Group items tagged

This article addressed the all to common problem of second language students being placed in mainstream English classes well before they have developed second language proficiency. These students are then expected to compete with their fellow peers who have developed proficiency since childhood. This article confronts the issues students face transitioning from ESL classroom environment to the mainstream environment. According Harklau the importance peer interaction and socialization should be used as tools to increase second language proficiency. Peer interaction and peer editing can help students develop a level of comfort and proficiency in their second language that is often missing in mainstream classrooms.

The authors discussed to common occurrence of teachers "bending over backwards" for their NNS (Non Native Speaking) students, especially when evaluating surface errors. The study in this article seemed well orchestrated. It presented a variety of English teachers with six compositions: two from native English speakers, two from Danish speakers, and two from speakers of Thai. These students however were not real and the "student profile" assigned to each composition was constantly rotated. The results found that NES (Native English Speakers) were judged more harshly because "they should know better". The northern European, the Danish, students were pretty neutral. The Asian, the Thai, students were given the most leniency. I found this article interesting because it gives insight to the impact that teachers' grading has on the development of ESL students' writing proficiency.

In "Exploring the Impact of a High-Stakes Direct Writing Assessment in Two High School Classrooms," Ketter and Pool (2001) use a case study to examine the effects of standardized direct writing assessments on instruction and on student affect. They used surveys, interviews, student work, case notes, and curriculum plans to closely examine how teachers and students in two Maryland high school classrooms were impacted by the state's high-stakes writing assessment. The two classes were designed for students who had previously failed the Maryland Writing Test, with the specific intention of helping those students to pass the direct writing test, which is required for high school graduation. Over half of the students in the two classes were identified as members of families of low socio-economic status. Ketter & Pool found that the primary factor negatively influencing instructional methodologies and student and teacher affect is the failure of instruction and assessment to address "how differences in discourse styles embedded in communities have a powerful effect on how children see their world and communicate about it with others" (369). In this way, students from non-mainstream culture are marginalized by the school system. Ketter & Pool recommend that school and community stakeholders work together to devise teaching and assessment practices that "take into consideration the rich variety of American culture and the complexity of literacy instruction that result[s] in a student's ability to make meaning" (386).

The link I've included is to the stable URL, which only displays the first page. Sorry -- you will have to log in to JSTOR to read the entire article.

Patrick Hartwell discusses the value of teaching formal grammar by reviewing its history as a fundamental building block to the development of good writing. By determining a set of definitions for grammar Hartwell shows that the process of absorbing correct grammar usage occurs within native speakers naturally by exposure to the language; even young children are able to use complex grammatical structures with skill. Yet when sorted through the scientific lens and broken down into categories and labels the study of grammar cannot explain how learning the component rules of language will prove valuable to overall writing ability. Instead Hartwell suggests and I agree that "one learns to control the language of print by manipulating language in meaningful contexts, not by learning about language in isolation, as by the study of formal grammar" (125). Language, Hartwell says is "verbal clay, to be molded and probed, shaped and reshaped, and, above all, enjoyed" (125). So language is play dough; it is supposed to be fun; it should not be something you do because you have to, but because you want to; you do it because you like to do it; it is about process not product. What can tutors/teachers do that can encourage students to view writing not as a means to an end, but as a valuable tool of expression, a concrete manifestation of focused energy that is representative of an individual's attempt to express? This need to express is at work on us all of the time; our survival depends on it. That is not an exaggeration; a closed mouth does not get fed. By funneling our thoughts into words, even if the result is an approximation of the truth of our energetic pursuits, there is still a result. Words do work on people because people feel. Maybe some of the frustration that freshman feel is a result of the heaviness of the rulebook; certain grammar rules affect student grades, certain constraints are imposed by the teachers rubric and the teacher as well a