Microsoft Word Pub Series 004 # Kamil doc

 

 

24

talking about literacy; learning about code and other skills; writing/reading and meaning-making; 

and the creation of successful social interactions among students and between students and text 

(Perez, 1993). In general, the teachers felt that the one factor contributing to the children’s 

success was their own expectation that the children develop specific “skills” (Perez, 1993). Perez 

concluded that the integration of skills and meaning-based approaches was important for 

prospective teacher education. Other approaches that have been successful in preservice education 

include integrated reading and writing programs (e.g., Hao & Hartley-Forsyth, 1993), family 

literacy programs (e.g., Liu, 1996), and the language experience approach. 

 

The Future of L2 Reading Research and Instruction 

The issues in L2 reading and instruction are highly complex in terms of cognitive 

processing as well as sociocultural considerations. Some earlier reviews of the literature on ESL 

reading instruction concluded that learning to read in L2 is much like learning to read in L1, with 

many of the processes transferable from the first to the second language. While it is true that 

many of the cognitive processes are shared in L1 and L2 reading, a key finding that has emerged 

in the present review is that transfer does not take place automatically, at least not for many 

struggling L2 readers. A body of research is being accumulated on specific areas of transfer, such 

as metalinguistic and phonological awareness. These studies investigated a range of different 

native and second languages (e.g., Turkish–Dutch, Cantonese–English, English–French, and 

Spanish–English). Some research has been conducted on vocabulary transfer strategies, such as 

cognate searching. Obviously, there is a continuing need for research in vocabulary and 

vocabulary acquisition.  

A critically neglected research issue is the role of instruction in facilitating the transfer of 

knowledge, skills, and strategies from L1 to L2. Currently, the research base in this area is 

uneven, involving only a handful of studies with small populations of students, which makes it 

difficult to draw strong conclusions about instruction. Another area where we do not have much 

---

 

 

25

systematic research is the developmental aspect of L2 reading. There is substantially more 

research on older students and adults learning to read in a second language, usually in the foreign-

language classroom context, but there are far fewer studies on school-age L2 students in bilingual 

education, ESL, or mainstream classrooms. Despite the fact that researchers always find a need 

for more research, this is clearly a case where there is a need to fund more research projects to 

answer the remaining important questions. 

Fortunately, L2 research has become a federal research priority. Research initiatives 

sponsored by the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development are now 

investigating many aspects of early reading instruction for second-language students. The 

Institute for Education Sciences is funding a project (the National Literacy Panel) to synthesize 

the extant literacy research base with language minority children in a systematic manner. These 

efforts are ongoing and hold great promise. 

Research is also needed to investigate the uses of computer technologies for L2 reading 

instruction. Much progress has been made in the use of computers as an aid to improve teaching 

of L1 reading. Work in L2 reading computer-assisted teaching should follow. Bernhardt (in press) 

has suggested the need for assessing vocabulary use in L2 reading assisted by computerized 

dictionaries. Such an assessment is clearly an area that could have immediate practical 

applications. Given the central importance of vocabulary in learning to read, both in L1 and L2, 

we endorse this call. 

Finally, the importance of teacher preparation in L2 reading instruction needs to be 

emphasized because much of the research on teacher education currently does not address this 

topic. Moreover, ongoing professional development of teachers dealing with L2 learners tends to 

be done on an informal basis. Thus, there is great potential for expanding teacher education 

programs that deal systematically with the literacy needs of L2 learners. There is also a 

compelling need to address the problems revealed in Bernhardt’s (1994) work described above. 

There is a critical need to improve the content of teacher manuals and textbooks, so that current 

---

 

 

26

research on L2 reading and methods can be widely disseminated. Teacher manuals and methods 

textbooks need to draw on a growing database of research that addresses both the cognitive and 

social aspects of L2 reading development. Teachers are and will remain the key to successful 

change in schools.  

The future needs in L2 reading are substantial. Researchers need to look to practitioners 

for promising interventions, and practitioners need to work with researchers to verify the 

effectiveness of those programs.  

---

 

 

27

REFERENCES 

Alderson, J. C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem? 

In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language. London: 

Longman. 

 

Aloki, E. M. (1993). Turning the page: Asian Pacific American children’s literature. In V. J. 

Harris (Ed.), Teaching multicultural literature in grades K–8 (pp. 109–135). Norwood, 

MA: Christopher-Gordon. 

 

Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1996). Linking reading comprehension instruction to language 

development for language-minority students. Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 295–309. 

 

Arnberg, L. N., & Arnberg, P. W. (1992). Language awareness and language separation in the 

young bilingual child. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 475–

500). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. 

 

Au, K. H. (2000). A multicultural perspective on policies for improving literacy achievement: 

Equity and excellence.  In  M.  L.  Kamil,  P.  B.  Mosenthal,  &  P.  D.  Pearson  (Eds.), 

Handbook of reading research, (Vol. 3, pp. 835–851). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 

Associates. 

 

Au, K. H., & Kawakami, A. J. (1994). Cultural congruence in instruction. In E. R. Hollins, J. E. 

King, & W. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge 

base (pp. 5–23). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 

 

August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language minority children: A 

research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 

 

Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, empirical and 

classroom perspectives. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. 

 

Bernhardt, E. B. (1994). A content analysis of reading methods texts: What are we told about the 

nonnative speaker of English? Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(2), 159–189. 

 

Bernhardt, E. B. (2000). Second-language reading as a case study of reading scholarship in the 

20

th

  century.  In  M.  L.  Kamil,  P.  B.  Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.) Handbook of 

reading research, (Vol. 3, pp. 813–834). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

 

Bernhardt, E. B. (in press). New Directions in Research: Literacy in a multilingual world. 

Reading Research Quarterly. 

 

Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: 

Consolidating the linguistic threshold and linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied 

Linguistics, 16(1), 15–34. 

 

Bialystok, E. (1997). Effects of bilingualism and biliteracy on children’s emerging concepts of 

print. Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 429–440. 

 

Bialystok, E. (2001). Metalinguistic aspects of bilingual processing. Annual Review of Applied 

Linguistics, 21, 169–181. 

---