<<  A pedagogy for the vocationally educated learner entering Higher Education: from competence to capability Computer and children: the pros and cons  >>
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
With special thanks to RAs: Patti Ortega, Ana Ferrer, Yael Wiesner,
With special thanks to RAs: Patti Ortega, Ana Ferrer, Yael Wiesner,
Questions:
Questions:
The Core Design
The Core Design
Contribution of Narrative Analyses: 1. Can HEAR the children
Contribution of Narrative Analyses: 1. Can HEAR the children
Findings from Narrative Analyses: ML > BL (mostly) Two-way = EI
Findings from Narrative Analyses: ML > BL (mostly) Two-way = EI
SAMPLE STORIES (4): Handout from page 144-145 of LLBC (and on CHILDES
SAMPLE STORIES (4): Handout from page 144-145 of LLBC (and on CHILDES
Frog, Where are You
Frog, Where are You
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
Story 1
Story 1
Story 2
Story 2
Story 3
Story 3
Story 4
Story 4
So
So
Oral Language Element Examples
Oral Language Element Examples
Narrative Element Examples
Narrative Element Examples
What about Complex Syntax
What about Complex Syntax
Complex Syntax (contd)
Complex Syntax (contd)
Findings from Narrative Analyses: (review) ML > BL (mostly) Two-way =
Findings from Narrative Analyses: (review) ML > BL (mostly) Two-way =
Question 1: ML outperform BLs (mostly) -- but not equally in all
Question 1: ML outperform BLs (mostly) -- but not equally in all
Question 1a: MLs outperform BLs (mostly)
Question 1a: MLs outperform BLs (mostly)
Question 1b: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Not equally in all aspects
Question 1b: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Not equally in all aspects
Question 1c: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Less so in the long term
Question 1c: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Less so in the long term
Q1d Most persistent ML/ BL gap in MS Accuracy
Q1d Most persistent ML/ BL gap in MS Accuracy
Question 1e: ML outperform BLs  but Gap in Total Score closes at
Question 1e: ML outperform BLs but Gap in Total Score closes at
Hypothesis 2: 2-Way = EI (partly) IN ENGLISH yes: Remake figure 7.4 p
Hypothesis 2: 2-Way = EI (partly) IN ENGLISH yes: Remake figure 7.4 p
Question 2a: EI = 2-way (partly) In ENGLISH: YES
Question 2a: EI = 2-way (partly) In ENGLISH: YES
Question 2b: EI = 2-way (partly) In SPANISH: NO
Question 2b: EI = 2-way (partly) In SPANISH: NO
Q2 b (cont)
Q2 b (cont)
Question 3a: L1 predicts L2 In Literacy Measures--YES
Question 3a: L1 predicts L2 In Literacy Measures--YES
Question 3b L1 predicts L2 In Oral Language-- NO
Question 3b L1 predicts L2 In Oral Language-- NO
Q3c A note about story length Despite
Q3c A note about story length Despite
Summary of Narrative Analysis Results
Summary of Narrative Analysis Results
Key Contribution of Narrative Analysis Results
Key Contribution of Narrative Analysis Results
Limitations of Narrative Analysis Results
Limitations of Narrative Analysis Results
Final word (from p. 172)
Final word (from p. 172)
Final word (cont)
Final word (cont)

: Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children. : Rebecca. : Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children.ppt. zip-: 767 .

Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children

Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children.ppt
1 Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children

Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children

Barbara Zurer Pearson University of Massachusetts University of Miami Bilingualism Study Group 1988-1998

2 With special thanks to RAs: Patti Ortega, Ana Ferrer, Yael Wiesner,

With special thanks to RAs: Patti Ortega, Ana Ferrer, Yael Wiesner,

Esperanza Rodriguez, and a host of UM students (all of whom spoke much better Spanish than I did--and without whom I could not have studied narrative).

3 Questions:

Questions:

Linguality: ML > BL ? IMS: Two-way > EI ?for Hi-SES ?for Lo-SES ? Interdependence: L1 predict L2

4 The Core Design

The Core Design

Monolinguals Bilinguals

Replicated at Kindergarten, 2nd and 5th Grades

Two-Way

English Immersion

ESH

OSH

ESH

OSH

Hi

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Lo

SES

5 Contribution of Narrative Analyses: 1. Can HEAR the children

Contribution of Narrative Analyses: 1. Can HEAR the children

(Theyre not just scores.) 2. A SINGLE task combining both oral language and the demands of literate language. 3. Encourage longer responses: more revealing than single word or short phrases of the Woodcock-Johnson.

6 Findings from Narrative Analyses: ML > BL (mostly) Two-way = EI

Findings from Narrative Analyses: ML > BL (mostly) Two-way = EI

(partly) in English Two-way = EI in Spanish Two-way > EI L1 predict L2 oral language No literacy Yes

7 SAMPLE STORIES (4): Handout from page 144-145 of LLBC (and on CHILDES

SAMPLE STORIES (4): Handout from page 144-145 of LLBC (and on CHILDES

archive and in SALT, U WI) 400+ stories 10 each from all cells of 2nd and 5th graders 80 ML 160 BL in English 160 BL in Spanish + 24 2nd stories from MLs (to test the effect of telling the story twice).

8 Frog, Where are You

Frog, Where are You

By M. Mayer (Dial 1969)

9 Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
10 Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
11 Story 1

Story 1

The dog looked in the bottle and looked at the frog. And the boy was sitting on a chair, and his sock and his shirt was laying on the floor. And the light was on, and the window was opened. When {the} the boy and the dog were sleeping the frog stuck his head out with his head and his arm out of the bottle.

12 Story 2

Story 2

One day a boy and his dog had found a frog. They kept him in the big jar. While the boy was asleep, the frog climbed out of the jar and ran away. When the boy woke up the next morning, he was very upset to see his frog missing. He searched everywhere. In boots and he turned over tables.

13 Story 3

Story 3

Once there was a little boy with his little dog. It was already night time. They were looking at the little frog. The little boy and his dog went to sleep. The frog wanted to go out to see {the w} the world. So he came out of the little can. It was morning already. The puppy and the boy looked to the can and saw {that their} that the frog was not there.

14 Story 4

Story 4

One day there was a boy n a frog and a dog. And then while the boy sleeps, {he} the frog came out. And then when he wake up, the dog and the boy, the frog was gone. He found everywhere and the dog found almost found in the bucket. And the boy was calling to the frog.

15 So

So

.?

Which one is a good story? Which one is not good? Which are from bilinguals? monolinguals? Motivation to split the task back up into ORAL LANGUAGE (Language Score) & LITERATE LANGUAGE (Story Score)

16 Oral Language Element Examples

Oral Language Element Examples

1

2

3

4

fluency

-- {}

-- {}

vocab example

Bottle

vs Jar

vs Can

[they] was laying

Pause for effect

For word-finding

vs Bucket Found xx

Morpho-syntactic accuracy

looked TO the can (boy with his dog)

Boy sleeps, he wake up

17 Narrative Element Examples

Narrative Element Examples

1

2

3

4

One day

Affective/ cognitive info

none

Temporal links

while + wrong tense; when1

orientation

none

One day..had found

Once there was

none (stuck head out)

upset; saw frog missing; searched

when2 clause

while when1

wanted to see the world; saw the frog not there

no clauses already night-morning

18 What about Complex Syntax

What about Complex Syntax

Grammatical devices (language) to introduce complexity and point of view (story)

In English Complement clauses: he saw that the frog was not there. Non-finite verbs: was upset to see his frog missing. Relative Clauses: the boy who had the frog woke up In Spanish Perfect tenses: vio que habian salido otras ranitas [he saw that HAD COME OUT other frogs] Subjunctive: dijo que se callara [he said that he was-to-be-quiet]

19 Complex Syntax (contd)

Complex Syntax (contd)

Between Clauses Causal conjunctions: in order to; so that he could... Adverbs of simultaneity: while; when2 Retrospective reference: still; already; todavia Language or Story or both?

20 Findings from Narrative Analyses: (review) ML > BL (mostly) Two-way =

Findings from Narrative Analyses: (review) ML > BL (mostly) Two-way =

EI (partly) L1 predict L2 oral language No literacy Yes

21 Question 1: ML outperform BLs (mostly) -- but not equally in all

Question 1: ML outperform BLs (mostly) -- but not equally in all

aspects of the task.

Remake fig 7.1 (p. 154) to emphasize story score equivalence and language score discrepancies. First for 2nd grade. Next page for 5th grade . (heading: language gap narrows by 5th grade.) Next page (heading: Language gap closes at HiSES, ESH: table 7.10 p. 158.) Next page: most persistent ML BL difference is in MS accuracy fig 7.6 (p. 160) (kids that dont talk so good cant think so good (but we saw in the story exerpts that that is not true, at least not in a circumstance of on-going 2nd language learning

22 Question 1a: MLs outperform BLs (mostly)

Question 1a: MLs outperform BLs (mostly)

(ML red/ BL blue 2nd gr solid/ 5th grade bars

23 Question 1b: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Not equally in all aspects

Question 1b: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Not equally in all aspects

of the task Story scores more equivalent; Most discrepancy in the Language Score .

2nd grade Story vs Language

24 Question 1c: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Less so in the long term

Question 1c: MLs outperform BLs (mostly) Less so in the long term

5th grade: ML/BL gap narrows Story Language Score

25 Q1d Most persistent ML/ BL gap in MS Accuracy

Q1d Most persistent ML/ BL gap in MS Accuracy

(Story Lexicon and Complex Syntax catch-up)

26 Question 1e: ML outperform BLs  but Gap in Total Score closes at

Question 1e: ML outperform BLs but Gap in Total Score closes at

HiSES, ESH

Frog Total

ML

ML

BL

BL

n

n

F

p

All 2nd grade

All 5th grade

5th gr; HiSES

5:HiSes;ESH

Simple Effect -- Linguality

Simple Effect -- Linguality

Simple Effect -- Linguality

M

M

40

79

35.6

.01*

40

81

3.29

.07

20

40

2.59

.11

20

20

0.98

.33

63.0

51.3

67.3

64.4

70.6

67.0

70.6

68.0

27 Hypothesis 2: 2-Way = EI (partly) IN ENGLISH yes: Remake figure 7.4 p

Hypothesis 2: 2-Way = EI (partly) IN ENGLISH yes: Remake figure 7.4 p

159 w/o MLs; make companion graph for Story Score Next page: look at MS Accuracy-Lex-and comp. syntax for 2-way vs EI 2nd to 5th (from scratch??) Next page: the interaction with SES and Language at home (figure 7.8 p. 162) Next page: IN SPANISH no: 2-Way > EI: figure 7.9 (p. 165) bigger difference is in Home Language

28 Question 2a: EI = 2-way (partly) In ENGLISH: YES

Question 2a: EI = 2-way (partly) In ENGLISH: YES

(EI green, 2-way blue) Story Language

29 Question 2b: EI = 2-way (partly) In SPANISH: NO

Question 2b: EI = 2-way (partly) In SPANISH: NO

(EI green, 2-way blue) (OSH orange, ESH brown) IMS LSH

30 Q2 b (cont)

Q2 b (cont)

That is, For English IMS has little effect. SES the biggest factor. LLBC p. 156

In Spanish, IMS has largest effect. SES has little effect; LSH less potent than IMS. LLBC p. 164

31 Question 3a: L1 predicts L2 In Literacy Measures--YES

Question 3a: L1 predicts L2 In Literacy Measures--YES

32 Question 3b L1 predicts L2 In Oral Language-- NO

Question 3b L1 predicts L2 In Oral Language-- NO

33 Q3c A note about story length Despite

Q3c A note about story length Despite

43 correlation to Narrative Score, length is NOT a clear measure of story quality. ie. Story quality is better at 5th grade for everyone, BLs stories are getting longer; MLs are getting shorter. MLs tell BETTER stories with fewer words (and presumably, eventually the bilinguals will too.)

34 Summary of Narrative Analysis Results

Summary of Narrative Analysis Results

Mirror the results from the Standardized tests: EI = 2 way in English; 2-way > EI in Spanish language of the home advantage for ESH (in English) disappears by 5th grade; language of the home advantage for OSH (in Spanish) persists for oral language, NOT narrative skills (where IMS and SES are more potent influences).

35 Key Contribution of Narrative Analysis Results

Key Contribution of Narrative Analysis Results

Despite language deficits in lexicon and MS-accuracy relative to ML peers, BLs demonstrated age-appropriate skill in these DIFFICULT narrative tasks: Creating a unified plot Motivating events through reference to internal states Providing narrators comments on the unfolding story Using compound time-referencing Using embedded structures which distinguished their own thoughts from those of the characters

36 Limitations of Narrative Analysis Results

Limitations of Narrative Analysis Results

Not standardized; hard to replicate our scoring system, which would need to be simplified to be practical. Our subjects not the best bilinguals, possibly not representative of most bilinguals. (Spanish surprisingly weak.) All born in US (avoided Age-of-arrival variable), but children speak a contact variety: most BLs in Miami have non-native English-language models AND non-native Spanish-language models. Bp: check how lo-ses osh did wrt IMS.

37 Final word (from p. 172)

Final word (from p. 172)

By using the factorial design of the larger study, which balanced the effect of each factor, we have enhanced our ability to generalize findings from the childrens stories. By expanding the performance demand on the children through the story task, we have provided an auditory snapshot of each individual, to add to the perspective provided by the standardized scores.

38 Final word (cont)

Final word (cont)

This snapshot enriches our ability to [appreciate] what the test scores are saying, and to have greater confidence in the messages they convey. --LLBC p. 172

Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children
http://900igr.net/prezentacija/anglijskij-jazyk/narrative-competence-in-monolingual-and-bilingual-school-children-175817.html
c

46

29
900igr.net > > > Narrative Competence in Monolingual and Bilingual School Children