SHARE
An Electronic Magazine by Omar Villarreal and Marina Kirac ©
Year
6
Number 151
8600 SHARERS are reading
this issue of SHARE this week
__________________________________________________________
Thousands of
candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not
be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being
SHARED
__________________________________________________________
Dear SHARERS,
We all know there are countless times when words are not enough. Words will always be poor to express extreme feelings and emotions such as bliss or deep sorrow. Today is one of those times. How can we express with words how we feel at the unexpected death of our dear friend and colleague Maria Elena Gomez last Tuesday?
Marina and I shared with Mariela some of those happy days at College when
we were all much younger
and more recently I was fortunate enough to have her as my assistant lecturer in Evaluation and as a decided and energetic collaborator in the organization of the 30 Year Anniversary Conference of our alma mater, the Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico.
All through these years Mariela won a place in our hearts and in the
hearts of her innumerable students of all ages. She was a devoted and skilful
teacher with an incredible sensitivity to help those that most needed her
encouragement,her support and that big smile of hers that made everyone´s day brighter.
We will all remember her like that, as a generous soul, a superb teacher and a
loyal friend.
Love
Omar and
Marina
______________________________________________________________________
In SHARE
151
1.- Stephen Krashen on Comprehensible
Output
2.-
Learning to Read and Whole Language Ideology.
3.-
Alternatives to Traditional
Assessment.
4.- First National Meeting of Teacher-Training
Colleges.
5.- First AES International Congress for ELT
Professionals.
6.- Ninth
International Conference for Teachers of
English.
7.- David Nunan at Licenciatura en Lengua
Inglesa UTN.
8.- Journalism applied to the teaching of
English.
9.- A Seminar on John Fowles and Graham
Swift at Universidad Nacional de Cordoba.
10.- News
from ELT Team.
11.- Pearson Education en el Aula
Bonaerense.
12.- Peru TESOL.
13.- IX Jornadas Nacionales sobre Normativa del
Idioma Español.
14.- Storytelling
Adventure in San Telmo!
15.- Columna de “Idiomas, Arte y Cultura” en
Radio Argentina.
16.- Word
son Words: Grants for Teachers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.- STEPHEN KRASHEN ON COMPREHENSIBLE
OUTPUT
Dr. Stephen Krashen
has generously offered to SHARE this article with all of
you.
Comprehensible Output
By
Stephen
Krashen
System 26: 175-182,
1998
The comprehensible
output (CO) hypothesis states that we acquire language when we attempt to
transmit a message but fail and have to try again. Eventually, we arrive at the
correct form of our utterance, our conversational partner finally understands,
and we acquire the new form we have produced.
The originator of the
comprehensible output hypothesis, Merrill Swain (Swain, 1985), does not claim
that CO is responsible for all or even most of our language competence. Rather,
the claim is that "sometimes, under some conditions, output facilitates second
language learning in ways that are different form, or enhance, those of input"
(Swain and Lapkin, 1995, p. 371). A look at the data, however, shows that even
this weak claim is hard to support.
The
Scarcity Argument
A problem all output
hypotheses have is that output is surprisingly rare (Krashen, 1994). In the case
of CO, the problem is especially severe.
A recent confirmation
of the scarcity of output is Ellis, Tanaka, and Yamazaki (1994), who examined
vocabulary acquisition under three conditions, tasks in which EFL students heard
(1) "premodified" input (input recorded from a task performed with a native
speaker and non-native speaker who could request clarification), (2)
interactionally modified input (the non-native students could interact with the
native speaker), or (3) unmodified input (input recorded from a native speaker
doing the task with another native speaker). Of interest to us here is the
finding that "of the 42 learners in the IM (interactionally modified) group,
only seven engaged in meaning negotiation. The others simply listened" (p. 211).
Even when acquirers do
talk, they do not often make the kind of adjustments the CO hypothesis claims
are useful in acquiring new forms.
Pica (1988) concluded
that instances of comprehensible output were "relatively infrequent" (p. 45). In
her study of ten one-hour interactions between low level ESL acquirers and
native speakers (teachers), only 87 potential instances of comprehensible output
were found, that is, interactions in which the native speaker requested
"confirmation, clarification, or repetition of the NNS utterance" (p. 93). These
87 interactions contained only 44 cases in which the non-native speaker modified
his or her output (about four per hour), and of these 44, only 13 modifications
involved grammatical form, about one per hour.
In Pica, Holliday,
Lewis, and Morgenhaller (1989), intermediate ESL acquirers interacted with
native speakers. Because the situation in Pica (1988) did not promote
negotiation (an interview), some of the conversations in this study were in
situations designed to require negotiation and comprehensible output. Of 1952
native speaker utterances, 327 were "signals indicating clarification or
confirmation of what the NNS had said" (p. 74). In reaction to these 327
utterances, the non-native speakers produced 116 responses containing "modified
output." In other words, they produced comprehensible output in response to
about 6% of the native speaker's utterances (116/1952).1
Interactions were also
contrived to promote negotiation in Van den Branden (1997). Eleven and 12 year
old speakers and acquirers of Dutch interacted with peers or with a teacher in
an activity in which speakers had to describe a drawing to a partner. In
peer-peer dyads, 51 instances of negotiation of meaning were recorded, and of
these, the speaker modified their output 20 times. In peer-teacher dyads, there
were 49 instances of negotiation of meaning and 20 instances of alteration of
output. In both cases, this amounted to about one every five minutes. We do not
know if the alteration improved the grammatical accuracy of the output; we are
only told that "these modifications often involved, or included, formal
modifications ..." (p. 616). Even if every case resulted in improvement,
however, this data confirms that even in contrived situations, comprehensible
output is infrequent.
Lyster and Ranta
(1997) recorded 18.3 hours of French immersion language arts and subject matter
lessons involving fourth and fifth graders. The lessons contained a total of
3268 student turns, of which about 1/3 (1104, or 34%) had at least one error.
While teachers provided some kind of feedback to 62% of these errors, only 73
were in the form of a clarification request, "a feedback type that can refer to
problems in either comprehensibility or accuracy, or both" (p. 47). Of these 73,
20 were followed by student repair, or correction. This amounts to about one per
hour, a result very close to that reported by Pica (1988) for conversations. In
this case, however, only the one student producing the repair had the benefit of
comprehensible output.
The situation in
writing is similar. Cumming (1990) examined the think-aloud protocols of second
language writers, hypothesizing that instances in which writers appeared to be
attending to both form and meaning at the same time are potential instances for
language acquisition, according to the comprehensible output hypothesis. Only
30% of the verbal reports made by the writers in his sample were of this kind
(p. 490). In addition, the nature of the episodes makes it unlikely that they
play a major role in language acquisition: Most of the episodes were writers'
searching for the right word, or searching for first language equivalents. The
latter is the familiar strategy of falling back on the first language when
competence is lacking in the second language (Newmark, 1966).
In Swain and Lapkin
(1995), grade 8 early French immersion subjects were asked to write a short
essay in French (one to two paragraphs) and then edit it, and to "think aloud"
as they made decisions. For the draft and editing stage combined, there were
"190 occasions in which students consciously recognized a linguistic problem as
a result of producing, or trying to produce, the target language" (p. 384). This
amounts to an average of 10.6 per student. If students wrote a short essay
everyday (which they do not), this would mean about ten chances to improve
through writing per day - not very much. As was the case with Cummings' study,
many of the decisions were lexical (looking for the right word), not grammatical
(50% in the first draft). In addition, Swain and Lapkin note that there was no
evidence that any of the episodes they described led to improvement.
Acquisition Without Output
There are numerous
studies that confirm that we can develop extremely high levels of language and
literacy competence without any language production at all (Krashen, 1994).
Laboratory studies show that subjects typically acquire small but significant
amounts of new vocabulary knowledge from a single exposure to an unfamiliar word
in a comprehensible text (Nagy, Herman, and Anderson, 1985), enough to account
for expected vocabulary growth, and similar results have been reported for
second language development (Pitts, White, and Krashen, 1989; Day, Omura, and
Hiramatsu, 1991; Dupuy and Krashen, 1993). It has been argued that a similar
effect exists for spelling (Krashen, 1989). In addition, there are case
histories of those who have developed very high levels of competence from input
alone (Richard Boydell suffered from cerebral palsy and acquired language
through listening and reading alone, see Krashen, 1985; Malcolm X and Richard
Wright credit their literacy development to wide reading, discussed in Krashen,
1993).
Ellis (1995) is an
additional analysis of Ellis et. al. (1994), discussed above, and provides
another instance of acquisition without output. The "premodified" group, a group
that did no speaking at all, made modest but clear gains in vocabulary, gaining,
in fact, more words per minute than the group that interacted with the native
speaker.2
Does CO
Lead To Language Acquisition?
Nobuyoshi and Ellis
(1993) claim to have provided data showing that comprehensible output results in
actual improvement. In their study, six adult EFL students in Japan of "fairly
low-level proficiency" but who were "capable of using at least some past tense
verb forms correctly" (p. 206) were asked to participate in a jigsaw task with
their teacher in which they described actions in pictures that, they were told,
occurred the previous weekend or previous day. During the first session of the
study, the three experimental subjects received requests for clarification if
the verb was not in the past tense or if the past tense was incorrectly formed.
During the second session, one week later, they received only general requests
for clarification (when the teacher did not understand). The three comparison
subjects received only general requests for clarification each time.
Nobuyoshi and Ellis
report that comparison subjects did not improve their past tense accuracy. Two
experimental subjects (E1 and E2) were able to improve their performance in
response to requests for clarification at the first session, but the third
experimental subject (E3) did not. Nobuyoshi and Ellis claim that E1 and E2
sustained their gains to time 2, with E1 increasing accuracy from an original
level of 31% to 89% and E2 increasing from an original 45% to 62%. Nobuyoshi and
Ellis conclude that their study "provides some support for the claim that
'pushing' learners to improve the accuracy of their production results not only
in immediate improved performance but also in gains in accuracy over time" (p.
208).
As Nobuyoshi and Ellis
point out, however, their conclusions are based on a very small sample size. In
addition, they are based on a very low number of obligatory occasions. E1, who
showed the clearest gains, went from 4 correct out of 13 at time 1 to 8 correct
out of 9 at time 2. E2 went from 9 correct out of 20 at time 1 to 16 correct out
of 26 at time 2. E1's gains are statistically significant (Fisher Exact Test, 2
tail, p = .0115) but E2's gains are not (chi square = .69). Thus, for one
subjects there was no evidence of the value of comprehensible output (E3), and
for another, gains were not statistically significant. Data supporting a central
hypothesis should be made of sterner stuff.
Note also that all
three subjects had studied the past tense rule, and had been clearly focused on
it in session 1. It is reasonable to expect that when subjects are focused on
form, then put back in the same environment, they will be focused on form again,
especially if the conversational partner is their teacher. The significant
effect on E1, in other words, may have been a performance effect - E1 was simply
more inclined to try to use a consciously learned rule for the past tense and
was a more successful Monitor user than E2 or E3.
Van den Brandon's
subjects (Van den Brandon, 1997, discussed earlier) who participated in sessions
that encouraged negotiation of meaning increased their output relative to a
control group that did not engage in interaction, but were not superior in
grammatical accuracy. Each subject, however, only had seven to nine minutes of
interaction.
Tarone and Liu (1995)
suggest that CO may have played a role in the second language development of
Liu's subject "Bob." Bob was recorded interacting with peers, with teachers, and
with an "adult-friend" (Liu). Tarone and Liu note that language use was much
more complex in the latter interactions, and, in general, "new structures appear
first in interactions between Bob and the researcher, spread to the interactions
with his peers, and appear last in his interaction with his teacher" (p. 119).
They note that it is likely that Liu provided Bob with more complex input, but
also suggest that Bob's attempts to produce CO in interacting with Liu played a
role. While interacting with Liu, Bob used English in a much wider range of
speech acts than in the other situations, and this may have pushed Bob to "go
beyond the limits of his interlanguage competence" in production" (p. 121).
Tarone and Liu show that the CO hypothesis, as well as the Input Hypothesis, is
consistent with what is known about Bob's development. As they note (p. 123),
data is lacking on the frequency of CO, which prevents us from determining
whether CO resulted in language development and whether Bob produced significant
quantities of CO.
The
Discomfort of CO
The CO hypothesis
predicts that we acquire language when there is a communicative breakdown and we
are "pushed to use alternative means to get across .. the message ... precisely,
coherently, and appropriately" (Swain, 1985, pp. 248-249). In addition to the
research that shows that CO is an unlikely candidate, there is additional
evidence that "pushing" students to speak is unpleasant for them. When asked
what aspects of foreign language classes are the most anxiety-provoking,
students put "talking" at the top of the list (Young, 1990). Laughrin-Sacco
(1992) reported that for students in beginning French classes, "for nearly every
student ... speaking was the highest anxiety-causing activity" (p. 314).
Ten "anxious" foreign
language students interviewed by Price (1991) stated that their greatest source
of anxiety "was having to speak the target language in front of their peers" (p.
313). Of great interest here is the finding that another source of stress "was
the frustration of not being able to communicate effectively" (p. 105).
These results suggest
that it is "pushed output," having to utilize structures they have not yet
acquired, under demanding conditions, that students find uncomfortable. Methods
based on comprehensible output put students in this situation constantly.
CO and
the Interaction Hypothesis
The CO hypothesis is
linked to what is sometimes called the "interaction hypothesis," the hypothesis
that we acquire language from interacting with others. As stated in this way,
the interaction hypothesis is vague - Is interaction necessary or just helpful?
Is it the only way to acquire language or one way to acquire language? Also,
what occurs during interaction that causes language acquisition?
I have argued that a
part of interaction that does not contribute to language acquisition is the
output produced by the language acquirer. In addition, there is evidence that a
strong version of the interaction hypothesis, one that asserts that interaction
is necessary for language acquisition, is not correct. Such a hypothesis denies
that acquisition can occur from reading and listening. In addition to the
massive data showing that reading can promote language development, the results
of Ellis et. al. (1994), discussed above, confirm that acquisition is possible
without actually participating in the interaction. A weaker version of the
interaction hypothesis is that interaction can be a good source of
comprehensible input (Krashen, 1982).
The Need
Hypothesis
The CO hypothesis is
closely related to the "need hypothesis." I have never seen the need hypothesis
discussed explicitly in print, but it is widely assumed to be true. The need
hypothesis says that we acquire language only when we "need" to communicate,
when we need to make ourselves understood. If this hypothesis is correct,
language acquirers must be forced to speak the second language. The need
hypothesis thus implies that "submersion" is a good thing, in that it forces
students to try to communicate.
The need hypothesis is not
correct. An excellent counter-argument was presented by Garrison Kieler on the
Prairie Home Companion, in a segment called "The
According to the input
hypothesis, need can be helpful when it puts the acquirer in a position to get
comprehensible input. All the need in the world, however, will not result in
language acquisition if there is no comprehensible input. In addition,
interesting and comprehensible input will result in language acquisition whether
need is present or not.
Summary
and Conclusion
The comprehensible
output hypothesis has numerous difficulties.
- Output and
especially comprehensible output is too scarce to make a real contribution to
linguistic competence.
- High levels of
linguistic competence are possible without
output.
- There is no direct
evidence that comprehensible output leads to language acquisition.
In addition, there is
some evidence that suggests that students do not enjoy being "pushed" to speak.
The original impetus
for the CO hypothesis was the observation that students in French immersion,
despite years of input, were not as good as observers felt they should be in
grammatical aspects of their second language (Swain, 1985). Input, it was
suggested, was therefore not enough. It can be argued, however, that we haven't
yet given comprehensible input a real chance. We have yet to see how students
will do if their classes are filled with comprehensible input, if they have
access to a great deal of very interesting reading and listening materials
(films, tapes), and if the acquisition situation is genuinely free of anxiety.
(There is evidence that children in French immersion do very little pleasure
reading in their second language; Romney, Romney and Menzies, 1995).
Given the consistent
evidence for comprehensible input (Krashen, 1994) and failure of other means of
developing language competence, providing more comprehensible input seems to be
a more reasonable strategy than increasing output.
Notes
1.
Swain (1995) notes
that in this study "in response to clarification and confirmation requests, over
one-third of the learners' utterances were modified either semantically or
morphosyntactically" (p. 131). This is correct. My concern here, however, is how
frequent CO is in general. CO in response to requests for clarification was
frequent in this study, but not overall.
2.
As noted earlier, only
seven of the 42 subjects in the interaction group actually spoke: Ellis et. al.
found, however, that these seven "did not enjoy a clear advantage in either
comprehension or vocabulary over those who just listened" (p. 212).
References
Cumming, A. (1990)
Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written
Communication 7, 482-511.
Day, R., Omura, C.,
and Hiramatsu, M. (1991) Incidental vocabulary learning and reading. Reading in
a Foreign Language 7, 541-551.
Dupuy, B. and Krashen,
S. (1993) Incidental vocabulary acquisition in French as a foreign language.
Applied Language Learning 4, 55-63.
Ellis, R. (1995)
Modified oral input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied Linguistics
16, 409-441.
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y.
and Yamazaki, A. (1994) Classroom interaction, comprehension, and L2 vocabulary
acquisition. Language Learning 44, 449-91.
Krashen, S. (1982) Principles
and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.
Krashen, S. (1985) The Input
Hypothesis: Issues and Implications.
Krashen, S. (1989) We
acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input
hypothesis. Modern Language Journal 73, 440-464.
Krashen, S. (1993) The Power of
Krashen, S. (1994) The input
hypothesis and its rivals. In Ellis, N. (Ed.) Implicit and Explicit Learning of
Languages, pp. 45-77.
Loughrin-Sacco, S.
(1992) More than meets the eye: An ethnography of an elementary French class.
Canadian Modern Language Review 49, 80-101.
Lyster, R.and Ranta,
L. (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in
communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 37-66.
Nagy, W., Herman, P.,
and Anderson, R. (1985) Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly
20, 233-253.
Newmark, L. (1966) How
not to interfere with language learning. International Journal of American
Linguistics 40, 77-83.
Nobuyoshi, J. and
Ellis, R. (1993) Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition.
ELT Journal 47, 203-210.
Pica, T. (1988)
Interactive adjustments as an outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language
Learning 38,45-73.
Pica, T., Holliday,
L., Lewis, N. and Morgenthaler, L. (1989) Comprehensible output as an outcome of
linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11,
63-90.
Pitts, M., White, H., and
Krashen, S. (1989) Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading: A
replication of the Clockwork
Price, M. (1991) The subjective
experience of foreign language anxiety: Interviews with highly anxious students.
In Horwitz,E. and Young, D. (Eds.), Language Anxiety, pp.101-108.
Romney, J.C., Romney, D., and
Menzies, H. (1995)
Swain, M. (1985) Communicative
competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its
development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language
Acquisition, pp. 235-256.
Swain, M. (1995) Three functions
of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. and Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.)
Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H.G.
Widdowson, pp. 125-144.
Swain, M. and Lapkin,
S. (1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step
towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16, 371-391.
Tarone, E. and Liu, G-Q. (1995)
Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In Cook,
G. and B. Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics:
Studies in Honor of H.G. Widdowson, pp. 107-124.
Van den Branden, K.
(1997) Effects of negotiation on language learners' output. Language Learning
47: 589-636.
Young, D. (1990) An
investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign
Language Annals 23, 539-553.
© by Stephen Krashen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.-
LEARNING TO READ AND WHOLE LANGUAGE
IDEOLOGY
Dr. Jeffrey Jones has generously sent us this contribution to SHARE with
all of you:
Learning
To Read and Whole Language Ideology
by Jeffrey M. Jones, M.D.,Ph.D.
Probably no other subject provokes such bizarre interactions between
teachers, school administrators, and parents as the selection of beginning
reading programs in American schools. Many districts have "closet phonics
teachers," who close the doors to their classrooms, get out their phonics-based
teaching materials, and teach their children how to read using phonics. When a
parent expresses chagrin over the lack of phonics in reading instruction or the
discovery that his child cannot read, school administrators typically say,
"There is lots of research to support our approach." The "approach" of course is
an "eclectic reading program" or "whole language program." The educators never
produce any concrete research to back up their assertions. But the parent is
invited to produce research that proves the educators wrong. This is a rather
stark role reversal. Shouldn't it be the education professional who is charged
with producing research to convince the parent? Hopefully this essay will make
life a little easier for parents caught in this predicament.
Basal reading programs are a complete package of reading materials (1).
They provide an entire reading curriculum (summarized in a "scope and sequence"
chart), instructional strategies for teaching reading (through teachers'
manuals), a graded anthology of readings for children (readers or primers), and
practice exercises (work sheets and workbooks). Basal reading programs are
organized by grade level with most programs beginning at kindergarten and
continuing through eighth grade. An entire basal reading program would make a
stack of books and papers four feet high. To develop one of these programs, a
large publishing company may invest up to $15 million. Needless to say many more
millions are earned yearly selling these programs so that there are vested
commercial interests in use of any particular program (1). The programs are
heavily marketed, with five well known programs having 70% of the American
market. (1,3)
Although educators often say teachers use whatever reading materials and
techniques work for them in beginning reading instruction, in fact commercial
basal programs drive reading instruction strongly. Studies have shown that basal
reading programs account for 75-90% of what goes on during reading periods in
elementary school classrooms (4). A number of classroom studies indicate that,
for the most part, teachers follow instructional strageties prescribed in a
given program's teachers' manuals and that students use the program's Readers
and workbook materials (5).
Parents need to be able to ask probing questions about basal programs
selected by their schools and about reading instruction in their childrens'
schools. “Becoming a Nation of
Readers” (BNR) is an excellent resource for interested parents (1). This
145-page monograph was prepared by the Commission of
Parents need to know that there is a group of educators who espouse a
pure whole language ideology for reading instruction that rejects use of phonics
and use of basal reading materials. I found it difficult to find a concise, logical
explication of whole language. These folks tend to prove points by speaking in
analogies. Because pure whole language is a set of beliefs to be acted upon and
defended, I think it is best termed an ideology. Whole language adherents
believe "language is whole" and that reading will happen if you just immerse
kids in language. More specifically they tend to believe: (a) written language
is language; (b) when a child is surrounded by speaking and naturally occuring
writings ("literature" by definition) the child will learn to read "incidently"
as a natural "personal" (psycholinguistic) and "social" (sociolinguistic)
experience; (c) use of phonics and prepared basal reading materials to teach
"skills" (used in a pejorative sense) will inhibit natural learning; (d) there
is a large orally transmitted (teacher to teacher, researcher to
researcher/teacher) and written body of research supporting (a) and (b); and (e)
teachers who choose to use whole language to teach reading must be supported or
society is infringing on their rights. Items (b) and (c) of this list appeals to
Piaget's philosophy and cognitive learning theories in a vague sort of way. Item
(e) seems to mix reading instruction into the teacher empowerment movement. I
assert that as bizarre as these ideas seem, when one strips away the flowery
rhetoric of whole language enthusiasts, the above five items constitute their
credo. I will offer you several exhibits to support my summation of their belief
system and then discuss each exhibit separately:
Exhibit A: Definition of whole language
according to Diane Stephens in Research on
Whole Language: Support
for a New Curriculum (10):
1. Learning in school
ought to incorporate what is known about learning outside of school.
2.
Teachers should base curricular decisions on what is known about language and
learning, should possess and be driven by a vision of literacy, should use
observation to inform teaching, and should reflect continuously.
3. Teachers
as professionals are entitled to a political context that empowers them as
informed decision makers.
Exhibit
B: Excerpts from "Whole
Language: What's New?" by Altwerger et al. (11):
[1] The key theoretical
premise for whole language is that the world over, babies acquire language
through actually using it, not through practicing its seperate parts until some
later date when the parts are assembled and the totality is finally used. The
major assumption is that the model of acquisition, through real use (not through
practice exercises), is the best model for thinking about and helping with the
learning of reading and writing.
[2] Language acquisition (both oral and
written) is seen as natural - - not in the sense of innate or inevitable
unfolding, but in the sense that when language (oral or written) is an integral
part of functioning of a community and is used around and with neophytes, it is
learned "incidentally"...
[3] Little use is made of materials written
specifically to teach reading and writing. Instead, whole language relies on
literature, on other print used for appropriate purposes (e.g. cake-mix
directions used for really making a cake, rather than for finding short vowels),
and on writing for varied purposes.
Exhibit C: Excerpts from "Twenty
Questions about Teaching Language," by Goodman and Goodman (12):
[1] Early in
our misuse research, we concluded that a story is easier to read than a page, a
page easier to read than a paragraph, a paragraph easier than a sentence, a
sentence easier than a word, and a word easier than a letter. Our research
continues to support this conclusion and we believe it to be true....
[2] It
is through errors...that we've learned that reading is a psycholinguistic
guessing game... The Hawaiian child who reads "He was one big fat duck" for "He
was a big fat duck" is letting us in on the ability to read one kind of dialect
and translate into dialect in order to comprehend....
[3] ...we can teach
children letter names and the sounds letters represent and we can teach them
words in isolation from the context of language, but we know that these methods
do not lead children to read.
At first glance the points
in Stephens definition appear rather opaque. But when viewed through the lens of
my characterization of whole language ideology you can actually see what she is
trying to say. I recommend Engelman's book War Against the Schools'
Academic Child Abuse (13) for a more complete
explication of criticisms applicable to Exhibits [B] and [C]. In any event,
stripped of its rhetoric, Exhibit [B] says:
1. Written language is
language.
2. Babies acquire language through actually using it, not through
practicing its seperate parts.
3. Oral language is learned "incidentally" (as
a aspect of doing something else).
4. Therefore, written language is best
learned "incidentally" (a la cake-mix
routine)
This represents distorted logic.
First, written language is not language. It is a representation of
a language, hopefully of a language known to the learner. When a baby starts out
babbling, what language is that? Also, the fact that a six year old knows a lot
more language than the two year old suggests that many specifiable "parts" and
aspects were learned in four years. It has been estimated that by the time a
child is six years old he has a 4,000 to 24,000 word speaking and listening
vocabulary upon which to draw in learning to read (14,15). We don't start from
scratch when we teach reading. We assume a basic oral language understanding. Do
parents really want a six year old, who has mastered language and who knows much
about word meaning and syntax from speaking and listening to be learning a
language when he learns how to read or to be learning to read "incidentally?" I
doubt it. Parents expect the teacher to direct the child's learning,
which is to be quite specific. It does not involve
learning a language but a code expressing a familiar language. The teacher may have 28 students
to teach the very specific things they don't know about "written language."
Now let's look at item [1] of
Exhibit [C]. Can the child read a sentence without being able to read the
component words? Really? If the words are harder than sentences, and if
sentences are made from words, what phenomenon lets kids transcend the more
difficult unit (words) to get the easier unit (sentences)? If something is
harder than something else, probably someone would fail to learn it. Engelman
(13) believes there ought to be something called the "Goodman Syndrome." These
children would fluently read stories, but when asked to read a page, they would
make many mistakes. They would stumble horribly over individual words and find
letter identification impossible. Goodman's assertion also reminds me of
performer Woody Allen's joke about speed reading. "I took a speed reading
course," he said, "and it really worked! I read War and Peace in 20
minutes! It was about
What is the research
concerning whole language as opposed to traditional programs that emphasize use
of phonics? A comprehensive review of whole language effectiveness was conducted
by Stahl and Miller in 1989 (16). They looked at 5 projects conducted as part of
a U.S. Office of Education study of first grade reading programs and at 46
additional studies that appeared as dissertations, transcripts of lectures, or
journals, which they felt had sufficient data to permit a metastatistical
analysis. They concluded "we have no evidence showing that whole language
programs produce effects that are stronger than existing basal programs, and
potentially may produce lower effects. The alternative, that whole language
programs are too new to evaluate, also suggests a lack of evidence of its
effectiveness." There is also the review of the theoretical foundations of the
phonics-first versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction produced
by Professor Vellutino of State University of New York in 1991 (17).
He summarizes his findings
as follows:
The implications of the
research for teaching children to read should be apparent. The most basic
dictate seems to be that instruction that promotes facility in word
identification is vitally important to success in reading. Accordingly,
instruction that facilitates both phoneme awareness and alphabetic coding is
vitally important to success in reading. However, there is nothing in the
research that precludes the use of whole-language-type activities in teaching
reading, such as use of context for monitoring and predictive purposes,
vocabulary enrichment to imbue printed words with meaning, discussion that would
encourage reading for comprehension, integration of reading, writing, and
spelling to concretize the relationships between and among these
representational systems, and so forth. [emphasis added]
(17).
Finally, there are two large
monographs which have reviewed the research regarding reading instruction
comprehensively. Both of these, one written by Jeanne Chall (18) and the other
more recently by Marilyn Jager Adams (19) have concluded that phonics
instruction is of prime importance for reading instruction, especially for the
first one to two years of instruction.
The whole language crowd has had a
simple retort to the assembled research that makes their positon unsupportable -
- they ignore it. Diane Stephens, in the monograph from which Exhibit [A] was
taken extolled the pure whole language approach. She listed 38 papers which she
believes represent research that supports the unfettered use of whole language.
Of these papers she reviewed, only 8 appeared in periodicals where some peer
review was possible. The remainder were unpublished masters or doctoral
dissertations, technical reports, book chapters, abstracts in yearbooks, or
transcribed lectures. Nearly all the studies she cites are "descriptive" of
classrooms implementation of whole language or "case studies" of individual
students learning to read. She claims 10 studies were comparative; however, when
I examine her synopses of these works, only eight truly compare what at least
their authors label "whole language" with "skill based" instruction. Of the
latter 8 papers, only three compared outcomes of instruction in any way. The
studies were short term, looking at the outcome of instruction for the year they
were employed. They tended to use nonconventional means for assessing reading
ability. Overall, they found little or no advantage for whole language compared
to traditional programs. The total number of students in the combined variable
and control groups for the three studies was < 200 students! This is the
quality of data the whole language crowd expects parents to accept as
"research." Stephen says that the most positive thing about the whole language
classrooms she described was that each teacher "behaved as if the desired were
actual." Each teacher "believed - - and was observed behaving as if - - the
students were competent, sensible, and well-intentioned." Do you remember when
Harold Hill in the Music Man sold musical instruments to the parents of
You may say that I am much
too virulent in my attack on the use of a purely whole language approach in
reading instruction. After all, educators would not force teachers to use
exclusively whole language as their principal teaching method. In fact they
certainly have done so in many instances across the republic. Parents have heard
anecdotes from teachers describing their teaching phonics "on the sly." But
consider the "Reading Learner Outcomes" specified in 1992 by the Oklahoma State
Department of Education in their official Oklahoma State Competencies,
Grade One, pages 15-22:
The student attend[s] to
the meaning of what is read rather than focusing on figuring out words....Uses
context, pictures, syntax, and structural analysis clues to predict meaning of
unknown words. Develops a sight vocabulary of high frequency words...Predict[s]
unknown words...Uses predictions in order to read pattern books (stories with a
repetitive element)....Uses fix-it strategies (predicts, uses pictorial cues,
asks a friend, skips the word, substitutes another meaningful word)....The
student will interpret a story from
illustrations.
What is missing from this picture?
The word "phonics" is nowhere to be seen. Woe be to the
The State of
References
1. Anderson, R.C., E.H.Hiebert, J.A.
Scott, and I.A.G. Wilkinson (preparers). 1985. Becoming a Nation of Readers:
The Report of the Commission on
2. Bond, G.L., and R.
Dysta. 1967 The cooperative research program in first grade reading
instruction. Reading Research Quarterly 2:5 - 142.
3. Shannon, P. 1983. The
use of commercial reading materials in American elementary schools. Reading
Research Quarterly 19:68-85.
4. Educational Products Information
Exchange. 1977. Report on a National Study of the Nature and Quality of
Instructional Materials Most Used by Teachers and Learners. Technical Report
No. 76.
5. Anderson, L. 1984. The enviroment
of instruction: the function of seatwork in a commercially developed curriculum.
In G.G. Duffy, L.R. Roerler, and J. Mason (Eds.), Comprehensive Instruction:
Perspectives and Suggestions.
6. Davidson, J.L. (ed.) 1988.
Counterpoint and Beyond: A Response to Becoming a Nation of Readers.
7. From "Mix and make."
1982. In T. Clyman and R.L. Venezky. Ginn Reading Program (level 3, unit
2). Lexington, Massachussetts: Ginn and Co., pp.36-37.
8. From "At the seashore." 1982. In
A. Hughes, S.A. Bernier, N. Thomas, C. Bereiter, V. Anderson, L. Gurren J.D.
Lebo, and J.A. Overberg. The Headway Program (Level B1, lesson 17).
9. Basic Reading
(1-1 Book). 1963. J.B. Lippincott, p.103.
10. Stephens, Dianne. 1991.
Research on Whole Language: Support for a New Curriculum.
11. Artwergen, B., C.
Edelsy, and B. Flores. 1987. Whole language: what's new? Reading Teacher
41:144-154.
12. Goodman, K., and Y.
Goodman. 1981. Twenty questions about teaching language. Educational
Leadership 38:437-442.
13. Engelman S. 1992. War against
the Schools' Academic Child Abuse.
14. Seashore, R.H., and
J.C. Seegers. 1949. How large are children's vocabularies? Elementary
English 26:181-194.
15. Lorge,
16.
17. Vellutino, F.R. 1991.
Introduction to three studies on reading acquisition: convergent findings on
theoretical foundations of code-oriented versus whole-language approaches to
reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 83:437-443.
18. Chall, J.S. 1983. Learning to
Read: The Great Debate. Second Edition.
19.
20. Education Week.
21.
22. Witt, H.
© by Jeffrey M. Jones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.-
ALTERNATIVES TO TRADITIONAL
ASSESSMENT
Our dear SHARER Mariana Celona has sent us this article to SHARE:
Testing Out Alternatives
Traditionally, students are judged
by exam results. Margi Wald, Cheryl Delk and Alice Savage present three ways to
weave assessment into everyday classroom operations.
Margi's "controlled"
technique: adapting traditional
forums
There are many ways to revisit traditional assessment with an eye toward
enhancing feedback on teaching and learning. I use "progressive writing
profiles" to help students build criteria for papers and reinforce the notion of
writing as a process. Grading is broken down into stages that parallel writing
stages: these profiles "grow" as the information covered in class grows.
Students assess each other's writing or receive teacher feedback on only a
limited number of criteria on the first draft (see Assessment Form Sample 1). As
students revise based on teacher, peer and class feedback and discussion,
criteria are added to writing profiles used for later drafts. Students are
"graded" on material as it is covered but in the end have a complete set of
criteria and are assessed based on standards for a polished final product.
(Hint: create the criterion lists as a class--use the students' words, not your
own, to better ensure student understanding.)
I use forms of assessment in an alternative fashion by including a
reflection element in the traditional testing process. After students take a
regular test, I give it a preliminary grade. In the next class period, students
work together, asking each other for feedback, sharing test responses to provide
good model answers, and correcting individual errors. At home, students fill out
a reflection worksheet: improvements made, items missed, plans for further
improvement (see Assessment Form Sample 2).
Then we discuss outcomes of the process. We look at how some
students' needs overlap and should be addressed in class activities while others
should be addressed in individual homework assignments. We list new course
objectives and plan and implement new activities based on the results. I may
give additional practice to the entire class on paraphrasing techniques and
paragraph editing, while designing specific homework for students who had
trouble with short answer reading questions or who want to improve vocabulary
skills. (Hint: If possible, give two grades on the test - one raw score to show
how far students have come and
Cheryl's
"semi-controlled" technique: checklists
An example of semi-controlled alternative assessment tool that can be
used to inform teaching and learning is the use of checklists. Combining
checklists with written student self-evaluations can be very informative in
speaking and listening courses when students are involved in group discussions.
Each semester, my students write discussion questions based on a single
topic that they know will elicit different opinions. Sample topics include
fashion trends, gun control, cross-cultural marriages, etc. One day a week is
assigned for these "topic discussions." While the students are involved in their
discussions (in groups no larger than six), I sit outside the group with a
matrix (see Assessment Form Sample 3) that indicates the topic, names of leader
and members, and discussion behaviors. Sitting for at least 10 minutes per
group, I simply make a mark each time a student (1) contributes meaningfully to
the discussion; (2) asks questions; (3) interrupts others to offer, add, or
modify his/her own opinion; (4) signals that he/she is listening; (5) or helps
other group members with vocabulary or completion of a thought.
For homework, each student writes a self-evaluation of his/her
participation in the group, how others responded to each other, and what he/she
can do to improve participation. The matrix is shown to the class and general
observations are made about the discussion behaviors of individuals or
particular groups. Students often include some of the comments they wrote in
their self-evaluation. I read each and then respond one-on-one. Since the group
members are shuffled for each discussion, students have the opportunity to
observe and model good techniques (and avoid bad ones). I remind the students
that my checklists are only snapshots of a particular period of time in the
discussion. The instructor's presence as an observer becomes less obtrusive as
the semester goes on, and the students see the discussion as an authentic,
contextualized activity that they will most likely encounter in their future
academic careers. Establishing goals for the next group topic discussion
actively engages students to make decisions about what is important to focus on;
the students assume responsibility for their own learning.
A more freestyle approach to assessment is simply to have the class take
time out to reflect on experience and share ideas and perceptions with the
entire learning community. This "feedback circle" is less-controlled, and
sometimes a risk for the teacher as students' responses can be unpredictable. I
have found that it is possible to implement feedback circles so that they
contain less evaluation and more investigation and exploration. The result is
that both the learners and I have the potential to come away with a clearer
picture of how learning is taking place within our particular environment. At
the beginning of the semester, I end class a few minutes early and ask students
to form a circle. I tell them that I want us to discuss their learning and that
it is important that everyone be able to see and hear everyone else. I then seat
myself among them as a further indication that I am not wearing my "teaching
hat."
Because many students have not had the experience of giving feedback, I
begin with specific questions about class activities. For example, after they
hand in an essay, I might start with the question, "What did you write about?",
encouraging students to talk about their ideas and struggles in putting thoughts
on paper. The specificity of the question helps us all to stay focused on the
same experience, serving two important purposes: it's an easy question to answer
for those who aren't used to sharing experiences before the group, and it makes
what each student says intrinsically interesting to others. Once they begin
sharing the process, I can steer the conversation towards reflection by asking
them to identify strategies or ideas that worked. Students may be slow to get
started, but I find that if I hold my tongue and wait, I am rewarded with
valuable information about their frustrations and discoveries. Later in the
semester I may start the feedback session with a more abstract question as
students generally grow comfortable with the process. For example, in a
listening or reading class, I may ask how things are going: "What do you feel
you still need?" Then I try to be as quiet as possible so that they can inform
one another and me by articulating their experiences. Despite, the temptation to
jump in with my own analysis, I restrict myself to playing the role of
facilitator. The benefits of these feedback sessions are numerous. As the
teacher, I gain confidence from knowing where my students are in their learning.
For example, a student may say, "I don't really want to do these taped listening
activities; what really helps me is when we have a conversation about an issue."
Other students may concur, so I allocate certain days in which students bring in
topics to discuss so they can practice all the grammar and vocabulary that they
study in their other courses. Or if a student asks for more correction, I can
check in with that student regarding which method of correction she would like.
"Would you like me to stop you mid-sentence or simply restate what you say
correctly afterwards?" Finally, I feel that I can better match the pace of my
teaching to the pace of their learning. Since I've started doing feedback,
projects frequently take longer than I initially expect but have a richness and
depth that comes from students having a greater voice. As a result, the finished
projects comprise less of me and more of them.
© by American Language
Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.- FIRST
NATIONAL MEETING OF TEACHER-TRAINING COLLEGES
Our dear SHARER Barbara Grodzki has sent us this
information:
First National Meeting of Teacher- Training Colleges
Looking Back and Thinking Ahead
September 2,3, 2005 - Córdoba
It gives us great pleasure to invite you to attend the First National
Meeting of Teacher- Training Colleges organised by the Profesorado de Inglés
Instituto “Juan Zorrilla de San Martin”, which will be held in the city of
The meeting aims at providing a forum for sharing ideas and experiences
in all aspects related to EFL methodology and teacher training, and in
particular, to what Teacher- Training Colleges have achieved in the last decade.
It is also hoped that it will be an opportunity for discussing what directions
are being considered in the fields of language theory and research, curriculum
development and professional growth.
Papers and experiential accounts can focus on topics such
as:
Methods and approaches favoured in the teaching of
EFL
(a) Instrumental Subjects
English Language (the macro skills –
lexis)
Phonetics and Phonology
Grammar
(b) Content Subjects
History and Culture
Literature
Linguistics
Didactics
Psychology of Learning
Curriculum and Syllabus Design
Language learning strategies
Professional Development
The role of research as a new function in Teacher- Training
Colleges
Research as a tool for professional and institutional
development
Training courses offered to the teaching
community
Teaching Practice
The Teaching Practice Curriculum
The Practicum
The challenges posed by teaching trainees with previous teaching
experiences
The learner in focus
Admission criteria for first year
students
Profile of the applicants
The heterogeneous class in the first
year
Profile of would-be teachers
Specialists in ELT will be giving plenary talks and the meeting will also
be a unique opportunity for teachers, teacher trainers, researchers and
materials writers to get together, present their work and reflect on their
practice.
The types of presentations which the meeting will include and the
guidelines for submitting proposals
follow.
Types of presentations
Papers (30 minutes)
The participant puts forward ideas related to an area of ELT and
discusses them.
The ideas might be based on classroom experience, research or reading.
The last five minutes should be reserved for
questions.
Demonstrations (45 minutes)
A demonstration should be a practical session which focuses on classroom
materials and/or activities which have been developed and tried out by the
presenter(s).
Theoretical discussion is usually kept to a minimum to leave time for
questions and comments from the audience.
Poster Presentations
A poster is a visual presentation containing an outline, which
illustrates or summarizes a project, a feature of language or an area of
research. This kind of presentation gives both participants and presenters the
opportunity to discuss ideas in a more relaxed and often more productive
atmosphere.
The closing date for receipt of proposals is
Receipt of proposal forms will be acknowledged by
(e-)mail.
For paper submissions send a 300-word abstract.
For demonstration submissions send a 150 word abstract. For poster
presentations, send a brief description (100
words).
Please do not include the names of the presenter(s) or make any reference
to their institutional affiliation anywhere in your
abstract.
Abstracts and other types of submissions must be typed or done on a word
processor. If possible, use Word and send a diskette along with the hard
copy. This will be much appreciated
if you are sending in your work via regular
mail.
Electronic submissions are highly recommended and
encouraged.
Abstracts may be sent by regular mail
to:
Primer Encuentro Nacional de
Profesorados de Inglés
Donaciano del Campillo
1563
Cerro de las
Rosas
(5009) Córdoba
or by e-mail to:
enproin@gmail.com (with "TTC
Meeting" in the subject line)
Fees:
Teachers:
Until July 11th: $ 40
Until August 12th: $50
After August 12th:
$60
Students: $15
The different methods of payment – together with registration details,
forms and requirements for submissions will shortly be made available to
attendees to the Meeting of TTC.
For further information, please
contact:
First National Meeting of Teacher Training
Colleges
c/o Prof. Celina Sánchez
Maciel
csanchezmaciel@sinectis.com.ar
Confirmed
Speakers
María Lucrecia Berrone,
M.A.
María Lucrecia Berrone is Lecturer in Linguistics, Grammar and
History of the Language at Facultad de
Lenguas, UNC. After graduating as Professor of English in this academic
institution in 1971, she was awarded a Fullbright scholarship to pursue graduate
studies in the
Topic
An Overview of Systemic Functional Grammar: a model of language in
context. How SFG builds on a three-dimensional view of meaning and how choices
in meaning are realized in texts. SFG as a toolkit for text and discourse
analysis.
Jeff Williams
Dr. Williams received
his doctorate in Literature from
Topic
Literature and Comics in the Language
Classroom.
Andrea
Alliaud
Topic
El Rol de la Investigación
en los <Institutos de Formación Docente
Ana Longhini
MA in English, Northen
Topic Language
Learning Strategies
Alejandra Portela
Lecturer in English Literature and Language, Facultad de Lenguas,
UNC.
Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics,
Researcher in Literary Studies and Applied Linguistics. Co-Director of
the following research projects:
Formación profesional: Una visión crítica de sustento
para la corrección de errores en la producción escrita
El género policial como
intertexto en la ficción europea y americana del siglo XX y del siglo XXI
Memoria cultural en Europa y
América
Latest publications:
"La función del mito en la
narrativa del siglo XX" (Revista Bitácora,
2004)
"El alivio, el dolor y la
humillación de ser sólo apariencias en 'Las ruinas circulares' de Jorge Luis
Borges y 'The Son' de Graham Swift" (Actas de las I Jornadas de Literatura de
Habla Inglesa, La Plata, 2004)
"Formación docente: del aprendizaje
atomizado hacia la transferencia integradora". (forthcoming, Bitácora,
2005)
Topic
An Approach to the Teaching of Literature at Teacher Training
Colleges
Cecilia Ferreras
Lecturer in Phonetics and Phonology, Facultad de Lenguas,
UNC.
Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics,
Researcher in applied linguistics. Head of the following research
projects:
Formación profesional: Una
visión crítica de sustento para la corrección de errores en la producción
escrita
Latest
publication:
Formación docente: del aprendizaje
atomizado hacia la transferencia integradora. (forthcoming, Bitácora,
2005)
Topic
How to Handle the Teaching of Intonation at Secondary School
Level
Liliana
Anglada
Dr. Liliana Anglada graduated as a translator and teacher of
English from the Escuela Superior de Lenguas (U.N.C.). She did her
postgraduate studies in the U.S and now holds an MA in Applied
Linguistics from
Workshop: An Introduction to the Use of the Internet for EFL Teachers and Learners
Marion La
Greca
Marion La Greca graduated
from Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
Instituto Nacional del
Profesorado Técnico de Capital Federal in 1994 and had her Diploma in March
1996, her Postgraduate Diploma in July 1998 and her Master of Arts in
Professional Development for ELT Practitioners in July 2001 from the University
of East Anglia (UEA) at Norwich
Institute for Language Education in Norwich, England. (She also became an “Ontological Coach” in 2002 . She has been teaching Cultural
Studies I & II, (corresponding to Post-graduate Studies) at Universidad
Tecnológica Nacional, Fac. Reg. Villa Maria, Prov de Córdoba, since
1999.
Topic
Socio-Cultural Studies
-----------------------------------------------------------
5.- FIRST AES INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS FOR
ELT PROFESSIONALS
Our dear SHARER Mónica
Blanco-Kunz has got an invitation to make:
The First
”Optimising True
Professionalism Within The Entire ELT Community”
5 - 6 August 2005 -
Morning & Afternoon - City Of
Friday
Registration
Congress Sessions
Saturday
Registration
Congress Sessions
This 2-Day
Mega-Event will boast over 25 talks, workshops as well as commercial
presentations. All delegates will have the opportunity to meet leading lecturers
and exchange views with a large number of ELT professionals. they will also have
the chance to find out about the latest ELT publications and services in a
substantial resources exhibition area consisting of more than 20 ELT-related
promotional stands.
A Growing Trend In
Education: Drama by Celia Zubiri (Arg)
Creativity: Painting
With All The Colours Of The Wind? By Omar Villarreal
(Arg)
How To Cope With A
Mixed-Ability Class: An Issue Which Affects Many Teachers Today by Marcela
Villan (Arg)
Accuracy, Fluency,
…Agency by Susana Trabaldo (Arg)
Using Newspapers In The
Classroom by Pablo Toledo (Arg)
Long-Lasting Learning
by Laura Szmuch (Arg) – Jamie Duncan (Nz/
Arg)
Creativity And
Communication by Laurie Sullivan (Ir/ Arg)
Holistic Activities For
Whole Learning by Maria Marta Suarez (Arg)
How The Student Brain
Learns by Lucrecia Prat Gay (Arg)
Dealing With The Use Of
Humour In The Classroom by Alicia Lopez Oyhenart
(Arg)
Sing A Song 2 by
Charlie Lopez (Arg)
Sorting Out The Massive Amount Of
Everyday Englishness: Elt Recipes Come In Handy, At Last! By Christian Kunz
(Arg/
Communicative Games For Young
Learners by Natalia Kunz (Arg)
– Karina Duarte (Arg)
The Pronunciation Of The Latest
British Model by Christian Kunz (Arg/
Innovate: Teach Grammar
Lexically by Marina Gonzalez (Arg)
Successful Marketing
Tools For Teachers Of English by Maria Belen Gonzalez
(Arg)
Bring Songs & Music
Into Your Classroom by Patricia Gomez
(Arg)
How Can Books Come To
Life by Fernando Armesto (Arg)
How To Enjoy Poetry by
Abstracts www.angliaexams.com
Special treat for all delegates! A
superb raffle prize: 4-week course at
Venue: Universidad Austral -
Av. Juan De Garay 125 – Ciudad Autonoma De Buenos Aires
Registration
Fees:
Individual
Rates
General Public Anglia Members Internationals
Before 18/06 $ 40.00 $
30.00 USD 15.00
Before 15/07 $ 45.00 $ 35.00 USD 20.00
15/07 - 04/08 $
50.00 $ 40.00 USD 25.00
On Site $ 60.00 $ 50.00 USD
30.00
Important: For The
On-Site Option Previous Email/ Fax Re Confirmation Of
Attendance
Required
Group
Fees
10%
discount for 3 - 5 delegates enrolling together
15% discount for 6 or more
delegates enrolling together
To register online, log on to:
www.angliaexams.com/congress%20registration.doc
For further information,
please contact us:
Kensington Schools of English - Exams And
Assessment Department
Tel/ Fax: 54 11 4246-3547 -kensangliarep@infovia.com.ar
info@angliaexams.com
with the support
of:
*Universidad Tecnológica
Nacional *Universidad Del
Centro Educativo Latinoamericano
*
*Pearson
*
*The Buenos Aires
Herald *Share Magazine *ELT
Today
*E-Teaching On Line *English And Fun *The
*Estari Libros *Advice
Bookshop *
------------------------------------------------------------
6.- NINTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR TEACHERS OF
ENGLISH
Our dear SHARER Professor Jaime Gómez Douzet has sent us this announcement:
IX International Conference for Teachers of English
Thinking Globally,
Teaching Locally
Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, República de Chile.
11,12 y 13 Agosto de
2005-
Sessions to be held at Hotel del
Valle.
Entrada Camino a
Azapa - Tel. (56) (58) 24 -20 -83
For full details and
online registration visit: http://yatichiri.facdehu.uta.cl/~8cipi/9cipi/
Nacional and Internacional
Lecturers:
Ana Ortigosa
Pastor
Ph.D. in Linguistics,
Assistant Professor in the department of Filologías Modernas at the
University of La
Julia Menard-Warwick Ph.D.
MA in TESL degree from the
PhD in Language, Literacy, and Culture from the
Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the
Lic. Omar
Villarreal
Licenciado en Ciencias de
la Educación (UCALP) Licenciado en Tecnología Educativa (FRA-UTN). Ph.D.
Candidate in Modern Languages (USAL). Principal of Licenciatura en Lengua
Inglesa – Universidad Tecnológica Nacional –Sedes Buenos
Aires.
Jaime Gómez Douzet
Ph.D.
Master of Arts in English at the
Keith S. Folse, Ph.D.
Ph.D. in Second Language Acquisition and Instructional Technology
from the
Ramon Barrientos Rivera
Ph.D
Master of Arts in Linguistics at Pontificia Universidad Católica de
Chile. Ph.D. in Spanish,
Professor of English
language at the Universidad de Chile, Antofagasta, Universidad de Antofagasta ,
Universidad de Playa Ancha, Universidad Católica del Norte, Universidad de
Valparaíso and Universidad de Tarapacá.
Hilde Fanta
Professor at the Pedagogical University of Carinthia, University Klagenfurt, Universitá Federal Brasilia, University Cambridge, Stanford University; University of Applied Sciences - Technikum Kärnten.
Judith Raine Baroody Ph.D.
Counselor for Press and Culture at the
A graduate of the University of Virginia, National Defense University and American University in Washington, D.C.
David Horner
Acting Director of the English Department at the
Dr. Ozzy Jochum Ph.D.
Professor in English at the University of Applied Sciences -
Technikum Kärnten. Lecturer at
Victor Hugo Rojas Bautista
B.Ed.
B.Ed. in TEFL from U.N.E. and M.Ed. Candidate at U.N. “Federico
Villarreal” in
Aldo Moreira
MA candidate in Applied Lingustics. Lecturer in ESP at Universidad
Andrew Sheehan
Full-time Consultant with Programa “Inglés Abre Puertas” of the Chilean government.
Romualdo Ibáñez
M.A.
M.A. in Applied Linguistics. Ph. D. Candidate in Linguistics, at Pontificia
Universidad Católica de Valparaíso.
Hildergard Morales
M.A.
BA in TEFL at the Universidad de Chile,
Tatiana Galvan de la
Fuente B.A.
Teacher of English as a Foreign Language at Facultad de Idiomas,
Universidad de Baja Claifornia in
Aida Cortés Lemus
B.A.
B.A. in Oceanology . B.A. Candidate in Docencia del Idioma Ingles at
the
Lecturer at the Facultad Nacional de Ingeniería in
Aida
Mercado
Lecturer at the Facultad
Nacional de Ingeniería in Oruro, Bolivia.
Degree on Pedagogy and a Higher Diploma on University Education.
Mabel Varas
Degree in Applied Linguistics from Universidad de Tarapacá.
Lecturer in Methodology and Didactics to undergraduate students from English Language Teaching Programs.
Margarita Sarlat
Lecturer at the
Lic. Ana Ibañez
Moreno
Licenciada en Filología
Inglesa por la Universidad de La Rioja
(España)
Marcos
Head teacher at Anglo-Saxon Institute. M.A. in
Education.
Ximena Palta
Ramírez
Coordinator of the Local English Teachers Network in
For further information
and Registration, contact: Professor, Jaime Gómez
Douzet.
Departamento de Idiomas
Extranjeros - Universidad de Tarapacá
Avenida 18 de septiembre 2222 - Arica
Chile, South America
Fax 56 58 205 231 or e-mail as attachment to: coningles@yahoo.com
or
<coningles@uta.cl >
------------------------------------------------------------
7.- DAVID NUNAN AT LICENCIATURA EN LENGUA INGLESA
UTN
Date and Times: Wednesday August
31st –
Venue: Auditorium INSPT de
la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional – Triunvirato 3174 – Ciudad de Buenos
Aires.
Registration: Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa INSPT –UTN
(Buenos Aires) licenciaturaingles@inspt.utn.edu.ar
This presentation can be
viewed same day, same time through interactive teleconference on the premises
of:
Facultad Regional Villa
María.
Contact: Lic.Maria Elena
Dutto dutto_me@frvm.utn.edu.ar
Facultad Regional Bahía
Blanca.
Contact:
Lic. Patricia Carnicina pcarnicina@frbb.utn.edu.ar
Facultad Regional Mendoza.
Contact:
Prof. Clarisa Israel
cisrael@frm.utn.edu.ar
Facultad Regional Venado
Tuerto.
Contact: Ing. María Elena
Pettucci
rrii@frvt.utn.edu.ar
For further info and
registration, go to www.eltconosur.com ,or: Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa INSPT –UTN
(
Thomson Learning
Southern Cone – (011) 4582 0601 /
0607
Dr Nunan will also visit
the following locations:
August 29th – Córdoba
August 30th -
September 1st -
Mar del Plata
September 3rd -
Further information and
enrolment:
Libreria Blackpool
(
Libreria Palito (Mar del Plata) - (0223) 494 6666
Librería Ameghino (Rosario) - (0341)
449 8906 / 5637
Advice Bookshop (Santa Fe) - (0343) 431 6100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.- JOURNALISM APPLIED TO THE TEACHING OF
ENGLISH
Our dear friends and
SHARERS from APIBB announce:
The "Asociación de Profesores de
Inglés de Bahía Blanca announces an intensive seminar on "Journalism applied to
the teaching of English," to be held on Saturday, August
13th in Bahía Blanca
with the coordination of Mr. Alfred Hopkins, a free lance journalist and
graduate of the
Writing skills are
essential for teachers as well as professional persons in all walks of life. But
journalistic skills are of special value for teachers and learners because
they have to do with investigation, observation, the information gathering
process and the ability to communicate ideas and issues in a fair and
interesting way.
How can we put life into
our ideas? Describe situations we have seen with objectivity? Reveal what is
under the surface?
What is the role of the
mass media and the ‘communicator’ in modern society? The so-called "fourth
estate."
How to synthesize and
convince. Graphic language and image makers. The Internet, blogging and
inter-active communication. Voice and diction in radio and TV programs.
The diversity and limits
of style. Journalistic techniques for language learning.
The workshop will discuss
these and other aspects of the trade and alert participants to the exciting
language teaching possibilities of written, oral and visual communication.
Work teams will conclude the day's events with the preparation of
articles, radio programs and TV shows.
Teachers and advanced
students interested in participating should contact the apibb at (0291) 456
3166, e-mail apibb@infovia.com.ar or write to APIBB, Chiclana 681 P 2,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
9- A SEMINAR ON JOHN
FOWLES & GRAHAM SWIFT AT UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE CORDOBA
Our dear SHARER Maria Teresa Fernandez from the British Council writes to
us:
John Fowles & Graham
Swift at Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
I'm copying you information on a new event to be held in the city of
Facultad de Lenguas,
Universidad Nacional de Cordoba
August 9 – 09: 30 – 10: 45
Primer encuentro: John
Fowles, la escritura como oficio.
A través de la minucia propia de un
coleccionista, John Fowles trabaja la palabra con dedicación precisa y
cuidadosa. The Collector y The French Lieutenant´s Woman -ambas de
inmediato suceso editorial- indagan en la conciencia de sus personajes en cada
detalle, en cada oración. El valor de la mirada y el contrapunto entre lo que
significa narrar para un escritor decimonónico y para un artista del siglo
pasado constituyen piezas fundamentales en los múltiples juegos de lectura que
Fowles propone. Esta charla acerca a los lectores algunas claves de ingreso al
mundo de este genial autor. También se proyectarán fragmentos de películas
basadas en sus novelas y de una entrevista realizada al autor por la
disertante.
11: 15-12: 30
Segundo encuentro: Graham Swift, hacia una
nuevo estatuto del personaje.
Graham Swift continua el gusto por la
anécdota y lo hace como un artesano, valiéndose de la palabra como materia. Waterland y Last Orders permanecen, también, en un
registro que hace prevalecer tópicos obstinadamente humanos. Sin embargo, se
distingue por su particular capacidad para 'oir' a los nuevos personajes
urbanos: aquellos de la
Londres menos suntuosa. Así, hace hablar con sus
propias voces a personajes de clase media en ambitos y oficios que les son
propios. Se proyectarán fragmentos de adaptaciones de sus novelas en la pantalla
grande y de una entrevista audiovisual. Además, la disertante comentara acerca
de su entrevista con el autor en South London, su barrio natal y escenario de Last Orders.
If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact
me:
teresa.fernandez@britishcouncil.org.ar
Kind regards.
Maria Teresa
Fernandez
Information Assistant - British Council
Marcelo T. de Alvear 590
- Piso 4 - C1058AAF - Buenos Aires - Argentina
T +54 (0)11 4311 9814 - F +54
(0)11 4311 7747
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.- NEWS FROM ELT
TEAM
Our dear SHARERS from ELT Team have sent us this
announcement:
Next term, you will have the chance to attend several once-a-month
intensive courses which different linguistic as well as teaching
needs. Have a look and decide on the most suitable
course for you:
Innovations in the ELT classroom:
Course with credits approved by Red Federal de Capacitación Continua
Proyecto 12/05 Dictamen 6432 for EGB 2, EGB 3 and Polimodal English
teachers.
This course aims to offer innovative ideas for the ELT environment based
on music, drama, storytelling, poems, videos, technology, games, etc. while
searching for the development of discourse competence in our
students.
Course length: 6 encounters (one per
month). Saturdays:
Starting in October! The last two
meetings take place in February, 2006.
Teaching Spanish as a Second
Language
This course, which is taught in Spanish, is designed for teachers of
English with the objective of teaching Spanish to foreigners. The course
addresses methodological, sociolinguistic and cultural issues. Novel material
will be presented. An excellent opportunity to broaden your professional
horizon!
Course length: 6 encounters (one per
month).Saturdays:
Starting in August! The last meeting
takes place in February, 2006
Keeping your English Active
This course is for advanced learners and teachers who feel the need to
keep their English brisk and updated. The general aim is to meet for lively
conversations, enlarge vocabulary, and tap into colloquialisms in a
learner-friendly atmosphere.
Course length: 6 encounters (one per
month) Saturdays:
Starting in August!
How to say it right, how to teach it better
This course, which is based on phonology, is directed to teacher trainees
and teachers willing to brush up on their pronunciation. Obtain constructive
feedback, receive strategic theory and learn useful tips and strategies on how
to teach phonetics to students of all ages and
levels.
Course length: 5 encounters (one per
month)
Starting in August!
Right road to effortless writing
I
This is an introductory course for advanced learners who desire to gain
theory and practice in the ABCs of writing. Sentence structure, organizing
information, cohesion and coherence, vocabulary, editing and drafting and
brainstorming techniques are some of the topics that will be placed into
practice through paragraph and essay writing.
Course length: 4 encounters (one per
month) Saturdays:
Starting in August!
Right road to effortless writing
II
This is a practical and theoretical course for advanced learners of
teacher training colleges, educators and trainees who desire to master their
penmanship. Become acquainted with numerous techniques which will prove
resourceful for a lifetime and which are applicable to numerous types of
advanced writing tasks. Learn how to set about accomplishing quality writing.
Course length: 4 encounters (one per
month) Timetable to be
confirmed.
Starting in August!
Slang Speaking
This course is for advanced learners who wish to venture into the world
of slang which is embedded in films, songs, and everyday authentic language. A
wealth of vocabulary will be presented and practiced especially through creative
speaking activities.
Course length: 4 encounters (one per
month) Saturdays
Starting in August!
A+ for advanced students
This is an appealing course for both learners planning to take up a
course of studies as an English language teacher and those already in their
first years willing to improve their academic achievement. This course focuses on practicing the
English language through the four skills while tapping into strategies for
success. Mastering academic skills is essential to become a successful learner
and efficiently tackle listening, reading, speaking and writing contexts.
Course length: 10 encounters (once each
fortnight) Timetable to be
confirmed
Starting in August!
In-service training at school
ELTeam has organized a series of two to three-hour in-service workshops
to be delivered to the staff of English Language teachers at your own school as
well as schools of English. The workshops are framed around concrete issues
which adhere to diverse educational contexts while focusing on the practice of
EFL teaching. Several tips and practical examples are given that can be
immediately applied to your teaching environment! The topics are: the use of readers,
values education, and self-esteem in the educational setting and learner
strategies for tackling tests. If you’re interested in receiving in- service
training, contact us to speak with the authority at your school or language
institution. Special fees for Winton Member
schools.
Starting in August!
Discounts offered for people interested in taking more than one course.
Sign up at 0223-4758631 (
Organized by Winton International (RFFDC: d1-100-118) and ELTeam
Consultancy
------------------------------------------------------------
11.- PEARSON EDUCATION
EN EL AULA BONAERENSE
Pearson Education en el
Aula Bonaerense
Training Course with credits approved by Red Federal de Formación Docente Continua
RFFDC: d1-100-150
By
Prof. Leonor
Corradi
Dates: 28/07 -
Venue: EGB
N° 2. Dorrego 633. B° La Perla.
Mar del Plata
Certificates will be issued.
Limited vacancies.
Registration is Free but essential
Information and
registration:
Pearson Education S.A, Tel:(011) 4309-6150/51,
Fax:(011) 4309-6199 E-mail: longman-ar@pearsoned.com
------------------------------------------------------------
12.-
Our dear SHARER Liliana Núñez-Aguirre from Perú TESOL has sent us this
invitation:
Call for
XII
August
1, 2, and 3, 2005
We appreciate your interest in sharing your knowledge and expertise
with teachers of English in
We look forward to seeing you in
Regards,
Liliana Núñez-Aguirre
In the
http://perutesol.homestead.com/peru.html
“Pursuing Excellence In Teaching” - August 1, 2, 3 – 2005 -
The Annual Convention is the most important event for Peru-TESOL and is
an essential element in the professional development of its members. These
meetings provide the venue for the reporting of projects and activities as well
as the sharing of experiences. All those interested in participating in our
Convention are invited to submit two or more session
proposals.
Who can present?
Teachers, teacher trainers, candidates to Master and Ph.D. degrees,
researchers, program administrators, materials and curriculum developers, as
well as professionals in fields such as education, linguistics, psychology,
sociology, translation and communications are welcomed. We especially encourage
members of Peru-TESOL and any other TESOL affiliate in the
world.
What topics are encouraged?
Innovative proposals on classroom practices, connections between teaching
and learning, language interaction, integration of skills, cultural differences
and similarities applied to language learning, technology supporting
teaching-learning processes, and activities which improve the language skills
are solicited. Interactive formats for presenting information to participants
are encouraged.
What types of proposals are
possible?
Two types of proposals can be submitted: a) workshops, and b)
demonstrations. Presentations like plenaries, colloquia, and papers are offered
only by invitation.
a) Workshop (90 minutes): A workshop has very little lecturing by the
presenter; the emphasis is on the participants’ activity, which is carefully
structured by the presenter. The presenter works with the group, helping
participants solve a problem or develop a specific teaching
technique.
b) Demonstration (45 minutes): In a demonstration, most of the time is
used for showing, rather than telling, a technique for teaching or testing.
Normally, the presenter's statement of the theory underlying the technique takes
no more than five minutes.
What are the steps in submitting a
proposal?
1. Complete the Proposal Form. Such form must be completed for each
proposal.
2. One requirement of the form is to provide an abstract that must not
exceed 100 words that will appear in the program book, if the proposal is
accepted. The abstract helps convention participants decide which presentations
will be most appropriate to their needs.
3. The title of the proposal must accurately reflect the content and be
clear to the intended audience; it is limited to nine
words.
4. A one-page summary of the presentation content must be sent. It is
going to be refereed by the Selection Committee and does not appear in the
program book. The title, type of presentation, designated interest section, and
the target audience.
5. Prepare a biographical statement of 30 words to be included in the
program book. Such information must include your place of origin, education and
titles, teaching experience, publications, and whatever you consider
relevant.
6. You can e-mail your complete proposals (form, summary, abstract, and
biographical statement) to the following e-mail
address:
perutesol@yahoo.com or
jezepas@speedy.com.pe (Jenny
Zegarra – Convention Chair
2005)
Note: Teachers who were in contact with
Jacqueline Ojeda (jackie_ojeda@yahoo.com) please continue to do so.
7. If your proposals are accepted, you will have to mail your photograph
(white background, dark clothes, and ID size) for the program book. You can scan
it and paste it in Word and
e-mail it to us.
8. The Selection Committee will send notifications of acceptance by
mid-June.
What are your responsibilities as a
presenter?
1. Register for the convention without expecting us to ask you for doing
it. Presenters have to pay a reduced fee. $ 20.00
2. Do not change the conceptual content of your session once it has been
accepted.
3. Please bring enough and additional handouts for your
presentation. Presenters are
required to leave two copies of each handout in the Coordination
Room for participant services. Presenters will be notified five days in
advance of the number of participants at his/her
presentation.
4. Be sure to request the necessary audiovisual equipment by the
deadline.
5. Your presentations can be scheduled on one or more convention days. It
is strongly recommended that presenters arrive in Lima- Perú the day before the
convention starts. If you cannot arrive on time, let us
know.
Applying for lodging sponsorship by
Peru-TESOL
1. Peru-TESOL sponsors presenters -with three proposals accepted as an
individual- that have requested for it in the application form. Such sponsorship
consists in providing lodging at a double or triple-room together with another
speaker/s at the headquarters hotel, as well as providing breakfast and a
snack for lunch. Likewise, presenters are expected to participate in the
extracurricular activities especially prepared for a memorable
stay.
2. Presenters can check in at
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13.- IX JORNADAS NACIONALES SOBRE NORMATIVA DEL IDIOMA
ESPAÑOL
Fundación Litterae
IX Jornadas Nacionales
sobre Normativa del Idioma Español
«El Español Para El Mundo»
4, 5 y 6 de agosto de 2005 –
Sede de las Jornadas: Universidad de Belgrano (Salón General Roca) - Zabala 1837
- Buenos Aires
PROGRAMA
Jueves 4 de
agosto
8.30 a 9.45
Acreditación
10.00 a 10.15
Palabras de la presidenta
de la Fundación LITTERAE, Dra. Alicia María
Zorrilla
10.15 a 10.45
Inauguración - «Hacia un diccionario de fraseología de los
argentinos», por el presidente de la Academia Argentina de
Letras, Dr. Pedro Luis Barcia
10.45 a 11.15
«El español de Buenos
Aires y la inmigración aluvional (1880- 1920)», por la Dra. Norma Beatriz
Carricaburo (Universidad Católica Argentina.
CONICET)
11.15 a
11.30
Receso
11.30 a
12.00
«Caminos para un diálogo
fecundo», por la Prof. María Elena Vigliani de La Rosa (Universidad Austral.
Fundación LITTERAE)
12.30 a 13.00
«Cambios en la lengua: el
conflicto entre la evolución semántica y la nostalgia lingüística», por el Prof.
Alejandro Parini (Universidad de Belgrano. Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Fundación LITTERAE)
13.00 a 15.00
Receso
15.00 a 15.30
Ponencia: «La costura
invisible: correctores de estilo y editores ante la diversidad de
los escritos», por la Prof. Carolina Bruck (Universidad Torcuato Di
Tella)
15.30 a
16.00
Ponencia: «La corrección
de textos médicos. Dificultades y desafíos», por la correctora Silvia Castello (Fundación LITTERAE)
16.30 a
17.00
Ponencia: «La lengua
española en la preparación del intérprete. Mediación lingüística en
interpretación»,por la Trad. Públ. María Lourdes Nafa Waasaf (Universidad
Nacional de San
Juan)
17.00 a
17.15
Receso
17.15 a
17.45
Ponencia: «De Marco
Denevi, Manuel de Historia o el habla
de los argentinos como constitutivo esencial de la identidad», por la Lic. Ana
Lía Amores (Universidad del Salvador)
17.45 a 18.15
Ponencia: «Urgencia de una
nueva pedagogía en la enseñanza del español para hispanoahablantes en los Estados
Unidos», por el Prof. Omar Mirabal (Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck,
NJ, Estados Unidos de América)
18.15 a
18.45
Ponencia: «El lenguaje de
la radio y de la televisión»,por la Licda. María Antonieta Dubourg (República
Oriental del Uruguay)
18.45 a
19.15
Ponencia: «Funciones y
actos de habla en el marco del aprendizaje de español como lengua
extranjera»,por la Prof. María Ester Moreno (Universidad Católica Argentina)
Viernes 5 de
agosto
9.00 a
10.00
«La diversidad léxica
entre España e Hispanoamérica»,por el Prof. Antonio Molero Düsseldorf)
10.00 a
10.30
«El español como lengua
internacional»,por el Dr. Héctor Valencia (Universidad del Salvador. Universidad
Católica Argentina)
10.30 a
11.00
«Ética, traducción y
sociedad. Los jaladores: ¿una nueva
estrategia de marketing o simplemente
fuera de lugar?»,por la Licda. Susan Trujillo Vargadá (Universidad Femenina del
Sagrado Corazón, Lima, República del Perú)
11.00 a
11.30
Receso
11:30 a
12.00
«La palabra y el
cuento»,por la escritora Victoria Pueyrredón (Directora de la Revista Letras de Buenos Aires)
12.00 a
12.30
«Las consultas
lingüísticas: dudas de los hablantes argentinos»,por la Dra. Alicia María
Zorrilla (Academia Argentina de Letras. Fundación LITTERAE. Universidad del
Salvador. Colegio de Traductores Públicos de la Ciudad de Buenos
Aires)
12.30 a
13.00
Ponencia: «El español en
la radio»,la Prof. Marcela de Fátima Ocampo (Instituto Nacional de Enseñanza
Superior Lola Mora. Provincia de
Tucumán)
13:00 a
15.00
Receso
15.00 a
17.00
Taller: «La redacción
académica»,por las Dras. Hilda Albano y Mabel Giammatteo
(Universidad de Buenos
Aires)
17.15 a
17.45
«Neología y registros
lingüísticos: los neologismos en suplementos juveniles de diarios
nacionales»,por el Licdo. José Daniel Isla (Universidad Nacional de General
Sarmiento)
17.45 a
18.15
«El uso del idioma en la
ficción infantil»,por la Licda. Graciela Perriconi (Universidad Tecnológica
Nacional)
Sábado 6 de
agosto
9.00 a
9.30
«Las características del
lenguaje jurídico»,por la Prof. Mariana Beatriz Bozetti (Universidad Torcuato Di
Tella. Fundación LITTERAE)
9.30 a
10.00
«Aspectos del vocabulario
en la producción de alumnos brasileños de español como lengua extranjera»,por el Licdo.
Paulo Antonio Pinheiro Correa (Universidad Federal de Río de
Janeiro)
10.00 a
10.30
«La influencia del español
en la sociedad estadounidense: tendencias educativas para integrar la creciente
minoría hispana en la cultura angloparlante»,por las Licdas. Marina Liliana
Guidotti y María Laura Pérez Gras (Universidad del
Salvador)
10.30 a
11.00
«Una nueva perspectiva en
la enseñanza de español como lengua extranjera»,por las Licdas. Ana María Bocca
y Nélida Beatriz Vasconcelo (Universidad Nacional de
Córdoba)
11.00 a
11.30
Receso
11.30 a
12.00
«Los neologismos en la
prensa escrita argentina: el observatorio de neología de la Universidad Nacional
de General Sarmiento»,por las Licdas. Andreína Adelstein, Lucía Brandani, Inés
Kuguel y Gabriela Resnik (Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento.
CONICET)
12.00 a
12.30
«Periodismo escrito: su dimensión poética»,por la Licda. Susana Giglio
de Magallanes (Universidad CAECE)
12.30 a
13.00
«”Me rindo loco. Esa mina
es un témpano”: el uso del español en la literatura contemporánea para jóvenes»,
por los Profs. Alberto Osvaldo Beker, Fernanda Aren y Claudia Irene Vespa
(Universidad de Buenos Aires)
13.00 a
15.00
Receso
15.00 a
17.00
Taller: «La redacción
académica»,por las Dras. Hilda Albano y Mabel Giammatteo (Universidad de Buenos
Aires)
17.30 a 18.00
«Hacia la
segunda lengua en las comunidades originarias del Chaco
salteño»,
por la Dra. Ana María
Fernández Lávaque, la Licda. Juana del Valle Rodas y la Prof. Nelly Elena Vargas Orellana
(Universidad Nacional de Salta)
18.00 a
18.30
«El español en la
Internet: ¿progreso o regresión?»,por el Licdo. Marcelo Bianchi Bustos
(Universidad Nacional del Comahue)
18.30 a
19.00
«Los libros de estilo de
los medios de comunicación y su importancia para el futuro del español»,por
el Prof. Alberto Gómez Font (Agencia EFE. FUNDÉU.
España)
19.15
Entrega de Premios a los
mejores egresados de la carrera de Corrector de Textos en Lengua Española de la
Fundación LITTERAE.
19.30
Entrega de diplomas a los
asistentes.
Informes e inscripción: Virrey Arredondo 2247 2.° “B” - 1426 Buenos
Aires
(de lunes a viernes, de
16.30 a 20.30) - Tel./Fax:
4784-9381/4786-1127
Aranceles para
profesionales asistentes y disertantes
$ 100 (del 1 al 29 de
julio)
Aranceles para
estudiantes
$ 30 (del 1 al 29 de
julio)
Nota: Puede depositar el
monto del arancel en nuestra Cuenta N.° 9 750 032 – 7 – 128 – 5 (Banco de
Galicia),a nombre de Fundación LITTERAE. Envíenos, luego, por fax el comprobante
de depósito, sus datos personales y el motivo de la
operación.
-------------------------------------------------------------
14- STORYTELLING
ADVENTURE IN SAN TELMO!
Our dear friend and SHARER Alfred Hopkins has got an invitation for all
of us:
Time
goes by like one of those good old tales Grandma used to whisper into your ear
at bed time in the "Café del Tiempo," Estados Unidos 523
Want to tell your favorite story in English? Have you written a horror
story? A tale of love in times of terror? Why not give it a
chance?
You are
welcome as storyteller or spectator and the only thing you have to pay is your
bus fare to San Telmo and the coffee or wine that you guzzle during the show. If
you dig the idea just call 4334-1561,
write alfshopkins@yahoo.com.ar
or check the information at
http://www.a-hopkins.com
-------------------------------------------------------------
15.- COLUMNA DE “IDIOMAS,ARTE Y CULTURA” EN RADIO
ARGENTINA
Our dear SHARER Analía
Kandel has got an invitation for all of
us:
Columna de “Idiomas, Arte
y Cultura” de Analía Kandel
Tercer sábado de cada mes
a las 15.30 hs.
en “Bureau de Arte” por
Radio Argentina AM 570
EN VIVO en www.am570radioargentina.com.ar
AUDIOS de entrevistas
anteriores en www.analiakandel.com.ar
La columna de “Idiomas,
Arte y Cultura” aborda temas relacionados con aspectos lingüísticos y culturales
de las lenguas extranjeras a través de comentarios, debates, gacetillas y
entrevistas a especialistas, profesionales y representantes de diversas
instituciones con el fin de brindar información actual y relevante a profesores,
traductores, intérpretes y amantes de los idiomas y la palabra.
Próximas columnas
Al comienzo de cada columna:
sorteo de libros y entradas, difusión de cursos, eventos y actividades
culturales, comentarios y noticias sobre idiomas Y luego… la
entrevista.
Sábado 20 de Agosto, 15.30
hs.
Entrevista
Roberto Arias. Periodista y capacitador de la
Radio Comunitaria Mapuche FM Pocahullo
Reciente e histórico otorgamiento por parte del
Comfer de una licencia a una radio comunitaria aborigen: FM Pocahullo (98.5 MHz, Aucapán, Neuquén). Sus objetivos. Su rol en la preservación del
mapudungun, la lengua
mapuche.
Ofelia Veltri. Directora
de AACI (Asociación Argentina de Cultura Inglesa) y
BAC (British Arts Centre)
AACI,la institución. cursos, servicios y actividades. BAC, objetivos. Actividades
culturales.
Sábado 17 de Septiembre,
15.30 hs.
Entrevista
Mariano Randazzo. Realizador, editor, musicalizador y docente en
escuelas de radio
El lenguaje radiofónico: el arte de combinar
los sonidos. ¿En qué consiste el idioma de la radio?
Columnas anteriores en
www.analiakandel.com.ar podés escuchar fragmentos
de las entrevistas más
recientes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16.- WORDS ON WORDS: GRANTS FOR
TEACHERS
Our dear SHARER Mary
Godward writes to us:
Words on Words Reading Groups for
teachers outside Buenos Aires, La Plata, Salta, Córdoba and Santa Fe
As many of you know, Words on Words this year is focusing on the
development of reading groups. So far, we have worked with three groups, which
each met three times (two in
Therefore, to support the development of reading groups in towns we
will not be visiting, the British Council will be offering three grants of $500
each (five hundred Argentine pesos) to support three teachers to attend the
three sessions on reading groups to be delivered by Prof Claudia Ferradas Moi at
the FAAPI Conference. This is only open to teachers outside
For further details, please contact us through our Livechat service
(you will find the link on our web pages: www.britishocuncil.org.ar) or e-mail us at info@britishcouncil.org.ar
Mary Godward
Manager Knowledge and Learning - British Council
T +54
(0)11 4311 9814 / 7519 - F +54 (0)11 4311 7747
mary.godward@britishcouncil.org.ar
www.britishcouncil.org.ar
--------------------------------------------------------------------
“In kindergarten your idea of a good friend was the
person who let you
have
the red crayon when all that was left was the ugly
black one.”
Today we would like to finish this issue of SHARE with very special Friends´Day greetings to all of you,dear SHARERS, that all through these six years together have always generously relinquished the red crayon so that we could be a little happier.
HAVE A WONDERFUL
WEEK
Omar and
Marina.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHARE is distributed
free of charge. All announcements in this electronic magazine are also
absolutely free of charge. We do not endorse any of the services announced or
the views expressed by the contributors. For more information about the
characteristics and readership of SHARE visit: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/ShareMagazine
VISIT OUR WEBSITE :
http://www.ShareEducation.com.ar
There you can read all past issues of SHARE in the section SHARE ARCHIVES.
------------------------------------------------------------------------