Microsoft Word Pub Series 004 # Kamil doc

 

 

9

instance, by making connections between school and community-based knowledge sources (Moll, 

1994). 

 

Comprehension Strategies 

In addition to vocabulary, L1 reading research has highlighted the importance of reading 

strategies and strategy instruction (NRP, 2000). In reading strategies as in vocabulary, we know 

more about older bilingual children and adults than about younger children. The likely reason for 

this trend is the tendency to not focus on teaching comprehension in the early grades, a tendency 

that also applies to L1 reading instruction. At the middle-school level, Jimenez, Garcia, and 

Pearson (1996) found that successful bilingual students used a range of reading strategies, of 

which a few were identified as unique to bilinguals. They studied 11 bilingual and 3 monolingual 

students, and concluded that the successful bilingual readers (a) actively transferred information 

across languages; (b) translated from one language to another, but more often from Spanish to 

English; and (c) openly accessed cognate vocabulary when reading, especially in their less 

dominant language. The less successful bilingual readers used fewer and less sophisticated 

strategies. Although both successful and less successful readers encountered more words that 

were difficult compared to the monolingual readers, the successful readers had more effective 

ways of resolving these problems. 

There is evidence of cross-linguistic transfer of knowledge and strategies in L2 reading 

comprehension. Jimenez, Garcia, et al. (1996) reported that the successful bilingual readers had a 

unitary view of reading in their two languages. However, knowing how to transfer knowledge and 

strategies across languages is not an automatic outcome of being bilingual (Chamot & O’Malley, 

1996; Garcia et al., 1998). The implication for instruction is the increased use of modeling and 

instructional scaffolding. Garcia (1998) reported that instructional scaffolding heightened 13 

Mexican-American fourth graders’ knowledge and use of transfer strategies in their English and 

Spanish reading. There have also been encouraging results in studies with small groups of low-

---

 

 

10

literacy Latina/o middle-school students (n=5), with an explicit focus on strategies, modeling, 

teacher–student interaction, and teacher scaffolding through the use of a modified think-aloud 

approach and culturally relevant text (Jimenez & Gamez, 1996; Jimenez, 1997).  

Furthermore, instruction in metacognitive reading strategies helps L2 learners to 

comprehend better. Muniz-Swicegood (1994) reported that third-grade bilingual students, who 

were randomly assigned (receiving instruction in metacognitive reading strategies), improved in 

reading performance in both Spanish and English. The children were taught to use self-generated 

questioning strategies during the Spanish reading period. Although the instruction was in Spanish, 

this had a positive effect on both Spanish and English reading test scores.  

Research in L1 comprehension instruction favors the teaching of multiple reading 

strategies to develop readers who can use their knowledge strategically and flexibly to understand 

texts (NRP, 2000). Taken together, these findings from L1 and L2 research suggest that multiple 

strategies, including transfer and metacognitive strategies, should be taught, with an emphasis on 

modeling and teacher scaffolding, and in the context of materials that engage students’ 

knowledge and interest. 

 

Sociocultural Factors in L2 Reading Development 

 

Sociocultural and sociopolitical factors have a direct impact on L2 learning and reading 

development. These include majority-language/minority-status issues, disparate classroom and 

home discourse patterns, as well as the problem of discontinuity between home and school, or 

community and school perspectives with respect to literacy. For instance, Hornberger (1992) did 

a comparative analysis of biliteracy in Puerto Rican and Cambodian communities in Philadelphia, 

and concluded that the students needed to be supported along three continua: 

(i) macro–micro continuum (political and economic factors which support the 

development and acceptance of biliteracy); 

---

 

 

11

(ii) monolingual–bilingual continuum (the use of both languages in school and societal 

contexts); 

(iii) oral–literate continuum (the use and support of oral and written language by the 

school and community). 

 

The children’s use of their native language and communication skills were adversely affected in 

the absence of one or more of the above conditions.  

Ethnographic studies such as that by Valdes (1996) also shed light on the different 

expectations of what it means to be literate in different communities. Valdes’s account of 10 

Mexican families living in the U.S.–Mexico borderlands showed that the parents and teachers did 

not share the same expectations of what constituted important knowledge about alphabetic and 

phonological processing in beginning reading. While American teachers emphasize the recitation 

of the alphabet and knowledge of the letter names for the English alphabet in beginning reading 

instruction, Mexican parents tend to see the knowledge of key syllables as more important. 

Moreover, the Mexican mothers found it extremely hard to follow the progress of their children, 

because they had little knowledge of what the letter grades and categories (e.g., uses phonics 

skills) meant in the report cards that the children brought home.  

Literacy is also defined as situated social practices (Gee, 2000). In this conception of 

literacy, ways of using language are intimately connected with particular sociocultural groups. Au 

and Kawakami (1994) reported that culturally responsive instruction led to improved learning 

opportunities for students of diverse backgrounds. For instance, acceptance of students’ home 

language and structuring of interactions consistent with the students’ home values led to positive 

results. Moreover, teachers who are outsiders to a culture can be prepared to teach in a culturally 

responsive way (Au & Kawakami, 1994). 

 

 

---