i n n o v a t i v e E.F.L. program i n McCauley School i n Edmonton, A l b e r t a , which appears to provide the b a s i c reading s k i l l s and l e a r n i n g experiences 4 needed to h e l p E.F.L. students to i n t e g r a t e i n t o the r e g u l a r classroom. Summary progress r e p o r t s f o r the Planning and Research Branch of A l b e r t a Education have shown that students studying E.F.L. have made s i g n i f i c a n t gains i n t h e i r E n g l i s h language reading s k i l l s through p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n that program. It appears that the program i s accomplishing i t s purpose i n equipping students with the f u n c t i o n a l reading s k i l l s necessary for entry i n t o a r e g u l a r school program. S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s study attempts to d e s c r i b e the McCauley program by monitoring the progress of 83 students e n r o l l e d i n the program between September, 1980 and June, 1981. Most of these students are Vietnamese boat people who r e c e n t l y f l e d t h e i r homeland and are s e t t l i n g i n Canada. The remainder of the students are c h i l d r e n from v a r i o u s e t h n i c groups. These students are recent a r r i v a l s i n Canada and have scant or no knowledge of e i t h e r t h e i r new country or the E n g l i s h language. T h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l experiences vary and the c u l t u r e shock that they experience may f u r t h e r compound t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l problems. Through the use of teacher and student q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and i n t e r v i e w s , examination of c u r r i c u l u m schedules and i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s and the use of v a r i o u s formal and info r m a l measures, t h i s study attempts to answer the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : 1. Who are the students i n v o l v e d i n the program and what are t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l and language backgrounds? 2. Who are the teachers i n the program and what are t h e i r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ? 3. How are the students s e l e c t e d and a s s i g n e d to the 5 v a r i o u s program l e v e l s ? 4. What i s the c u r r i c u l u m o r g a n i z a t i o n of the program? 5. How i s the reading component of the c u r r i c u l u m organized i n terms of i n s t r u c t i o n a l time, content, resources and methodology? 6. How i s the program evaluated? 7. Is the program e f f e c t i v e , i . e . , are there demonstrable gains in students' reading a b i l i t y ? E. D e f i n i t i o n Of Terms 1. E.F.L. ( E n g l i s h as a F o r e i g n Language) i s used t o encompass E.S.O.L. ( E n g l i s h , to Speakers of Other Languages), T.E.S.O.L. (Teaching of E n g l i s h to Speakers of Other Languages) and E.S.L. ( E n g l i s h as a Second Language). 2. Immersion E.F.L. program r e f e r s to one i n which students are segregated from the r e g u l a r school program and are taught as a group e x c l u s i v e l y in E n g l i s h . 3. Minimal E n g l i s h s k i l l s are d e f i n e d as i n s u f f i c i e n t knowledge of the language to cope i n a r e g u l a r school program. 4. F u n c t i o n a l reading s k i l l s means reading s k i l l s that are adequate to allow entry i n t o a r e g u l a r school program as d i s t i n c t from an E.F.L. program. 5. Basic c l a s s e s r e f e r to students diagnosed as having no E n g l i s h s k i l l s . 6. T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s r e f e r to students diagnosed as having minimal E n g l i s h s k i l l s . 6 F. Assumptions And L i m i t a t i o n s Of The Study I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s study must be made i n c o n j u n c t i o n with the f o l l o w i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s : 1 . T h i s i s a b a s e l i n e d e s c r i p t i v e study. I t may serve as a model that can be adapted to s i m i l a r e d u c a t i o n a l circumstances. However, as no c o n t r o l group was a v a i l a b l e , i t cannot be surmized that a c a u s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between the program i n s t r u c t i o n and the a c q u i s i t i o n of E n g l i s h . 2. I t i s assumed that the re s e a r c h e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the program d i d not i n v a l i d a t e data gathered i n the teacher i n t e r v i e w s . 3. The st a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s employed i n the program were normed f o r a very d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , c a u t i o n must be e x e r c i s e d in the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e s u l t s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , more a p p r o p r i a t e l y normed t e s t s were not a v a i l a b l e . 4. The assumption i s made that students understood q u e s t i o n s asked in the i n t e r v i e w s and answered a c c u r a t e l y . Since i n t e r p r e t e r s were employed, i t i s f u r t h e r assumed that the language b a r r i e r d i d not s e r i o u s l y hamper t h i s p r o c e s s . 5. F i n a l l y , t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n assumes that teachers answered q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a c c u r a t e l y and u t i l i z e d t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e i n responding to i n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n s . G. T h e s i s O u t l i n e Ensuing chapters of t h i s study present the McCauley School E.F.L. program. Chapter Two p r o v i d e s a review of cu r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e i n the f i e l d . In Chapter Three, the procedures used to a t t a i n p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n are e x p l a i n e d . The f o u r t h 7 chapter d e s c r i b e s the program i t s e l f , d e t a i l i n g i t s components and p r e s e n t i n g pre- p o s t - t e s t program t e s t r e s u l t s . Chapter F i v e concludes the study with recommendations d e r i v e d from the i n v e s t i g a t i o n . 8 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Overview The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed i s d e r i v e d from textbooks, j o u r n a l s , government p u b l i c a t i o n s , E.R.I.B.C. r e p o r t s and documents procured through the E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Centre (E.R.I.C.). T h i s chapter begins with e x i s t i n g s t u d i e s p e r t a i n i n g to general E.F.L. theory. Next, research on E.F.L. programs and t h e i r e v a l u a t i o n i s d i s c u s s e d , followed by l i t e r a t u r e about s p e c i f i c E.F.L. reading programs. B. E x i s t i n g S t u d i e s • . The l i t e r a t u r e concerning E.F.L. theory proposes that the goal of E.F.L. t e a c h i n g i s a c q u i s i t i o n by the student of the language and c u l t u r e (Ashworth, 1975; Savage, 1978; Thonis, 1970). T h i s t r a n s p i r e s most s u c c e s s f u l l y i n an humanistic atmosphere (Smith, 1975). Although there are too many l i m i t a t i o n s i n c u r r e n t research to make a case f o r any one best procedure f o r te a c h i n g E.F.L. (Gradman, 1978), there e x i s t s some evidence of the s u p e r i o r i t y of an i n t e g r a t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n a l model combining s o c i o - p s y c h o l o g i c a l and p e d a g o g i c a l - l i n g u i s t i c aspects of language l e a r n i n g ( K a l a n t z i s , 1972). E.F.L. reading programs should t h e r e f o r e be c u l t u r a l l y , age and i n t e r e s t a p p r o p r i a t e to immigrant students (McGee, 1978; Stoddard, 1968; Tyacke and Saunders, 1979). In d i s c u s s i n g elementary E.F.L. programs, Ashworth (1979) emphasized that no one program i s s u i t a b l e f o r a l l school d i s t r i c t s . F a c t o r s that must be c o n s i d e r e d when choosing a .9 program are a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n s t r a i n t s , the p o p u l a t i o n served and the program o b j e c t i v e s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n s t r a i n t s r e f e r to the number of E.F.L. students, t h e i r age range, p r e v i o u s s c h o o l i n g , the q u a l i t y of l o c a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n to c o n s o l i d a t e students i n one s c h o o l , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of t r a i n e d E.F.L. teachers and the nature of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e support and funding. The p o p u l a t i o n to be served by an E.F.L. program can vary from f o r e i g n born students to n a t i v e s who speak non-standard E n g l i s h . Each group r e q u i r e s a d i f f e r e n t program. The program o b j e c t i v e may be simply to teach c h i l d r e n E n g l i s h and put them i n t o the mainstream. On the other hand, i t may be to a s s i s t them in t h e i r c u l t u r a l adjustment as w e l l as i n t h e i r language a c q u i s i t i o n . These f a c t o r s are as a p p l i c a b l e to the high school E.F.L. program as they are to the elementary E.F.L. program. Thus, E.F.L. educators should t a i l o r the E.F.L. program to c l o s e l y meet students' needs ( K a r k i a , 1979). Thonis (1970) proposed an experimental E.F.L. c u r r i c u l u m with s i x dimensions. These were expanded experiences, improvement of n a t i v e language, l i t e r a c y i n the v e r n a c u l a r , o r a l E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y , l i t e r a c y i n E n g l i s h and achievement in s u b j e c t areas through i n d i v i d u a l language s t r e n g t h s and the p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s of the students. With regard to the e v a l u a t i o n of E.F.L. programs and students, Thonis suggested that m a t e r i a l s , techniques, methods, p r a c t i c e s and rewards of the program be assessed o b j e c t i v e l y . E v a l u a t i o n of p u p i l s should be an ongoing p r o c e s s . Informal o b s e r v a t i o n , reviews of the p u p i l ' s school h i s t o r y , i n t e r v i e w s , q u e s t i o n i n g and c a s u a l c o n v e r s a t i o n should be used. Teacher-10 made t e s t s should be c o n s t r u c t e d to measure s k i l l development. Th i s e v a l u a t i v e procedure r e s t s on the premise that the goals and o b j e c t i v e s of the program are e x p l i c i t r a ther than i m p l i c i t ( S t r e i f f , 1970). E v a l u a t i o n models f o r E.F.L. programs were examined by Bauldauf (1978), who made the p o i n t that s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s are not v a l i d measures of achievement f o r many E.F.L. students s i n c e they are not normed f o r that p o p u l a t i o n . He recommended a l o c a l norms model. T h i s would use as a standard of comparison l o c a l l y developed norms based on r e p r e s e n t a t i v e samples of the r e l e v a n t p o p u l a t i o n . Because t h i s task i s a d i f f i c u l t and time-consuming one, Bauldauf (1978) a l s o suggested the development and use of c u l t u r a l l y r e l e v a n t c l o z e t e s t s which can be s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e d to reading achievement. The v a l i d i t y of using c l o z e t e s t s i s born out by t h e i r high c o r r e l a t i o n with other t e s t s of E.F.L. p r o f i c i e n c y (Hisama, 1978). Se v e r a l schemes f o r E.F.L. programs were found i n the l i t e r a t u r e . K a r k i a (1979) recommended that the E.F.L. program emphasize speaking, l i s t e n i n g and reading s k i l l s as w e l l as grammar and vocabulary. Wilson (1969) presented a program which he claimed produced E n g l i s h two y e a r s . The plan advocated t o t a l involvement using the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among experience, t h i n k i n g and language developed by student p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the work and play a c t i v i t i e s of peers. He concluded that t o t a l language immersion at home and at school was the best formula f o r l e a r n i n g a new language. A study d i r e c t e d at i d e n t i f y i n g s a l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of four a d u l t E.F.L. programs p r o v i d e d g r e a t e r d e t a i l about 11 important program components (Savage, 1978). The major goal of the programs was to enable f o r e i g n - b o r n a d u l t s to a s s i m i l a t e i n t o the American c u l t u r e . The o b j e c t i v e was to teach l i s t e n i n g , speaking, reading, and w r i t i n g s k i l l s i n an American c u l t u r a l m i l i e u . Student needs were assessed by o r a l and w r i t t e n t e s t s and by personal i n t e r v i e w s . Program designs u t i l i z e d small group i n s t r u c t i o n which took i n t o account c o g n i t i v e , a f f e c t i v e and psychomotor aspects of language and c u l t u r a l a c q u i s i t i o n by means of a v a r i e t y of t e a c h e r - s e l e c t e d a c t i v i t i e s . These a c t i v i t i e s s t r e s s e d the program o b j e c t i v e . No standard methodology was p r e s c r i b e d : i n s t e a d , an e c l e c t i c approach was encouraged, dependent only on the teacher's d e c i s i o n about how best to approach a s p e c i f i c task. S i m i l a r l y , no one method of classroom p l a n n i n g was endorsed. In the c l a s s e s observed, however, the f o l l o w i n g were predominant f e a t u r e s : peer-mediation, s t u d e n t - c e n t r e d problem s o l v i n g a c t i v i t y , paced and v a r i e d tasks with an i n i t i a l emphasis on a u r a l / o r a l s k i l l s , minimal teacher modelling and c o r r e c t i o n , teacher-prepared m a t e r i a l s r a t h e r than textbooks, s e l f - d i r e c t e d problem s o l v i n g a c t i v i t i e s , c u l t u r a l l y r e l e v a n t idioms, an atmosphere of p u r p o s e f u l i n f o r m a l i t y , high regard f o r student s e l f - e s t e e m and small c l a s s s i z e . Program e v a l u a t i o n focused on e x p l i c i t g o a l s . I t took the form of r e g u l a r but i n f o r m a l t e s t i n g , teacher-made t e s t s , c o n t i n u a l program reassessment by teachers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , r e g u l a r teacher o b s e r v a t i o n s and peer o b s e r v a t i o n s . A v a r i e t y of methods was used to c o l l e c t data on these programs. They i n c l u d e d i n t e r v i e w s with program a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and f a c u l t y , i n f o r m a l t a l k s with students, 12 classroom o b s e r v a t i o n s and examinations of program l i t e r a t u r e and m a t e r i a l s . The apparent success of s p e c i f i c E.F.L. programs i s supported by a number of s t u d i e s . An e v a l u a t i o n of a migrant education program in C a l i f o r n i a ( B l a h k e t t , 1972) r e v e a l e d that c h i l d r e n e n r o l l e d i n E.F.L. c l a s s e s learned to speak E n g l i s h more q u i c k l y and took part i n classroom a c t i v i t i e s sooner than d i d migrants i n other types of programs. In A r i z o n a , at the Rough Rock Demonstration School, teachers undertook to improve Navajo Indian a r t s and language s k i l l s (Rough Rock Demonstration School, 1969). To do so, they compiled c u r r i c u l u m g u i d e l i n e s fo r use at a l l school l e v e l s i n a v a r i e t y of content areas. These c u r r i c u l a were designed t o : meet the s p e c i f i c needs of the students; develop c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g ; s t a t e e x p l i c i t l y the b a s i c concepts to be learned; and to implement a v a r i e t y of teaching methods emphasizing program f l e x i b i l i t y , student involvement and v i s u a l s t i m u l i . They c r e a t e d an environment l i n k i n g s k i l l mastery and p r a c t i c e in decision-making, thus encouraging the students to regard l e a r n i n g as a l i f e l o n g p r o c e s s . An e v a l u a t i o n of an Elementary/Secondary Education Act program (E.S.E.A., 1965) i n Sacramento examined a u d i o l i n g u a l lessons which were developed p a r t i c u l a r l y for non E n g l i s h speaking students (Delavan, 1966). The author concluded that the s p e c i f i c i t y of content and design p l u s the i n c l u s i o n of d i a l o g u e , p i c t u r e s and worksheets and the c o n d i t i o n of small group p r e s e n t a t i o n were c r i t i c a l components in a s u c c e s s f u l program f o r E.F.L. students. Despite the e x i s t e n c e of v i a b l e E.F.L. programs, there are inherent problems. The H a r t f o r d P u b l i c Schools e v a l u a t e d t h e i r E.F.L. programs in a 1973-1974 study ( H a r t f o r d P u b l i c Schools, 1973-74). The goal of the program was to help E.F.L. students master the w r i t t e n and o r a l aspects of E n g l i s h and to move i n t o a r e g u l a r school program. C l a s s e s were he l d f o r only one hour d a i l y . While t h i s goal was met, concern was expressed about funding, c l a s s s c h e d u l i n g and s i z e , lack of i n t e r e s t i n the program by other s t a f f members, l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s among E.F.L. students and lack of time to meet with r e g u l a r teachers to plan programs f o r E.F.L. students. Examination of the l i t e r a t u r e concerning E.F.L. reading programs r e v e a l s a v a r i e t y of t h e o r e t i c a l bases. In "Developing L i t e r a c y S k i l l s i n Adolescents and A d u l t s " (Payne, 1976), l i t e r a c y was d e f i n e d as the meaningful i n t e r a c t i o n of language in i t s w r i t t e n form. The u n d e r l y i n g assumption i s that l i t e r a c y i s a c q u i r e d through motivated p r a c t i c e of reading and w r i t i n g s k i l l s . Reading and w r i t i n g are complementary s k i l l s that are developmental. Just as reading i s a l i n g u i s t i c guessing game (Tyacke and Saunders, 1979), speaking i s a l i n g u i s t i c choosing game. Ther e f o r e , guessing and choosing are s k i l l s that need to be taught. Reading and w r i t i n g are p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s of language and l e x i c a l , s y n t a c t i c a l , phonographic and semantic aspects need to be taught. Rigg (1976) recommends language experience as one way of accomplishing these ends. T h i s s t r a t e g y p r o v i d e s a c t i v i t i e s i n which the student guesses , chooses and p r a c t i c e s a p p l y i n g s k i l l s to the tasks of reading and w r i t i n g . The developmental reading program f o r E.F.L. students a l s o has i t s proponents (New York C i t y Board of Education, 1968). In the beginning reading program, students should master the m a t e r i a l o r a l l y before reading i t (Stoddard, 1968). E.F.L. students can be grouped a c c o r d i n g to the speed at which they w i l l probably a c q u i r e reading s k i l l s (McGee, 1978). Those i l l i t e r a t e in the v e r n a c u l a r w i l l r e q u i r e p r e - r e a d i n g i n s t r u c t i o n . Those l i t e r a t e i n a language that has a d i f f e r e n t s c r i p t w i l l r e q u i r e both i n t e n s i v e (comprehension) and e x t e n s i v e ( f i c t i o n and n o n - f i c t i o n ) reading p r a c t i c e . The author recommended the c h o i c e of a reading program with a s i m i l a r c u l t u r a l background to that of the student. I t should a l s o be one that i s a p p r o p r i a t e to the student's age and i n t e r e s t s . The impact of l i n g u i s t i c s on language t e a c h i n g cannot be ignored. Wilson (1973) espoused the d i r e c t t e a c h i n g of grammar p a t t e r n s i n E.F.L. reading. She emphasized that teaching reading i n another language i s d i f f i c u l t because there are few known techniques. The d i f f e r e n c e between reading and w r i t i n g s k i l l s has not been acknowledged in the past, nor i s i t known which aspects of reading are u n i v e r s a l . L e x i c a l , s t r u c t u r a l and c u l t u r a l reading comprehension must be taught using sentence p a t t e r n s from formal prose. Since reading i s a problem-solving a c t i v i t y , knowledge of general p r i n c i p l e s i s u s e f u l . S p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n i n grammar p a t t e r n s helps the reader's s y n t a c t i c a l comprehension. Some p a r t s of the l i n g u i s t i c transform a t i o n a l model d e s c r i b i n g syntax are u s e f u l i n teaching, reading, but i t i s a slow procedure and some of the grammatical c a t e g o r i e s are not u n i v e r s a l ( P q l i t z e r , 1972). The s t a r t i n g p o i n t of any e x e r c i s e should be a c o n s t r u c t i o n i n the f o r e i g n language. Good 15 teaching m a t e r i a l s should be based on a grammatical comparison of the n a t i v e language and the f o r e i g n language so that d i f f e r e n c e s are noted. P r a c t i c e i s an e s s e n t i a l component of language l e a r n i n g because l e a r n i n g about a language i s not the same s k i l l as l e a r n i n g to use a language. P o l i t z e r (1972),who concluded that the best way to teach a f o r e i g n language i s by the d i r e c t method, advocated that n a t i v e language be t o t a l l y avoided and l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e and sequencing be used. He cautioned, however, that l e a r n i n g grammatical s t r u c t u r e s i n i s o l a t i o n i s no assurance of f o r e i g n language a c q u i s i t i o n . The n a t i v e l i t e r a c y approach to t e a c h i n g reading s k i l l s r e p r e s e n t s another a l t e r n a t i v e (Ching, 1976). The non-English speaking student i s faced with two tasks i n l e a r n i n g to read E n g l i s h . Not only does he need to l e a r n the reading process, he a l s o must a c q u i r e the E n g l i s h language i t s e l f (Weber, 1970). One approach, d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r , i s to teach the student the spoken language and then the w r i t t e n language (Stoddard, 1968). Another i s to teach the student to read i n h i s n a t i v e language f i r s t , p r o v i d i n g him with reading s k i l l s that can be t r a n s f e r r e d to E n g l i s h . T h i s r e q u i r e s that the teacher speak the student's n a t i v e language, which i s not always p o s s i b l e . An i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h i s type of program i s found i n the Milwaukee B i l i n g u a l Program (1977). The c h i l d r e n e n r o l l e d i n the program were taught to read i n t h e i r n a t i v e languages while l e a r n i n g o r a l E n g l i s h . A f t e r mastering o r a l E n g l i s h , they were taught to read i n E n g l i s h . Standardized t e s t scores i n d i c a t e d that t h i s program was s u c c e s s f u l . The r e s e a r c h concerning the teaching of reading to 16 E.F.L. students provides a v a r i e t y of o p i n i o n s as to when t h i s i n s t r u c t i o n should begin (Raz, 1969-70; Weber, 1970; Lado, 1976). One p o i n t of view suggests that students should master the o r a l language and meaning before being taught reading ( D e r r i c k , 1966; Moss, 1972; New York C i t y Board of Education, 1968; Paine, 1972). T h i s i s based on the assumption that reading i n a f o r e i g n language i s part of l e a r n i n g that language. As such, i t should f o l l o w l i s t e n i n g and speaking i n that language, as i t does in the n a t i v e language (Moss, 1972). Another p o i n t of view was that the o r a l and w r i t t e n language should be presented simultaneously (Kaplan, 1969; Lado, 1976; Weber, 1970). Just as the n a t i v e speaker of E n g l i s h f i n d s i t e a s i e r to r e c o g n i z e a name i f i t i s seen as w e l l as heard, so E.F.L. students f i n d i t e a s i e r to comprehend a u r a l m a t e r i a l i f they have a w r i t t e n c l u e . T h i s g i v e s them a guide to l i s t e n i n g , making an e a r l y connection between w r i t t e n and o r a l language i n t h e i r minds (Lado, 1976). Stoddard (1968) presented a compromise s o l u t i o n . In the e a r l y stages of reading, o r a l mastery was a t t a i n e d before reading was attempted. However, unless the student was i l l i t e r a t e i n h i s n a t i v e language, a long delay was c o n s i d e r e d to be i n a d v i s a b l e . Students were, equipped with f u n c t i o n a l reading s k i l l s as soon as p o s s s i b l e . T h i s allowed them to r e t u r n to t h e i r i n t e r r u p t e d education as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . Furthermore, i t was f e l t that students may become discouraged i f reading was w i t h h e l d too long. Kaplan (1969) concurred that reading and w r i t i n g must be i n t r o d u c e d as soon as the student has s u f f i c i e n t l e x i c a l c o n t r o l to make reading i n s t r u c t i o n v i a b l e . There was no consensus among l i n g u i s t s as .• 17 to the best time to begin reading i n s t r u c t i o n (New York C i t y Board of Education, 1968). The E.F.L. student faces a number of problems in l e a r n i n g to read E n g l i s h . I n i t i a l l y , he must become accustomed to the sound of the E n g l i s h language, hear the d i s t i n c t f e a t u r e s of the language and be able to reproduce some of i t (Bernardoni, 1962; Bouchard, 1974). L e f t - t o - r i g h t v i s u a l t r a c k i n g s k i l l s must be assured ( B r i s t o l Community C o l l e g e , 1974). The E.F.L. student must see p r i n t as a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of meaningful language ( F r i e s , 1972; Sutton, 1977). Once the student possesses these p r e - r e a d i n g s k i l l s , the d i f f e r e n t s k i l l s and s t r a t e g i e s of reading must be taught o v e r t l y (Sutton, 1977) . Problems that w i l l c o n f r o n t the reading student i n c l u d e a r e s t r i c t e d vocabulary, ignorance of s t r u c t u r a l s i g n a l s and scant understanding of the s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l context of the reading m a t e r i a l i t s e l f (Kerr, 1975). T h i s hinders the a b i l i t y to p i c k c o r r e c t reading cues and to a c c u r a t e l y confirm or r e j e c t them. Thus the h y p o t h e s i s - t e s t i n g procedure used by accomplished readers does not f u n c t i o n (Bouchard, 1974). T o t a l reading comprehension r e q u i r e s the E.F.L. student to have mastered s i x l e v e l s of meaning (Motta, 1974). F i r s t , the reader must know. He must know word s t r u c t u r e s , sentence s t r u c t u r e s , word f u n c t i o n s , punctuation, d e n o t a t i v e meaning, and must be able to r e c a l l s p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n . Second, the reader must comprehend, be able to understand and r e s t a t e a message, make in f e r e n c e s and draw c o n c l u s i o n s . A p p l i c a t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n i s the t h i r d meaning l e v e l . A n a l y z i n g i s the f o u r t h comprehension l e v e l , r e q u i r i n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of sequence, main ideas, 1 8 c o n n o t a t i v e meanings, f i g u r a t i v e language and r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The f i f t h l e v e l , s y n t h e s i z i n g , looks at c r e a t i n g new ideas while the s i x t h l e v e l , e v a l u a t i n g , i n v o l v e s s e l f - a p p r a i s i n g b i a s e s , judging i n f o r m a t i o n as v a l i d or i n v a l i d , e v a l u a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n as f a c t or o p i n i o n , a s s e s s i n g propaganda and e v a l u a t i n g the q u a l i t y of the w r i t t e n word. C. Summary The body of r e s e a r c h about E.F.L. reading programs i s i n c o n c l u s i v e . It appears that the most s u c c e s s f u l teaching methods combine s e v e r a l approaches.. They s e l e c t m a t e r i a l s and s t r a t e g i e s a p p r o p r i a t e to i n d i v i d u a l student needs. They provide a s u p p o r t i v e emotional atmosphere. Reading s k i l l s should be taught s e q u e n t i a l l y , p r a c t i c e should be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by m a t e r i a l s that can be c o r r e c t e d and d i r e c t e d by the student. F i n a l l y , students r e q u i r e s p e c i a l i z e d content reading and study s k i l l s i n s t r u c t i o n (Thonis, 1970). A s u c c e s s f u l E.F.L. program w i l l i n c o r p o r a t e a l l of these a s p e c t s . 19 CHAPTER THREE: PROCEDURES A. Overview Chapter Three d e s c r i b e s the procedures u t i l i z e d to o b t a i n d e s c r i p t i v e data about the McCauley School E.F.L. program g e n e r a l l y and the reading program s p e c i f i c a l l y . In t h i s chapter, the research methodology i s presented along with the s e l e c t i o n of s u b j e c t s and p i l o t s t u d i e s undertaken in the development of instruments. These, instruments are then d e t a i l e d , as are the f i e l d procedures used i n t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n . Information i s provided concerning the c o l l e c t i o n and r e c o r d i n g of data. F i n a l l y , data d i s p l a y and treatment are e x p l a i n e d . B. Research Methodology Because of the d e s c r i p t i v e nature of t h i s study, the survey method was adopted. A l l of the students e n r o l l e d f o r a l l or par t of the 1980-81 McCauley School E.F.L. program were used as s u b j e c t s . A d d i t i o n a l l y , data was gathered from the s i x teachers of E.F.L. core s u b j e c t s and the two program a i d e s . The Teacher and Teacher Aide Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and Interview Schedules and the Student Interview Schedule were p i l o t e d i n an Elementary E.F.L. program in Edmonton. However, because no p a r a l l e l j u n i o r high school program e x i s t s i n Edmonton, the Teacher and Aide Interview Schedules c o u l d not be p i l o t e d e x t e n s i v e l y . C. C o l l e c t i o n And Recording Of Data Demographic i n f o r m a t i o n concerning the program's s t a f f was obtained through q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The Teacher Q u e s t i o n n a i r e was 20 designed to determine post secondary education, teaching experience, p r o f e s s i o n a l a f f i l i a t i o n s and knowledge of languages other than E n g l i s h . The Aide Q u e s t i o n n a i r e was concerned with s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s about education, work experience and knowledge of f o r e i g n languages. Student Interviews were employed to gather i n f o r m a t i o n regarding sex, n a t i v e country, l e n g t h of time in Canada, n a t i v e and other languages spoken, years of previous s c h o o l i n g ( i n c l u d i n g years i n E.F.L. programs) and languages s t u d i e d . Teacher and Aide Interviews s o l i c i t e d program data. The Teacher Interview c o n s i s t e d of i n q u i r i e s about s k i l l s taught, m a t e r i a l s used and procedures f o r e v a l u a t i o n . The Aide Interview sought i n f o r m a t i o n about a i d e s ' d u t i e s and time a l l o c a t i o n s . At the beginning of the school year, the researcher met with the other f i v e E.F.L. teachers, the two E.F.L. aid e s and the p r i n c i p a l of the s c h o o l . The purpose of the study was e x p l a i n e d and t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n was e n l i s t e d . Upon enrolment in the program, students were interviewed i n d i v i d u a l l y by the r e s e a r c h e r . The purpose of the questions (to p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r both the school and f o r a study of the McCauley E.F.L. program) was e x p l a i n e d . F i v e student i n t e r p r e t e r s were t r a i n e d and used, where necessary, to a s s i s t in t h i s procedure. Students were then given to a b a t t e r y of t e s t s . A teacher aide was t r a i n e d by the P r o j e c t D i r e c t o r to administer a l l t e s t s . Included were the Comprehensive E n g l i s h Language Test (C.E.L.T.) with S t r u c t u r e , L i s t e n i n g and Vocabulary components, the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language (a l o c a l l y 21 developed t e s t ) and the Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y Test (number 1). The m a j o r i t y of students wrote these t e s t s as a group. However, because of l a t e entrance to the program, some students wrote them i n d i v i d u a l l y . F i n a l l y , the researcher a d m i n i s t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l l y the S c h o n e l l Graded Word L i s t . Scores f o r a l l t e s t s were recorded. P o s t - t e s t s were given to a l l students l e a v i n g the program. The forms of the C.E.L.T., D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language and the S c h o n e l l Graded Word L i s t remained the same. An a l t e r n a t e form of the Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y Test (number 4) was employed. Upon l e a v i n g the program, each student completed the G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e Reading Test (Basic students L e v e l A, Form 1; T r a n s i t i o n a l students L e v e l E, Form 1). The C u l t u r e F a i r I.Q. Test was a l s o given to those students e n r o l l e d in the program in June. In a d d i t i o n to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , i n t e r v i e w s and t e s t i n g , i n f o r m a t i o n was obtained from r e p o r t cards, a program summary report and school records. The procedures used to determine re p o r t card marks in E n g l i s h language development are d e s c r i b e d in Chapter Four. P o l i c y on student promotions w i t h i n and out of the program i s a l s o d e t a i l e d t h e r e . Hearing and v i s i o n t e s t r e s u l t s were provided by the school nurse. The Summary Progress Report fo r the 1980-81 School Year for the P r o j e c t s Funded by the Planning and Research Branch, A l b e r t a Education p r o v i d e d i n f o r m a t i o n on the.program o b j e c t i v e s , the design, the p e r c e i v e d r e s u l t s of the program, i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e and the d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered in conducting the program. The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r a t e g y of the program i s diagrammed in a flow 22 c h a r t (presented i n Chapter Three). School t i m e t a b l e s f u r n i s h e d time a l l o c a t i o n s . D. Data D i s p l a y And Treatment Data i s d i s p l a y e d i n t a b l e s , f i g u r e s and through e x p l i c a t i o n , in Chapter Four. The t o t a l E.F.L. program o r g a n i z a t i o n p r o v i d e s the framework w i t h i n which the reading program operates. Subjects of the study - the s t a f f and students - are d e s c r i b e d demographically. The reading program i t s e l f i s then d e t a i l e d through the a n a l y s i s of f i v e components: reading time, reading approaches, reading s k i l l s , t eaching m a t e r i a l s and e v a l u a t i o n procedures. F i n a l l y , r e s u l t s of the E. F.L. program are presented. Program .organization d e s c r i b e s the route followed by students e n r o l l e d i n the program. Procedures undertaken upon entrance to the program, w i t h i n the program and upon e x i t from the program are o u t l i n e d . T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s expanded in the chapter t e x t . Information about student movement w i t h i n the program, the l e n g t h of time students were in the program, E.F.L. teacher assignments, d u t i e s of teacher a i d e s , a l l o c a t i o n of student time, amount of time spent i n E.F.L. l e a r n i n g and i n Language A r t s versus content area study are d i s p l a y e d in t a b l e s . D i s c r e p a n c i e s between Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s are h i g h l i g h t e d i n t e x t . Teacher and student demographics are summarized. S i m i l a r i t i e s are a l i g n e d to generate p r o f i l e s of t e a c h i n g and student backgrounds. Students are grouped by i n i t i a l c l a s s placement to r e v e a l commonalities and d i s p a r i t i e s between Basic 23 and T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s p o p u l a t i o n s . Demographic data c r e a t e s a p r o f i l e of the s t a f f and students who c o n s t i t u t e the program. T h i s data i s presented to r e v e a l f a c t o r s r e l e v a n t to the i n s t r u c t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n . The reading program i s d e s c r i b e d in terms of reading time in core s u b j e c t s , reading approaches, reading techniques, m a t e r i a l s and e v a l u a t i o n procedures. Comparisons between reading time i n Language A r t s and content area s u b j e c t s are made. Conclus i o n s are drawn as to the most popular approaches. Reading techniques were obtained from a reading s k i l l s c h e c k l i s t (Braun and Froese, 1977). A t a b l e d i s p l a y s the general reading s k i l l s of word r e c o g n i t i o n , word a n a l y s i s , comprehension, study s k i l l s and content area r e a d i n g . Observations regarding the most important s k i l l s and techniques f o r the whole, group, fo r Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s and i n s u b j e c t areas, are i n c l u d e d . Types of m a t e r i a l and t h e i r frequency of use are d i s c u s s e d i n the text of Chapter Four. E v a l u a t i o n procedures used by teachers are c o n s i d e r e d . F i n a l l y , program pre- and p o s t - t e s t r e s u l t s are d e s c r i b e d . They are summarized in a t a b l e . S t a t i s t i c a l analyses provided answers to the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : 1. Did more time i n the program make a d i f f e r e n c e in gain scores? 2. Was there a c o r r e l a t i o n between sex and gain scores? 3. Was there a d i f f e r e n c e between T r a n s i t i o n a l and Basic students i n gain scores? 4. Was there a d i f f e r e n c e between scores of students who spoke Chinese as a n a t i v e language and scores of students who 24 d i d not speak Chinese as a n a t i v e language? 5. Was there a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between I.Q. scores and C.E.L.T. score gains? 6. Was there a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between I.Q. s c o r e s and G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e p o s t - t e s t scores? 7. Was there a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between Gates-M a c G i n i t i e p o s t - t e s t scores and C.E.L.T. Vocabulary p o s t - t e s t scores? 8. Was there a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y p o s t - t e s t scores and C.E.L.T. Vocabulary post-t e s t scores? 9. Was there a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language p o s t - t e s t scores and C.E.L.T. S t r u c t u r e p o s t - t e s t scores? E. Summary Information was gathered about the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the program and about the program's o r g a n i z a t i o n and e x e c u t i o n . The components of the reading program were i s o l a t e d . Test r e s u l t s were examined to determine whether or not students appeared to have made gains i n t h e i r E n g l i s h Language a b i l i t y . 25 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS A. E.F.L. Program O r g a n i z a t i o n 1. Overview The McCauley Program e x i s t e d w i t h i n an elementary j u n i o r high school (K-9) and was designed to accommodate non-English speaking students. As F i g u r e 1 shows, upon entry to the program students were screened and designated as Basic (having no or few E n g l i s h language s k i l l s ) or T r a n s i t i o n a l (having some s k i l l i n E n g l i s h ) . According to t h e i r age, they were then assigned to one of the two Basic c l a s s e s (BA f o r o l d e r students, BB f o r younger students) or to one of the three T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s (TA f o r the o l d e s t , TB f o r the next o l d e s t , TC f o r the youngest s t u d e n t s ) . S t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d the ages i n the T r a n s i t i o n a l group and the B a s i c group were comparable. 2. S t a f f As s t a t e d i n Chapter Three, the program's s t a f f c o n s i s t e d of s i x teachers and two a i d e s . There were 83 students. Table 1 i n d i c a t e s time a l l o c a t e d to teachers f o r E.F.L. and non-E.F.L. t e a c h i n g . Because of the v a r i e t y of assignments w i t h i n the E.F.L. program, however,- f u r t h e r c l a r i f i c a t i o n i s r e q u i r e d . Four of the s i x teachers taught both T r a n s i t i o n a l and Basic c l a s s e s . The other two taught only T r a n s i t i o n a l students, one teaching only Language A r t s and the other teaching only content s u b j e c t s . Only two of the program's teachers taught both content s u b j e c t s and Language A r t s . One of the program a i d e s was f u l l - t i m e . She spent the Figure 1 McCauley E.F.L. Program Organization Screening (standardized t e s t s ' ) Diagnosis E.F.L. c l a s s placement and movement w i t h i n program (based on standard-ized t e s t s , ^ achievement grades and teacher judgment) ( i n d i c a t e d by broken l i n e s ) Placement upon leaving program (based on standardized t e s t s , 3 achievement grades and teacher judgment) ( s o l i d l i n e s ) Assessment of Eng l i s h Language S k i l l s Minimal En g l i s h Ski 1ls No E n g l i s h Ski 1ls L Trans. A Trans. B Age 14-6 Age 13-6 16-10 i High School i i I -f A Trans. C Age 12-1 I'M I Regular Grade 9 I Basic A Age 13-9 ( 4 -16-1 ! — - J 1 Regular Grade 8 Basic B Age 12-0 \k-6 Regular E.F.L. Grade 7 1 - CELT, Edmonton S p e l l i n g , S c h o n e l l , Diagnostic 2 - as per screening plus Gates M a c G i n i t i e 3 - a l l 27 m a j o r i t y of her time i n p l a n n i n g and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , with l e s s e r amounts of time a l l o c a t e d to record-keeping and t e s t i n g . The h a l f - t i m e aide was u t i l i z e d mainly as a t u t o r but spent some time in plan n i n g and o r g a n i z i n g a c t i v i t e s as w e l l as in t e s t i n g . Table 1 E.F.L. Teacher Assignments Teacher Time 1 Assignment E.F.L. Non-E.F.L. 1 hrs % . 18 74 4 1 7 2 hrs % 22 1 89 6 3 hrs % 16 66 6 26 4 hrs % 23 0 94 0 5 hrs % 1 6 66 7 29 6 hrs % 7 16 29 66 T o t a l hrs % 1 02 34 Averac je hrs % 17 6 70 24 1 per week, 24.3 hrs = 1 week 28 Upon enrolment in the program, 53% of the students were assigned to T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s , 47% to Basic c l a s s e s . At f i r s t glance t h i s may be m i s l e a d i n g because in f a c t the c l a s s e s were not e q u a l l y balanced, as Table 2 shows. A t h i r d of the students moved, durin g the course of the program, from t h e i r i n i t i a l c l a s s placement. Thus, 2 students moved w i t h i n Basic c l a s s e s , 14 moved from Basic to T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s , and 2 moved from the youngest Basic c l a s s to the o l d e s t one. The v a r i a t i o n i n time spent by students in the program i s d e p i c t e d in Table 3. Two-thirds of the students were e n r o l l e d for a l l of the program; o n e - f i f t h spent l e s s than s i x months in i t . There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n number between Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l students who completed the f u l l program. Table 2 Student Movement During Program T r a n s f e r r e d I C l a s s To Basic T r a n s i t i o n a l % # % # Basic 2 2 0 0 T r a n s i t i o n a l 1 7 1 4 0 0 Regular 1 1 1 8 7 EFL elsewhere 0 0 5 4 T o t a l 20 1 7 13 1 1 1 one student t r a n s f e r r e d from Basic to T r a n s i t i o n a l to r e g u l a r (She i s not i n c l u d e d elsewhere on the t a b l e ) 29 Table 3 Length of Time Students in Program Time i n Number of Students Months Bas i c T r a n s i t i o n a l T o t a l % # % # % # 9.0-10.0 31 26 34 28 65 54 5.0- 8.9 1 1 9 7 6 18 1 5 2.0- 4.9 5 4 1 2 1 0 1 7 1 4 T o t a l 47 39 53 44 100 83 In Table 4, student t i m e t a b l e s are summarized. From t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , i t can be deduced that T r a n s i t i o n a l students spent an average of 76% of t h e i r time i n E.F.L. st.udy compared to 86% fo r Basic Students. Of t h e i r E.F.L. time, T r a n s i t i o n a l students spent 32% i n Language A r t s , whereas Basi c c l a s s e s spent 50%. More time was spent in "other" s u b j e c t s (24%) than i n content s u b j e c t s by T r a n s i t i o n a l students. The reverse was true f o r B a s i c Students, who spent 36% of t h e i r time i n content l e a r n i n g . Table 4 Student Time A l l o c a t i o n s f o r S u b j e c t s 1 Content T o t a l E.F.L. C l a s s L.A. S.S. Sc. Math % hrs % hrs % hrs % hrs % hrs B.A. 42.9 10.5 14.3 3.5 14.3 3.5 14.4 3.5 85.8 21 .0 B.B. 57.2 14.0 0 0.0 14.3 3.5 14.3 3.5 85.8 21 .0 T.A.&T.B 31.4 7.5 14.4 3.5 14.3 3.5 14.4 3.5 74.4 18.0 T.C. 34. 3 8.5 17.3 4.0 14.3 3.5 14.1 3.5 80.0 19.5 Average 39.4 9.5 12.0 3.0 14.3 3.5 14.3 3.5- 80. 1 19.5 C l a s s A r t 2 % hrs Home Ec . 2 % hrs P.E. 3 % hrs I T o t a l Non-E.F.L % hrs B.A. 5.8 1 .5 0 0.0 8.5 2.0 14.3 3.5 B.B. 5.7 1 .5 0 0.0 8.5 2.0 14.2 3.5 T.A.&T.B 5.6 1 .5 8.5 2.0 11.5 3.0 25.7 6.0 T . C. 8.6 2.0 0 0.0 11.5 3.0 20. 1 5.0 Average 6.3 1 .5 3.4 1 .0 10.3 2.5 20.0 5.0 1 24.3 h r s . i n s t r u c t i o n a l time per week = 2 taught by teacher of r e g u l a r program 3 i n t e g r a t e d i n t o r e g u l a r program 1 00% 31 B. Demographics 1. S t a f f Teachers in the program had a v a r i e t y of backgrounds. A l l had the e q u i v a l e n t of Bachelors i n Education, four had a d d i t i o n a l Bachelors of A r t s and one had a Masters of A r t s . Three had s p e c i a l i z e d i n E n g l i s h , one i n S o c i a l Sciences and two in Science and Math. No one had s p e c i a l i z e d i n E.F.L. i n h i s degree work. Three teachers had taken reading courses, four had taken courses i n E.F.L. methodology and four had taken courses in E.F.L. r e l a t e d areas such as Anthropology and L i n g u i s t i c s . Two teachers had taken courses i n a l l three areas. Fluency i n a f o r e i g n language was claimed by two t e a c h e r s . N e i t h e r language was a n a t i v e language of any student i n the program. Teaching experience ranged between 2 1/2 years and 21 years, the average being 11 ye a r s . F i v e teachers had pre v i o u s E.F.L. t e a c h i n g experience ranging from 1 to 15 years with an average of 7 years. The same f i v e teachers had taught i n the program the previous year. The program a i d e s had taken courses i n both a u d i o - v i s u a l a i d s and o f f i c e s k i l l s . Each had worked i n the program the previous year. P r i o r to t h a t , n e i t h e r had experience as an a i d e . 2. Students The 83 students in the program c o n s i s t e d of 43 males (52%) and 40 females (48%). They were d i s t r i b u t e d evenly among the f i v e c l a s s e s . Student age ranged between 12 and 17 ye a r s . Those between the ages' of 15 and 17 comprised a l l of the TA c l a s s , 67% of the BA c l a s s and 20% of the TB c l a s s . Students 32 between 12 and 14 years of age accounted f o r a l l of the TC c l a s s , 95% of the BB c l a s s and 80% of the TB c l a s s . An a n a l y s i s was done and no s i g n i f i c a n t age d i f f e r e n c e between the T r a n s i t i o n a l and Basic groups was found. F i f t y - n i n e percent of the students came from Vietnam, 25% from other p a r t s of Indo China (Laos, China, Korea), 10% from other p a r t s of A s i a (Lebanon, M a l a y s i a , Borneo, P a k i s t a n , India) and the remaining 6% from Europe ( P o r t u g a l ) , the USSR and L a t i n America ( A r g e n t i n a ) . F i f t y - e i g h t percent of the students spoke Chinese as a n a t i v e language. T h i s represents 18% of the. p o p u l a t i o n speaking both Chinese and Vietnamese and another 40% speaking only Chinese. Of the remaining students, 19% spoke only Vietnamese, 8% spoke L a o t i a n and 15% spoke other languages. When interviewed, 65% of the student p o p u l a t i o n had no knowledge of a non-native language. However, 18% claimed Vietnamese as a second language, 6% claimed Chinese and 4% claimed T h a i . A v a r i e t y of other languages c o n s t i t u t e d the remaining 7% of those with an a d d i t i o n a l language. Further q u e s t i o n i n g r e v e a l e d that only 13% of those who knew another language c o u l d read i t . Upon entrance to the program, 12% of the students were new a r r i v a l s to Canada, 55% had spent l e s s than a year here and 32% had been here f o r more than a year. Previous s c h o o l i n g ranged c o n s i d e r a b l y . Only 2% of the students had no previous s c h o o l i n g o u t s i d e Canada. Sixty-one percent had between 6 and 10 years of s c h o o l i n g i n n a t i v e /refugee c o u n t r i e s and 37% had between 1 and 5 years of 33 s c h o o l i n g . With respect to f o r e i g n language study o u t s i d e Canada, 30% of the students had experienced none, 48% had st u d i e d one or more languages f o r 1 month to 5 yea r s , 22% had stu d i e d f o r 5 to 10 years. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , 51% of the students had not s t u d i e d any E n g l i s h p r i o r to reaching Canada, 32% had s t u d i e d E n g l i s h f o r up to 1 year, and 17% had s t u d i e d i t for 2 to 10 years. An examination of previous student s c h o o l i n g i n Canada reve a l e d t hat 27% of the p o p u l a t i o n had no pr e v i o u s s c h o o l i n g i n Canada, 48% had between a month and a year and 25% had more than one year (to a maximum of 3 y e a r s ) . Previous E.F.L. s c h o o l i n g was l i m i t e d to 31% of the students, 50% of whom had l e s s than a year and 19% of whom had more than a year to a maximum of 3 years. C. The Reading Program 1. Reading Time The amount of time devoted to reading i n s t r u c t i o n i s d i s p l a y e d i n Table 5. Students spent about h a l f t h e i r i n s t r u c t i o n a l time being taught reading. B a s i c students r e c e i v e d some 12% more reading time than d i d T r a n s i t i o n a l students. The m a j o r i t y of reading i n s t r u c t i o n took p l a c e i n Language A r t s and S o c i a l S t u d i e s c l a s s e s . F i f t y - f i v e percent of the E.F.L. students' time at school was spent l e a r n i n g r e a d i n g . Reading was taught more than 80% of the time i n both S o c i a l S tudies and Language A r t s . By c o n t r a s t , i t was taught f o r only 46% of the Science time and f o r only 28% of the Math time. • 34 2. Reading Approaches Table 6 shows the v a r i o u s reading approaches u t i l i z e d and the amount of time that each was u t i l i z e d . Language Experience ( l i s t e n i n g , speaking, w r i t i n g , reading) was used h a l f the reading i n s t r u c t i o n time. L i n g u i s t i c s , (grapheme - morpheme r e l a t i o n s h i p s - the a s s o c i a t i o n of sound and the v i s u a l symbol) and Basal Readers ( r e a d i n e s s , pre-primer, etc.) were used e q u a l l y f o r about o n e - f i f t h of the reading time. The Alphabet (I.T.A., Words in C o l o r , D i a c r i t i c a l marking system) and I n d i v i d u a l i z e d ( v a r i e t y of m a t e r i a l s and p u p i l c h o i c e , teacher-p u p i l conferences) approaches were used only a small p o r t i o n of the time. L i n g u i s t i c s was used twice as o f t e n i n Basic c l a s s e s as i n T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s . No i n d i v i d u a l i z e d reading was undertaken i n Basic c l a s s e s . 35 Table 5 Percent of Core Subject Time and Hours per Week Spent i n Reading I n s t r u c t i o n Subject C l a s s Averages Basic % hrs T r a n s i t i o n a l % hrs T o t a l hrs Average % hrs L.A. 83.6 10.0 81.6 6.5 16.5 82.9 8.5 S.S. 37.5 1 .5 93.5 3.5 5.0 83.9 2.4 Sc 60.0 2.0 31.7 1 .0 3.0 46. 1 1 .6 Math 32.5 1 .0 23.3 1 .0 2.0 28.2 1 .0 Time 60.5 14.5 48.7 12.0 26.5 54.6 13.5 per week Ay. core 70. 1 3.5 63.9 3.0 6.6 68.2 3.5 s u b j e c t s Table 6 Percent of Reading I n s t r u c t i o n Time spent being taught Reading by Var i o u s Approaches Reading C l a s s Averages Approach Basic T r a n s i t i o n a l A l l Students Language 51 7.5 53 6.5 51 7.0 Experience L i n g u i s t i c s 27 4.0 1 4 2.0 20 3.0 Alphabet 4 0.5 3 0.5 3 0.5 I n d i v i d u a l i z e d 0 0.0 6 0.5 3 0.5 Basal Reader 1 7 2.5 24 3.0 20 3.0 36 An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading approach and core su b j e c t r e v e a l e d the f o l l o w i n g t r e n d s . Language experience was used most o f t e n (41% to 78% of the time) in a l l s u b j e c t s . L i n g u i s t i c s was the second most popular appproach (being used 14-23% of the time) i n a l l s u b j e c t s except Language A r t s , where the Basal Reader approach was s l i g h t l y more popular (used 31% of the t i m e ) . The Alphabet, I n d i v i d u a l i z e d and Basal approaches were used l e a s t o f t e n (0-9% of the time) with the exception of Language A r t s as p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d . 3. Reading S k i l l s The percentages of reading i n s t r u c t i o n time devoted to general reading s k i l l s are summarized i n Table* 7. T h i s t a b l e i n d i c a t e s that the l a r g e s t amount of time was spent on comprehension s k i l l s f o r both Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l students. The r e s t of the time was e q u a l l y d i v i d e d among the remaining s k i l l s , with s l i g h t l y l e s s time a l l o c a t e d to study s k i l l s . However, Basic students spent three times as many hours on word r e c o g n i t i o n s k i l l s as d i d T r a n s i t i o n a l students. T r a n s i t i o n a l students spent almost twice as much time on study s k i l l s and content area reading as d i d Basic students. S p e c i f i c a l l y , content area reading was most prominent i n Math (44%) and Science (50%) where the second l a r g e s t amount of time was spent on comprehension (26-31%). Comprehension took up the most time i n Language A r t s (47%) and i n S o c i a l S t u d i e s (44%) where the second l a r g e s t amount of time was spent i n word a n a l y s i s (22%) and content area (21%) r e s p e c t i v e l y . Comparable amounts of time (10-18%) were spent i n a l l s u b j e c t s on study s k i l l s . The l a r g e s t amount of time spent on word a n a l y s i s was 37 in Language A r t s (22%). Almost twice as much time was devoted to word r e c o g n i t i o n i n Language A r t s (15%) and S o c i a l S t u d i e s (13%) as i t was i n Science (8%) and Math ( 5 % ) . Table 7 Percent of Reading I n s t r u c t i o n Time Devoted to Reading S k i l l s Reading S k i l l C l a s s Basic | T r a n s i t i o n a l | Average word recogniton 21 3.0. 7 1.0 1 5 2.0 word a n a l y s i s 1 7 2.5 1 4 1.5 1 5 2.0 comprehension 44 6.5 ' 43 5.0 44 6.0 study s k i l l s 8 1.0 1 4 1 .5 1 1 1.5 content area 1 1 1 .5 21 2.5 1 5 2.0 Teachers estimated r e l a t i v e time spent on v a r i o u s techniques subsumed by each g e n e r a l reading s k i l l . O v e r a l l , the g r e a t e s t amount of i n s t r u c t i o n a l time i n word a n a l y s i s s k i l l s was devoted to s t r u c t u r e , f o l l o w e d by semantics, syntax and phonics. (Basic students, however, spent more time on s t r u c t u r a l and phonic aspects than d i d T r a n s i t i o n a l s t u d e n t s ) . Comprehension time was a l l o c a t e d most f r e e l y to l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t i v e techniques with vocabulary, i n f e r e n t i a l , e v a l u a t i v e , and i n t e r p r e t i v e techniques ensuing. More time was spent on l o c a t i o n a l study s k i l l s than on o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s k i l l s , a n a l y s i s of t a b l e s and graphs or skimming/scanning techniques. 38 In Mathematics, steps i n s o l v i n g a w r i t t e n problem were emphasized more than was reading f o r d e t a i l s . Science c l a s s e s s t r e s s e d reading f o r d e t a i l s f i r s t , t e c h n i c a l vocabulary second, and e x p e r i e n t i a l background t h i r d . No time was spent on understanding graphs, drawings, equations and formulas. In the f i n a l content area, S o c i a l S t u d i e s , i n s t r u c t i o n i n general vocabulary was granted more time than was i n s t r u c t i o n i n i n f o r m a t i o n a l reading and i n c r i t i c a l reading (which only T r a n s i t i o n a l students r e c e i v e d ) . In the context of su b j e c t areas, word a n a l y s i s and study s k i l l s techniques were taught a c r o s s a l l s u b j e c t s . Content area reading techniques were taught in a p p r o p r i a t e s u b j e c t s with Science and S o c i a l S t u d i e s s k i l l s r e c e i v i n g some a d d i t i o n a l time i n Language A r t s . E v a l u a t i v e and i n t e r p r e t a t i v e comprehension techniques were not taught i n e i t h e r Science or Mathematics c l a s s e s . Further a n a l y s i s d i s c l o s e d that semantic word a n a l y s i s technqiues i n v o l v e d more i n s t r u c t i o n a l time in Language A r t s and S o c i a l S t u d i e s that they d i d i n Science and Math. Vocabulary and l i t e r a l comprehension techniques were the most important comprehension s k i l l s i n a l l s u b j e c t s . O r g a n i z a t i o n a l study s k i l l s ranked h i g h l y i n a l l s u b j e c t s . L o c a t i o n a l techniques were a l s o h i g h l y ranked i n a l l s u b j e c t s except Math, where techniques f o r understanding t a b l e s and graphs were deemed more important. 4. M a t e r i a l s A v a r i e t y of m a t e r i a l s were used in the reading program. Taken as a group, students r e c e i v e d some 32% of t h e i r reading 39 i n s t r u c t i o n using textbooks, 27% using t e a c h e r - c o n s t r u c t e d m a t e r i a l s , 21% using a u d i o - v i s u a l s , 7% using workbooks and 3% using games. (In d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between m a t e r i a l s used i n T r a n s i t i o n a l and Basuc reading i n s t r u c t i o n , i t was noted that textbooks, t e a c h e r - c o n s t r u c t e d m a t e r i a l s and a u d i o - v i s u a l s were used e q u a l l y in Basic i n s t r u c t i o n , whereas in T r a n s i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n , textbooks f i g u r e d most prominently, f o l l o w e d by t e a c h e r - c o n s t r u c t e d m a t e r i a l s , workbooks and a u d i o - v i s u a l s . Games were used more o f t e n i n Basic than i n T r a n s i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n , although the time f a c t o r was small f o r both groups. A comparison of content area m a t e r i a l s with Language A r t s m a t e r i a l s showed that Language A r t s c l a s s e s used t e x t s four times as o f t e n as d i d content area c l a s s e s . However, content c l a s s e s used workbooks twice as o f t e n as d i d Language A r t s c l a s s e s . They a l s o used a u d i o - v i s u a l m a t e r i a l s three times more f r e q u e n t l y than d i d Language A r t s c l a s s e s . Games were used only by Language A r t s and S o c i a l S t u d i e s c l a s s e s . In both cases, the amount of time was small (4% to 5%). 5. E v a l u a t i o n Procedures In the e v a l u a t i o n of reading a b i l i t y , teacher-made t e s t s accounted f o r 50%, teacher o b s e r v a t i o n f o r 40% and the remaining 10% was made up j o i n t l y of s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s and t e s t s that accompany p u b l i s h e d m a t e r i a l s . However, when Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l groupings were considered s e p a r a t e l y , a d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e emerged. Teacher-made t e s t s accounted f o r the g r e a t e s t part of the e v a l u a t i o n of T r a n s i t i o n a l students (67%) but f o r only 35% of Basic students' e v a l u a t i o n . Teacher o b s e r v a t i o n was r e s p o n s i b l e 40 for most of the remaining e v a l u a t i o n (24%) of T r a n s i t i o n a l students, whereas i t accounted f o r 54% of the e v a l u a t i o n of Basic students. In terms of s u b j e c t s , teacher o b s e r v a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e d h a l f of Language A r t s reading a b i l i t y e v a l u a t i o n . By c o n t r a s t , teacher-made t e s t s formed more than h a l f of t h i s e v a l u a t i o n i n content s u b j e c t s , with t e a c h e r - o b s e r v a t i o n forming only a t h i r d of the e v a l u a t i o n . Standardized t e s t s made up a quarter of the e v a l u a t i o n i n Language A r t s , but almost none of the e v a l u a t i o n in content s u b j e c t s . The student r e p o r t card was designed to evaluate Language A r t s and content s u b j e c t performances i n d i f f e r e n t ways. The Language A r t s e v a l u a t i o n focussed s p e c i f i c a l l y on E n g l i s h Language development i n the areas of l i s t e n i n g , speaking, reading and w r i t i n g . E.F.L. teachers a r r i v e d at a consensus, based on t h e i r experiences with students' E n g l i s h s k i l l s i n a l l academic areas. Content s u b j e c t achievement was determined by a p p r o p r i a t e i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r s . Promotion of students w i t h i n the program was based on teacher concensus. 6. Program R e s u l t s Hearing and v i s i o n t e s t s were administered by the nurse (with the a i d of an i n t e r p r e t e r ) i n A p r i l . S i x t y - f i v e students were t e s t e d . Twenty percent of the students performed below accepted l e v e l s on the t e s t s . Of that number, 11% f a i l e d the v i s i o n t e s t , 7% the hearing t e s t . Table 8 presents the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r the pre- and p o s t - t e s t s adminstered i n the program, along with T values and 2 - t a i l p r o b a b i l i t i e s . As the t a b l e i n d i c a t e s , a l l 41 were s i g n i f i c a n t beyond P > 0.000 suggesting t h a t , at l e a s t in terms of the t e s t s given, the program i s s u c c e s s f u l . For example, the Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y p r e - t e s t mean of 24.5 t r a n s l a t e s to a grade score of 4.5 or f i v e months i n grade f o u r . The p o s t - t e s t mean of 40 on the same t e s t r e p r e s e n t s a grade score of 7.8. Thus, in terms of t h i s t e s t , there i s a mean gain of more than three years d u r i n g the course of the program. Norming data f o r the S c h o n e l l t e s t suggest that students made approximately one year of growth i n terms of grade l e v e l , from grade 2.6 to grade 3.6. Table 8 P r e - t e s t and P o s t - t e s t R e s u l t s Test N = P r e t e s t Post Test T Value 2 - T a i l Prob. M SD M SD 1. EDMONTON S p e l l i r L A b i l i t y Test 74 24.5 15. 5 40.0 16.7 -11.58 0.000 2. S c h o n e l l Graded i Word L i s t s 78 25.8 16. 9 35.8 1 3V7 ' -1 0.68 0.000 3. C.E.L.T. ) Vocabulary 79 15.1 9. 5 22.6 7.1 - 7.88 0.000 4. C.E.L.T. S t r u c t u r e 80 16.8 1 1 . 3 26.5 10.6 -11.89 0.000 5. C.E.L.T. L i s t e n i n g 80 14.4 9. 3 21 .8 8.0 -11.34 0.000 6. D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language 66 12.2 14. 7 24.5 18.0 - 9.59 0.000 U n f o r t u n a t e l y , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to t r a n s l a t e the scores from the remaining pre- and p o s t - t e s t s i n t o meaningful i n f o r m a t i o n , s i n c e norming data i s not a v a i l a b l e f o r e i t h e r the C.E.L.T. or the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language. One can only s p e c u l a t e that the i n c r e a s e from pre- to p o s t - t e s t mean scores on both the C.E.L.T. and the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h 42 as a Second Language r e f l e c t s some l e g i t i m a t e measure of growth. IQ s c o r e s , as measured by the C u l t u r e F a i r IQ Test administered to students upon e x i t from the program, i n d i c a t e d that 46% of the students who wrote i t achieved an average score (90-109), 10% achieved a s u p e r i o r score (110-139) and 44% achieved a lower than average score (< 90). The mean score was 92 and scores ranged from 57 to 139 (82 p o i n t s ) . There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the scores of Basic and T r a n s i t i o n a l students. Regression Analyses of Variance (using e q u a l i z e d p r e t e s t scores) with sex and len g t h of t i m e . i n program as c o - v a r i a t e s r e v e a l e d that there ' were no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between gain scores of male and of female students on any of the t e s t s . Nor d i d the len g t h of time i n the program have an e f f e c t on gain s c o r e s . A s i m i l i a r ANOVA with c l a s s groupings ( T r a n s i t i o n a l , Basic) and time i n program as c o v a r i a t e s proved that the only t e s t i n which one c l a s s had higher gain scores than another was the C.E.L.T. Vocabulary T e s t . T r a n s i t i o n a l students' mean score of 25.86 was s i g n i f i c a n t by b e t t e r (p > 0.032) than B a s i c students mean of 18.89. The same type of r e g r e s s i o n ANOVA with time i n program and n a t i v e language (Chinese and non-Chinese) as c o v a r i a t e s showed that there was no d i f f e r e n c e between two groups i n gain score on any of the t e s t s . The e f f e c t of 22 scores on the C.E.L.T. subtest gain scores was assessed by m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n analyses of v a r i a n c e using post t e s t s as the dependent v a r i a b l e . A c o r r e l a t i o n was 43 found between the 22 scores and gain scores on both the Vocabulary (F -4.486) and L i s t e n i n g (F = 4.486) subtests but not on the S t r u c t u r e subtest (F = 0.598). The Ga t e s - M a c G i n i t i e Reading Test was given as a p o s t - t e s t . The scores were compared with IQ scores, r e s u l t i n g i n a c o r r e l a t i o n of 0.45. When Gates scores were compared with C.E.L.T. Vocabulary p o s t - t e s t scores, the c o r r e l a t i o n was 0.58. The Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y p o s t - t e s t scores c o r r e l a t e d with the C.E.L.T. Vocabulary post t e s t scores (0.6004). The st r o n g e s t c o r r e l a t i o n . d i s c o v e r e d was between the C.E.L.T. S t r u c t u r e post t e s t scores and the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language p o s t - t e s t scores (0.8200). 44 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  A. Overview The McCauley E.F.L. program i s one of a number of E.F.L. programs in North America. I t serves a s p e c i f i c p o p u l a t i o n of refugee, adolescent students. L i t e r a t u r e i n the f i e l d suggests a need f o r development, implementation and e v a l u a t i o n of such programs. In t h i s paper, the McCauley model has been d e s c r i b e d i n d e t a i l . Those who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n i t , the s i x te a c h e r s , the two ai d e s , and the e i g h t y - t h r e e students have been d e s c r i b e d . Aspects of t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l and e x p e r i e n t i a l backgrounds that may have i n f l u e n c e d the program were h i g h l i g h t e d . Teaching techniques, m a t e r i a l s and content of reading i n s t r u c t i o n were e x p l i c a t e d , l e a d i n g to some general c o n c l u s i o n s about dominant f e a t u r e s of each. Pre- and post-program s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t scores were analyzed to determine success i n a c q u i s i t i o n of E n g l i s h as measured by those t e s t s . B. Conclusions The f i n d i n g s in Chapter Four suggest a number of c o n c l u s i o n s . The McCauley program i s a proponent of the theory that an immersion model i s the best environment i n which students can absorb E n g l i s h ( B l a n k e t t , 1972). The program appears to have a f l u i d nature, adapting to i n d i v i d u a l student l e a r n i n g r a t e s , with 28% of the students being promoted w i t h i n the program or to reg u l a r c l a s s e s ^ T h i s i s c o n s i s t e n t with K a r k i a ' s (1979) recommendation that E.F.L. programs be c l o s e l y 45 adapted to student needs. Furthermore, teachers appeared to be able to operate e f f i c i e n t l y w i t h i n a f l e x i b l e environment that provided r e l a t i v e l y few m a t e r i a l s or course p r e s c r i p t i o n s and c l a s s e s which were seldom s t a t i c i n p o p u l a t i o n . I t i s worth no t i n g , however, that two-thirds of the students were e n r o l l e d fo r a l l of the program, thus p r o v i d i n g a c o n s i s t e n t b a s i s f o r program d e s c r i p t i o n . Time a l l o c a t i o n s , r e s u l t i n g i n a v a r i e t y of teacher assignments, may have given teachers a fragmented view of the program and perhaps a b i a s e d view of student progress/achievement l e v e l s . For example, two teachers taught only T r a n s i t i o n a l students and t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s may have been u n r e a l i s t i c s i n c e they had no B a s i c students with whom to compare them. The f a c t that one of these teachers taught only Language A r t s and the other only content area s u b j e c t s may have f u r t h e r i s o l a t e d them from the E.F.L. mainstream. A d d i t i o n a l l y , s i n c e c e r t a i n of the Mathematics s k i l l s r e q u i r e d l i t t l e or no knowledge of E n g l i s h , those students with g r e a t e r Math a b i l i t y may have been p e r c e i v e d as more advanced and thus r e q u i r i n g l e s s E n g l i s h language s k i l l development. The presence of the competent f u l l - t i m e aide f r e e d teachers to spend more time with and to expend more energy on students, rather than on record-keeping. F u r t h e r , the use of the p a r t -time aide as a t u t o r allowed Basic students e n t e r i n g the program with no E n g l i s h s k i l l s to r e c e i v e i n t e n s i v e one-to-one or small group i n s t r u c t i o n . These f a c t o r s may have c o n t r i b u t e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y to the success of the program and probably lessened the adjustment d i f f i c u l t i e s of new students e n t e r i n g 46 c l a s s e s d u r i n g the course of the program. The f a c t that T r a n s i t i o n a l students spent 10% l e s s time i n E.F.L. study than d i d Basic students allowed the former to spend more time with Canadian E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g students. T h i s may have aided i n the a c c u l t u r a t i o n process and i n the t r a n s i t i o n from a p r o t e c t e d E.F.L. environment to the mainstream of Canadian school l i f e . The l a r g e r amount of time spent by B a s i c students i n Language A r t s would seem p r a c t i c a l ; they r e q u i r e more intense language i n s t r u c t i o n . F u r t h e r , i t would appear that the a d d i t i o n a l 12% of content i n s t r u c t i o n time (as compared to T r a n s i t i o n a l students) i s j u s t i f i e d . Basic Students may need added time to a c q u i r e the content knowledge of t h e i r Canadian peers. Teachers in the program had v a r i e d e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s . Only h a l f had taken reading courses. T h i s may have i n f l u e n c e d the q u a l i t y of reading i n s t r u c t i o n . S i m i l a r l y , none of the teachers had s p e c i a l i z e d i n E.F.L. i n h i s degree work. However, E.F.L. courses, E.F.L. r e l a t e d courses and the background of p r a c t i c a l experience i n E.F.L. may have helped to o f f s e t t h i s l a c k of formal t r a i n i n g . F i v e of the teachers had worked together i n the same program p r e v i o u s l y . They appeared to h o l d s i m i l a r e d u c a t i o n a l views and to work together compatibly. T h i s may have been b e n e f i c i a l to the program. The preponderance of one n a t i v e group (59% Vietnamese) may have had some d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s w i t h i n the program. They formed a n a t u r a l group wherein t h e i r c u l t u r e and language were r e i n f o r c e d . The need to l e a r n E n g l i s h and to a s s i m i l a t e may 47 have thus been m o l l i f i e d . Furthermore, students o u t s i d e t h i s group sometimes found i t d i f f i c u l t to i n f i l t r a t e f r i e n d s h i p s e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h i n the group. (T h i s was most obvious in Basic c l a s s e s where E n g l i s h communication s k i l l s were s e v e r e l y l i m i t e d . ) While a l l but 2% of the students claimed some s c h o o l i n g o u t s i d e Canada, there was no way to judge e i t h e r the q u a l i t y or the i n t e n s i t y of that e d u c a t i o n . Conversation with students suggested that c l a s s e s had been l a r g e (more than 50 students) and a u t o c r a t i c , with l i b e r a l measures of c o r p o r a l punishment. It was a l s o i m p l i e d that t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s d i f f e r e d from those i n Canada. Students had almost no experience with textbooks, notebooks or r e s e a r c h s k i l l s . They were discouraged from q u e s t i o n i n g the teacher's o p i n i o n . T h i s background may have made students' adjustment to Canadian s c h o o l i n g an a d d i t i o n a l burden to the language b a r r i e r . Since the m a j o r i t y of students (70%) had s t u d i e d a f o r e i g n language at one time, t h i s probably c o n t r i b u t e d to t h e i r f a c i l i t y i n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h . However, h a l f the students had not p r e v i o u s l y s t u d i e d any E n g l i s h . I t may be that more time was r e q u i r e d f o r these students to attune themselves to the sound of E n g l i s h (Bernardoni, 1962; Bouchard, 1974), d e l a y i n g the a c q u i s i t i o n of i t s s p e c i f i c s . It would seem reasonable to assume that the e x t r a 12% of i n s t r u c t i o n a l time devoted t o reading i n B a s i c c l a s s e s was j u s t i f i e d by these students' l a c k of E n g l i s h language s k i l l s . The reading approaches u t i l i z e d (Language Experience, L i n g u i s t i c s ) are c o n s i s t e n t with methods recommended i n c u r r e n t 48 E.F.L. l i t e r a t u r e ( K a r k i a , 1979; Savage, 1978;.Rigg, 1976). The major emphasis on . comprehension ac r o s s c l a s s e s and s u b j e c t s would appear a p p r o p r i a t e to the age of the students. The purpose of the program, a c c o r d i n g to the funding r e p o r t , was to f i l l the content gap evident i n other E.F.L. programs. Most students i n the program had some degree of l i t e r a c y i n at l e a s t one language. Thus, many of the reading readiness s k i l l s c o u l d be omitted or merely reviewed. One would assume, f o r i n s t a n c e , that the concept of meaning from p r i n t would have been e s t a b l i s h e d f o r most students. Time a l l o c a t i o n s f o r v a r i o u s , s k i l l s suggest that Basic students were h e a v i l y exposed to word r e c o g n i t i o n s k i l l s i n an attempt to produce some degree of l i t e r a c y and independent reading as r a p i d l y as p o s s i b l e . Study s k i l l s were l e f t mainly u n t i l students reached the T r a n s i t i o n a l l e v e l . T h i s may have been d e t r i m e n t a l to t h e i r Canadian s c h o o l i n g as they a p p a r e n t l y lacked any p r e v i o u s t r a i n i n g i n those s k i l l s . The reading techniques most f r e q u e n t l y s t r e s s e d were drawn from the lower end of the h i e r a r c h y of s k i l l s . L i t t l e time was spent on the higher l e v e l s k i l l s such as c r i t i c a l r e ading. Some exposure to them may have been advantageous to students moving on to high s c h o o l . T h i s emphasis on s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n i n ba s i c s k i l l s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n grammar) i s , however, supported by Wilson (1973). Although a v a r i e t y of t e x t s were used i n Language A r t s c l a s s e s and workbooks were used i n Math c l a s s e s , teachers of S o c i a l S t u d i e s and Science r e l i e d h e a v i l y on m a t e r i a l s of t h e i r own c r e a t i o n . The l i t e r a t u r e (Savage, 1978) suggests that t h i s 49 i s b e n e f i c i a l . I n . f a c t , few p u b l i s h e d m a t e r i a l s appeared to be a v a i l a b l e f o r content i n s t r u c t i o n of adolescent p u p i l s a c q u i r i n g the language. Hence, perhaps some of the research s k i l l s that students should have been l e a r n i n g i n S o c i a l S t u d i e s and Science weren't being taught. Since content teachers used a u d i o - v i s u a l s f a r more of t e n than d i d Language A r t s teachers, i t c o u l d be that more p r a c t i c a l means were r e q u i r e d to put meaning across i n those s u b j e c t s . Teachers tended to r e l y h e a v i l y on s u b j e c t i v e r a t h e r than o b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n in a s s e s s i n g reading a b i l i t y and growth. T h i s probably r e s u l t e d from a lack of r e l i a b l e t e s t s capable of d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f i n e degrees of reading a c q u i s i t i o n . However, these procedures are c o n s i s t e n t with views expressed in the l i t e r a t u r e (Thonis, 1970; Savage, 1978) that p u p i l e v a l u a t i o n should be c o n t i n u a l and i n f o r m a l , u t i l i z i n g teacher-made t e s t s to analyze s k i l l growth. Due to the o b j e c t i v e nature of Math and the r e l a t i v e lack of E n g l i s h r e q u i r e d , teachers n a t u r a l l y r e l i e d more h e a v i l y on t e s t s than on p e r s o n a l o b s e r v a t i o n i n that s u b j e c t . The h e a r i n g and v i s i o n t e s t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d l a t e i n the program. Consequently, 20% of those students i d e n t i f i e d as d e f i c i e n t in those areas operated under that handicap f o r most of the year. The f a c t that 44% of the students scored below average on the I.Q. t e s t may i n d i c a t e that the t e s t was c u l t u r a l l y b i a s e d or that i n s t r u c t i o n s were not understood. However, the t e s t p u r p o r t s to be " c u l t u r e f r e e " . I n t e r p r e t e r s were used in g i v i n g t e s t i n s t r u c t i o n s and each student was i n d i v i d u a l l y asked by a 50 teacher i f he understood the d i r e c t i o n s . One i s n e v e r t h e l e s s l e f t with the q u e s t i o n of whether the I.Q. of t h i s p o p u l a t i o n was normal, whether the t e s t i t s e l f was u n r e l i a b l e or whether the lack of t e s t experience on the part of the students was the cause of such a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of students s c o r i n g below average. Students appear to have made about a year's growth i n o r a l word reading s k i l l (as evinced by the S c h o n e l l t e s t ) , o b t a i n i n g a mean grade score of 3.6 by the end of the program. T h i s i s comparable to t h e i r G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e scores (mean of 3.4) and to t h e i r s p e l l i n g scores (4.0). The higher vocabulary gains by T r a n s i t i o n a l students do not appear to be due to more intense i n s t r u c t i o n . B a s i c and T r a n s i t i o n a l c l a s s e s r e c e i v e d a p p a r e n t l y equal amounts of vocabulary development. I t may be that Basic students r e q u i r e more s p e c i f i c vocabulary d r i l l to make gains comparable to T r a n s i t i o n a l s t u d e n t s . The v a l i d i t y of t e s t gain scores c o u l d be q u e s t i o n a b l e i n l i g h t of the f a c t that so many students scored zero on p r e t e s t s (e.g. 26 students scored zero on the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language). A f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s that these t e s t s were not normed f o r t h i s E.F.L. p o p u l a t i o n and may t h e r e f o r e be i n v a l i d (Bauldauf, 1978). The highest i n t e r t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n was between the C.E.L.T. S t r u c t u r e and the D i a g n o s t i c Test of E n g l i s h as a Second Language, i n d i c a t i n g that they may be measuring s i m i l a r s k i l l s . The c o r r e l a t i o n s between I.Q. score and some of the other t e s t scores may mean that I.Q. score can be used as a p r e d i c t o r of success in the program, 51 i n d i c a t i n g that those who score high on the C u l t u r e F a i r I.Q* Test may l e a r n to read (as measured by the G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e Reading Test) more r a p i d l y . t h a n those who have low I.Q. s c o r e s . Those who scored w e l l on the C.E.L.T. Vocabulary Test a l s o seemed to do w e l l on the Edmonton S p e l l i n g A b i l i t y T est, suggesting that s i m i l a r s k i l l s are r e q u i r e d i n both t e s t s . One c o u l d assume from growth measurement on the t e s t s t h a t the program was of some value i n h e l p i n g students a c q u i r e E n g l i s h language reading s k i l l s . C. Summary And Recommendations For Further Study In summary, i t would appear that the McCauley program i s an e f f e c t i v e model for responding to the need for s p e c i a l programs in E.F.L. Students appeared to have made about a year's growth in reading and s p e l l i n g s k i l l s . Because of the developmental nature of the McCauley program, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to i s o l a t e s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e s to draw c o n c l u s i o n s as to which components of the program are c o n t r i b u t i n g most to the program's success. I t i s e q u a l l y d i f f i c u l t to g e n e r a l i z e the f i n d i n g s of the present d e s c r i p t i v e study to other p o p u l a t i o n s . Even though the present study was p r i m a r i l y designed to gather b a s e l i n e data, i t has n e v e r t h e l e s s uncovered a number of s e r i o u s problems which merit f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . Some of the more important of these are l i s t e d below. 1. One very s e r i o u s problem f a c i n g education working in the area of E.F.L. i s a need for a p p r o p r i a t e d i a g n o s t i c and achievement assessment instruments normed f o r Asian p o p u l a t i o n s . The f a c t that 44% of the p o p u l a t i o n i n the present study 52 achieved I.Q. scores of l e s s than 75 suggests that the C u l t u r e F a i r I.Q. norms are l i k e l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e to such students. The development of such assessment t o o l s i s a c r i t i c a l area f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h . 2. Because of the nature of the present study there was no apparatus to s t a n d a r d i z e any of the techniques or procedures used in the program. There i s a need for r e s e a r c h i n which procedures and m a t e r i a l s can be c o n t r o l l e d and manipulated, thereby a l l o w i n g for comparison and r e p l i c a t i o n . 3. In the McCauley program, there was no measurement of pre-program n a t i v e l i t e r a c y . Even though one might s p e c u l a t e that students who read and w r i t e i n t h e i r n a t i v e language w i l l make the t r a n s i t i o n to E n g l i s h more q u i c k l y than those who do not, there i s no e m p i r i c a l evidence of t h i s with p o p u l a t i o n s such as those i n the McCauley program. Research i n t h i s area, i s d e f i n i t e l y needed. 4. A follow-up study of the e d u c a t i o n a l success of students e n r o l l e d i n the program would help to determine the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h i s type of E.F.L. program. 5. Because of the obvious s o c i o l o g i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d with the a c c u l t u r a t i o n process, there i s a need f o r r e s e a r c h f o c u s s i n g on t h i s aspect of t o t a l ' immersion programs such as_ that at McCauley. 53 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ashworth, M. Programs, P o l i t i c s and Progress TESL Talk , Winter/Spring 1979, J_0 (1&2), 16-24. Ashworth, Mary. Immigrant C h i l d r e n and Canadian Schools. Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart L i m i t e d , 1975. Baldauf, Richard B. J r . E v a l u a t i o n Models and Instrumentation:  Problems f o r T i t l e I i n America's P a c i f i c P o s s e s s i o n s . Paper presented at the Trust T e r r i t o r y T i t l e I Conference, February 1978. (ED 156 691 ) Bernardoni, L. C. and o t h e r s . (Annual Conference of the Co- o r d i n a t i n g C o u n c i l f o r Research in Education. Phoenix, A r i z o n a : A r i z o n a State Dept. of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n , 1962. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 012 631) . B l a n k e t t , B. L. Implementation of a Migrant Education Program in  the Richgrove School D i s t r i c t . ( D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , Walden U n i v e r s i t y , 1972). (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 063 990) . Bouchard, D. and o t h e r s . Language, Thinking and Reading. B r i s t o l Community C o l l e g e , F a l l R i v e r , Mass., 1974. Brawn, C. and Froese, V. (Eds). An Experience-based Approach to  Language and Reading. B a l t i m o r e : U n i v e r s i t y Park Press, 1977. Ching, D. C. Reading and the B i l i n g u a l C h i l d . Newark, Delaware: I.R.A., 1976. C o l l i n s , L. Language P r o c e s s i n g and Second-language A c q u i s i t i o n ( D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , 1972). (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 082 190) . C r i t c h l o w , D. E. Reading and the Spanish Speaking C h i l d . Laredo, Texas: Texas S t a t e C o u n c i l , I.R.A., 1975. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 138 036) Delavan, F. E. and England, M. C. E v a l u a t i o n of E.S.E.A. Programs and S e r v i c e s f o r the E d u c a t i o n a l l y Disadvantaged. Sacramento, C a l i f : Sacramento C i t y U n i f i e d School D i s t r i c t , 1966. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 013 128) D e r r i c k , June Teaching E n g l i s h to Immigrants. London: Longman, 1 966. E b e l , C.W. An Update: Teaching Reading to Students of E n g l i s h as a Second Language. The Reading Teacher, January, 1980, 33(4), 403 407. 54 E n g l i s h as a Second Language, 1973-1974. H a r t f o r d Moves Ahead:  An E v a l u a t i v e Report. Conn.: H a r t f o r d P u b l i c Schools (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. 098269) . F r i e s , C. C. Learning to Read E n g l i s h as Part of the O r a l Approach. In Kenneth C r o f t (ED). Readings on E n g l i s h as a  Second Language. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop P u b l i s h e r s , Inc., 1972. Gradman, H. L. E n g l i s h as a Foreign Language (EFL). In H. G. Shane and J . Walden (EDS.), Classroom-Relevant Research i n  the Language A r t s . Monograph of the A s s o c i a t i o n f o r S u p e r v i s i o n and Curriculum Development, 1978, No. 5, Stock no. 611-1781 40. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 158 333) . Gray, W. S. Reading. In C. W. H a r r i s (ED.), Encyclopedia of  E d u c a t i o n a l Research (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan, 1960, 1086-1135. Government of Canada. Newsletter - Indochinese Refugees. P u b l i c A f f a i r s D i v i s i o n , Employment and Immigration Canada, Aug. 8, 1979.. Government of Canada. Newsletter - Indochinese Refugees. P u b l i c A f f a i r s D i v i s i o n , Employment and Immigration Canada, Aug. 15, 1979, 1(5). Government of Canada. Newsletter - Indochinese Refugees. P u b l i c A f f a i r s D i v i s i o n , Employment and Immigration Canada, Sept. 26, 1979, 1(11). Guldemond, M. Comparison of I n s t r u c t i o n a l Modes for Immigrant Education. TESL Talk September, 1976, 7 (4), 12-16. Hisama, K. In B i l i n g u a l , B i c u l t u r a l and B i d i a l e c t a l S t u d i e s Related to Reading and Communication S k i l l s A b s t r a c t s of D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n s P u b l i s h e d i n D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s  I n t e r n a t i o n a l March through December 1977 ( v o l . 37 No. 9 through v o l 38 No. 6) Urbana, 111.: E.R.I.C. Clearinghouse on Reading and Communications s k i l l s , 1978. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 153 252) . K a l a n t z i s , C. P. The Systems Approach to I n s t r u c t i o n E n g l i s h as a Second Language (D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , Boston U n i v e r s i t y School of Education, 1972). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s  I nternat i o n a l , 1972, 3_3, 1321 -A. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 72-25, 444). K a r k i a , P. A survey of A t t i t u d e s of S e l e c t e d I r a n i a n C o l l e g e  Students concerning E n g l i s h as a F o r e i g n Language. Unpublished D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s at Urbana Champaign, 1979. 55 Kaplan, R. B. 4 9 1 3 9 1 6 2 5 1 6 2 5 4 1 2 5 3 6 6 1 . J o u r n a l of E n g l i s h as a  Second Language, 1969 , 4 ( 1 ) , 7 - 1 8 . Kerr, A. H. Reading E n l g i s h as a Second Language. L i t e r a c y - A  Focus on the Future, South A u s t r a l i a n Reading A s s o c i a t i o n , A d e l a i d e , 1975 . Lado, R. Why Not S t a r t Reading E a r l i e r ? In M. Burt, H. Dulay and M. F i n o o c h i a r o (EDS.), Viewpoints on E n g l i s h as a Second  Language, New York: Regents Pub. Co. Inc., 1976 . McGee, Donna. Reading S k i l l s f o r Basic L i t e r a c y . TESL Talk, Winter 1978 , 9 ( 1 ) , 5 3 - 5 8 . Miles-Herman, M. A Survey of Screening and Placement T e s t s and  Procedures Used for E n g l i s h A d d i t i o n a l Language Programs i n  B r i t i s h Columbia K - 1 2 . E d u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Columbia Report No. 8 0 : 1 6 , 1980 . Milwaukee ESEA T i t l e VII B i 1 i n g u a l / B i c u l t u r a l Education Program, 1976, 1977 . Milwaukee, Wis.: Milwaukee P u b l i c Schools; Wis. Dept. of Education, 1977 . Moss, K. L. O r a l - A u r a l P r o f i e n c y Required. TESL Reporter, 1972, 5 ( 3 ) , 5 - 1 2 . Motta, J a n i c e and et a l . Meaning L e v e l s i n Reading.. B r i s t o l Community C o l l e g e , F a l l R i v e r , Mass.; 1974 . New York C i t y Board of E d u c a t i o n . Handbook f o r E n g l i s h Language  A r t s , Grades 5 - 1 2 , Reading and L i t e r a t u r e . N.Y.: N.Y. C i t y Board of Education, 1968 . Paine, M. J . The V a r i a t i o n of Classroom Reading Techniques, ( 1 ) . E n g l i s h Language Teaching, October 1972 , 2 7 ( 1 ) , 2 7 6 - 2 8 1 . Payne, R. and McTeague, F. Developing L i t e r a c y S k i l l s i n Adolescents and A d u l t s . TESL T a l k , September, 1976 . 7 ( 4 ) , 60-61 . Peck, S. Report on the Los Angeles Second Language Research Forum. TESOL Q u a r t e r l y , 1977 JM ( 2 ) , 2 1 3 - 2 1 6 . P o l i t z e r , R. L. and F. N. Teaching E n g l i s h as a Second Language. Toronto: Xerox P u b l i s h i n g , 1972 . P r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r Reading E n g l i s h as a Second Language. B r i s t o l Community C o l l e g e , F a l l R i v e r , Mass.: 1974 . (E.R.I.C. Docu-ment Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 098 512) . Rigg, P. Reading i n ESL i n J . F. Fanselow and R. H. Grymes (EDS.), On TESOL ' 7 6 . Washington, D.C.: TESOL, 1976 . 56 Rough Rock Demonstration S c h o o l . Curriculum G u i d e l i n e s f o r the  S k i l l s of E n g l i s h . C h i n l e , A r i z . : Author, 1969. Savage, A. P. and Terry, L. A Comparative Study of Four Adult  Programs i n E n g l i s h as a Second Language i n Postsecondary  I n s t i t u t i o n s 1978. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 166 964) . Smith, N. B. Reading Innovations: P r a c t i c a l Suggestions f o r Teaching and Humanizing Procedures. Paper Presented at the T h i r d Annual Meeting of the P l a i n s Regional Conference of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Reading A s s o c i a t i o n , St. L o u i s , M i s s o u r i , 1975. (E.R.I.C. Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 103 810). Stoddard, John & F r a n c i s . The Teaching of E n g l i s h to Immigrant  C h i l d r e n , London: U n i v e r s i t y of London Press, 1968. S t r e i f f , P. R. Some C r i t e r i a f o r the E v a l u a t i o n of TESOL Programs. TESOL Q u a r t e r l y , Dec. '70, 4 (4), 365-371. Summers, E. G. Information C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the J o u r n a l of Reading (1^957-1977). J o u r n a l of Reading, October 1979, 39-49. Sutton, M. Teaching Reading S k i l l s . TESL T a l k , Summer 1977, 8 (3), 23-25. Tan San Yee, C. Sequence S i g n a l s i n T e c h n i c a l E n g l i s h . R.E.L.C. J o u r n a l , December, 1975. 6 (2), 63-101. Thonis, E. W. Teaching Reading to Non-English Speakers. New York: Macmillan, 1970. Tyacke, M. & Saunders, J . B. F u n c t i o n a l Reading Using "Found" M a t e r i a l s . TESL Talk, Winter/Spring 1979, J_0 (172), 169-174. U l i j n , J . F o r e i g n Language Reading Research: Recent Trends and Future Prospects J o u r n a l of Reading Research, February, 1980, 3 ( 1 ) , 17-37. Weber, Rose-Marie. L i n g u i s t i c s and Reading. Washington: Centre fo r A p p l i e d L i n g u i s t i c s , May 1970. (E.R.I.C. Document Repro-d u c t i o n S e r v i c e No. ED 043 852) . Wilson, L. I. Reading i n the ESOL Classroom: A Technique f o r Teaching S y n t a c t i c Meaning. TESOL Q u a r t e r l y , September, 1973, 7 (3). Wilson, T. M. E n g l i s h as a Second Language. E d u c a t i o n a l  Leadership, December 1969, 27 (3), 250-252. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0078249/manifest

Comment

Related Items