VOL_34_1

TABLE OF CONTENTSQUARTERLY Founded 1966 Volume 34, Number 1 䊐 Spring 2000 A Journal for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages and of Standard English as a Second Dialect Editor CAROL A. CHAPELLE, Iowa State University Research Issues Editor PATRICIA A. DUFF, University of British Columbia Brief Reports and Summaries Editors ROD ELLIS, University of Auckland KAREN E. JOHNSON, Pennsylvania State University Review Editor DAN DOUGLAS, Iowa State University Assistant Editor ELLEN GARSHICK, TESOL Central Office Assistant to the Editor BARBARA S. PLAKANS, Iowa State University Editorial Advisory Board Ralph Adendorff, University of Natal Caroline Clapham, Lancaster University Susan Conrad, Iowa State University Kathryn A. Davis, University of Hawaii at Manoa Rod Ellis, University of Auckland Dana Ferris, California State University, Sacramento Thomas N. Huckin, University of Utah Joan Jamieson, Northern Arizona University Ann Johns, San Diego State University Karen E. Johnson, Pennsylvania State University Keiko Koda, Carnegie Mellon University Frederick O. Lorenz, Iowa State University Numa Markee, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Tim McNamara, University of Melbourne Teresa Pica, University of Pennsylvania James W. Tollefson, University of Washington Additional Readers Roberta Abraham, Paul Angelis, Dwight Atkinson, Elsa Auerbach, Patricia Byrd, Patricia Carrell, Joan Carson, Ulla Connor, Jeff Connor-Linton, Graham Crookes, Fred Davidson, John Esling, Carol Fraser, Jerry Gebhard, Fred Genesee, Paula Golombek, Liz Hamp-Lyons, Linda Harklau, Eli Hinkel, Janet Holmes, Bill Johnston, Gabriele Kasper, Eric Kellerman, Antony Kunnan, Patsy Lightbown, Roy Lyster, Peter Master, Mary McGroarty, Barry McLaughlin, Bernard Mohan, Gayle Nelson, Bonny Norton, Rebecca Oxford, Brian Paltridge, Kate Parry, Steven Ross, David Singleton, Peter Skehan, Merrill Swain, Elaine Tarone, Kelleen Toohey, Roberta Vann, Karen Watson-Gegeo, Devon Woods Credits Advertising arranged by Suzanne Levine, TESOL Central Office, Alexandria, Virginia U.S.A. Typesetting by Capitol Communication Systems, Inc., Crofton, Maryland U.S.A. Printing and binding by Pantagraph Printing, Bloomington, Illinois U.S.A. Copies of articles that appear in the TESOL Quarterly are available through ISI Document Solution, 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 U.S.A. Copyright © 2000 Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. US ISSN 0039-8322 REVIEWS i Volumes Menu QUARTERLY Founded 1966 CONTENTS ARTICLES Three Misconceptions About Age and L2 Learning 9 Stefka H. Marinova-Todd, D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow From the “Good Kids” to the “Worst”: Representations of English Language Learners Across Educational Settings 35 Linda Harklau The Helping Behaviors of Fifth Graders While Using Collaborative Strategic Reading During ESL Content Classes 69 Janette K. Klingner and Sharon Vaughn Negotiating the Social Services Oral Intake Interview: Communicative Needs of Nonnative Speakers of English 99 Elaine Tarone and Kimberly Kuehn Discourse Community, Legitimate Peripheral Participation, and the Nonnative-English-Speaking Scholar 127 John Flowerdew THE FORUM Comments on Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray’s “Going After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative Approach to Classification” A Reader Reacts . . . 151 Joan H. Sawyer Another Reader Reacts . . . 160 Ron Sheen The Authors Respond . . . 165 Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray RESEARCH ISSUES Current Trends in Research Methodology and Statistics in Applied Linguistics 175 Anne Lazaraton ii TESOL QUARTERLY Volume 34, Number 1 䊐 Spring 2000 REVIEWS Negotiating Academic Literacies: Teaching and Learning Across Languages and Cultures 183 Vivian Zamel and Ruth Spack (Eds.) Reviewed by Stephanie Vandrick Exploring Second Language Reading: Issues and Strategies 184 Neil Anderson Reviewed by Richard Day Time to Know Them: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level 186 Marilyn Sternglass Reviewed by Vivian Zamel Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching in Multicultural Contexts (2nd ed.) Carlos J. Ovando and Virginia P. Collier Reviewed by Joel Hardman Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe 189 Christina Bratt Paulston and Donald Peckham (Eds.) Reviewed by Joseph E. Suttles 187 BOOK NOTICES 191 Information for Contributors 195 Editorial Policy General Information for Authors TESOL Order Form TESOL Membership Application REVIEWS iii is an international professional organization for those concerned with the teaching of English as a second or foreign language and of standard English as a second dialect. TESOL’s mission is to develop the expertise of its members and others involved in teaching English to speakers of other languages to help them foster effective communication in diverse settings while respecting individuals’ language rights. To this end, TESOL articulates and advances standards for professional preparation and employment, continuing education, and student programs; links groups worldwide to enhance communication among language specialists; produces high-quality programs, services, and products; and promotes advocacy to further the profession. Information about membership and other TESOL services is available from TESOL Central Office at the address below. TESOL Quarterly is published in Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. Contributions should be sent to the Editor or the appropriate Section Editors at the addresses listed in the Information for Contributors section. Publishers’ representative is Helen Kornblum, Director of Communications & Marketing. All material in TESOL Quarterly is copyrighted. Copying without the permission of TESOL, beyond the exemptions specified by law, is an infringement involving liability for damages. Reader Response You can respond to the ideas expressed in TESOL Quarterly by writing directly to editors and staff at [email protected]. This will be a read-only service, but your opinions and ideas will be read regularly. TESOL Home Page You can find out more about TESOL services and publications by accessing the TESOL home page on the World Wide Web at http://www.tesol.edu/. Advertising in all TESOL publications is arranged by Suzanne Levine, TESOL Central Office, 700 South Washington Street, Suite 200, Alexandria, Virginia 22314 USA, Tel. 703-836-0774. Fax 703-836-7864. E-mail [email protected]. OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2000–2001 President BARBARA SCHWARTE Iowa State University Ames, IA USA President-elect NEIL J. ANDERSON Brigham Young University Provo, UT USA Past President DAVID NUNAN University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Secretary CHARLES S. AMOROSINO, JR. Alexandria, VA USA Treasurer MARTHA EDMONDSON Washington, DC USA iv Kathleen Bailey Monterey Institute of International Studies Monterey, CA USA Adelaide Parsons Southeast Missouri State University Cape Girardeau, MO USA John L. Balbi Board of Education of the City of New York New York, NY USA Mary Romney Quinebaug Valley CommunityTechnical College Willimantic, CT USA Virginia Christopher Vancouver YMCA English Language Institute Vancouver, BC Canada Amy Schlessman Evaluation, Instruction, Design Tucson, AZ USA Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ USA Nancy Cloud Rhode Island College Warwick, RI USA Donna T. Fujimoto International University of Japan Niigata, Japan Elizabeth Hanson-Smith Computers for Education Sacramento, CA USA Constantine Ioannou Ottawa-Carleton District School Board Ottawa, ON Canada Nancy K. Storer Baker University Baldwin City, KS USA Gail Weinstein San Francisco State University San Francisco, CA USA Jean Zukowski/Faust Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ USA TESOL QUARTERLY QUARTERLY Founded 1966 Editors’ Note ■ I am happy to note that the tables of contents for issues of TESOL Quarterly can now be found on the World Wide Web at http://www.tesol.edu/pubs /magz/tq/index.html. Guidelines for contributors are available at http:// www.tesol.edu/pubs/author/serials/tqguides.html. I would like to thank Patsy Duff for preparing a special Research Issues column and Anne Lazaraton for her contribution, which takes stock of trends in research methods in applied linguistics as we enter the new millennium. In This Issue ■ The first article updates arguments about a critical period for language acquisition. The second and third articles report on classroom research to offer insights into TESOL from primary school through college. Through case studies, the final two articles provide rich accounts of how nonnative speakers negotiate two different genres of essential discourse. • Stefka H. Marinova-Todd, D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow revisit a perennial issue for TESOL—the effects of age on second language acquisition (SLA)—considering recent data and framing their discussion in terms of misconceptions that persist. They claim that proponents of a critical period for language acquisition have misinterpreted the research on speed of acquisition, misattributed age differences to neurobiological factors, and misemphasized poor language learners in research on adult SLA while neglecting those who successfully acquire their L2. Their interpretation of research results offers promise for TESOL by calling into question a biologically determined critical period. • Linda Harklau’s investigation of immigrant ESL learners in the United States examines the ways in which their identities are created through their educational settings as they participate in high school and then IN THIS ISSUE Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2000 TESOL QUARTERLY 5 college. Her 3-year ethnographic case studies followed learners from high school to college ESL classes documenting evidence of how teachers perceived these learners and how these perceptions helped to create their identities, which in turn influenced their classroom behavior. As the title of the article indicates, she found that these ESL learners went from being perceived as the “good kids” in high school to the “worst” in college classes. Harklau’s analysis suggests that their representation as poor students in college stems largely from their misfit in classes designed primarily for newly arrived international students, and she identifies teaching practices that contribute to the alienation of these immigrants. • Janette K. Klingner and Sharon Vaughn take a close look at the collaborative processes used by fifth-grade ESL learners in content classrooms. The learners had been trained in the use of helping strategies intended to promote text comprehension and vocabulary acquisition during group work. Analysis of learners’ helping strategies during cooperation indicated that training had been successful, and comparison of scores on vocabulary pre- and posttests based on the text revealed significant gains. The authors recommend this method of strategy training for content area group work. • Elaine Tarone and Kimberly Kuehn examine the discourse of the social services oral intake interview, which is part of the process of obtaining financial benefits in the United States. Many immigrant nonnative speakers of English engage in this important speech event, but because of the privacy surrounding the process, its characteristics have not been studied by linguists or observed by nonnative speakers. Through a combination of observation, interviews, and expert judgment, the authors describe the genre of the oral intake interview with particular focus on the performance of two native speakers and one nonnative speaker of English. They argue that instruction in how to participate in this genre is important for many ESL learners. • Through a case study, John Flowerdew reveals details of the process a nonnative-English-speaking scholar goes through to get a paper published in an international professional journal. Flowerdew documents this process by examining data from a number of sources, including the scholar’s communications with journal editors, a journal’s copy editor, and a local editor hired to help the scholar. Flowerdew interprets the data in view of how the scholar learns the conventions of the discourse community through legitimate peripheral participation, and he draws implications for how TESOL professionals might contribute to this type of English language learning, which he argues is critical to the success of many nonnative-speaking scholars. Also in this issue: • The Forum: Joan H. Sawyer and Ron Sheen each comment on Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray’s “Going After the Phrasal Verb: An 6 TESOL QUARTERLY Alternative Approach to Classification” (Vol. 33, No. 1, Spring 1999). They raise questions about the classification system Darwin and Gray offer for phrasal verbs on the basis of its utility in the classroom. Darwin and Gray clarify the purpose of their classification system and provide some additional corpus-based data. • Research Issues: On the basis of her survey of 7 years’ worth of papers in four of the primary journals in SLA and language teaching, Anne Lazaraton reports trends in research methodologies. Despite theoretical discussion suggesting the need for multiple approaches to empirical inquiry, findings indicate that the overwhelming majority of research remains within quantitative paradigms. • Book Reviews and Book Notices: Reviewers comment on five new titles—Negotiating Academic Literacies: Teaching and Learning Across Languages and Cultures, Exploring Second Language Reading: Issues and Strategies, Time to Know Them: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level, Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching in Multicultural Contexts (2nd ed.), and Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe. An additional five are summarized in the Book Notices section. Carol A. Chapelle IN THIS ISSUE 7 Three Misconceptions About Age and L2 Learning STEFKA H. MARINOVA-TODD, D. BRADFORD MARSHALL, and CATHERINE E. SNOW Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States Age has often been considered a major, if not the primary, factor determining success in learning a second or foreign language. Children are generally considered capable of acquiring a new language rapidly and with little effort, whereas adults are believed to be doomed to failure. Although older learners are indeed less likely than young children to master an L2, a close examination of studies relating age to language acquisition reveals that age differences reflect differences in the situation of learning rather than in capacity to learn. They do not demonstrate any constraint on the possibility that adults can become highly proficient, even nativelike, speakers of L2s. Researchers, in other words, have often committed the same blunders as members of the general public: misinterpretation of the facts relating to speed of acquisition, misattribution of age differences in language abilities to neurobiological factors, and, most notably, a misemphasis on poor adult learners and an underemphasis on adults who master L2s to nativelike levels. By clarifying these misconceptions, we hope this article will lead to a better understanding of L2 learning and, in turn, better approaches to L2 teaching. T he term critical period for language acquisition refers to a period of time when learning a language is relatively easy and typically meets with a high degree of success. Once this period is over, at or before the onset of puberty, the average learner is less likely to achieve nativelike ability in the target language. It is generally accepted among psycholinguists that a critical period for L1 acquisition exists, but controversy arises when the critical period claim is extended to L2 learning. The existence of a critical period for second language acquisition (SLA) would have serious implications for foreign language teachers working with older students, not the least of which would be a need for a complete overhaul of expectations and methods of evaluation. If older students are biologically incapable of mastering another language to a TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2000 9 stiff and rigid” (p. knowing the facts about the critical period for SLA is relevant to policy and to practice in education. McLaughlin (1984. the human brain becomes lateralized. so too should teaching methodologies be modified to promote limited proficiency. and avoid even broaching the unreachable goal of native fluency. we preserve the term chosen by the original authors.2 1 Attempts at a more or less comprehensive overview of the literature include. Lamendella (1977) argued that Lenneberg’s conclusion regarding the critical period was overstated and introduced the term sensitive period to emphasize that language acquisition might be more efficient during early childhood but was not impossible at later ages. Furthermore. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991). Clearly.very high level. Rather than focusing on the low probability that adults will acquire fluency in L2s. if a critical period for L2 learning does exist. He also claimed that postpubertal language acquisition was far more difficult and far less successful than acquisition occurring during the prepubertal period of rapid neurological development. and Birdsong (1999). 236). as we do throughout this article. among others. then they should not be graded in comparison to native speakers. 1985). for example. then schools should obviously introduce foreign languages earlier. we argue. many researchers in the field use the two terms interchangeably. as California has done. Such an approach can also inform sensible decisions about the allocation of resources for foreign language or L2 teaching. it does not present a comprehensive review of critical period research. . when “the human brain becomes . He argued that puberty represents a biological change associated with the firm localization of language-processing abilities in the left hemisphere. challenged Lenneberg’s characterization by showing that brain lateralization may be completed by the age of 5. As expectations are lowered. The idea of a critical period was first introduced by Penfield and Roberts (1959). Today. Krashen (1973). and all states should introduce policies to accelerate the exposure to English of immigrant children. allow for a greater number of errors. . Harley and Wang (1997).1 We conclude from this analysis that older learners have the potential to learn L2s to a very high level and that introducing foreign languages to very young learners cannot be justified on grounds of biological readiness to learn languages. 10 TESOL QUARTERLY . who argued that language acquisition is most efficient before age 9. 2 When citing other people’s work. The purpose of this article is to analyze some common misconceptions about L2 learning by examining the relevant literature. Later Lenneberg (1967) claimed that during this period of heightened plasticity. however. it is more productive to examine the factors that typically lead to nativelike proficiency in L2s for any learner. Neither researchers nor others can ignore the overwhelming evidence that adult L2 learners. achieve lower levels of proficiency than younger L2 learners do. on average. It is thus not surprising that the notion of a critical period for L2 learning is widely taken for granted. These two phenomena seem on first view to be quite similar and to converge to support the credibility of a critical period for language learning. especially those in the field of neurobiology. found it a challenging and frustrating task. We argue. Genie in Curtiss. 1989). Finally. that the cases of children deprived of an L1 and those of L2 learners who encounter obstacles to high-level achievement are entirely different and that the critical period that limits the learning of the first group is irrelevant to explaining the shortcomings of the second. and who were generally not very successful. often without any direct measures of proficiency. and misemphasis. Most concern wolf children. though.” This claim.. THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 11 . are available. Furthermore. 1977) or congenitally deaf children whose hearing was improved with the help of hearing aids only after puberty (e.g. not accepted by researchers who have actually carried out age comparisons. Such cases. demonstrate the effortfulness and poor outcomes associated with language learning in later childhood or adolescence as compared with its normal course in early childhood. another set of studies documents that some adults have poor L2 outcomes and then imply that no adults are capable of achieving nativelike proficiency.Case studies of several individuals who began to acquire an L1 late in life. a careful reexamination of the arguments offered in support of the critical period hypothesis suggests that each of them is subject to one of three fallacies: misinterpretation. Chelsea in Curtiss.. though rare. represents a straightforward misinterpretation of the facts. The person in the street will offer as support for the existence of the critical period the observation that children “pick languages up so quickly. ignoring the existence of proficient adult learners. most people can think of dozens of acquaintances who have attempted to learn an L2 after childhood.g. In this article we review studies on the critical period in SLA to analyze these misconceptions and to present an alternative view. this evidence is not sufficient to conclude that a critical period for SLA exists. misattribution. report differences in the brain organization of early and late L2 learners and then misattribute presumed language proficiency differences to these brain organizations. children reared in isolation without any linguistic input (e. and achieved only rather low proficiency. However. We argue that this body of work suffers from the fallacy of misemphasis. Other researchers. These findings call into question the alleged advantages of younger learners in foreign language programs and demonstrate that older students can learn more than younger ones in the same period of time. & Camarata. These results are continually confirmed. their ability to acquire new languages diminishes. Another type of misinterpretation is epitomized by a widely cited study by Johnson and Newport (1989) that has been accepted as the best evidence in support of the critical period in L2 learning (Long. 1984. 1985) focusing on learners in an L2 environment showed that older learners are generally faster and more efficient in the initial stages of L2 learning. 3 It is interesting to note that.MISINTERPRETATION Many people have misinterpreted the ultimate attainment of children in an L2 as proof that they learn quickly and easily. Long.” A recent article in the news magazine The Economist typifies this misconception.” 1998. Snow & Hoefnagel-Höhle. Genesee argued that older students are more efficient L2 learners than younger students.g. however. the older children with SLI showed higher rates of language acquisition despite their impairment (Nelson. 32). 1996). 1987). the exact opposite (see Table 1 for a brief review of relevant studies). foreign language educators also widely recognize that the progress of young foreign language learners is considerably slower than that of language learners at the secondary level. 1990). normally developing counterparts (who are younger in chronological age). at early stages of phonological acquisition. 61) to the L2. Research shows. The study is based on the speculation that. Finally. p. Camarata. Significant work in the 1970s (e. 1979).3 Rivera (1998) found that. once children master general problem solving. Even researchers who argue that younger learners tend eventually to achieve greater proficiency have admitted that older learners initially acquire a new language more rapidly (Krashen. in studies comparing the L1 acquisition rates of children with specific language impairment (SLI) and of their language-matched. the author claims in passing that bilingual children in English-only classes “can absorb the language within months” (“Ron Unz. Welsh. & Scarcella. Butkovsky. and summarized in McLaughlin. 12 TESOL QUARTERLY . adolescents performed better than children. It is not uncommon for a teacher to hear adults lament how easy a new language would be “if only I had studied it when I was young. and he speculated that more intensive L2 programs introduced at the secondary level may “offset any possible advantages associated with amount of exposure” (p.. 1977. Evaluations of French immersion programs in Canada show that English speakers receiving late immersion (L2 introduced in Grade 7 or 8) have performed as well as or better than children in early immersion programs (L2 introduced in kindergarten or Grade 1) (Genesee. 1978. followed by adults. No No No Oldest subjects performed the best. morphology. and syntax. 17–18 Major findings Yes Age of subjects Age on arrival correlated strongly and negatively with performance on L2 grammaticality judgment test. 12. late arrival (after age 17) Johnson & Newport (1989) Adolescents did better than children in early stages of L2 phonological acquisition. Comments 10. Adolescents were the fastest and achieved the highest proficiency in pronunciation. Study Authors’ interpretation of results as support for critical period hypothesis TABLE 1 Summary of Studies Discussed Under “Misinterpretation” . Rivera (1998) No Early arrival (before age 15). Study claims that adults are better than children on vocabulary. 5–31 3–60 8–10.THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 13 Short-term study showed that older learners were faster at L2 learning than children. 12–15. youngest children performed worst. Subjects were learning L2 in formal instruction. adults Snow & HoefnagelHöhle (1977) (laboratory) Snow & HoefnagelHöhle (1977) (naturalistic) Snow & HoefnagelHöhle (1978) Age differences were addressed only cross-sectionally. early arrivals were too old. and youngest performed the worst on a pronunciation task. and syntax. Young children had no immediate advantages in learning L2 pronunciation. Study used different scales to present results and did not emphasize adults who performed as well as the youngest subjects. but no data are given. morphology. a procedure for scanning brain activity during specific tasks. Relkin. neuroscientists have often committed an error of misattribution.. Bialystok and Hakuta recalculated the correlation between age on arrival and scores on the grammaticality judgment test and showed deterioration in subjects’ proficiency only after age 20. assuming that differences in the location of two languages within the brain or in speed of processing account for differences in proficiency levels and explain the poorer performance of older learners (see Table 2).g. Other studies have also shown that age effects in L2 learning continue well after a critical period is terminated by physiological changes in the brain or by puberty (Birdsong. 1992. they concerned structures that are very different in English and in Chinese/Korean (e. For example. As a result. The results indicated that the late bilinguals had two distinct but adjacent centers of activation in Broca’s area (the language 14 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1997) looked at the localization of languages learned at different ages. The authors used functional magnetic resonance imaging. a recent. determiners. Oyama. 1994). when there were such effects. and subcategorization of verbs). the early bilinguals had first been exposed to the L2 during infancy. However. Given the glamour of brain science and the seemingly concrete nature of neurophysiological studies. MISATTRIBUTION The field of SLA lacks a uniformly accepted theory of how L2s are acquired. with early and late bilingual subjects. widely reported study (Kim. 1976). who completed a grammaticality judgment test that assessed knowledge of various English grammatical rules.Johnson and Newport studied native speakers of Chinese and Korean who had first been exposed to English either before puberty (which they somewhat oddly place at 15 years) or after puberty (17 years or older). The subjects. upon reexamination of Johnson and Newport’s (1989) data. which they performed silently while their brain activity was recorded. Lee. However. & Hirsh. much later than biological changes associated with puberty. some researchers have turned their attention toward neuroscience in the hope of finding new and more conclusive evidence based on which they could create more coherent theories of SLA (Danesi. though it did not report data on the L2 proficiency of the bilingual subjects. the conclusions have often been readily accepted by the public. Both age groups were given a sentencegeneration task. Furthermore. Bialystok and Hakuta (1994) found age-related effects for only some of the structures examined. whereas the late bilinguals had had their first exposure during adulthood. plurals. showed a decline with age in correctness of the judgments. or > 16 Weber-Fox & Neville (1996) Brain processing was assumed to be responsible for different language performance. Adults exposed to L2 at age 1–3. which were absent in older learners. Age of subjects Adults who were bilingual before age 6 (early bilinguals).THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 15 Yes Left-hemisphere advantage was found for processing words in languages learned before age 9. 7–10. other bilingual adults (late bilinguals) Furtado & Webster (1991) Study Authors’ interpretation of results as support for critical period hypothesis TABLE 2 Summary of Studies Discussed Under “Misattribution” . (1997) Adults with first exposure to L2 in infancy. Adults Weber-Fox & Neville (1992) Early learners were too young. proficiency declined with age. right-hemisphere advantages were found for languages learned after puberty. this implied that younger learners have better L2 pronunciation due to brain differences. Comments No Major findings Early and late bilinguals showed similar lateralized interference patterns that were language specific. Yes Native speakers and early L2 learners showed different brain patterns for processing function and content words. adults with first exposure in adulthood Effects of language were more important than those of age. 18–36 Wuillemin & Richardson (1994) Study did not reveal relationship between L2 proficiency and brain lateralization. brain responses altered only for subjects who were first exposed to L2 after age 11. Kim et al. Yes (unclear) Two separate areas were found in brain for production of L1 and L2. regardless of L2. Yes When subjects detected semantic anomalies in L2. 11–13. Connection between different brain responses and L2 learning outcome is unclear. 4–6. whereas in the brains of the early bilinguals there was no separation of the areas of activation associated with the two languages. Kuhl. should have looked at differences in late bilinguals’ L2 proficiency as related to the differentiation of L1 and L2 brain activation patterns. Other neurobiological studies have purported to provide evidence in support of the critical period hypothesis by showing that older learners process L2 information differently from younger learners.. 1994. 1996. 1999) have performed a series of experiments utilizing various brain-imaging techniques and different stimuli. 16 TESOL QUARTERLY . phonemes from two languages become permanently represented in the organization of Broca’s area in the early bilinguals. in the late and early bilingual subjects.. Perhaps adults who have in fact learned to make phonemic distinctions in the target language (which is entirely possible. is very likely). and their results have consistently shown differences between younger and older learners in activation patterns and location of language processing.’s (1997) results are intriguing. 173) Although Kim et al. Nor do they incontrovertibly demonstrate age effects on brain organization. 1997. This could necessitate the utilization of adjacent cortical areas for the L2 learned as an adult. they concern only certain tasks (such as speech production) and not every aspect of using an L2.4 The authors related their findings to work (e. they claimed. That is. they are in fact irrelevant to the possibility that adults can achieve nativelike proficiency in an L2. p. Snow (in press) argues in commenting on Kim et al. In other words. Kim et al. (Kim et al.’s findings that “the real question about age differences in brain localization is whether it implies anything about behavior or about critical periods. and the findings Kim et al. This implies that even if there are differences. Werker & Tees. similar or identical cortical regions served both L1 and L2 within Wernicke’s area (where speech perception occurs).” At a bare minimum. Weber-Fox and Neville (1992. Weber-Fox and Neville demonstrated that when learners responded to semantic anomalies. with good training and sufficient exposure) show brain activation patterns equivalent to those of the early bilinguals. reported simply reflect the fact that the late bilinguals studied were less proficient in the target language than the early bilinguals (which. there was no separation of activity based on the age of language acquisition. on average. their brain responses also varied as a function of age 4 On the other hand. 1984) showing that infants limit the phoneme distinctions they hear to those that are present in their environmental languages by about 1 year of age.g.area of the brain responsible for speech production) corresponding to their L1 and L2. They further argued that it is possible that representations of languages in Broca’s area that are developed by exposure early in life are not subsequently modified. there is no strong evidence that the localization of the processing of any of the experimental tasks in a particular part of the brain was associated with better processing. it is entirely possible that adult and child learners localize their learning differently without showing different levels of learning. When asked to read and translate a list of words from their L1 into their L2 while they were tapping with their fingers. Like the results reported by Kim et al. First. and the effect was most prominent in the older age group. Wuillemin and Richardson examined the relation between degree of lateralization of the two languages in bilinguals’ brains and their L2 proficiency. 1999) fail to relate differences in brain activation patterns to differences in target language proficiency and thus are essentially irrelevant to any claim concerning a critical period. Once again. 1996. both groups showed similarly lateralized. 1991) compared subjects who were first exposed to their L2 before age 6 with those exposed to it after that age. it seems that any difference in proficiency in an L1 or L2 cannot be attributed to the different localization of the two languages in a bilingual brain. language-specific interference patterns. Another study (Furtado & Webster. from early childhood through the end of adolescence. those reported by Weber-Fox and Neville (1992.at L2 learning. The results showed that the younger learners displayed a significant left hemisphere advantage for processing words in the L1 and L2. Alternately. the brain response typical of younger L2 learners was considerably altered in subjects who had first been exposed to L2 after the age of 11. All of these studies are subject to two possible misattributions. there was no relationship between proficiency in the L2 and right hemisphere involvement. or alternately show similar localization but different learning outcomes. Confirming this view. Their subjects learned English at various ages. When subjects were presented with sentences containing grammatical anomalies. However. (1997). it is entirely possible that the presumption that any type of processing has an optimal localization in the brain is correct. whereas in older learners there was an increase of right hemisphere involvement in the processing of second or subsequent languages. Wuillemin and Richardson (1994) have shown that the different localization of L1 and L2 cannot account for poorer knowledge of one of the languages. who may not even be aware that the sentences are ungrammatical. Furthermore. the type of grammatical anomaly was related to the parameters of the age change. The different patterns of language processing in adult brains reported by Weber-Fox and Neville (1996) might simply mean that adults are better able to attend to grammatical anomalies than are children. but that the adult learners assessed in these studies were poorly selected and do not THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 17 . with the response to some grammatical anomalies suggesting that age 4 constituted the end of a sensitive period and the response to others suggesting age 11. However. noting that all younger learners. the loss of plasticity in the brain is cited as an important factor in explaining the existence of the critical period for language acquisition (Jacobs. but only some adults.” Pulvermuller and Schumann (1994) agree that even if plasticity were related to learning. than high-proficiency speakers will. 1988). First. 18 TESOL QUARTERLY . it “results in reduced neural plasticity and. Although localization has been the most frequently researched brain correlate of age of acquisition. p. In fact. will be highly motivated to learn an L2. As we shall see. The critical study yet to be undertaken would compare the brain activation patterns of child and adult learners who have achieved equivalent levels of proficiency in the target language. Researchers in neuroscience have admitted that the exact connection between learning and the state of the neural network is unknown. Still. another line of research in the field of neurobiology has focused on the process of myelination as a factor in limiting plasticity and thus perhaps determining the critical period. they conclude by suggesting that motivation plays a determining role in the success of SLA. it could only account for the better performance of younger learners when they are viewed as a group and would not explain the great variation in ultimate achievement in the L2 among older learners. in difficulty in learning” (Pulvermuller & Schumann. 1994. Yet researchers and nonspecialists alike have mistakenly assumed that this somehow implies that all adults are incapable of mastering an L2. Myelination refers to the covering of neural axons with myelin. motivation is not an insignificant factor in language learning. As myelination slows. it is commonly believed that children outperform adults due to greater brain “flexibility. 719). Numerous studies and abundant anecdotal evidence have shown that many adults do have significant problems in learning another language. though its relation to brain plasticity is tenuous to say the least. 1988).represent highly proficient adult bilinguals. consequently. It seems obvious that lowproficiency speakers of an L2 will process it differently. as the authors are unable to determine exactly how plasticity might influence learning. MISEMPHASIS Perhaps the most common error that has led to the widespread belief in a critical period in L2 learning is that of placing an enormous emphasis on unsuccessful adult L2 learners and ignoring the older learners who achieve nativelike L2 proficiency. Indeed. adults are not a homogeneous group of linguistically incompetent creatures. and likely with different brain localization parameters. a process that occurs after birth and that allows for more efficient transport of neural impulses (Jacobs. although the average performance of a group of near-native speakers of French was below that of native speakers. 1998. Oyama. Krashen. A recent study by Johnson. 1972). that adults’ L2 skills eventually fossilize. 1992. 1987. 1993. van Summeren. have shown that whereas younger learners tend to perform fairly similarly to one another. both for and against the idea of a critical period. Seliger et al. Planken. 1976. are capable of mastering an L2. Shim. 1989. White & Genesee. albeit not the majority. & Schils. 1982. In his discussion. plateauing at some point prior to reaching native proficiency (see Selinker. only very few of the studies (Birdsong. & Ladefoged. Singleton. Most researchers have provided only average scores for each age group and have paid little or no attention to the adults who performed at the native or near-native level. In a more in-depth study. Newport. Rarely. 1982. 1997. Most of the studies designed to examine the foreign accent of L2 learners have used judges who are adult native speakers of the language in question.many studies. Birdsong pointed out that it is important to study these most advanced L2 learners in order to understand the factors that contribute to an adult’s success in an L2. older learners show great variation in their proficiency (Asher & Garcia. 1992. reported age differences but made no mention of the degree of variation among the older learners tested. and Medin (1996).. 1995. 1993) have reported details on the individual performances of their older subjects. yet the study actually contained a few examples of adolescent and adult learners who outperformed some of the early learners both in speed of language processing and in the number of correct responses in the L2 (see Table 3). Problems in Testing Successful adult L2 learners may go undetected due to problematic testing conditions. Unfortunately. Johnson & Newport. 1987. by Shim (1993). have researchers clearly established either the exact margins of what is considered a standard accent in the target language or the degree of variability among native speakers. for example. THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 19 . Birdsong (1992) made a significant contribution when he showed that. Shim. Birdsong also questioned another long-standing belief. Shenkman. Bongaerts. For example. Riney & Flege. the near-native-speaker group did include adults who performed well above some of the native subjects. many adults have been evaluated as having “poor” or nonnative accents. Yet these studies have often ignored the fact that native speakers have accents that themselves vary from the standard. Coppieters. 1978. however. Seliger. Coppieters. 1969. 1996). Clearly some adults. Birdsong. Another. also concluded that older learners are less proficient than younger learners. (1997) Bongaerts et al.20 TESOL QUARTERLY 35–40 (average) Adults 19–52 Birdsong (1992) Bongaerts et al. Study tested few tasks but highlighted possible adult L2 proficiency.” Some learners pronounced as well as natives. Major findings Authors’ interpretation of results as support for critical period hypothesis TABLE 3 Summary of Studies Discussed Under “Misemphasis” First 6 hours of training involved only listening. need to establish “standard accent. age on arrival in L2 country affected some grammar tasks. Few details on good L2 learners are given. No No No difference was found between early and late L2 learners (Chinese). Special phonetic training improved pronunciation. Comments . Yes Young subjects and those who resided longer in L2 country had the best pronunciation. Some learners pronounced better than natives. (1997) Adults Adults who were either early (<15 on arrival) or late (>15 on arrival) L2 learners Bialystok & Miller (in press) ChampagneMuzar et al. younger learners performed better than older (Spanish). no spontaneous speech. (1993) 7–19 Age of subjects Asher & Garcia (1969) Study No No No Some L2 learners performed as well as natives. Authors specifically studied good L2 learners. Study involved small amount of oral data. Age influenced proficiency level achieved through all ages rather than defining a critical period. perhaps motivation or type of L2 exposure played a role. beliefs about self. Written version of Johnson & Newport (1989) found weaker correlation found between age and proficiency. Important variables were cognitive aptitude. . foreign accents grew stronger and grammaticality judgment decreased. Study did not focus on adults’ greater improvement between tests. Older learners improved on retest. Study implies effect of L1 use on L2 but did not study L1 use or proficiency. University age Tremblay. and education. Study was small (n = 2). (in press) No All bilinguals had at least slight accent in L2. L2 achievement correlated most strongly with factors such as anxiety about language learning and self-confidence. (1997) No Many factors were shown to influence L2 proficiency more than age did. 2. 39 (average) Ehrman & Oxford (1995) No Natives and near-natives showed differences in grammar performance. confirming Johnson & Newport (1989). length of residence at least 5 years Adults Adults Ioup et al. late arrivals maintained L1. Authors did not study age. Effect of age on arrival disappeared when variables confounding with age were controlled for. Gardner. Performance of near-natives varied greatly. (1996) Adults 1–23 on arrival Flege et al. Adults Coppieters (1987) L2 oral proficiency was worse than native but improved between tests. judges of L2 accent did not always agree. (1994) Jia & Aaronson (1998) Johnson (1992) Johnson et al.THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 21 Some No No No Yes Yes With increased age on arrival. sample was small (n = 10). & Masgoret (1997) 21–23 1–38 on arrival.6–9.6 on arrival Flege et al. Younger arrivals switched to L2. Adults achieved native proficiency in grammar and pronunciation. L1 proficiency plays a role in L2 learning. reading skills. language-processing speed and error rate decreased with increase of age of onset of L2. Older subjects believe they have stronger L2 accents. No research was done into environment of young learners. Continued Summary of Studies Discussed Under “Misemphasis” Study reported only mean scores for different ages and did not emphasize observed individual differences. Younger learners had better L2 comprehension. Training involved 12-hour silent period (listening. no speaking). Younger learners had better pronunciation regardless of length of exposure. Native L2 pronunciation was achieved after special training. Authors did not study age. Authors studied only phonology. L2 exposure affects L2 pronunciation.22 TESOL QUARTERLY Adults 14–37 Adults <9 to >16 Oyama (1976) Oyama (1978) Riney & Flege (1998) Seliger et al. those with strong L2 accents were said to have more L1-speaking friends. adolescent (9–17). some adults do as well as natives. (1982) Adults who were early (3–8). regardless of length of exposure. Study highlights learning environment. Major findings Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Authors’ interpretation of results as support for critical period hypothesis TABLE 3. Factors such as willingness to communicate and attitudes toward target culture for L2 achievement are important. In self-reported study. or late (20–30) L2 learners Adults Neufeld (1979) Shim (1993) Adults Age of subjects MacIntyre & Charos (1996) Study Proposed a critical period before age 3. Comments . young learners (1–5) achieved near-native L2 pronunciation. deviation from native pronunciation resulted from interactions between L1 and L2. Most subjects were more proficient in either their L1 or their L2. Most young learners become proficient in L2. Older learners showed greater variation in proficiency. as do almost one third of older learners. (1999) Language use affects both L1 and L2. older learners (12–23) achieved native L2 pronunciation. Singleton (1995) Adults 16–66. . Access to universal grammar did not decline with age. average 29 Adults who were 1–23 on arrival White & Genesee (1996) Yeni-Komshian et al.THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 23 No No Some Performance on vocabulary acquisition tasks showed no major difference relating to age. authors did not study effect of L1. However. replicating the older learners’ better performance on the written test. 1997. but in written form. previously mentioned. in which the relationship between spelling and pronunciation can be rather complex. Johnson presented the same test to her subjects. Thus. in a follow-up study..As a result. although the instances of errors in the oral and written conditions were equal. judgments are themselves influenced by the generally held belief that adults cannot and children can achieve nativelike pronunciation. native speakers’ perception of a foreigner’s accent may be influenced by the amount of background information they are given about the L2 learner. Bongaerts et al. In addition.. Seliger et al. The Role of Environment Even with proper testing. 1997). not in linguistic capabilities (Bialystok & Hakuta. Studies of pronunciation that elicited spontaneous speech from their subjects have tended to report better performance by older learners than studies that used only reading-aloud and imitation tasks (Asher & Garcia. whereas in the original study subjects had judged the grammaticality of sentences heard orally. Similarly. a nonnative speaker could be perceived as native in some parts of the host country and as foreign in others. many older learners reveal considerable difficulties in SLA. 1999). 1982). Results on the written task showed fewer and less severe age-related effects on proficiency in the L2. 1969. thus confirming Bialystok and Hakuta’s (1994) suggestion that such differences often reflect a general decline with age in auditory processing and attention.. they are often unfamiliar with the pronunciation of words they are asked to read. many of 24 TESOL QUARTERLY . different judges have been shown to rate the same L2 speaker quite differently (Bongaerts et al. one must avoid extrapolating to the conclusion that adults have problems because they are adults. They even found that native-speaking control subjects responded faster to written stimuli. However. Still another example of the problems in testing is found in Johnson’s (1992) follow-up to Johnson and Newport’s (1989) study. Bialystok and Miller (in press) found a significant effect of the modality of test presentation. The truth is that myriad factors are involved in successful L2 learning. These results could be explained by the fact that the learners’ pronunciation of spontaneous speech in the L2 may have been flawless due to their familiarity with the words and phrases they chose to use. This can be a particular problem for languages such as English (and French). given that adults usually have literacy skills that are greatly advanced over their knowledge of the target language from direct exposure. Lately. This finding. their results indicated that even the youngest learners (those who arrived before age 11) were rated as having pronunciation proficiency significantly different from that of monolinguals in both Korean and English. He demonstrated that adult L2 learners could attain nativelike pronunciation in the target language after experiencing a silent period during which they were asked to listen to L2 speech without speaking it (conditions replicating the learning situation of young children). including the youngest learners. & Nozawa. researchers have extended their attention to age effects on both the L1 and the L2 of bilinguals. & Bourdages (1993) showed that the amount of phonological training before testing had a significant positive effect on the pronunciation of a group of university students who were at the beginning level of French as an L2. had L2 pronunciation ratings indistinguishable from those of monolingual English speakers. This suggests that prepubescent children may attain high levels of proficiency in their L2 only at the expense of their L1 and that older learners tend to retain nativelike proficiency in the L1 at the expense of their L2. Notable among these is the environment in which the language is learned. Yeni-Komshian et al. learners who live in a foreign country but interact primarily with speakers of their native language tend to have stronger accents than those who use their L1 less often (Flege. in fact. THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 25 . confirms the results of a series of earlier studies by Neufeld (1979). Although their results showed a general decrease in L2 pronunciation with age. only those who depart from their L1 environment after age 8 consistently retain a nativelike pronunciation in their L1. A recent study by Riney and Flege (1998) shows that living in an environment where the target language is the standard has a positive effect on older L2 learners’ global pronunciation. 1997). The pronunciation of the group of students who spent most of the time between the two tests in English-speaking countries improved significantly more than that of the students who remained in Japan. A study by Champagne-Muzar. Moreover. Yeni-Komshian. Similarly. who had arrived in the United States before age 5. The critical period hypothesis would predict that learning any language prior to the termination of that period would result in proficiency undistinguishable from that of monolinguals. Frieda. Flege. none of their age groups. and Liu (1999) studied the level of perceived pronunciation proficiency in the L1 and L2 of Korean-English bilinguals. Schneiderman. concluded that learners who live in an L2 environment do not automatically achieve nativelike pronunciation in the L1.which may be correlated with age but have nothing to do with changes in the brain. The authors observed a group of Japanese university students who were initially tested at the beginning of their first year in college and then were retested 42 months later. The Role of Motivation Ioup. both were married to native speakers of Arabic and lived in Egypt. However. the authors claim that changes in how the L1 and L2 phonological systems interact as the L1 system develops better explain the older learners’ poorer performance on the phonological test. Jia and Aaronson (1998). studying Chinese immigrants to the United States. Jia and Aaronson also reported a stronger correlation between age on arrival and maintenance of exposure to Chinese than between age on arrival and proficiency in English. and Liu (in press) also found a significant effect for age on arrival on their subjects’ performance on phonological and morphosyntactic tests. showed that the richness of the English language environment correlated negatively with the richness of the Chinese language environment available to the learners. and how often one speaks the L1” (p. thus retarding their own L2 exposure and acquisition. and literacy experiences in Chinese more effectively). Obviously. Both women had first been exposed to Arabic in their early 20s. whereas younger learners are more likely to switch to dominance or even monolingualism in the L2. and Moselle (1994) examined the acquisition process of two native speakers of English who had achieved nativelike proficiency in Arabic. Their 26 TESOL QUARTERLY . Boustagui. In another study. 125). They explain the age effects on the morphosyntactic measures as a result of variation in the education and language use of their subjects. Flege (1999) has recently explained that the general decline in L2 pronunciation with age does not result from a loss of ability to pronounce but is “a function of how well one pronounces the L1. the older arrivals had access to relatively richer Chinese environments (because they could choose their own friends and seek out films. Tigi. and the younger arrivals all reported preferring to talk and read in English by the end of 1 year in the United States. Jia and Aaronson’s study raises an issue often ignored in studies of age differences in SLA— that older learners are more likely to maintain their L1 at a high level. Flege. their ability to recognize accents in the L2. These women were judged to have achieved native or near-native proficiency in their L2 based on the quality of their speech production. and both had a strong desire to master the new language. TV.Older immigrants are more likely to structure heavily L1 environments for themselves. factors they found to be highly correlated with age on arrival. YeniKomshian. suggesting that even some older learners with relatively impoverished English learning environments acquired reasonable proficiency in English. and their knowledge of syntactic rules for which they had not received explicit feedback. Another study by MacIntyre and Charos (1996) revealed the importance of factors such as self-efficacy and willingness to communicate. Finally. and support from the environments in which they find themselves to expect high levels of success. But most adult learners fail to engage in the task with sufficient motivation. in fact.5 CONCLUSION The misconception that adults cannot master foreign languages is as widespread as it is erroneous. Thus. connections between brain functioning and language behavior will no doubt in time be confirmed. with less speed and more effort than adolescents or adults. The second fallacy is misattribution of conclusions about language proficiency to facts about the brain. Ehrman and Oxford (1995) identified a number of factors. Hard data make it clear that children learn new languages slowly and effortfully—in fact. and self-confidence) are strongly correlated with L2 proficiency. commitment of time or energy. They found. however. motivation. end up with lower-than-nativelike levels of proficiency. published findings with Tremblay and Masgoret in 1997 highlighting the importance of over 30 motivational variables. and their conscious attention to grammatical form. We argue in this article that this misunderstanding rests on three fallacies associated with the uncritical acceptance of a notion of a critical period for SLA. their exposure to a naturalistic environment. a number of which (notably language anxiety. that may affect the success of adults in achieving proficiency in speaking and reading an L2. researchers and laypersons alike have been misled by a misemphasis on the average attainment of 5 For a summary of motivational research. see Oxford (1996). the common fallacy of reasoning from frequent failure to the impossibility of success has dogged L2 research. including age. that variables such as cognitive aptitude and beliefs about oneself were more strongly correlated with success of L2 learning than was age. A good deal of research in motivation and learning strategies sheds light on adult SLA. Most adult learners of an L2 do. Gardner.success in L2 learning was attributed to their high degree of motivation to learn the language. who has done extensive research on motivation. The first fallacy is misinterpretation of observations of child and adult learners. which might suggest that children are fast and efficient at picking up L2s. but their exact nature cannot even be guessed from the data currently available on brain functions in early versus late bilinguals. THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 27 . but this research has rarely been connected to work on the critical period. Typically. 1997). We hope this review of thinking about the critical period for L2 learning will dispel the persistent myths that children learn more quickly than adults and that adults are incapable of achieving nativelike L2 proficiency. Foreign Language Teaching in the Early Grades This work should be of some interest to schools and school districts contemplating the introduction of foreign language teaching in the early grades to satisfy desires to benefit from the hypothesized critical period.the adult learner. they need several years of continued instruction to achieve even modest proficiency. Research has shown that in formal settings early L2 instruction does not prove advantageous unless followed by well-designed foreign language instruction building on previous learning (Singleton. informative L2 environments. psychological. We see the work reviewed in this article as relevant to three crucial areas of language policy and teaching practice. This misemphasis has distracted researchers from focusing on the truly informative cases: successful adults who invest sufficient time and attention in SLA and who benefit from high motivation and from supportive. the early elementary foreign language course will be able to cover only half as much material in a year as the middle school course. not because of any critical period that limits the possibility of language learning by adults. which in turn will progress much more slowly than the secondary or university course. and other factors that can affect L2 proficiency. Children who study a foreign language for only a year or two in elementary school show no long-term effects. well-planned. but primarily because it is associated with social. IMPLICATIONS Age does influence language learning. but administrators and parents should not proceed on the assumption that only early foreign language teaching will be effective. We certainly would not argue against the value of excellent foreign language instruction for learners of any age. 1992). educational. and they need furthermore to be realistic about what can be expected from younger learners (McLaughlin. Investment in elementary foreign language instruction may well be worth it. if the early learning opportunities are built upon with consistent. 28 TESOL QUARTERLY . but only if the teachers are themselves native or nativelike speakers and well trained in the needs of younger learners. 1989). However. Hart. Lapkin. can become nativelike speakers if their instructional environments are well structured and motivating (Singleton. 1991). THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 29 . the robust evidence that children in late-exit bilingual programs do better than those in early-exit programs (Ramírez. science. an observation that further supports our and Singleton’s (1997) regard for the importance of continued L2 education. children who start learning English after the early elementary years. Bilingual Education The argument presented here would also suggest that the widely declaimed “failure” of bilingual education has nothing to do with the postponement of English instruction for children attending bilingual classes.nor late-immersion students have typically emerged with nativelike skills in the L2. there are no good studies showing that foreign language instruction is worth more than additional time invested in math. 1995). directly contradicts the predictions of the critical period hypothesis. Yuen. even as late as during high school. 1987). Collier (1992) interpreted studies of bilingual children in the early grades as indicating that L1 instruction is more important than L2 instruction for ultimate literacy and academic achievement in the L2. & Swain. Furthermore. Decisions to introduce foreign language instruction in the elementary grades should be weighed against the costs to other components of the school curriculum. with or without bilingual instruction. schools in later grades show better academic performance than those who start in kindergarten (Collier. First. as well as the evidence that children who arrive as immigrants in U. In fact. & Pasta. music. Ramey. much evidence would suggest that access to and acquisition of English for immigrants to the United States begins quite early. and late-immersion students have achieved results similar to those of early-immersion students on literacy-based tests (Turnbull. as far as we know.S. neither early.ongoing instruction in the higher grades. art. Older immersion learners have had as much success as younger learners in shorter time periods (Swain & Lapkin. for example. Third. it has become obvious that many immersion programs violate the principles we would like to see instantiated in an optimal L2 learning environment—access to rich input from many native speakers. or even basic L1 literacy instruction. and if the learners are given some opportunities for authentic communicative experiences in the target language. Second. 1998). . (1992). Bialystok. He is completing a doctorate on media discourse and the use of newspapers in the foreign language classroom. J. 162–181).L2 Teaching Finally. E. such teachers are justified in holding high expectations for their students and can give their motivated students research-based information about how to improve their own chances for learning to a high level. 30 TESOL QUARTERLY . New York: Basic Books. D. & Garcia. motivation. She is currently interested in examining the factors that contribute to the successful attainment of foreign language proficiency by some adult learners. K. THE AUTHORS Stefka H. Marinova-Todd is a doctoral student at the Harvard Graduate School of Education whose research has focused on the existence of the critical period for language learning. B. D. Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 68. Modern Language Journal. Confounded age: Linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS During the preparation of this article. REFERENCES Asher. 53.. Catherine E. Language. She has conducted research on the language and literacy acquisition of L1 and L2 learners in Europe and North America. Bradford Marshall has been teaching French and English as foreign languages for more than 13 years to university students and adults in the United States and France. & Hakuta.. The optimal age to learn a foreign language. In D. & Hakuta. NJ: Erlbaum. they can do much to influence a student’s learning strategies. R. Snow is a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Snow. In other words: The science and psychology of secondlanguage acquisition.. E. Birdsong (Ed. The problem of age in second-language acquisition: Influences from language. E. Thus. & Miller. for even though teachers can do little to “improve” a student’s age. (1994). 344–351. Mahwah. and learning environment. structure and task. (in press). Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. In Bilingualism: Language and cognition. the work we have reviewed spells good news for ESL and other foreign language teachers of older students. Birdsong. Bialystok. K. Bialystok.). 706–755. (1969). the first two authors were supported by a Spencer Mentor Grant to Catherine E. (1999). Yeni-Komshian. Schneiderman. Boustagui. S. Age and rate of acquisition of a second language for academic purposes. 101–131). (1991). Collier. 448–461. In D. & Moselle. Coppieters. Frieda. (1999). Canadian Journal of Psychology. Modern Language Journal. Cambridge. W. G. Johnson. V. (1995). Critical period effects in second language acquisition: The effect THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 31 . (1987). Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. 145–168. 344–362. Birdsong (Ed. 63. M. J. Mahwah. E. (1997). Language.). Studies in Second Language Acquisition. & Webster.. Birdsong (Ed. G.Birdsong.. C. NJ: Erlbaum. Danesi. Furtado.. B. S. A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data on academic achievement. P. Second language accent: The role of the pedagogical environment. J. Genesee. (1998. P. Mahwah.. Age of learning and second language speech. The critical period hypothesis: Where are we now? In A. Jacobs. Curtiss.. (1993). MA: Newbury House.). R. & Liu. (1994). In M.. Curtiss. 16. 143–160. MA. T. The Modern Language Journal. Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. 45. 187–209. Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum. Gardner. 21. (1987). Concurrent language and motor performance in bilinguals: A test of the age of acquisition hypothesis. 31.). Interaction in human development (pp. Towards a full model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. Neurobiological differentiation of primary and secondary language acquisition. The independence and task-specificity of language... F. Planken. (1999). 19. E. 169–186. Tremblay. Kroll (Eds. Bornstein & J. In D. Age constraints on second-language acquisition. R. M. J. J. Boston.” New York: Academic Press. A. & Schils. Collier. Flege. Flege. van Summeren. 447–465. Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 79.. 19–51). M. Ioup. B. 227–249. Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. R. M. Age differences in second language acquisition: The dominant language switch and maintenance hypothesis. Age and ultimate attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language.. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development. J. F. D. Ehrman. (1997).). B. Journal of Memory and Language. 67–89. 105–137). (1994). J. Journal of Phonetics. 81. NJ: Erlbaum. Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. (1997). TESOL Quarterly. Bruner (Eds. G. Tigi.. Lenguas Modernas. V. & Bourdages.. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. The neuroscientific perspective in second language acquisition research: A critical synopsis. Introduction: Whys and why nots of the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. 25. Mahwah. H. 73–98. Champagne-Muzar. Competence differences between native and near native speakers.. Flege. 1–22). Bongaerts. (1987). I... Jia. de Groot & J.-M. E. November). 544–573. & Oxford.. C. F. B. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. & Nozawa. Genie: A psycholinguistic study of a modern day “wild-child. (1992). S. D. E. P. & Wang. 303–338. International Review of Applied Linguistics. C. 16. (1989). NJ: Erlbaum.. S. Bilingual Research Journal.. Amount of native language (L1) use affects the pronunciation of an L2. & Aaronson. W. & Masgoret. Harley. (1992). 21. (1977). (in press). E. (1988). (1997). T. Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: A case of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment. 10. M. Kim. Journal of Memory and Language. Personality. P. (1976). Kuhl. K. Oxford. (1984). J. Johnson. (1990). S. Krashen. & Long. Long. Yuen. K. 251–285. Oyama. Cognitive Psychology. 388. Krashen. Journal of Language and Social Psychology.. (1985). 261–285. N. College Park. (1989). W. S. 63–74. 681–734. (1992. MD: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. E. J. (1978). (1996). attitudes and affect as predictors of second language communication. The sensitive period and comprehension of speech. Neurobiological mechanisms of language acquisition. Language Learning. & Roberts. (1996). 39. 4. Johnson. Hillsdale. J. rate. E. L. Maturational constraints on language development. Working Papers on Bilingualism. R. Age. S. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. A sensitive period in the acquisition of a non-native phonological system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. (1979).. C. Nelson. Larsen-Freeman.. 42. Effects of imitative and conversational recasting treatment on the acquisition of grammar in children with specific language impairment and younger languagenormal children.. (1996). (1996). J.of written versus auditory materials on the assessment of grammatical competence.. (1959). (1997). 335–352. R. 3–26. 812–818. (1994). 60–99.. S.. 155–196. Lenneberg. Second-language acquisition in childhood: Vol. Ramírez. Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages.. Nature. early-exit and late-exit 32 TESOL QUARTERLY . F. Lamendella.. Shenkman. Camarata. Ramey.. E. 1–17. New York: Wiley. D. Princeton. Lateralization. M.. S.. Language Learning. 5. Language Learning. Myths and misconceptions about second language learning: What every teacher needs to unlearn (ERIC Digest EDO-FL-91-10). Newport.. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. NJ: Erlbaum. 227–241. Penfield. 573–582. Indeterminacy in the grammar of adult language learners. NJ: Princeton University Press. McLaughlin. MacIntyre. Preschool children. NJ: Erlbaum. Language Learning. Long. & Medin. Welsh. Second-language acquisition in childhood: Vol. McLaughlin. M. 217–248. E. Hillsdale. L. & Schumann. J. TESOL Quarterly. and eventual attainment in second language acquisition. K. Pulvermuller. Oyama. (1973). Current Opinions in Neurobiology. General principles of neurofunctional organization and their manifestations in primary and non-primary language acquisition. P. 23. & Charos. & Camarata. 21. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research.. School-age children. Speech and brain-mechanisms. & Scarcella.. (1967). December). M. P. (1994). Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century (Technical Report 11). Lee. & Pasta.. London: Longman. J. 171–174. J. 44. An introduction to second language acquisition research. (1991). B. McLaughlin. Biological foundations of language. R. 35. D. Relkin. Final report: National longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy. M. K.. D. 850–859.. D. 15. 13. & Newport. Language Learning. D. M. (1991). 2. S. B.. D. G. (1977). Learning and representation in speech and language. 27.. Butkovsky. 29. L. K. 12. & Hirsh. language learning and the critical period: Some new evidence. 16. K. B. Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of the maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. 1. (1979). Towards a theory of language learning ability. Neufeld. Maturational constraints in the acquisition of second languages. 213–243. The Economist. French second language education in Canada: Empirical studies (pp. Mahwah.. 7. p. Snow. Rivera. 357–365. F. Second language in primary school: The age dimension. M. Languages of the brain. (1998. E. (1977). (1998. D. Time on task and immersion graduates’ French proficiency. 10. J. & M. Language and Speech. MA: Newbury House. 31–55). & Neville. H. 15. R. L. Effecto de la edad de inicio de aprendizaje de la lengua extranjera (inglés) y cantidad de exposición a la LE en la percepción de las fonemas del inglés por hablantes de español y catalán [Effect of age at starting to learn English as a foreign language and amount of exposure on perception of English phonemes for speakers of Spanish and Catalan]. May). PA: Multilingual Matters. C. 8. 335. Long (Eds.. Canada: University of Toronto Press. NJ: Erlbaum. (1998). Seliger. C. 43–64. September). 155–166. 20. (1992). International Review of Applied Linguistics. E.. M. Toronto. 6.). swimming instructor. (1999). 49–63. THREE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT AGE AND L2 LEARNING 33 . Swain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. H. Singleton. Weber-Fox. C. R. & Hoefnagel-Höhle. & Neville. (1984). Weber-Fox. Spain. 49. 1. C. 23–38). & Ladefoged. Sensitive periods for second language acquisition: A reaction-time study of Korean-English bilinguals. 231–256. D. Age differences in pronunciation of foreign sounds. Weber-Fox. Functional neural subsystems are differentially affected by delays in second language immersion: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilinguals.transitional bilingual educational programs for language minority children (Vols. Second language learners’ contributions to our understanding of languages of the brain. M.. 150–159. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. C. CA: Aguirre International.. Rowley.. Bristol. In S.. Ideal. The Irish Yearbook of Applied Linguistics. Birdsong (Ed. 4). 73. & Neville. Changes over time in global foreign accent and liquid identifiability and accuracy. & Lapkin. Werker. Krashen. Kosslyn (Eds.). Paper presented at Il Encuentro Internacional sobre Adquisición de las Lenguas del Estado. In A.. C. Interlanguage. The age factor in second language acquisition (pp. (1996). J.). In D. Canadian immersion and adult second language teaching: What’s the connection? Modern Language Journal.). Maturational constraints on cerebral specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. In D. Cambridge. F. Singleton & Z. 13–19). Snow. C. Selinker. (1978). 1114– 1128. & Hoefnagel-Höhle.. S. E. (1998). R. Krashen. P.. (1993). 18. (1995). Barcelona. Riney. & Swain. & Flege. Child Development. H. 1–29). & Tees. San Mateo. 20. (1989).. MA: Harvard University Press.). M. 209– 231. Ron Unz. Shim.. Singleton. Hart. Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. H. T. (1982). Scarcella. In S. Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual organization during the first year of life. Lapkin (Ed. Infant Behavior and Development. Galaburda & S. S. Lapkin. (1972). J. (in press). Turnbull.. The critical period for language acquisition: Evidence from second language learning. Introduction: A critical look at the critical hypothesis in second language acquisition research. Child-adult differences in second language acquisition (pp. (1997). M. Snow. N. 32. D. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts. Lengyel (Eds. S. F. (1996). How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Right hemisphere involvement in processing later-learned languages in multilinguals. Brain and Language. E. & Genesee.. 620–636. J. Second Language Research. H. (1994). Manuscript submitted for publication. 46. 233–265. S.. 12. G. Wuillemin. L. Yeni-Komshian. Pronunciation proficiency in the first and second languages of Korean-English bilinguals. B. 34 TESOL QUARTERLY . Flege.. & Richardson.. (1999)..White. & Liu. D. 1995. and some of these populations are more researched than others. or archetypal images of learner identity. the article suggests that images of students and of their backgrounds. In contrast. A s Nayar (1997) has pointed out. United States Based on year-long ethnographic case studies following U. immigrants in their last year of secondary school and first year in a 2-year community college. & Donato. 1999. instructional goals. 1. Contending that representation is an inevitable part of human meaning making and identity formation.. Henze. Lucas. 1996. & Queen. processes of English language learning are best documented in the elementary grade levels. The article compares representations of ESL student identity in the two educational institutions and illustrates the manifestation of these representations in class curricula and spoken and written interactions.g. Prevalent institutional images of ESL student identities were appropriated and recreated by students and educators in one context and resisted by students in another. Faltis & Wolfe.S. Georgia. this article contrasts prevalent institutional images of what it means to be an English language learner in these two educational settings.From the “Good Kids” to the “Worst”: Representations of English Language Learners Across Educational Settings LINDA HARKLAU University of Georgia Athens. K–12 education. Fu. Lucas. 34. Davidson. secondary-school-level immigrant and bilingual students may be “the most underrepresented. 1997. 1994. understudied group TESOL QUARTERLY Vol.S. experiences. The article draws on the notion of representation. 1998). and needs not only inform curriculum but also have significant consequences for students’ identities and attitudes toward classroom learning. in spite of a growing body of recent research (see. AlexanderKasparik. arguing that representation offers a means of understanding how seemingly self-evident and unchanging identities emerge in a particular social context out of ever-evolving processes of identity (re)creation. No. Mace-Matluck. In the context of U. and student needs. Harklau. 1990. the generic label ESL has been applied to a wide variety of different populations. Spring 2000 35 . e. 1991).S.S.S. and many colleges appear to confound them with international students (Gray. U. as they work to tailor instruction to students with vastly different sorts of academic and life experience in the United States and abroad (see. & Melamid. secondary schools (see. subsequently came to be characterized as underachieving and difficult students in their college ESL classes. however. society. 1997). Its initial purpose was to describe how one group of U. 1996). Department of Labor. in a postindustrial economy in which three quarters of all jobs will require some postsecondary education (U. Rolph. Losey. p. 1997). 1 I use ESOL to refer to English language teaching and learning throughout this article.-educated immigrants and bilingual students may not even be acknowledged as a special population. Moreover. and coming of age in U. As the study progressed. immigrant students negotiated the changing academic and linguistic demands of the transition from secondary to postsecondary education. 36 TESOL QUARTERLY .S. learning a new language.g. I found that the very same ESL students who had been considered “the good kids” in high school. secondary schools are discovering that getting through high school is often inadequate in itself to secure a prosperous future in their adopted country. Harklau. The lack of research on the growing population of adolescent and young adult ESL students in U. The institutional label ESOL student 1 and the meanings given to it became an increasingly salient issue. the ones praised and admired by their teachers. Reid.. high schools is to serve as a prelude for and gateway into college. e.S. high schools and colleges provided the impetus for the study described in this article.S.of students in the United States” (Faltis.S. Nonetheless. 1999.S. if ESL students at the secondary level are an underresearched population. & Siegal. and I found that the ways in which students’ identities were constructed in these two different educational institutions played a crucial role in students’ transition from high school to college. 1993. There is a significant lack of communication and articulation between secondary and postsecondary institutions in the United States. work on their transition from high school into college is virtually nonexistent. in keeping with usage where the study took place. Too little is known about how these English language learners take on the simultaneous challenges of managing high school content-area academics. ESL Intersegmental Project. increasing numbers of immigrant ESL students educated in U. students find that a major function of U. The difference between these populations is becoming abundantly clear to college ESL educators.g. e. Rather.. 2). and colleges are inconsistent in the data they collect and the policies they enact regarding ESL students who enter higher education by way of U. Atkinson.. 1998). 1997. 1995. the tendency is to accept representations such as that of ESOL students as relatively unchanging and self-evident even though. Much of this work has taken place in educational institutions. and subject to constant change. In this article.g. who have increasingly called on the construct of learner identity to understand classroom learning. 1999). Thus. 1995. as this article illustrates. 1998). this article begins from the premise that identities are locally understood and constantly remade in social relationships. Angélil-Carter. e. I argue that representations result from constant attempts to hold a heterogeneous and everevolving social world still long enough to make sense of it.. homogeneous. I highlight the role of representation in accounting for the dynamics through which vastly different images of English language learners’ backgrounds and experiences come to be embodied in the same designation of ESOL student across educational institutions. social organization. Because the processes that give rise to representations are largely out of conscious awareness.The finding that learners’ identities affected their experience in school is consistent with the work of other researchers. and counter identities imposed on them (see. it is important to account for the ubiquity of such categories and how they come to appear so stable. even though an identity label such as ESOL student may seem self-evident. Drawing on work in this vein. social practice. archetypes. Whereas identities may be multiple. e. its meanings are in fact constantly renegotiated and reshaped by particular educators and students working in specific classrooms. and interactions serve to reinforce or contest these categories. they are in fact locally shaped and continually recreated. 1996. institutions. Thesen.g. e. or even stereotypes of identity with which students are labeled. even if sociocultural categories of culture and identity are viewed as intrinsically unstable and heterogeneous and therefore problematic (see. resist. and how students accommodate. Peirce. Toohey. fragmentary. representations are temporary artifacts that serve to stabilize and homogenize images of identities. Drawing variously from critical theory. 1997. McKay & Wong. Duff & Uchida. how classroom curricula. and societies. At the same time. 1997. Thesen. 1997. Rampton. Toohey. Norton. and how such images are FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 37 . Representation is employed here to explain the dynamics through which vastly different images of English language learners’ backgrounds and experiences come to be embodied and applied to the very same individuals across educational institutions. and taken-for-granted in a given context. Representation refers here to the images. and poststructuralist approaches. exploring how schools categorize and position students with identities.. 1997.g. recent contributions have emphasized the role of sociocultural context in language teaching and learning (see. Cummins hypothesizes that the images of teachers’ roles and students’ identity manifested in classroom interactions often reflect oppressive power relations in the broader society. he also believes that these images can be altered in classroom interactions among educators and students that explicitly challenge power relations in the broader society. 38 TESOL QUARTERLY .. REPRESENTATION AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF ESOL STUDENT IDENTITY Sociologists. worker. However. tenant). Cummins (1997) has suggested that the negotiation of identity among educators and students plays a central role in achievement. 1995).g. Tollefson.. 1989). several scholars have posited that schools perpetuate prevalent societal images of immigrants and minority groups through a hidden curriculum of schooling (Auerbach.S. researchers and theorists within L2 studies have suggested that prevalent images of immigrants and linguistic minority groups are conveyed in the curriculum in North American educational settings and that such images have significant effects on the intertwined processes of student identity formation and learning.constantly re-created and resisted at the institutional level through classroom interactions among teachers and students. 1995. and historians have long contended that classrooms and educational institutions play a prominent role in the identity formation of language minority students in immigrant-receiving countries such as the United States (see. secondary school to a community college ESOL program.g. I argue that the notion of representation lends useful insight in understanding how labels given to students in classrooms and institutions have consequences for students’ classroom behavior and ultimately for students’ motivation or investment (Peirce. anthropologists. Likewise. McGroarty. whereas the dominant representation of ESOL students in their subsequent community college experience led to increasing student resistance and inimical relationships with educators. consumer. I show how the representation of what it meant to be an ESOL student in these particular students’ high school facilitated favorable classroom conditions for learning. leading subordinated social groups to feel ambivalence and insecurity in regard to cultural identity. 1985. e. Drawing on yearlong ethnographic case studies of immigrant students’ transitions from an urban U. For example. They contend that the hidden curriculum functions as a means of socializing immigrants to take on certain roles and positions in society (e. I illustrate the interplay between student and teacher agency and wider societal representations of language and ethnicity in re-creating institutional representations in each setting. 1995) in English and academic learning. Olneck. Likewise. Toohey emphasizes that it is largely through classroom practices that are “so commonplace in classrooms as to be almost invisible” (p. 1997). Toohey (1998) shows how school and classroom organization and interaction served to socialize immigrant children into the prevalent institutional and societal image of learners as individuals who independently negotiate classroom life and achievement. For example. Peirce. and locally contingent nature of identity categories that are constructed by and for learners (see. and institutional settings. Rampton. 1996). for example. Thus. The notion of representation is rooted in the premise that human beings FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 39 . hooks. Thesen. 1992. this work has emphasized the fluidity and instability of resulting identities. 1997. 77) that prevalent societal assumptions about learner identity are communicated and re-created. 1995. & Rampton. pp.. Toohey (following Mehan. 1993) concludes that classroom practices both exhibit and generate social structures. contradictory. 24–26). Weedon. commonsense categorical perceptions of identity prevalent in particular sociocultural. 1999. disjunct. Recent poststructuralist perspectives on second language acquisition (SLA) have further amplified the reciprocity of social context and individual interactions in forging learners’ identities. Rattansi. Harris. Although varying theoretical perspectives on the term exist (see Hall. 1997. several studies have documented the multiple. 1996. unitary. Leung. Angélil-Carter. Less explored in this work is why notions of identity appear to be so stable. McKay & Wong. historical. in a study of ESOL students’ experiences in mainstream elementary classrooms. and interactionally rendered processes of identify formation by English language learners. For example. 1997. Siegal. Another approach has employed learners’ experience as a means of critiquing identity categories themselves (Kubota. This article builds on poststructuralist perspectives on SLA by proposing the concept of representation as a means of accounting for how apparently unchanging and homogeneous categories of institutional and societal identity emerge from the highly unstable. 1995. 1997. e. examining notions of identity prevalent in particular social contexts and exposing their socially constructed nature and homogenizing effects. who cast classroom practices and social structure as mutually constitutive in shaping students’ identity and achievement. by representation here I mean seemingly static. In particular.The notion that dominant societal images of students’ identities are not simply mirrored in classroom processes is echoed by other researchers. 1995. conventional classroom seating arrangements reinforce the notion that learning is an individual endeavor. and self-evident in a given context in spite of their multiplicity and constant flux or why identity categories such as ESOL student remain omnipresent and seemingly indispensable even when regarded as problematic.g. and timelessness in a particular social setting. Power figures prominently in the exercise of representation because it can lend a greater sense of authority and sense of reality to some representations than to others. Because the teaching and learning of English take place amid asymmetric relations of power between teachers and students in the classroom and between majority and minority in the broader society. identities such as ESOL student are relational categories that are always context specific. Far from being self-evident. because individuals also have agency. However. commonsense. and in constant flux. or appropriate (Fairclough. Representations are thus artifacts of meaningmaking processes that are inherently retrospective—they look backward. It is through representation that teachers and students create images or archetypes of ESOL students that have the effect of fixing meaning. 1997). and 40 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1979). students and educators constantly appropriate. attempting to capture ephemeral identities—and conservative—they attempt to homogenize and preserve identities that are always multiple and always changing (Rattansi. rather. making these views seem self-evident and unchanging—just the way ESOL students are—while limiting recognition of other views of students or of heterogeneity among them. In this fashion.make meaning through a process of sorting perception and experience into relational categories. 1995). Prevalent institutional representations promote certain views of learner identity. these identities embody myriad meanings depending on contextual factors. they exert influence on the categories through which individuals make sense of their social worlds and thus on how individual teachers and students construe the category of English language learner within particular institutions and classrooms. the view of representation forwarded here suggests that institutional images of ESOL students are not simply handed down monolithically and deterministically. or discourses. educators are more able than their students to impose their perspectives and viewpoints as commonsense. 1995). I argue that these sorts of archetypes or representations of ESOL learner identity inevitably exist in all institutional settings (and in all classrooms) in which students are educated. lending fleeting identities the sense of normalcy. reshape. Identities—one’s own and others’—in this view are relational categories that are embedded in and inextricable from the diffuse yet powerful influence of broader social forces. Because they are constantly re-created and reshaped in particularistic processes of social interaction. Thus. such as whether English is the socially dominant language (Nayar. in any given setting (Foucault. multiple. Discourses do not impose meaning deterministically or monolithically but rather direct and limit what may be seen as normal. common sense. educators’ representations of ESOL student identity are more likely to be reflected and reproduced in broader institutional discourses than their students’ are. 2 Initial fieldwork in the study took place at an ethnically diverse urban high school (approximately 60% Black. institutional. although some also came from Haiti. Like Thesen (1997). students. College data from a case study student who attended a different college are not included in this analysis. one an urban secondary school and the other a community college. I show how the seemingly self-evident identities of ESOL students in each setting were in fact socially constructed and rendered static through a process of representation. 30% White. Students participating in the study were enrolled in a science and technology magnet program at the school that was generally regarded as one of the district’s best and most competitive. Of these. and 10% Latino and Asian American students). I show how representations have direct effects on classroom behavior and achievement in both settings. By contrasting the classroom experiences of three immigrants in two U. Moreover. The notion of representation thus allows a means to account for the presence of seemingly stable social categories of identity in a manner that is neither a priori nor deterministic. I show how such archetypes can be so implicitly assumed and normalized that their locally situated and socially constructed nature becomes evident only in crossing from one educational setting to another.S. 2 The study began with five case studies. educational contexts. and broader curricular. and societal forces in simultaneously re-creating and resisting prevalent representations of what it means to be an ESOL student. In this article. I utilize the transition from secondary to postsecondary education as a means of illuminating identity in movement and the changing identity categories encountered when crossing institutional settings. students from Southeast Asia predominated. keeping students engaged in language and academic learning in high school and turning them away in the community college. Students receiving ESOL instruction represented 45 of the school’s approximately 950 students. I describe the mutual roles of educators. METHOD This article is based on three year-long ethnographic case studies of language minority students.contest and resist them even as they re-create them in the course of classroom interaction. FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 41 . I illustrate the dynamic process through which representations of learner status are recreated and resisted across two institutional settings and argue that predominant institutional representations of what an ESOL student is have direct and material consequences for learning paths. One student eventually decided not to enroll in college. Taiwan.S. Merriam. China. the students were asked to recount recent class activities and assignments in each of their classes. and students’ comments in previous interviews. In addition. Data Collection Tape-recorded interviews 30–50 minutes long were conducted with each case study participant at the school at 2. and Penny. two 50-minute interviews were conducted with the students’ two English teachers.Ukraine. Puerto Rico. and written documents—formed the basis of data collection and analysis (Merriam. I formally interviewed the students’ ESOL teacher twice for over an hour regarding the case study students and language minority students’ experience at the school. Qualitative case studies provide a particularly effective means of organizing inquiry into the experiences of learners who traverse multiple classroom settings with multiple instructors. 1997).to 4-week intervals in January–June. teacher interviews. in which theories of culture and inquiry practices derived from anthropology inform case study methodology (regarding qualitative case study methodology. In addition to their classroom teachers. I also kept in contact with the teachers informally as the semester progressed to talk about the students and emerging data themes. three main sources—interviews. 1995. The three participants (Aeyfer. This study adopts an ethnographic perspective (Green & Bloome. during the students’ senior year of high school. Before the student interviews began. high school and college students described here. TESOL QUARTERLY . At each interview. one jointly and another separately. Claudia. and these interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed. the school’s writing resource teacher and 3 42 All names are pseudonyms. see Davis. As is typical in qualitative case study research. Turkey. 137). Each of the students’ teachers was contacted by telephone or in person before the classroom observations and asked to comment specifically on the case study students’ performance in their classes and more generally on their experiences with ESOL students.3 see Table 1) were recruited from college-bound high school seniors identified by the ESOL teacher among her present and former students at the school. observation. The interviews were loosely structured. and Bosnia. such as the U. Teachers also made time in their busy schedules to speak with me before or after observed classes or at lunchtime. 1998. p. students’ work. and these interviews ranged from 10 to 50 minutes in length. 1998). I prepared follow-up interview questions as I reviewed classroom observations. educational system. Textbook chapters corresponding to material covered on the days students were observed were FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 43 . in which reading and writing are tightly integrated into classroom communication and language use (Alvermann & Moore. and field notes were recorded. Computer Applications. In all I spent 10 full school days at the school during the spring semester of the students’ senior year in high school. Written documents are a crucial data source in advanced levels of the U. ESOL 101 Writing. Pre-Calculus I. where I spent time between interviews. Economics. General Physics. French I. made interview appointments. when study began 6 10 7 High school courses English 12. completed schoolwork (some of which predated the interviews). College Algebra. General Physics. In addition. Accordingly. General Physics. Vietnamese Years in U. essays. Computer Applications English 12. tests. Other informal contact with teachers took place in the teacher’s lounge. were solicited at every student interview and again after final examinations concluded. or checked in on teachers and administrators. and assigned readings. I also met with various students and faculty on a few occasions in 1995 and 1996. including class handouts. Sequential Math 2A. Economics College courses ESOL 103 Reading and Vocabulary.S. ESOL 203 Writing. I spent over 30 class periods in interviews and on a number of other less formal occasions visited with students at the school during breakfast. Sequential Math III. Sociology. TVL 213 Domestic Ticketing Claudia and Aeyfer’s counselor were interviewed. These materials were photocopied and returned to students. Community First Aid and Safety/ CPR for the Professional Rescuer ESOL 184 Grammar. note packets. Each student’s classes were observed throughout 2 full school days. Travel and Tourism 101. Sociology 101 ESOL 213 Reading and Vocabulary. 1996).S. Computer Graphics English 12. ESOL 104 Writing and Grammar. ESOL 103 Reading and Vocabulary.TABLE 1 Case Study Profiles Student Aeyfer Claudia Penny Home language Turkish Vietnamese Cantonese. returned schoolwork. Nevertheless.g. Data collection at the college paralleled that in high school. this account has come to focus on institutional and educators’ perspectives in interaction with those of their students. With an enrollment of approximately 13. 10 days of high school classroom observations and over 50 hours of community college classroom observations. in press. is itself an interpretation or representation (Ramanathan & Atkinson. the data were analyzed inductively and recursively throughout the project. e. it featured a growing ESOL program serving 250 students from over 30 countries. Had I chosen to focus on teachers’ perceptions. Although all three of the case study students eventually hoped to earn 4-year baccalaureate degrees.700. Given the paucity of work on the student’s perspective in L2 research (Leki. The ESOL teacher also provided portfolios of students’ written work across the curriculum collected over the course of middle school and high school.. It was a modern facility of 12 interconnected buildings surrounded by vast commuter parking lots. although the interpretive lens attempted to privilege students’ views. like all ethnographic descriptions. Initial data analysis through coding and analytic memoing served to generate further questions to be explored and to identify emergent thematic elements. I verified findings with them. The students also received all manuscripts resulting from the study. the data reflect over 50 formal interview sessions with students and instructors as well as over 25 other informal interviews with students’ instructors. or what Thesen (1997) 44 TESOL QUARTERLY . In interviews with the students at the conclusion of the study. this account would no doubt be considerably different. Data Analysis As is typical in qualitative research and particularly ethnographic approaches (see. I note that the description here. 1995). In keeping with the theoretical framework utilized here. Rampton.000 pages of written materials collected from students and from the study sites over the course of the year in which the study took place. I set out to represent this perspective. Data across cases and sources were subjected to triangulation in search of confirming. 1997). disconfirming. 1995. with recent Southeast Asian and Eastern European immigrants predominant. Bogdan & Biklen. Van Maanen. The college was a state-sponsored institution offering 2-year degree programs. they decided to enter a community college in the vicinity in order to gain vocational credentials in dental hygiene (Claudia. Penny) and travel and tourism (Aeyfer) while earning associate degrees. In all. and altering initial themes.photocopied. 1998). and over 5. Thesen. 1999. The club was an extracurricular organization consisting mostly of language minority students at the school who organized presentations and field trips together. Coding conventions are as follows: I = interview. For example. English. science. including the tracking system. the logistics of ESOL class scheduling. HIGH SCHOOL: “THE KIDS WITH DETERMINATION” Students at the case study students’ high school had elected to participate in its particularly rigorous academic program (including 4 years each of math. 4 I thank Carol Chapelle for this insight. D = document. Aeyfer. February 10. 488). or an award. Thus. p. Extracts from documents are identified by subject (e. Claudia. and I am inexorably subject to the very social and institutional forces that I interpret here. a pregnancy. I am a positioned subject who is “prepared to know certain things and not others” (Rosaldo. “If it’s a fight. FN = field notes. language minority students at the school were probably a somewhat select group. for a number of reasons. and the ESOL teacher’s hand-scheduling of some students into classes where teachers were most likely to be sympathetic towards nonnative speakers of English. and Penny had attended the same schools and many of the same classes together since they had arrived in the United States.g. counselors. a chemistry teacher inquired about an absent student by asking the ESOL teacher. and administrators to deal with any issues arising about language minority students at the school whether they were in ESOL or not.. and computer programming courses). As she put it. “Where’s your Cambodian today?” (FN. possessing higher-than-average degrees of ability and motivation. January 26. physics).5 During observations. Their small number at the school as well as the single ESOL teacher’s high profile as a student mentor and advocate seemed to contribute to a pan-ethnic category of ESOL student identity in spite of considerable heterogeneity in ethnicity and in socioeconomic and educational background. Additionally. 5 FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 45 . they just come and get me” (I. 8). 1993).has termed “the tensions between the labelers and the labeled” (p. A sense that ESOL students were regarded as and regarded themselves as a group was also borne out by the school’s Bilingual Club. the ESOL teacher reported that she was routinely called in by other teachers. Immigrant students at the school seemed to be viewed primarily as affiliated with and the responsibility of the ESOL program and teacher. 1994).4 In addition. like any researcher. 1989. None of the three had spent more than one of their six class periods per day in ESOL for several years. The strongest expression of this sentiment came from Claudia and Aeyfer’s English teacher. “An Inspiration for Everyone” A prevailing institutional representation seemed to draw on broader U.S. The drive and desire. it’s just unbelievable” (I. It’s incredible. he observed. there was considerable evidence that students and teachers collaboratively regenerated and perpetuated this representation of identity.Even though they might have been distinguished at the high school by their affiliation with the ESOL teacher and program. I mean. where journals and essays were common practices. hardworking. enduring financial and emotional hardships. In the context of the high school. and even inspirational students may have seemed like just a commonsense social observation to students and teachers. they really are. But even though the representation of immigrants as determined. Thus most of these students’ classroom interactions and identity construction in high school derived from participation in mainstream classrooms. Personal Stories In classrooms such as English. two of the three students (Claudia and Aeyfer) were not enrolled in ESOL at all in their senior year. most of the students’ teachers commented favorably on ESOL students’ motivation and school performance as a whole. highly motivated students who had triumphed over adversity. Although this teacher’s opinion was perhaps the most emphatic. 1994). March 29. these images informed a representation of ESOL students as hardworking. Several layers of representations of ESOL status in these classrooms were apparent in classroom observations. primarily through the relating of personal stories and through their classroom comportment. written communication. asserting that “they’re an inspiration for EVERYONE. Clearly. “These students have such determination. the case study students spent the vast majority of their high school careers in mainstream content-area courses alongside native speakers.” “They just perform well.” He said that he admired ESOL students. students and teachers seemed to make occasions for the telling and retelling of personal stories about the difficulties students 46 TESOL QUARTERLY . many of the students had experienced hardship and did work hard. and interviews with teachers and case study students. In fact. In interviews. societal “Ellis Island” images of immigrants leaving their homes. and through sheer perseverance succeeding in building a better life for themselves in America. had faced and overcome as immigrants to the United States. Aeyfer’s English class, for example, featured a pictorial autobiography project. The cover of Aeyfer’s autobiography featured the potent image of her sitting between two flags, one Turkish and one U.S. In her narrative, Aeyfer related that she was forced to leave school and begin a job as an apprentice hairdresser in her last year in Turkey. She wrote that she prayed to Allah to send her to school, a dream that she could only attain because her family came to America (D, English, March 15, 1994). Aeyfer’s autobiography drew an outpouring of sympathy, support, and admiration from her teacher. His comments in the margins included “Wonderful,” “I’m proud of you,” “Your writing is very perceptive,” and “You do very well. You are a smart young lady.” In an interview her teacher commented on how much her story had moved him, marveling that because “she wasn’t able to go to school,” “her DREAM was to go to school” (I, March 29, 1994). In an interview discussing this project, Aeyfer both proudly and sheepishly noted, “I guess he was reading it to classes!” (I, April 11, 1994) and said that her autobiography had inspired a question on the midterm asking students whether they felt that they valued school or took it for granted. Aeyfer was complimented by the attention she received: “I was like, ‘This is my thing!’ . . . I felt good” (I, April 11, 1994). As Cummins (1997) has observed, teachers’ and students’ roles are mutually constituted, and in this example mutually ennobling representations of teacher and ESOL student identity are perpetuated through a cooperative process, with educators implicitly represented in student text as fulfillers of immigrant dreams and ambitions and the student cast in turn by her teacher as a model of how to overcome hardship and obstacles to succeed. This example would be unremarkable if it were an isolated instance. However, although more prosaic writing did appear in the case study students’ compositions (e.g., Penny’s discussion of her favorite movie [D, English, September 9, 1993]; Claudia’s story about what happened when she came home with a bad grade in math [D, English, April 29, 1994]), many of the students’ writing assignments seemed to be oriented toward particular genres of personal writing—autobiographies, leave-taking stories, stories about hardships they had endured as immigrants, and essays about customs and holidays in their countries of origin. This sort of writing by ESOL students appears to be widespread. For example, Fu (1995) reports very similar genres of personal writing in her study of immigrant high school students. As Fu amply documents, the representation of ESOL student identity appropriated from broader societal images of immigrants and manifested in these stories and essays has undoubted benefits. Students in this study found these sorts of writing assignments highly motivating for the most part. The assignments provided links between school and personal experience and encouraged FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 47 the students to take pride in their unique status as immigrants. They provided the students with opportunities to express heartfelt feelings and thoughts and to cast themselves and their experiences in a positive light for their teacher audience. In many ways, then, these assignments were emotionally positive experiences for students, helped cement social relationships with teachers, and at the same time acted to reinforce the representation of ESOL student identity already prevalent in the school. However, the origins and motivations of students’ production of tales of immigrant hardship and success were complex and more than a simple matter of self-expression and self- (and teacher) affirmation. Such stories were enmeshed in issues of personal disclosure and studentteacher power relationships. For example, although the sentiments expressed in Aeyfer’s autobiography may have been genuine, at the same time her teacher was perhaps unaware that Aeyfer had been asked to produce virtually the same narrative by at least two previous teachers and had probably received similar reactions (D, ESL, 1992; I, January 19, 1995). In fact, the power of such narratives to arouse sympathy and admiration created significant incentives for students to disclose such narratives even when not explicitly solicited by teachers. For example, in response to the fairly broad and open-ended essay prompt, “Give an account of an event that actually happened or that you imagined,” Claudia told the story of how she had been singled out for harassment by U.S.-born peers as a newcomer in elementary school (D, English, November 9, 1993). These stories carry at least the potential for students to essentialize themselves as a cultural “other” in order to secure teachers’ sympathy and support. Leki (1995), for example, relates the story of a Taiwanese student attending a U.S. university who incorporated her identity as an outsider in virtually every academic writing assignment she was given, commenting, “I am Chinese. I take advantage.” Significantly, the school’s ESOL teacher was the only one at the high school who regularly and explicitly discussed with me factors in ESOL students’ background besides immigrant status, such as class, gender, and family circumstances. She was also the only teacher who articulated concern about the perils of overgeneralizing about individuals based on their backgrounds, noting that “each time you think you sort of have a profile of what the family situation probably is based on a few indicators, I find out that it’s—I really can’t make that assumption” (I, March 29, 1994). Thus, although immigrant narratives seemed to contribute for the most part to a favorable representation of ESOL students at the school, the representation by its very nature also tended to essentialize and homogenize student identity within the institution. 48 TESOL QUARTERLY Classroom Behavior A second major means through which ESOL students collaborated in their teachers’ construction of them as persevering, model students was classroom behavior. For example, Claudia and Penny attended class more regularly than U.S.-born peers, a seemingly trivial detail but one highly valued by the high school teachers. In senior classes, where teachers routinely reported absenteeism rates up to 50%, Penny missed only three school days all year, and she had had perfect attendance in her junior year. In observations, none of the three exhibited the cat-andmouse or adversarial classroom behavior often seen in their U.S.-born adolescent peers. They were consistently diligent and attentive in the classroom. This is not to say that ESOL students viewed their teachers less critically than their peers did. Claudia, for example, was not hesitant to tell me what she thought about her economics class—“I hate that class! I HATE the teacher!” (I, February 8, 1994)—or to observe of another teacher, “He’s so WEIRD!” (I, March 28, 1994). Still, they tended not to demonstrate such attitudes overtly in classes. As Claudia put it, “I just sit there and listen” (I, February 8, 1994). The immigrant students in this study also seemed to be freer with displays of appreciation of and even affection for their teachers than the U.S.-born adolescents at the school did. For example, Penny ended a note to her ESOL teacher with, “One more thing I have to say to my sweet teacher—THANK YOU” (D, ESL, November 13, 1990). The contrast between U.S.-born and immigrant students’ behavior was rendered even more distinct when immigrants were placed in low-track classes, a frequent occurrence because of an inflexible statewide tracking system for high school students. ESOL students regularly reported days when only two of their classmates attended class or when those who attended were napping. When surrounded by U.S.-born peers halfjokingly referred to as “lunatics” and “parolees” by a teacher (I, June 21, 1994), immigrants found it relatively easy to appropriate the representation of the hardworking, diligent immigrant to portray themselves as exemplary students. One teacher enthusiastically reported, for example, “They’re showing up. They’re doing the best they can” (I, April 20, 1994). Another teacher noted favorably that Penny completed her work before her (frequently off-task) U.S.-born peers (FN, March 9, 1994). On-task behavior and perseverance had come to be an intrinsic part of the representation of immigrant students, and teachers expressed surprise when students did not conform to the representation. Penny’s English teacher, for example, related that her senior English class had become listless and that students often stared off into space the last few weeks of school. But she noted that she became truly alarmed when “She FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 49 [Penny] was getting that way, and I said, ‘Oh no! Even my GOOD kid’s bad now!’” (I, June 21, 1994). “They Struggle” The perseverance that was part of the prevailing institutional representation of immigrant students at the high school may have been regarded as admirable, but it was simultaneously construed as a possible indication of a lack of innate ability. Aeyfer’s counselor, for example, commented that she “has to work hard” and portrayed her as “sticking it out” in high school. Likewise, the same counselor commented that Claudia’s high grades came from “pure determination and lots of time” (I, June 16, 1994). Another teacher remarked of Aeyfer, “She struggled in high school” (I, April 19, 1994). Although educators may have seen immigrants’ effort and diligence in school as commendable, the same effort and diligence also led them to doubt students’ linguistic and academic capabilities. Some invoked a deficit model of bilingualism when discussing students’ academic performance. Situated in a predominantly monolingual society in which SLA research itself has tended to cast learner status as “fundamentally stigmatized” (Rampton, 1995, p. 292; Firth & Wagner, 1997) and in an educational context where English was the exclusive medium of instruction, it is unsurprising that some teachers cast these students’ ability to communicate in two languages not as a special talent or strength but rather as a disability, emphasizing what immigrant students could not do relative to monolingual, standard English speakers. One teacher, for example, commented, “It must be like somebody who’s very bright and has a stroke. And can’t express themselves” (I, June 21, 1994). Nor did teacher and institutional representations of immigrants as model students necessarily imply a high estimation of their academic ability. Some teachers clearly held high opinions of the students’ academic potential. Claudia and Aeyfer’s English teacher, for example, consistently commented that ESOL students did not have any weaknesses and that he had no doubt that they were going to be very successful (I, March 29, 1994; April 20, 1994). However, like the college faculty Zamel (1995) surveyed, other educators at the high school seemed to conflate English proficiency with cognitive ability, questioning ESOL students’ intellects. Aeyfer’s math teacher observed that the motivation and discipline of ESOL students was usually quite high but that concepts sometimes “give them trouble” (FN, April 29, 1994). Likewise, another teacher commented, “They’ll be successful because they are very motivated, but I have no idea of what their natural ability is” (I, June 15, 1994). Speaking of one ESOL student’s performance on a 50 TESOL QUARTERLY November 2. For example. For their part. . experiences. hardworking. 1994). it cast students’ bilingualism only as a deficit in English. and even though he rated her participation and organization as only satisfactory. March 17. the same teacher asserted. students continually invoked and re-created it in the course of classroom interactions with their teachers. FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 51 . Aeyfer. Penny reported that her family had gone to some lengths.standardized state writing competency test. and in that sense it was 6 Although Penny’s family was from Vietnam and Penny spoke Vietnamese. She also spoke proudly of her studies in Quranic Arabic literacy (I. It led to generally supportive and cordial relationships with teachers and positive evaluations of ESOL students’ classroom performance even in the face of evidence to the contrary. The prevailing representation of well-behaved. Similarly. Aeyfer’s physics teacher rated her “attitude” and “behavior” as excellent in his class (D. however. in spite of considerable variation in curricula. That is more of an analytic skill” (I. 1993) even though he commented on a progress report that she needed to treat lab work more seriously. the students spoke of their bilingualism matter-of-factly or as a talent. “She had trouble—and it’s not brain surgery . June 15. for example. 1994). societal discourses. It intrinsically held the potential to essentialize and even stereotype immigrant students at the school and. 1994). orientation. there nonetheless seemed to be institutional consistencies in the representation of ESOL students’ status at the high school. October 19. embedded in broader U. some of them have trouble just organizing. the family was ethnic Chinese and spoke Cantonese at home. April 21.S. . The prevailing representation of immigrant students at the school was neither consistent nor unequivocally positive. Thus. physics. the students seemed largely unaware that there was some question about their linguistic and academic abilities. Perhaps because teachers viewed these perceived students’ deficits sympathetically. and do all assigned work. and relationships among educators and immigrant students. including hiring private tutors. 1994). even though she had done poorly on a quiz and a test. regarded her bilingualism as a significant asset in fulfilling her goal of making a career in the Turkish tourism industry (I. Nevertheless. persevering students at the school was shaped by and served to reinforce broader societal notions about the immigrant experience. because the representation held many affirming elements for how they were viewed academically and socially at the school. to ensure that she was literate in her native Chinese6 as well as in English (I. read assigned material. The representation of ESOL students as persevering through the hardships of immigration thus played a role in keeping students engaged in classroom learning. the fact that the community college positioned the students first and foremost as in need of ESOL constituted a significant contrast from the way that they had been constructed in high school. and these ESOL courses dominated their schedules in their first semester in college. May 18. thought that ESOL would help her acclimate to college-level academic work (I. but not as much” (I. 52 TESOL QUARTERLY . typically 10–15 students. for example. This in itself was not unwelcome to them. 1994). Aeyfer even asserted that taking ESOL was her main objective in college. “I really need to get my English more. The rest of the classes. They were directed to the ESOL program. residents and U. high school graduates.S. Penny. May 26. and Aeyfer enrolled at an urban community college the following fall. Students initially expressed eagerness to begin their college careers with ESOL classes.S. I don’t care about the other stuff. Travel and Tourism 101). and grammar classes. Through collegewide entrance placement tests. COLLEGE: “THE WORST OF AMERICAN STUDENTS’ HABITS” Claudia.S. about the origins of and appropriate instruction for students’ English language features. Each of the case study students was placed in low-intermediate.g. May 19. program director. 1994). writing. Because ESOL classes had not formed a significant portion of their secondary school course work. where they were further tested and placed in one of four levels of intensive reading-vocabulary.ultimately consequential for the ways in which ESOL students’ academic and linguistic learning took place in high school. Introduction to Sociology. Although they were each allowed to take one to three introductory-level college courses (e. This orientation gave rise to particular institutional and programmatic representations of ESOL students that carried significant assumptions about students’ need for cultural orientation. Even though faculty were clearly mindful of and concerned about the needs of the long-term resident U. I care. about students’ cultural experiences and affiliations. and about students’ cultural capital (Bourdieu. 1994). Penny. high school graduates in their classes. each was identified as a nonnative speaker of English. the curriculum and teacher talk were in many ways still oriented to the majority of students in the program—newcomers to the United States who had been educated abroad.. however. saying. Each of the case study students’ classes included 1–3 students identified by teachers and students as long-term U.to advanced-level courses (see Table 1). their ESOL student label became the primary determinant of their program of study. consisted mostly of recent adult immigrants who had received all of their previous secondary and postsecondary education abroad (I. however.” but also goals related to cultural orientation: “acculturation to life in America” and “personal growth” (FN. 1994). “That’s RIGHT. the students in this study found themselves viewed in ways that not only were discontinuous with the predominant representation of their identity as ESOL students in high school but also seemed to cast their experiences with U. notes that they are frequently the province of ESOL programs in immigrant-receiving countries.S. including “Class attendance is mandatory. “Acculturation to Life in America” Because most of the community college students were new to the United States. Some instructors prohibited students from wearing baseball caps or chewing gum in their classes. for example. Ve:ery go:od”. Perhaps because institutional and programmatic discourses constructed acculturation as a student need and a program responsibility. . 1994).1977) deriving from educational background and social class. schooling and society in an unfavorable light. “Put those eyes FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 53 . When I asked Claudia about the goals. the prevailing representation of ESOL student identity depicted students as in need of socialization into U. Walking into college ESOL classes. . . Eating. . were diametrically opposed to the case study students’ self-perceptions and expectations as seasoned school-goers and residents of the United States. For example. they often policed students’ behavior. Students should not schedule appointments during class hours . 1994).S. The syllabus for Penny’s ESOL writing course featured a lengthy section on students’ classroom conduct.S. “What does this got to do with the college. . she commented of the latter two. November 16. society more broadly. Aeyfer’s reading teacher shushed students when they spoke out of turn. drinking or other distracting behavior will not be permitted” (D. . A successful student is one who regularly completes his/ her homework . for example. anyway? That’s just my opinion” (I. college norms and behavior as well as to life in U. For example. the goals of the ESOL program as written by one of the teachers for a collegewide presentation included not only instrumental academic and linguistic goals. The curriculum in ESOL classes reflected this image of students as cultural novices. September 7. December 8. such as “through language study [the program] opens the door to a college degree program” and “better communication. many of the ESOL instructors at the community college assumed a caregiver persona in the classroom. These goals. These goals in themselves are unremarkable—Nayar (1997). The same instructor often fell into a caregiver or foreigner-talk register signaled by exaggerated intonation contours and frequent imperatives. writing. or they failed. “Your Country” As the high school classes had.S. Got it?” or “Read it for us. was asked to write an 7 Gender. noted that the students she had problems with were always the ones who had gone to high school in the United States (I. As long-term U. the case study students contrasted their ESOL classes with the considerably enhanced autonomy and self-determination they experienced in regular college classrooms. 54 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1994). They all noted that college instructors. for example. December 6.S. Skim quickly. sociology. and for much the same reasons. college ESOL classes elicited narratives about immigration from students’ personal experience. 1994. Although the teachers varied in their views of the socialization needs of newcomers and long-term residents. the case study students became ambivalent about the ESL instruction. no longer monitored or policed their academic and classroom conduct. for example. December 9. Either students did the work. November 16. Observations of these classrooms similarly recorded no comments by instructors about students’ conduct. which appeared to question their ability to function autonomously in college or in the United States at the very same time in their lives when U. autumn 1994). However.7 the prevailing representation of ESOL students as newcomers and cultural novices led to significant similarities in socialization practices in ESOL classrooms and a corresponding similarity in long-term resident students’ resistance to them throughout the semester. Claudia. for example. the independence of U. residents and citizens. Many newcomer students no doubt welcomed the explicit socialization and guidance provided by the ESOL instructors. seemed to play a significant role in the degree to which teachers sanctioned students’ classroom behavior or used a caregiver register. which in contrast to the ESOL course syllabi made no mention of classroom behavior aside from one statement about mandatory attendance and participation (D. 1994).S.down.-educated students often struck teachers as lack of cooperation and rudeness. in spite of the prevalence of eating. for example. and wearing baseball caps. such as the one for Penny’s sociology course. chewing gum. This ethos was reflected on syllabi. Because the prevalent institutional representation of ESOL students and the behavior of many of the newcomers led ESOL instructors to expect compliance with and even gratitude for the social orientation they provided in classes. Jerry” (FN. unlike high school teachers. society conferred expectations of increased autonomy and recognition as high school graduates and adults. One teacher. writing. FN. the elicitation of such stories tapped into broader U. long-term U. September 8 and November 21. This representation overlooked the multiple cultural affiliations of long-term resident students.S. November 17. “a holiday of your culture. 1994). 1994). Long-term residents’ cultural experiences and affiliations. urban U. Penny was even assigned a reading about Ellis Island (D. their lives and cultural identities were situated in the multiethnic. 1994. She wrote back. For one thing. 1994. In fact. these stories were privileged over other. 1994). college-level ESOL materials and textbooks. newcomers actively sought out occasions to talk about their countries in college ESOL classrooms. November 1. writing.“arrival story” as one of her first ESOL writing assignments (D. however. writing. Recollections of what the assignments assumed to be their countries were colored by a separation long in time and distance. writing. but some of my cousins went back to visit and they told me somethings had changed” (D. October 4 and December 8. students were frequently assigned to write about their country of origin on topics such as “my hometown.S. Instead. reading. social milieu in which they had grown to adulthood.S.” For example. however. residents were surrounded by classmates whose formative life experiences and education had taken place outside the United States. were by no means that simple. 1994).” “my country—a great place to visit. Claudia. And much as in high school. Penny. reading. For example. in response to the composition assignment “Return Home. As in high school. September 8. Unlike the situation in high school. I believed my country changed a lot. October 6. beliefs about the nobility and pathos of immigration. October 16.” “‘low’. In fact. curricula and teacher talk in college ESOL courses tended to position students as outsiders through discourses presuming a mutually exclusive “United States” and “your country.” Penny wrote such a detached and speculative composition that her teacher was prompted to inquire. “I have left my country since 1987.” “homeless people in your country. perhaps more mundane or universal aspects of their experience.S. common in U.or ‘high’-class foods in your country” (D. Their ethnic affiliations were grounded at least as much in a culturally hybrid immigrant community as in their natal countries. writing. These assignments and the assumptions underlying them seemed unproblematic for students recently arrived in the United States. 1994). The programmatic representation of ESOL students at the community college was also reinforced by an international student archetype.” and “problems of students in my country” (D. 1994). I haven’t go back to country yet. that likewise assumed that ESOL students have grown to adulthood abroad. I have lived in the United States for seven years. November 17. “Have you ever had this experience?” (D. The very assumption that Vietnam was still Penny’s home (or at least FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 55 . contending that newer Vietnamese immigrants were not as self-disciplined or hardworking (I. 1994). D. Claudia told me flatly that she would not associate with newcomers from Vietnam in her classes. Penny seemed to pity newcomers. September 28.” They were neither or both depending on time and context. One can see that these U. commenting that “the English is not really good. simultaneously a status symbol and somewhat distancing (I. Likewise. For example. the prevailing institutional representation of ESOL students as adult newcomers implicitly presumed pure exemplars of other cultures and languages. If they were not pure cultural exemplars of those other places.” affiliations and referents that shifted constantly as she discussed different settings and participants (I. “In my culture we go to the market to buy food every morning. between “in my country” and “because we’re American. reading. October 4. we shop once a week” (italics added. high school graduates might find the predominant representation of ESOL student identity alienating and even a bit insulting. September 28. I was struck by her easy alteration between frames of reference.” and said that she had helped a newcomer classmate with a report because “he would be—like. December 2. in college they were in effect out-newcomered and outothered by their classmates.S. who had just become a U. Claudia reported that when she visited Vietnam after 9 years in the United States. October 17. The dualistic framing of most of the curricula and teacher talk in these classrooms simply could not account for such complexity. neither did these students feel themselves to be wholly affiliated with the White. reported that she had few relatives or friends left in Vietnam (I. her Vietnamese relatives regarded her as an American. Penny wrote in a composition on shopping. the case study students also felt a separation from and perhaps a certain superiority to the newcomers in their classes. 1994). appreciate it if we share.her only home) was a dubious one. Not like here. it led to the neglect or implicit devaluation of the hybridity and multiplicity of U. Thus. when Claudia was telling me about a visit to Vietnam. something that the dualistic representations of culture prevalent in their classes did not easily allow. and in doing so. citizen. high school graduates’ ethnic affiliations in the college’s ESOL curriculum. Similarly.S. 1994). Although these students had been able to draw on broader societal representations of the hardships and perseverance of immigrants in high school in order to construct favorable representations of themselves. the students’ writing on topics comparing the United States with their natal country shows constant shifts in pronominal usage and cultural perspective. residents who knew the ropes. middle-class version of culture that they and their teachers referred to generically as “American. 1994). As long-term U.S. you know? So I do it with him” (I.S. 1994). 1994). 56 TESOL QUARTERLY . Penny. November 16. it’s very boring. However. they tended to perform poorly on exercises or tests that required them to identify and label parts of speech or be familiar with metalinguistic terminology (see Ferris.“You Are Starting to Do This on Instinct” Students and the community college ESOL teachers soon found themselves in conflict because of the curriculum’s implicit representations of ESOL students as inexperienced users of English and related assumptions about the transient and erasable nature of nonnative speaker language features. students were assigned to read a novel and subscribe to a newspaper on the assumption that they were not accustomed to extensive reading in English. November 17. grammar-oriented measure designed for nonnative speakers of English—resulted in her placement in a low intermediate grammar class that began with a review of present tense verb usage. “It sounds stupid” (FN. they had a keen implicit understanding of English form and usage. academically and otherwise. October 31. the ESOL program’s placement tests and curricula tended to presume exactly those sorts of knowledge. When Claudia’s grammar teacher asked the class why a sentence was ungrammatical. 1997). Given Penny’s 6 years in the United States. Grammar instruction in the college’s ESOL classes also presumed that students’ language features were simply the result of lack of experience with English. Claudia simply replied. However. As a result. standardized multiple-choice. English was the only language in which Claudia was literate. Penny could be seen flipping to her horoscope and local department store ads. 1994) and that Penny was complaining. 1994). Unfortunately. Reid. 1994). This representation overlooked students’ considerable previous experiences. because their understanding of English form and function was largely intuitive. U. most of their language learning had taken place as part of their immersion in an English-medium schooling environment. with English.S. while her teacher lectured the class on how to locate stories in sections of the newspaper. 1999. The lack of recognition given to these students’ considerable experience with English language texts led to resistance in college ESOL classes. In fact. after several years attending English-medium schools in an English-dominated society. “some:times. For example. Although the students in the study had received some explicit grammar instruction in middle school and high school from ESOL and writing teachers. Penny’s performance on the program’s diagnostic test—a commercially published. high school graduates were quite comfortable reading in English. For example. November 8. a small but telling act of resistance as well as a more authentic act of newspaper reading than the class exercises (FN. you FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 57 . it is unsurprising that her teacher was soon noting that she should have been placed higher (I. On one occasion she answered and then loudly declared. Likewise. In a very real sense. A telling example comes from a teacher’s comment on a composition Penny wrote in response to a reading about an immigrant who does not want to speak his native language in class with friends. looking up ever so casually from the book from time to time to call out answers to his questions. October 5. 1994). Nevertheless. high 58 TESOL QUARTERLY . the curriculum and teacher talk in college ESOL classrooms denied these immigrants ownership of English. Claudia also made it clear to her teacher that she regarded language assignments as busy work. the teacher wrote. as if to say. she technically fulfilled the assignment requirements. 1994). “She Knows What the Teacher Wants” Many newcomers in the college program arrived as “privileged” students (Vandrick.S. 1977)—relatively privileged social status and educational backgrounds—in their native countries. 1994). on an exercise about clause connectors. who had been in the United States for a decade. she unabashedly worked on her homework assignments as her teacher lectured. “I learned that in seventh grade” (FN. 1995) with significant amounts of cultural capital (Bourdieu. That’s good. In my classroom observations of Claudia’s grammar and writing class. November 17. 1994). “See how easy these are for me?” (FN. For example. 1994). 1994). English was just as much Penny’s language as Chinese or Vietnamese was. Claudia’s grammar teacher once lectured the class. reading. At the bottom. Because the teacher did not specify which connectors to use. Claudia.know?” (I. “How much time do you speak English compared to your language?” (D. but we shouldn’t get carried away” (I. November 17. The statement was telling in its presumptions that students were starting from rule-based instruction and only then applying it to productive use and that they were only beginning to develop intuitions about language use. she used since for every sentence. she drew her teacher’s ire and a C on the assignment (FN. November 15. The representation of these ESOL students as novices in English in spite of their considerable accomplishments in the language led the immigrants to counter with classroom displays of self-assured expertise and boredom. October 31. November 15. subtle ways. I think a lot of you are starting to do this on instinct. In daily. Moreover. may have been learning rules for things that she had done “on instinct” for years. doing the minimum necessary to complete them. In fact. both teachers and students regarded the educations these students had received abroad as having been more rigorous than the educations received by U. “You know. for example. She handed in one assignment with a flourish 5 minutes after it had been assigned. you know the COLLEGE stuff!” (I.S. The socioeconomic and educational background of these internationally educated students had become normative in the representation of ESOL students within the institution. see Cummins. For their part. She felt that teachers had to provide “structure” to such students.] high school math. 1994. high schools. implying a relative lack of motivation (I. for example.S. that immigrants were lacking in cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP. November 10. even though the community college was itself part of the U.S.S. 1981) as a result of their U. November 17. October 26. The highest.S. 1995).S.S. the regent one. 1999. she reported several heated exchanges with her teacher on the issue of differential treatment of U. She knows.-born peers did (in fact. the case study students recognized and sometimes resented the favoritism shown toward newcomers in their classes. high school graduates seemed to assimilate the worst from U. Two instructors asserted. As a result. 1994). As Aeyfer observed. FN. 1994). high school graduates over the semester (see Harklau. U. In fact. as noted above. 1994). what she [the teacher] wants” (I.S. much as it has in U. Claudia and Penny’s reading teacher asserted that U. schooling and the immigrants who were products of it were stigmatized and seen as comparatively lacking. college-level TESOL research and pedagogy. . “But maybe I am” (I. you know the [U. Resistance In many ways.S.school graduates. then. in the fifth grade [in Turkey]. voiced her frustration: “You know that girl? Who was talking mostly? . 1994). When you are in the high school. January 19. in particular. Aeyfer complained that such students dominated class discussions and the teacher’s attention. ironically enough. Although the college ESOL teachers acknowledged that their students behaved in much the same way as their U.” The teacher told me that he could not imagine teaching American students fresh out of high school. Thus. educational system. Claudia’s composition teacher lamented that a group of Vietnamese American male students would pass the course “because they’ve been here awhile. . like. May 18. the representation of ESOL students that immigrants encountered in the community college ESOL program did not FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 59 . you know. . then paused as he realized. teachers implicitly rejected the very Americanness of students’ educational backgrounds in favor of the class and educational backgrounds of students educated abroad. “When you are. for elaboration). but that is a big part of their problem. November 16. teachers clearly disapproved of their behavior as well. they often behaved better). high school education (I. Aeyfer. As skillful and experienced instructors. December 6. 1994) when asked about their teachers or classes. On the contrary. high school graduates. October 31. Aeyfer’s teachers consistently remarked that although she had begun the term with high motivation and had completed all of her assignments. September 28. December 8. Similarly. 1994). November 2. However.reflect their backgrounds and experience. they were concerned about long-term residents’ performance in their program and sought out more effective ways to teach them. December 6. making noncommittal remarks such as “She’s ni:ice” (I. kicking her foot. November 16. December 6. resistance soon began surfacing in all the case study students and escalated over the course of the semester. 1994. high school graduates as implicitly deficient. and she had begun to miss class and assignments. Aeyfer made a point of declaring to her reading teacher that she seldom read the assigned newspaper (FN. Penny spent most of her writing and grammar classes listlessly fidgeting. which surely won her no favors. “She doesn’t seem to have the spark and enthusiasm that she did at the beginning” (I.S. From her perspective. 1994. “It’s hard! I keep quiet. you know? She [the teacher] KNOWS I don’t like that class” (I. Already in September. and putting her head on her desk (FN. Other forms of resistance were manifest. their failure to mirror the representation—in turn served for the teachers as increasing confirmation of their original assessments of and previous experiences with U. As a result. November 10. Claudia and Aeyfer conspicuously forgot to bring their books to classes (FN. 1994). During my observations. Aeyfer was trying to simply tolerate her classes until they ended. 1995). 1994). they were often hesitant to say anything negative. 1994). many did not appear to recognize the extent to which the very representations of English language learners in 60 TESOL QUARTERLY . In fact. The faculty clearly recognized that they had a problem with disaffection and resistance among U. As the students withdrew or made more overt demonstrations of resistance to the received representations of their identities cast for them within college ESOL classrooms. 1994).S. but she told me later in an interview that she had read it frequently and enjoyed it (I. 1994). the students’ resistance—that is. “That’s why I continue to take it [ESOL]!” (I. and because of this mismatch the students often found themselves cast as deficient. She commented. November 16. It was not that the students set out to dislike ESOL classes or that they took pleasure in complaining. One teacher commented. She soon shared that sentiment with her teachers. she joked. as the semester progressed her work had deteriorated. January 19. It is easy to see why the community college’s ESOL teachers did not welcome these comparatively ill-behaved and combative students in their classes. Claudia had begun a refrain of “I just think this class is BORING” and “I don’t want to take those class!” (I. Many forms of resistance were subtle. 1994). S. 1995). significant differences emerge in how the seemingly self-evident term ESOL student is constructed and understood. students could simply choose to bypass the sequence and register for first-year composition. for a better life in the United States. commenting.S. . IMPLICATIONS In the classroom language learning experiences of long-term U. Aeyfer had made the same discovery and also planned to bypass the program. through education. these students’ resistance to alienating representations of their identities had become complete rejection.” She added “I got sick and tired of learning English” (I. were aware of how differently these students were viewed and treated in their program than they had been in high school. Claudia had consulted with friends and had discovered the little-advertised fact that ESOL courses were not compulsory— that is. the largely positive ways in which the representation depicted ESOL students academically and socially were significant enough to foster its continual reappropriation by students and educators at the high school. for example. May 6. they faced a number of constraints on their ability to respond or make instructional adjustments.their classroom talk and curricula were implicated in resistance. Some of the teachers. . Even when teachers appeared to recognize the interconnections of representation and resistance among immigrants in their classes.S. residents across two institutional settings. isolation within the college. societal discourses regarding the immigrant experience. instructors often seemed to believe that U. but I don’t want to go in there anymore. acknowledged that students were “used to feeling successful” in high school (FN. including a heavy workload. ESOL student meant something considerably different in the students’ community college ESOL program. especially two who had been high school teachers themselves. 1995). One. By the end of their first semester in ESOL classes. “I think I need more ESOL classes . Although the same perseverance that was seen as ennobling also cast doubt on immigrants’ linguistic and perhaps even innate cognitive abilities. January 19. high school graduates’ resistance and acting out in their classrooms stemmed from intrinsic surliness or poor command of classroom etiquette rather than from the dissonance students experienced in the dominant institutional representation of their experience. and the need to balance among various student constituencies. the representation of ESOL students that held sway in the case study students’ high school was one of enduring emotional and material hardships in order to strive. On the other hand. Informed in part by broader U. However. With a student body consisting mainly of new arrivals who brought with them FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 61 . teacher sanctions in the classroom. the college’s prevalent representation in many ways implicitly overlooked or devalued the resources and skills of U. The workings of representation illustrated in this article provide one means of exploring seemingly stable and unitary identity categories in social contexts such as educational institutions within a poststructural framework positing identities to be inherently dynamic. and reinforcement from college ESOL textbooks and pedagogical literature favoring a similar archetype. It is only in looking at the same individuals across institutional settings that the contextual particularity and homogenizing effects of representations of identity such as ESOL student are made clear. in a sense. Similar to language minority students in British educational contexts as described by Leung et al.S. prevalent institutional and programmatic representations of what it means to be an ESOL student had material effects on students’ motivation and classroom experiences in both settings. and the students’ eventual rejection of college ESOL instruction. Because the backgrounds and characteristics of the majority of students in the program in some ways matched the dominant representation and because of the asymmetric power relations between teachers and students in the classroom. contradictory. where international students often remain the implicit archetype in research and curriculum planning. confirming the integral role that schools play in the intertwined processes of English language learning and academic achievement. L2 learner. Thus.significant. forged in broader processes of social interaction and meaning making and manifested in educators’ and students’ perceptions. It would be easy to think of the representations of immigrant student 62 TESOL QUARTERLY . the representation of the privileged newcomer prevailed. It is precisely these students’ marginality in existing representations or labels of ethnolinguistic identity (e. particularly at the college level. (1997) and by Rampton (1995).g.. and curricula. setting in motion ever-deepening cycles of resistance on the part of long-term resident students. classroom talk. The study also lends support to Thesen’s (1997) and Norton’s (1997) observations regarding the productivity of learner transitions in revealing the socially constructed nature of identity categories. often socially privileged educational and life experience outside the United States. their characterization becomes a window into prevailing discourses of the institutions they enter. the learners described here did not fit neatly into prevailing images of ethnic and linguistic identity in U. high school graduates and cast them as deficient. society and educational institutions.S. and partial. language minority student) that makes their experiences compelling. What appear to be commonsense or self-evident conceptualizations from within a classroom or program can be seen as prevailing institutional representations. This study lends support to Thesen’s (1997) call for greater institutional and educator awareness of how students’ identities are shaped by institutional labels. Students’ and educators’ agency—the fact that we can and do take action as individuals—means that we are continually recreating and reshaping notions of identity in the course of classroom interaction. Because institutional representations are arguably at the heart of how entering students are placed and evaluated in college language programs.identity described here as the foibles of teachers other than ourselves or institutions other than our own (from which we are thankfully free). representation is inevitable. compassionate. As the study concluded. such an effort was already underway in the community college ESOL program described here. but to do so would miss the point.S. the faculty had identified a need to explain the rationale for ESOL placement to long-term U. they are largely implicit and not easily open to examination. or skilled than educators elsewhere. placement measures and evaluation. Instructors had also begun working to FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 63 . and exit tests. regular composition programs. U. From the theoretical perspective forwarded here. Like the teachers and students in this study. It also indicates a need to constantly reexamine how program configurations and placement measures are chosen. Institutional representations of language minority students—how students’ non-English language backgrounds are construed by colleges and universities—affect the configuration of programs. high school graduates from minority language backgrounds are placed variously in college intensive English programs. Rather. And although representations give the effect of fixing meaning. ESOL academic skills sequences. This study also points out the need for TESOL educators to engage students in an explicit dialogue on how and why program and placement decisions are made. basic writing sequences. they have significant educational implications. I do not believe that the educators I have depicted here were any less perceptive. It is an artifact of the discursive processes through which teachers and students make sense of the social world. they were subject to the same discourses and social and institutional forces that tended to position students in certain ways. processes that operate at a level that is seemingly self-evident and taken for granted. Because these representations are understood at the level of common sense. and what is taken for granted in those choices.S. or academic assistance sequences depending on the specific practices of the postsecondary institution they enter. residents and citizens and to address students’ heterogeneity in background. and outlook more explicitly in the classroom. Through ongoing discussions. experience. they are not deterministic and are subject to continual change and revision. we cannot operate outside of the meaning-making effects of discourses and our own social positioning. E. in her work she focuses on the experiences of English language learners in secondary and postsecondary education. Bogdan. and anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts of the article. Angélil-Carter. Penny. (1997). (1998). Bourdieu. 31. R. P. 263–287. Barr.reorient their curriculum to better acknowledge and draw on the life experience and expertise brought by long-term U. & Moore. Pearson (Eds. W. NJ: Erlbaum. REFERENCES Alvermann. In R. Hanh. 1997. K.S. and to Bettie St. S. 179). and Marianne for their immeasurable help and guidance throughout the study and beyond. P. Mahwah. Second language acquisition of spoken and written English: Acquiring the skeptron. The politics of the ESL classroom: Issues of power in pedagogical choices. Auerbach. Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. Atkinson. D. the significance of case studies such as these lies not so much in specific prescriptions for practice as in their heuristic value—in the ongoing conversation they initiate regarding ESOL students’ identity formation in educational settings and in their capacity to help us as TESOL professionals “attend to the world a bit differently” (p. Pierre.. 951–983). Because “the contextual ground of education is always shifting” (Dyson. D. Karabel & 64 TESOL QUARTERLY . E. Handbook of reading research (Vol.). Secondary school reading. 625–654. and that things we do in the classroom not only serve to teach language but also serve to shape our students’ attitudes toward schooling and their very sense of self. C. W. In J. D. L. 33. Meryl Siegal. Joan Kelly Hall. 2. TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly. D. to Ana Ramos-Pell for her assistance during the study. Tollefson (Ed. (1999). This study dealt with particular students in particular contexts. p. 9–33).). Aeyfer. A past recipient of the TESOL Distinguished Research Award. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Claudia. THE AUTHOR Linda Harklau is assistant professor of language education at the University of Georgia. S. Kamil. In J. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. residents and citizens into their classes. pp. TESOL Quarterly. (1977). R. New York: Cambridge University Press. & P. (1996). M. Understanding the nature of these fundamental processes of cultural identity formation is vital in order to recognize that we are never entirely immune from nor entirely subject to the societal positionings of ourselves or our students. & Biklen. (1995). Power and inequality in language education (pp. Mosenthal. I am also grateful to the teachers and institutions described here for opening their classrooms and sharing their insights. 179).. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. (Eds. Flood. Ferris. J. b. D. Mahwah. Santa Monica. N. In J. hooks. C. In California State Department of Education (Ed. & Uchida. New York: Cambridge University Press. (1997). Davidson. H. and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. 241–272. Dissemination. 427–453. 109–130). Losey. Cummins.. Gray. 28. S. J.). Y. (1995). Immigration and higher education: Institutional responses to changing demographics. J.. Representing culture in the ESL writing classroom. Harklau. Editor’s introduction: Trends in bilingual education at the secondary school level. D. A. (1994). On discourse. communication.. J. 69. Hall. (1997). Glendale: California TESOL. ESL and mainstream classes: Contrasting second language learning contexts. 13–64). So much to say: Adolescents and ESL. B. Heath. H. Los Angeles: California State University.. ESL Intersegmental Project. Evaluation. Modern Language Journal. Siegal (Eds. (1997). B. Fairclough. New York: Vintage Books. (1995). L.). FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 65 . Portsmouth.-educated learners of English as a second language. 31. Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp.. (1997). M. Power and ideology in education (pp. colleges. The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students.). (1999). Hall (Ed. gender. In S. & D. Generation 1. (1999). & Wolfe. Davis. 1–5. (Eds. In E. M... (1993). Albany. The work of representation. A. ESL. New York: Oxford University Press. 487–511). (1981). Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. and universities. Losey. Mahwah. 3–49). 29. E. 167–180). Halsey (Eds. Children out of bounds: The power of case studies in expanding visions of literacy development. New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan.S. & D. 451–486. J. (1997). 28. L. Faltis. TESOL Quarterly. Harklau. NJ: Erlbaum. Firth. & Wagner. & Siegal. Rolph. Cummins. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. NY: SUNY Press. Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp.5 meets college composition: Issues in the teaching of writing to U. M. One size does not fit all: Response and revision issues for immigrant student writers. Dyson. and Assessment Center. 143–157). TESOL Quarterly. Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp.. CA: RAND. A. P. New York: Teachers College Press.). (1996). My trouble is my English: Asian students and the American dream. A. K. (1995). Lapp (Eds. (1992). L. Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 285–300. New York: Longman. K. In L. 181–202). Language minority students. (1999). NJ: Erlbaum. Black looks: Race and representation. J.). (1999). P. Anthropology and Education Quarterly. Making and molding identity in schools: Student narratives on race. Green. 411–430. Peabody Journal of Education. (1997). TESOL Quarterly. K.A. Faltis. and college composition (pp. NH: Boynton/Cook. The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and practices in postsecondary EFL classrooms. 81. Flood. Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: A situated perspective. Fu. E. New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan. Qualitative theory and methods in applied linguistics research. and academic engagement. & Melamid. Critical discourse analysis: Papers in the critical study of language. Foucault. California pathways: The second language student in public high schools. & Bloome. Minority status and schooling in Canada. Boston: South End Press. & M. Hinkel (Ed.). A. Harklau. Lapp (Eds. D.). (1997). S. Duff.). In J. (1996). C. R.). Harklau. (1979). L. Heath. London: Sage/Open University. S. 241–268). Peirce. M. R. H. Social postmodernism: Beyond identity politics (pp. McGroarty. Rosaldo. Banks (Eds. B. (1997). TESOL Quarterly. New Directions for Teaching and Learning.). J. (1995). TESOL Quarterly. 543–560. Crossing: Language and ethnicity among adolescents. Leung. Leki. (1997). 33. & Donato. New York: Cambridge University Press. Alien winds: The reeducation of America’s Indochinese refugees. B... New York: Praeger. B. Promoting the success of Latino languageminority students: An exploratory study of six high schools. B.. R. Immigrants and education. 487–512. Rattansi. 29. (1995). Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics.S. Multiple discourses. Alexander-Kasparik. 66. Issues in Education. 70. Japanese culture constructed by discourses: Implications for applied linguistics research and ELT. The idealised native speaker. M. Ethnographic approaches and methods in L2 writing research: A critical guide and review. Banks & C. (1997). T. multiple identities: Investment and agency in second-language learning among Chinese adolescent immigrant students. Hearing voices: L2 students’ experiences in L2 writing courses. D. I.). reified ethnicities. S. Through the golden door: Educational approaches for immigrant adolescents with limited schooling. (1993). 9–31. NJ: Erlbaum. discourse. 235–260.). Boston: Beacon Press. Nicholson & S. L. 20. 31. 409–429. Which non-native speaker? Differences between international students and U. Beneath the skin and between the ears: A case study in the politics of representation. I. (1989). Images of the learner in English language texts for adults: From citizen to consumer. Into. M. Washington. TESOL Quarterly. 17–27. ESL/EFL dichotomy today: Language politics or pragmatics? TESOL Quarterly.. Mahwah. 29. Siegal.. Coping strategies of ESL students in writing tasks across the curriculum. TESOL Quarterly. M. (1985). & Rampton. Harris. (1998). Merriam. and beyond secondary school: Critical transitions for immigrant youths. DC: Center for Applied Linguistics/Delta Systems. 9–35. P. W. Nayar. & Wong. Harvard Educational Review. 250–286). Ramanathan. identity. Just framing: Ethnicities and racisms in a “postmodern” framework. R. On second language writing. (1999). (1997). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 44–70. R. In S. Language. Lucas. Social identity. 17. A. and the ownership of English. and language learning. T.). 60. (1999). V. R. Chaiklin & J. In J. S. Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. A. 31. Mace-Matluck. Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. TESOL Quarterly. R. In L. Silva (Ed. 31. C. Norton. New York: Cambridge University Press. Voices. DC: Center for Applied Linguistics/Delta Systems. M. New York: Longman. L. Seidman (Eds. 9–37. (1995). N. Reid. (1998). investment. R. B. (1990). B. 356–382. (1996). 310–327). C. Olneck. (1997). and classroom realities. M. A. Harvard Educational Review. (1989). Thesen. J. Henze. Lucas. Culture and truth: The remaking of social analysis. 315–340. In T. (1996). TESOL Quarterly. & Queen. through. & Atkinson. B.Kubota. New York: Macmillan.. (1995). Tollefson. J. and transition: In search of new categories in EAP. The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed. (1997).. Lave (Eds. Washington. Leki. resident (language minority) students. Rampton. 31. Mehan. 3. 13–30.). McKay. 66 TESOL QUARTERLY . 577–608. (in press). (1995).. R. S. Department of Labor. (1998). Government Printing Office. 375– 380. 506– 521. Washington. DC: U. TESOL Quarterly. 29. Vandrick.). 46. Representation in ethnography (pp. (1995). taking them away”: ESL students in Grade 1. 32. Van Maanen (Ed. In J. (1997). 61–84. CA: Sage. (1995).Toohey. Van Maanen. S. Zamel.). (1991). Strangers in academia: The experiences of faculty and ESL students across the curriculum. U. TESOL Quarterly. An end to innocence: The ethnography of ethnography. J. Privileged ESL university students. V. MA: Blackwell. C. “Breaking them up. Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory (2nd ed. Thousand Oaks. 1–35).S. College Composition and Communication.S. Cambridge. K. FROM THE “GOOD KIDS” TO THE “WORST” 67 . Weedon. What work requires of schools: A SCANS report for America 2000. (1995). 1997).to posttesting. This reflects an 6. Florida. academic underachievement among Hispanic students continues to provide a formidable challenge for educators (García. Patrick. Yet most teachers have had little or no preparation in ESL methodology (Fitzgerald. Given the challenges of meeting the diverse needs of students in today’s classrooms. the number of limited English proficient (LEP) students attending schools in the United States surpassed 3. A s of 1996–1997. heterogeneous groups as they implemented a reading strategy: collaborative strategic reading. asking and answering questions.The Helping Behaviors of Fifth Graders While Using Collaborative Strategic Reading During ESL Content Classes JANETTE K. LEP students are faced with the dual task of acquiring academic English while learning content (Jacob. Spring 2000 69 . each group provided some explanation in Spanish. students in groups spent large amounts of time engaged in academic-related strategic discussion and assisted one another in understanding word meanings. United States This study investigated the frequency and means by which bilingual students helped each other and their limited English proficient peers in content classes while working in small. 34. 1990). No. Students’ scores on English vocabulary tests improved significantly from pre. Furthermore. Texas. & Wheeler. Hamayan. United States SHARON VAUGHN University of Texas at Austin Austin. Results revealed that students’ helping behaviors were facilitated by the provision of specific instruction in how and when to help their peers. 1994). Across the United States. 1998). Overall. and relating what they were learning to previous knowledge.9% increase over the previous school year. 1995. approximately 8% of kindergartners speak a language other than English (August & Hakuta. getting the main idea. Within this context of increasing diversity. KLINGNER University of Miami Miami. Rottenberg. there is a critical need for empirically based interventions TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 1.4 million (Macías. 1996). 1986. Kagan. 1984). Young. This type of peer interaction increases opportunities for meaningful communication about academic content in low-anxiety contexts (Cazden. The use of native language discussions to clarify meaning when students are reading English language texts has been 70 TESOL QUARTERLY . or procedural discussion... Cooperative learning also allows LEP students to draw on native language support from bilingual peers (Cohen.g. 1988. Durán & Szymanski. Noddings. We analyzed transcripts of students’ conversation to determine (a) the percentage and nature of discourse devoted to comprehension strategies. heterogeneous groups as they implemented CSR. This article reports the results of research investigating the frequency with which and means by which bilingual students helped each other and their LEP peers while working in small. Paninos. Vaughn. with the assistance of the teacher. 1994. 1985. 1989) and instruction in reading comprehension strategies (e. Thus. (b) the amount and type of helping utterances.g. 1985).that enhance English acquisition. 1994. Wong Fillmore. Tharp & Gallimore. Krashen. & Linnell. Rivers. & Schumm. Richard-Amato. increasingly become more proficient at applying comprehension strategies and constructing knowledge while reading. García. In part it is based on the theory that cognitive development occurs when concepts first learned through social interaction become internalized and made one’s own (Vygotsky.. 1983. and (c) the ways students responded to classmates’ requests for clarification of words they did not understand. Johnson & Johnson. CSR was designed to promote content learning. CSR provides an instructional context in which students. peers. an instructional approach for English language learners that combines cooperative learning (e.. oral reading. 1996. which may in turn lead to increased content-area learning. Pica. and reading comprehension in diverse classrooms (Klingner. 1988. Palincsar & Brown. 1998). Lincoln-Porter. 1989). 1985. or both. 1995. For these reasons we developed collaborative strategic reading (CSR). 1985. We also examined outcome data reflecting students’ progress on vocabulary measures. language acquisition. 1978). Long & Porter. 1991) and potentially provides modified input for English language learners (Long.g. & Doughty. Jacob et al. 1992. 1985). 1996. Swain & Lapkin. BACKGROUND Cooperative Learning Cooperative learning is touted as an effective technique for culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms (e. Pica. 1994a. 1995). many English language learners noted that they preferred to be assisted by a peer than by an adult. In junior high HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 71 . King. Gersten and Jiménez (1998) found that English language learners were less inclined to respond without encouragement. 1985. Hakuta. when interviewed about their preferences for receiving help. 1996) and under which conditions it is most effective (Cohen. stimulating cognitive development by creating conflict as peers engage in mutual problem solving (Piaget. tended to give brief or oneword answers. Early studies found that students had more language practice opportunities and displayed a wider range of language functions during cooperative work than in teacher-directed classrooms (Long. 1986. 1984. 1950) and that it can also be used to provide scaffolded collaborative assistance (Vygotsky. saying that “students explain it better” (Vaughn.. Yet an examination of how the technique is implemented in classrooms (Jacob et al. 1987). & Saumell. Jacob et al. Furthermore. few studies have examined the verbal interactions of English language learners during cooperative learning (Durán & Szymanski. In some of these missed opportunities. p. O’Connor & Jenkins.found to increase comprehension. The sixth-grade students in their study successfully gave and received help with academic terms and concepts while they studied social studies. Moll. 1996. Webb. 1985). 1978). Although cooperative learning is a highly promoted instructional approach. Long & Porter. Klingner. found only 71 instances of positive opportunities over 8 hours of interaction in the cooperative learning groups. Cazden (1988) states that peer discourse can serve a catalytic function. (1996) found that cooperative learning provided English language learners with a wide range of opportunities to acquire academic English. 1993. the students also missed many opportunities for meaningful communication.. McLean. 1994b. 1991). 1995. and in general were reluctant speakers in large-class instructional settings. Díaz. 1990. some students must act as “more knowledgeable others” who assist their peers. & Mehan. Adams. 1994b) is useful and relevant to a full understanding of its potential benefits and possible pitfalls. 1976. Pica et al. 243). In a more recent study. students requested help with an academic term but did not receive it. with the conceptual knowledge developed through students’ native language transferring to English when the appropriate English vocabulary is learned (Cummins. Jacob et al. However. & Castanos. Schumm. Hudelson. A key area of research on small-group processes has been the helping behaviors of students during group learning (Cohen. Helping Behaviors For cooperative learning to effectively promote content-area learning. students as help providers must know what their peers already know. and high achievers differed in their willingness to provide help. These tasks are challenging indeed. The extent to which students help each other while working in small groups varies and appears to depend upon several factors. and then returned to his or her task brought about greater gains in reading comprehension than incomplete sequences. 1985. 1989) found a relationship between student achievement and the extent to which students supplied explanations when requested to do so by other students. In a study of third graders learning mathematics. 143). elaborate responses were more effective at increasing achievement than brief responses were (see reviews by Webb. 1989. emphasize that in order to give assistance that is useful. received help from a peer. & Ettenberger. When explanations were provided to a peer who had made an error or had asked for help. 1994b) cautioned that some students are inclined to dominate during group work. Like others who have examined group processes. and know how to lead or scaffold their peers to understanding. Also. and Pressley et al. O’Connor and Jenkins (1996) found a great deal of variation across groups in the amount and kind of help students with disabilities received in their cooperative learning reading lessons (and in who helped the students). Navarrete (1985) studied the helping behaviors of English language learners working in small groups and found that sequences in which a student asked for assistance. be able to pinpoint the area(s) of confusion. Student learning depends on the nature and quality of student interactions. Pressley et al.school mathematics classrooms. The provider of the explanation also gained from verbalizing or demonstrating the material. go 72 TESOL QUARTERLY . Mulryan (1989) found that low achievers varied in terms of their willingness to seek help. note that there are many ways interactions can go awry. Wharton-McDonald. in which a student received help without having asked for it or received no help even though it had been requested. 1991). the peer learned the material better than when there was no explanation. Hogan. Similarly. King (1993) found that low achievers were generally passive during small-group work unless specific steps were taken to reduce this passivity. A key factor affecting the productivity of small-group work appears to be how well the learning environment is structured to promote improved performance—placing students together and telling them to cooperate is not enough (Jacob et al. Webb (1982. whereas others tend to withdraw. 1996. Cohen (1994a. “Academically productive peer interactions will be more certain when greater care is taken by teachers to ensure that students who are talented in helping peers are in fact the ones helping” (Pressley. 1996). Mistretta. Similarly. Some students dominate discussions. Many groups tended to exclude lower skilled children from participation.. p. In a study of students’ behaviors and perceptions in small groups during mathematics. five. To maximize its benefits. 1984). students who had been taught how to provide conceptual explanations gave more such explanations than students who had not received the training. students of various reading and achievement levels work in small. or bicker. and adjust implementation procedures if the desired outcomes are not being achieved. the benefits of cooperative learning are not automatic. Bentz and Fuchs (1996) and Fuchs et al. students monitor comprehension by identifying clunks. when.. or difficult words and concepts in the passage. they are divided into small groups of four. and using fix-up strategies when the text does not make sense. closely monitor groups. Students learn why. during peer-mediated mathematics instruction. and teacher think-alouds. During CSR. 4. Webb and Farivar (1994) found that students who had been taught how to provide assistance showed higher achievement than peers who had not received this instruction. Wrap-up: After reading. and peers often provide explanations that are too brief. As students develop proficiency with the strategies. students summarize what has been learned and generate questions that a teacher might ask on a test (Palincsar & Brown. The clunk expert uses clunk cards to remind the group of the steps to follow when trying to figure out a difficult word or concept.off topic. Initially. Collaborative Strategic Reading CSR is a classroom technique developed to take advantage of the potentials of collaboration for language development in content classrooms. The leader guides the group in the implementation of CSR by prompting peers to apply each strategy at the proper time. Each student in a group performs a different role. (1997) found that. In a study of helping behaviors in cooperative groups during mathematics with middle school students. Click and clunk: During reading. about half of whom were English language learners. Get the gist: During reading. students restate the most important idea in a paragraph or section. the classroom teacher presents the strategies to the whole class using modeling. Preview: Prior to reading. students recall what they already know about the topic and to predict what the passage might be about. In conclusion. 3. These cards direct students to (a) reread the sentences before and after the HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 73 . and how to apply the strategies (Klingner et al. 2. role playing. teachers must structure the environment to support learning. or six students. cooperative groups to assist one another in applying four reading strategies to facilitate their comprehension of content-area text: 1. 1998). g. Thompson. The encourager evaluates the group. (c) look for a prefix or suffix. (c) individual accountability. they are encouraged to set aside the cue cards to enable more natural discussion to take place. & Hougen.and high-achieving students implemented CSR with a unit from their social studies textbook for 11 sessions. 1996). Classes were randomly assigned to treatment conditions. Roles are explicitly taught by the classroom teacher.and eighth-grade English language learners with learning disabilities were taught to apply reciprocal teaching strategies (Palincsar & Brown. (b) reread the sentence without the clunk and think about what would make sense.clunk. As students become confident in how to fulfill their roles. and average. see Klingner & Vaughn. In one study (Klingner et al. in many cases quite dramatically. and encourages all group members to participate and assist one another.. English language learners. (b) considerable face-to-face interaction among students. gives feedback. Ugel. The timekeeper keeps track of how much time the group members have to complete the section of the text they are reading.) Research on CSR CSR has yielded positive findings in investigations of its effectiveness. and (e) process evaluations following each session. 1984) while working in student-led cooperative learning groups. Students’ reading comprehension scores on passage comprehension and standardized tests improved at statistically significant levels. Subsequently. Students record their ideas in CSR learning logs and complete various follow-up activities (e.. and (d) break the word into smaller parts and look for words they know. we have attempted to fine-tune CSR’s 74 TESOL QUARTERLY . The announcer calls on different group members to read or share an idea and makes sure everyone participates. looking for clues. semantic maps and games to reinforce vocabulary). fourth-grade students in three diverse classrooms that included struggling readers. Over the past few years. 1999. Initially. Students’ scores on a standardized reading comprehension test improved at significantly higher levels than those of their peers in classrooms that did not use CSR. CSR has demonstrated statistically significant improvement in reading for middle school students with reading problems (Bryant. seventh. Vaughn. The essential characteristics of cooperative learning as described by Johnson and Johnson (1989) are present: (a) positive interdependence. (d) explicit social skills instruction. (For a more detailed description of the components of CSR and how to teach them. 1998). students use cue cards with prompts that specify how to carry out the different roles. 1999). In an earlier study (Klingner & Vaughn. we wished to know the following: 1. What percentage of discourse in each group was devoted to providing help. As in other studies of strategic learning in cooperative groups. Meloth & Deering. or procedural discussion. What percentage of discourse was devoted to the CSR comprehension strategies. and the researchers as effective. and (c) students were motivated and trained in how to help each other. and what was the nature of this help? 3. oral reading.) The total school population HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 75 . 1998). (All but 1 of the 38 students in the class received parental permission to participate in the study. What were students’ learning outcomes on vocabulary measures? METHOD Participants and Setting This study included 37 students in a fifth-grade class at an elementary school in a large. These modifications included (a) more clearly defining students’ helping roles and explicitly providing instruction in how to help clarify unknown vocabulary words and (b) increasing collaboration with teachers to model how to ask questions. 1994). in what ways did peers respond? 4. and what was the nature of this discourse? 2. particularly with unknown vocabulary. students spent considerable time engaged in procedural discussions (Deering & Meloth. In such a supportive setting. the majority did not. Although a few students assisted their peers. When students came across unknown vocabulary words. other teachers. We have since made modifications to CSR in an attempt to increase involvement. metropolitan school district in the southeastern United States. improve the quality of discussions. heterogeneous groups as they implemented CSR. fourth graders who were learning an earlier version of CSR overrelied on the initiation-response-evaluation pattern of discourse and infrequently engaged in higher level discussions. In a previous study (Klingner et al. with an excellent classroom manner. 1991.. and elaborate the responses of others to support their learning. The purpose of the present study was to determine how often and in what ways bilingual students helped each other and their LEP peers while working together in small. the principal. and enhance students’ abilities to help each other. (b) the teacher was viewed by parents. provide instruction.implementation procedures. This examination of helping behaviors during cooperative learning group work took place in a classroom where (a) considerable effort went into teaching students how to implement CSR. thus those students considered fluent in English were bilingual. of whom 75% qualified under income guidelines to receive free or reduced-price lunches and 31% were LEP. The classroom teacher. Levels correspond to those of the school district’s language proficiency interview. On the first day. First.consisted of 937 students (94% Hispanic. listening comprehension. Her classroom management skills in particular were considered superb. with 5 indicating full English proficiency) were measured with the district-developed English Language Proficiency Interview.” Mutual respect was paramount in her classroom. as determined by the State of Florida Language Survey (administered to all students in the district). The Language Assessment Scales—English Version (LAS. Achievement levels were determined by the classroom teacher based on students’ reading levels (as determined by test scores and teacher observation). the classroom teacher and her students learned how to implement CSR. had been teaching for more than 30 years and was by all accounts an excellent teacher. 1% Asian). All but 2 students spoke Spanish as their L1 or learned both Spanish and English in the home. “I wish I could be a fly on the wall to see how she does it. she explained the purpose of CSR and modeled the entire CSR plan for strategic reading as an overview for the students. Over the next 2 months. 4% White non-Hispanic. and 8 low-achieving students. and other teachers confided. The students then used CSR to learn content from their science textbook while data were collected. 6 average-achieving students. The LAS is an individually administered test of language proficiency with subtests that tap vocabulary knowledge. ESOL levels (from 1 to 5. The 37 participants included 2 students with learning disabilities. she conducted five demonstration lessons in the teacher’s classroom. teacher and students alike seemed to share a calm sense of purpose. ranging from 1 to 5. Sullivan. Procedures This study was conducted in two phases. and speaking ability. During the next three 76 TESOL QUARTERLY . De Avila & Duncan. 1990) were administered to the LEP students in the class to more precisely determine their English proficiency levels (see Table 1). as we observed and noted in the researcher’s log numerous times. 1% African American. Mrs. Phase 1: Learning CSR The first author initially taught CSR to the classroom teacher during an all-day workshop. 5 highachieving students. TABLE 1 English Language Proficiency of LEP Student Participants Student District ESOL level LASa level Country of origin Time in U. she provided explicit instruction in how to implement each of the CSR strategies. 4 months 3 years 1 year. 6 months Boys Manuel Hector Niklas Juan Raul Albert 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 4 4 Venezuela Cuba U. bNiklas was born in the United States. each with four lessons. one parent was from Colombia. Four of the groups consisted of 6 students. Phase 2: Implementing CSR CSR was integrated into science instruction during a unit on the systems of the human body that covered two chapters in the fifth-grade science textbook (Mallinson et al. and the other was from Nicaragua. the second phase of the study began.. By this point. the students quickly made this transition. 6 months n.S.b Colombia Cuba Cuba 6 months 2 years. visits. CSR HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 77 . The teacher and students then took over the responsibility for implementing CSR independently.a. Girls Rosa Teresa Amanda Linda Liana Arlene Juli Maribel Lourdes Marta 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 Cuba Cuba Cuba Venezuela Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba 4 months 8 months 10 months 9 months 1 year. 2 years 1 year. 1990).S. 1 month 1 year. 6 months 2 years 2 years. The first author continued visiting the class regularly and providing assistance as needed while the class became increasingly proficient at implementing CSR. Because they were already accustomed to working together cooperatively in other ways. students were ready to implement CSR in cooperative groups. 2 months 1 year. 1993). Once the teacher was confident that she and her students had developed expertise in the use of CSR. and two included 7 students. Students were assigned to groups including at least 2 highachieving or average-achieving students who were proficient in Spanish and English and at least 2 LEP students. 6 months a Language Assessment Scales (De Avila & Duncan. ”). for 30–40 minutes a day. Students read the text in English but translated vocabulary and key concepts into Spanish for their LEP peers. Thus.. Two researchers independently scored all tests. Vocabulary Measure We administered two 25-word. 78 TESOL QUARTERLY .072 utterances (speaking turns regardless of length). All bilingual and LEP students were assigned roles (i.94.e. The tests were scored as follows: Full definitions were awarded 2 points. partial definitions. 0 points. This process yielded 4. Students volunteered to take turns reading. a total score of 50 was possible for each test. peers assisted the less proficient English language learners by reading aloud with them or helping them decode difficult words. announcer. which were taken from the text but were not targeted by the book’s authors as key words. These roles rotated. The 11 remaining words. researcher-made vocabulary tests. and incorrect or missing definitions.was applied 2 or 3 days a week for 4 weeks. encourager.. timekeeper) in their CSR groups.” Fourteen of the words on each test designated as key vocabulary terms by the book’s authors were printed in bold letters in the text and were explicitly defined in context (e. Discussions about text content took place in English and Spanish. clunk expert. to all students as pretests and posttests. tapes were not available for a few sessions during which tape recorders malfunctioned).g. 1 point. were selected because students might consider them to be clunks and because they were important for understanding the text (e. “Marrow is a soft tissue inside bones. one for chapter 14 and one for chapter 15. Interrater agreement was calculated to be . By this time students were familiar enough with their responsibilities that they no longer relied on the CSR cue cards. Measures Recordings of Cooperative Group Discourse We audiotaped all cooperative learning group sessions during Phase 2 of the study (however. A bilingual research assistant later transcribed the tapes..g. Instructions directed students to “write a definition for each vocabulary word. leader. from 43 sessions by 6 groups (encompassing approximately 17 hours). Differences in scoring were discussed until mutual agreement was reached. dominance). (b) the amount and type of helping utterances. and (c) the ways peers responded to classmates’ requests to help clarify clunks. and reflections related to the study. three researchers independently coded the same transcripts (from two sessions) for the purposes of refining the coding scheme and calculating interrater agreement. two raters coded every utterance as applying to one of six categories: (a) oral reading. identifying incidents of helping. No utterances unrelated to the task were found in the transcripts. or procedural discussion. Classroom observations included notes about the teacher’s implementation validity as well as students’ behaviors in their CSR groups. The next analysis was conducted in a multistep procedure (Strauss & Corbin. Data Analysis The data analysis consisted of categorizing the utterances observed during group work and comparing pre. 1990). Any HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 79 . Representative samples from each group’s transcripts were selected to illustrate how strategies were actually applied and how students assisted one another.and posttest measures of vocabulary. (d) get the gist. (e) wrap-up. one of the researchers independently coded all transcripts. we examined the transcripts to determine how often the students used each of the strategies when working in their CSR groups. Similar to the coding scheme used in previous studies (Klingner et al. or (f) procedural (see Table 2). First. 1998. (b) preview. (c) click and clunk. oral reading. We operationalized helping behaviors as those utterances that appear designed to assist a fellow group member in applying a strategy or learning a concept. Meloth & Deering. 1994). We analyzed transcripts of students’ conversations while they worked in their cooperative learning groups three times using different coding schemes to determine (a) the percentage of discourse devoted to the CSR comprehension strategies. and then categorizing these into various subtypes (as reflected in Table 3). Next. For the purpose of coding the helping behaviors among the participants in this study. conversations with teachers and students. Intercoder agreement was calculated at 96%. and the other two researchers each coded half. and the nature of this discourse. we developed a taxonomy by reading through the transcripts. Once an initial coding taxonomy was in place. classroom observations of the teacher and students while implementing CSR..Researcher’s Log The first author kept a written record of demonstration lessons. which was 93%. ” • “I learned the three kinds of glands.TABLE 2 Taxonomy for Coding Oral Reading.” Get the gist Students determine the main idea of the paragraph or section of text they have just read.” Wrap up After reading. • “It’s time to stop. and Procedural Discussion Category of utterance Oral reading Comprehension strategies Preview Description Student reads aloud (with or without assistance). and review the most important ideas learned that day. ask for assistance with words they do not understand. . Once we agreed on units.” • “Sorry.” Students remind each other of the steps they should be following. • “Does everyone understand what we just read?” • “What is marrow?” • “Marrow is a soft tissue inside bones. students • “I already know that if we didn’t brainstorm what they already have bones we would die. Comprehension Strategies. • “How can drugs be harmful to you? • “It can harm you by taking it wrong or improper. To resolve disagreements. . We did not say the main idea. the coders met and discussed their interpretations and agreed upon the appropriate category. students generate teacher-like questions.” Procedural instruction differences in coding were resolved through discussion. about where the bones are and their names. and help each other clarify unknown words.” Click and clunk Students check to make sure everyone has understood what they have read. Another researcher then coded all of the data and achieved an agreement level of over 95% with the initial ratings. .” Before reading.” know about the topic and predict • “I think we are going to learn what they might learn. there has been a mistake. • “What is the most important idea we have learned so far?” • “It is talking about how the nervous system carries messages from all parts of the body. we highlighted representative quotes as well as quotes that appeared to be exceptions to general patterns. Sample utterances • “What does the muscular system do?” • “You have learned that the skeletal system helps the body move .” • “Read the sentence again and look for clues. 80 TESOL QUARTERLY . answer each other’s questions. Three researchers than independently coded all click-and-clunk utterances. As in previous analyses. we followed the same process used to code helping behaviors: We read through all clock-and-clunk utterances. To develop a coding taxonomy.TABLE 3 Taxonomy for Coding Helping Behaviors Category of helping behavior Description Sample utterances Comprehension check One student checks with the group or a specific individual to make sure they know a word or understand a concept. We also examined outcome data reflecting students’ progress on vocabulary measures. Two paired-sample t-tests were applied to assess HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 81 .” The next analysis examined how peers responded when their classmates encountered unknown vocabulary words. we categorized click-and-clunk utterances into subgroups. identifying the ways students responded to requests for assistance and then developing categories that reflected the types of help provided (see Table 4). a concept rather than just a brief And then you see the little wires definition or translation.” than just saying the answer. achieving interrater reliability of 94%. I’m going to add something to it. we identified representative utterances during this process.” • “That was pretty good. It is talking about the cerebellum and how when they stretch the surface . or a prompt to elicit exercise?” further information from another • “Do you want to add anything to student. • “Does everybody know what ligaments are?” Instruction A group member tells the steps • “Read the sentence over again needed to find an answer rather looking for clues. Prompt A student provides a clue. . a • “What did you do? What was the probe. . • “OK. or • “Right here it said that this is the provides a detailed explanation of long branch of the nerve cell.” • “Incorrect. right?” Elaboration A student elaborates upon another student’s contribution. back here. . Because discourse related to the click-and-clunk strategy occurred more often than other types of discourse among the students in this study and because it was through this strategy that students learned unknown vocabulary words. that response?” Feedback A student provides positive or corrective feedback (other than OK) to another student’s contribution. to posttest gains on the content and vocabulary measures for chapters 14 and 15 were statistically significant. • “Read the sentence over again looking for clues.” Definition A student provides a (brief) definition of a clunk. • “I agree with her. • “Como fracturado. • “Right here it said that this is the long branch of the nerve cell. And then you see the little wires back here. right? That middle one is called the long branch.” Feedback A student provides positive or corrective feedback (other than OK) to another student’s contribution.” Procedural instruction A student tells the steps needed to figure out a clunk rather than just saying the answer. • “Fracture?” Responses to clunks Translation A student translates a clunk but (without definition) does not define it.” Other on-task utterance A student gives a brief response.” Conceptual instruction A student provides a detailed explanation of a concept rather than just a brief definition or translation. right? The middle one is the longest.05 was maintained (Keppel. 1982). Using Bonferroni’s correction (because multiple analyses were conducted).” Elaboration A student adds to or rephrases another student’s explanation. • “Who has a clunk they would like help with?” • “Does everybody know what ligaments are?” Clunk A student has a clunk that needs clarifying. • “No.TABLE 4 Taxonomy for Coding Click-and-Clunk Utterances Category Description Sample utterances Comprehension check One student checks with the group or an individual to find out if anyone has a clunk.” or calling on a student whether students’ pre. That the skeletal muscles are attached to the bones of the skeleton.” “yes. • Positive: “That was pretty good. the alpha level for each was set at 0.025 so that a family-wise alpha of 0. and that these muscles move the bones of the body. 82 TESOL QUARTERLY .” • Corrective: “Incorrect. without elaboration or further instruction. • “Fracture means when you break a bone. RESULTS We first present results of the three discourse analyses in order to address the study’s principal research questions regarding students’ interactions in their cooperative learning groups. Almost no time was spent negotiating procedures. CSR Comprehension Strategies. que quiere decir? (Yes. strategic discussion. and wrapup strategies illustrate how students implemented the CSR strategies. Two groups spent 15% of the time getting the gist.1 1.) 1 In the examples. get-the-gist. The wrap-up strategy was applied the least consistently. and one group spent a full 34% of their time on this strategy. Oral Reading. Mario as the group leader checked for understanding. do you know what voluntary is? Voluntario? ¿Sí. students in Group 1 spoke in both English and Spanish as they clarified a key concept from the passage after reading a section of text. The following examples of the click-and-clunk. Coding from transcripts revealed that the groups spent virtually all of their time engaged in academicrelated. HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 83 . All names are pseudonyms. As for the strategies. Even though no one had identified voluntary as a clunk. English translations of Spanish utterances are in parentheses. In the first example. About 20% of the students’ utterances were devoted to reading aloud from their textbooks. More variation was apparent in students’ implementation of the get-the-gist and wrap-up strategies. whereas three groups approached or reached 25%. (That they move when they want. all six groups spent approximately half of their discussion time (ranging from 43% to 56%) identifying and clarifying clunks. and Procedural Discussion This analysis provides an overview of the percentage of discourse devoted to oral reading. what does it mean?) Como ellos se mueven cuando ellos quieren. in part because some groups frequently ran out of time before finishing the day’s reading assignment. The analyses of student outcome data follow. Mario: Frank: Mario: Frank: Does anybody have any click and clunks? ¿Alguien tiene alguna palabra que no entiende? OK. and to procedural discussion (see Table 5) and a backdrop for understanding additional analyses of students’ helping utterances. to each CSR strategy. took place after the group had read the day’s entire assignment. Greg: Diana: Jessica: Diana: Pablo: What is the most important idea we have learned about the topic so far? Jessica. the closed fracture hurts more than the open fracture because it opens up more when it is open. and Erica was the announcer. from Group 2. teacher-like question as required by the wrap-up strategy. from Group 5. Gloria: What Frank is trying to say is that voluntary means when all your fingers move by themselves. can you please answer that? We learned that a fracture is a crack or a break in a bone.TABLE 5 Utterances Devoted to Oral Reading. He regularly contributed to discussions about the gist of a passage. When a part of your body moves when you want it to and it stops when you want it to. can you add to that? Yes. Pablo was an English language learner with learning disabilities. Roland was the designated group leader. 84 TESOL QUARTERLY . Pablo. a Regularly done with the teacher as a whole class prior to working in groups. OK. 2. Comprehension Strategies. by Category and Group (%) Group Category of utterance Oral reading Comprehension strategy Previewa Click and clunk Get the gist Wrap upb Procedural instruction 1 2 3 4 5 6 21 15 16 24 20 20 0 45 25 10 0 1 51 22 11 0 0 46 15 22 0 1 43 24 6 2 0 56 15 8 1 0 46 34 0 0 Note. Tasha asked the question. asked for elaboration to the response. and Procedural Instructions. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding. the conversation took place after the group had read a section of text. that is because of the muscle cells. The first line of discourse is a studentgenerated. The third example. it is trying to say that when you break your bone like a closed fracture and an open fracture. and eventually provided a detailed answer herself. bSometimes completed as a whole-class activity after students worked in groups. Greg was the leader and Diana was the announcer. In the second example. implemented the comprehension strategies HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 85 . And. Like Group 4. from a high of 21% in Group 5 to a low of 5% in Group 4 (see Table 6). I would say the same thing because the bones without calcium are nothing. Group 3 focused a relatively high percentage of instructional utterances on providing explicit instruction in concepts. well. calcium is something that keeps the bones healthy and stuff like that. Tasha: OK. some students were more proficient at providing assistance than others. Helping Behaviors The percentage of utterances devoted to helping behaviors varied across groups. then after you die you know your bones decay and you turn into dust. group members also elaborated frequently. The examples also indicate the unstilted quality of the students’ discussion. Students in Group 4 frequently checked whether their peers understood but provided little instructional support beyond that.3. Luis: OK. Group 5 was characterized by close to equal percentages of explicit instruction and comprehension checks. Group 6 had a high percentage of comprehension checks. what is calcium? And then we can figure out what it says and how it helps the bones. These examples illustrate the high level of task engagement typical of all groups. Within each group. they will probably break. Erica: OK. first of all. Students in Group 2 frequently elaborated and provided positive feedback. Erica: Tasha? Tasha: If you don’t have enough calcium the bones will rot and you will be dead. If it does not have enough calcium. Groups varied in the types of instructional utterances emphasized: Students in Group 1 were more likely to check for comprehension (as in Example 1) or elaborate than to provide explicit instruction. however. then the bones will get weak and break. with little elaboration or prompting. Although students were engaged in academic discourse and were exhibiting teacher-like behaviors. Close inspection of the transcripts revealed that all groups were on task. Roland: All right. Your bones will like decompose in your body which will destroy and corrupt. they used language that was clearly their own. But can we add a little bit? Roland: Well. Students appeared to take seriously their responsibilities of learning the content and helping others do so as well. Tasha: What might happen if your bones did not contain enough calcium? Luis: They will break. we finished this. ranging from a low of 27% for Group 3 to a high of 73% for Group 6. depending on the personalities and skills of the group members. Yes. In response to the clunks. and worked together collaboratively. Definitions were accurate but brief. Yet clearly each group developed its own style and strengths.”).. Student 1: “Allowed?” Student 2: “Es dejar. 86 Susana: Ruben: Denis: Maria: Did everyone understand what we read? Yes. All groups sometimes gave brief definitions for some words. Susana was the leader. 4. students in Group 3 were the most likely to provide a quick translation from Spanish to English rather than an elaborate clarification (e. effectively. Yes. TESOL QUARTERLY . % of all utterances Subcategories as % of all helping utterances Comprehension check Instruction Elaboration Prompt Feedback Positive Corrective 1 2 3 4 5 6 607 627 840 720 819 459 90 15 61 10 106 13 37 5 170 21 89 19 38 8 26 12 15 15 38 6 23 39 21 1 62 11 14 5 36 38 6 2 56 13 29 1 13 3 23 3 8 8 0 8 14 2 1 0 Note. by Category and Group Group Category All utterances All helping utterances No. Responses to Unknown Vocabulary Students across all groups frequently asked their peers if they had any clunks (part of the click-and-clunk strategy). and students in every group complied by coming up with numerous words they did not understand (see Table 7).g. Students were able to help one another. Example 4 illustrates the cursory manner in which the students in Group 6 often implemented this strategy. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.TABLE 6 Utterances Devoted to Helping Behaviors. 5. HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 87 . Diana: Pablo: Greg: Pablo: Greg: Pablo: Greg: Pablo: Click and clunk? Calcium. Diana was the leader. Try to read sentences in the back and in the front to try to get a clue. now I do. and checked for understanding. It is what connects your bones in place. Do you know what mineral is? Yeah. and Greg was the clunk expert and a high-achieving student. Group 5 did this most often (for 36% of the clunks). as illustrated in the following examples. Did you get anything? No. Does everyone know what injury is? Like when you break a bone. I get something. from Group 5. by Category and Group Group Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Comprehension check 92 90 101 113 151 64 611 Clunk Response to clunk Translation Definition Procedural instruction Conceptual instruction Elaboration Feedback Positive Corrective Other on-task utterance 65 95 107 86 76 63 492 7 42 5 20 10 16 44 4 26 2 56 29 17 10 12 30 49 0 7 5 28 25 28 24 17 3 46 6 5 8 140 235 60 92 54 1 0 30 4 1 32 0 0 38 0 0 18 4 1 96 0 0 14 9 2 228 Susana: Ruben: Susana: Denis: Does anybody know what ligaments is? It is what holds your bones in place. Few groups supplied procedural instructions designed to help students figure out clunks on their own. OK. What is it? It’s like a kind of vitamin. followed by Group 3 (for 16%). Pablo is an English language learner with a learning disability.TABLE 7 Click-and-Clunk Utterances. You get cut. In Example 5. He supplied both procedural and conceptual explanations. It is a tiny crystal-like mineral. Think if you see any sentences in the back or in the front that can help you. In Example 7. good. Que es como un elastic en la punta del hueso y es cuando los dos huesos se conectan. one more time? It is a type of element that helps the bones grow. OK. . Es una vena que corre por el hueso.) Cartilage is a strong elastic tissue in the skeletal system. ignored this contribution and went on to show how to figure out the meaning of the word. OK. It’s a vein that runs through the bone. the blood vessel. Es una vena. go right here.” This is where the picture is helpful. OK. Es muy importante. 7. Es una vena que pasa por aquí. Yo creo. (OK. Everyone put your finger over here where the word is. as illustrated by the following two examples. . right here. And if you look up here. I think. Cuando tú estás TESOL QUARTERLY . and 5 supplied their peers with at least 20 detailed conceptual explanations (for 31%. It’s a blood vein. And. cartilage. Es una vena de sangre. (It’s a vein. Eso es lo que yo dice. Do you now understand what calcium is? Yes.) Students in Groups 1. Tina: Mario: Frank: Gloria: Frank: 88 OK. who has any click and clunks? Quién tiene alguna palabra que no entendiste aquí? Cartilage. You see it here. 27%. from Group 1. where is it? Umm. Cartilage is found in places where bones come together. What is it again. vessels. Tina was the leader. Tú lo ves aquí. (reading) “Notice that vessels run into the marrow . ese es cuando tú tienes la punta del hueso. and 32% of all clunks generated by the group. Everyone find the word. It’s very important. to the sentence before. OK. you see where it says “blood vessels. el blood vessel. that is when you have the tip of the bone.Greg: Pablo: Greg: Pablo: Greg: OK. respectively). . When the bone connects to another bone you have something there and that is cartilage. Cuando conecta a otro hueso tiene como algo ahí que esta ahí y eso es un cartilage. Carlos. Calcium helps the bones in order to make them strong. the students reread the sentence with the word and used a picture to help them figure out their clunk. Arelis: Rafael: Carlos: Arelis: Carlos: Rafael: What is vessels? Does anyone know? Vessels go through the marrow and inside the bones. Arelis was the leader. the clunk expert. Even though Rafael defined the clunk. 2.” Look at the picture right here. calcium is a type of element that there is in the bones. the bones need that. 6. It’s a vein that passes through here. In the exchange from Group 3 shown in Example 6. whereas other groups took the time to provide conceptual explanations of key terms. That it is like an elastic in the tip of the bone and it is when the two bones connect. Ana: Greg: Diana: Pablo: Diana: Pablo: Diana: Pablo: Diana: Pablo: Click and clunk? He has two. You see these little things. so that they would need to provide an explanation. The short branch is the one that connects it to the cell. (That’s what I said. thus requiring an explanation. Let’s turn back to the page and look at the picture. I got it. or (b) one their peer did not understand. tú haces así y lo estiras. bilingual peers were required to make two important decisions. One gets it. right? OK. So when the branches finish and get there they hook up in the cell. Long branch and short branch. then they give the message. you do this and it stretches. First. They connect it to the branches. You are seated and you stand up and it is the elastic of the muscle of the meat that is stuck to the bone that helps you to move. Did you understand? Yes. While the long branches carry messages it connects to the short branches. And. The middle one is the longest.) In Example 8.sentado es como un elastic. You see three branches. OK. for every clunk. Ana was the leader. Get it? Yeah. thus requiring only a translation or brief explanation. That middle one is called the long branch. 8. right? Yeah. When you are seated it is like elastic. they needed to decide if the clunk was (a) a concept their classmate already knew and understood (in Spanish). and Diana. was the clunk expert. Some students appeared more able to make these distinctions than others did. how they connect it. from Group 5. Second. they were required to decide if the word was (a) important to understanding the passage. HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 89 . That carries the messages to the next nerve cells. let’s answer the first one. or (b) not essential. and then the branch passes it on to the other one and that one gets it. the long branches carry messages to their cells. The short branches receive messages. Some groups were more likely to provide simple translations or quick definitions. As shown in the examples. so that a simple translation would suffice. OK. which is the long branch. Like. Tú estás aquí sentado y te paras y es el elastic del músculo de la carne que está pegado al hueso que lo ayuda a moverse. an average-achieving student. Student Outcomes on Vocabulary Measures According to two paired-sample t-tests. Predictably. p = .95 11. p = . Maximum possible score was 50. Gains were higher on the chapter 15 measure than on the chapter 14 measure. Table 9 shows the performance of the LEP. All students showed more improvement on the chapter 15 than on the chapter 14 vocabulary measure.32 19.38 28 28 6.16 14.73 27 Note.28. Because the content in chapter 15 built on what students had learned in chapter 14. The LEP students exhibited little growth on the chapter 14 vocabulary test but showed some improvement on the chapter 15 test. who in turn outperformed low-achieving students. Closer scrutiny of the LEP students’ vocabulary tests indicated that in many cases they approximated the correct definition in either Spanish or English but were unable to meet the strict scoring criteria. All paired-sample t-tests were statistically significant.000 for the chapter 15 vocabulary test (see Table 8). p = .05 2. high-achieving.28 21 2. students’ pretest-to-posttest gains on the chapter 14 and 15 vocabulary measures were statistically significant. averageachieving.000 for the chapter 14 vocabulary test and t(27) = 6.73. this increased growth could in part be attributed to students’ increasing familiarity with key vocabulary. with the average-achieving students approaching the mean score of the high-achieving students. This measure may not have done enough to tap into LEP students’ growing understanding of difficult words.000.18 3. high-achieving students outperformed average-achieving students. and low-achieving students on the chapter 14 and 15 vocabulary tests.49 22 22 7. or students may have been learning partial meanings without gaining deep conceptual understandings of words (Laufer. t(21) = 7. 90 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1998).64 19. TABLE 8 Means and Standard Deviations on Vocabulary Tests for Paired Samples Measure Chapter 14 Pretest Posttest Chapter 15 Pretest Posttest M SD n t df 4. .TABLE 9 Means and Standard Deviations on Vocabulary Tests. Sullivan exhibited high levels of CSR implementation during observations but frequently made one adaptation: She conducted wholeclass previews rather than asking groups to preview on their own. Researcher’s Observations Mrs.17 23. too.28 3 13 1. Maximum possible score was 50.55 7 7 Note.76 7.57 3. They seem more confident. The students will be reading in the cafeteria. She exclaimed.80 34. Yet by the end of the intervention she was convinced that her LEP students had benefited a great deal. or both. Sullivan was very enthusiastic about CSR (e.g. And they are participating more in other subjects.80 33.g. “Another reason I like this technique is that there is a transfer.” HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 91 . and what was learned.58 12. For homework. what does it mean?’ and that just thrills me.79 5.43 1. Initially.31 1.. After students had wrapped up in their groups. to formulate and answer questions.86 11 13 5. how much they learned. Sullivan was skeptical about including her LEP students in CSR groups for content-area instruction. She explained that she liked to do this to help students make connections between material they had already learned and the day’s topic. questions.62 . Mrs.76 5 5 6. Mrs.60 5. time permitting. she often asked students to make vocabulary cards with a word on one side and a definition on the other.82 7.13 2.26 5 5 5. I’ve seen so much improvement in their English. she also conducted a whole-class wrap-up of clunks.83 2. Statistical significance was not tested because of the small sample size.75 11. ‘Hey.” She added.68 7 8 1. and they’ll say.33 5.04 6 6 2.26 8.25 7.07 7. previewing before a math lesson or figuring out clunks during reading). “I can’t believe how well they did.14 11. by Student Achievement Level Chapter 14 Achievement level LEP Pretest Posttest High achieving Pretest Posttest Average achieving Pretest Posttest Low achieving Pretest Posttest Chapter 15 M SD n M SD n 2.67 32.47 6 6 3.17 3. look at this clunk word.94 6.20 1. “It’s wonderful”) and implemented comprehension strategies throughout the day (e. (1997) and Pressley et al. Klingner et al.Descriptive accounts from the researcher’s log noted that all small groups functioned quite well during CSR. For example. whether students scaffold may be a question not of whether students are capable of doing so but of whether they know how to provide assistance. in which students were much more engrossed in procedural discussion (Deering & Meloth. 1998). 1990). Groups spontaneously began using choral reading techniques to help LEP students take a turn reading aloud. This appeared to in part be a function of English proficiency. These findings corroborate the recommendations of Fuchs et al. his entire group applauded him. It was clear that students took very seriously the responsibility of helping each other succeed. Scaffolding for peers. in general those students with the lowest English proficiency levels seemed least likely to be able to participate in and benefit from interaction with their peers. diverse fifth-grade class studied consistently applied comprehension strategies. peers translated and explained concepts in Spanish. (1996). whether they are motivated to do so. when one LEP student tentatively read aloud in English for the first time. and formulating and answering questions about what they read. Students in every group demonstrated patience and skill in teaching concepts to their peers. 92 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1991. Most of the LEP students appeared to be active participants in their groups. students were “very on task and cooperative. Students kept learning logs in Spanish and English. the students in the large. What is remarkable about these findings is that the overall amount of time students spent engaged in academic-related. 1994). Meloth & Deering. Many students assumed the role of language broker (Moll. DISCUSSION In CSR cooperative learning groups. Contrary to the conclusion reached in an earlier study (Klingner et al. strategic discussion exceeded that found in previous studies. getting the main idea. can be particularly challenging for bilingual students helping LEP classmates with English content learning. a few seemed marginalized. who emphasize that for group work to be successful.” Each group had at least one LEP Level 1 student. 1992).. a formidable task even for fluent English speakers (Tudge. and whether the environment is structured to provide an optimal level of support. doing more than translating—enabling and facilitating the language understanding of their classmates. with bilingual students translating English vocabulary into Spanish and sometimes providing elaborate conceptual explanations of key vocabulary terms. However. teachers must provide students with careful guidance on how to interact effectively. 1998. They assisted one another in understanding the meaning of challenging words.. Durán & Szymanski. it as yet may not do enough to draw in and supply comprehensible input for all students in a linguistically diverse group.. diverse classrooms that include LEP students during content instruction. As Jacob et al. Although CSR provided a participant structure that facilitated group interactions. Although cooperative learning is often suggested as a means for facilitating the engagement of children with diverse learning needs (e.. However. we observed cases in which students did not appear to understand but did not request assistance. some opportunities for instruction were missed. the small-group. heterogeneous class to participate. this study can assist teachers in setting realistic. requiring students to write full definitions for target words. and in which students asked for help with a clunk and received only a cursory reply (e. we did not find instances in which students asked for help and did not receive it.g. It is likely that smaller groups (of four or five rather than six or seven students) would lead to increased levels of participation.g. a brief translation). 1986). Yet unlike Jacob et al. O’Connor & Jenkins. 1995. appropriate language and content curriculum HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 93 . gains were not dramatic. or perhaps the instruction provided by bilingual peers did not meet the need for comprehensible input of the groups’ beginning English language learners (Pica et al. 1996).If students’ vocabulary test scores in this study are an accurate indication. However. (1996) found in their study. The findings from this study demonstrate that the components of CSR can provide a format and participant structure that promote group functioning and facilitate strategic learning. By helping teachers understand the ways in which students are able to help each other while working in CSR groups. nonteacher-directed activities allow more students in a large. Pedagogical Implications We believe the findings from this study yield important implications for heterogeneous. Perhaps the vocabulary measure was difficult. just as the students they help do. Furthermore.. previous observations of less proficient learners in cooperative groups have indicated that these students are often less-than-active members of their groups (Jacob et al. students—both average-achieving and high-achieving—who give assistance also benefit. 1996... Kagan. lending insights into the ways in which cooperative groups can provide opportunities for student-led discussions that enhance vocabulary acquisition. On the other hand. 1996). teachers implementing this approach should pay close attention to students’ participation levels and make adjustments if some students seem marginalized. although the vocabulary scores of the LEP students improved. content goals are met as well. This is especially important given the positive outcomes associated with the question generation strategy in previous research (see Rosenshine & Meister. 386). study of other classrooms seems warranted. Because CSR involves students in authentic language activities that require the negotiation of meaning among participants and provide semistructured vocabulary practice. 1994. 1994). Future research would do well to examine student discourse across a variety of classes. Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Further Research This study examined student discourse in one class only. perhaps with teachers less proficient in classroom management than Mrs. Also. Although much can be learned about teaching English language learners from studying expert teachers. noting the usefulness of examining patterns of participation and the forms and functions of students’ language when determining teaching goals. “especially goals for content-linked ESL teaching” (p. Future efforts to fine-tune the implementation of CSR should strive to ensure that all students implement the wrap-up strategy. 1995. it should not be the only instructional approach used for this purpose but should be a tool for teachers to add to their repertoire. 1992). Moll. Sullivan was. And because students are reading and discussing science or social studies text. Gersten & Woodward. 1992). The students in this study were remarkably engaged in learning. it is well suited for meeting language goals (Ulichny. 1995. Cazden (1995) emphasized the importance of examining the composition of classroom talk and its relation to specific curriculum goals. Future research should also explore the use of CSR in combination with other approaches. Although CSR is one method of simultaneously teaching academic content and language skills to students. teachers are likely 94 TESOL QUARTERLY . With CSR. to what extent this was because of the structure provided by CSR and to what extent it was because of the classroom teacher’s high expectations is a topic for future research. 1995. such as the one in this study (García. Moll.goals. Gersten & Woodward. 1996). The use of control classes would also provide the opportunity to collect comparative outcome data. intellectually limited academic tasks rather than higher level learning activities (Fitzgerald. Also of interest is whether the structure of CSR is sufficient to increase high-level task engagement in classrooms where teachers involve students in low-level. student discourse was examined only while students worked in cooperative learning groups. Similar analyses of discourse while students engage in alternative activities would provide further bases for comparison. She has been the TESOL program coordinator. L. content-area textbook reading sessions. We also appreciate the valuable contributions of our research assistants. L. DC: National Academy Press.. For teachers interested in teaching reading comprehension strategies and implementing cooperative learning in their classrooms. Klingner is an assistant professor at the University of Miami’s Department of Teaching and Learning. REFERENCES August. Aile Montoya. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special thanks are due to Lucille Sullivan and her students for so generously sharing their time and allowing us into their classroom. Bentz. CSR provides a structure and format conducive to high levels of student engagement. & Hakuta. D. HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 95 . Improving peers’ helping behavior to students with learning disabilities during mathematics peer tutoring. & Fuchs.). K. S. This project was partially funded by a Research Support Award from the University of Miami. CSR may offer an effective alternative to whole-class. and Liana Simon. (1996). 202–215. (1997). CONCLUSION This study contributes to the small but growing knowledge base on peer assistance in diverse cooperative learning groups by showing that students can help one another effectively in a conducive setting when given adequate levels of support. J. Sharon Vaughn is the Mollie Villeret Davis Professor of Learning Disabilities at the University of Texas at Austin.. Washington. Learning Disability Quarterly. Her current research interests include outcomes for English language learners with learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms and reading comprehension strategy instruction. (Eds. 19. we recommend that the teacher use other ESL strategies to introduce or reinforce important concepts. THE AUTHORS Janette K. Her research interests address academic and social interventions to enhance outcomes for students with learning problems.to have students work in cooperative groups two or three times a week rather than every day. On days when students are not working in their small groups. Improving schooling for language minority students: A research agenda on the education of limited-English-proficient and bilingual students. but not to all types of teacher-facilitated instruction. Debbie Sheingold. P. R. (1995). Gersten. (1999).. (1994). Durán. Cooperative learning: What special educators need to know. M. Los Angeles: California State University. Enhancing students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. B. (1986). K. Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. S. R. E.. S. K. 223–240. Language Arts.. R. English-as-a-second-language reading instruction in the United States: A research review. Moll. Cazden. (1989). D. 1–35. N. E. Elementary School Journal. 223–249. In California State Department of Education (Ed. L. Manuscript submitted for publication. & Mehan. CA: CTB Macmillan McGraw-Hill. Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp.. Language assessment scales.. P.. T. J. C. E. A descriptive study of naturally occurring discussion in cooperative learning groups.. Cohen. TESOL Quarterly. Cazden. S. R. E. Ugel. Fuchs. 95. (1996).. Kagan. Vaughn. Hakuta. 253–280. Evaluation. Washington. (1998). J. 827–841. (1988). 64. Cooperative learning and sociocultural factors in schooling.. (1995). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups... J. (1990). Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Deering. M. (1997). 149–169. H. San Diego. S. 5–10. G. Johnson. B. L. The Pointer. The Elementary School Journal. In California State Department of Education (Ed. & Jiménez. DC: George Washington University. A longitudinal study of transitional and immersion bilingual education programs in one district. García. (1995). Center for Applied Linguistics. Díaz. Jacob. Dissemination. S. 28.. R. In Proceedings of the first research symposium on limited English proficient students’ issues (pp. & Johnson. G. Belmont. Discourse Processes. (1991). M. D. Sociocultural resources in instruction: A context-specific approach. Washington.. De Avila. Patrick.. Phillips. CA: Wadsworth. H. and Assessment Center. 115–152. 1–22). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Karns. Cummins.. TESOL Quarterly.). The role of native language literacy in the education of language minority children. & Duncan. E. 27. Thompson. S. S. Understanding and meeting the challenge of student cultural diversity. 231–298). Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp.. New ideas for research on classroom discourse. & Dutka. B. L. M. E. Rottenberg. Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Hudelson. 33.). T.Bryant. 7–13. (1994a). 19. Preparing mainstream teachers for teaching potentially English proficient students. Cooperative learning interaction and construction of activity. 64. P. E. CA: College Hill. Fuchs. 384–387.S. (1987). Reading intervention model for middle school students with learning disabilities. Fitzgerald. (1984). Los Angeles: California State University. (1986).. 30. & Hougen. and Assessment Center.. & Wheeler. Department of Education. S. (1990). W. 97. Review of Educational Research. (1990). 187–230). DC: U. Hamayan. Designing groupwork. Promoting learning for culturally and linguistically diverse students. D. Dissemination. Bilingualism and bilingual education: A research perspective. Hamlett. T. B. Evaluation. Journal of Classroom Interaction. E. L. 96 TESOL QUARTERLY . NH: Heinemann. New York: Teachers College Press. & Szymanski. 29. Journal of Reading Behavior. S. & Meloth. Gersten. Monterey. D. (1994b). Cohen. C. A. C.. Cooperative learning: Context and opportunities for acquiring academic English. (1995). Portsmouth. & Woodward. M.. S. 21. & Vaughn. Rowley. In E. 20–24. Input and second language acquisition theory. K. J. C. (1992. M. C. Long. Mulryan. NJ: Prentice Hall. Elementary School Journal.. Morristown. University of Missouri. (1983). Navarrete. 19. Lincoln-Porter. Gass & C. A. McLean. J. Doing things with words— verbal interaction in lockstep and small group classroom situations.. 30. L. (1985). 96. 3–21. (1982). & Brown. Lewis. & Castanos. C.). & Porter. G. (1994). M. 137–153). L. 207–228. Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input. Piaget. (1985). Task talk and task awareness under different cooperative learning conditions. The reciprocal teaching of comprehensionfostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. K. K. Froschauer. Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. J. Klingner. content learning. Washington. F. S. Department of Education. Pica. (1985). American Educational Research Journal. 6. Klingner. S. & Jenkins. Exceptionality.. (1993). L. The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language. C.). P. N. J.. S. Fanselow & R. S. NJ: Silver Burdett & Ginn. Klingner. interlanguage talk. (1984).. S. 377–393). DC: U.. Long. 138–165. DC: TESOL. (1985). T.. (1993).. In J. London: Longman. Applied Linguistics. M. 59–84. Noddings. L. and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly. (1998). Stanford. Group work. 399–416. S. Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. 93. (1989). Stanford University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Adams. Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving (pp.). G. Paninos. M. J. The psychology of intelligence. Hillsdale.. Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook. (1999). R. P. O’Connor. Macías. J. Small groups as a setting for research on mathematical problem solving. Krashen. & Schumm. 19. 738–747. King... Crymes (Eds. Moll. Linguistic and conversational adjustments to nonnative speakers. (1996). Cognition and Instruction. Science horizons. Promoting reading comprehension. L... Madden (Eds. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. 117–175. HELPING BEHAVIORS OF FIFTH GRADERS 97 . 345–360). B. M. & Valentino. G. R. D. Englewood Cliffs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. J. Columbia. On TESOL ’76 (pp. Silver (Ed. Long. Bilingual classroom studies and community analysis: Some recent trends. E. (1996). S. D. Problem resolution in small group interaction: A bilingual classroom study. 1. and English acquisition through collaborative strategic reading (CSR). A.. Long. CA. F. M. The Reading Teacher. output. & Vaughn. March). (1950). A study of intermediate-grade students’ involvement and participation in cooperative small groups in mathematics. J. Palincsar. Vaughn. Harris.Keppel. Input in second language acquisition (pp. Mallinson. (1998). 5. 177–193. & Deering.. Elementary School Journal. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 31. Mallinson. B. High and low achievers’ perceptions and cooperative learning in two small groups. TESOL Quarterly. Elementary School Journal. Laufer. (1976). 29–51. (1998).. Summary report of the survey of the states’ limited-English-proficient students and available educational programs and services 1996–97. 52. Meloth. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. MA: Newbury House. Educational Researcher. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. & Linnell. (1985). 255–271. and second language acquisition.. A.. In S. Cooperative learning as an inclusion strategy: A closer look. 275–293. 99. NJ: Erlbaum. (1996).S. M. Washington. F. A. H. R.. J. 11. Webb. The multicultural classroom: Readings for content-area teachers (pp. (1989). 138– 146. Ulichny. 74. Vygotsky. 475–484. & Doughty. Journal of Educational Psychology. N.. In R.). Tharp. & Lapkin. & Gallimore. Cambridge. 97–119). (1994). 21–39. (1991).). S. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vygotsky. B. A. M. (1982). Vygotsky and education (pp. J. American Educational Research Journal. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Swain. Bialystok (Ed. 155–174). and achievement in cooperative small groups. S. M. Snow (Eds. group interaction. Webb. M. (1996). C. S. & Saumell. 271–284). R. Language processing in bilingual children (pp. R. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice. Webb. Barasch & C. K.. Students’ views of instructional practices: Implications for inclusion. International Journal of Educational Research.. and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. Performed conversations in an ESL classroom. NY: Longman. Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. P. R. S. Sharan.. (1991). Basics of qualitative research. M. James (Eds. Learning to cooperate. P. New York: Plenum Press. C. M. Hogan. learning.Pica. Rivers. 479–530. Richard-Amato. 71–95).. In R. S. 739–764. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.). J. Richard-Amato & M. Second language learning in children: A model of language learning in social context. R. Webb. L. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education. N. R.. (1989). C. In E. (1992). K. Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. TESOL Quarterly. & R. 147–176).. 31. (1994). & Corbin. Peer teachers: The neglected resource. Hertz-Lazarowitz. (1996). Tudge.. Student interaction and learning in small groups. J.. L.. Review of Educational Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 22.). M. CA: Sage. Comprehension and production: The interactive duo. MA: Harvard University Press. N.. Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. J. (1978). Moll (Ed. In R. Webb. Rousing minds to life: Teaching. S. The impact of interaction on comprehension. Young. Mistretta. 30. Kagan. A. White Plains. S. Peer interaction and learning in small groups. C. The challenges of instructional scaffolding: The challenges of instruction that supports student thinking. (1985). 64. (1990). 73. Vaughn. 98 TESOL QUARTERLY . 18. 236–248. N. In L. (1985). (1994). Canadian immersion and adult second language teaching: What is the connection? Modern Language Journal. Rosenshine. the zone of proximal development. J..).. Beyond the monitor model: Comments on current theory and practice in second language acquisition (pp. Strauss. Webb. Beyond the monitor model: Comments on current theory and practice in second language acquisition (pp. 369–395. Slavin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schumm. cooperating to learn (pp. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. (1988). Group composition. In P. Learning Disability Quarterly. Wharton-McDonald. A. Newbury Park. 366–389. and schooling in social context.). (1990). G. S. Schmuck (Eds. Barasch & C. Pressley. & Meister. (1995). & Farivar. 49–69).. W. T. L. James (Eds. 13. N. Wong Fillmore. A. 150–159. & Ettenberger. Klingner. M. more powerful role. This genre may be particularly difficult for English language learners to master.g. Swales. Hamp-Lyons.. This study of three oral intake interviews used a process of triangulation to establish a prototypical structure for the interview. R esearch in a range of fields has focused upon the description and explanation of both oral and written genres employed by discourse communities within many different social settings. Oregon. as they have no input on its nature before participating in it and no supportive. which followed but did not exactly replicate the application form in content and linguistic structure. mediative collaboration during participation because their only interlocutor plays a different. 1997. from academic (e. Maier. Minnesota. TESOL professionals can use the findings of this study to design materials that will prepare nonnative-speaking applicants to more effectively negotiate the social services oral intake interview. 1. in which information previously written on an application form is reviewed to decide whether an applicant is eligible for benefits. United States Genre analysis is applied to the study of discourse occurring in the social services financial intake interview. 1990) to business (e.. United States KIMBERLY KUEHN Portland Community College Portland. Misunderstanding in this context puts an applicant at risk of failing to secure financial support and even of unwittingly committing welfare fraud. 34. Her responses (or lack of them) often suggested that she did not understand all the information conveyed by the interviewer. Although native-English-speaking and English language learner applicants responded to the interviewer in similar ways.Negotiating the Social Services Oral Intake Interview: Communicative Needs of Nonnative Speakers of English ELAINE TARONE University of Minnesota Minneapolis. Nickerson. Spring 2000 99 . 1992. the English language learner used little or no back-channeling to show understanding and fewer explicit responses to confirmation requests and directives.g. TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. No. such as criminal prosecution. or welfare. In this setting. John & Johnson. Misunderstanding entails very serious consequences in the social service setting. experienced financial workers are genre experts. do not precisely conform to the information requested on the application form along with any protocols that the social services institution and the financial worker must follow. or welfare. office takes place when a representative of the institution—a financial worker—questions applicants for social services such as food stamps. such as that by Peirce (1995). This article explores the applicability of genre analysis to discourse that occurs in institutional government offices.S. The intake interview in a U. as we shall show. The only way for a novice to become an expert is by participating in an interview because the interview is normally private. being designated to determine whether the applicant is eligible for benefits based on the information written on the application form and gathered during the oral interview. 1996. Simonot. 1996). 1992). or jail time. who is often unemployed or underemployed and may need and be eligible for financial support through social services.S. and cash assistance in programs such as Aid to Families With Dependent Children. they may unintentionally open themselves to charges of welfare fraud and resulting serious legal difficulties. Research on survival English. Drew & Heritage. In this encounter. like the NNSs in Bardovi-Harlig and Hartford’s (1996) study of students in academic advising sessions. Applicants may be either experts or novices. Even worse. in which they have no access to appropriate target language input to guide their own L2 use. Vasseur. has dealt with many important 100 TESOL QUARTERLY .1998. social services. & Broeder. social services system. nonnative-Englishspeaking applicants who misunderstand or miscommunicate in a social services intake interview may fail to secure needed financial assistance. Interviewers’ questions are based on but. Bremer. fines. Genre analysis provides a useful tool for describing the oral discourse that takes place when an applicant requests benefits from the U. The oral discourse that takes place in such interviews thus constitutes a genre that is typically closely shaped in both form and function by the structure of the application form itself. medical assistance. One type of novice applicant is the recent immigrant or refugee. Roberts. the financial worker has gatekeeping power. The problem for nonnative-speaking applicants in the social services intake interview is that. St. Although the structure of institutional talk has obviously been studied (cf. We are particularly concerned to identify the needs of nonnative speakers (NNSs) of English as applicants in the interview. they must participate in unequal status encounters that are private speech events. this talk has not to our knowledge been explored in terms of genre analysis. The applicant meets face-to-face with the financial worker to discuss information written on an application form filled out before the interview. It is understandably very difficult to get permission to tape social services intake interviews because of the government’s responsibility to protect the privacy of the applicants. Matthews (1994). let alone the social services intake interview. Such popular texts as those by Gill and Hartmann (1993). Current ESL textbooks that purport to prepare English language learners to participate in oral interactions in English do not prepare them for this context. as the only interlocutor present is playing a different. We believe that one major reason for the lack of description of this important genre is the great difficulty applied linguists have had in gaining permission to collect even a small amount of data on discourse in this setting. because no information is available beforehand and almost no mediative collaboration is provided during the interview. this genre is virtually impossible for NNSs and other novices to acquire without prior instruction. Even so-called survival English courses for recent immigrants or refugees in the United States. ESL teachers and ESL materials writers need to find accurate information on the social services oral intake interview to inform their teaching materials. In spite of—and perhaps because of—this difficulty. In this case. and Kozyrev (1998) claim to prepare NNSs to participate in oral English interactions in the wider society outside academia. ESL professionals need to know more precisely what information and skills nonnative-speaking applicants need in order to successfully negotiate this oral interview. To create teaching materials that adequately prepare NNSs to communicate effectively in the intake interview. the NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 101 . THE INTAKE INTERVIEW AS A GENRE The social services intake interview can be studied as a genre: a class of oral communicative events that share a set of communicative purposes. As we show in this article. ESL professionals need detailed information based on authentic discourse in this context. do not prepare them for this commonly encountered communicative situation.social contexts encountered by immigrants but not with the social services oral intake interview. which usually focus on teaching the practical language skills these students will be likely to need in key social situations during their first year or so in the United States. Leshinsky (1996). which in turn determine the structure of the genre. but none contains material on effective communication in interview situations. more powerful role. The privacy that necessarily surrounds the social services intake interview has until now protected this genre from description by applied linguists who might be interested in documenting its nature. . . a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise. to review information given on the written form as they negotiate whether and how much assistance should be given to the applicant. financial workers who are expert members of that discourse community recognize and agree among themselves as to the nature of the purposes of the genre. participatory mechanisms [used] primarily to provide information and feedback . and to decide whether an applicant is eligible for assistance. . both in writing and orally. . . . who is the interviewer. but both sides acknowledge the overt general purpose of the interview and agree to abide by the rules of the genre. The applicants and the interviewers may disagree on what is and is not a legitimate financial need and may negotiate that in using the genre. 58). those agreed-upon purposes constrain the structure. mechanisms of inter-communication among its members . (pp. to elicit missing information. style. . As the study described in this article shows. . and because the interviewers are in a position of power in this setting. 24–27) The discourse community participating in the oral intake interview seems to possess these characteristics. The applicants’ purposes are to provide information about their financial situation in order to establish eligibility for and request the financial assistance to which they are entitled. The purpose of the oral intake interview as a genre of that community is to enable an applicant and a financial worker. and relies on its expert members. 102 TESOL QUARTERLY . and the workers use it to evaluate applications and decide whether to grant help. The financial workers’ purposes are to examine the information provided.structure of the genre closely follows the structure of a written application form. one or more genres [used] in the communicative furtherance of its aims . . . The applicants use the genre to seek help. and content of the discourse in the intake interview. The overtly agreed-upon goal of the community is to distribute social services benefits to those individuals who are entitled to them. the community provides mechanisms of intercommunication and feedback. A discourse community has a broadly agreed set of common public goals .” the purposes of the individuals using this genre may in practice be somewhat conflicting. some specific lexis . Swales (1990) defines a genre as a class of communicative events used by a discourse community to serve some agreed-upon set of communicative purposes (p. But although the goals are “broadly agreed. uses quite specific lexis. They did not want us to impose on the applicants and wanted us to be as noninvasive in our research as possible. and had earned the trust of the other financial workers there. interviews with two other financial workers. examination of the application form. as opposed to explanatory hypotheses. We tapped multiple sources of information on the structure of this genre using a range of methods: introspection on the part of the second author. we submit that those data are worth our attention here in that they are both hard to obtain and important for teachers and students to examine. had served as a Spanish-English interpreter as needed. in this study. May 1999). having herself been present in a great many intake interviews.BACKGROUND We have suggested that one of the difficulties in studying this genre in the past has been that the discourse of the intake interview has been shielded from study by the privacy requirements of the social services office. We further believe that the use of triangulation as detailed above effectively provides useful information and insights for ESL professionals and social workers. 1 An exploratory study such as this one may have as its goal the development of descriptive hypotheses. and descriptive hypotheses1 for further research into the nature of this genre. We also could gain access because three applicants for assistance in this office granted her written permission to audiotape their intake interviews for the purposes of this study. personal communication. This unusual set of circumstances enabled us to employ triangulation in genre analysis. Although we recognize that this study provides limited data on this genre. Our study focused on three research questions: 1. She was a nonparticipant observer in the study and also an expert member of the discourse community. which lay out in advance of some future study what sorts of events and language behaviors are predicted to occur in a given social context (“this is what we’ll find if we look”). and in what order do they occur? Yule (1996) defines a speech act as “an action performed by the use of an utterance to communicate” (p. Allwright. we were able to gain access to the three interviews in the study described here because the second author had previously been a social worker in the office. examples of speech acts include giving directives and requesting confirmation. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 103 . As researchers. The social services office denied us permission to ask the applicants for follow-up interviews. as recommended by Jasso-Aguilar (1999). which set out a possible relationship that is predicted to hold between events or behaviors in studies in which some variables are held constant or manipulated and others are left free to vary (D. What is the prototypical structure of the genre of the social services intake interview: What speech acts occur. had participated in many interviews with her clients. 134). and analysis of transcriptions of audiotapes of three intake interviews. 2. What is the structure of the oral discourse in relation to the structure of the written application form: Is the same information exchanged in the same order, and is the linguistic structure of the oral discourse the same as that of the application form? 3. What are the responses of nonnative-English-speaking applicants as opposed to the responses of native-speaking applicants to the financial workers’ performance of some common speech acts in the social services intake interview, and do their responses suggest any misunderstanding? METHOD Participants Two financial workers, both middle-aged White women who had been born in the United States and who were experienced intake interviewers at a U.S. social services office in rural Minnesota, agreed to participate in the study. Among the applicants who had scheduled appointments on a given day for their oral intake interviews with the two financial workers, three agreed to allow us to tape their intake interviews. All three applicants had previously gone through the intake interview process. Thus, no participant, whether financial worker or applicant, was a novice in this discourse community. The applicants were John,2 a White man in his early 20s who was a native speaker (NS) of English; Jane, a White woman in her late 40s who was an NS of English; and María, a Latina woman in her 40s who was an NS of Spanish. María was accompanied by her daughter, Juana, who was in her 20s and served as interpreter at certain points in the intake interview. We do not have detailed information about the English language proficiency levels of María and her daughter, but the fact that Juana acted as an interpreter for her mother can be construed to mean that the two had agreed that the daughter was more proficient than her mother was (though the mother might also have wanted her daughter along for moral support or because she believed that two heads were better than one). We cannot say how much more proficient Juana was than María or even whether Juana was English- or Spanish-dominant. As the results show, Juana certainly was not proficient enough in English to accurately interpret all exchanges. 2 104 Participants’ names are pseudonyms. TESOL QUARTERLY Data Collection Before the data were collected, the second author wrote a description of her intuitive notion of the sequence of speech acts typically occurring in social service oral intake interviews. After permission was obtained from the agency and the applicants, three social service intake interviews were audio recorded on 3 different days in a room in a social services, or welfare, office in rural Minnesota. The compact cassette recorder used was in plain view of both the interviewer and the applicant. We were not present during the interview. The interviews were 20–40 minutes in length. In part, as is typical, the length of the interview depended on the number of questions that had to be followed up (e.g., on whether the applicants provided proofs or had assets). The shortest interview was John’s because the interviewer determined fairly quickly that he was ineligible for benefits. The other two interviews were nearly identical in length, with María’s being about 1 minute longer. Time constraints made it necessary to tape interviews conducted by two different financial workers, one who interviewed John and Jane and another who interviewed María and her daughter. The intake interviews had been scheduled in advance of the study, and we had already taped the interviews with John and Jane, the NSs of English, when we were given permission to tape the interview with María, the English language learner in this study; the same financial worker was not on duty the day María came in for her scheduled interview. The fact that we were limited to recording those interviewees who happened to be available and to give their consent when we were at the office also meant that we could not impose further on their time. Unfortunately, because different financial workers interviewed the NSs and the English language learner, we could not confidently isolate differences between English language learners and NSs in addressing Research Question 3. Any differences identified in María’s behavior as opposed to Jane’s, for example, could have been due either to the applicants’ differing language abilities or to their different interviewers. Our conclusions and hypotheses with reference to Research Question 3 must be tempered by this constraint. In follow-up interviews conducted 1–2 months after the financial intake interview, the two financial workers were asked to describe the sequence of speech acts in a typical intake interview and typical problems that they tried to watch out for during the interviews. The workers also examined transcripts of the taped interviews, noted whether the interviews had been typical, and identified any instances of possible miscommunication. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 105 Data Analysis To analyze the genre of the oral intake interview, we checked the second author’s written-out intake interview structure against three sources: (a) the intuitions of the intake interviewers,3 (b) the application form that the social services department requires interviewers to use in structuring the intake interview, and (c) the transcripts of two of the taped interviews. We examined the transcripts to identify an order for the speech acts that took place in the interviews and that appeared to be prototypical of the intake interview. The comparison resulted in modifications to the interview structure, producing the genre structure that appears in the Results section below. We also compared the sequence of information exchanged in the transcripts with the sequence of the questions on the written application form, and we compared the linguistic structures of the questions on the written application form with the financial workers’ equivalent questions or paraphrases. The transcripts were examined for all instances of the applicants’ responses to three speech acts commonly performed by intake interviewers: (a) reading the rights, (b) requesting confirmation, and (c) issuing directives. Those responses were analyzed and compared to identify differences between the responses of the NSs and those of the English language learner, and possible instances of misunderstanding. Misunderstanding, as Linnell (1995) points out, is a difficult phenomenon to identify, describe, and explain. Our analysis tapped only instances of overt misunderstanding: instances “with clear reflections and manifest properties in the interactional data” (p. 187). Covert misunderstanding undoubtedly also occurred but could not be identified given our inability to interview the applicants after their intake interviews. To identify instances of overt misunderstanding, during the follow-up interviews we asked the financial workers to make predictions about areas of the oral intake interview that an English language learner might find difficult but that an NS of English might not. Because the follow-up interviews were conducted 1–2 months after the financial intake interviews, we used the transcripts of the financial intake interviews as prompts to help the financial workers recall difficulties that they believed their applicants had had in the interaction. Evidence of misunderstanding was taken to consist of instances in which the applicantinterviewer discourse was incongruent or incoherent, in which María requested that her daughter interpret an English utterance, in which the meaning of an English utterance and its Spanish interpretation were 3 Additional intuitions were solicited from another licensed social worker, T. Kuehn, in a November 1993 interview. 106 TESOL QUARTERLY clearly incongruent, or in which the applicant provided no immediate verbal or nonverbal response to a directive to do something.4 RESULTS Research Question 1: The Structure of the Genre What is the prototypical structure of the genre of the social services intake interview: What speech acts occur, and in what order do they occur? The financial workers stated in their follow-up interviews that the structure of the oral intake interview is identical to the structure of the form itself; however, our analysis suggests that this is not the case. The purpose of the intake interview is to orally verify the written questions and answers on the application form. Thus, the application form grounds and structures the sequence of the discourse, and much of what is asked or said centers on information already provided on the application form. But the oral interview varies from the form in several ways. The social services financial intake interview has the following form: 1. The financial worker asks the applicant for the completed forms. 2. The worker reads the applicant his or her rights. 3. With only a copy of the filled-out forms in front of her or him, the worker asks the applicant the questions written on the application form in the order in which they appear on the form, making confirmation requests.5 The applicant responds orally to each question. 4. The worker compares the applicant’s oral response with the written response on the form. The worker may orally challenge a response given by the applicant, asking the applicant to provide further information, change the information provided on the form, or verbally retract the claim made on the form. 5. The worker asks for proofs or verifications at various points in the interview, based on the applicant’s responses to particular questions. 4 We recognize that this last criterion could be questioned. Failure to acknowledge a directive may not necessarily mean that it has not been understood. However, because the applicants’ goal in this interaction is for the interviewer to approve the granting of benefits, it seems likely that they would make every effort to indicate overtly to that interviewer that they have understood and intend to comply with all statements that they understand to be directives. Our assumption needs to be tested in future research. 5 Although the workers stated that they made confirmation requests for each question printed on the form, the transcript showed that this was not the case. The workers’ process of deciding whether or not to make a confirmation request was fairly complex. (See Results, Research Question 3.) NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 107 Repeat questions in 108 TESOL QUARTERLY . during any of which the applicant may ask for clarification: • The financial worker asks the applicant to fill out or sign a releaseof-information form. • The applicant is given forms to take somewhere to be filled out. letters. A written list of proofs needed. one or more of the following will occur. to complete the application. an applicant who claims to have a 15-year-old son is asked for his birth certificate. if anything. if any. sales receipts. bills. but most likely this information will not be written down. and titles to cars.Such proofs or verifications are usually printed documents. which the worker will mail to the appropriate place in order to get the proof or verification. and return them to the social services department. The financial worker tells the applicant again what he or she needs to do. 6. and may indicate how long it will take for the worker to complete the processing of the application. and is the linguistic structure of the oral discourse the same as that of the application form? We found that the information was covered in the same order in both the oral interviews and on the application forms. Research Question 2: Oral Discourse Versus Written Application Form What is the structure of the oral discourse in relation to the structure of the written application form: Is the same information exchanged in the same order. that support information written by the applicant on the form. get the forms filled out. It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact these places. and probing questions. For example. 7. such as birth certificates. the information covered in the interviews was not identical to the information given on the form. However. is given to the applicant. • The worker gives the applicant a written list of proofs or verifications to bring or mail to the social services department. insurance policies. The financial worker terminates the interview with a definite signal. The applicant is invited to ask for clarification or for information about other available services. The interviewers asked two sorts of questions in the oral interviews: repeat questions. which reproduced or paraphrased the questions printed on the form. The sources for these verifications may be discussed. If the applicant does not have the required proofs with him or her. which were designed to explore the veracity of the information the applicant was giving. 8. as in Examples 2 and 3. Do you. uh.the oral interviews followed the same sequence as the questions on the written application form. personal communication. Space does not permit an exhaustive comparison of the linguistic structures of questions on the form with the interviewers’ oral solicitations. The exact words used to conduct the interview varied from interviewer to interviewer. The interviewers did not read verbatim the questions on the application form but paraphrased them. even when orally “repeating” questions that were printed on the application form. even in subtle ways. correct? So there is no child under the age of 19. p. W1: (to John) And any children under the age of 19 in your home? 4. Allwright. is now age 19. The financial worker takes obvious risks in straying too far from the wording on the form. delete the subject and verb or.7 Note that such paraphrased questions could. M. In addition. rephrasing a question on the form as an oral statement with a request for confirmation may put the applicant into the position of having to deny an assertion by the worker. as in Example 4. Worker 1 (W1): (to Jane) And the father of any person under the age of 19 is? No kids under 19 in your home? 3. May 1999). not every written question was covered orally. Do you have a child under age 19 in the home? (Combined Application Form. with or without rising intonation. a more threatening act than simply answering a question (D. as in Examples 2 and 3. Also. There is no one under 19 in the home. although. and the questions asked did not always reflect the linguistic structure and vocabulary on the written form even though the financial workers later stated that they had read verbatim from the application during the interviews. Thus. 10) 2. take the form of a statement. Worker 2 (W2): (to María) OK. 7 NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 109 . the following excerpts are typical of the way the two interviewers in three separate interviews paraphrased the sentences in the written application form:6 1. explanatory material and English translations are in parentheses. That is. so those don’t apply. as shown below.. although the questions asked orally covered the same content as the questions on the written application form. er P. For example. the application form itself structured the discourse but did not dictate it exactly. the interviewers often used paraphrases of the assertions applicants had made in answering the 6 In the data extracts. the linguistic structure of the interviewers’ paraphrases varied from what was printed on the form. the linguistic structure of the oral questions differed from that of the questions on the form. Statements such as the one in Example 4 appeared to be rephrasings of the information written by the applicant on the form rather than of the questions themselves. . Do you have the title with you? No. she did not stop until the applicant had explicitly indicated that he would comply with the request. right. using a sequence of standard yes/no questions and a statement with rising intonation. I don’t have it with me. Probing Questions As noted. the interviewer asked the applicant to cross out incorrect information. an interviewer might ask an applicant for proof of an asset claimed on the form. . the interviewer might either have the applicant sign a release-of-information form in order to obtain the information directly from the source or ask the applicant to bring or send the information back within a certain length of time. or verbally retract the claim made on the form. Here the interviewer devoted four consecutive turns to requesting the required proof. Um. as in Example 4 above. the interviewer challenged the stated information in several subsequent turns. and sign or initial and date the changes. And you own a . Another kind of probing question occurred when the applicant provided information that the interviewer believed to be incorrect. In both cases. do you know where it is? Yeah. In these cases. The goal of this series of questions and statements appeared to be to get the applicant to provide further information. such as probing questions. the applicants took the initiative in digressing from the form. 110 TESOL QUARTERLY . In other cases. We just have to prove ownership. 5. . Do you have . When changes needed to be made to the form. the worker might also give the applicant a written list of necessary documentation as a reminder. as in Example 5. however. if the applicant did not have this documentation available. W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: OK. . Her persistence seemed to be designed to get him to provide that commitment. such as when they requested information not provided on the form. You can get it for me? Right. right.questions on the form as substitutes for the questions. write in the correct information. Several exchanges in the oral intake interview were not repetitions or paraphrases of the information on the form. OK. At the end of the interview. car. These might be interviewerinitiated exchanges. most of the interviewers’ oral discourse followed the sequence of information on the form. As indicated. change the information provided on the form. citizen?” You checked “No. a rather complex speech act challenged the accuracy of the applicant’s answers on the form and led to a change in one of those answers. OK. “Is each person a U. Cross that off and put your initials . acrost it? Yeah. . This resulted in the applicant’s disavowal of the information on the form and the interviewer’s directive to remove it.6. the interviewer’s initial probing question was a statement with rising intonation.S. Um. W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: And you’re a U. Thus. usually to be done outside of the interviewing room. OK. and that’s the state health plan. Example 7 shows such a request. Minnesota Care is going to start accepting single adults. maybe? Well. Yeah I heard something about that. For example. at times seeming to be prompted by the interviewer’s mention of a program. How old are you? 22. starting in July. OK. Sometimes the applicant requested information about other possible services. 7. I have an application out front. a rare word-for-word reading of the question on the form. frequently in the reading of the rights. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 111 . The interviewer then explained and offered further information or action. and an explicit reference to the answer checked off by the applicant. to request information about other possible services or programs in such situations.S. Subsequent to this statement were a directive to change the information given. You might want to check into that. after the interviewer mentioned during the reading of the rights that the mental health unit was located in the building.” (laugh) Don’t know why. OK. Where. the exchange shown in Example 8 took place. Applicant-Initiated Subroutine The applicants initiated other divergences from a simple repetition of information on the printed form. you might want to check “Yes” here. In Example 6. María used Spanish. (laugh) Oh. citizen? Yep. . John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: Is there some other program I can look into? Could I get it. not English. Right there. We’ll go over your rights and responsibilities. In Example 9. I’ve been having a problem trying to get it. you know. ? Uh. . María: ¿Qué lo tiene en Mental Health? (What’s in Mental Health?) Juana: What was that again about mental health? A second type of divergence from the printed form and from the genre as defined by the workers was an attempt by all three applicants early in the interview to explain their reasons for applying for assistance.8. So that people won’t insure you? Right. insulin dependent. however. but when the applicant began to detail the nature of his medical problems. they explicitly stated this in their interviews afterward. because all three applicants had gone through intake interviews before. ’Cause I have diabetes. do you have some medical bills that we need to help cover? Or are you just . the same thing had probably happened in their earlier interviews. an NNS. to those of Jane and John. NSs of English. and soOK. W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: John: W1: OK. we compare the responses of María. during the workers’ performance of 112 TESOL QUARTERLY . and do their responses suggest any misunderstanding? In this section. OK. the interviewer cut him off and began to read him the rights and responsibilities section. So I’m. the interviewer asked whether the applicant was applying for medical benefits. Research Question 3: Responses to Speech Acts What are the responses of English language learner applicants as opposed to NS applicants to the financial workers’ performance of three types of speech acts in the social services intake interview. We assume that. I’m having a problem getting insurance. The interviewers. OK. constant medical expense or sump’n like that they were trying to tell me. Yet all three applicants still attempted to give their reasons for applying for benefits quite early in the interview. Yeah. Because of the. 9. All three applicants’ attempts to initiate the “why-I’m-applying” routine were cut off by the interviewers. We explore this issue in the Discussion section. did not accept this act as a part of the oral interview genre. I’m having some problems getting that OK. This disparity between the applicants and the financial workers is puzzling. . (For detailed comparisons of the major and some minor transactions of the NSs and the NNS. and directives. María’s only back-channel response was Uh-hmm. The rights. . right. confirmation checks. and evidence exists that these differences can cause difficulties in communication across cultures (Tannen.) The fact that the financial worker who interviewed María was not the one who had interviewed Jane and John weakened our ability to attribute any differences in responses that we found to the language abilities of the two sets of applicants. W2: (to María) Do you want to go over rights and responsibilities again. oh. . the most frequent was OK. Reading of the Rights During this part of the intake interview. considerably less than the 17 instances each produced by Jane and John. There are attested cultural differences in the way in which back-channeling occurs. first of all you have the right to privacy. Any information you give is strictly confidential .? Or are you familiar with those? OK. However. Anything that you share with us goes no further than our offices . 10. Confirmation Requests In confirmation requests.three types of speech acts: reading of the rights. and others included uh-huh. This is your copy. see Kuehn. M. we’ll go over ‘em. Jane and John showed variety in their back-channel responses. María provided only 1 instance of backchanneling. You have the right to privacy. and yeah. a fact that was revealed when we later asked the financial workers why María was not asked about citizenship whereas Jane and John were. . . the amount of back-channeling provided to the interviewer differed markedly: During the reading of the rights. 1990). financial workers informed the applicants of their rights and responsibilities. W1: (to Jane) All right. Not all information on the form was confirmed in this way. This difference in back-channeling behavior may have occurred because María was an English language learner. let’s go over your rights and responsibilities. The interviewers read or paraphrased fairly closely the statements in the rights and responsibilities section. . All the applicants mostly listened at this point. mhmm. the financial worker asked the applicant to verify particular items of information provided on the application form. The financial NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 113 . 11. 1994. . and nope. W1: (to John) And you own a . in which applicants’ expenses have no bearing on the results of the application. no. . The native-speaking applicants responded verbally to every confirmation request using simple answers such as yes. she did not respond to one statement-style confirmation request. 19. According to the financial workers. such as proving citizenship if identification had been provided. . W1: (to John) And you are living in an apartment or a? 16. car. shown in Example 22: 114 TESOL QUARTERLY . right. 18. these confirmation requests often appeared to be simple declarative statements. if they had instructions not to pursue questions. 17. María responded in English to some confirmation requests but not to others. W2: (to María) No one in the house is on strike. They also sometimes skipped requests to confirm answers if they had interviewed the applicant previously. Confirmation requests took a variety of forms. W2: (to María) P. as in the case of medical assistance. is now age 19. W1: (to Jane) Current savings. W1: (to Jane) OK. correct? Thus. W1: Jane: Own any burial plots? No. Because these confirmation requests simply checked information already given. Both financial workers concurred that they tended to skip questions that were marked no on the form because such questions required no verification of assets (but see Example 6 above). the interviewer’s intonation tended to fall. How many hours a week do you work? 14. or account information? 13. which nonnative-speaking applicants could have misperceived as utterances that needed no response. 20. W1: (to John) Buy and prepare food together? 15. W1: John: Do you have any burial plots? No. the choice of questions to confirm in an individual interview depended on the applicant’s situation as well as on the individual worker. including the following complete and fragmentary yes/no questions and simple declarative statements with or without a tag question: 12.workers stated that they had been explicitly told not to ask about citizenship if the applicant had marked that answer yes and had provided proof of identification to support it (the case with María). no. or if answers would have no impact on the decision to award or deny benefits. However. huh? María: (no response) We noticed that when María. OK. As a result. Even at this point. W2: Are we doing any sort of an application as far as um P. as her next statement was NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 115 . and María concurred. In fact. OK. as was the case with John. (Well. In Example 22. she’s applying for him. yes. W2: Both still living in the community. failed to respond. She’s applying. indicating that she could confirm it later based on information available to her in other ways. This was a dangerous strategy. is concerned? As far as cash assistance? Juana: ¿Está aplicando por él? (Are you applying for him?) María: Pues. the worker abandoned her attempt to confirm the information she had been given. is no longer a student. however. In Example 23. when the worker asked for the year the car was made. because at times Juana clearly misunderstood as well: 23. some of the interviewer’s confirmation requests were not interpreted for the applicant. an NNS. W2: Juana: María: W2: And it’s a what. the daughter told her the make of the car. you said. a 19 how much 80? What’d you say? Mitsubishi. W2: And P. María: No. 22. Instead of telling María that her daughter’s answer on her behalf was incongruous. to answer for her and then to concur with her daughter’s answer. in Example 5. an NS of English.21. yes. then we haven’t changed address or anything like that. the worker could not have discovered that María sometimes had difficulty understanding the English confirmation requests. however. OK? Mitsubishi? Mhmm. she’s applying. her daughter. she often appeared to rely on Juana. if he qualifies.) Juana: (replies for mother and expands) Yes. but her lack of response suggests that she may have misunderstood the question. María asked Juana to interpret other confirmation requests: 24. I can look it up when I get the proof of ownership. the worker did not attempt to prompt a response by repeating or rephrasing her requests. The interpreter may also have failed to identify some confirmation requests as such. it was not clear whether María had understood the translated confirmation request. María did not ask for interpretation. There is a basic difference between a directive and a request (cf. 28. And.’s behalf.) By contrast. Although María could produce sufficient English to explain or give some additional information. (Ah. have been hired. hired . Yo dí muchas cosas.) W2: No. . I don’t know if he can work. (I don’t have the title. . . W1: Jane: W1: Jane: How often are you paid? Every 2 weeks. 1962. April 1st. no. María’s response seems to indicate that she thought the financial worker’s question concerned job applications rather than her application for cash assistance on P. (No.) Directives The financial worker frequently directed the applicant to perform actions. A request gives the hearer a choice of whether or not to comply whereas a directive does not. Mamí. not working. so we just got one on the 18th. el carro el Mitsubishi 1950. Searle. particularly if there is a power differential between the 116 TESOL QUARTERLY . 26. either immediately or in the future. María: We have an application for job in many places. W2: And then now you have another one María is that correct? A different one do you have now? María: No tengo el registrado. . I hope they call. the 1950 Mitsubishi. Furthermore. no. when will you get your next paycheck? Uh. ah. I gave away a lot of things. No estoy. Mommy. ah. W2: Does anyone in the household expect to work or expect income from a job this month or next month? María: I expect Juana: No. no trabajando. contractada . I am not. the car.25. At other times María seemed able to understand the English but used Spanish to explain. 1975). utterances that appear to be requests may actually be intended as—and most plausibly interpreted as— directives. Austin. María: Ah. she sometimes began her explanations or information provision in one language and switched over once her daughter started interpreting. Jane and John not only could explain in English but could also use it to provide additional information in response to confirmation requests: 27. She did not respond to many of them verbally. María: (nods) 8 For example.. Right there. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 117 . please? 34.8 In the intake interview. W2: (to María) Got your forms all done? 33. It’s 4/19 today. 35. The intake interview had a kind of call-and-response rhythm. OK. W1: (to John) And do you have a current bank statement with you? 32. 30. W1: Jane: Why’n’t ya change this then. right here after your name. W1: (to John) Call me if you have any questions about your pending application. 37. Where? Acrost it? Yeah.” and “maybe I should see”: 29. often asking for clarification of the directive as well. if a supervisor asked an employee. such as the phrases “you might want to. W1: (to Jane) So maybe I should see those. The power differential means the addressee has no choice. Thank you. W2: Could we date it with today’s date M. W1: John: W1: Cross that off and put your initials. Many of the following examples of the financial workers’ utterances are directives and not requests. W1: (to Jane) OK. OK. María. W2: (to María) Could we date it with today’s date. Um.speaker and hearer. W1: (to John) You might want to check “Yes” here. 31. “Could you do this?”. 36. please. it would be a directive (not a request) even though the form of the utterance and use of the modal might seem to offer a choice. such as nodding: 38. though at times she gave a nonverbal response. in which the service provider confirmed or directed and the applicant was expected to respond.” “could we. Jane and John appeared to understand most directives and responded to them. It appeared that María did not understand all the worker’s directives. the financial worker is in a powerful position because she has the ability to approve or turn down the application for assistance. even though those utterances may take the form of a question or contain modals. We wonder whether English language learners may sometimes not understand that an apparent request is in fact a directive. In fact. I’ll need that. the following directives all use quite indirect language. The comment in Example 40. . .However. Of 24 directives issued to María during her interview. it is unclear why this interviewer did not persist in demanding a response from María in the way the interviewer in Example 5 demanded a response from John. if you think M. as indicated by her requests for interpretation or the need for the worker to repeat the directive. This lack of response and subsequent lack of compliance shows that María most likely misunderstood the directive. OK. Again. Example 39 shows an instance in which María did not respond either verbally or nonverbally to a directive. and explicitly said she did not understand 3 times. However. led to a similarly unclear situation. I can introduce umm you to Mary Lynn and maybe you can make some arrangements with her. which followed María’s request for information about the social services mental health unit. . but it is also possible that they had not understood. Neither María nor her daughter reminded the worker of her promised action. she responded (complied) nonverbally 4 times. responded verbally and appropriately 6 times. 40. However. . OK. we’ll do that when we get done. Sounds good! The interviewer did not issue a directive but rather suggested that she and María meet the receptionist for the unit in order to make arrangements for those services. To the remaining 14 directives. Sounds good!”). she asked for interpretation of the most common ways of requesting proofs from the applicants or 118 TESOL QUARTERLY . made 1 inappropriate verbal response. W2: And I need you to sign the release that says you’re willing to go to work readiness in order to get a general assistance grant and that’s right here . later in the interview María had still not signed the form. . needs . 39. Just as María did not respond to an I need you to X type of directive (see Example 39 above). and the worker performed her own agreement to future action (“we’ll do that when we get done. we’ll. at times María did not even respond nonverbally. she failed to respond in any way to 10. . . There were other directives that María clearly did not understand. María gave no sign of agreement. They may have changed their minds or may have been uncertain about arranging for these services. Yah. María: (no response) The interviewer went on to give additional directives for future action. W2: We can. María subsequently left the building without getting this information because the worker forgot to take her to the appropriate unit at the end of the interview. I[’ll] need X. OK J: Pero cuando vayas al Private Industry Council M: um hmm J: (mumble) el veinte seis. W2: And then this one is for you then María. something to the effect that you gave it away. . María. you’ll go to orientation on Tuesday. you go to job club on Wednesday. . um something to . in fact. .) María interrupted the interviewer to request interpretation from her daughter. you no longer own it. María: ¿Qué le pongo de aquí? (What do I put for her here?) 42. . someone would tell the financial worker that María would receive a check for May. May M: Oh. however. OK. and we’ll get the cash going right away. .9 Thus the NNSs overtly misunderstood 9 Juana’s translation appears below: J: De que no vas a calificar para . There’s no cash grant for the month that you apply. Unfortunately. ’cause otherwise we have to know what happened to it. 41.directing them to perform an action (Do you have X [with you]?. eso. W2: OK. I’ll get you approved for May and you’ll get your first checks in May. I need you to make a statement kind of to that effect then on here. (Explain that more for me. qué voy a escribir? (So. As shown in Example 42. if María failed to do the two things specified in the underlined directive. both NNSs apparently misunderstood this directive. veinte siete. . María: (to Juana) ¿Entonces. or I need you to X). María also appeared to have had particular difficulty understanding sentences that were long or that contained slang or jargon. She said in Spanish that María did not qualify for assistance but that when she went to the Private Industry Council. and I need you to sign and date with today’s date. her application would not be approved: 43. and the daughter misinterpreted. um just something stating that . A. . what am I going to write?) In addition to the I need you to X type of directive. too. Jerry’ll let me know everything’s hunky-dory. . OK just so you realize that . so you’ll go to your. in such cases the interpreter apparently had difficulty. so for April there’ll be no cash. Juana. María: Explícame más. ella le va a decir a ella para Mayo vas a recibirlo. just that um the 1978 Dodge. Juana. You’ll receive your first check in May. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 119 . W2: And I’ll process it as an ongoing application ’cause you’re already on food stamps and the M. . several confirmation requests and directives issued in the oral intake interview. But the workers paraphrased the written questions and at times issued confirmation requests in the form of paraphrases of the applicant’s written responses to the questions. 120 TESOL QUARTERLY . which the applicants were expected to confirm. In addition. All three applicants studied had been through a social services oral intake interview before. The workers tested the veracity of information given on the form by supplementing repeat questions with probing questions. In later interviews. the workers stated that such attempts were common but that they were not trying to elicit this information. When asked what they perceived the structure of the interview to be. yet applicants need to know that it is their right to ask for information about other services that might be available to them. The requests for additional services seemed infrequent. The repeat questions and oral confirmation requests in the interview followed the sequence and content of the questions on the application form. the oral interview was modified in part by agency or higher level prescriptions about what questions on the form should and should not be asked orally. This seems to indicate a divergence between the workers’ and the applicants’ views with regard to the content of the genre. as shown in Example 6. In addition. they were only trying to confirm which program the applicant was applying for. DISCUSSION Structure of the Interview The social services intake interview clearly had an agreed-upon prototypical structure. as when they asked about additional services or told the worker why they were applying for aid. the financial workers stated that it consisted of the application form itself. the applicants asked questions and gave information not requested on the written application form. Content of the Interview We have noted that the financial workers did not welcome the applicants’ attempts to explain why they were applying for assistance. The workers felt that they did not need to know why the applicants were applying in order to make a decision. but in reality the interview did not consist of just a reading of the application form. yet they all tried to initiate this move. The application form structured the interview but was not identical to it. interviewers are taught that such information should not sway the outcome of the interview. so these natural attempts by the applicants to make their case were unlikely to help them in this situation. Words and phrases such as go retroactive. “hunky-dory” in Example 41). particularly in her discussions with her daughter in Spanish and in her responses to directives. GA. Another possibility is that the financial workers may not have given clear feedback to the applicants during their earlier attempts to explain their need. it is natural to explain why the request is necessary and to try to justify one’s behavior when one feels one might be judged negatively by others. proofs. as the human representative of the system and someone they could interact with. personal communication. both in back-channeling and in providing nonverbal and verbal responses. In these taped interviews. and they may need to have it explained. In addition.. Worker’s Comp. monthly household report form. SSI. was the person to whom they wanted to present a justification. Allwright. the interviewers sometimes used slang and informal expressions (e. MA. although the NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 121 . to maintain their self-respect by justifying to themselves their need to request financial benefits (D. that she did at times misunderstand. In later interviews. RSDI. the workers’ signal to the applicants to stop describing the reason for applying was generally to say “OK”—obviously a rather unclear form of negative feedback. There is additional evidence in the transcripts. Responses of Native and Nonnative Speakers Did English language learners respond the same way as NSs did to three speech acts performed by the financial workers? In particular. The applicants may also have believed that a convincing description of their need would assist them in obtaining the benefits they were applying for.g. In fact. both financial workers confirmed that the three speech acts examined indeed were typical areas in which English language learner applicants generally seemed to respond problematically. In particular. retro medical coverage. and monthly standard abound. María responded differently from John and Jane. applicants need to understand some specialized vocabulary. May 1999). A final possibility is that the applicants may have told their stories for their own benefit rather than for that of the financial worker.Why might this divergence occur? The applicants may have felt that the interviewer. However. In making a request. These differences suggest that María may have misunderstood the information being conveyed in these speech acts. what the financial workers say in the intake interview is not always easy to understand. was there any evidence that they misunderstood the information conveyed? In responding to the speech acts examined in detail in this study. or the nature. being of a higher status and in a different role from the applicant.g. before their interviews. and as Bardovi-Harlig and Hartford (1996) point out. back-channeling behavior) are unlikely to be captured in such conversations. More evidence from future studies is needed on the sorts of difficulties encountered in this situation by English language learners with low proficiency. and in any case subtle details of face-to-face interaction (e. the I need you to X type of directive appeared to be particularly problematic. the context of the social service intake interview contains fewer opportunities for either prior input or collaborative support for learners in the acquisition of the new genre. However.financial workers stated that they tried to avoid slang in their dealings with English language learners. The francophone nursing students in Parks and Maguire’s study were fortunate to have an ample supply of mentors and coworkers who worked with them over time in a variety of ways to help them learn how to produce nursing notes in English. The intake interviewers seem to attempt a form of collaborative mediation in the course of the interview. Of course. and applicants run the risk of never having their voices heard if they want to say anything that 122 TESOL QUARTERLY . the data showed that they were not always successful. The interlocutor uses unfamiliar vocabulary and does not explain it. The nature of this genre is such that novices can be expected to have great difficulty learning to use it. learners have no opportunity to observe other applicants before they themselves are called upon to perform. as they structure it heavily with questions and statements that require specific responses and prompt the applicants overtly to respond in certain ways.. the unequal status of the interviewer and the applicant means that applicants may feel pressured to respond only in those ways. Parks and Maguire (1999) point out that genre analysis has traditionally focused on the product. We have noted that the linguistic form of some directives may have led María to misinterpret them. During the interview itself. Though María was willing and often able to comply with the financial worker’s requests. learners may talk to others who have been through such interviews and ask their advice on how to fill out the form or respond to questions. However. Nor is there any evidence that they attempted to explain the meaning of these terms to the applicants. she may have misunderstood the actions she was being directed to do or the reasons for them. of the genre rather than on the process of learning to use a new genre. This interview is a private encounter between individuals of unequal status in an institutional setting. the interlocutor does not model appropriate applicant behavior. But no obvious person may be available for applicants to ask the first time through the process. it is virtually impossible for learners to access good input on appropriate L2 performance in such settings. And because the encounter is private. 5. and the specialized vocabulary used by the interviewers. audiotapes of intake interviews to highlight speech acts typical of the genre. NNSs can be told that it is inappropriate NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 123 . examples of the application form and guidance in writing answers to the questions on the form. written transcriptions of the language used in authentic intake interviews that highlight prototypical speech acts. including indirect directives. In the one case we identified in which the applicants did have a clear intention that violated the expectations of the interviewers— to explain why they were applying for assistance—the interviewers’ feedback appeared ineffective in getting the applicants to change their behavior to meet the interviewers’ expectations. exercises providing practice in responding to prototypical questions asked during intake interviews. including a description of documentation to be brought to the interview. This study thus uncovers a puzzling dilemma for NNSs: How are novices to learn to use this genre in the absence of clear input on appropriate applicant behavior and in the absence of supportive. In either case. 4. the typical sequence of speech acts that occurs in this interview. mediative collaboration? IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CLASSROOM Armed with information such as that obtained from this study. Models of appropriate and inappropriate oral interview behavior can be drawn from this article. a clear description of the purpose and nature of the social services oral intake interview. who structures the interaction. confirmation requests in the form of declarative statements. appropriate ways of responding to those speech acts. ESL professionals can play a role in helping novices learn to use the genre of the social services oral intake interview.contradicts the expectations of the interviewer. 2. and the consequences of providing inaccurate information during the interview. For example. 3. this genre appears to be a particularly difficult one for learners to master. The results of this study can provide ESL teachers and material developers with resources for these and other classroom activities that would prepare nonnative-speaking immigrants to deal more effectively with the social services oral intake interview: 1. Discussion in class of the broader social and political context surrounding requests for financial assistance will probably be useful. CONCLUSIONS In summary. Another task might involve deciding how to complete portions of an application form or deciding how an applicant should respond to specific speech acts initiated by an interviewer during the oral intake interview. 124 TESOL QUARTERLY . Finally. it showed that genre analysis may usefully be applied to the study of discourse occurring in the social services financial intake interview. This fact makes this oral interview a crucial area for attention by both researchers and ESL teachers: ESL teaching materials based upon authentic discourse in this context are sorely needed. Students might listen to a set of utterances and decide which are indirect directives or confirmation requests. often suggested that she did not understand all the information being conveyed by the interviewer. We hope that this genre analysis has provided a description of authentic discourse in the oral intake interview that is useful in the creation of such materials. Noteworthy areas of difference for the English language learner applicant were the use of back-channeling to show understanding and the giving of explicit responses to confirmation requests and directives. The consequences of misunderstanding in this context can be serious: Applicants may receive fewer benefits than they deserve or even unwittingly commit welfare fraud. and evaluate the effectiveness of the native-speaking applicant’s responses. or lack of them. mediative collaboration in their performance during the interview itself. although our study focused on a small database.S. given the lack of supportive. particularly in providing practice with back-channeling responses to the interviewer or giving explicit responses to the interviewer’s directives or confirmation requests. society.and ineffective to try to tell the interviewer the reasons they are applying for assistance and that their attempts to do so will be cut off by the interviewer. this genre may be particularly difficult for English language learners to master. such as Examples 5 and 6. Students could identify the overall purpose of the interviewer’s speech act sets and the language used to realize them. Role-play activities certainly seem appropriate. Her responses. We also hope that our study demonstrates the usefulness of genre analysis as a tool for describing important speech events in the social life of nonnative-English-speaking immigrants and refugees in U. Task-based instruction might involve the students in examining interviewers’ discourse in data samples. Englewood Cliffs. J. 15(1). K. A current area of interest is educational technology and its applications in language acquisition. Authentic listening and discussion for advanced students. J. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 176–213). Vasseur. P. 18. M. University of Minnesota. Linnell. 192 Klaeber Court.). Coping with on-the-job writing in ESL: A constructivist-semiotic perspective. Talk at work. R. B. ILASLL.. Simonot. (1997).. 11. 49. (Ed. investment. (Eds. L. Kozyrev. Gill. NEGOTIATING THE SOCIAL SERVICES ORAL INTAKE INTERVIEW 125 . NJ: Prentice Hall. (1996). NJ: Prentice Hall. (1995). N. 281–294. Kuehn. P. English for Specific Purposes. English for Specific Purposes. Foppa (Eds. P. (1994). M. Gramann. University of Minnesota. Bremer. S. Drew. Hamp-Lyons. Language Learning. (1993). P. 189–206. C. Input in an institutional setting. (1999). B. (1996). St. P. How to do things with words. Roberts. Kimberly Kuehn has taught ESOL since 1987 in a variety of community and academic settings. 171–188. London: Longman. & Heritage. Oxford: Clarendon Press. John. M. English for academic purposes [Special issue]. She is an ESL/English as a new language instructor in the Portland.THE AUTHORS Elaine Tarone teaches ESL teachers in an MA-ESL program at the University of Minnesota.. methods and triangulation in needs analysis: A critical perspective in a case study of Waikiki hotel maids. Oregon.. 9–32. K. MN 55455) Leshinsky. Matthews. M. Parks.. & K. She has published studies on the impact of social factors on second language acquisition. 16(1). C. 143–175. Mutualities in dialogue (pp. (1962). English for Specific Purposes. Maier. (1992). Politeness strategies in business letters by native and non-native English speakers. (1995). 17. P. (1998). (1998). G. Upper Saddle River. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Business English [Special issue]. & Broeder. Speech solutions. REFERENCES Austin. 18. (1992). and language learning. & Maguire. Troubles with mutualities: Towards a dialogical theory of misunderstanding and miscommunication. J. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Get it? Got it! Listening to others/speaking for ourselves. 27–46. (1996). Nickerson. M. K. Peirce. J. & Johnson. area. Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters. & Hartford. (1999). L. (1994). Talk it over! Oral communication in the real world.. & Hartmann. (1996). English for Specific Purposes. Minneapolis.. Master’s qualifying paper. Social identity. In I. Markova. where she also directs the Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition... Corporate culture and the use of written English within British subsidiaries in the Netherlands. J. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Jasso-Aguilar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. TESOL Quarterly.). C. M. (Available from Reading Room Supervisor. 29. Bardovi-Harlig. English for Specific Purposes. C. Sources.). C. Form-structured discourse: A script of a welfare office intake interview for ESL learners. You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. In P. Swales. New York: Morrow. 126 TESOL QUARTERLY . Cole & J. Pragmatics. M. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 3. J. Tannen. Syntax and semantics: Vol. 59–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. New York: Academic Press. Yule. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Morgan (Eds. D. G. (1990). (1990). J. Speech acts (pp. (1996). Indirect speech acts. (1975).Searle. L.). A few studies have touched on the problems experienced by such people. for a review). Weissberg & Buker. for example. & Nunan.. 1996) research into the publishing practices of young TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 34..g.g. if any.Discourse Community.g. 1994. Gosden’s (1995. The article applies elements of social constructivist theory—most importantly the notions of discourse community (e. and manuals are available to assist in the writing of research papers (e. little. The investigation is presented as a contribution to the important study of what it means to be a non-anglophone researcher seeking international publication in English but living and researching in a non-anglophone country. Swales & Feak. 1990) and learning as peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger. 1990).. These nonnative-English-speaking scholars. an important question that has not been much addressed in the literature is the particular challenges to achieving publication that are presented to scholars whose L1 is not English. 1991)—to interpret the difficulties the writer experiences. Cooley. There is a considerable literature on the role of TESOL in the preparation of students for graduate-level academic writing (see. 1. e. it can be argued—other things being equal—are at a disadvantage vis-à-vis their native-English-speaking peers when it comes to writing up the results of their research for publication. It also considers the role that TESOL may play in addressing these difficulties. 1988. However. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. No. Lewkowicz. and the Nonnative-English-Speaking Scholar JOHN FLOWERDEW City University of Hong Kong Kowloon. Swales. Spring 2000 127 . Hong Kong This article presents a case study of a nonnative-English-speaking scholar from Hong Kong and his experience in publishing a scholarly article in an international refereed journal on his return from doctoral study in the United States. Allison. W ith the ever-increasing trend towards international scholarly publication in English. attention has been paid to the potential role of TESOL in helping nonnative-speaking scholars after they have finished their academic study and are seeking to develop their academic careers. for more case studies of individual writers from different disciplines. Li. negotiable nature of learning and the fact that learning is not always based on overt teaching.” the mediated nature of the publication process. 1982a. Berkenkotter and Huckin (1995). the field needs to learn more about the particular difficulties of nonnative-speaking scholars before a comprehensive agenda for helping them can be developed. and sociocultural and linguistic backgrounds before TESOL can identify appropriate ways to help these people with their language problems. 1999. Most of the empirical case studies of academic literacy development based on the notion of discourse community have been concerned with native speakers (NSs). Egypt. rather. Authors such as Swales (1990). Research in academic literacy has increasingly come to emphasise the importance of discourse communities in shaping the generic competence of young scholars (Bartholomae. one planned to return to an academic career in her home country. Although these accounts offer some recommendations for TESOL. although Swales (1990) and Casanave (1995) are notable for their focus on nonnative speakers (NNSs). within the field of TESOL. In addition. nobody has taken up the story of Swales’s subject following her return to Egypt. 1999). it does not begin with a preestablished set of research questions. “if [the subject’s] story is going to contribute to what we know about being a non-anglophone researcher in the Third World the case study needs to continue” (p. Swales’s account of this scholar ended with her impending return. As Swales stated. 1982b. a number of recently published first-person accounts of the apprenticeship into scholarly writing offer advice to others drawn from the personal experience of their narrators (Connor. the key issues are developed out of the data.Japanese academics. and Dudley-Evans (1991) have investigated how novice scholars are inducted into their disciplinary discourse communities through various forms of apprenticeship. Bizzell. 1985. Belcher (1994). this article presents a case study of another nonnative-speaking scholar and his experience of writing and publishing an article after his return home from doctoral study in the United States. 208). Casanave (1995). Building on the pioneering work of Swales. Because this research is basically ethnographic in nature. however. There is a need. As the ethnographic account will make clear. the importance of adapting content to fit the expectations of 128 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1994). Of the three. to my knowledge. however. Dias. Swales (1990) presented three cases of nonnative-speaking scholars developing their scholarly writing skills at the University of Michigan in the United States. these key issues include the importance of knowing the rules of the publishing “game. therefore. Unfortunately. The notion of discourse community is relevant in the study of academic literacy because it stresses the participatory. countries. an individual has to learn the conventions that underpin Swales’s six criteria. (b) participatory mechanisms. students must also learn what Bazerman (1980. because they share “similar educations and professional initiations. and practices. By means of fine-grained. 1982b) and Bartholomae (1985) argue that students entering academic disciplines must learn the genres and conventions that are commonly employed by members of the disciplinary discourse community. Huckin. The article argues that the concepts of discourse community and legitimate peripheral participation are important in understanding these issues involved in the process of NNSs’ scholarly apprenticeship. This is normally done by some form of formal or informal apprenticeship—Kuhn’s professional initiations. and (f) a high general level of expertise. and made up of many subgroups. the issues and problems that are current at any one time.” because they share goals and professional judgments. In recent work. drawing on Bazerman (1988). As Berkenkotter and Huckin (1995) point out. beliefs. 1973). and Prior (1998) have demonstrated how this process of gaining entry into the community and THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 129 .” because they have “absorbed the same technical literature and drawn many of the same lessons from it. Thus Bizzell (1982a. and Akerman (1988). subject to change. (d) community-specific genres. suggesting that the latter are not as homogeneous and closed as previously implied but are dynamic. among others.the journal. 1990). To acquire membership in a discourse community. researchers such as Myers (1985). Berkenkotter. and because their communication is “full” (cited in Casanave. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Discourse Communities A discourse community is a group of people who share a set of social conventions that is directed towards some purpose (Swales. Swales lists six criteria for defining a discourse community: (a) common goals. thick descriptions (Geertz. according to Kuhn. Prior (1998) has warned of some of the dangers of existing views of discourse communities. Casanave (1995) traces the concept to Kuhn (1970). (e) a highly specialized terminology. Berkenkotter and Huckin (1993. Members are able to function as scientists. 1985) calls the conversations of the discipline. who characterises it as consisting of the practitioners of a scientific speciality who share language. p. 87). the problem of distinguishing the dividing line between content and form. 1995. Such issues and problems are developed through study and collaboration on research projects with experienced practising scholars. (c) information exchange. and the problems of geographical isolation. 1995). both large and small. open. Berkenkotter and Huckin (1995. The biologist involved in this study submitted an article to a journal whose introduction was considered by the reviewers to be lacking in the conventional literature review. As one example of such research. in favour of the more formal register that was required by the disciplinary community. 22) nature of academic writing. 130 TESOL QUARTERLY . Myers (1985) conducted a study that showed how scientific texts are the products of a discourse community of researchers and not just of individuals. these scientists both responded to and developed a disciplinary consensus. in their study of a graduate student’s writing development and his acquisition of discipline-specific text conventions. revises collaboratively. that is. Berkenkotter and Huckin thus show how experienced scholars who have already published widely may also need to continue to reflect the beliefs. Berkenkotter and Huckin (1995) demonstrated how these conventions were linked to the learning of the research methodology employed by the disciplinary community. chapters 3. as he or she reads. has further emphasised the “mediated” (p. and so on. demonstrating how an established expert also needed to observe the conventions of the chosen discourse community if she wanted to maintain her position by having her work published. In a recent book. By comparing successive versions of proposals written by two biologists for research funding. and conventions of the target discourse community in order to maintain their position. the student gradually abandoned the articulate but informal style he brought with him when he entered the programme. As another example. To achieve success in his writing. In a further study. based on ethnographic case studies. and conventions that characterise that community. discusses. Access to and acceptance by the disciplinary community are thus dependent upon the learning of the beliefs. Myers showed how. Prior (1998). values. how literary products do not emanate from a single author but are jointly constructed by various parties in addition to the actual writer. values. It was only when the writer positioned her study in her introduction within the context of related scientific activity in the field that the paper was accepted for publication. in writing and rewriting. At the same time they have considered what factors are beneficial or otherwise in acquiring and maintaining the appropriate generic conventions. 4) turn their attention to an experienced scholar.maintaining membership occurs. the sort of knowledge that is required in order to be accepted by the discourse community in scholarly writing is not usually acquired in the formal setting of a classroom. graduate students learn as much through the various opportunities for peripheral participation they are exposed to—working as members of research teams. 1990. having finished their studies. 1985) conversations of the discipline are ongoing. Such learning is what Lave and Wenger (1991) refer to as legitimate peripheral participation—legitimate. As Lave and Wenger put it. if not more than they do there. Learning is not a onetime process but continues throughout the life of a scholar. scholars need to engage in continual legitimate peripheral participation. therefore. p. perhaps more isolated and less privileged institutions. because anyone is potentially a member of what Lave and Wenger call the community of practice. taught part of their courses. Writing about students within the United States. The intellectual dislocation that accompanies such a return for NNSs is extreme. the opportunities for peripheral participation are reduced. It is only valid when activated within the discourse community.S. graduates Geertz had in mind. and participation. leave their prestigious research universities to take up positions in other. such learning is also ongoing. not a product. knowledge is acquired through “centripetal participation in the learning curriculum of the ambient community” (p. submitting papers for publication. Swales maintains that the term exile in Geertz’s formulation would be even more appropriate for NNSs returning to their home countries than for the U. Bazerman’s (1980. 100). Knowledge is thus a process. Emphasising the even greater plight of graduates who leave the United States. peripheral. As the example of Berkenkotter and Huckin’s (1995) experienced biologist demonstrates. because learners are acquiring the knowledge through their involvement with it. 207). to maintain membership of the discourse community. Geertz has labeled this phenomenon the exile from paradise syndrome (cited in Swales. When doctoral graduates. because participants are not central but are on the margins of the activity in question. interacting with their academic supervisors (who may act as mentors). even experienced scholars need to continually negotiate their position as members of the disciplinary community as that position is ratified by acceptance of their writing for publication. or discourse community. THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 131 .Legitimate Peripheral Participation As the above examples show. One way of conceptualising graduate education is as the facilitation of legitimate peripheral participation for young scholars. and communicating with journal editors and reviewers—as they do in the more formal. Arguably. THE STUDY Purpose and Context The purpose of the study reported here was to examine the process a recently returned nonnative-English-speaking doctoral graduate went through in attempting to publish an academic paper in an international refereed journal in English. The author of this paper was a young Hong Kong scholar. correspondence be132 TESOL QUARTERLY . Rather. interviews with Cantonese L1 academics (Flowerdew. His field of study was mass communication. I used several sources of data for the study. with a single case study format. problems. The central focal point of the analysis and point of orientation of the other sources were the various drafts and the final version of a paper published in the XYZ Journal (a pseudonym).Although legitimate peripheral participation and the related notion of discourse community are important. In order to examine the issue from a number of different perspectives and achieve an element of triangulation. a study of editorial correspondence conducted between journal editors and referees and Cantonese L1 contributors (Flowerdew & Dudley-Evans. Method The method used in this investigation was. Other data sources were my in-depth interviews and e-mail communication with Oliver. who had recently returned from doctoral study in the United States. 1999d). 1999a). and strategies of Hong Kong Cantonese L1 academics in writing for publication in international refereed journals in English. ethnographic. 250) notes. interviews with journal editors (Flowerdew. p. The study was carried out within the broader framework of a research project conducted over several years that sought to develop an understanding of the perceptions. referred to here as Oliver (a pseudonym). this does not mean that there is no place at all for formal training. instruction is not to be avoided. 1999b). I will return to this point in my conclusion. 1999c). and studies of the written work of Cantonese L1 academics (Flowerdew. As Lave (1998. The project was carried out by means of a quantitative survey of Cantonese L1 academics (Flowerdew. 1999). classroom time can be seen as an opportunity for facilitating and reflecting upon legitimate peripheral participation as opposed to an opportunity for the transmission of knowledge. broadly speaking. Participant Educational background. Later. participant verification (Ball. Oliver had considerable exposure to English throughout his life. The case study was conducted in Hong Kong over several months during 1998. His first contact with the language was at kindergarten. living for 2 years with an American family. Oliver provided various drafts and final versions of academic papers he had written and was interviewed on a number of occasions by both the LE and myself. Oliver was one of those people who agreed to participate in this exchange. when he was 3–4 years old. Following kindergarten. he worked for a time. It was clear from Oliver’s account of his experiences in the United States that he had benefited greatly from the opportunities for legitimate peripheral participation provided in his PhD programme. As indicated in interviews. and every paper they produced was looked at thoroughly by a faculty member. In return for editorial assistance. field notes and a report written by an NS in Hong Kong who provided editorial assistance to Oliver. the LE helped with data collection and analysis. His undergraduate education was at a Hong Kong university that has a bilingual policy of teaching in Chinese or English. where he had friends in the local community. he went to an English-medium elementary school. where he had very little contact with non-English speakers either inside the university or outside. A preliminary analysis of the articles and correspondence provided by Oliver suggested that a manageable case study could be conducted by focussing on just one article. As part of the full-scale project described above. which was an empirical public opinion survey study relating to Hong Kong’s political transition from British to Chinese sovereignty. In his courses he would work in small groups of five to six students.tween Oliver and the journal editor. Oliver THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 133 . On graduation. He also provided copies of correspondence he had conducted with editors in connection with papers he had submitted for possible publication. reviewers. and a written account produced by the LE. He made himself available to provide editorial assistance to Hong Kong Cantonese L1 academics in return for their agreement to serve as possible subjects for a case study. After that he moved to an English-medium secondary school that was staffed primarily by Irish Jesuit priests. for his MA and PhD. my discussions throughout the case study with the research assistant/local editor (hereafter LE). and the in-house editor who worked on the paper. Oliver said that he considered both Chinese and English as his mother tongue. 1988) of the final report by Oliver. he moved to a major research university in the United States. Attitude towards writing for publication in English. December 15. Publication in international journals (in English) is more important for career progression than publication in Chinese language journals. FN = field notes. 1999d) and indeed scholars worldwide. “and basically most of the stuff was his research—maybe I collect the data and make the first draft of the article for him and this is not course work. December 15. “definitely. 1998). It 1 Coding conventions are as follows: E = e-mail message. When asked how he had learned to write for publication in English. 1998) In addition. but only if he was commissioned to do so. 1998). some as a single author and some coauthored with his advisor. because his research training had been in English. Oliver did write in Chinese. author. author. They think with a very different perspective.” adding that he was still collaborating with his advisor on papers and that he regularly sent articles to both his former advisor and a faculty member in political science. 134 TESOL QUARTERLY . author. the advisor would correct his writing and tell him what his problems were. I think it may be cultural.1 He worked with his advisor as both a teaching and research assistant.” who helped him “not just academically but personally” (I. 1998) through research methods and graduate courses in the United States. December 15. Oliver found it easier to write in that language: “I am used to writing in English journals. (I. R = report written by LE. author. Prior to participating in this study. it was very important for Oliver to publish in English.” Oliver told me in an interview. In line with the majority of Hong Kong scholars (Flowerdew. “I have to work at least 10 hours for my boss. Academic tenure and promotion in Hong Kong are dependent upon publication in international refereed journals.described his advisor as a particularly important “mentor. When asked in the same interview if he still kept in touch with his advisor and other mentors. so it is more difficult to switch to Chinese” (I. Oliver stated that he had learned “style and organization” (I. The following statement regarding the difficulty some NNSs have in academic writing shows Oliver’s awareness of the importance of writing in the appropriate academic register: I do want to say that some people after many years do not know how to write.” While working with Oliver. which are usually not refereed: I don’t like to write in Chinese but not because I hate Chinese but simply the Chinese journals are not recognized—the English article will count more than the Chinese one. I = interview. December 15. Oliver had published a number of international refereed articles. Oliver answered. author. Bazerman’s (1980. author. THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 135 . . (I. . December 15. . It is a circular spiral process . The review began as follows: “Obviously. (I. and every time I review their articles I have to change quite a bit. 1998) 2 Oliver showed me one review that did actually have such a statement in the first two sentences. 1998) Oliver believed that it was difficult for Hong Kong scholars like him to publish in international journals: I think Hong Kong scholars to be published in international journals is real hard.simply doesn’t fit the mentality of the Western reviewers. and Lave and Wenger’s (1991) legitimate peripheral participation: There is the language problem. initially the first two sentences must have been demoralising. yes. . I speak every day with them certain topics. who have to submit to these journals. (I. they will have the tendency to reject. December 15. Oliver experienced difficulties related to his isolation from the mainstream—Geertz’s (1973) exile from paradise syndrome. a large portion of the paper to bring more sense. The reviewer did then go on to say that extra efforts need to be made so that international contributions can be published. 1998) In addition to the language problem. but there is more than that. I think first of all it’s the language problem. I should use this kind of subtle cross-cultural academic dialogue. Nevertheless. What I mean. and the further you get away the more you’re not sure what’s going on anymore . to make it acceptable to the Western journals. December 15. There are many problems with language usage that would need to be corrected were this to be published. December 15. . author. I think the journal editors’ first impression of your manuscript they discover that it is not written by a native speaker—no matter how brilliant your idea. this manuscript has not been written by a native speaker. Oliver took exception to journal reviewers who specifically identified him as an NNS: What makes me feel bad is I get letters from the reviewer. It’s also influencing the NNSs the non-American European scholars etc. . the less dialogue. the less good work you can produce in the mainstream journals. and in the first two sentences it will say this is definitely not written by a native speaker 2—they shouldn’t point this out as part of the main criteria for rejecting the article. however. although I am a NNS. author. . 1985) conversations of the discipline. I don’t feel the problem. voice the politically correct voice. (I.” Oliver also showed me several other reviews that had similar statements. 1998) In particular. . when I was in the US. but when I leave the States I lose that ability to link the hot topic. Hong Kong scholars submitting to the States are suffering from a lack of common dialogue from the mainstream. being connected to the leading edge. although not right at the beginning. although not all. maybe even on a single paper. and his academic appointment would be up for renewal shortly. and I mean thoroughly. but it’s not as deep as direct conversation. this too is deeply linguistic. 1998) Oliver’s Attempt to Publish His Article Context At the time the study was conducted. 136 TESOL QUARTERLY .” “topic. This publication activity was in addition to starting up new research projects and developing and teaching new courses. and at these conferences we discussed our papers.” as his ensuing description of the difficulties of isolation reveals. Oliver was undergoing a similar process with various other articles. He was preparing for his PhD dissertation defence. (I. March 31. Oliver needed to demonstrate that he had been successful in research and teaching. which would incorporate descriptions of the courses he had taught and the results of student and peer evaluation. most. His research performance would be evaluated on the basis of how successful he had been in obtaining grant funding and in publishing in international refereed journals. but there is more than that. when I was there [the United States] I could fly to the cities quite easily and maybe talk to them [other researchers]. The importance of communication is again highlighted in the following response to a question about whether Oliver suffered difficulties in maintaining contact with the mainstream: Well.” and “voice” in describing the problem of isolation make this very clear. His multiple references to “dialogue.Although Oliver separates the isolation problem from the language problem in this statement. which would take place in several months back in the United States. At the same time as he was trying to publish the article that is the focus of this study. LE. with his introductory “There is the language problem. of which were based on material in his recently completed PhD dissertation. In order to have a good chance of renewal. This period was a particularly hectic one for Oliver. and I could go to local conferences. His teaching would be evaluated on the basis of a teaching portfolio he would have to prepare. Now we can still communicate on e-mail. Oliver had been working for a short time as an assistant professor at a Hong Kong university. definitely. being considered as first tier by both Oliver and a number of academics in the discipline who were consulted. He accordingly recommended that Oliver submit his paper to XYZ Journal. Oliver indicated that he received little useful feedback on the paper at this conference (I. 1998). stating that even though XYZ Journal had already recently devoted a THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 137 . would be considered. Oliver took the advice of the editor and submitted his paper to XYZ Journal. May 1997: Conference paper delivered at international conference in North America. This journal. The journal selected for the initial submission of the paper was the premier first-tier journal in Oliver’s primary academic area. LE. September 4. March 31.Article Submission and Revision The process Oliver went through in writing and publishing his article is mapped out in the following chronology. Here the response was that the paper. The original draft was worked on during the summer of 1996. 1998). 1998) was encouraging. although pointing out defects in the paper (including “second language mistakes that interfere with clarity and obscure meaning”. with revisions. March 31. being more concerned with area studies than with mass communication. This time Oliver considered the journal’s response to be positive. LE. the reviewer urged the editor to publish Oliver’s article.” On the basis of these positive comments. was devoted primarily not to Oliver’s main field of interest but to a related area. November 1. which was in fact more prestigious. He was anxious to establish an academic publishing record during 1997–1998 in order to prepare for reappointment. although notes and data collection actually stretched back over a period of almost 4 years. FN. The second submission was to what Oliver described as a “third-tier” journal (I. First. The data for this analysis were collected jointly by the LE and myself. the publishing opportunities for the period 1997–1998 were already filled. and the editor said that he did not want to make Oliver wait (I. The reviewer described Oliver’s paper as “valuable” and stated that “both the data and the argument [of the paper] contribute significantly to a deepened understanding of [X]. March 31. however. LE. LE. June–September 1997: Paper submitted to various journals. Nevertheless. April 18. the single referee’s report that accompanied the editor’s letter. 1996: Original draft completed. However. Oliver received a rejection notice and believed that even with revisions the paper would not be published in this journal. 1998). 1997: XYZ Journal gives a positive response. the journal editor indicated that the paper had been reviewed by the same reviewer as the original submission. November 4. The message was to proceed. April 3. For his part. journal editor. further. the editing needed to go beyond “surface” features of grammar and lexis to tackle the overall organization and “flow” of the paper (FN. the editor reported that the reviewer indicated that 138 TESOL QUARTERLY . I think there is great merit in considering them and suggest you think carefully about submitting this manuscript to them. (L. October 1997: Manuscript edited and resubmitted. 1997: XYZ Journal responds to the resubmission. Oliver and the LE discussed some of these issues after the manuscript had initially been edited. we are prepared to encourage you to address the issues set forth here in the review. Oliver engaged the services of an L1 writer (the LE) to edit the manuscript. LE.” In spite of this apparent encouragement to submit a revised version. and the LE felt that the edit would be somewhat superficial and. We shall understand here. this is one of the few manuscripts where we have encouraged revision. the editor held out the possibility of publication of a suitably revised resubmission: On the basis of an encouraging referee report. 1997: Oliver informs XYZ Journal of his intention to submit a revised version. the editor also stated. The LE understood that Oliver expected him to be able to edit the manuscript independently. In her letter of response. “I encourage you to publish this thought provoking article later in the year. Oliver was expecting the LE to do two things: see if there was anything that someone not in the field might not understand and make some grammatical or stylistic changes. I write to tell you that we will be happy to review a revised version of the manuscript and give you a rapid response. Though we reserve final judgment until we receive the final version. However. but the LE noted that Oliver was only able or willing to give him about half the time he actually needed. that in order for the paper to be published. September 12. “Moreover. 1998). 1997) As what appeared to be a further inducement. as we have gone through a transition of leadership here at XYZ Journal. September 4.” Following the reviewer’s advice.special edition to the topic of Oliver’s article. in her closing paragraph the editor rather enigmatically suggested that Oliver might nevertheless want to consider other journals: You will note that the referee suggested some other journals for publication. Over the following month. portions of the paper were rewritten by the journal’s in-house editor and submitted for Oliver’s consideration and clarification. clearly in preparation for the further editing that was to come. coordinated edit would have smoothed the flow of the manuscript.” The in-house editor did an aggressive job. 1998: Copy editing completed. The in-house editor e-mailed Oliver to say that he would be returning the manuscript (by fax) for further editing. April 8. she hardened her approach by ending the letter with a reiteration of the suggestion in her previous letter that Oliver consider submission to publications that were in her opinion more directly related to Oliver’s field and that “may have the capacity to undertake the extensive editing we have shown you. 1998: Letter of acceptance received and publishing agreement signed. and virtually every sentence was rewritten. the LE was dissatisfied with this process as he again felt that Oliver did not have enough time to direct the edit and that the cumulative effect of the various edits may have obscured the original text to some extent.” Five pages of actual editing were included by way of example.” November 12. Entire paragraphs were removed. 1997: Oliver informs XYZ Journal of his intention to make a further resubmission. January 1. the journal editor contacted Oliver directly by e-mail. THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 139 . March 5.“an immense editing job had to be done” and that acceptance was conditional upon Oliver’s ability “to undertake the editing or arrange for the editing to be done by someone else following the examples presented to you. 1998: E-mail correspondence begins. The editor further indicated that the journal was “making an effort to reduce the time spent in editing manuscripts. in spite of the earlier warning from the editor that the journal could not do the “immense editing job” that the article required. the in-house editor needed to become familiar with the content of the paper and did so by asking a huge number of questions (45) regarding details in the paper. cutting the paper from 43 pages to 29. May 5. In addition. 1998: Reedited manuscript submitted. Having completed the reediting.” In addition. in effect. For the first time. He felt that a final. He also stated that this would delay publication of the paper and that “We are sorry for the abrupt change of schedule but we all want the article to be as good as it can be. LE. As it was. the LE felt that his own contribution might have been greater had the paper initially been rejected. he had to negotiate several areas that to him represented factual errors. December 2. however. on the other. reviewer which was responsible for the positive response initially given to the paper. did not envisage such consultation as part of the editing process. However. 1998). 1998). the LE felt he was constricted by his own lack of disciplinary knowledge. Consequently. having worked for many years in the research office of a North American government agency. and paragraph coherence. the LE reported. For the LE. inaccuracies. Oliver. LE. after editing the LE and 140 TESOL QUARTERLY . LE. (R. Oliver was flexible enough to accept most of the changes made by the in-house editor. The structure and thematic consistency needed attention but seemed to be outside the edit mandate. the LE felt he needed lengthy discussion with Oliver to find out exactly what he was trying to say: Very quickly into the edit it became apparent that there would be some difficulty in dealing with those requirements that went beyond the English portion of the edit.May 1998: Editing completed by Oliver and manuscript resubmitted. “As the editor I had to determine what was ethical and reasonable under the circumstances” (R. To do justice to the paper. The LE accordingly limited his editing largely to what might be termed surface features of grammar. December 2. “Essentially the directions were simply to ‘edit what you can’” (R. As an editor. December 2. December 2. 1998) Paradoxically. lexis. . LE. . or outright falsehoods. and by the limited role assigned to him by Oliver. the LE wrote. however. the role of the reviewer was much more critical to the paper than his own editing: It was the considerable expertise of the . 1998). His/her ability to look beyond the language and beyond the structural and thematic problems was crucial to the life of the paper and this may not have been the case given a reviewer with less ability/vision. The Role of the LE The LE had considerable research experience. on the one hand. He expected the LE to be able to work independently and revise the paper appropriately on his own. In his account of the editing experience. June 1998: Paper published in XYZ Journal. Oliver would then have had “no choice but to provide the impetus for a more carefully directed rewrite” (R. she invited a resubmission but encouraged Oliver to submit his manuscript to another journal. (R. the Reviewer. In her second letter. but not all. Finding a suitable L1 editor. on the recommendation of the same reviewer. 1998) During the second edit. The journal editor’s role in the publication process for Oliver’s paper is somewhat ambiguous. and the In-House Editor Journal editor. students interrupted constantly. in fact. The LE estimated that a good exchange of views would have required several hours but that he and Oliver spent only about half of the necessary time on this task. in suggesting that Oliver obtain assistance in editing his manuscript. The reasons for this are that the number of edits that were done acted to obscure the text to some extent. In her first letter. as office space was shared. In other words the flow of the paper could not be adjusted until the edits were completed and the reader was able to “see” a clean copy. and one meeting even had to be held in the staff restaurant. The LE further stated. as well as having to address the editorial demands of the journal editor and the reviewers all represent L2 challenges which seem far beyond those experienced by L1 scholars. as stated in the chronology above. “to effect thematic changes and improve upon the continuity of the paper. I have to believe that for the author the entire process must have been extremely stressful. Much. One of the things that was clear about this paper was that it would have benefited from a further edit after the author had made the necessary changes and before it was resubmitted.” In this respect the second edit done by the LE was more satisfactory. and in reiterating her suggestion that Oliver consider THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 141 . dealing with the subsequent edits and contending with the vagaries regarding content. LE.Oliver set aside some time for discussion. One possible interpretation of this is that although she herself was not that enthusiastic about the paper. 1998) The Role of the Journal Editor. LE. But she also again expressed her reservations—in emphasising the immense editing job that was required. but even this was problematic. she again signaled that Oliver could proceed. of the second edit could have been avoided if this process had been followed. in stating that the journal was trying to cut down on time spent editing. (R. the LE felt that there was more opportunity to work on the overall clarity of the paper—that is. December 2. The LE’s overall evaluation of the editorial process from the point of view of Oliver was as follows: In the end. December 2. on the basis of the reviewer’s recommendation she felt obliged to at least offer resubmission. “He [the in-house editor] is trying to make the argument that [X is significant]—[Y] may not be as interesting as covering as [X]. As noted by the LE. He changed not only surface stylistic features but also—in making drastic cuts—the whole organization of the manuscript. He described the changes as primarily two types: linguistic-stylistic and organizationalstructural. which were of most interest. 1998). “[XYZ Journal] is not an [X] journal and they do not require a lot of empirical stuff” (E. but this was created not by putting the paper in the context of other work but by emphasizing the methodology and subject matter that is appropriate for readers of XYZ Journal. Because the journal had a less empirical leaning. Oliver felt this section to be important in his discipline. “My article is something about [X] and this has not been the major focus of the journal.” Oliver stated. December 2. He attributed the organizational-structural changes to disciplinary factors. Oliver described the job the in-house editor did as “a huge edit” and as “the most difficult” of all the editing processes he had gone through (FN. 1998). whose reviewers insisted that she make the article “newsworthy” by situating it within the previous related research. Oliver stated that he felt that the in-house editor played a major role in shaping the focus of the paper. As he put it. author. the methodology. LE. September 11. The journal was primarily focussed on area studies. which values rigorous quantitative analysis and methodology more highly than the disciplinary orientation of the journal. then. the literature review. Reviewer. In-house editor. The extensive cuts. the reviewer’s role was crucial: He or she was able to envision the final paper based upon the initial submission. The role of the journal’s in-house editor went far beyond what would normally be expected of a copy editor. The disciplinary orientation of the in-house editor led Oliver to emphasise certain aspects that he himself considered minor relative to other sections of the paper.submitting his paper elsewhere (to a journal with better facilities for editing his manuscript). In Oliver’s case it is also a question of news value. indeed. as he described it. June 15. 1998). LE. which was by no means clear either to the LE or to me. whereas Oliver saw himself more closely affiliated to mass communication. were mainly in the methodology section. 142 TESOL QUARTERLY .” This function of the reviewer and in-house editor in reorienting the main focus of the paper is similar to the situation described by Berkenkotter and Huckin (1995) in their case study of the biologist. and the empirical data were less important than analysis and interpretation. in “put[ting] his own agenda on the paper” (R. which is more interested in political analysis. 1998). and I think that when I write another article—the current article I am writing—I will be more focussed and more concentrated on the style rather than a lot of the content and stuff like that” (I. as legitimate political entities for district board electioneering in the 1990s. a significant area where many changes were made). As with Berkenkotter and Huckin’s (1995) biologist. Example 1 Author: The question is whether the media would continuously be a companion of pro–status quo camp during the late political transition or after the Communist Party has taken over. Example 2 Author: With people’s aspiration of democracy and hence district boards’ popularity in the subsequent elections. the editorial experience enabled Oliver to appreciate the importance of the rhetorical dimension of the scholar’s work. THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 143 . The following examples are indicative of some of the transformations of certain paragraphs (some key words have been changed to preserve anonymity). What will be the treatment of the media upon the various interest groups when they entered the establishment after winning the district board elections? LE: The macro question under review is whether the media continues to support the pro–status quo camp and the public after the Communist Party take-over of Hong Kong. and the final published version. In-house editor: This article seeks to anticipate whether the media will continue to lean toward the pro–status quo camp and the public under Chinese rule. author. the important legitimate peripheral participation afforded by this activity came out strongly. I emphasize. The extensive nature of the editing carried out on Oliver’s paper makes it difficult to exemplify clearly. or the cumulative effect that extensive sections of such rewriting had on comprehensibility. which may well be as important as the actual content—at least if one wants the results of one’s research published. the LE’s revision. however. mass media were shown to have made a complete volte-face from outraging to following public opinion. to shape the various groups. December 15. Three stages are provided for each of the examples: the original submitted version. which were also important editorial changes made by the in-house editor. especially status quo groups. They do not show deletions and reorganisation. “I learned a lot in terms of style.” Oliver stated. that the examples illustrate editing only at the level of paragraph coherence (admittedly. Examples of editing. “The editor was tough.When Oliver was asked about the experience of working with the in-house editor. Third. had a particular political ideology to convey. Example 3 Author: In the campaigns. author. Beijing acted inconsistently. First. Beijing was contradicting itself by on the one hand espousing that the political reforms were a ‘triple violation’ and on the other hand by mobilizing pro-China figures to participate. in the interpretation of events.LE: With the peoples’ aspiration of democracy and the ensuing parties’ popularity in the elections. In-house editor: Such democratic aspirations and the resulting popularity of the parties brought a complete about-face in the mass media in the 1990s. he added a lengthy section describing Hong Kong’s gradual democratic development before the handover. that the journal. he considered that the main concern of the journal was “freedom in Hong Kong under the rein [sic] of China. Second. however.” In response to this last issue. or at least the in-house editor. he stated that. 1998). The Editing of Content One other important aspect of the editorial process is the need for the author to adapt the content to suit the priorities of the journal. as opposed to the more empirical emphasis that Oliver had originally put on the paper. the journal “tended to attribute everything to China’s interference” (E. In response to a specific request for examples of this type of editing via e-mail. LE: In the campaigns waged. In-house editor: In the campaign. He felt obliged to accommodate this tendency. September 11. They also suggest. Beijing was contradicting itself by espousing the reforms be a “triple violator” but mobilizing pro-China figures to participate. the mass media made a complete about-face from opposing the general public opinion (in the 80s) to following and endorsing it (in the 90s) with regard to their view of district boards as legitimate political entities. though. 144 TESOL QUARTERLY . Oliver mentioned a number of aspects of content that he had felt obliged to change. saying that Governor Patten’s political reforms were void while simultaneously mobilizing pro-China figures to participate in the subsequent school elections.” These changes were in line with the analytical orientation of the journal. he felt that the journal wanted the conflictual aspect of Hong Kong–China relations to be emphasised. in order to satisfy what he described as the journal’s desire “to make the point that Hong Kong’s political development is interrupted by China’s presence. and they now endorsed various groups as legitimate political entities. he had accordingly developed this theme more. Other possible impediments to success. Oliver’s struggle represented “L2 challenges which seem far beyond those experienced by L1 scholars” (R. To what extent Oliver’s difficulties were specific to his situation as an NNS is hard to say. As the reviewer of Oliver’s article noted. His disregard of the two separate suggestions by the editor of XYZ Journal to submit elsewhere was a wise move in the end. As an NNS writer. In terms of the time put in working on a manuscript. It is of course true that native-English-speaking writers are likely to experience most. December 2. He was also lucky in that the single reviewer of his submission had the skill to see a publishable article in a manuscript that two nonspecialists (the LE and I) were unable to envision and that had what the reviewer described as “second language mistakes that interfere with clarity and obscure meaning” (reviewer. Certainly. one wonders if the editors of XYZ Journal would have been willing to put in so much time on a poorly presented manuscript if it had be written by an NS. and at various stages Oliver’s efforts might have been thwarted. of Oliver’s problems. as an NNS Oliver most likely had to put in more time than would an NS. his was one of the few submissions taken on by the new editor. the process was fraught with difficulties. are more transparent than others). Considering Oliver’s endeavour in terms of discourse community and legitimate peripheral participation sheds a considerable amount of light on the experience. insofar as Oliver achieved publication of his article. as far as the LE was concerned. were overcome by luck as much as judgement. Finally. His willingness to cooperate with the in-house editor and accept radical cutting and rewriting also worked in his favour.” He was knowledgeable enough about the initial rejection from the first journal not to give up but to try a second and then a third one. On the other hand. He was furthermore lucky in that the journal staff devoted an immense amount of time and effort to editing his paper when the journal editor had earlier said they were not willing to do this. however. he was fortunate in being able to secure the services of the LE. however. such as subject-verb concord.DISCUSSION This ethnographic investigation of the publication of a scholarly article by an NNS is ultimately a success story. However. September 1997). L2 mistakes do have the potential to interfere with clarity and obscure meaning (although some errors. if not all. 1998). Oliver was at two steps removed THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 145 . in the change of editorship of XYZ Journal. LE. It is equally true. that it is impossible to draw the line between content and form in writing. Some of these difficulties were overcome through Oliver’s prior knowledge of the publishing “game. Perhaps as an NNS Oliver was accorded a special privilege. Oliver was lucky in that. in highlighting the important roles played by the LE and the in-house editor.from a desirable situation with regard to these two phenomena. but this can be done without distinguishing between NSs and NNSs. in Hong Kong. but not at the service of the supplicants. for Oliver e-mail communication was “not as deep” as face-to-face conversation. it seems. as previously highlighted by. CONCLUSION What might be done to alleviate the difficulties of nonnative-Englishspeaking scholars such as Oliver seeking to publish in international journals in English? In many ways Oliver is in a privileged position compared with other NNSs. By living and working on the periphery. of course. The technology. the geographical isolation was mitigated by the use of technology (e-mail). for example. Nonstandard language needs to be pointed out to all contributors. Nonnative-speaking scholars who have had less exposure to English and less opportunity for peripheral participation than Oliver are presumably in a more difficult position when it comes to the international publication of their research. having had great exposure to English at school and having done his graduate studies in the United States. but. it is the language they have been educated in and the language in which they conduct a great part of their scholarly activity. In any case. the study has reiterated the mediated nature of academic writing. who are eager to receive news of progress on their submission. In Oliver’s case. The terms NS and NNS mark two ends of a continuum that mask a whole range of language competencies. including reviewers. Prior (1998). But he was also linguistically removed insofar as he lacked the nativelike language proficiency that full membership of his target discourse community and peripheral participation demanded. NNSs. also have a responsibility to prepare their 146 TESOL QUARTERLY . as nonstandard. with all of the opportunities for legitimate peripheral participation that that implies. One obvious point that needs addressing is the tendency of editors and reviewers to use the label NNS in their reviews and correspondence. he was geographically removed from the discourse community and peripheral participation to which he is seeking access. perhaps significantly. even though his English is perceived by others. electronic communication began only when the journal was already committed to publishing Oliver’s paper. English is the native scholarly language of many scholars internationally even though it is not strictly speaking their mother tongue. as already mentioned. is at the service of the gatekeeper. In terms of literacy theory. when the in-house editor requires rapid work on the paper. Thus Oliver described himself as an NS of both Chinese and English. 1998). If one were to identify a misapprehension on Oliver’s part. was beneficial not just in terms of getting the paper published but also in the opportunity for the peripheral participation and learning it afforded. it might be that. (Oliver’s experience in collaborating on this research project was also beneficial. editors. native-English-speaking writers might be better to work with a specialist in the discipline in addition to a nonspecialist NS. Given the importance of disciplinary knowledge in editing (as indicated by the problems of the LE in this study). To this extent Oliver’s experience. he did not initially put a high value on the rhetorical dimension of his work. teacher-fronted package. which are so crucial in achieving success in writing for academic publication. author. as reported in this case study. and be mentored by both subject and language THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 147 . as this case study has demonstrated and Oliver has acknowledged. however. the notions of discourse community and legitimate peripheral participation do not preclude any role for formal instruction (Lave. receive a certain amount of formal instruction in academic writing. young scholars would meet periodically to interact with their peers. he was more interested in the ideas than in the format for their expression. Oliver’s understanding of the importance of the discursive dimension of his work. A number of further recommendations come to mind with regard to the notions of discourse community and legitimate peripheral participation. with each submission Oliver will know a little bit more about how to manage the process. In considering the sort of training that might be offered to people in Oliver’s position. Legitimate peripheral participation is likely to come about through the encouragement of attendance at international conferences and exchanges of scholars between the centre and the periphery. instead of being designed as a formal. reviewers. As stated earlier. June 5. 1998). came with the experience of submitting and editing journal papers. In such a programme. I would like to stress that this is certainly not the case. he commented that he felt that what this article says was “essentially true” and that “the influence of research collaboration [as highlighted in the paper] is particularly important” (E. like the biologist in Berkenkotter and Huckin’s (1995) study. and the academic community at large still have a duty to facilitate and optimise such learning. international collaboration in research is likely to be beneficial. Similarly. however. In case the conclusions about the usefulness of informal legitimate peripheral participation to be drawn from this article might be construed as negative for the teaching of academic writing. Like other academics. such instruction might better be envisioned as an opportunity for bringing together apprentice professionals to share their experiences and reflect together on their ongoing legitimate peripheral participation.manuscripts to the best of their ability and to use any editorial assistance they may be able to find locally. 109–127). Hillsdale. T. C. C. Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: cognition/culture/power. Keeves (Ed. 3–23. Bazerman. A relationship between reading and writing: The conversational model. C. 310–314). 13. Berkenkotter. Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. (1995). 2. The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. Ball.). See also an account of a similar programme run at the University of Hong Kong for graduate student dissertation writing (Allison et al. D.. 1999). Berkenkotter. Blyler & C.. R. College English. Participant observation. Bartholomae.3 This training might be supported by individual mentoring sessions organized in some sort of writing “clinic” staffed by both language and subject specialists. English for specific purposes/English for academic purposes. Newbury Park. In N. Professional communication: The social perspective (pp. THE AUTHOR John Flowerdew is professor in the English Department. NJ: Erlbaum. New York: Guilford Press. D. 250). curriculum theory. L. C. (1988). Bazerman. (1985). 2. (1985). You are what you cite: Novelty and intertextuality in a biologist’s experimental article. 23–34. In M. Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. 3 This idea is expressed in more general terms by Lave (1998.. & Hamp-Lyons. Rose (Ed. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Oxford: Pergamon Press. J. 656–661. Daniel Reeves. (1994). Belcher. Lewkowicz. (1988). English for Specific Purposes. 1998). & Nunan. N. p. & Huckin. D. Bazerman.. & Huckin. Dissertation writing in action. J. and the use of English in Hong Kong. English for Specific Purposes. Thralls (Eds. Hong Kong Polytechnic University has recently set up such a centre (Sengupta. P.4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported in this article was funded by Hong Kong University Research Grants Council under the project reference CityU 769/95H.. I would like to gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of the anonymous participant in this study and of my senior research assistant. T. Written Communication. CA: Sage.specialists. Cooley. (1993). D.). C. Inventing the university. 41. In J. S. Perhaps Oliver’s experience might have been easier if his university had been able to offer him access to a centre where such opportunities were available. When a writer can’t write (pp. (1988). REFERENCES Allison. 209–217.). City University of Hong Kong. For the past several years he has been investigating the writing processes of Hong Kong Cantonese L1 academics writing for publication in English.. Educational research methodology and measurement: An international handbook (pp. His research interests include discourse analysis. Forey. 134–165). 4 148 TESOL QUARTERLY . (1980). Braine (Ed. P. (1999). Academic writing in a second language (pp. Geertz. J. & P. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 29–42). Writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. G. 123–145.. Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. Bizzell. (1999). (1995). 213–243. English for Specific Purposes. A. U. S. Lave. Prior. C. 14. & Akerman. Initiating students into discipline-based reading and writing. 219–245.). Braine (Ed. (1973). Heaton. NJ: Erlbaum. In D. Gosden. 12. (1999d). The interpretation of cultures.. H. (1991). Flowerdew. Forey. In P.. X. 12. In A. Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. 8. Learning and teaching genre (pp. New York: Cambridge University Press. Dias. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sengupta. Genre analysis of editorial letters to international journal contributors. (1998). NH: Elsevier. Manuscript in preparation. Attitudes of journal editors to non-native speaker contributions. Dudley-Evans. Research in the Teaching of English. Belcher & G. Writing from the vantage point of an outsider/insider. J. H. T. The social construction of two biologists’ proposals. P.).). THE NONNATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING SCHOLAR 149 . Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Mahwah. J. & Dudley-Evans.Berkenkotter. Norwood. G. Casanave. J. English for Specific Purposes. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Adams. Lave. 8. (1994). Communities of practice. NJ: Ablex.. 243–264. Manuscript submitted for publication. B. (1970). Mahwah. 9–44. Medway (Eds.D. 41–51). 191–207. (1998). S. Huckin. & Hamp-Lyons. Gosden. J. Myers. Connor. and certainty: What we need to know about writing. Manuscript submitted for publication. 3. New York: Basic Books.D. (1995). T. NJ: Erlbaum. Kuhn. (1999). Socio-cultural issues in English for academic purposes (pp. Bizzell. J. (1991). C. Journal of Second Language Writing.). In G. P. J.). Curriculum Inquiry. (1999). 83–110). [Review of Four worlds of writing and Writing in the arts and sciences]. T. conversations. Socialisation into the academic community: Linguistic and stylistic expectations of a Ph. Howarth (Eds. 193–206). J. (1982a). (1988). P. Flowerdew. Li. thesis as revealed by supervisor comments. 22. Flowerdew. Supporting effective English communication within the context of teaching and research in a tertiary institute: Developing a genre model for consciousness raising. L. (1999b). (1999c). PRE/TEXT. London: Macmillan. 37–57. Flowerdew.. C. Freeman & P. Success in research article writing and revisions: A social constructionist perspective. Portsmouth. program. College composition: Initiation into the academic discourse community. Verbal reports of Japanese doctoral students. and the writer: Case study of a student in a rhetoric Ph.). 18(Supplement). Conventions. Local interactions: Constructing contexts for composing in a graduate sociology program. A text analysis of the introductions to two manuscript submissions written by Hong Kong academics. Learning to write academic prose in a second language: A literacy autobiography. Braine (Eds. P. NJ: Erlbaum. E. Mahwah. Written Communication. Journal of Second Language Writing.. (1996). Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. M. (1982b). convention. & Wenger. (1985). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed. S7–S22. 5. Flowerdew. 109–128. In G. Cognition. Journal of Second Language Writing. (1999a). 43–55). & Buker. (1990). Weissberg. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. & Feak. Academic writing for graduate students.. (1994). S. Writing up research: Experimental research report writing for students of English. J. C.Swales. R. Swales. M.. J. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall. B. 150 TESOL QUARTERLY . M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. rather than extending the potential membership in the class of phrasal verbs. From among the traditional syntactic tests. 1. JOAN H. Gray’s article in TESOL Quarterly (Vol. which can be eliminated with adverb insertion (only one of the tests that would do this): TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. SAWYER Brookline Adult and Community Education Program Brookline. . 1. 33.THE FORUM The TESOL Quarterly invites commentary on current trends or practices in the TESOL profession. Darwin and Loretta S. as Darwin and Gray suggest? For example. 34. Comments on Clayton M. What if this approach actually rules out combinations that aid in the teaching of these structures. No. No. Spring 2000 151 . It also welcomes responses or rebuttals to any articles or remarks published here in The Forum or elsewhere in the Quarterly. . Gray’s “Going After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative Approach to Classification” A Reader Reacts . United States ■ The crucial notion underlying the proposal in Clayton M. Massachusetts. Spring 1999) is that all verb ⫹ particle combinations should be considered as phrasal verbs until they can be proven otherwise. only those showing that the combination does not function as a single unit either lexically or syntactically would rule a combination out of membership in the class of phrasal verbs. Darwin and Loretta S. The combination give up would be an example of this class. For them. 76–77). “a phrasal verb consists of a verb proper and a morphologically invariable particle that function together as a single unit both lexically and syntactically” (pp. their definition would rule out walk out. DEFINING THE PHRASAL VERB The fact that Darwin and Gray adopt the definition of a phrasal verb as a verb ⫹ particle that acts as a single word both syntactically and lexically (p. in this response the word real precedes the word particle when it references the element that forms a unit with the verb. Powers. Pollock. I endeavor to show that. 152 TESOL QUARTERLY . Darwin and Gray are suggesting an agreement on the approach to these combinations that is not reflected in the literature. This reduces avoidance of these combinations on the part of students and gives teachers a simple foundation on which to build an understanding of the functioning of the semantically less transparent combinations. The syntactic tests that Fraser supplies in the beginning of his book are intended to rule out verb ⫹ preposition and verb ⫹ adverb combinations (both phrasal verbs) from the true verb ⫹ particle combinations (those that act as a single word) that he wishes to discuss. 1995. A second view (held by Bennis. 1996. den Dikken.1 This definition does not line up with the one that Fraser puts forward. adverb. in this latter sense the word particle will be modified by the words morphologically invariable. 1990. When the word particle refers to the generic use as a morphologically invariable form. the adverb part way modifies only out. which can be a preposition. Wouldn’t beginning with these semantically transparent constructions (rather than ruling them out) be simpler? In this reply to their article. Jordens. & Weissenborn. 1994. Sawyer 1999) is that in the verb ⫹ particle combination. den Dikken. one can include semantically transparent combinations that lead students to understand the surface structure of the combinations. 1995. the particle is a secondary predicate and forms a small clause. or what I refer to here as a real particle. this would be impossible. Alternately. it appears between quotation marks. Kayne. phrasal verbs all include a verb and a morphologically invariable constituent (as Darwin as Gray suggest). Thus. an adverb. If walk and out were functioning as a unit. 1985. 2 To avoid confusion and draw attention to the intended meaning of the word particle. not the verb walk.1. In this case. or real particle. according to Fraser’s approach.2 The examples below show each type: 1 In stating this as the standard definition. Combinations of this latter type are semantically transparent yet have the same surface structure as the more semantically opaque constructions that Darwin and Gray wish to concentrate on teaching. He walked part way out of the building before he remembered his umbrella. 76) suggests that what Fraser (1976) defines as verb-particle constructions and phrasal verbs are the same thing. by opening the membership in the class of phrasal verbs to all combinations of verbs and morphologically invariable particles (not only the ones that function as a unit). but this latter element could be a preposition. In Example 3b the adverb is independent of the verb. The cowboy shot up the bullet. Up changes the 3 In this example.3 All three types are phrasal verbs. as in the following: 3a.2a. In Example 2b the verb chew appears with an adverb. in Example 3c. which is a complement of the verb. in Example 2c the verb chew appears with a real particle. up is a real particle). and morphologically invariable particle. up. (real particle) Each of the above cases includes a verb chew and a morphologically invariable particle.. adverb. The reasoning behind why these tests work as they do can be found in Sawyer (1999). that the branch is now down as a result of being chewed). The cowboy shot up the saloon.. or real particle by using the tests in Fraser (1976). (preposition) b. (preposition) b. THE FORUM 153 . verb. The cowboy shot up the hill. The cowboy is therefore moving quickly up the hill.” These examples demonstrate not only the difference between the functions of the three “particle” types but also the danger of trying to classify a verb ⫹ “particle” as a particular type without reference to a specific context. but only in Example 2c are the verb and particle acting as a single unit (i. The woodchuck chewed around the branch. running or perhaps riding a horse. the morphologically invariable particle is a preposition that forms a constituent (a prepositional phrase [PP]) with the noun phrase (NP) complement the branch. In Example 2a. (real particle) This set of examples shares the same subject. The woodchuck chewed down the branch. Although these examples of the three types of particles appearing in phrasal verbs are relatively uncontroversial.e. The only difference is the NP that follows the “particle. The adverb specifies the meaning of the verb and suggests the NP complement’s location in space (i. In each case above.e. is moving in an upward direction as a result of being shot. the “particle” up forms a unit with the verb. Finally. (adverb) c. In Example 3a. which is independent of the verb. Finally. (adverb) c. The woodchuck chewed up the branch. Up specifies the direction of the shooting and indicates that the NP the bullet. up is a preposition forming a constituent (PP) with the NP the hill. down. the “particle” was classified as a preposition. the “particle” serves a different function. the difficulty in recognizing the difference among them becomes apparent when the verb and all three types of “particles” have the same morphologically invariable form. In this case the real particle forms a unit with the verb and alters the meaning of chew to be that of destroy or consume. if the class of phrasal verbs is taken to include cases of verb ⫹ morphologically invariable particle.a. Sawyer (1999) added Tests 8 and 9. n. 4.a. n. 8. Table 1 shows only how the “particle” types pattern. 7. Allows both V-NP-“particle” and V-“particle”-NP word order Allows insertion of manner adverbials Allows “particle” and NP in sentence-initial position Allows “particle” on both sides of the PP in action nominalizations “Particle” functions as an independent constituent in gapped constructions Allows insertion of degree adverbials Allows contrastive stress of “particle” “Particle” can be initially coordinated “Particle” can be coordinated with prepositional phrases PrepoReal sition Adverb particle No n. 5. and how does doing so help teach the three types? Bolinger (1971). 6. Fraser (1976) suggested that there were three types (prepositions. 9. Because readers of Darwin and Gray’s article will be familiar with most of these tests and because space requirements preclude a detailed discussion.a. TABLE 1 Syntactic Tests for Distinguishing the Three “Particle” Types Syntactic test 1. n. that study reviews these tests and demonstrates why the three “particle” types pattern as they do (see the study for details). there would be three types: (a) verb ⫹ preposition.a. Examples that demonstrate the classifications are found in the Appendix. n.a. n. Yes No n. Greenbaum and Quirk (1990).a.a. and real particles) and that all members of a given type would function consistently on Tests 1–7 in Table 1. DETERMINING WHICH “PARTICLE” IS WHICH How can teachers determine which “particle” is which. 3.meaning of shot to something like caused a commotion or damaged by shooting a number of times. 154 TESOL QUARTERLY . To review. See the Appendix for examples. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No Note. 2.a. and Lindner (1981) used syntactic tests to demonstrate that “particles” behave differently in a variety of syntactic situations. Yes No No Yes No No n. (b) verb ⫹ adverb. adverbs. and (c) verb ⫹ real particle. would show students how the surface structure operates and would help reduce avoidance of phrasal verbs. the adverb and realparticle cases both involve word-order alternation (shown in Example 4). (nonsplit) Once students realize that the verb and the adverb retain the standard meaning. and understanding how to use this alternation is crucial to using these combinations correctly. each of which retains its original meaning when appearing in combination. Excluding verb-preposition combinations from the class of phrasal verbs leaves only the combinations that include adverbs and real particles requiring specific instruction. The hurricane knocked the tree over. Step 2: Teach Verb-Adverb Combinations The adverb examples contain a verb and an adverb. Similarly. in Example 3a the verb and preposition retain their normal meaning and function. the combination is semantically transparent. and the preposition around retains its meaning as well. There is no reason to deal with them as anything but standard verbs followed by PPs because they do not present a challenge for comprehension or production of this group. In short. I suggest this order because it allows teachers to exclude the prepositional cases from the set that needs to be taught specifically as phrasal verbs. the real-particle cases would be taught in groups according to the contribution that the real particle makes to the meaning of the verb. The hurricane knocked over the tree. Step 1: Do Not Teach Verb-Preposition Combinations as Phrasal Verbs In Example 2a. teachers can demonstrate that the object can appear either between the verb and the “particle” (the split form) or after the THE FORUM 155 . teachers can focus on the word-order alternation in combinations that are easy to understand and produce. the prepositional cases would not need to be taught as phrasal verbs at all.TEACHING PHRASAL VERBS Knowing the “particle” type not only helps predict which combinations might be easily taught but also suggests the order in which they might best be presented to students. (split) b. which are semantically transparent. 4a. However. As long as the student knows the meaning of the verb and the adverb. Last. The adverb cases. the meaning of the verb chew is unaffected by the addition of the preposition. By presenting the adverb cases before the real-particle cases. they must be presented in context. along. van Hout. b. When they begin working on less transparent types. In these combinations. ahead. they no longer need to be concerned with word order. sort out. back. students may begin to see a pattern that they can use to decode new combinations encountered. which has been claimed as a function of the real particle up (Tenny. The first is telicity or completiveness. Examples of this group are clean up. Again. up with verbs of consumption such as eat and drink). Teachers can demonstrate each real particle in this group by presenting a series of verbs with which the real particle has the telic reading (e. such as give up. A second group for which it is easy to supply examples is real particles that do not seem to add much semantically to the verb.“particle” (the nonsplit form).. Whether there are certain contexts that naturally include a 156 TESOL QUARTERLY . Again. over. the item that appears as the object of the action (an apple or milk) is consumed completely. Other examples are chew up.g. off. through. and wear out. *The hurricane knocked over it. around. wash up. These combinations are the most difficult to organize into groups for presentation. away. forth. by. tear up. forward. Verbs such as push and pull work with large numbers of adverbs. act out. and up. The third group consists of idiomatic combinations that must be learned individually. under. lock up. think up. The teacher need add only that the nonsplit form is ungrammatical when the object is a pronoun: 5a. Sawyer’s (1999) longitudinal study of spontaneous speech in children between the ages of 1 and 7 years found the following adverbs occurring with multiple verbs: across. others can be taught in groups. Teachers should have no difficulty finding verb-adverb combinations to teach. and start out. the students would see that these are not isolated cases but show a pattern. together. on. down. Step 3: Teach Verb–Real Particle Combinations Although some idiomatic combinations must be learned individually. Sawyer’s (1999) study of child language acquisition demonstrated that there are at least three common functions for real particles. and use up. past. in. teachers would demonstrate each real particle that works this way with a set of verbs to which it adds little semantically. One of the apparent advantages to teaching word order with semantically transparent examples is that seeing these understandable combinations gives students confidence. 1998) in examples such as eat up and drink up. out. The hurricane knocked it over. apart. 1994. 1997. Thus. Presenting semantically transparent adverbial forms before real-particle forms teaches the intricacies of the word order and builds students’ confidence. adverbs. The fact that real particles can be clustered into groups by function (e. and Marco Haverkort for his careful reading of this response and useful suggestions for its improvement. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank Julie Whitlow for bringing Darwin and Gray’s article to my attention and for suggesting that I respond to it. the prepositional cases do not need to be taught as phrasal verbs because the verb and preposition retain their normal meaning and function. Sawyer and Whitlow’s (1999) study seeks to test the effects of this method on adult learners of English in the Boston area. those that go with out that add nothing) makes teaching more efficient. The fact that there seem to be some patterns in the functions of real particles is encouraging and suggests that more work should be done to identify as many new patterns as possible. CONCLUSION The fact that “particles” can be effectively separated into prepositions. In this approach. and real particles is an important step. teaching combinations divided into groups by verb may not be the most efficient approach. a study of the adult data is now underway. Second. verbs that go with up that are telic.. Analysis of their different functions offers teachers one way of considering which ones to teach and suggests a step-by-step process for doing so. This method also suggests a direction for future research. The more similarities that can be found and described. the method presented in this response. while intuitively appealing. corpus studies are needed. Teaching the real particles by their function in groups of verbs may help students learn patterns for decoding new combinations and increasing their vocabularies while reducing their avoidance of these combinations. as Darwin and Gray note. as Darwin and Gray point out. In the case of real particles. The data used for Sawyer’s 1999 study identified conversations between children and adults. has yet to be demonstrated in the classroom. THE FORUM 157 . the fewer combinations will need to be taught as individual lexical items. Also.g.large number of them or whether enough of them would be encountered naturally in reading newspapers or literature is a question worthy of further investigation. because little is known about which combinations are most commonly used. MA. Verb-adverb and verb-particle constructions: Teaching and acquisition. Dissertation Abstracts International. J. & Whitlow. Powers. Somerville.. & J. The antisymmetry of syntax. & Weissenborn. C. In A. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. MA: Cascadilla Press. J. A. Kayne. Sawyer. A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb particle constructions (Doctoral dissertation. adverb. (1990).. Manuscript in preparation. Gueron. 1. MacLaughlin & S. (1996). MA: Cascadilla Press. Dordrecht. & A. Kayne. (preposition) b. MA: Cascadilla Press. Greenbaum. 03A. 2. On the role of direct objects and particles in learning telicity in Dutch and English. In E. Somerville. Jordens. In D. MA: Harvard University Press. (1999). D. 09A. San Diego. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface.). P. Bok-Bennema & P. & H. Obenauer. H. S. (1999). Littlefield. (University Microfilms No. 678–688). A. 60. den Dikken. The verb-particle construction in English. Cambridge. Tenny. Unpublished manuscript. Grammatical representation (pp.). Netherlands: Foris. (1971). 398–408). (1981). Coopmans (Eds. 42. Bolinger. England: Longman. 23–32). Dordrecht. Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle.. Cambridge. H. Netherlands: Foris. M. R. The phrasal verb in English. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. van Hout. Hughes. The woodchuck chewed down the branch. pp. Dissertation Abstracts International. In J. J. den Dikken. c. Linguistics in the Netherlands (pp. J. and real particle) a. Proceedings of the 21st Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. In R.). MA: MIT Press. triadic. Fraser. G. M. Greenhill. Hughes. APPENDIX Examples for Syntactic Tests 1. 70–81).-Y. 101–140). Learning telicity: Acquiring argument structure and the syntax/ semantics of direct objects. MA: Harvard University Press. Dordrecht. Word order (contrasts preposition. The woodchuck chewed around the branch. Verb adverb and verb particle constructions: Their syntax and acquisition (Doctoral dissertation. Proceedings of the 22nd Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. Hughes. pp. (adverb) 158 TESOL QUARTERLY . Cambridge. B. M. 2. University of California. S. (1994). Pollock (Eds. den Dikken. *The woodchuck chewed the branch around. Lindner. (1998). Principles of particle constructions. McEwen (Eds. 1999).. pp. (1995). (1976).. S. 1981). M. R. A student’s grammar of the English language. and causative constructions. Somerville. Essex. (1997). Cambridge.). Case checking and particle constructions. (1990).-Y.). Greenhill (Eds.. & Quirk. van Hout. Picking up particles. L. (1995). 8205341) Pollock. Boston University. Oxford: Oxford University Press. R. (1994). Harvard University. Sawyer.REFERENCES Bennis. The structure of English complex particle constructions. (1985). M. Walsh (Eds. J. Jack knocked the green marble in and Jill [ ] the red one out. A hurricane knocked the tree part way over. d. but these informants agree that they are markedly better than their adverb or real-particle counterparts. adverb. (adverb) c. 3. *The elderly couple looked hopefully up the information. 6. (adverb) b. The woodchuck chewed up the branch. 4.2. (adverb) d. The wind blew the leaves AROUND. The wind blew the tree part way down. (preposition) b. (real particle) c. (real particle) c. 9. Bruno pushed the weights both up and down. The gladiators drove recklessly off the path. (adverb) c. He jerked the spatula both up and out of the fire. *Off the enemy drove the gladiators. *The thieves knocked the spring designs part way off. *The brilliant lecture blew the students AWAY. *The thieves knocked the spring designs OFF (not ?) (real particle) c. *The terrorists blew the building part way up. The woodchuck chewed the branch up. *The little boy threw his dinner both up and into the garden. The child turned the lights both on and off. *Julia looked the information both up and over. *Don Juan picked the beautiful girl both out and up. adverb and real particle) a. The knocking (off) of designer clothing (*off) is a huge industry. He pulled his hood both up and over his head. Off the path drove the gladiators. The blowing (up) of the photo (*up) was complete in an hour. The storm blew the tree over and the wind [ ] the leaves away. (adverb) b. (real particle) Sentence initial position4 (contrasts preposition. *Up the information looked the elderly couple. The woodchuck chewed the branch down. The elderly couple looked longingly up the hill. (real particle) f. Up the hill looked the elderly couple. (preposition) d. (adverb) b. (preposition) d. 7. (real particle) d. (real particle) c. (real particle) Function of the “particle” in gapped constructions (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. THE FORUM 159 . (adverb) d. e. (adverb) b. (not ?) (real particle) Initial coordination (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. (real particle) c. (real particle) Insertion of degree adverbials (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. The blowing (around) of the leaves (around) frustrated the gardener. 8. (real particle) Contrastive stress of the “particle” (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. The guest’s knocking (over) of the vase (over) was clumsy. (adverb) b. *The gladiators drove courageously off the enemy. (not out) (adverb) b. 5. (preposition) b. Insertion of manner adverbials (contrasts preposition. (adverb) Action nominalizations (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. (real particle) Coordination of the “particle” with a PP (contrasts adverb and real particle only) a. (real particle) d. (not away) (adverb) d. (adverb) c. and real particle) a. (real particle) 4 Some informants claim that sentence-initial PPs sound antiquated or perhaps poetic. (adverb) d. The incompetent goal keeper knocked the ball IN. *Mario called Jane both up and on the phone. *The brilliant lecture blew the students away and the terrorists [ ] the building up. *Bubba knocked his enemy out and the thieves [ ] the spring designs off. However. If the classification systems already available did not allow for teaching such a distinction. . second. 160 TESOL QUARTERLY . A SIMPLER SYSTEM OF CLASSIFICATION It is true that. Thus learners need to understand that. No. then Darwin and Gray would have a point. to look up a word in the dictionary contains a PV whereas to look at a word in the dictionary contains a VPN. Learners will then benefit from being able to differentiate the two types. First. 33.Another Reader Reacts . They assume that their new system of classification will “eliminate curriculum-based problems encountered by students” (p. Second. This plaudit given. with which they are often confused. I am sceptical for three reasons. First. understanding PVs usually entails learning a wide range of meanings and uses that particularly involve differentiating the literal from the idiomatic (as in He picked up the paper from the floor/He picked up Spanish on the beaches of Cancún). both teachers and students need a reliable system for classifying PVs. 1. it suggests that an improved. that there is a benefit in a declarative. explicit knowledge of how the language works. as this response does. Canada ■ Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray (TESOL Quarterly. and. as Darwin and Gray demonstrate. as contrasted with the limited and largely literal nature of the meanings and uses of VPNs. in a teaching approach that assumes. 82). the article assumes that other systems of classification have been less adequate than their own for the teaching and learning of PVs. . I take issue with the main thrust of their article. Spring 1999) make a valuable contribution to teaching phrasal verbs (PVs) in pointing out the unreliability of choosing such items as curriculum content based on intuition and in emphasising the need to base such a selection on authentic frequency of use. it fails to recognise the important distinction between passive and active knowledge of vocabulary. Vol. for recognizing that a two-word combination is a PV should prompt an awareness of the syntactic variation and semantic possibilities. Third. linguistically oriented classification system will result in better teaching and learning but provides no empirical evidence from classroom studies to support this assumption. the two types differ syntactically. however. for two reasons. RON SHEEN Université du Québec à Trois Rivières. 65) and will constitute “a great advancement in ESL” (p. Such a system is necessary because PVs behave differently from combinations of verb ⫹ preposition ⫹ noun (VPNs). the problem becomes one of degree. I adopted an explicit-plus approach in my first years. and practice? Or should teachers devote time and effort to enabling students to analyse PVs both syntactically and semantically (henceforth referred to as the explicit-plus approach). but. Thus. I taught that up expresses completion (to use up) or emphasis (to speak up). for example. For most teaching and learning purposes. that some explicit knowledge is essential. whereas out expresses.the existing systems permit such a differentiation. but these represent a very minor problem and can be tackled as such as they occur. they can be adequately handled without teaching the complexities discussed by Darwin and Gray. one can function very well on the basis of the principle that transitive PVs allow for particle movement with object nouns but require the postposition with object pronouns whereas VPNs never allow such movement. It is true that there are all sorts of exceptions to such systems. there appear to be no published comparisons of the efficacy of the two approaches. which would teach the word-order problems with transitive PVs and leave the rest to exposure. Should teachers be content with the minimalist approach (henceforth referred to as explicit-minus) outlined in the previous paragraph. As a teacher whose leaning is towards affording explicit knowledge of the language a major role. as I do. This approach entailed grouping PVs by the nature of the adverbial particle and attempting to generalize the idiomatic meanings thereof. EXPLICIT-PLUS OR EXPLICIT-MINUS? The major problem with PVs is not addressed by Darwin and Gray. I devoted much time and effort to teaching the sort of syntactic complexities discussed by Darwin and Gray and welded this to the semantic approach proposed in McArthur (1979). THE FORUM 161 . Teachers are therefore left to base their decisions about teaching PVs on the results of their own experience or that of others. which is absolutely essential to a mastery of English? Assuming. The comparison of the two teaching approaches is an empirical question. as would be involved in exploiting the classification system proposed by Darwin and Gray (though I fully realise that they are not proposing that it be used unadulterated with students). In addition to the time devoted to analysis. I taught PVs and VPNs at university level over an extended period in the 1970s and 1980s. although it is raised peripherally: What is the best way to achieve familiarity with and fluency in the use of PVs. memorization. The rest of this section reports on my own experience with the two approaches. as Darwin and Gray rightly indicate. As for all the various meanings and uses of PVs as opposed to VPNs. distribution (to give out) and elimination (to wipe out). unfortunately. one is the enormous difficulty of provoking the use of PVs in an oral interview. one might argue that the oral test was artificial and therefore did not really test mastery of PVs.g. such as “They extinguished the fire” or “They surrendered. First. I also set weekly pencil-and-paper tests in order to oblige students to learn the material covered. The results on the oral test were not encouraging. In the oral test.g. as a means of evaluating the validity of the test. If the sentence contained a PV. in which I spent a minimal amount of time on grammatical analysis and devoted the time saved to group oral/aural activities entailing the types of exercises in the tests. although there was a positive relationship between performance on the written test and the oral test. Similar exercises were also 162 TESOL QUARTERLY . at least as measured in the tests used. even to the extent of creating situations in which they could practise them (e. the students had two tasks. Of course.” to which they were to respond. if the students heard a VPN. such as “She looked at the book. If they heard “He looked it at” or “They went it up.” they were simply to reply “Incorrect” and not repeat it. the correct response to “He took it off” would be “He took it off”). the students had to repeat it but with a variant word order. this success did not extend to oral proficiency.” and realised no variant word order was possible. respectively.I spent some minimal time on classroom oral/aural work and exhorted students to try to use PVs as frequently as possible outside class. On the other hand. This apparently worked. exercises obliging students to use PVs in questions. Can you help me out?”).. I adopted an explicit-minus approach. Given the poor results on the oral test. Unfortunately. Testing oral proficiency in the use of a specific feature such as PVs is extremely difficult for obvious reasons. However. “They put the fire out” or “They put out the fire” and “They gave up.” In the other task the students heard an utterance containing a transitive PV with a direct object or a VPN. The oral test therefore seems to tap into an awareness of the difference between the two types of verbs and the spontaneity required to respond rapidly. they were to respond by simply repeating what they heard. I administered it to a group of Anglophones. In addition to favouring a general explicit approach. who found no major difficulty in doing it. the correct response to “He took off his hat” would be “He took his hat off”. and the out-of-class activities already mentioned. I decided to change teaching strategies.. though they hesitated occasionally. they heard an utterance containing a one-word verb (which had a PV equivalent). if possible (e. for the results of the tests and final exams demonstrated a much-improved written proficiency in the use of PVs compared with the results of a pretest. going into shops and asking questions such as “I can’t figure out how to make this machine sort the papers out. THE FORUM 163 . the marked improvement may be ascribable to the change in teaching strategies. Of course.89 15.30 4. Table 1 shows the results on the same 20 oral-test items for the 4 years concerned. with some justification. and motivation.32 27 24 15. should have allowed for better results than did the explicit-plus approach. 1998) based on the combining of declarative knowledge with controlled and automatic processing. one might argue. With this. but the improvement still supports the argument for the explicit-minus approach. but the fact that their results in other English courses and work were no better than those of the previous years argues against this.57 20 20 4. This is true. 1995.24 3. intelligence. the oral test partially repeated activities carried out as class work and. Other extraneous contributing factors need to be acknowledged as well.48 11.23 20 20 3.1 In the years in which I followed the explicit-minus approach. PASSIVE VERSUS ACTIVE KNOWLEDGE Another aspect of Darwin and Gray’s article that raises doubts is related to their treatment of the selection of the most frequently used 1 I realise now that I was adopting what was to be later termed a skills acquisition approach (see Anderson. as instructional emphasis on some specific skill will have the required positive effect at least on those students with the necessary aptitude. Although time on task and other variables were not strictly controlled in this classroom setting. therefore. 1993. I entirely agree. that the improvement was entirely to be expected.TABLE 1 Oral Test Results for Groups Taught via the Explicit-Plus and Explicit-Minus Approaches Approach and year Explicit-plus Year 1 Year 2 Explicit-minus Year 1 Year 2 N M Maximum points possible SD 26 24 10. the second two classes may have entailed a better group of students. Second.70 provided as lab activities. 2 years with the explicit-plus approach and the following 2 years with the explicit-minus approach. the results of the oral tests were much improved over those in which I used the explicit-plus approach. First. DeKeyser. for it allowed the students to reach a standard nearer to that of Anglophones than did the explicit-plus approach. (1953). 33. to the subsets to teach at different levels of proficiency. London: Longman. is that the best strategy would be to establish a restricted list of PVs for active use and a much longer list for passive use. J. then. turn on. In C. I would think most would support this general strategy and would welcome Darwin and Gray’s proposals for basing such choices on authentic use. Anderson. the former would include put off. New York: Wiley. and keep up. Arabic. for it already permits learners to understand the differences between PVs and VPNs. teachers need to devote time and effort to activities encouraging frequent and spontaneous use of PVs and not to the sort of analyses involved in exploiting the classification system proposed by Darwin and Gray. the creation of a more rigorous classification of PVs cannot be guaranteed to bring the “great advancement in ESL” suggested by Darwin and Gray.PVs and.). Williams (Eds. 269–280. DeKeyser. T. Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. The classification system already in place is adequate for language teaching needs. Second. McArthur. put down to. This is compatible with my own observations of French. Cornell. Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practising second language grammar. M. more specifically. 42–63). Though not all teachers might agree on the details. (1995). bring about. REFERENCES Anderson. and the latter. and Japanese speakers’ endeavours at learning English. Learning and memory: An integrated approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hillsdale. once students have learned those minimalist principles. M. CONCLUSION To summarise. Thus. A general service list of English words. A. International Review of Applied Linguistics. as in vocabulary in general. Realistic goals in teaching and learning phrasal verbs. Doughty & J. (1993). (1985). (1979). J. 164 TESOL QUARTERLY . On the other hand. Rules of the mind. for example. is the division between passive and active use. Cornell’s conclusion. Such a selection would result in a bank from which one might choose a restricted list for active use and a much longer one for passive use. with which I concur. and lie in. London: Collins. West. (1998). R. NJ: Erlbaum. using West’s (1953) list. A prerequisite of such selection. Darwin and Gray’s suggested approach to the selection of PVs for classroom use is valid and constitutes a positive contribution to the teaching and learning of PVs. Patterns of English 4: Using phrasal verbs. given the authenticity of that selection. Cornell (1985) found that German adult students’ level of retention of PVs was low and their active use error-ridden. we found that authors varied widely in their assignment of the term phrasal verb to a V ⫹ X combination. Greenbaum. a distinction that we needed to make in order to establish our list. Consequently. Leech. WHAT TO TEACH. and preposition) combinations to include in the category of phrasal verb. Georgia.”1 We admit. United States LORETTA S. we attempt to clarify our purpose and logic before presenting rebuttals to arguments raised against it. Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman. In doing so. THE FORUM 165 . to remedy problems encountered with our original article. GRAY Central Washington University Ellensburg. NOT HOW TO TEACH Our article was an outgrowth of a corpus-based project in which we established a list of frequently occurring phrasal verbs in order to improve the rather arbitrary lists commonly used for ESL pedagogy. because of the interest both respondents have shown in frequency counts. Washington. we hope to resolve most points of contention. and Svartvik (1985) because it was the most concise representation of definitions presented by others working on phrasal verbs (e.The Authors Respond .g. 1971. DARWIN University of Georgia Athens. . not differentiating among particle. V ⫹ X combinations 1 See Darwin and Gray (1997) for a comprehensive report of work dealing with phrasal verb classification in the context of corpus studies. we begin with a sincere apology for any lack of clarity in “Going After the Phrasal Verb. Instead. But this was not the case. . 1999). We expected that this representative definition would lead to agreement about which verb + “something” (V ⫹ X. Additionally. depending on how well each felt the combination exhibited phrasalverb-like features but not necessarily on whether a particular combination matched the accepted definition. we will present the results of a count conducted with this approach. adverb. however. United States ■ In responding to Joan Sawyer and Ron Sheen. Thus. we chose one presented by Quirk. As with any such study. Bolinger. CLAYTON M. we needed a working definition for phrasal verb to guide the selection process. that we anticipated some difficulty for readers because our proposed partial reversal of the common approach to phrasal-verb classification was initially difficult for us as well.. then. The definition found in Quirk et al. But language. and not phrasal verb [⫺G. ⫹L] as in look up the word. ⫺L]. we decided to limit our list to only those V ⫹ X combinations most closely matching this definition. however. ⫹L].such as do over. was to make this distinction consistently by developing a methodology and a set of corresponding tests that could reliably separate the [⫹G. as with any definition for classification. ⫹L]. The usual method of V ⫹ X classification has been to apply a series of tests such as those proposed by Bolinger (1971) in order to determine whether a combination exhibits sufficient phrasal-verb features to warrant inclusion in the class. is also a simplification because unity or connectedness in a grammatical or lexical sense is by degree. (1985) comprises two parts. This decision was made so that students presented with our list of common phrasal verbs would not encounter conflicting examples. For convenience. as in look around the corner. [⫺G. Thus. following Quirk et al. (1985). with this methodology. This classification system. The second half of the definition involves lexical unity. ⫺L] V ⫹ X combinations. we also found that Quirk et al. one author might classify a V ⫹ X combination as a phrasal verb because it has a very strong [⫹L] feature 166 TESOL QUARTERLY . Our task. as having the features [⫹G. in defining a phrasal verb. a phrasal verb is usually defined. Although we did note conflicting ideas of what constituted a phrasal verb at very early stages of our project. which indicates that the pair in a V ⫹ X combination is a single lexical item with a meaning significantly different from that carried outside the combination. However. Consequently. This disagreement exposed a need for a classification method that would eliminate the vagaries and allow the establishment of a list of phrasal verbs ESL students would likely encounter. as well as a continuum from prototype to antitype. one is never sure how many features need to be exhibited and to what degree they should be evident. of course. we will call the feature [⫹G]. is not so simple as to allow a dichotomy between just phrasal verb [⫹G. the definition provides at least four feature combinations for categorizing a V ⫹ X occurrence. Thus. rush away. ⫹L] phrasal verb from [⫹G. those already mentioned as well as [⫹G. and improve on were considered phrasal verbs by some but not others. indicating that a combination has grammatical unity. that is. This definition. Logically. [⫹L]. ⫺L]. prototypical phrasal verbs. Thus. a prototype is established. which is the basis for the disagreement about classification. ⫹L]. ⫺L] and [⫺G. actually defines only an ideal. however. a phrasal-verb prototype. and [⫺G. The first is grammatical in that the V ⫹ particle combination is essentially functioning as a simple verb and both elements are found in the head position of the verb phrase.’s (1985) definition was well entrenched in previous research. we do not wish to comment on them in order to avoid scumbling the intent of our own proposal. CONFLICTING CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS Because Sawyer addresses some of the classification issues examined in our own work. Our focus is what to teach. Additionally. Although these approaches have merit. all V ⫹ X combinations included in the phrasal-verb category are strictly aligned with the accepted definition. we believe that this omission is warranted by the reduction in conflict between definition and example in the pedagogical tools produced. although we propose a specific set of tests. ⫺L] and [⫺G. inherently unreliable.even though its [⫹G] is weak or nonexistent. whereas another author would discard it because it exhibits [⫺G]. In this way. any single test that demonstrates a negative feature is suitable for excluding a potential V ⫹ X combination. Both go on to explain their own approaches to teaching phrasal verbs and other related constructions. is a reversal of method. Although it is true that lists of phrasal verbs constructed using the methodology we propose will overlook many [⫹G.” Sheen claims that students can learn phrasal verbs without being taught the “complexities” discussed in our article. Sawyer and Sheen. ⫹L] V ⫹ X combinations that others have included. which is to outline an approach to classification for use in choosing which phrasal verbs to present in ESL texts and classrooms. although insightful. Sawyer begins her critique by noting that our approach excludes the following combination: THE FORUM 167 . assume that in this article we are proposing a teaching approach. Sawyer accuses us of wanting to teach “semantically opaque constructions. that is. Rather than classifying any V ⫹ X combination as a phrasal verb because it exhibits some particular feature. not how to teach. we would like to respond to a few of her points. we simply say that the V ⫹ X combination in question is not a phrasal verb if it can be shown to exhibit any negative phrasal-verb feature. The alternative approach outlined in “Going After the Phrasal Verb” was thus proposed for use in conducting a frequency count. including those of Sawyer and Sheen. What we have proposed. we believe they can be taught in many different ways. Obviously. however. as it is less subjective. once commonly used phrasal verbs are determined. [⫺G] or [⫺L] to any degree. Furthermore. this method did not serve our purpose because it is. then. we feel that this method will greatly increase interrater reliability in research. In fact. We do not recommend that our approach be used to help students distinguish between various verb constructions. 1985). the test requiring coordination of the particle with a prepositional phrase (PP) excludes in (The incompetent 168 TESOL QUARTERLY . she notes the importance of distinguishing between these combinations by applying nine tests. verb ⫹ adverb. verb ⫹ preposition. as Bolinger (1971. Also troublesome is that some of the tests admit what they propose to exclude.. the manner-adverbial insertion test produces some arguably possible results: ?I came suddenly across an interesting article (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman. some tests do not account for all possibilities. For instance... and verb ⫹ real particle combinations. the test can fail when the noun is replaced by a pronoun (e.e.g. Whereas we refer to only verb ⫹ particle combinations as phrasal verbs. fall for someone.. they should not: I swallowed it part way down then choked. This assertion. consider out of in this sentence as a prepositional unit (cf. This example is representative of conflicting classification systems. are problematic for several reasons. however. the application of some tests produces conflicting results. The application of these tests allows her to prescribe a sequence for learners: verb ⫹ preposition combinations. Braun yielded up the key of the city). He walked into the building). Bolinger (1971) provides examples that show why the test of inserting degree adverbials is problematic. For instance. Nonetheless. ?She’s gone steadily with him for years. according to her. Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman. Also. Similarly. Other tests exclude what they should admit.. the real particles that Sawyer says have telic meanings pass the degree-adverb insertion test when. see something through). The tests described by Sawyer. It also enables her to discuss how these combinations operate in sentences. however. the action nominalization test.g. In addition. misrepresents the test we propose in our article (p. and others (e. 10) points out. which is to insert two -ly adverbs. yield up: Ms.. We. though. does not work when phrasal verbs retain a literal meaning (e.. For example. verb ⫹ adverb combinations. the word-order test accounts for neither inseparable phrasal verbs (e. though.e. First. yields down as a real particle in *The wind slowed completely down. run something down. 80).g. that our tests would rule out this combination as a phrasal verb (i. In these cases.1. p. the results of this test reveal down in slow down to be an adverb: The engine slowed all the way down. get to something) nor obligatorily separable phrasal verbs (e. Sawyer says that this combination is eliminated because the verb and particle can be separated by the insertion of an adverb.g. and verb ⫹ real particle) as phrasal verbs. Quirk et al. Sawyer includes all combinations (i. Sawyer is right.g.. two -ly adverbs can be inserted). Applying the adverb insertion test. He walked part way out of the building before he remembered his umbrella. 1983). 1999. According to him. *the yielding of it up). aside. The results of using this approach in a frequency count are presented in this section. In our terms. she is advising teachers to teach semantically transparent phrasal verbs before semantically opaque phrasal verbs. to which to and into were added. First.goalie knocked the ball in) from being considered an adverb because it cannot be coordinated with a PP. on. around. we believe that there are many ways to teach phrasal verbs. The following three electronic texts were selected for the study: Discovering World History on CD-ROM (Craig. down. 1997). Finally. 1971) were combined to form a list of 18 particles. away. Basically. these texts were selected because electronically stored material was available. Sawyer’s method being just one of them. THE FORUM 169 . Sawyer uses six tests to distinguish between adverbs and real particles. forth. Fraser’s (1976) list of observed particles and Meyer’s list of common particles (Bolinger. Although Bolinger (1971) suggests that a list of particles could be quite long. We try to avoid the problems outlined above by using an approach that asks that verb ⫹ particle combinations be considered potential phrasal verbs until they can be proven otherwise. & Turner. is the use of these tests in frequency counts. though. off. a count of phrasal verbs in these texts could be useful to ESL students because many study English with the goal of attending universities. however. across. Graham. previous exposure to phrasal verbs used in college textbooks could aid students’ reading comprehension. the number of those commonly used is much smaller. about 20. Kagan. In addition. what the purpose of the tests is. Discovering Psychology on CD-ROM (Davis & Palladino. by. 1997). RESULTS OF A FREQUENCY COUNT Our major concern. we conducted a computer-assisted search for particles instead of verbs because particles constitute a relatively closed class. 1997). For this study. Even though we have just shown the problems associated with these tests. we chose freshman humanities textbooks as our corpus for three reasons. This yielded the following: about. It is not clear to us. along. this advice is equivalent to recommending the teaching of verb ⫹ preposition and verb ⫹ adverb combinations before phrasal verbs. Ozment. then. back. (The tests we use for exclusion are described in our TESOL Quarterly article. and Discovering Sociology on CD-ROM (Macionis. she believes the word-order issues they illustrate do not need to be taught. These texts were also selected for the limitations the category imposes regarding academic level. and literal phrasal verbs before idiomatic ones. which would allow the search to be conducted with greater accuracy and in a reasonable amount of time. into. in. In developing the list.) For this count. as mentioned above. let us say that for a moment they are effective. However. Although this list clearly does not contain all particles. Particle search: A particle was entered into the word processor’s search feature. Final eliminations: After establishing the list of common occurrences. under. 4. Transfer of data: The first step was to transfer the text from the disks to the hard drives of our own computers. and the history text). 7. Establishing a list: In establishing the final list by combining the results of three searches (i. It would be better. which may have occurred frequently in one text but not at all in another. the sociology text. the researcher ignored it and moved on to the next occurrence. 3. 2. Application of criteria: Once the program found a potential particle. we examined each entry more closely than in Step 3 and again 170 TESOL QUARTERLY .. along with a definition illustrating how it was used. the researcher quickly looked at it in context and applied the criteria for exclusion. and time constraints on the study did not allow a search for others. over. the potential particle was part of a combination that could not be divided up easily. through. the text was reexamined. however. If the potential particle could easily be divided up by one of the tests. it was displayed on the screen. 6. to include more particles. and the problem was resolved. to. 5. the number of occurrences of the particles chosen was quite large. Phrasal verbs with multiple meanings were listed as one entry so that combinations such as make up would be included if they occurred regularly but not a sufficient number of times with one distinct meaning. This requirement eliminated oddities resulting from jargon or the author’s idiolect.out. When the program found an occurrence of the particle. of course. it is believed to represent the most productive. Verification: After we had both searched an entire text for all particles.e. which allowed us to search the text using the search feature of our word-processing program. It was this situation that led to the alternative (throw-it-out) approach discussed in our TESOL Quarterly article. Because this type of study can require researchers to confront a thousand tokens of a potential particle in an hour. of the psychology text. researchers must have a set of criteria so they can determine quickly and accurately if the particle is not part of a phrasal verb and then continue the search. the combination was recorded. If any differences were found. The following is the procedure used in the search: 1. Recording: If. on an initial list to be analyzed further at a later time. we compared the two sets of results. we decided that phrasal verbs must have appeared at least twice in two texts to be included. and up. of the over 300 verb ⫹ particle combinations initially recorded during the study. Of the lexical entries. Craig et al. 124 occurred at least twice in two texts. In this study we examined over 2.100 pages of text and encountered just over 49. 8. out. out.0% and 60. only 12 are represented on the final list. The trend seems to be that the more frequently a word is encountered. Book 3 variations: Because of the requirements for inclusion on the list described in Step 6. This figure does not. giving it an initial productivity of 0. respectively.000 potential particles. the next question is how it should be implemented in the classroom. include to. the less frequently it is found as a particle. as is the case with in and by compared with up. not as subcategories or synonyms of single-word THE FORUM 171 . and off (13). on (14). up was encountered as a particle in 75. a prepositional verb).0%. 361 of which were in combinations that were recorded on the initial list of phrasal verbs. By far the most productive particles were up.000 times without yielding a phrasal verb. Once a list has been established.002%. however. Of the original 20 particles. By was encountered 3. up was encountered 480 times.g.2% of occurrences. In this area.. Relying on lists generated from frequency counts eliminates the possibility of students’ wasting time learning obscure phrasal verbs and reduces the possibility that students will be given confusing examples (e. At the other end of the spectrum are by and in. It was followed by out (23). the top 20 by number of occurrences are shown in Table 1. with initial productivity rates of 69.subjected it to the criteria for exclusion. The first suggestion is that instructors take advantage of lists of phrasal verbs derived from actual counts of phrasal verb occurrences rather than lists based on speculation. just those that had occurred in phrasal verbs at least twice in one of the other two texts. we would like to add four suggestions to those made by Sawyer and Sheen. it was not necessary to search the third text (Discovering World History. The second suggestion relating to the pedagogy of phrasal verbs is to treat them as lexical items. Thus. having been encountered 13. Out and off were encountered 595 and 180 times. Of these 12. In is slightly higher at 0.703 times yet was included on the initial list only 9 times. and off.006%. as it was removed from the list of particles midway through the search of the first text because it had been encountered 3. 1997) for all particles. In the first two texts. and off. On the final list.. This step saved time by preventing the close examination of the combinations that were not included on the list established in Step 6. This number was reduced to 114 after a critical application of the criteria for exclusion (Step 7). up produced the highest number of phrasal verbs (43).680 times and yielding 77 combinations on the initial list. set up 10. Listing them as parts of the definitions of other words can only lead to confusion.TABLE 1 The Top 20 Phrasal Verbs Phrasal verb 1. Because phrasal verbs are not commonly treated as lexical items—although they are beginning to appear as such in some dictionaries—it is up to instructors to instill the idea of lexical unity in their students. break out 6. grow up 7. students need to understand their meanings. bring on 8. take on 12. some phrasal verbs do need to be mastered for oral production whereas others. break down 13. take over 11. of occurrences 106 104 91 56 50 49 42 38 35 32 30 29 29 26 23 23 18 17 17 14 verbs. out. The final suggestion is to classify the entries in lists of common phrasal verbs by priority for learning. set out 16. students need to be taught particle semantics. go on Brief definition record indicate do. carry out 4. point out 3. cut off 17. even if 172 TESOL QUARTERLY . give up 15. The third suggestion follows Side’s (1990) ideas about particles. as phrasal verbs may share no meaning with their non-phrasal-verb counterparts. This understanding should give students the ability to comprehend new phrasal verbs and the freedom to appropriately coin phrasal verbs themselves. point up 18. surrender begin with purpose isolate indicate convey summarize happen No. end up 9. and off occur as particles more often than as prepositions or adverbs. sum up 20. stand out 14. As Cornell (1985) proposed. Students must also be made aware of the problems of looking for definitions of phrasal verbs in a standard dictionary. write down 2. perform constitute erupt mature cause be. pass on 19. become establish assume control assume break into pieces be conspicuous quit. make up 5. that is. Considering that words such as up. English Language Teaching Journal. M. M.. S. (1999). D. The occurrence of phrasal verbs in freshman texts. Realistic goals in teaching and learning phrasal verbs. NJ: Prentice Hall.. F. J.. THE FORUM 173 . Phrasal verbs: Sorting them out.. Kagan. D. Upper Saddle River. frequency lists are indeed necessary. & Palladino. Fraser. especially in light of the vast amount of electronic corpora that have become available. (1997. Darwin. B.. J. D. & Svartvik.. (1990). 269–280. Upper Saddle River. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. NJ: Prentice Hall. Discovering World History on CD-ROM [Computer software].. Celce-Murcia. (1997). R.they are included on lists of common phrasal verbs. G. S. The phrasal verb in English. (1976). We are encouraged by both Sawyer’s and Sheen’s interest in developing such lists. W. Greenbaum. 23. C. NJ: Prentice Hall. Celce-Murcia. that our methodology and resultant list do not explain away all problems associated with the phrasal verb and its pedagogy. (1985). (1985). Graham. Discovering Psychology on CD-ROM [Computer software]. (1971).. from the World Wide Web: http://www. 144–152. Discovering Sociology on CD-ROM [Computer software].uga . (1983). & Larsen-Freeman. Leech. New York: Longman. S. The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course (2nd ed. though.html. The verb-particle combination in English. 44. Cambridge. Davis. & Larsen-Freeman. D. A. & Turner. MA: Harvard University Press. Ozment. need only be passively recognizable. Side.. but we are convinced that the establishment of lists based on empirical evidence and a defensible theory of classification is the underpinning of a solution. July). We realize. (1997). (1997). Macionis. J.edu/~cdarwin/pv. New York: Academic Press. Retrieved December 22. The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Quirk. of course.arches. MA: Newbury House. Upper Saddle River. L. Craig. A. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. 1999.). Cornell... and we hope that others share the same ideas and will work in this direction as well. R. In order to put these suggestions into practice. REFERENCES Bolinger. & Gray. Rowley. RESEARCH ISSUES TESOL Quarterly publishes brief commentaries on aspects of qualitative and quantitative research. Virginia. respondents reported a mean of less than 2 for terms like power. mostly university faculty working in North America. a number most felt was insufficient for the work and advising they were doing. which asked them about their attitudes toward statistics and empirical research and their knowledge in these areas. For this issue. we asked a researcher to discuss issues related to research methodology and statistical rigor in TESOL and applied linguistics. who noted a sharp increase in the number of quantitative articles in both TESOL Quarterly and Language Learning from 1970 to 1985. 1. as evidenced by the increasing prominence of qualitative research as both a subject of theoretical discussion and a method for conducting empirical work (Lazaraton. the Rasch model is a mathematical model for relating test performance to test takers’ ability and task difficulty.1 1 The term power refers to a statistical test’s ability to correctly evaluate a null hypothesis. On a 4-point scale. 1995). TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. Lazaraton. and Scheffé test. 34. one or two courses in research design and statistics. No. Edited by PATRICIA A. Spring 2000 175 . Rasch model. United States ■ The past decade has seen a second “coming of age” of the research in applied linguistics. Riggenbach. and Ediger (1987) reported on a survey of 121 professionals in field. DUFF University of British Columbia Current Trends in Research Methodology and Statistics in Applied Linguistics ANNE LAZARATON George Mason University Fairfax. 704). The majority of the respondents indicated that they had taken. The first coming of age was remarked on by Henning (1986). at most. a Scheffé test is a post hoc comparison of means to locate precise differences after a significant overall difference has been detected among more than two means. The second area surveyed was the respondents’ ability to use and to interpret 23 statistical terms (such as mean or median) and statistical procedures (such as correlation or t test). At about the same time. which he viewed as “a positive development—a kind of coming of age of a discipline” (p. however. Because the 1987 survey respondents reported trouble interpreting research terms and procedures. reflects not so much a paucity of critical work into questions concerning ESL in the workplace. Brown (1988). A more recent contribution is Cumming’s (1994) edited TESOL Quarterly article. contributions have situated research as a contextualized practice involving ethics. A number of other useful resources on research design or statistics have appeared as well. 1991). as well as in suggesting implications of language analysis research for the ESL classroom” (p. 691). the book included actual research summaries for readers to critique. A subtle change in its focus is detectable since its inception in 1990. including descriptive approaches (analyses of learner language. Likert scales. Pennycook. interpretive approaches (classroom interaction analysis and ethnography). on the one hand. Fletcher. Earlier articles tended to focus on the technical aspects of research. including those by Woods. cautions that “researchers typically agree. and because most applied linguists. protocol analysis.The results of this survey suggested that applied linguistics professionals felt limited in their ability to carry out the empirical work they were doing. writing about critical pedagogical approaches to research. 1998). need to be able to read the professional literature. ESL and antiracist education. in which various researchers each wrote a short piece on alternative approaches to research. ESL and gender. 678). observes that “this lack of published work [in critical pedagogical research in education]. and Long (1997) and Gass (1998). and ideology. and Hughes (1986). and data of second language 176 TESOL QUARTERLY . and so on but rather the difficulty in getting such work published” (p. and Nunan (1992). verbal reports. Several other recent publications argue for other viewpoints that deserve attention but can only be mentioned here: the ongoing dialectic between Firth and Wagner (1997. Also of note is the now-established Research Issues column that appears twice a year in TESOL Quarterly. However. method. and multiple t tests. Tarone. One tangible outcome was the decision by Hatch to revise Hatch and Farhady’s (1982) Research Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. gender. power. in theory. in The Modern Language Journal about the proper study. Johnson (1992). More recently. whether or not they engage in statistical research. for example. the rating of writing. and ideological approaches (critical pedagogical research and participatory action research). power and effect size. bias. 676) yet goes on to note that “quantitative methods of research have probably been overdominant in attempts to analyze learner language. the author of the piece on analyzing learner language. which resulted in The Research Manual (Hatch & Lazaraton. and texts). that both qualitative and quantitative methodologies are essential to the accurate description and analysis of learner language” (p. on the other. scope. whose editorial policy states that it is “devoted to problems and issues in second and foreign acquisition of any language”. Polio and Gass’ (1997) call for more replication studies in applied linguistics research. The Modern Language Journal. which is “devoted to research and discussion about the learning and teaching of foreign and second languages”. With this background in mind.” Only articles that reported firsthand results of research were considered. and the like. which “represents a variety of cross-disciplinary interests. Specifically. and solicited articles. RESEARCH ISSUES 177 . special edited columns. findings from an ethnography using field notes and quotes from respondents were more clearly qualitative. subtitled “A Journal of Research in Language Studies”. as my goal was to get an idea of the “regular” articles published in these journals. as these were guest edited and therefore not necessarily an accurate reflection of normal editorial and review policy. both theoretical and practical” and which addresses “implications and applications of this research to issues in our profession. Although their readerships probably overlap. position pieces that did not report empirical research. articles excluded were those in special-topic issues.acquisition. Those articles which presented statistical analyses of data were more clearly quantitative. book reviews. meta-analyses and replications of previous studies. but the majority of the article consisted of quotes from learners. whereas those which reported. For each journal I tallied the number of qualitative and quantitative articles by year. they have differing histories. and TESOL Quarterly. for example. I asked myself: Does the empirical work being published in major applied linguistics journals match the scope of research discussed above? METHOD I made a careful analysis of all the data-based articles in four applied linguistics journals over a 7-year period (1991–1997). The four journals were Language Learning. conceptual and theoretical articles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. and Edge and Richards’ (1998) proposals about the sorts of grounds on which qualitative research findings may be justified. 311). In seven cases it was unclear how to categorize the articles: The data were analyzed quantitatively. The methodology employed is in line with a survey by Thomas (1994). who noted that these journals “prominently mention research on L2 acquisition in their statements of editorial policy. institutional affiliations and theoretical perspectives” (p. transcripts. Based on sheer numbers. ANOVA has a number of fairly stringent assumptions related to it. I found it particularly interesting that ANOVA accounted for over 40% (123/292) of the statistical analyses in the articles I examined. how are they represented in these journals? TESOL Quarterly presented a more optimistic picture: 62% (39/63) of the articles were quantitative whereas 38% (24/63) were qualitative. as there would seem to be less chance of it being published in the other refereed journals through the normal blind review process. and standard deviations were presented. I found it surprising that this number was not 100%. as mentioned above. For example. Some articles reported more than one procedure. 96/99 (97%). contrary to expectations about qualitative research. with the exception of TESOL Quarterly. This finding is somewhat troubling in view of the results of the 1987 survey. which indicated that ANOVA was not ranked among the easier procedures to interpret or carry out. In the next stage. the results show that. this was particularly noticeable in The Modern Language Journal. reading and evaluating the 178 TESOL QUARTERLY . Even some of the qualitative studies presented descriptive statistics. It is my belief that all statistical analyses should be accompanied by the descriptive statistics on which they are based. The Modern Language Journal. where even analysis of variance (ANOVA) tables were missing. 33 (10%) were qualitative. If there are so many alternative ways of doing research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.RESULTS A total of 332 empirical research articles were analyzed: 292 (88%) were quantitative. One implication of this finding is that if applied linguists are to learn to carry out or interpret just one statistical procedure. Specifically. a couple of the published ethnographies presented tables of frequency counts or percentages. and it is likely that the majority of studies that used ANOVA did so in violation of at least some of these assumptions. More specifically. means. more than 90% of the published articles in the other journals were quantitative: Language Learning. sometimes as many as five. and 7 (2%) were partially qualitative. ANOVA was employed in almost 50% (46/96) of the articles in Language Learning and in over 50% (30/57) in Studies in Second Language Acquisition. it seems that TESOL Quarterly is the primary journal of the four to which one would consider sending a qualitative research report. Whereas 79% (76/96 in Language Learning) to 90% (35/39 in TESOL Quarterly) of the articles in all four journals presented descriptive statistics. The most common procedures were those labeled as descriptive. As The Research Manual (Hatch & Lazaraton. 100/108 (93%). otherwise. where frequencies. 57/62 (92%). 1991) points out. that procedure might well be ANOVA. I looked at the statistical procedures used in the quantitative research articles and tallied the number of times each procedure was used per year over the four journals. and chi-square (12%). Ethnography was the most frequently employed procedure. I did not look at whether the procedures used in each article were carried out appropriately. Once again. they are more likely to err in evaluating a null hypothesis. 1991. or in about 11% of the articles. featuring solicited articles on topics such as sociocultural theory and on discourse construction. Their major drawback is that they are less powerful. for more on this point). Other statistical procedures included Pearson correlation (26% of the articles). followed by analyses of oral and written discourse. Finally. RESEARCH ISSUES 179 . Nor did I analyze each article with regard to the 2 Briefly. I hope that is an improvement from the situation before The Research Manual (Hatch & Lazaraton. t test (23%). I note that each in recent years has devoted special issues to primarily qualitative research. that is.) LIMITATIONS A number of limitations of this study are evident. Parametric statistical procedures generally assume certain sample sizes and continuous data that are normally distributed. and several others used 2 or fewer times. regression analysis (13%). at 7% each. First. all of which are procedures that have very stringent assumptions and usually have very high sample size requirements.g. 1991) was published. used 15 times. I analyzed the methodological approaches used in the 33 qualitative studies by journal. As a rule. however. used 11 times. when the rate might have been only 2%. and 24 of these were published in TESOL Quarterly—qualitative research was published only 9 times in the other journals. The rank-sums test was the only nonparametric procedure2 (excluding chi-square) to be used more than 10 times. and factor analysis at 6%. other nonparametric procedures were used a total of only 36 times. (In defense of The Modern Language Journal and Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Rounding out the list were multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). the fact that so few of the 332 total articles analyzed were qualitative is disheartening. parametric procedures are favored when their assumptions are checked and met (see Hatch & Lazaraton.results in half of the empirical studies in these journals will be extremely difficult. nonparametric tests (such as the rank-sums test or the Kruskal-Wallis test) make much less stringent assumptions about the data and their distribution than parametric procedures (e. it is heartening to see these procedures being used more often because the small sample sizes used in many studies preclude meaningful interpretation of parametric tests. whereas nonparametric procedures are particularly suitable for small sample sizes and rank-ordered or frequency data that are irregularly distributed (a common situation in applied linguistics research).. either by the type of research questions posed or by the type of data collected. ANOVA or t test) do. way. (1998). it may be that qualitative research is being conducted.. Gass. Apples and oranges: Or. qualitative research methodology. submitted to. please?: Justifying outcomes in qualitative research. (1998). Applied Linguistics.). communication. and in advising my students where to send theirs. (1998). (Ed. 28. Firth. why apples are not orange and don’t need to be: A response to Firth and Wagner. K. I would hope that more care would be taken in applying all statistical procedures appropriately in accordance with their underlying assumptions. 334–356. as each highlights reality in a different. A. yet complementary. they do seem to be useful in gauging where the field is. 285–300. Understanding research in second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (1997). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. interpretive. and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research.. May I see your warrant.. 82. CONCLUSION Although I find myself somewhat disillusioned by these results. She has published in the areas of research design and statistics. J. Perhaps the next frontier in applied linguistics research should be developing alternatives to parametric statistics for small-scale research studies that involve limited amounts of dependent data. & Farhady. 83–90. A. & Wagner. and conversation analysis. J. 180 TESOL QUARTERLY . D. J. & Richards. The Modern Language Journal. 7 years may not be a long enough time period to see the sorts of changes in focus that the theoretical discussions in the literature suggest. (1994). Edge. oral language testing. On discourse. even though most of the articles could be classified accordingly. 81. MA: Newbury House.research orientations described in Cumming’s (1994) article. Although the findings suggest that parametric statistical procedures still reign supreme. A. S. THE AUTHOR Anne Lazaraton teaches in the linguistics program at George Mason University. 91–94. in deciding where to send my own future work. Cumming. 673–703. and ideological orientations. Firth. & Wagner. Hatch. Alternatives in TESOL research: Descriptive. (1988). E.. Finally. Furthermore. 82. J. 19. The Modern Language Journal. H. and reported in other journals (which may not be applied linguistics journals). Rowley. I examined only four journals. I would also hope to see more studies that combine qualitative and quantitative research methods. Finally. (1982). TESOL Quarterly. REFERENCES Brown. SLA property: No trespassing! The Modern Language Journal. 318–323. 44. A. E. 29. 19. Lazaraton. D. A. 21. M. 263–277. H. H. TESOL Quarterly.Hatch.. (1991). 20. Thomas. 81. P. Henning. Nunan. C. 307–336. Woods. A. M. Riggenbach. Assessment of L2 proficiency in second language acquisition research. & Ediger. Quantitative methods in language acquisition research. Language Learning... G. Statistics in language studies. A. Polio. The Modern Language Journal. (1986). Long. (1992). (1997). Lazaraton. Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A progress report. 455–472. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Johnson. Forming a discipline: Applied linguists’ literacy in research methodology and statistics.. 499–508. (1987). Fletcher. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. S. Research methods in language learning. & Gass. TESOL Quarterly. A. & Hughes. New York: Longman. RESEARCH ISSUES 181 . (1994). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (1992). Construct validity in SLA research: A response to Firth and Wagner. (1997). & Lazaraton. 701–708.. (1995). A. TESOL Quarterly. The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. D. Replication and reporting: A commentary. M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (1986). Approaches to research in second language learning. especially those embedded in a culture not one’s own.REVIEWS TESOL Quarterly welcomes evaluative reviews of publications relevant to TESOL professionals. 1. The articles are varied in tone and emphasis: Some are heavily academic. Min-zhan Lu. Perusing this collection of previously published articles allows one to see the multitude of connections among the fields represented. education. 34. ■ Although ESL is closely related to composition. Acquiring and juggling various academic discourses. and Fan Shen write of their struggles to master academic discourse without losing or compromising their own identities. and vice versa. even polemical. others are personal stories. others are political.). xviii + 329. Spring 2000 183 . anthropology. 1998. Articles about this process predominate here. Edited by DAN DOUGLAS Iowa State University Negotiating Academic Literacies: Teaching and Learning Across Languages and Cultures. The issue of how students’ (and teachers’) discourses (the editors prefer the plural forms. The readings chosen are landmark essays that have been frequently debated and cited. the work of ESL scholars is too seldom seen in the publications of these fields. The appearance of Zamel and Spack’s edited collection of influential. The personal stories are particularly effective. as authors ask such questions as the following: What are academic literacies. along with one’s prior discourses is a difficult and complex process. Mahwah. as writers such as Michelle Cliff. reflecting the variety found in the academy) are intimately connected with their identities is central in these readings. and it is most useful to have them gathered in one volume. Pp. or academic discourses? Does requiring the use of academic discourses serve to keep many students out of the academy? TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. The editors in effect are declaring a canon of writings that represent the thinking of leading scholars on teaching academic literacy. thought-provoking readings on academic literacy from ESL as well as from these other areas is therefore welcome indeed. NJ: Erlbaum. and other fields. No. linguistics. Vivian Zamel and Ruth Spack (Eds. particularly immigrants. 1999. edited by Donald Freeman. teach comprehension. are they muting students’ own voices. These include Mike Rose’s “The Language of Exclusion. These eight chapters are framed by introductory and concluding chapters. personal. ■ A new addition to the TeacherSource series.” and Zamel’s “Strangers in Academia. Pp. examples include Henry Widdowson’s “The Ownership of English. such as Spack’s “Initiating ESL Students Into the Academic Discourse Community.Should ESL and writing teachers explicitly teach academic discourses? If so. Four ESL teachers are the sources for “Teachers’ Voices”. xi + 129. which stands for six of the eight strategies Anderson discusses: activate background knowledge.” Also of interest to ESL teachers are articles about basic writers.” The intended audience for this book seems to be mainly teachers and scholars in the areas of ESL and composition (which often overlap). as ESL students. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. and eight strategies are presented and discussed in “Frameworks.” Robert Land and Catherine Whitley’s “Evaluating Second Language Essays in Regular Composition Classes. are often (rightly or wrongly) considered basic writers. increase reading rate. verify strategies. but any academic interested in issues of language. The other two strategies deal with motivation and with planning for and selecting materials. and evaluate progress. Exploring follows the organization of the other volumes in the series. In addition. Exploring Second Language Reading: Issues and Strategies is an engaging.” Exploring is built around the acronym ACTIVE. cultivate vocabulary. forcing them to conform to an alien culture? Of particular interest to ESL professionals are contributions that specifically address ESL issues.” Alistair Pennycook’s “Borrowing Others’ Words. 184 TESOL QUARTERLY . “Investigations” consists of suggested tasks and questions for the reader to address in a Reader’s Reflective Journal. the book would be an excellent text or resource for a MATESOL or multicultural education class. and informal discussion of L2 reading strategies. Neil Anderson. STEPHANIE VANDRICK University of San Francisco Exploring Second Language Reading: Issues and Strategies. literacy.” Other pieces set teaching issues in the context of the theoretical and political insights offered by postcolonial studies. and culture will find this book valuable.” and Norma González’s “Blurred Voices.” Eleanor Kutz’s “Between Students’ Language and Academic Discourse.” and Lisa Delpit’s “The Politics of Teaching Literate Discourse. & Bamford. URLs scattered throughout the book direct teachers to World Wide Web sites of interest.Anderson states explicitly that Exploring is “not designed to teach second language instructors how to teaching reading” (p. it is valuable to read in ESL reading teachers’ own words what they do in their classrooms. Then Anderson discusses 10 characteristics of successful extensive reading programs presented by Day and Bamford (1998). although he does write. (1997). There are few or no follow-up exercises after reading” (p.. However. The book’s weaknesses range from merely annoying to more substantial. “Typically. Anderson provides no references for this claim. extensive reading is combined with other activities so that reading is only a portion of what the learner is expected to do” (p. the list is actually on page 48. From reader to reading teacher. R. REFERENCES Aebersold. This can only be accomplished if the reader is willing to engage in the interesting tasks in the “Investigations” section. 42). Exploring has much to offer ESL reading teachers in its comprehensive discussion of the eight reading strategies. Extensive reading in the second language classroom. L. Anderson writes. 2). & Field. that Aebersold and Field (1997) “tell us that this type of reading is a means toward the ends” (p. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Exploring has a number of strengths. such as one on portfolio assessment. 42). An example of the former is on page 14. this fact points to one of the limitations of the book: It is written mainly for an ESL audience. the voices of the four ESL reading teachers. Day. J. J. No attempt is made to reconcile these two conflicting points of view. The same mistake occurs on page 49.. including No. More substantively. 42). 5: “Reading is its own reward. Indeed. presumably with approval. A. and each chapter ends with a number of suggested readings for those who might want to pursue a particular topic in more depth. where Anderson refers the reader to a list of common transition words on page 47. In the “Teachers’ Voices” section. I would have appreciated a broader range of voices: The teachers were all working in ESL contexts. Shortcomings aside. M. The notes and highlights in the margins are reader-friendly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. R. RICHARD DAY University of Hawai‘i REVIEWS 185 . generally in secondary school environments. and the questions and tasks. (1998). He explains that his purpose is to help reading teachers develop their own philosophies of the teaching of reading. Through the rich and full accounts of these students and their experiences. class. and indeed these students—because of their commitment and tenacity—do succeed. each contributing to an understanding of the complex and dynamic ways that metacognitive awareness. Mahwah. 1997. Sternglass. NJ: Erlbaum. In following students through their courses and listening to their voices. nonlinear. much to her credit. The students who participated in Sternglass’s long-term study come from diverse backgrounds and bring with them complicated histories. tends to view these factors as strengths and resources. reflecting on classroom observations. and learning across instructional settings are inextricably linked. the reader gains insight into the ways in which their life situations are interwoven with particular instructional conditions in a way that either promotes or undercuts their progress. writing instruction. this is in large part because of the complicated. xxli + 326.Time to Know Them: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level. language. especially with respect to their written work. although their successes are not straightforward or predictable. acknowledging that. analyzing students’ writing. gathering a wealth of data—conducting interviews. individual factors. the reader comes to appreciate how issues such as gender. ethnicity. institutional testing. The other chapters are a powerful demonstration of why such research is so illuminating. ■ Time to Know Them chronicles in remarkable detail the experiences of a group of undergraduates as they negotiate their way through courses across the curriculum at an urban public institution. and contextdependent nature of students’ academic achievement. As Sternglass demonstrates in compelling detail. construct new knowledge. and ideology are brought to bear on students’ academic work. Sternglass followed these learners over the course of their entire academic careers. Sternglass’s research shows how and why engagement in writing provides students with opportunities to think analytically about course issues. and (re)see their own worlds and experiences in light of assigned work. Pp. Marilyn Sternglass. translate the unfamiliar language of their courses into their own language. One of the most crucial findings of Sternglass’s research is the extent to which writing—throughout the curriculum—contributes to students’ learning. The students themselves attest to the ways in which writing benefits them. The book is framed by opening and closing chapters in which Sternglass provides a rationale for the kind of longitudinal research she undertook. unlike fact-driven examinations such as multiple-choice tests and 186 TESOL QUARTERLY . evaluating assessment practices— in order to document and make sense of these students’ struggles and successes. Pp xix + 380. that the lives of students (and of those who work with them) will be impoverished if we as teachers and researchers do not take the “time to know them. Numerous research advances. the tiger-tail of technology may take the field in unpredictable directions. according to the second edition. At a time when institutions of higher education are closing their doors to students who are labeled underprepared or remedial. 52). and when students’ academic potential is undermined by preconceptions about their abilities. Boston Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching in Multicultural Contexts (2nd ed. curricular REVIEWS 187 . The theory and practice of language teaching have also changed remarkably in the past two decades: the Unz initiative is not a primary issue. Collier. writing not only allows for a more genuine demonstration of their understanding but indeed enables that understanding.). and the Unz initiative (California Proposition 227. 28 states offered certification/endorsement in bilingual education and 26 states offered that credential in ESL (Ovando & Collier. 32).” VIVIAN ZAMEL University of Massachusetts. Ovando and Virginia P. p. whereas. Carlos J. 1998. Boston: McGraw-Hill. a fundamental feature of the authors’ discussion in both editions is the view that ESL and bilingual education are inextricably linked—each works best in the company of the other. approved in 1998) and other assaults on bilingual education were unimaginable. Sternglass’s impressive study makes clear that such efforts are wrongheaded. Sternglass’s research thus makes a powerful case for the central role that writing needs to play in fostering learning in courses across the curriculum. ■ Since Ovando and Collier wrote the first edition of Bilingual and ESL Classrooms in 1985. 1985.short-answer quizzes. A comparison of the two editions of the book reveals that in 1982. In the mid-1980s. when decontextualized forms of assessment are being used to either place students into courses or limit their instruction. there has been a sea change in national attitudes and practices regarding bilingual education and ESL. 31 states offered bilingual and 41 states offered ESL certification/endorsement in 1994 (p. the cognitive processes associated with language acquisition are still a great unknown. In the past 15 years the relationship between ESL and bilingual education professionals has also been shifting. the English-Only movement was nascent. However. Bilingual and ESL classrooms.” has been added. P. conceptualizing school second language acquisition rather than focusing mostly on the work of Stephen Krashen and Jim Cummins. The new chapter on teaching describes broad issues related to learning and instruction that are not limited to the language classroom. the cognitive academic language learning approach (CALLA). Ovando and Collier do not make a heavy-handed distinction between theory and practice. C. and one new chapter. & Collier. V. “Teaching. The chapter on language has been effectively reorganized around Thomas and Collier’s (1997) Prism Model. (1985). A minor weakness is that the authors could have placed more emphasis on debate within the field of bilingual education and TESL rather than giving the impression. (1997). The general strengths of the first edition of this book have been maintained: Bilingual education and ESL are wisely presented as intertwined. such as active and cooperative learning.innovations. and methodological adaptations need the thorough review and the discussion they receive in the second edition of Bilingual and ESL Classrooms. W. as Ovando and Collier sometimes do. whole language. critical pedagogy. Some chapters. Other changes include the updating of citations throughout and the organization of sections of each chapter under clear subheadings. The chapter reviewing policy and programs has been pointedly rewritten to include discussions of the English-Only movement and of more recent state laws and policies. Thomas. have had only relatively minor updates and rearranging. V. New York: McGraw-Hill. JOEL HARDMAN Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville 188 TESOL QUARTERLY . School effectiveness for language minority students. REFERENCES Ovando. but most have had major overhauls.. such as those on students and culture. and technology. DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. This chapter also surveys language teaching methods and is expanded in the new edition with a discussion of content-area instruction. Refreshingly. Washington. and the book’s comprehensive and grounded approach to its topic makes it an excellent course text. & Collier. as in the first edition.. that there is consensus in the field on best practices and policies. P. and L1 usage. the chapters combine to make an excellent primer for the ESL teacher. the Czech Republic. xii + 289. and Slovakia. ■ Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe is a timely collection of articles that consider the overall language situations of Austria. As such. As these countries continue their respective transitions from authoritarian regimes with state-controlled economies to politically pluralistic societies with free-market economies. Russia. each of the countries described within the text is an emerging democracy with a developing economy. and language groups are all faced with a host of challenges as they attempt to reconcile more progressive aspirations with the realities of the region. Clevedon. REVIEWS 189 . or the policy maker who is attempting to understand the linguistic and historical complexities of the region. however. but the generalist and those with backgrounds in other fields such as public administration will find it very readable.Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe. the Balkans. an additional theme runs through each of the articles in the book. Hungary. The book is particularly timely in view of recent events in the region.). Most importantly. given that country’s progressive language planning policies. Southern. and minority mean in the context of that region. as grammatical and spelling errors are at times so noticeable as to be distracting. policy makers. the language planner. Paulston and Peckham and their contributors go far to explain the non-Western linguistic paradigms that exist in Central. the beginning linguist. Christina Bratt Paulston and Donald Peckham (Eds. nationality. Each chapter in the book gives an overview of a particular state or geographic area within the larger region. and Eastern Europe as well as the notion of what constitutes an ethnic or linguistic minority—concepts with decidedly different definitions in Eastern Europe than in North America or Western Europe. With the exceptions of Austria and Greece. TESOL professionals who work in or have an interest in these countries will find the book invaluable. 1998. citizenship. the Caucasus. including the conflict in Kosovo. Professional linguists may find the text rather basic. the final editing is somewhat lacking. even judged by Western standards. In addition to linguistic complexity and non-Western conceptualizations. Furthermore. Pp. Latvia. each chapter stands alone and may be read in isolation. Hugh Poulton’s article on the Balkans does an excellent job of providing examples of what nation. Language planners. they are attempting to bring their human rights policies in line with Western standards and institutions. This is unfortunate. Two critical observations: Slovenia receives very little consideration in the text. England: Multilingual Matters. taken together with Paulston’s introduction. For example. SUTTLES University of Arizona 190 TESOL QUARTERLY . providing specific examples for each country and identifying common regional themes. JOSEPH E.The editors and their contributors offer an overview of the problems faced by each of the countries covered. Finally. each chapter suggests future directions that research could—and should— take. It also contains a number of longer projects and assignments plus photocopiable materials to accompany the activities described. particularly Puerto Rican. Angi Malderez and Caroline Bodóczky. 1999. Hungary. Americans. 34. and Multicultural Education. Mentor Courses: A Resource Book for Trainer-Trainers. who live in the same town and share the same schools. xii + 220. No. the other by Latino. An anthropologist and educator. innovative restructuring of an English teacher-training program in Budapest.BOOK NOTICES TESOL Quarterly prints brief book notices of 100 words or less announcing books of interest to readers. White Ethnics. The town of Arnhem is seen as a microcosm of the American dream and its reality. and assessment of teachers. Ellen Bigler. the same unemployment. Pp. TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. and the same tax burdens. 1. Book Notices are intended to inform readers about selected books that publishers have sent to TESOL and are descriptive rather than evaluative. Bigler describes two opposing discourses on education. ■ Although this book was developed in the context of a specific. They are solicited by the Book Review Editor. The book consists of a collection of activities and discussions arranged into 10 chapters covering such topics as basic concepts of teaching and learning. ■ The author uses a specific conflict over school curricula and the place of English and Spanish in the school system of a small upstate New York town as a springboard for a wide-ranging discussion of multicultural and bilingual education in the United States. one constructed by largely English-speaking European Americans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. American Conversations: Puerto Ricans. xi + 289. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Spring 2000 191 . it is aimed at preparing mentors to work with student teachers in a variety of preservice and in-service training programs. course procedures. role plays. 1999. Language Play. Pp. Directed toward graduate students in TESOL programs. ESL teachers. Loretta F. He challenges certain current “orthodoxies” in the profession. Guy Cook. Language Learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. as well childish jokes. offers explanations for various types of language play. Cook discusses the importance and extent of language play in human activities. language learning. Linguistics for Non-Linguists: A Primer With Exercises (3rd ed. x + 341. 2000. and TESOL but who have been daunted by their first sight of a full-blown linguistics text. and finally considers its implications for language learning and teaching. liberated. Pp. Responding to a key concern about assessment in content-based instruction. NJ: Erlbaum. vi + 235. foreign languages. literature. Mahwah. Frank Parker and Kathryn Riley. xiv + 227. I like you. taunts. 2000. insults. The newest edition of this popular text has exercises integrated throughout the text as well as supplementary 192 TESOL QUARTERLY . education. among other things. and the uses of technology in content-based language instruction.). Kasper. communication. Eenee meenee dissaleenee. content-based activities for the development of English language skills. reading. You are the one and only Educated. the book provides practical techniques based on classroom experience and grounded in theory to help practitioners develop content-based programs appropriate to their own instructional contexts. ■ Kasper and nine contributing authors offer detailed discussions of the theoretical and pedagogical bases for content-based ESL instruction. are seen by Cook as ways for children to disconnect from reality and suspend social structures in creating a space for. 1) ■ Nonsense rhymes like this chant to accompany skipping rope. and college administrators. 2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press. and selection rituals. each chapter discusses assessment practices appropriate to the particular methods outlined. (p. Pp. Content-Based College ESL Instruction. ■ This book is not intended as a replacement for an introductory linguistics course but rather as a “pre-text” for those who require some understanding of linguistic concepts for their work in such fields as anthropology. with the exception of historical linguistics. It covers the standard areas of the field. and expanded discussions of a number of topics. updated recommended readings. BOOK NOTICES 193 . in accessible language with plenty of examples.exercises at the end of each chapter. INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS EDITORIAL POLICY TESOL Quarterly. do not use running heads. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS Submission Categories TESOL Quarterly invites submissions in five categories: Full-length articles. issues in research and research methodology 2. including those individuals who may not have familiarity with the subject matter addressed. Submit three copies plus three copies of an informative abstract of not more than 200 words. indicate the number of words at the end of the article. Spring 2000 195 . and sociology) and addressing implications and applications of this research to issues in our profession. authors’ names should appear only on a cover sheet. it particularly welcomes submissions drawing on relevant research (e. Contributors are strongly encouraged to submit manuscripts of no more than 20–25 double-spaced pages or 8. education. testing and evaluation 4. applied and theoretical linguistics. psychology and sociology of language learning and teaching.. materials. CONTRIBUTORS 34. notes. first and second language acquisition. a professional. both theoretical and practical. and techniques 3. refereed journal. Submit manuscripts to the Editor of TESOL Quarterly: INFORMATION FOR TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. English education [including reading and writing theory]. professional preparation 5. professional standards Because the Quarterly is committed to publishing manuscripts that contribute to bridging theory and practice in our profession. The Quarterly prefers that all submissions be written so that their content is accessible to a broad readership. encourages submission of previously unpublished articles on topics of significance to individuals concerned with the teaching of English as a second or foreign language and of standard English as a second dialect. language planning 6. instructional methods. psychology. To facilitate the blind review process.g. the Quarterly invites manuscripts on a wide range of topics. It welcomes submissions from English language contexts around the world. and tables). sociolinguistics. in anthropology. not on the title page. communication. No.500 words (including references. curriculum design and development. If possible. As a publication that represents a variety of cross-disciplinary interests. 1. psycholinguistics. TESOL Quarterly is an international journal. especially in the following areas: 1. Submissions should generally be no longer than 500 words.g.Carol A. Reviews should provide a descriptive and evaluative summary and a brief discussion of the significance of the work in the context of current theory and practice. Chapelle Department of English 203 Ross Hall Iowa State University Ames. • The manuscript is likely to arouse readers’ interest. that is. comparative discussions of several publications that fall into a topical category (e. • The manuscript strengthens the relationship between theory and practice: Practical articles must be anchored in theory. not only to specialists in the area addressed. • The manuscript offers a new.or audiotaped material. Reviews. • The manuscript makes a significant (practical. Review articles should provide a description and evaluative comparison of the materials and discuss the relative significance of the works in the context of current theory and practice.. • The manuscript reflects sound scholarship and research design with appropriate. TESOL Quarterly invites succinct. • The content of the manuscript is accessible to the broad readership of the Quarterly. pronunciation. useful. and other instructional resources (such as computer software. classroom texts. plausible) contribution to the field. and tests).). IA 50011-1201 USA The following factors are considered when evaluating the suitability of a manuscript for publication in TESOL Quarterly: • The manuscript appeals to the general interests of TESOL Quarterly’s readership. Submit two copies of the review to the Review Editor: Dan Douglas Department of English 203 Ross Hall Iowa State University Ames. correctly interpreted references to other authors and works. evaluative reviews of professional books. Submissions should generally be no longer 196 TESOL QUARTERLY . video. TESOL Quarterly also welcomes occasional review articles. teaching methodology). literacy training. IA 50011-1201 USA Review Articles. and theoretical articles and reports of research must contain a discussion of implications or applications for practice. original insight or interpretation and not just a restatement of others’ ideas and views. • The manuscript is well written and organized and conforms to the specifications of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed. Brief discussions of qualitative and quantitative Research Issues and of Teaching Issues are also published in The Forum. TESOL Quarterly also invites short reports on any aspect of theory and practice in our profession. Reports or summaries should present key concepts and results in a manner that will make the research accessible to our diverse readership. Submissions to this section should be 7–10 double-spaced pages. Submit two copies of the review article to the Review Editor at the address given above. Longer articles do not appear in this section and should be submitted to the Editor of TESOL Quarterly for review. notes. If possible. the discussion of issues should be supported by empirical evidence. Typically. Send one copy of the manuscript to each of the Editors of the Brief Reports and Summaries section: Rod Ellis Karen E. PA 16802 USA Auckland. Brief Reports and Summaries. New Zealand The Forum. one issue per volume will be devoted to a special topic.400 words (including references. Topics are approved by the Editorial Advisory Board of the Quarterly. we are not able to publish responses to previous exchanges. and tables). Johnson Institute of Language 305 Sparks Building Teaching and Learning Pennsylvania State University Private Bag 92019 University Park.than 1. collected through qualitative or quantitative investigations. Duff Bonny Norton Department of Department of Language Education Language Education University of British Columbia University of British Columbia 2125 Main Mall 2125 Main Mall Vancouver. readers may send topic suggestions or make known their availability as contributors by writing directly to the Editors of these subsections. Contributions to The Forum should generally be no longer than 7–10 double-spaced pages or 3. indicate the number of words at the end of the report. Responses to published articles and reviews are also welcome. BC V6T 1Z4 Canada Canada Special-Topic Issues. Research Issues: Teaching Issues: Patricia A. TESOL Quarterly welcomes comments and reactions from readers regarding specific aspects or practices of our profession. In all cases.500 words.400 words. Although these contributions are typically solicited. We encourage manuscripts that either present preliminary findings or focus on some aspect of a larger study. BC V6T 1Z4 Vancouver. Submit two copies to the Editor of TESOL Quarterly at the address given above. unfortunately. If possible. indicate the number of words at the end of the contribution. Those wishing to suggest topics or make known their availability as INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS 197 . or 3. The author will be consulted only if the editing has been substantial. WC2E 8LU.apa. or the Middle East should be sent to American Psychological Association. All submissions to the Quarterly should conform to the requirements of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed. plus any special notations or acknowledgments that they would like to have included. Book Order Department. authors should include an electronic mail address and fax number. 7. 4. Issues will generally contain both invited articles designed to survey and illuminate central themes as well as articles solicited through a call for papers. the Editorial Advisory Board. Dept. 8. Africa. Material published in the Quarterly should not be construed to have the endorsement of TESOL. 6. Where available. DC 20090-2984 USA. General Submission Guidelines 1. Brief Reports and Summaries. The views expressed by contributors to TESOL Quarterly do not necessarily reflect those of the Editor.org/books/ordering. Box 92984. It is understood that manuscripts submitted to TESOL Quarterly have not been previously published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. 3 Henrietta Street. The Editor of TESOL Quarterly reserves the right to make editorial changes in any manuscript accepted for publication to enhance clarity or style. P. and Forum contributions should include two copies of a very brief biographical statement (in sentence form. All submissions to TESOL Quarterly should be accompanied by a cover letter that includes a full mailing address and both a daytime and an evening telephone number. England. For more information. and The Forum sections. Brief Reports and Summaries. 2. Authors should be sure to keep a copy for themselves.O.html. KK. KK. 198 TESOL QUARTERLY . or TESOL. Authors of full-length articles. Orders from the United Kingdom. Washington. Double spacing should be used throughout. London. 3. Dept.org or consult http:// www. which can be obtained from the American Psychological Association. 9.). TESOL Quarterly provides 25 free reprints of published full-length articles and 10 reprints of material published in the Reviews. 5. maximum 50 words). It is the responsibility of the author(s) of a manuscript submitted to TESOL Quarterly to indicate to the Editor the existence of any work already published (or under consideration for publication elsewhere) by the author(s) that is similar in content to that of the manuscript.guest editors should contact the Editor of TESOL Quarterly. e-mail order@apa. Manuscripts submitted to TESOL Quarterly cannot be returned to authors. Covent Garden. Europe. You have followed the human subjects review procedure established by your institution.Informed Consent Guidelines TESOL Quarterly expects authors to adhere to ethical and legal standards for work with human subjects. 4.. and that the participants may withdraw at any time without penalty.edu or call 703-535-7852. sample. 8. You have explained to participants any possible direct benefits of participating (e. seeing work with errors in print). You have obtained from each participant (or from the participant’s parent or guardian) a signed consent form that sets out the terms of your agreement with the participants and have kept these forms on file (TESOL will not ask to see them). Participation in the Research 1. You have given each participant a clear statement of the purpose of your research or the basic outline of what you would like to explore in writing.g. or program that you will be conducting research in which they will be the participants or that you would like to write about them for publication. you will be asked to sign a statement indicating that you have complied with Option A or Option B before TESOL will publish your work. that there is no penalty for refusing to participate..g. You have explained that participation is voluntary. You have explained to participants any foreseeable risks and discomforts involved in agreeing to cooperate (e. group. you may e-mail the managing editor of TESOL publications at tq@tesol. we require authors and contributors to meet. making it clear that research and writing are dynamic activities that may shift in focus as they occur. class. 5. TESOL recognizes that some institutions may require research proposals to satisfy additional requirements. 6. 9. Although we are aware that such standards vary among institutions and countries. If you are not bound by an institutional review process. 2. the conditions detailed below before submitting a manuscript for review. INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS 199 . As an author. 7. You have explained to participants if and how their confidentiality will be protected. You have informed participants in your study. If you wish to discuss whether or how your study met these guidelines. or if it does not meet the requirements outlined below. receiving a copy of the article or chapter). 3. B. you have complied with the following conditions. A. You have explained the procedure you will follow in the research project or the types of information you will be collecting for your writing. You have given participants sufficient contact information that they can reach you for answers to questions regarding the research. as a minimum. it is of particular concern that published research articles meet high statistical standards. 4. If your research or writing involves minors (persons under age 18). ratings. you have made that clear to the participants in writing. In order to accommodate both of these requirements. If you will be collecting samples of student work with the intention of publishing them. appropriate types of reliability and validity of any tests. a signed drawing or signed piece of writing) will be published with the student’s real name visible. you have written the consent forms in a language that the participant or the participant’s guardian can understand. questionnaires. 5. and sample sizes. you have supplied and obtained signed separate informed consent forms from the parent or guardian and from the minor. 3. the following guidelines are provided. the study should include sufficient information to allow readers to evaluate the claims made by the author. independent. graphs and charts that help explain the results. standard deviations. 6. If you are working with participants who do not speak English well or are intellectually disabled. If the sample of student work (e. and sign the form. understand. authors of statistical studies should present the following. In order to support this goal. 7. 1.g. necessary for the reader to correctly interpret and evaluate any inferential statistics. 11. 2.. Reporting the study. moderator. Studies submitted to the Quarterly should be explained clearly and in enough detail that it would be possible to replicate the design of the study on the basis of the information provided in the article.Consent to Publish Student Work 10. clear and careful descriptions of the instruments used and the types of intervention employed in the study. and so on. Likewise. you have obtained a signed consent form and will include that form when you submit your manuscript for review and editing. either anonymously or with attribution. intervening. and control variables. a clear statement of the research questions and the hypotheses that are being examined. Statistical Guidelines Because of the educational role the Quarterly plays modeling research in the field. 12. explicit identifications of dependent. including the means. 13. complete source tables for statistical tests. if he or she is old enough to read. descriptive statistics. 200 TESOL QUARTERLY . 1. Studies submitted to the Quarterly should exhibit an in-depth understanding of the philosophical perspectives and research methodologies inherent in conducting qualitative research. authors should choose one significance level (usually . the study focuses on research participants’ perspectives and interpretations of behavior. the author should explain the effects of such use on the probability values in the results. studies should report effect size through such strength of association measures as omega-squared or eta-squared along with beta (the possibility of Type II error) whenever this may be important to interpreting the significance of the results. In other words. and these should be avoided with correlational studies. tests of the assumptions of any statistical tests. multiple ANOVAs. Researchers should conduct ongoing INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS 201 . Reports of qualitative research should meet the following criteria. valid.8. Interpreting the results. Data collection (as well as analyses and reporting) is aimed at uncovering an emic perspective. 2. Conducting the study. when appropriate. Likewise. and situations rather than etic (outsider-imposed) categories. Thus. and 10. especially for correlation. assumptions such as random selection and assignment of subjects and sufficiently large sample sizes so that the results are stable. and viewpoints. Results of the study should not be overinterpreted or overgeneralized. Qualitative Research Guidelines To ensure that Quarterly articles model rigorous qualitative research. models. discussions of how the assumptions underlying the research design were met. The results should be explained clearly and the implications discussed such that readers without extensive training in the use of statistics can understand them. and so on. 9. However. persistent observation.05) and report all results in terms of that level. Care should be taken in making causal inferences from statistical results. studies should avoid multiple t tests. Utilizing these perspectives and methods in the course of conducting research helps to ensure that studies are credible. Data collection strategies include prolonged engagement. Finally. Quantitative studies submitted to TESOL Quarterly should reflect a concern for controlling Type I and Type II error. in the very few instances in which multiple tests might be employed. the following guidelines are provided. Conducting the analyses. In reporting the statistical analyses. realistic interpretations of the statistical significance of the results keeping in mind that the meaningfulness of the results is a separate and important issue. alternative explanations of the results should be discussed. and triangulation. and dependable rather than impressionistic and superficial. events. learn the culture (e. 2. 202 TESOL QUARTERLY . a description of the theoretical or conceptual framework that guides research questions and interpretations. and testing of hypotheses in further data collection. a description of a clear and salient organization of patterns found through data analysis—reports of patterns should include representative examples. and a description of the roles of the researcher(s).observations over a sufficient period of time so as to build trust with respondents. and check for misinformation introduced by both the researcher and the researched. interpretations that exhibit a holistic perspective in which the author traces the meaning of patterns across all the theoretically salient or descriptively relevant micro. classroom. Data analysis is also guided by the philosophy and methods underlying qualitative research studies. Analyzing the data. and collection of relevant or available documents. The researcher should engage in comprehensive data treatment in which data from all relevant sources are analyzed. school. Reports also should include the following. informal and formal interviewing. 4. procedures for ensuring participant anonymity. Reporting the data. or community). 3. creation of hypotheses.. Triangulation involves the use of multiple methods and sources such as participant-observation. a description of the research site. 6. In addition. analysis (taking an emic perspective and utilizing the descriptive language the respondents themselves use). many qualitative studies demand an analytic inductive approach involving a cyclical process of data collection. interpretations and conclusions that provide evidence of grounded theory and discussion of how this theory relates to current research/ theory in the field. not anecdotal information. 1. participants. The researcher should generally provide “thick description” with sufficient detail to allow the reader to determine whether transfer to other situations can be considered. the article should focus on the issues or behaviors that are salient to participants and that not only reveal an in-depth understanding of the situation studied but also suggest how it connects to current related theories.and macrocontexts in which they are embedded. a clear statement of the research questions. including relevant citations—in other words. 5.g. and data collection strategies.