Electronic Text and English as a Second Language Environments

Carla Meskill, Jonathan Mossop, Richard Bates

 

Introduction

School-age children for whom English is not the native language have immediate and critical needs regarding English language and literacy. The majority of these children are not in any of the nations bilingual programs. Thus they are restricted in their participation in academic activity during the period needed for their second language and literacy acquistion, a period which is typically from five to seven years. During this time, English as a Second Language (ESL) learners receive instruction in second language and literacy through specialized English as a second language instruction as well as "incidentally" in regular mainstream classroom classes.

Providing opportunities for ESL learners to develop English language and literacy skills is a continual challenge and concern for schools. Recent interest in technologies1 as a means of supporting language development has brought ESL teaching professionals around the country to include computers, multimedia, and telecommunications as tools for instruction. In addition to ESL-specific instruction, non-ESL or mainstream teachers are coming to view these technologies as a means by which ESL learners who cannot otherwise participate in class activities can be actively involved in language and literacy practice.

A recent survey of school use of technologies with ESL children indicates that not only are ESL teachers utilizing technologies with their students in a number of ways to support their language and literacy development, but also that the vast majority of software packages they use are designed for native speakers of English. In other words they are academic, content-rich and, when their use is coordinated with mainstream academic content, they help to simultaneously support the interplay of linguistic and conceptual development. Reporting teachers also state that use of content-area software promotes student involvement and consequent skills development in content-based language and literacy. In short, electronic texts are apparently being used, and used well and thoughtfully, by many ESL professionals (Meskill & Mossop 1997).

This report discusses the unique features of electronic texts2, provides analysis of learner interactions with them, and discusses the implications for second language and literacy development. Examples drawn from extended observations in two exemplary ESL classrooms (one elementary and one middle school) where computers are used as tools to support ESL instructional activities are provided to illustrate the nature and dynamic of second language learner literacy skills development as they occur in interactions with electronic texts.

Goals and Processes of K-8 ESL Instruction

The goal of ESL instruction in grades K-8 is to provide linguistic, cognitive, and affective support to learners as they catch up with, and proceed through their grade-level curricula. It is the ESL experience and support a child receives, then, that serves as the primary locus of a mentored initiation into the immediate discourse communities of school (Freeman & Freeman 1994). Much of that experience and support is consequently centered on the development of literacy and the language that constitutes and mediates literacy in an academic environment. Because this support must be tailored to widely differing needs, backgrounds, and levels of ability, it takes on many forms but consistently focuses on the language, literacy, and concepts of the academic subjects the ESL students are studying.

The ESL professionals major concern is to design and implement activities that guide learners to attend to the linguistic forms and meaning of content. At the same time they encourage the development of appropriate linguistic and cognitive strategies for understanding and production. A balanced focus on form and meaning is particularly critical for this population (Long 1991; Ellis 1995; Spada & Lightbown 1993) as methods of analysis and the meanings derived from instructional materials depend a great deal on what learners bring to the process in terms of background, experiences, beliefs, and the ways of the native language they already speak. Ways of knowing and talking in ESL instructional contexts simultaneously validate the wealth of linguistic and cultural knowledge and experiences children bring to school, and work to weave these into academically appropriate ways of knowing and expressing. In this respect, the textwork that ESL focuses on is far more complex than the comprehension myth of learning: simply recognizing and comprehending words does not constitute reading or transacting with text for academic purposes.

As with reading in ones native language, developing the transactional expertise needed for effective and critical understanding entails much more than superficial word recognition. A cognitive and experiential complex activates and interacts with what one reads and interprets. Particularly relevant to second language readers is the role of vocabulary, an aspect of language that represents a crucial dimension for participation in the second language environment. Recent conceptualization of the nature of word knowledge recognizes the continuum on which the notion of knowing a vocabulary word fluctuates. At one end of the continuum knowing a word means simple recognition; at the other, a depth of understanding permits one to use the item productively and well. The process of moving from one end of this theoretical continuum to another entails a long process of encounter with, and use of, words and their meanings in both aural and textual forms. It is up to the ESL professional to discover, make connections, and cultivate ways of knowing that capitalize on what learners bring in conjunction with new ways of knowing and transacting with text. Effective textwork, then, is activity that 1) combines focus on form and meaning; 2) scaffolds learner understanding dialogically; 3) encourages melding old and new ways of knowing; and 4) ultimately brings learners to participate in the literate community surrounding them.

In tandem with textwork comes meaningful interaction in the target language at the levels of linguistic, literacy, and cognitive development. In terms of linguistic development in a second language, a number of hypotheses have been proposed that point to the importance of conversational interaction in the language acquisition process. Longs (1985) negotiated input hypothesis states that the interactional modifications people make as they negotiate meaning and solve communication problems provides the kind of input learners need to develop their communicative competence. Swain (1985) proposes the comprehensible output hypothesis, which also focuses on negotiation of meaning. In this view, learners of another language should be encouraged to communicate because it is when they experience difficulties communicating that they search for precision or alternative linguistic means of expression. Thus, they are "pushed" into rendering their output more coherent. Besides the claims of benefits to speakers, negotiation is also believed to facilitate comprehension. Pica, Young, and Doughty (1987) empirically demonstrated that negotiated input results in higher comprehension than either unmodified or simplified input. Finally, Peck (1978) suggests that in interactive discourse, learners have the chance to practice syntactic constructions and provide scaffolding for each other. Taken together, these studies strongly suggest that negotiation of meaning has an important role to play in the development of a second language (Savignon 1991).

We will discuss at length our observations of textwork being supported in unique ways through the thoughtful integration of electronic texts in ESL instruction and the powerful forms of literacy-oriented discourse and activity that ensue.

Electronic Texts

Electronic texts (e-texts), by virtue of their unique characteristics, play a potentially powerful role in school-based ESL contexts and can be viewed as a good venue for literacy activities in K-8 classrooms. They can also serve as rich contexts for the active negotiation of meaning by students in need of this kind of linguistic/cognitive engagement.

E-texts consist of on-screen information (visual, textual, and aural) within computer, multimedia, and/or telecommunications environments. They are what people from all walks of life, especially school-age children, are becoming accustomed to encountering, reading, manipulating, and producing as part of daily activity. They include games, databases, talking books, hypermedia and telecommunications. E-texts are becoming widely used by contemporary school-aged students as a matter of course for both deliberate and incidental instruction and they offer several features that can, when deliberately exploited for instructional purposes, enhance learning across grades and subjects.

E-texts have features and accompanying capabilities that are qualitatively different from what has traditionally served as our primary tool for literacy activity the print medium (Barker 1996; Papert 1993; Ulmer 1989; Winkelmann 1995). The attributes of e-texts differ from those of print in many significant ways. For example, where print is permanently static, electronic texts are dynamic, malleable and manipulable (Winkelmann 1995). Where print is typically hierarchical, electronic texts are anarchic, with forms that are instantaneously changeable (Ulmer 1989). As a result both the experience of the reader and the environment itself are subject to a form of lawlessness. This is in direct contrast to experiences with traditional Western forms of expository print which is most often written within a strict, closed, linear form. This anarchic aspect of electronic texts shapes roles and discourse around e-text activity.

Where print is physically self-contained and restrictive, e-texts are hypertextual, decentralized, and democratizing (Winkelmann 1995). E-texts are typically linked to a variety of information in a variety of forms. Meaning is not restricted to a single, closed set of words on a self-contained page. E-texts, particularly in the public settings of classrooms and laboratories, are also open to viewing and, by extension, to critique and commentary. Democracy gets played out in the context of interactions around the medium.

The unique features of e-texts lead to a type of literacy activity that is qualitatively different from the reading of print. The malleability of words and screens place the "reader" in a position of power in which she can move in a variety of directions at any given moment. The visual and functional nature of this activity is not reading but "e-texting" a term that will be used here to describe computer-based activity whereby an "e-texter" interacts with written and visual information on the screen. This activity, while not completely unlike print reading, represents expanded and unique opportunities for working with language. It includes the essential characteristic of the "psycholinguistic guessing game" (Goodman 1967) in both text form as well as in visual (pictorial) texts, to which Arnheim (1988) expands Goodman's definition. E-texting, then, involves reasoning with both the aural/written word and visual information and this engages cognitive processes that are viewed not only as parallel, but also as interworking systems of understanding.

The widely differing literacy practices, experiences, and text orientations of various cultures have often been cited as a serious source of difficulty for those learning and adapting to a second language, culture, and the accompanying literacy practices. In the U.S. in particular, cracking the code of tightly structured hierarchical print forms used in schools and the workplace are particularly problematic for individuals whose life experiences do not necessarily include apprenticeship to these forms (Cummins & Sayers 1994; Heath 1983; Parry 1996). The permeable, quasi-structure of e-texts represents unique opportunities for their readers to read by enabling them to align their existing experiences with the ordering and independent management of what they see on screen. Freed from the physically locked, culturally dense domain of print craft, those of differing orientations can tailor their experiences with electronic texts as they wish, thus exercising their flexible stance toward varied forms of representation.

This individual volition exerted on the form and meaning of electronic texts may be both a liberating factor and one that ultimately expands childrens skills and abilities as readers (Meskill, Mossop & Bates 1998). The trend in language acquisition studies is to view learning language as a process that involves the analytic and holistic, with the former called into the service of the latter. This shift parallels a broader postmodern conception that moves away from the analytic as preeminent and has evolved as a result of reconceptualizations from diverse disciplines. In terms of language learning, three of the most influential paradigmatic shifts have been 1) advances in first language acquisition research that clearly demonstrates that from birth, humans are endowed with a highly sophisticated biological apparatus for learning language that gets triggered by direct experience in the world (Chomsky 1968); 2) humanistic trends in education that recognize and value the crucial role of affect in language and learning (Curran 1976); 3) postmodern valuing of cognition that extends well beyond traditional Western ratio-analytic modes of human thought (Ulmer 1989). The merger of the analytic with the holistic, with the former subordinated to the latter, is nowhere better exemplified than in e-text an environment that invites free form creativity, experimentation, bricolage, and discovery.

The differences between print and e-texts are summarized below in Table 1.

Print

E-texts

static

dynamic, malleable

private activity

public activity

hierarchical

anarchic

self-contained

hyper, decentralized

linear

non-linear

whole

fragmentary

restrictive

democratizing

illustrative

mixed media

Table 1: The differences between print and e-texts.

In the ESL context, e-texts are being used widely and thoughtfully in schools (Meskill & Mossop 1997). This report examines particular features of e-text that may be especially valuable for second language and literacy development and documents how these play a role in unique discourse and literacy activity in the classroom.

Methodology

The guiding question for the design and implementation of this study was the following.

What specific features of the e-text environment appear to support language and literacy development in a second language?

Of the more than one hundred ESL teachers who identified themselves as having model applications of technologies with their students (Meskill & Mossop 1997) two were selected to have their instructional contexts be the focus of this phase of our investigation. Both teach in the same district. Criteria for selection included exit rates of ESL children in the district, length of time a technologies component had been in place, and teachers training and expertise in both instructional technology and as an ESL professional.

Observations, teacher interviews, student interviews, and interviews with district administrators took place in selected contexts over the course of a two-year period. The elementary context involves an ESL pull-out approach that utilizes technologies during pull-out time. The second context, a middle school ESL classroom, has children scheduled for daily ESL classes. This technology-rich classroom is also a popular drop-in site for children seeking additional help with their coursework during their free periods and after school.

A total of 20 sessions were videotaped, transcribed, and coded using the qualitative research utility NUD*IST. Two sets of codes were iteratively developed: 1) unique features of electronic texts (see Appendix A); and 2) optimal conditions for language learning in instructional contexts (Appendix B). The starting point we employed for unique features of e-texts were those described by Ulmer (1989) and Winklemann (1995). Through the constructive, iterative processes of independent coding, comparison and negotiation, we came to include additional features we were seeing come into play in the two contexts we were studying. Optimal conditions for learning in the second language classroom were adapted from Johnson (1995) a composite of conditions that have emerged from second language theoretical and empirical work over the last ten years. The coded data were subjected to an intersection search (e-text feature(s) + condition(s)). Intersections are defined as instances of discourse and action where e-text features play a key role in the instructional discourse and where coders saw at the same time optimal conditions for second language learning reflected in the same talk and action. From these intersections, it became clear that certain features of e-texts do in fact co-occur with conditions that promote successful language learning. (See Appendix C for sample intersections.) Rather than present only isolated examples of coding intersections, we then chose three representative sessions of three different levels (early elementary, late elementary and middle school) for intensive descriptive analysis in narrative form. The goal of the analysis is to detail the complex interplay of e-texts with language and literacy activity that is characteristic of these instructional environments.

Our two participating teachers were also asked to engage in stimulated recall or what we call "video talkback" using the videotaped sessions of their teaching with e-texts. As they viewed videotapes of their classrooms, they were asked to comment on their practices, the role the medium was playing in their decision-making processes, and how they perceived activity as supporting the language and literacy development of their students.

Teachers and students both ESL and mainstream and district staff and administrators were also interviewed. Prompts and questions used in the interviews probed these stakeholders perceptions of the ESL and e-text interface. Interviews were also transcribed and coded by broad topics (see Appendix D).

The Context

ESL practices are deeply conjoined with a myriad of contextual, affective, societal, familial, and political influences. First and foremost is the valuing of the ESL child, her language and cultural heritage and the richness of the contributions her uniqueness brings to the local community. This is an essential stance both within the direct (district/building) and the wider community. Where these elements are not philosophically aligned with the needs and goals of non-native speakers as a whole, instruction risks being reductionist and impoverished, serving more to disenfranchise than to embrace and nurture the ESL learner and her family. When instruction is undertaken within supportive local contexts, the ethos of the sociocultural context can be highly supportive of the language and literacy development process (Reyes 1992).

The Indian River Central School District3 is located in rural northern New York State and abuts the U.S. Armys Fort Drum. The district is comprised of five elementary schools (grades K-4), a middle school (grades 5-8), and a high school (grades 9-12). Approximately 3,100 students attend Indian River schools. With the expansion of Fort Drum to accommodate the 10th Mountain Division in 1985, the district now provides public education to the children of military families as well as children residing with the rural families that the district has traditionally served. Since 1985, the portion of the student body coming from the military has steadily grown and now makes up well over half of the student body. However, due to the nature of military service, the student population from military families is highly transient. Families typically remain in the Indian River district for as long as the military heads of household are stationed at Fort Drum usually three years. Also, given that children in military families tend to be young in age, the five elementary schools are those most affected by the special challenges of educating a mobile student population.

One such challenge is meeting the immediate needs of children learning English as a second language. Prior to 1985, the Indian River school district did not have an ESL program. Now there are five New York State certified ESL teachers employed three at the elementary level and one each at the middle school and the high school. The heritage languages of students served in this districts ESL classrooms represent a rich diversity of cultures. They include Spanish, German, Korean, Tagalog, Hawaiian, Samoan, French, and Japanese. The ESL program serves approximately 225 students each year.

The Indian River ESL program provides ample support for its students. Its first and most important task is the immediate identification and assessment of new ESL students. Typically children whose first language is other than English are children of military fathers who have wed overseas. Some parents who wish to have their children quickly assimilate into the American mainstream may be reluctant to identify their children as ESL learners. Another issue is that these children may have already begun their education at schools without ESL programs. Some of these children have also been identified as learning disabled, reading disabled, or speech impaired.

From our observations it is evident that the Indian River ESL program has a unique commitment to its students. First, and apparent from the focus of our study, learners in the ESL program are supported by a range of technology resources (computers, printers, scanners, digital cameras, camcorders). The ESL teachers themselves are knowledgeable technology users who have received training supported by district procured grant sources. The ESL teachers in turn regularly provide support for mainstream classroom teachers who are beginning to use technology as tools for instruction. Their mainstream classroom teacher colleagues professionally respect the ESL teachers. In tandem with collaborating with others around technology, these teachers strive to foster continuity between the efforts of the mainstream classroom and the ESL program in terms of curriculum, instruction, and student assessment.

At the district level, both the integration of technology in the classroom and the local population of ESL children and their families are highly valued. Both are seen as enriching the district at all levels. At the level of funding, the district offices have been very proactive in obtaining state grants to support technology integration in general and technology integration for ESL in particular. These monies are used not only for the purchase of equipment for labs, libraries, and classroom clusters, but for in-service training workshops and a district instructional technology curriculum specialist as well. Unlike many other school districts that view technology as a route to uniformity and consistency across curricula and grade levels, this district is casting technology in the role of catalyst for teacher reflection, creativity, and change. It is seen as a tool to instill pride and a sense of empowerment for teachers, an attitudinal stance that is clearly trickling down to the children as we will see in the next section.

Kathy Moran has both Bachelor's and Master's degrees in Elementary Education (with concentrations in French and Educational Computing). Between 1971 and 1990 she taught elementary grades 1-3 in both New York and Arizona. Since 1991 she has been teaching ESOL (K-4) in the Indian River Central School District.

Martie Menzel has a Bachelor's degree in French and a Masters degree in Elementary Education. Prior to relocating to the Indian River District, she taught ten years at the 5th grade level. When she found there were no openings at the elementary level, she obtained accreditation in ESL through Syracuse University. She has taught for the district at the elementary and middle school levels for eight years.

The ESOL program enjoys a unique position in the Indian River School District. Both the non-native speaking students and the technology are valued and both Kathy and Martie have strong backgrounds in both ESL and technology. Above all, however, the pull-out classes that form the basis for our analysis are small (2-4 students). This allows a type of continuous personal interaction between teachers and students that would be impossible under larger class size conditions. Thus, our aim is less to present these classes as blueprints for emulation than to portray them as examples of successful technology integration within one specific context.

Language-Teaching Epistemologies

Both Kathy and Martie have training in second language acquisition studies and generally keep up with trends in the field. Their District encourages and supports this ongoing professional growth and reflection. The District Administration encourages teachers to "constantly revisit the research out there and see how they can make it apply" (District Superintendent). We found through numerous discussions with these practitioners that their reflections on the foundations upon which their teaching practices are shaped are closely aligned with popular theory in second language teaching and learning. Not only does their practice reflect these solid foundations, but they are also very clear in articulating key issues in the field and their applicability to their own students and professional contexts.

BICS/CALP

In 1980 Jim Cummins introduced a critical notion to the field of K-12 second language teaching pedagogy. His was a widely applicable and well applauded distinction between the kinds of social language that children appear to pick up quite quickly and easily, or Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS), and the more cognitively challenging language skills associated with higher order thinking and abstraction known as Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP). While children who are second language learners appear to converse with ease, their ability to think, read, and write in an academic realm may be quite limited; this is especially true if the child is from a semi-lingual population that has no native language CALP on which to build his English academic skills. This is a fundamental concept behind the practices of Kathy and Martie. It is why their focus on textwork, wordwork and higher order thinking and problem solving is focal and intensive.

Thats one of the problems that the ESOL students have . . . it effects their reading comprehension because they know a lot of the common words but words that you acquire from reading a great deal, they just dont have those more academic type words. So I think that [computer technology] challenges them more . . . to throw those words out to them and keep using them so that they do become part of their vocabulary. (Martie)

The surface oral fluency that ESL children may demonstrate is deceiving. Their sociocollaborative chatter around the computer would lead one to assume that they have mastered the intricacies of the English language. However, their CALP their ability to use and understand academic English in conjunction with higher order thinking and abstraction is what drives the initiation processes orchestrated by Martie and Kathy.

Language through Content

An optimal condition for second language development in instructional settings is content richness or, in the case of an academic environment, content and cross-curricular relevance. Because ESL children must simultaneously master both the language and the academic content it conveys, ESL professionals design and orchestrate tasks that can be characterized as a "language through content" or "sheltered English" approach to instruction (Krashen 1985; Edelsky 1996; Mohan 1986). Such tasks require children to interact with, and produce and respond to, language that is situated locally in the work of their mainstream classes. Work in the ESL classroom, then, is characterized as having dual parallel objectives.

I have congruency forms where I ask the classroom teachers to tell me what areas I could help the children in, or what themes, topics they are going to be studying in the up-coming month, and what skills I could help the children with. (Kathy)

In the case of Martie, the middle school teacher, not only does she design for these two parallel objectives, but she integrates a third: the teaching of higher order thinking skills:

Well after I pick my language objective I always try to put a content objective for every lesson because I only have them for one period a day. If I only focused on language, I would lose a lot because you can teach the language with the contentEvery lesson has both a language objective and a content objective and then we also list a higher level thinking strategy we want to work on too . . . And I try even serving on the committees too so I know whats going on and Im there and Im not a stand alone. Our program (ESOL) doesnt stand alone, its all connected with all the grade levels.

Foci on particular academic content in these ESL contexts is systematic. These professionals work closely with their students mainstream teachers to keep current with what their learners are doing and with what they need in the way of vocabulary, concepts, and language skills. Work done in the ESL context, then, is consistently tied to the larger content area curricula and serves as the substance through which language and literacy skills are practiced and developed.

Integrated Skills

A key tenet in the field of second language teaching and learning is the notion of integrated skills. No longer are the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing treated as separate, autonomous skills, but are viewed as highly integral to one another (Johnson 1995; Savignon 1991). As such, language instructional activity involves children exercising all four skills simultaneously. At the district level, administrators, too, are keenly aware of the value of the integrated skills approach in general, and for language learners in particular. They view the computer as an ideal venue to exercise language using all four skills in immediate and meaningful ways. Likewise, the New York State Language Arts Standards (1998) consistently emphasize the mastery of all four skills and suggest these receive balanced attention in school curricula and classroom processes. The ongoing stream of participatory literacy activity in these ESL environments bespeaks teachers adherence to this fundamental principle and serves as an exemplary model of language and literacy skills integration.

It (using the computer for letter recognition) goes hand in hand with reading. Reading, writing, spelling, listening, and speaking, they just all go together and I try to work on all of those areas. (Kathy)

This is echoed by the district's assistant superintendent, who emphasizes the richly motivational contexts computer-supported work can contribute to the simultaneous honing of reading, writing, listening, and speaking: "To hear these kids talk, see them listen, read, and write the computer creates a superior context for that and it means something."

Negotiation of Meaning as Venue for Acquisition

Current views (e.g. Long 1985; Swain 1985; Pica 1987; Johnson 1995) of optimal second language acquisition contexts see the active negotiation of meaning through motivated interaction with others as the main enterprise of the learning process. It is the active use of the target language that serves as a primary locus for linguistic and conceptual development. The teachers in our study are very clear about their adherence to the notion of motivated conversation.

In ESL, one of the basic philosophies is the more the students are talking, the more theyre learning. So, there should be a lot more student talk than teacher talk. . . . I try to get them talking as much as I can, and not only just to me, but then to involve the other ones. . . . Ill often ask "Can anyone else help him first?" . . . [I]ts very easy for the teacher to give the answer. But they arent learning the language as much that way, and they become dependent on that. (Martie)

Both teachers see the computer as a rich venue and stimulus for meaning-based acquisition. The tight alignment of textual, aural, and pictorial representations in conjunction with teacher scaffolded meaning making comprise an ideal context in which learners can come to exercise and own content words and concepts. As Kathy relates when asked about the ways children make meaning around the computer:

I think especially because theyre so excited about playing the game Oregon Trail. I think they will now know what occupation means. I dont think theyll ever forget. Whenever they see the word occupation I think it will take them right back to where they first really understood the meaning and got to choose an occupation.

Awareness of Form

Current views of second language learning (e.g. Ellis 1995; Lightbown & Spada 1993; Johnson 1995) also advocate a balanced emphasis on form and meaning. It is not sufficient for learners to be engaged in meaningful interaction; their attention must be drawn to and awareness cued in to the forms the language takes in the process (Schmidt 1990). The Indian River ESL teachers were quite clear on the role that attention to form plays in their teaching in general, and with the computer screen representing and mediating forms in particular.

Im also trying to reinforce some grammar in this lesson with comparing slower, slowest, . . . so I keep repeating just as a model so that they can hear whether its slowest or slower. (Martie in a video talkback)

With careful teacher orchestration, the immersion in meaning quality to these computer-based activities are effectively punctuated by attention drawn to the forms of words, sentences, and texts representing the focus and substance of talk and action. Our observations reveal a great deal of talk and activity punctuated by something weve come to call point talk where what is being spoken about is pointed to on the screen with either the mouse or the index finger. As such, learner attention is continually drawn to various forms of language and the visual objects and actions these represent.

Challenge

One of the optimal conditions for language learning in an instructional context is that learners be challenged by materials and activities that are just beyond their current level of ability (Johnson 1995; Krashen 1982). Driving Kathy and Martie's moment-by-moment decision-making processes is their continual judging of teachable opportunities in light of an individual students current level of ability. As such, they are maintaining and continually making adjustments to an internal syllabus of sorts for each of their learners. This is attested to in several of the teachers comments regarding their instructional decision making.

Thats one of the theories, the ESL theories, its called i + 1. You always try to go beyond what they already can do so that you are challenging them to grow faster. They dont have a lot of time. You really have to push them to learn the language. You dont have time to spend a lot of time at one level, you just keep pushing them as far as you can. (Martie)

Valuing the Native Language and Culture

In addition to valuing each learners individual qualities and experiences and working to integrate these into the ongoing instructional stream, the ESL teachers value children's native language and recognize the fact that cognitive growth in and through that language is critical to their overall development as literate thinkers. The first language is viewed as the linguistic and conceptual link that teachers and learners make use of; learners bring strengths and skills from their other language and cultural heritage. Teachers value this bilingualism and biliteracy as an important asset.

I have another [software program], Sticky Bear Reading, which my first graders use and that [has] the option to go into Spanish too, . . . often times the Spanish speakers will choose that. They dont want to forget their native languages. And thats a perfect opportunity for them to become literate in Spanish. With the first graders, they may never have seen these words written in Spanish before and [I] think thats great when they want to see what the printed word looks like in Spanish. (Kathy)

In addition to conducting ESL "pullout" sessions with their students, these teachers are also actively involved in "push-in" activities whereby they accompany their students in their mainstream classes to provide support and assistance as needed. Pushing in also affords them opportunities to monitor their learners progress and needs and gives them a chance to keep up with the mainstream curriculum. In both cases, the ESL teacher is seen as a powerful asset in the mainstream classes. They are viewed as experts in much more than English as a second language:

I push in to their programs (mainstream classes) to enrich anything that has to do with multiculturalism. Theyll ask me could you come in and explain certain holidays or certain activities that go on around the world, that type of thing. (Martie)

To further integrate and encourage the heritage language, parents and other relatives are frequently invited to work around the computer with the children using both English and the native language.

We invite the parents in the Fall, and the parents come in and they are partners with their children for that period; and then in the springtime I like to arrange a special time for parents to come back. . . . that time the parents work one on one with their children on the computer. They can construct stories in their native language and they are excited about it. (Kathy)

E-Text in Action: Three Narratives

In the following section, we present three narratives that serve as detailed illustrations of these teachers and their students at work with e-texts. The first is a sample of grade 2 students using the Once Upon a Time software package; the second a 4th grade class using Oregon Trail; the final narrative is from the 8th grade using a program called Widget Workshop.

Once Upon A Time

Once Upon A Time is authoring software with which students can write a story based on a particular theme. There is a range of environments to choose from, items that can be placed into the environment, and a space for writing. When a student selects an item, she hears the word "spoken" and then decides whether to include it and its accompanying picture in her story. In this way students construct a story to accompany a sequence of pictures that they create.

Kathy's room is small and narrow with six computers arranged along the two longer walls. Despite the restricted space, the room is bright and attractively decorated with students' work. Juana, a Spanish speaker, and Chang, a Korean speaker, are paired at a computer where they are working to create a story about a farm. Chang is an experienced user of the program and Kathy has purposely put him with Juana so that he will be able to show her how to use it, and to do it in "kid talk." Kathy also feels that Juana has something to offer Chang since she speaks more English at home and has a better grasp of word order:

Chang speaks Korean when he goes home. He speaks Korean and English. Juana doesn't speak much Spanish at home. So she hears more English than Chang does and I think her word order in English, in her spoken English, would be a better model than Chang's is. So, I think he could help her learn to use the program. But she could help with the word order.

While Kathy is happy with Chang's ability, she feels that Juana is behind the group in terms of reading ability. She scored at the 11th percentile on the Stanford Reading Comprehension Test. She hopes that by having Juana write and then read back her own work her skills may improve:

She's a quiet little gal, but she doesn't have the ability to read as well as her peers in her classroom, as well as the peers in the ESL group with Chang and Alicia. Her writing seems to be stronger than her reading, and so if I can give her an opportunity to see words printed correctly she can model those and also to help her fix any errors she has in her written work it will help her when she reads it back, to see it written correctly, without errors. So, I don't consider her an advanced student yet for that reason, because, [she doesn't have] . . . that total picture, that listening, speaking, reading, writing.

Kathy has chosen a farm topic for this class as a result of the congruency forms she regularly distributes to the mainstream teachers, in which she asks them for up-coming themes and for skills with which the non-native English speaking students need help. Having been a regular 2nd grade teacher for five years she said she knows the curriculum well. Her objective for this unit (which took place over several class periods) was to work with the students to write a simple text with correct punctuation and with a number of sentences going together to make up a paragraph.

Kathy believes that computers are very helpful to her in achieving these goals. Programs like Once Upon A Time provide an array of flexible vocabulary features that connect print, sound, and graphic in ways that she believes can help improve reading ability:

Well, I think with the vocabulary word portion of this computer program, she has a listing of maybe 40 or 50 vocabulary words. And she can click on a word and it will be pronounced for her, and then if she chose . . . she would have to type in those letters exactly, and then the picture would appear. So if it were a horse, maybe she could read the word horse, but still she would have to type in h-o-r-s-e in order to get the horse, to be able to manipulate that animal. And if she did not know how to read that word, she could click on it and it would be read for her, so she could hear the spoken word. She would have a chance to spell, type the spoken word, and then manipulate that animal and then construct a sentence where she could put that word in the sentence. So I think that will help her improve her reading skills.

Kathy also believes that computer tasks can provide something unique (or at least something that is difficult to provide ordinarily) in that they create an environment where the students are motivated towards the achievement of products they can take pride in. This motivation inspires the whole pattern of interaction:

What we're seeing right now on video, had they been in their classroom, they easily could have just been sitting and listening and not interacting, not saying anything. They could easily be overlooked in a classroom just by being quiet, well-behaved children. I think in here, the dialog that we have, the learning, the pride of learning to do something new, accomplishing something, I think that was a beneficial half-hour for all of us. . . rather than giving the children a blank piece of paper and saying "Okay, I want you to write a story, or draw some pictures and then write a story about it," being the well-behaved, polite, children that they are, you know, I'm sure they would have done what I asked, because that was a task that I had assigned. But with a computer it just opened up a world. Juana was able to choose the background, first of all, that she wanted. And then choose vocabulary words, and the pictures, she had the option to erase, delete some of the pictures she had chosen if she didn't want to use them.

The classroom sequence we videotaped and analyzed is characterized by an alternating sequence of teacher-student and student-student interactions as Kathy moves around the room helping different dyads on computer. She organizes her dyads so that the students have clear roles to play when she is absent and this provides a structure in which problem solving becomes a cooperative venture despite the fact that one student has control of the computer and the story being generated. What follows is a detailed account of the first half-hour of the farm unit.

Kathy begins by introducing the activity to Juana and Chang and enlists Chang's help as "teacher" while she circulates to other groups in the room. Chang immediately begins to take on the role of instructor as he issues a series of short directives:

Chang: Click on it.

Juana: What?

Chang: Background. Right there. Yeah, click on it. Hold it. See it goes on the farm. Back up to there. If you want pictures just push this.

These directives are accompanied by much pointing to the screen. The gestures provide visual support for Juana and Chang's negotiation of meaning. What is also notable is that Juana retains her control over what finally happens on screen by keeping her hand on the mouse. This forces Chang to use language rather than demonstrate by taking control of the computer. With Chang's guidance, Juana brings up a farm background on the screen.

Kathy returns and helps the dyad find an animal to place into the farm background. Her first concern is that Chang might be rushing Juana through the screen options without giving her a chance to understand them. She asks Chang how the computer might be able to help with unfamiliar words and then suggests that Juana give it a try. Juana clicks on the word "bull," which she does not understand and Kathy carefully takes her through the steps of typing the letters and clicking on them for a picture of a bull to appear.

Kathy: Just one second. Let's take a look at that bull first of all. What would you say a bull is?

Chang: It's like a dog, but it just gots horns.

Juana: It's like a cow.

Kathy: It is like a cow. Do you think it's a boy or a girl?

Chang: Girl.

Juana: Boy.

Kathy: Well let's see. If it's a girl. What gives milk?

Both: Cow.

Kathy: A cow. And a cow would be a girl. This would be a boy. B for boy, B for bull. Here we have a bull. Would you like a bull in your story Juana?

Juana: Dog.

Kathy: Would you like a bull in your story?

Juana: No.

In this exchange we see Kathy adopting a scaffolding approach to questioning. While she knows the answers to her own questions, she does not evaluate but instead uses Juana's answers to scaffold further questions. Furthermore, while she has assumed control of the interaction she has not taken control of the topic. She ends the sequence with a genuinely dialogic question to which Juana answers "no." After a considerable amount of time spent on the word "bull," Juana decides that she wants a dog rather than a bull in her story.

Kathy walks away to another group and Chang now tells Juana how to color her dog. He suggests brown but Juana insists she wants a black dog. Again we see Juana emphasizing her ownership over the story.

Kathy comes back and discusses the positioning and size of the dog. Chang takes the mouse to show how to position the dog and Kathy questions him so that what he did can become clearer to Juana.

Kathy: How do you think you'd move that dog over there?

Chang: Like this. [Chang moves the cursor with the mouse.]

Kathy: What did you do Chang?

Chang: I clicked on the dog.

Kathy: And then what did you do to make it move? What did you do with your hand?

Chang: I touched the dog and I was moving the mouse.

Kathy: Could you move the dog Juana? Let's see you move that.

Juana positions her dog but is unhappy with the size.

Chang: Click it shrink.

Kathy: What does shrink mean?

Chang: It's going to get smaller.

Juana: Oh, yeah.

Kathy: Is that a good size?

Juana: Yeah.

Kathy: Do you want any more dogs in your picture?

Juana: No.

Kathy immediately picks up the unfamiliar word "shrink" and again uses Chang to explain the meaning to Juana before handing back topic control to her.

The next time Kathy is away, Chang tells Juana how to put flowers into the picture and then how to color them. When Kathy returns she introduces the writing activity. First she instructs Juana directly about how to get a vocabulary list from the program and it is quite clear that Juana has difficulty reading the words.

Kathy: Can you read some of the words?

Juana: Nope.

Kathy: I'll bet you can.

Juana: Sleep, sleep.

Kathy: It looks like "sleep," but it's a sheep. That's an animal on the farm isn't it?

Juana: Uh huh.

Kathy: First letter?

Juana: S S

Kathy: You can just continue with the first letter then honey.

Juana: Sun, T. Tree. Is that truck?

Kathy: Yes it is a truck. Click on it and see. [Juana clicks. Computer says "truck"] You're right.

Juana: My dad has a white truck and a white car.

Kathy: You might want to put a truck in your picture.

Here we see a student on the verge of literacy, sounding out letters and trying to get meaning. When a familiar word (truck) appears, Kathy accepts the apparently off-task comment of Juana and suggests that she incorporate it into her story. Then Kathy asks that they work on a sentence while she spends time with another group.

Chang now tells Juana how to begin writing her name and the two students interact around the task of getting Juana's name on the screen.

Chang: Write your name. Hold shift. With the J [points to the keyboard].

Juana: I have to hold shift again?

Chang: No just spell your name. That's the name. U - A.

Juana: I know, I know, I know.

Kathy reappears and helps Juana with her sentence. While the sentence itself is simple, "Juana has a farm," the fact that it is on computer leads to considerable interaction where the context, the words on the screen, the keyboard, and the software provide the reasons to talk.

Juana: I forgot have you erase this thing for F. [points to screen] I forgot to put the space.

Kathy: Okay. You push your left arrow one time [points to keyboard]. Now press the spacebar and you push your right arrow [points to keyboard]. Push it one time. There. Now you can put these in the story. What have you written so far?

Juana: Juana has a farm.

Kathy: Then you've got the F there. Finish writing farm. Do you know how to spell farm?

Juana: No.

Kathy: Look up here [points to screen]. Do you see "farm" written anywhere? Up here? We called your story "Farm" and you are on page one. Can you find the word "farm"?

Juana: [points to screen] Farm page one.

Again although the discourse is "teacherly" in the sense that Kathy already knows the answers to all the questions she asks, it is has a rich dialogic quality as both the participants are working together to complete the on-screen task. Having the computer as a mediator of the linguistic interaction results in part of the focus being on the mediating tool and less on the correctness of Juana's response.

Several comments can be made about this short sequence of classroom interaction. First of all it is undeniably real. The students have been set a task that involves the manipulation of complex technology and as a result the talk is mostly about how to use it. While the story itself is the locus of relatively abstract language (there is little of the "here and now" quality of language to the topic of writing about a farm in a classroom), the computer screen anchors and brings to life what would otherwise be wholly abstract. It is with the computer as a tool that both the production and comprehension of language become real and meaningful. One feature of any computer software is that there is little room for ambiguity or tolerance of error. To progress to the next step of any program, the preceding one must be completed in a precise way. Kathy uses this feature as an accuracy tool for writing when she has Juana type out unfamiliar words in order to see the graphic equivalent.

In this interaction Juana has been given control of the computer. She is writing her story about a farm and despite her lack of language and computer skills her story idea remains the dominant force in her decision making. She is directed by Chang and instructed and questioned by Kathy but ultimately retains control of her topic. She decides not to take a bull, where to position her dog, what size and what color to make it. Kathy and Chang are both more skilled participants but they respect Juana's ownership over her story. With a computer, what appears on the screen has a publicness that is seldom evident with handwritten text and yet it is also privately controlled. Thus there can be public discussion without conflict of ownership. By organizing the activity so that Juana had control of both the mouse and the keyboard, Kathy ensured that she would not be relegated to the role of passive observer.

As well as being challenged linguistically, Juana is also challenged communicatively as she is the person controlling what appears on screen. She is obliged to comprehend Chang's and Kathy's messages perfectly as the machine has no tolerance for ambiguity. With a computer task it is not possible for learners to use any of the avoidance strategies that are normally used to mask comprehension failure and lubricate the wheels of conversation. Chang is also challenged, though admittedly to a lesser extent. His role is that of a teacher to "teach" Juana how to use the program. This is not an easy task as it requires a use of language (directives) that students rarely have an opportunity to employ. Again, with the computer as a mediating tool, he is required to be precise and clear in his expression of meaning. He does, of course, have the use of gesture to anchored referents to aid him and we see this in the constant "points to screen" notes on the transcript.

As is evident in the excerpts above, the discourse between Kathy and her students in this sequence is never completely monologic or dialogic. Kathy never asks "test questions" which are then overtly evaluated and yet she does ask many questions to which she already knows the answers. While there is a surface level of monologism, beneath this there is a rich dialogic structure as all three participants share in the construction of the story. Juana, although she has the least knowledge, is the ultimate arbiter of what is accepted; Chang adopts the role of a proxy teacher; and Kathy uses her power (the power that all teachers have) to prompt the students to express themselves and to scaffold the acquisition of new literacy and computer skills. In this process, the computer screen both brings the topic to life and demands comprehension. It also facilitates both student control and the appropriation of different roles.

Oregon Trail

A 4th grade group of four ESL students are working on the simulation Oregon Trail. The students must choose professions and with varying amounts of food and money embark on the journey from the Midwest to Oregon. Along the way they encounter disease, hunger and the other hardships that were common during the years the trail was used.

Kathy chose this program because it linked with a 4th grade theme about life on the prairie:

We now are reading one of the Little House on the Prairie books, On the Banks of Plum Creek, . . . a trade book from the 4th grade classroom. I chose this one purposely just so they could see what it was like to travel back in this time and to actually meet a family. And I taped an episode from the television, A Little House on the Prairie episode two weeks ago. They viewed that in class and they had a chance to meet that particular family and see what the surroundings looked like at that time and the problems they had. Now we're back reading our novel and we're continuing back also with the Oregon Trail game. So it all ties right in.

Kathy is very aware that children tend to rush through the program to achieve the end goal, without thinking about options and the implications of their choices. She therefore continuously interacts with the students to slow things down and to encourage them to explore the on-screen information before making decisions.

Rather than just have them play the game where it's just easy to move and take time out, continue, go hunting, I wanted them to really think about their choices ahead of time and not just click on an occupation and just quickly get into it. I wanted them to take the time to use the help button and read it and understand that there are different advantages that the different occupations have and just to get them more into the reading and the understanding of the entire game.

I just want them to see what is available to them on the screen. Where the computer will keep track of how much food is remaining, what their pace is, the health of everyone just so they get an awareness for the entire part of the screen and not just follow the little red line of the wagon train.

With her 4th grade students, Kathy intervenes not only because she wants them to extend their vocabulary. She also wants them to be more aware of their surroundings:

To make sure they understand the meaning instead of just moving on because they could have just sat down and started this game right from the beginning and not talked about anything and they still would have traveled the trail. And they might have had the very same outcome, but I think it's just important to see all of the things that are going on in the course of an adventure, a journey, just day to day life instead of just walking around staring at the ground. Just look around and see what's going on around you and how's that going to affect your own situation.

Kathy feels that the computer offers several advantages over text-based lessons. First there is the way in which information can be accessed quickly with explanations of unfamiliar words only a keystroke away "because it's quick, the information's available to them within a second." Any problem with text would be much more disruptive.

If we're working at a table with books and a child had a question we might have to stop everybody and we'd all have to focus on the one child's problem, but this way they can still hear what's going on with a classmate but continue on with their own journey.

As with the younger students, Kathy finds that when normally quiet children work on computer, they open up and become animated. "Often times these are the children who are real quiet back in the classroom. You wouldn't think that to hear them and see them interact."

Kathy begins by grouping all four students around one computer and asking questions that recall information from a previous lesson on the Oregon Trail. She has a map for the students to see where the trail is and she emphasizes that it was a real trail. On the previous occasion, the students had chosen occupations, and she comes back to check that they have all understood what an occupation is.

Kathy: What's that thing called? Occupation, what does that mean?

Her questions, though, go beyond checking for meaning as she asks them why they chose what they did.

Kathy: Was there a special reason why you chose what you chose?

Tyrone: I chose a doctor because he can . . . it helps peoples.

She then moves to helping the students navigate (talk about the software).

Kathy: For your job. It's your job. Okay. And do we push that help button?

Anna: Yeah [points to screen].

Kathy: And what did that do for us?

From here she moves into the simulation (talk inside the software).

Kathy: Something breaks and you'll be a good carpenter.

Anna: Me too.

Kathy: You too? How much money did you start with?

Then she switches out of the simulation to congratulate Bridget on her use of the computer hardware.

Kathy: Gee Bridget I like the way you're using the mouse to show us right where we are. It helps to point so we can track our reading. How about the carpenter?

These excerpts show how Kathy moves fluidly across different types of discourse as she interacts with the students.

Next the students divide into pairs on two computers and begin traveling the trail. One pair soon comes to a river. To make the river crossing more meaningful Kathy has a ruler ready so Anna and Tyrone can measure the depth.

Tyrone: You must cross the river to get (?). The river is 610 feet wide and 2½ feet deep. How high and deep is it?

Kathy: Well let's get a ruler and measure that. [Anna gets the ruler and measures] 2½ feet deep. I would measure it right from the ground. Right from where your feet are. One . . . two . . . and then take that bottom one and go up ½ foot.

Tyrone: ½ foot right there?

Kathy: Okay. So it's about [points to screen] . . . how deep it is.

Tyrone: So we could just walk through it [points to screen].

Anna: Yeah.

Kathy: Let's see how you make out.

Tyrone: Oh my gosh.

Anna: Oh no.

Kathy: Did you make it?

Tyrone: Yeah.

Anna: Yeah. We almost went all the way down.

By now the students have totally entered into the spirit of the simulation and they separate again so that each one can experience the simulation individually. Their language expresses their excitement and involvement with the program. Tyrone even spontaneously asks a math question in his effort to gauge the extent of the obstacle facing him.

As the students continue on the trail they encounter challenges ranging from snake bites to broken wagons. The students have total control over their discourse as they "live" in the adventure. At times Kathy enters into the spirit and interacts with the students at this level.

Bridget: Oh Tyrone, you got snake bitten.

Tyrone: Ouch.

Bridget: Tyrone got snake bitten.

Kathy: Hey, I'm curious these are the doctors over here and their health is poor? Somebody drowned? What happened to these doctors?

Anna: Tyrone and the ox is sick. Tyrone is bitten by a snake.

Tyrone: Our wagon's delayed. Come on. Come on.

Bridget: Everybody's good.

Kathy: Oh boy. Good going carpenter.