Afterwords

I appreciate this learning experience very much. Through reading articles and collecting them together, (since I didn’t get a book from the reading list), I begun to read and think critically, and twice-think about what literacy is in my discipline.

Article 8

Yang, Y. & Yeh, H. & Wong, W. (2010). The influence of social interaction on meaning construction in a virtual community. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41 (2), 287-306.

The research reported by this article was driven by the social constructive theory. The researchers designed an online learning community in which students played multiple roles as writers, editors and commentators. The purpose of this design was to foster social interaction according to the constructive theorists.

The study was done in National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Taiwan. Students read their peers’ texts, edited their errors, evaluated peer editors’ corrections and finally reconstructed their own texts.

The results of this study showed students learned to view their own texts from others’ perspective. Based on this experience, students are more willing to get information from and contribute information to peers. According to the article, this is the way (improving their own final drafts in both local and global revision) that meaning construction of texts takes place. Active participants’ final drafts were very different form those of passive participants whose first and final drafts were almost the same except some grammatical revisions.

I personally have the same experience when doing the pbworks activities. When I realized that my version was seriously read and edited by somebody, I was more careful about my product. And every time after I posted something, I very eagerly waited for people’s reply. During the process posting and commenting, I began to reflect what I was learning as a whole and gradually draw a bigger and clearer picture. For this point, I very much advocate for this approach.

But on the other hand, I am also curious about the accuracy of peers’ correction, since this research was done in a country where English was a second language. When there was not enough social background for the peers to trust for linguistic and ideological accuracy, what is the mechanics that drives learning forward?

Once again, I am questioning the portion of the application of such pedagogical approach, especially in areas where English is a second or foreign language.

Article 7

Tufekci, D. & Sapar, V. (2011). Social constructivist approach: (re)transformation of “little red riding hood” for writing course. Education Sciences, 6 (2), 1732-1746.

This article reported a research done to practice constructivist approach in critical writing in EFL department at Balikesir University (Turkey). This research was done within the constructivism paradigm. The researchers did a thorough literature review of social approach of constructivism. 

The research focused upon the effectiveness of creative writing and critical thinking skills in terms of constructivist approach on EFL learning process.

The subjects of the study were 36 fourth year students who took the selective course “teaching English through Literature”. They collected data through a background questionnaire, interviews, oral presentation, classroom discussions and essays that were parts of students’ portfolio. The researchers discovered that advanced EFL learners’ attitudes were changing positively on creative writing. And this change caused them to write more creative literacy texts.

The study consisted of three steps: 1. Preparation stage (the introduction of the tale, interviews, oral presentations and classroom discussions); 2. Production stage (maintaining Little Red Riding Hood, estimating LRRH’s past and present, writing a parody or a drama and changing the essence of the fairy tale); 3. Data analysis (subjects wrote a journal about the contributions and negative aspects of this study).

The article reported that the creative writing had some considerable contributions to cognitive skills of EFL learners, such as: thinking skills, imagination, synthesizing skills; linguistic skills, leaner’s affection of the target language (motivation and self-confidence); reading, listening, speaking and writing skills; grammatical and lexical knowledge gaining; change in students’ perceptions towards using teaching methodology. But there were also negative aspect of the teaching approach reported: time consuming, challenging, problems posed to learners who were good at individual learning.

I am very grateful that the researchers honestly reported the problem caused by this approach to learners who are good at individual learning. This problem asks us to stop here and question the percentage of constructivism teaching in light of individual differences. This may not indicate that we should throw away the approach, but more pedagogical strategies under this paradigm should be discovered to address all the learners in the classroom.

As to the negative aspect of time consuming and challenging, I am thinking about the possibility of designing tasks of different difficulty in relation to learners’ ability. This may cause great difficulty for instructors to plan the lesson but might be more considerate to the learners.

In a whole, this article set a model for critical writing instruction so that the whole language capacity is improved. I believe this approach deserves duplication in other countries where English is taught as the second language.

Article 6

Fernsten, L. (2008). Writer identity and ESL learners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52 (1), 44-52.

The author employed critical discourse analysis as a research methodology to better understand how language shapes and positions people as writers. According to the author, CDA can be used to raise awareness of language in its social context and can also help people understand and control their own roles in the use of discourse. The research was done under Gee’s theoretical framework of Discourses.

By examining closely writers’ and speakers’ choices or uses of discourse, it is possible to discover how “people position themselves and are positioned by and construct and are constructed by the linguistic and ideological choices they make”.

The author defined three terms before the introduction to the research design. Here are the author’s definitions.

Identity refers to how does language in the text signal participation, representation, or identification with a group or indicate a relationship regarding who this individual is in the world.

Traditional formal discourse refers to a kind of academic discourse containing varied forms that can be found in different departments across colleges and universities. Typical conventions are structured introductory paragraphs, thesis statement, topic sentences, tightly organized text blocks, and claims supported by detailed explanation.

Expressiveness refers to the discourse that informs pedagogy which privileges individual control over textual meaning and production and is often viewed in opposition to traditional formal discourse.

The author took Mandy, a Korean girl who was raised in America, as a subject of the case study. From the three microanalyses of Mandy’s discourse, namely, Mandy’s response to writer identity prompt, her journal responses to assigned readings and her conference, the author understood how Mandy viewed herself, positioned herself and the social and linguistic reasons why she positioned herself that way, and further more pedagogical implication of this research representing more people like Mandy.

This article is illuminating to me because it addressed the issue of second language learners’ identity as writers. I agree very much with the author’s suggestion that teachers should teach students that they should ask for opportunity to rewrite a paper that has language issues. Thus, students will see themselves as writers “in progress” rather than “bad readers”.

According to my own experiences, this is vital for a second language user to develop her confidence to merge more into the Discourse and better grasp that Discourse meta-knowledge and make further improvement in that discipline.

This article is of special significance to Chinese language teachers whose students are more sensitive to identity and always label themselves as “bad writers”.

I am wondering if CDA could be taught to students to analyze their own discourse so that they better understand themselves and be able to improve their identity as writers.

Article 5

Zhou, L. & Siriyothin, P. (2009). An investigation of university EFL students’ attitudes towards writing-to-read tasks. Suranaree J. Sci. Technol. 16 (4), 297-309.
This article presented the results from a study of language attitudes to determine which reading tasks EFL learners think were effective.

The two tasks were writing summaries after reading and writing journals after reading. The teaching procedures in the two groups were all composed of three steps: pre-reading, while-reading, and post-reading. The teaching procedures followed the five procedures suggested by Brown, namely goals, objectives, materials and equipment, procedures and evaluation.

The pre-reading and during-reading stages were the same between the two groups, except that one group wrote summaries at the post-reading stage while the other one wrote journals. In the journal writing group, students were to write their reactions, comments, questions and feelings about the text read.

The results showed that students from RJ (journal writing) had a more positive attitude towards the reading task than students from RS (summary writing), which means that the students liked the task of reading with journal writing more than the task of reading with summary writing. It was found that many students thought the reading tasks assigned to them could help improve their reading comprehension. Students in both groups reported the application of reading strategies, gaining writing skills.

Students also reported problems and suggestions. The problems were vocabulary, understanding of the content of the reading tasks, and motivation.

The authors discovered pedagogical implications of the approach: 1. Teachers must be careful in employing summary writing in class because students dislike its tight format. 2. Writing journals increases students’ motivation for learning. 3. Teacher’s feedback should be given to the students’ journal. 4. Reading strategies should be taught explicitly.

I found this article echoes with the learning assignment of LLSS538. We practice teaching reading under the same theoretical frame. This article described some of my teaching experiences. Students are afraid of writing summaries because they are afraid of making mistakes. This is partially caused by the wide practice of standardized examination, partially caused by Chinese in-built characteristics as a nation. Yet, according to my experiences, writing summaries could be more beneficial and fruit producing though sometimes less of fun. This could be a new direction for further research. That is, how to make summary writing more interesting to students and helpful to their reading. 

This research reminds me of my own learning experiences. I was afraid of writing summaries too because it challenges my understanding very strictly and calls upon my writing ability. On both side, I had to be exact and accurate. Whereas, in journal writing, I can writing anything related to the content, no matter how much of the whole text I had got. Journal writing is more of fun and less challenging. For this reason, I am wondering if the design of the research to compare which approach is more welcome and efficient sounds “unfair”.                          

Article 4

Mannion, G & Miller, K. & Gibb, I. &Goodman, R. (2009). Reading, writing, resonating: striking chords across the contexts of students’ everyday and college lives. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 17 (3), 323-339.

This article reports the research done with a situated, socio-cultural approach which helps researchers notice how contexts and practice co-emerge. This research project inquired the interface between literacies in students’ everyday lives and their formal college coursework. The article reported data collected from two student case studies of a three-year research project. Their findings indicate that if contexts and their associated literacies are co-emergent and co-determined by each other, then literacy skills don’ simply “transfer” between contexts but are better seen as resonant across context. The authors concluded some strategies for “enacting a critical, ituated-yet-polycontextural literacy pedagogy that pays respect to students’ everyday literacies as a valuable resource base in formal coursework.

The theoretical framework of this research addresses concepts like: new literacy studies (NLS), “transfer” in teaching and learning, recontextualisation, learning as “becoming” (through learning in one situation) and “design” (a similar process of recontextualisation through literacy),

Identification through literacies, border literacies and bordering literacies, aspects of literacy practices, resonance through literacy, etc.

This article in theory resonates with the ideas from the course LLSS538, and helps me better understand how researchers understand literacy and practice in searching for a more efficient pedagogy.

The other reason I selected this article is that the researchers of this project deeply studied students’ daily life and the connection between their daily literacies and their academy.

Together with the articles learned in LLSS538, this article offered a different zoom for me to read literacy and literacy teaching.

Yet, a question raised behind the promising results: what is the influence of new literacy studies upon the production of classic works? Or, what is the relationship between the NLS and the production of classic works?

Article 3

Oszakiewski, H. & Spelman, M. (2011). The reading/writing workshop: an approach to improving literacy achievement and independent literacy habits. Illinois Reading Council Journal. 39 (2), 13-25.

This article reported a research upon the workshop style approach to reading and writing education. The article made a thorough literature review of the theoretical framework of the workshop approach, ranging from students needs, learning opportunities, learning environment, large group learning and small group learning, essential instructional strategies in an effective workshop approach, the strategy of conferring, the strategy of guided reading, of repeated reading, of Readers’ Theater, to the 6+1 Trait writing program, the three goals of the reading/writing workshop approach (to provide time for students to respond in writing to texts they have read, to improve the independent reading habits of students, to develop lifelong readers and writers).

The research was designed to examine the impact of a reading/writing workshop approach on the practical problem of increasing the reading achievement, writing skills, and the independent literacy habits of elementary-level students. The researchers want to build an understanding of the strengths and limitations of the workshop approach through the close, yearlong examination of 31 student participants.

The reading/writing approach was arranged for a block of 75 minutes in the morning after the math and science class and 45 minutes in the afternoon. The morning workshop consisted of guided reading, independent reading and writing. The afternoon workshop was devoted to the implementation of reading strategies in the content area of social studies. For three days each week, all students remained in the workshop setting and participated in the 75-minute morning workshop that was built around mini-lessons, guided reading groups, and novel study. Students also had opportunities on these same days to read self-selected independent novels, complete 6+1 Traits writing activities, and participate in conferences with the teacher and peers. This workshop model employed a variety of formats to provide whole group, small group, and individual instruction. The class came together on a regular basis for mini-lessons, specific direct instruction topics and informal sharing.

The three hypothesis guided this study are: 1. Would participation in a yearlong reading/writing workshop increase students’ scores on literacy inventory and benchmark assessment? 2. Would participation in a yearlong reading/writing workshop improve students’ writing skills? 3. Would participation in a yearlong reading/writing workshop strengthen independent literacy habits?

The results of the research proved the three hypotheses to be true, suggesting that the reading/writing workshop may offer a viable alternative to the traditional classroom setting. Though, as the authors pointed, the external validity is limited, the results may be generalizable to other intermediated classrooms. The approach has the advantages of independence, choice, time and students relationships with each other and the teachers, which offer opportunities for all levels of learners.

This article is interesting because the researchers explored an alternative approach which constructs literacy through deeply involve students into reading. By cooperation with peers and the teacher, students build up their literacy and a habit of lifelong reading.

Article 2

Sorry, the second article comes late. I got this paper from http://web.ebscohost.com.libproxy.unm.edu/ehost/detail?sid=f634a01f-db36-40e4-824c-b915748e7859%40sessionmgr111&vid=4&hid=110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=ehh&AN=4113370.

I selected this paper because it thoroughly explicated some of the theoretical background of constructivism and then presented a detailed example in which a traditional classroom lesson and a constructivist version of the same lesson were described and analyzed. The paper also discussed several myths and important instructional issues.

People can get a better understanding of the background of the theory. According to the author, the concept “constructivism” most probably comes from Piaget who referred to his views as “constructivist”.

The constructivist view of human knowledge acquisition is knowledge construction rather than knowledge transmission and the recording of information conveyed by others. Learners are building and transforming knowledge. Teachers are guiding and scaffolding students. Endogenous constructivism focuses on internal, individual constructions of knowledge. Dialectical constructivism focuses on the social intersection of people, interactions that involve sharing, comparing and debating among learners and mentors.

There are two concepts from the constructivist point of view: situated cognition and zone of proximal development. The former concept believes that learning is to be born. Knowledge is conceived as being embedded in and connected to the situation where the leaning occurs. The latter one believes that when children work on tasks that cannot be accomplished alone but can be successfully completed with the assistance of an adult/expert, they are working within their zone of proximal development. Constructivism believes that all learning is discovered.

The paper represented Ms Blake’s classroom arrangement and teaching activity which is very traditional. The author analyzed Ms Blake’s classroom arrangement and teaching from a constructivism perspective and made a constructivism version of Ms Blake’s classroom and teaching.

Through the comparison between two versions, a reader may easily get a clear idea about what a constructivism classroom and teaching should be.

The article also pointed out some misconceptions and myths with constructivism instructional practices. The five myths are:

1. there is no focus for learning, no clear goal in constructivist-based instruction.

2. constructivist based instruction is not thoughtfully planned; careful preparation is less important than in traditional instruction.

3. there is an absence of structure for learning in a constructivist learning environment.

4. as long as learners are involved in discussion and other forms of social interactin, learning will take place.

5. since teachers are not primarily engaged in delivering instruction, their role in the classroom is less important.