Triadic Scaffolds

Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: tools for teaching English language learners with computers, language learning & technology, pp 46-59, 9

In this article Meskill examines the use of computers in the classroom of English learners. She uses the term triadic scaffolds to mean how the teacher, learner and computer all work together in a classroom to build communicative competence (I’m guessing). One interesting point the teacher that she was observing made was how quickly the learner picked up on the language when working on the computer with the teacher.
After reading the article I felt how WAY behind our k to 1st graders are in technology, simply because the children don’t have access to technology. If they do, it is with the outdated computers that can’t connect to internet or the printer but yet we have all these Ethernet-erbobs hanging from the walls (on all four corners might I say). I can only imagine working on the computer with a 5-year old and how all the new terms the child could acquire. I can only imagine going into Word and instructing the child how to make shapes on a page, and how to enlarge it or make it smaller. I can only imagine printing that page off and instructing that child how to add colors inside the shapes, while the page is printing. I can only imagine giving her the paper and having the child color her paper to match what’s on the screen. Imagine how much language can be spoken there. I can only imagine.

Bloch reading

Bloch, J. (2007). Abdullah’s blogging: a generation 1.5 student enters the blogoshere, Language learning & technology, 11, 128-140

This article is about using blogging in a second language classroom in English. Abdullah is an immigrant student from East Africa who participated in blogging. Students shared a blogging site where they shared their ideas and comments, one of them about plagerism.
As I read the article I thought of how students at Ayaprun Elitnaurvik could use blogging in the classroom, much like this article, only in Yugtun. Reading in Yugtun can be difficult at times, but with practice students (and teachers) can become accustomed to reading and writing in Yugtun. Blogging could be a great place to start. What I liked about the article is that students were told to share and not worry about grammar. As students participate they begin to make meaning of what they read.

July 21 readings

Thorn, S. (2006). New technologies and additional language learning. CALPER Working Paper Series, 1-26

The article is about the use of chats, emails, and other forms of internet communications (CMC or computer mediated communications) in the classrooms for learners of an additional language. Studies on the use of synchronous CMS (or chats) among learners of an additional language found that more students were involved in communication, and that language use was more complex than in a face-to-face instructional settings.
What I would like more clarification on is the study done by Payne and Ross (2005) where an experimental study was done on language learning and use of chat (where oral production was omitted) and with out chat. I think the outcome of the study was to produce a biomodal chat where both writing and oral communications can be used. Did the experimental group that did not use chat, use a traditional form of classroom instruction? Or how were the groups set up exactly?
Benefits to using internet and acquiring an additional language are tremendous. Interactionist researches on second language acquisition (SLA) suggest that comprehension comes about through interaction with other learners and native speakers. By negotiating for meaning and receiving feedback from others does a learner internalize the new language. Sociocultural theory also suggest that one cannot truly acquire a language without being exposed to the culture, activities, and language use (or being immersed in a language and culture). One finding that was interesting was how two different cultures seemed to clash among learners conversing with native speakers from another country.

McFarlane, S. (2008). The laptops are coming! The laptops are coming!, Rethinking Schools, 22, 22-26

McFarlane is a high school teacher who has dealt with students using laptops in the classroom. The school that McFarlane taught in was given laptops for each student and access to the internet for educational purposes.
Some positive points with technology in the classroom that McFarlane saw was in giving students who do not have computers at home an opportunity to be computer literate, and allowing more student involvement. The author raised concerns that would be worthy of research: the effects of the students’ bodies might have with the “increased screen time”, how learning might change, and how interaction amongst peers may be effected. One drawback to technology in the classroom is with students who are just learning English. McFarlane states that although shy and quiet students are more involved in the classroom, the English Language Learners (ELL) are alienated because they have difficulty reading and writing. Another drawback the author found was that the more time she spent on the computer the less time she was able to interact with her students face-to-face. What I liked was that there needs to be a balance between computer use and face-to-face communication among students.

Garcia, A. (2008). Rethinking myspace, Rethinking Schools, 22, 27-29

Garcia writes about her experiences with using MySpace as a communication and informational too with her students. All the articles that I read for this week, and including this article agree that student participation increases with the use of technology in the classroom. Most notable are those quiet and shy students who are able to express themselves through writing.
Although MySpace is banned the schools in our district, students do find away to get on that website which Garcia also noticed in her area. My son is constantly on that website and he communicates with a lot of his classmates and friends through that site. My greatest fear is that someone may lore him into sites he should be in. I wonder if curriculums on safety should include making students aware of the dangers of internet use.

week in review

What I took away from week one is he importance of planning aims and objectives. Progams work when everyone is involved, and if something is not working it is important to analyze what works and what isn't working and why. I've been trying to apply what we've covered to our immersion program. What is really working for immersion? What isn't working, and how can we go about those problems so that the program is running smoother?

chapter 2 &pp 13-22

Sarieva, I., & Zoran, A. (2008). Guiding principles: second language acquisistion, instructional technology, and the constructivist framework. In Erben, T. & Sarieva, I. (Eds.), CALLing all foreign language teachers: comuter-assissted language learning in the classroom (pp.7-12). Larchmont: Eye on Education.

Integrating technology into a second language classroom allows for higher thinking skills and builds on knowledge through different tools (mediated learning). The teacher becomes the facilitator instead of being the only source of learning. The chapter lists hypothesis of computer-assisted language learning (CALL): webpages in the target language can be used to highlight vocabulary, language structures, and explain concepts or words; allowing students practice speech and receiving comprehensible input in a nonthreatening atmosphere; allowing students to notice errors and to practice skills; allows for language practice to more native speakers in the world; and all participants are involved.
It is true that today’s young children are becoming more and more computer literate, and classrooms today should follow along and integrate technology. We complain that there are no programs and activities for children in Yugtun. But if we don’t start making websites using our language, there will never be sites for students to visit. If we can utilize the programs, we can create more authentic materials for students to use.


Erben, T., Ban, R., Jin, L., Summers, R., & Eisenhower, K. (2008). Using technology for foreign lanuage instruction: creative innovations, research, and applications. In Erben, T. & Sarieva, I. (Eds.), CALLing all foreign language teachers: comuter-assissted language learning in the classroom (pp.13-20). Larchmont: Eye on Education.

The chapter states that computers can be used as teacher and tool. Learners have the opportunity to practice language use, read or hear language use, and to receive feedback. The positive sides to integrating technology in the classroom are activities are student-centered, students are active learners, participation is in a less stressful environment, and students are exposed to authentic material. Some of the challenges and concerns are that frustration can occur when technical difficulties occur or when students don’t know how to do the tasks, and control of the classroom where students may enter into wrong websites. Some ways to avoid the problems is to check to make sure technology is working before beginning the class, students should be trained before using technology, and to have students aware of the class goals and objectives before beginning the activities.
While I was reading this chapter I was thinking how technology would fit into my kindergarten classroom. I think one way to use technology is to have parent involvement. Students can check out websites or chat rooms with parents as homework. But that would leave out the families that can’t afford computers. As the weeks go by I’ll be thinking of how to apply technology with my kindergarten students. I know little kids have fun taking pictures and movies; how do I go from there to internet?

chapter 9

Richards, J. (2001). Approaches to evaluation. In Curriculum development in language teaching (pp. 286-308). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The chapter states that evaluation of the language program is important to make that it is running the way it’s supposed to. There are different purposes to evaluation which include: formative evaluation that looks at what is working, what is not, and what the problems are; illuminative evaluation looks at how different aspects of the program are working by concentrating on the teaching and learning aspects; and summative evaluation looks at the effectiveness of the program.
There are two types of evaluators, insiders (people that deal directly with the program) and outsiders (evaluators who have no connection to the program). Teachers can give a formative evaluation of how the course is working while students can be the participants of the summative evaluation to see the product of the course. Outsiders are used to get an objective insight to the program.
After reading this chapter I’m beginning to wonder if the immersion program has ever been evaluated, and if so when was it done? I’d be interested to see what is working well and what needs improvement in the immersion program. It would be interesting to see why the two positions at our school keep changing teachers.

chapter 8

Richards, J. (2001). The role and design of instructional materials. In Curriculum development in language teaching (pp. 251-284). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The materials act as resources or support in language teaching. Such materials can be authentic (magazines, newspapers, teacher created) and created materials (textbooks, instructional resources). The chapter makes good points about selecting textbooks. One of the important criteria to look for in selecting textbooks is that student needs are met. Textbooks tend to be costly so it is important to carefully look through them before purchasing them. Authentic materials are good in that students are introduced to language used in real situations. But the downside is that it takes time to collect materials and to create activities around those materials.
What we do at immersion is to keep a collection of old and new textbooks and teacher resources (both English and Yup’ik materials) and use them as resources in teaching our language. I’m excited about having to develop materials around a theme that we don’t have materials for. In the past I’ve had to quickly make books or activities for family and animal units. Those take up time that we don’t have in the school year.

chapter 6

Richards, J. (2001). Course planning and syllabus design. In Curriculum development in language teaching (pp. 145-197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The chapter deals with planning and creating a syllabus in a language course. In planning and creating a syllabus, the course should include a rationale describing beliefs, values, and goals behind the course, describe the entry and exit level (who will be the learners and what will they be able to do when completing the course), and the course content and structure to name a few. The chapter also points out that grammar-based courses tend to focus on sentence and not on the whole language use, that focus is on form and not on meaning. Although it is part of communicative competence it should not be taught in isolation.
The chapter describes guidelines for creating a curriculum that the immersion program can use to create its own curriculum. This way more concentration will be placed on the language and language use for learners of the Yup’ik language. The curriculum for the Yup’ik First Language program is a great program for students who already speak the language but not quite adequate for learners of the language.

chapter 5

Richards, J. (2001). Planning goals and learning outcomes. In Curriculum development in language teaching (pp. 112-144). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

In planning a language curriculum planners look at the long term goal of the learners including: academic rationalism (justifications behind teaching a language), social and economic efficiency (looking at the needs of learners including economic needs of a society), learner-centeredness (looking at the individual needs of a learner), social reconstructionism (empowering learners by making them aware of the social injustices and acting on them), cultural pluralism (that other cultures are just as important as the dominant culture). The curriculum should also include aims or goals, and objectives or learning outcomes specifying the goals of the program.
The chapter describes in detail of how a language curriculum should entail, which makes me want to investigate the curriculum of our Yup’ik program. Do the outcomes include the non language outcomes like the thinking skills? When I was reading about the social and economic factors, I was reminded of one outcome that I read somewhere. The statement was that a child will have more job opportunities that deal with the Yup’ik language.

qanemciq

Waq', naspaatnguuq una.
Hi, this is a test.