Metalinguistic Transfer in Biliteracy Instruction: Theory, Research

1
Metalinguistic Transfer in Biliteracy
Instruction Theory, Research Effective
Practice

• Jill Kerper Mora, Ed.D.
• San Diego State University
• http//coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora

2
Framing the Conversation

• Literacy educators have come through the Reading
  Wars and gained much from the research debate
  about effective literacy instruction. Important
  research studies include the National Reading
  Panel Report (2000) the National Literacy Panel
  on Minority-language Children Youth (August
  Shanahan, 2006).
• We have seen dramatic shifts in policies
  regarding bilingual learners at the federal
  state levels. The federal No Child Left Behind
  Act Reading First legislation are most
  notable.
• We have refined improved teacher preparation,
  programs practices for bilingual learners and
  experienced growth in dual language programs.
• We need a paradigm shift to solidify past gains
  move forward in literacy education.

3
Definition of a Paradigm Shift

• In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
  (1964), Thomas Kuhn describes a paradigm as a set
  of beliefs, theories, or a world view that is
  unquestioningly accepted has become established
  as "truth." In education, the more common term is
  model.
• A paradigm shift is a change in the existing
  standard model, which creates a shift in the
  established truth. Therefore, in education,
  adopting a new or different model to describe our
  thinking about literacy biliteracy may lead to
  a shift in our thinking in the field.

4
Foundational Structure of Literacy Instruction
Effective Practice
Theory
Research
5
The Problem with the Scientific Research
Approach

• RF claims to base programs on scientifically-base
  d research use evidence-based instructional
  practices.
• Yet, we have not critically examined the
  theoretical constructs about literacy learning
  teaching that were examined in separate research
  studies.
• We cannot derive a coherent comprehensive
  paradigm or model of literacy biliteracy
  instruction from a collection of studies.
• Nor can effective programs be merely a collection
  of strategies without a coherent theoretical
  framework.
• This approach negates the professionalism of
  teachers the importance of teachers own
  theoretical orientation toward literacy
  instruction their experiences in teaching
  bilingual learners.

6
The Reading First Five Components Model

• Reading First defines effective reading
  instruction as having 5 components phonemic
  awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency
  comprehension. These are also called the 5
  domains, dimensions, elements, pillars or
  building blocks.
• The National Reading Panels (2000) categories
  for reviewing research studies have been
  transformed into a de facto model of reading
  instruction that is driving program development,
  teacher professional development, instructional
  practices program/policy evaluation.
• The NRPs research findings do not provide a
  theoretical framework for understanding how these
  5 components are inter-related, subordinated,
  interdependent or proportional to one another.

7
Reading Comprehension Defined

• The RAND Reading Study Group (2002) defines
  reading comprehension as the process of
  simultaneously extracting constructing meaning
  through interaction involvement with written
  language.
• RAND identifies impediments to achievement in
  reading comprehension 1) lack of appropriate
  instruction 2) lack of sufficient oral language
  development in K-3, 3) lack of vocabulary
  knowledge for comprehending abstract/complex
  texts 4) poor decoding skills fluency 5)
  low levels of independent reading.
• There is insufficient discussion attention in
  policymaking about the role of English language
  proficiency L1/L2 interaction in the reading
  comprehension achievement of bilingual/English L2
  learners.

8
The Reading First Dilemma

• The Reading First Interim Report (2008) found no
  statistically significant differences in reading
  comprehension scores (SAT 10) after 2 academic
  years between students in schools that
  implemented RF control-group schools with
  comparable student populations.
• Questions were raised about the RF Reports
  validity significance based on its research
  methodology.
• Literacy educators researchers raise these
  questions Is comprehension instruction merely a
  component of a reading instruction program? What
  are the implications of treating comprehension as
  a component rather than the purpose of reading?
  Do good decoding skills lead automatically to
  good reading comprehension, especially among L2
  readers?

9
The Missing PieceA Theoretical Model of
Literacy Learning

• How are phonemic awareness phonics related to
  comprehension?
• If phonics instruction is most effective when it
  is direct, systematic explicit, what is it that
  we are make explicit how do we do this
  systematically directly?
• How does vocabulary knowledge relate to word
  recognition phonics instruction? How frequently
  does comprehension break down at the word level
  vs. the sentence, paragraph or discourse levels?
• How does reading fluency relate to comprehension?
  What do measures of fluency tell us about
  comprehension? What is the relationship between
  reading fluency and overall proficiency in the
  language of the text?

10
A Meta-Model of Biliteracy Instruction
Reading Comprehension
L1/L2 Language Competencies
Knowledge of the World
Instruction
Metalinguistic Knowledge (How Language
Works) Phonology Morphology Syntax
Grammar Orthography Semantics Lexicon
Metacognitive Knowledge (How Thinking
Works) Communicative Functions/Pragmatics Monitor
ing Repair Strategies Text Structure Patterns
of Exposition Conceptual Cultural
Knowledge Adjusting for Reading
Purpose/Task Literary Genre Analysis
11
Rationale for the Meta-Model of Biliteracy
Instruction

• The prefix meta is used in English to indicate
  a concept which is an abstraction from another
  concept, used to complete or add to the original
  concept. A meta-model (M-M) is theoretically
  sound coherent, which allows for validation,
  reexamination further enhancement through
  research.
• The M-M promotes teaching for transfer because it
  articulates L1/L2 language universals vs.
  language particular knowledge skills.
• The M-M guides us in decision making about what
  to teach explicitly directly without
  overdwelling what students learn through guided
  discovery experiences.
• The model gives us a paradigm for planning
  differentiated instruction according to students
  L2 proficiency.

12
Metalinguistic Awareness

• MA is the ability to talk about think about
  language as an abstract thing or process to
  analyze how language is used systematically to
  express meaning.
• MA has various components or processes that
  reflect the complexities, dimensions forms of
  language phonology, morphology, syntax
  grammar, semantics lexicon.
• In bilingual learners, MA entails the ability to
  compare contrast two language systems to
  discover commonalities differences.
• Bilingualism enhances metalinguistic awareness
  because of the juxtapositioning of two language
  systems. Growth in metalinguistic knowledge in L1
  contributes to L2 language literacy learning.

13
Transfer Facilitation Model (Koda, 2008)

• Children form sensitivity to the regularities of
  spoken language as they develop oral language
  skills.
• All writing systems are structured to capture
  represent these regularities in language.
  Learning to read involves mapping spoken language
  elements onto written symbols of the language of
  the text.
• Metalinguistic awareness enables learners to
  analyze spoken words into their constituent parts
  so that they can decode written text. This
  process becomes more explicit through cumulative
  experiences with print.
• The result is increased awareness of the specific
  ways in which regularities of language are
  represented in the writing system how written
  language varies systematically in the two
  languages the students are learning to read.

14
How Metalinguistic Knowledge is Acquired

• 1. Implicit unarticulated awareness is present
  in L1 developing in L2.
• 2. Awareness is made explicit through structured
  experiences direct teaching, as well as
  discovery experiences with discussions of
  students insights understandings
• 3. Which lead to explicit articulated knowledge
  of language forms functions
• 4. Resulting in increased self-regulatory control
  enhanced language use performance in a
  variety of increasingly cognitively-demanding
  literacy task.

15
Metalinguistic Transfer (MT) in
Bilingual/Biliteracy Learning

• MT is the application of particular
  metalinguistic awareness knowledge in L1 to
  language learning literacy achievement in L2
  English.
• Knowledge skills that transfer across languages
  include phonemic awareness phonological
  processes, knowledge of phoneme-grapheme
  relationships in the L1/L2 orthographic systems
  recognition of syntactic features of both
  languages.
• Some reading strategies are common to both
  languages, while others are specific to the
  phonetic graphic systems of L1 or L2. Explicit
  instruction in linguistic parallels contrasts
  is helpful for developing effective reading
  comprehension strategies.

16
Contrasts Between Spanish English Orthographic
Systems

• Spanish spelling is more regular because there
  are fewer multiple phoneme-grapheme
  relationships.
• There are phonemes in English that do not exist
  in Spanish (short vowel sounds, some consonant
  blends, voiced consonants, etc.)
• Not all English spelling is phonetic. There are
  many morphological spellings in English.
• The characteristics of syllables play different
  roles in decoding/spelling Spanish English.

17
English Demons for Spanish Speakers(Thonis,
1983)

• All the short vowels-hat, bed, hit, top, up
• The sh of shoes, mission, nation, ocean, chef,
  special, sugar (One sound with 6 different
  spellings!)
• The th of this and the th of thank
• The j of jello, edge
• The z of zero, has
• The v of voice, very

• The r-controlled vowels-especially the one sound
  (ir, er, ur)
• The zh of measure, mirage
• The d of day, ladder, bad
• The h of home, house, hare

18
Veterans of the Reading Wars, Unite!

• We must join in making a paradigm shift to focus
  on a valid, coherent, research-validated model of
  literacy biliteracy learning effective
  instruction.
• We must build on expand our knowledge base
  about metalinguistic metacognitive knowledge
  among bilingual learners to enhance programs,
  instructional materials classroom practices.
• We must drop the war analogy, retire our
  armaments, store our uniforms in the attic get
  on with the task of formulating implementing
  policies programs to enhance reading
  achievement for ALL students.

19
Whole Language Advocates, we love you!
The Reading Wars are over!
Comprehension is King
Bring Back Balance
Peace to the Phonics Folks!
20
References

• August, D. Shanahan, T. (Eds.) (2006).
  Developing literacy in second-language learners
  Report of the National Literacy Panel on
  Language-minority Children Youth. Mahwah, NJ
  Erlbaum Associates.
• Koda, K. (2008). Impact of prior literacy
  experience on second-language learning to read.
  In K. Koda A. Zehler (Eds.) Learning to read
  across languages Cross-linguistic relationships
  in first- and second-language literacy
  development, pp. 68-96. New York, NY Cambridge
  University Press.
• National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children
  to read An evidence-based assessment of the
  scientific research literature on reading and its
  implications of reading instruction. (National
  Institute of Health Publication No. 00-4769).
  Washington, DC NICHD.
• RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for
  understanding Toward an RD program in reading
  comprehension. Santa Monica, CA RAND Science
  Technology Policy Institute.
• Thonis, E. W. (1983). The English-Spanish
  Connection. Compton, CA Santillana.