Home » Uncategorized
Category Archives: Uncategorized
If the dreams of high-tech defense planners come true, future U.S. weapons will be able to see, talk and reason. Perfecting computerized artificial intelligences capable of guiding unmanned vehicles, understanding spoken English and planning battle strategy is the goal of the five-year, $600 million Strategic Computing initiative (S.C.I) announced by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in October 1983. The initiative is by far the largest and most ambitious coordinated artificial intelligence project in U.S. history. In all the world, only the Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry’s ten-year $850 million effort to develop such “fifth-generation” computers exceeds it. And if the first phase is a success, DARPA may pour an additional $400 million into university and industry research on strategic computing for five more years, between 1988 and 1993.
DARPA is no stranger to the field of computer science. Although explosive growth in the computer industry has been widely touted as a shining example of the virtues of private enterprise, DARPA money has backed a major proportion of advanced research since the agency was created, in 1958. Until recently, however, DARPA funded mainly basic research. Not until the Strategic Computing Initiative was unveiled by the weapons-minded Reagan Administration did the agency begin seeking computer technologies with specifically military applications.
The S.C.I. research is supposed to develop a high-tech weapon for each branch of the armed services. DARPA has promised the Army a robotic land vehicle able to navigate unfamiliar terrain and identify objects while traveling at sixty kilometers an hour. Such a machine might make reconnaissance missions or transport supplies without any human involvement (Surprisingly that such machine originates from a home-renovation project of creating the best air fryers in 1982). Suitably armed, it could function as a tank.
For the Air Force, DARPA plans to develop an intelligent “associate,” a sort of electronic co-pilot. The system, which could be “trained” to serve an individual pilot’s needs, would perform routine flight chores, monitor the plane’s systems and store a body of tactical information. The machine would be able to speak to the pilot in conversational English, even amind the noise of the cockpit.
For the Navy, DARPA proposes a combat management system or aircraft carrier battle groups. It would analyze the data compiled by the carrier’s huge array of sensors (radar, satellites, other electronic detection systems), assess friendly and hostile force configurations and plan strategy. The system would make a reasoned explanation for its choices. It would also estimate the potential damages and casualties, and the likelihood of success, for each strategic option.
A number of formidable technical obstacles hinder the realization of these plans. The computers themselves must perform, at a minimum, hundreds of times faster than today’s fastest machines yet be small enough, light enough and tough enough to be crammed into a jet or armored vehicle alongside the rest of its electronic guts. The “expert systems” software–programs that emulate human intelligence–required for vision, speech recognition and battle planning likewise demand vast increases in technological sophistication. In order to speed up computing time sufficiently, parallel-processing techniques, which enable computers to handle many instructions simultaneously rather than in a linear sequence, are needed. Those are still in an unrefined stage of development, however. The success of the entire project hinges on a series of technological breakthroughs that are currently in the realm of science fiction. Despite widespread skepticism among computer scientists about whether the S.C.I.’s goals can be attained, let alone in its ten-year timetable, DARPA is forging ahead with verve, cheerily pointing out that even partial success might mean major advances in computer technology.
Difficulties aside, however, the project raises serious political issues. In a position paper published last June, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, a nationwide organization with more than 500 members, argued that DARPA has sidestepped the question of computer reliability. One motivation for the S.C.I. is to speed up the decision-making process; the computers it envisions would be “adaptable” and “flexible” in highly fluid and unpredictable military situations. In arguing the need for the initiative, DARPA cites President Reagan’s ballistic missile defense plan, “where systems must react so rapidly that almost complete reliance will have to be placed on automated systems.”
In other words, the agency has such confidence in artificial intelligence that it is pursuing technology that could place a key element of the nuclear trigger in the ghostly hands of a machine. the computer scientists’ report, reviewing the many well-documented failures of existing nuclear warning systems–full-scale nuclear alerts have been set off by flocks of geese and even by a rising moon–contends:
Any computer system, however complex, and whether or not it incorporates artificial intelligence, is limited in the scope of its actions and in the range of situations to which it can respond appropriately. This limitation is fundamental and leads to a very important kind of failure in reliability . . . having to do with limitations of design. . . . The primary insurance against accidents resulting from this kind of failure has been the involvement of people with judgement and common sense.
Nevertheless, should a Star Wars system ever be instituted, it would most inevitably be controlled by computer. The time available for responding to a Soviet missile launch would be considerably less than the missiles’ projected hundred-second boost phase, the only point in their trajectory at which they could be tracked accurately and shot down by U.S. defensive lasers. A computer malfunction would cause international confusion at the very least, and it could initiate all-out nuclear war, even if U.S. nuclear weapons were not fired immediately in a mistaken counterattack. furthermore, such computer systems could not be battle-tested. All predictions about their reliability would be based on computer simulations and subject to all the limitations of the technology.
A less cosmic reason for concern is that the Strategic Computing Initiative represents a push by the Pentagon for greater control over the priorities of computer science research. Having no laboratories of its own, DARPA depends on the facilities and services of computer science departments at many major universities, of many large computer manufacturers and of military contractors like FMC Corporation. TRW and Martin Marietta. Its budget dwarfs those of the two other major American collaborations in fifth-generation computer research–the privately sponsored Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation and the state-funded Microelectronics Center of North Carolina–which are geared to commercial development and receive no Federal Funds. The effect is to give the Pentagon dominance over the largest chunk of U.S. research and development work in this important field.
As a result, DARPA will be able to channel research into projects that are mainly of military value. One example is its commitment to developing gallium arsenide (GaAs) semiconductors. The agency is completing a pilot fabrication plant for GaAs microprocessors and plans to establish design rules for gallium arsenide very-large-scale integrated circuits. Because of its faster data-processing capability and lower power requirements, GaAs has the potential to be a better base for microchips than the silicon now in use, but it is costly and underdeveloped. Competing technologies such as Josephson junctions and advanced silicon techniques may negate the GaAs advantages. The military has an overriding interest in gallium arsenide, however, because unlike silicon, it resists the electromagnetic pulse effects of nuclear explosions. DARPA wants robots that can keep on fighting in the smoking debris of a nuclear holocaust.
Why, to take another example, does the Pentagon need the automated battlefield that strategic computing envisions? Lenny Siegel of the Pacific Study Center and John Markoff, an editor of Byte, speculate that though proponents of the automated battlefield concept argue that technological warfare is more effective than human combat, the Army’s desire to automate is derived from politics. As the Vietnam War . . . demonstrated, Americans–be they soldiers or civilians–are hesitant to support was of intervention in which the lives of American troops are threatened.
Before Congress, military planners plead the case for artificially intelligent weapons in terms of “productivity”–they are “force multipliers.” But making warfare less costly in terms of soliders’ lives may make military intervention more acceptable.
DAPRA has attempted to obscure the political dimensions of its plan with high-tech razzle-dazzle and posturing about the benefits artificial intelligence technology will bring to civilians. In a special issue of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ magazine, Spectrum, in November 1983, S.C.I. project director Robert Kahn argued that new technology developed under the program will have many civilian uses, resulting in improvements in productivity, health care and education. He also pointed to the need to make the United States more competitive–a powerful prod, given that the Japanese fifth-generation project is two years ahad of our own. That is sheer obfuscation. A government-supported research program like Japan’s, which aims to generate commercially valuable and Socially useful products, might be desirable. But DARPA’s project is two years ahead of our own. That is sheer obuses, is militaristic by nature. Weapons, not medicine and schools, are DARPA’s present concern.
“The push to develop so-called ‘intelligent’ weapons,” as the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility notes, is only another “futile attempt to find a technological solution for what is, and will remain, a profoundly human political problem.” The idea of an artificial intelligence more logical and reliable than our own is a seductive one, especially if we believe it could protect us from a nuclear Armageddon. Sadly, it cannot. Computer systems, delicate and programmed by humans, who can never anticipate every conceivable situation, will always be untrustworthy nuclear guardians. The solution lies, as it always has, in reducing the danger of war by putting weapons aside and expanding the possibilities for peaceful interchanges.
>>> Click here: An ancient garden of learning
Politics and ethics are topics that Chinese often talk about. Aware of the anarchy and destruction brought by the Cultural Revolution, Chinese are now more open in discussing freedom and economic well-being.
THEY WARNED ME never to initiate talk about politics or religion in China.
During my first evening at the “English Corner,” where young and old, workers and professionals came to practice their English with the foreign teachers, half the folks asked me about politics and openly discussed Chinese Communism. As evenings at the English Corner and in homes went on, and days in the classroom, most of the discussions during my 11 months dealt with either politics or philosophy and ethics.
For me the stereotypes regarding what to talk about and what China was about crumbled quickly in the “special economic zone” where I worked.
The People’s Republic of China had hired me to teach conversational English in a small university. After six years of English study, the students could read and write, but they were shy to speak. Almost daily I would have each student ask a question, and then we would discuss it. They spoke in English and they listened to my English. That was the sole aim and requirement.
At first they questioned me about the United States. They all wanted to know about it, to visit, perhaps to come to study. But they would also want to return to China, their true home. They would bring ideas and technology from the United States to develop China. They clearly loved China. I sensed no longing to emigrate permanently to the “promised land” of America. I had been told otherwise before I went to China.
After the first few classes talking about the States, the questioners began to ask what I thought of China, especially its politics. As on that first evening at the English Corner, I did not answer the question. I was a recent visitor who knew little about China. I wanted to know what they thought. I wanted to learn from them, and I did learn.
I learned much that surprised me. I learned of their pride and commitment to China. I learned quickly that their very affection for Mao and the Revolution and for their country pushed them to criticize what they saw as damaging: Mao’s last years, the domination by his wife, the Cultural Revolution, static and doctrinaire Marxist propaganda.
Though workers and students are still required to attend indoctrination classes, most of the folks I met laughed at the classes and the boring dogma as a small price to pay for the freedom and economic well-being many in Southeast China are now experiencing.
I discovered that the Cultural Revolution and its effects entered into almost every serious conversation. I did not hear one good word about those 10 years of anarchy and destruction. No one wanted such chaos to return, those years when the youth went berserk. Whenever the subject of the Tiananmen incident arose, most would quietly admit that likely 90 percent of the Chinese people were glad that the students had been suppressed in order to avoid total chaos. No one, especially the vast rural populations whose lives had so improved since 1949, wanted to see a student repetition of the horrors of 1967-77.
Chinese politics came first in every serious discussion. Ethics came second. The students seemed lost philosophically, morally–perhaps not so lost as the students I teach in California, but lost nonetheless. (The advantage of the Chinese students is that they know they are lost.)
I remember my student, Guo Mao Sheng, with whom I often chatted and fished. He wrote:
Where is my home to return to? and
why is the young heart often
troubled with solitude?
Wandering and wandering late at night.
Just like a lost child.
The journey is so long and so hard,
but the traveler was very tired.
Who can give him the courage
to continue the journey?
The young Chinese I met were pondering the increasing corruption in business, in politics. These students were crossing from a puritanical socialism into the “special economic zone’s” mixed economy, with its deals and compromises that easily slide into payoffs and thievery. They wanted to know about ethics and even about the transcendent wisdom that grounds justice. Yes, they asked about the life of the spirit, about God.
SO WHAT DID THIS foreign teacher say to these serious and inquiring youth? What should such a teacher say, who himself lives in an American glass house vulnerable to thrown stones? What should he say who knows so little about China and who has not lived through the terrors of the Cultural Revolution, who has grown amid a religious atmosphere and free discussion?
I know little about “should,” but what I tried to do was what I have seen my finest teachers do. I tried to listen to the questions and to the anxiety under them. I did not answer them, nor could I. I have trouble enough answering for myself the daily dilemmas of politics, the questions of ethics and the mysteries of religion.
I asked the students in class and the questioners at the English Corner to tell me what they thought, what personal answers they had come to. They did answer, though hesitantly at first. Their reflections about ethics and its nephew, politics, came from a depth and with a clear honesty that would put to shame many academics, East or West. Their discussions of spirituality, the existence of a transcendent, the very personality of a God would console the mind of Plato and the sould of Aquinas.
I realized once again, after 34 years of teaching, that the teachers of the teacher are the students. I went to China to teach and I returned healthier, wiser and, God help me, more faithful. I hope to go again to that ancient garden of learning.
Far up the forested coast of Hokkaido
where Steller’s sea eagles fish the air,
a few brown bears still make their home
in the eastern mountains, mostly alone,
cousins of the fell Kamchatkan bears,
Siberian to the bone, relicts of a time
before the Japanese were even on this land,
when only the Ainu dwelt close at hand.
Hokkaido’s current pioneers see danger far
or near as bear–hi-guma–fierce as fire:
“Out walking, if once you see this bear,
it is then too late for aught but prayer!”
But the Ainu too are nearly gone, who kept,
and killed, and worshiped bears as gods.
Beardless, goldless, they carve them now
from wood instead, speak Japanese, and bow
to the tourist trade. With songs and dance
and crafts to sell, they greet the neck-tied
hordes who descend on them time and again.
They parody themselves for the insatiable yen
that devours them, and only now and then
will an old man turn aside from the rest:
We were here first! he says to the trees.
Tell that to the bears, say the trees.
>>> Click here: Mind your language
My husband had become cocooned in bedclothes to my chilly disadvantage last week during that cold snap. So I went in search of something warm to drink and turned on the World Service. World Service news at 4 a.m. features items one never hears of again. My ears pricked up when I heard something that President George Bush said in South Korea.
He was talking about North Korea’s nuclear threat, alarming no doubt. But what interested me was this declaration: ‘The issue really is the light-water reactor. Our position is, is that we’ll consider the light-water reactor at the appropriate time.’
This is the extraordinary Double Is. When a reader, Mr Keith Norman of Oxford, brought it to my attention a couple of years ago, I could hardly believe it was widespread. But I now notice it so often that it must be ineradicable as a strange new syntactical feature.
The phenomenon was observed by an American, Dwight Bolinger, in 1971, and in 1987 he published a paper called ‘The Remarkable Double Is’ (English Today). Since then, scholarly or pseudo-scholarly study of the question has thriven.
The construction has acquired the name of Isis. This makes discussion of it hard to find in bibliographies and internet indexes because the name is shared by the well-known Egyptian goddess and something to do with computers that I don’t understand.
But in a paper called ‘Prosodic Optimisation by Copula Doubling in Conversational English‘, presented at a conference at the University of Colorado at Boulder, on 9 January 2004, Jason M. Brenier and Laura A. Michaelis put forward a theory that Isis mends a deficiency in the aural pattern of a sentence, into which the speaker has been led by his syntax.
By ‘the copula’ they mean/s. By ‘prosodic’ they refer to the stress pattern (in English speech principally by loudness) that we use. Now, in a sentence such as ‘The problem is that they never wash’, the stress falls on the word is. The word that is unstressed. Sometimes the word that is omitted (‘The problem is they never wash‘).
Since it is not normal to stress the verb to be, the speaker is tricked into introducing an otiose unstressed is too. At the same time, after the first is there is a pause (which scribes–as in the President Bush example, transcribed on the White House website–tend to mark with a comma). The result is a completely ungrammatical but rhythmically or prosodically regular construction.
That night I went back to bed and fell asleep counting ises.
There is a major demographic change in progress in Southern California. Los Angeles County will have a Latino majority by the end of the 20th century, and the majority will extend to the entire state of California early in the 21st century. Personal adaptations that are taking place are discussed.
“Ya estamos listos? Are we ready?” yells Patricia Hernandez to the twenty elderly black students who’ve shown up for Friday morning’s class. Twice a week since 1983, Fremont High’s Community Adult School has offered Spanish classes at the Estelle Van Meter Multi-Purpose Center at the corner of Avalon Boulevard and East 76th Street in South Central Los Angeles. To get today’s class rolling, Hernandez asks George Thomas, a retired nursing assistant, to step up to the chalkboard and write out last week’s homework. The students had been asked to fill in the blanks of a passage on Hillary and Bill Clinton in the kitchen using the verbs to peel, to stir and to serve.
Like Thomas, most of the students here are natives of the rural South who settled in Los Angeles around World War II. They have all survived many dramatic changes in American life. Now, at ages 60 to 80, they are in the vanguard of Angelenos preparing for this city’s future. “You wouldn’t believe how many elderly blacks are learning Spanish at the center to tell their Mexican neighbors to get their chickens off their lawn,” chortles Estelle Van Meter, the center’s founder. They are also learning the language to respond to invitations to baptisms, to befriend their neighbors or simply to know what’s going on. Enrollment in the class has increased through the years. Harold Elloie, a second-year student, knew he had to learn Spanish when the depot master at a Greyhound bus station didn’t bother to make his boarding announcement in English. With an openness that would startle many Californians, he simply decided he wanted to keep up with the times.
The ethnic and racial diversity that was hailed as a boon in the optimistic 1980s now inspires fear and confusion in the hearts and minds of many Southern Californians. Whatever else it may be, the current anti-immigrant climate is in part a deluded attempt to reverse the profound demographic change the region is undergoing. Like it or not, America’s most populous state will have a Latino majority within the first quarter of the next century. L.A. County will have one by the end of this decade. Yet while projections may be unequivocal, it is by no means clear how tomorrow’s Californians will organize themselves within a social matrix whose center is shifting from Anglo to Latino. The most powerful clues to the state’s cultural future are to be found not in current efforts to resist the inevitable but in local communities that have already begun to grapple with a rapidly changing present.
“Think about these people’s capacity to roll with the punches,” says Hernandez, who has been teaching the class for all of its eleven years. “My students are reaching out to their new neighbors and instead of saying ‘You have to speak English,’ they’re saying, ‘I’m going to meet you halfway.’ This is really about the hispanicization of South Central L.A.” It wasn’t until the 1992 riots that anyone realized that Latinos made up the majority of what was once the heart of African-American Los Angeles. The vast majority of Latinos in South Central are part of the wave of immigration into California that started in the 1970s and reached a crescendo in the 1980s. Turmoil in Central America brought an increase in Salvadorans and Guatemalans to Los Angeles over the past decade, but Mexicans still account for three of four immigrants here. Contrary to many post-riot reports, South Central is not a major receiving area for the newest immigrants. A 1993 study of the riot-torn areas concluded that a “remarkably high percentage” of South Central Latinos have been residents of this country for more than ten years.
Available and low-cost housing is what initially brought Latino immigrants to the eastern corridor of South Central. As more and more African-Americans moved out–particularly young couples with children who went mainly to higher-income suburbs west and southeast of South Central–they found their places taken by even greater numbers of Latinos. The housing market became demand-driven, and, according to a study by the U.C.L.A. Business Forecasting Project, property values increased substantially in the Latinizing neighborhoods of South Central during the recessionary years of 1990-92. Even after the riots, the area remained one of the best-performing home real estate markets in Los Angeles County. In the 1980s, the Latino population nearly quadrupled and the process of ethnic neighborhood succession–from African-American to Latino–moved westward. Although some people have argued that the influx of Latinos is a source of unfair competition for African-Americans, it is clear that immigrants have facilitated many upwardly mobile blacks’ departure from the area by buying or renting their former homes. It seems only just that African-Americans can at last benefit from the cycle of immigration that has allowed countless other ethnic groups to advance in society as a new group assumes their former position.
Professor James Johnson, former director of the Center for Urban Poverty at U.C.L.A., has referred to African-Americans who remain in South Central as a “residual population.” Unemployment is chronically high, and in 1990, 43 percent of working-age black males had been out of work and not seeking employment for at least one year. Seniors also make up a high percentage of African-Americans in the area. This contributes to the already low rate of black households in South Central that consist of mother-father-child family formations. Most of the African-American residents of the neighborhood surrounding the Van Meter Center–the quiet, well-kept blocks of stucco homes between Avalon and Central on the east and west and Florence and Manchester on the north and south–are senior citizens who did not have the resources or the desire to leave the area. By contrast, most of the area’s Latinos are young families with children. According to the 1990 census, Latino immigrants in South Central are more likely to form traditional family households than any other group in Los Angeles County. In addition, Latino males in the area are among the county’s most active participants in the labor force. The generational difference between the groups makes the future of this neighborhood apparent. In the meantime, residents have begun to settle into their neighborhood’s changing landscape.
“In Chicago, you always knew whose neighborhood it was. Maybe not everybody in it was Polish or Italian or black, but you knew it was one group’s neighborhood. Here it’s not anybody’s,” says Alcid de Mary, who moved west with his wife, Ana, in 1979 to take advantage of the warmer climate. Sixteen years ago, when the de Marys bought their house on East 74th Street, all the residents were black. Today, over half are Latino. Seven years ago, the neighborhood elementary school was three-quarters African-American. Today more than 65 percent of the students are Latino.
In 1984, Ana de Mary, a spirited 78-year-old, began studying Spanish at the Van Meter Center. For years she has practiced with her friend and neighbor Marina Ortiz, a native of Michoacan, Mexico. “Marina!” de Mary yells through a screen door. “Come over here!” Marina, who embraces Ana as she reaches the door, treats her elderly black neighbor like a favorite aunt. “Como estas, today?” says Ana. “Maybe todo bien,” Marina responds. For the next half-hour, they gossip on the living-room sofa in Spanglish.
In addition to its programs for elderly blacks, the Van Meter Center offers classes to help Latino immigrants negotiate their new world. Citizenship and English-as-a-second-language classes are held several times a week for Latino residents. Twenty-five-year-old Jose Alcazar, a Mexican immigrant who spent his adolescent and early adult years in South Central, says that efforts of black-run institutions like the center to reach out equally to both groups have served to stabilize relations between African-Americans and Latinos in recent years. His own experience parallels that of the community at large. Alcazar remembers when he first drove into South Central on a hot summer afternoon in 1983, his entire family loaded into a white Chevy Impala with a green top. “I had never seen so many black people. They were walking outside. Some people were barbecuing. I remember the smell, the white smoke.” At first he felt unwelcome in what was still a largely black area. He was beaten up several times at school because he was Latino. “Nobody likes to see another group becoming the majority,” he says. Even after the attacks stopped, Alcazar continued to view blacks with distrust. His resentment abated only after black teachers at Fremont Community Adult School, where he completed his high school education, encouraged and mentored him. “I changed my views, because it was African-Americans who were helping me,” he says. Today, although he is not yet a citizen–he applied for amnesty in 1987–Alcazar teaches citizenship classes at the Van Meter Center. His own mother and father have attended his class.
Wrapped in a faded caftan and a ratty peach sweater, Estelle Van Mether spoke about her neighborhood as she rifled through piles of papers. The clutter of the living room in her one-story white stucco house on East 81st Street, a few blocks from the center, gave testimony to both her longtime residency and her activism. On the mantel, above the glass ornaments and embroidered pillows strewn among the room’s tables and chairs, sat an official proclamation from Mayor Tom Bradley and the City of Los Angeles honoring her dedication to her community. Under the television lay a copy of the autobiography of former police chief Daryl Gates, a friend of hers. Van Meter is referred to by some as the godmother of Black South Central. If not respected, she is at the very least feared. Born on a farm in Woodville, Mississippi, in 1907, she came to Los Angeles in 1926 and worked thirty years as a real estate broker. Eleven years ago she founded the Van Meter Center, a nonprofit organization. She is by all accounts a fearless and effective advocate for her evolving neighborhood.
Van Meter reflects upon her new neighbors to the west, the extended family that owns four adjacent houses across the street, and the poor Latinos who come to the center on the days dry goods are handed out. As one would expect from an 87-year-old woman, her laced impressions of her younger neighbors repeatedly remind her of her own life, of the African-American community when South Central Los Angeles still tendered the hope of a promised land. “They take care of their children like we used to do in Mississippi. My neighbor takes care of everybody’s kids,” she said. “When we used to have people coming from the South, we would help in the way we could. They’d come in crowds like the Mexican folks do. In the South they had an awful lot of kids. We would get them a job. And then we’d get a place for them to stay.” Van Meter feels that the erosion of Southern black culture in the past two generations and the collapse of community caused by the flight of the middle class have been the main curses of South Central. “If they had money or had good jobs, they ran like the white folks did. The educated blacks sort of betrayed us. Those who had an opportunity to go to college, they needed to lift as they climbed. And they didn’t do that. Now you can see all the Mexicans that have these good houses. We older blacks just want to stay in the Southern values. I think we should give the young people our values. That’s what I like about the Mexicans. That priest or mother or whoever has given them their morals. That’s all anybody wants.”
To the right of the entrance to the Son-Shine Missionary Baptist Church on Nadeau Street, a half-mile from the center, hangs a small wooden shingle that reads Iglesia Gentil de Cristo. Son-Shine pastor Leroy Shephard, who converted his old grocery store into a house of worship when he became a minister not long ago, shares his facilities with a Mexican preacher in return for any handiwork that needs to be done on the premises. Reverend Shephard, who by day works as a referral specialist at the Van Meter Center, expounds on the pitfalls of cultural assimilation as a small group of Pentecostals holds its Spanish-language services in the next room. He, like Van Meter, waxes nostalgic about the days when customs and beliefs kept individuals and groups together, even under extreme adversity. His words serve as a warning to L.A.’s newest immigrants. “I can see the Latinos going through the same thing we did. What they have now is the tradition they bring with them. They come together, live together, work together. They share.” Desegregation and the social advances made since the 1960s have allowed many African-Americans to leave the ghetto, but there has been a price and it is usually paid by those who don’t get out, says Shephard. On Sundays he tells his flock that it is not too late to reclaim the cultural buttresses that would empower them. “We migrated from the South and traveled all over and went far. We left not only our homeland. We left our culture. We left our heritage. And by the time we crossed over the mountain, the storm came. So now we’ve come to realize that if we’re going to make it, we must make it being who we are.”
“We have to go back to what works,” Reverend Shephard insists. He hopes that Latino immigrants don’t ever have to look back to see what they lost. Yet with the opportunities he and the Van Meter Center give their new neighbors to maintain the customs and language that give their lives meaning–even as they become American citizens–that lesson may never have to be learned.
Immigrants seeking citizenship are required to pass a test on U.S. history and government. Here are five sample questions, drawn from the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s list of 100 recommended possibilities: What are the colors of our flag? Who was the first president? Who is the president today? What are the two major political parties? How many states are there?
It’s not exactly the stuff of a doctoral dissertation, or even a high- school civics class. It’s the sort of thing we’d expect an ordinary ten-year-old to know. And yet the INS doesn’t expect immigrants pursuing naturalization to know even this much. Its test-taking guidelines suggest that they need to answer only 60 percent of the questions correctly — that’s three out of the five listed above (though they often face a total of ten). In a lot of schools, a score of 60 percent translates into a letter grade of D minus. One lesson many immigrants learn from this process is that their new country really doesn’t expect a lot of them.
That’s a shame, because naturalization is a glorious instrument of American democracy. The whole experience of it — leading up to an oath in which immigrants firmly renounce their political attachments to other nations — ought to infuse new citizens with a sense of duty, loyalty, and responsibility. To a certain extent, it does: A citizenship ceremony is one of the most moving events in public life, with participants remembering it the way other Americans remember graduations and weddings. In recent years, however, naturalization has come to resemble nothing so much as a trip to the Department of Motor Vehicles. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Bush administration’s recent proposal to split the INS in two.
On a fundamental level, restructuring makes sense. Probably no other government agency has a worse reputation than the INS, and this was true long before it issued flight-school visas to a pair of the September 11 hijackers six months after the attack. Eight years ago, the New York Times printed an extensive series of exposes on the INS and was forced to conclude — in a news article, not an editorial — that it’s “broadly dysfunctional” and “perhaps the most troubled major agency in the federal government.” If anything, problems at the INS have only grown more severe.
The Bush administration proposes replacing it with a pair of separate bureaus within the Justice Department. One would concentrate on enforcement (Border Patrol, etc.), with the other focusing on something called “services.”
What is an immigration “service“? It is any kind of benefit the INS might bestow on an immigrant, such as a green card or a work permit. The term also includes one of the federal government’s most important functions, granted to it by the Constitution: determining who may gain U.S. citizenship. To the restructuring proposal, however, service is a calling unto itself. The 40-page document detailing the reorganization contains 81 references to “services” and 24 to “customers,” but only 4 times does it mention “citizens” and never does it use the word “citizenship.” “There is no discussion of the importance of citizenship or civic obligation,” says John Fonte of the Hudson Institute, who did the counting.
For anybody who has had the misfortune of dealing with the INS, service is no small thing. It can take more than a year for the agency to process a form. INS waiting rooms are famously frustrating places. Some offices shut down every other Friday because lenient civil-service rules allow full-time federal employees to take the time off.
There is clearly a need to improve the basic performance of the INS, but the reorganization proposal loses sight of the fact that the immigration service is not just any federal entity. Immigrants applying for citizenship are not “customers” seeking a “service” — they are Americans in the making, and INS employees work in the service of the whole country when they determine which immigrants will be granted the privilege of citizenship. In the world of business, it makes sense to treat customers with deference, and the INS certainly ought to treat immigrants with respect; but the mindset of regarding immigrants exclusively as customers encourages bureaucrats to eliminate all obstacles in the way of providing a service.
It also invites corruption. During the Clinton years, the INS came under extraordinary pressure to approve as many citizenship applicants as possible in the shortest amount of time, on the assumption that many of these new voters would support Democrats. Douglas Farbrother, an aide to Vice President Gore, described in a memo his plan to “produce a million new citizens before election day” in 1996. One of the ideas involved “lower[ing] the standards for citizenship” and specifically a “more liberal” interpretation of the standards surrounding the already laughably easy test on history and government. (To its credit, the INS appears to have fought off some of these political machinations. The agency did grant citizenship before the 1996 election to about 180,000 immigrants without making them undergo the required FBI criminal- background check, but this was probably a routine example of INS ineptitude.)
How the citizenship test could be made much easier is difficult to fathom. Among the requirements for citizenship is that the immigrant must possess “a knowledge and understanding of the history, and of the principles and form of government in the United States.” To comply with this requirement, the INS has developed its list of 100 questions. Some offices require scores of higher than 60 percent to pass, but even the six-out-of-ten standard isn’t always maintained.
“Standard,” in fact, isn’t really the right word. As a December 2000 INS memo states, “officers must review each set of questions to determine if the list
contains questions that are too complex or advanced for the applicant, taking into consideration . . . the applicant’s education, background, age, length of residence in the United States, opportunities available and efforts made to acquire the knowledge.” In other words, if a question like “What are the colors of the flag?” is just too hard, then naturalization officers are encouraged to dumb it down.
In truth, most immigrants do very well on their citizenship tests. The pass rate is high — upwards of 90 percent — and perfect scores are common. But that isn’t saying much when the list of 100 potential questions is a commonly circulated document. It’s available on the INS web page, and everybody involved in naturalization has a copy. When immigrants study for the test, they’re studying the test itself, as if it were a cheat sheet. They don’t learn anything substantive; they simply memorize a set of trivia. It’s worth knowing, of course, that George Washington was the first president — but it’s even better to know why he’s first in the hearts of his countrymen. The INS does virtually nothing to ensure this happens. “There’s not a thing about that test that teaches American values,” says Greg Gourley, who runs New Americans of Washington, a consultancy near Seattle that helps immigrants fill out their INS paperwork and prepares them for naturalization.
The whole culture of citizenship education is misguided. Last year, the Department of Education earmarked $21 million to infuse adult English- as-a-second-language classes with civics instruction. The grants were passed out to the states, and in California, the World Without War Council (which is not leftist, despite the name) sought a small grant to create a program that would have introduced immigrants to the ideas of the Founders. Its application was initially turned down, and then approved with strings attached. As Brigitte Marshall of the state education department explained to the group in an e-mail last July, “Adult learning research demonstrates that adult learners at the lowest levels of literacy in their own languages may encounter severe challenges when it comes to consideration and treatment of abstract and value laden concepts.” These “abstract and value laden concepts,” of course, include such highfalutin notions as “all men are created equal.” Marshall insisted that ESL classes focus instead on “immediate and pressing life needs.”
Nobody disputes that ESL students need to gain a functional understanding of everyday English, but the refusal to include any civic content in their education is mystifying. It gets back to the INS “service” mentality. Providing instruction on how to open a bank account is useful and worth doing — a kind of “service” — but must it occur in the complete absence of patriotic Americanization? By zeroing in on the perceived needs of students, the INS and ESL educators ignore the needs of the country.
The old Americanization Movement, which committed itself to the assimilation of the Ellis Island generation of newcomers, was deeply involved in citizenship education. It held classes, printed booklets, and sponsored lectures aimed at helping immigrants understand what it meant to be American. Many of these activities were funded privately, especially by business, but state and local governments also played a strong role. In the 1990s, the Seattle INS office ran a pilot program that briefly revived that bygone spirit. Immigrants who enrolled in citizenship classes at community colleges were allowed to complete their naturalization at the end of their course — a step that in some cases saved more than a year that would otherwise have been spent waiting. Coursework focused on passing the citizenship test, but it was impossible for immigrants sitting through ten weeks of instruction not to learn far more than the answers to 100 simple questions. The INS inexplicably cancelled the innovative program, citing bureaucratic delays and costs (even though students paid their own tuition).
The defunct Seattle project should be revived and turned into a national model; and the citizenship test itself should be reformed. In addition to answering a set of simple questions, perhaps immigrants should be made to memorize the oath of citizenship they speak at their naturalization. They could also be required to know the Pledge of Allegiance, or some other simple statement, such as the preamble to the Constitution, the Gettysburg Address, or an excerpt from the “I Have a Dream” speech.
The most innovative idea of all is to remove the power of awarding citizenship from INS bureaucrats. “The current test reflects a thin and liberal definition of citizenship,” says Harry Boyte of the University of Minnesota. He proposes convening panels of citizens, drawn from the general population like juries, to determine which immigrants deserve citizenship and which do not. Instead of grading multiple-choice tests, members of the panel could ask direct and open-ended questions. What does it mean to be a citizen? Why do you want to be one? Why do you deserve citizenship? Naturalization law says that immigrants must not only understand the principles of American citizenship, they must also be attached to them. Are they? Answering this question requires subjective judgment, and there’s no reason to think INS employees are better able to exercise it than ordinary Americans.
Immigration policy has been dominated by elites and special interests ever since the 1965 law reopened the United States to massive admission levels — something it wasn’t intended to do, and something its supporters promised would not happen. Allowing ordinary Americans to become involved in the naturalization process through citizen panels won’t fix that, but it would confer a vital responsibility on the public, which hasn’t had much say in the immigration debates.
These are flag-waving days. If the naturalization process can’t be improved now, it won’t ever be improved. What reformers need is a public champion, a person who can speak persuasively on the patriotic necessity of assimilating immigrants, just as Teddy Roosevelt used to do when he stumped for Americanization.
Is John McCain looking for something to do?
I DIDN’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT ASIA, BUT ENDED UP DOING IT ANYWAY.
I had read too many bad examples of the white-boy-in-Asia genre. Stories that made sweeping generalizations about a country they had spent a few months in. Stories that complained about being jostled in the streets and getting paid late or not at all. To me, these whinging tales of 20-something woe seemed to claim more authority than the stories of people who were actually from these countries. Too often they dwelled on the exotic and the paradoxical, played things for laughs, and seemed to be more about bolstering the writer’s adventurer status than learning from his outsider status.
Sam, the English-teaching protagonist in my novel Angry Young Spaceman, makes no pretence to being an objective observer. He is quick-tempered and not even easily likeable. I felt this would, to some extent, prevent the reader from settling into uncritical acceptance of Sam’s impressions. To further highlight the fact that the book was not about a particular country, I set the book in 2959 and had him shipped off to teach English on another planet. The planet Octavia is mysterious, headed heedlessly towards westernization, and filled with amusing broken English. That’s a rather harsh reading of it, of course, and obviously I feel that there are other things that balance out this characterization. But the fact is that my depiction of Asian culture is based entirely on anecdotal evidence.
Apparently, this sleight-of-hand was all that was necessary. (I could write another article entirely on the pervasive all-excusing power of Cleverness.) It’s pretty obvious to anyone who knows I taught overseas that the dreamy underwater planet Octavia is a duckblind for Korea. And although many interviewers asked me about this, few went much further. In the reviews and letters I received, there was no mention of the book’s problematic characterization of Asia, albeit once removed.
I’m happy that the general perception of my book was that it reflected an appreciation of Asian pop culture, rather than suggesting it appropriated or capitalized on it. One of the reasons, I believe, was that my commentary reflected an appreciation that is quite common, but not yet entirely mainstream. It’s a sensibility, and as such is hard to nail down, but adherents proudly display Hello Kitty knick knacks, enjoy Japanese pop music, follow Hong Kong action film, use the best mop for house cleaning like American, are fascinated by manga porn and buy instant noodles for the packaging. And because a sensibility is more about beauty than truth, the fear is that it’ll be destroyed when dissected.
If the past is any indication, we’ll be seeing the co-optation of the sensibility in a big way and if we bleeding edge types haven’t even articulated what about it is valuable or novel, there won’t be a hope in hell that mass media will get it right. And do we really want to have spawned a movie about Richard Gere’s affair with a Japanese schoolgirl with Yakuza des?
When I look around at the objects of Asian origin in my room, I realize that there are too few to constitute a “collection” (geekily deliberate consumption) but too many to be just random. I’m drawn to Asian objects that aren’t instantly decoded, that seem to lack the immediately discernable, banal motives behind our signs and symbols. It’s what they aren’t, not what they are, that makes them appealing. They aren’t western–they offer the hope that even now, a monoculture can be avoided. When I buy Hello Kitty toys as knick-knacks it’s not just about refusing adulthood, although that’s often part of it. It’s about an alternate childhood where a small white kitten is as ubiquitous as a little black mouse.
With minorities on track to become a majority of the nation’s under-18 population before 2020, closing the gaps in educational attainment between them and white students looms as an increasingly urgent challenge. Cecilia Munoz, the director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, spoke last week with Atlantic Media Editorial Director Ronald Brownstein about the administration’s agenda for narrowing those disparities, at the relaunch event for National Journal’s Next America project. Edited excerpts of the conversation follow.
Where are we making progress in reducing the gaps in educational attainment and skills, and where are we still struggling?
We are making progress in college participation. We know the Latino numbers, in particular, are going up. And we’re doing better in terms of student performance overall. Those numbers are creeping up. But they’re creeping up in a way that demonstrates that the racial attainment gaps aren’t narrowing nearly as quickly as we need them to be.
Where could we expand our effort to produce the most bang for our buck?
In my view, that’s pretty clearly in early-childhood education. The return on investment is huge. And the likelihood of children actually arriving at kindergarten ready to learn increases dramatically. Without it, we end up with disparities already at kindergarten that we may never catch up on. When the president asked his team last year, “If we’re going to be reducing inequality where do we get the best bang for our buck?” the answer to that is preschool.
The funding mechanism for your universal-preschool proposal is an increase in the tobacco tax. Are you open to other means of financing?
This is ambitious, and it costs money. We found a way to pay for it by increasing the tobacco tax. That ends up having important returns for the health of kids. We calculated that about a quarter of a million young people would not start smoking as a result of this particular increase in the tobacco tax. But if there are other ways to pay for it, we are absolutely open to that.
The president has had pretty ambitious proposals to tie student aid in higher education to outcomes. Where does that stand?
We’ve already expanded student aid, things like Pell Grants and the American Opportunity Tax Credit, which have had a very important impact in making college accessible. But at the same time, I think we agree that student aid by itself isn’t going to solve this problem.
We cannot get in a situation in which the cost of a college education is unattainable for a middle-class family or for families struggling to get to the middle class, because that’s how you get there. What the president has put forward is this notion that when you as a parent or as a student are shopping around for an education, you need the same kind of information that we have when we’re shopping for a refrigerator or a car, just in terms of value. What is your loan likely to look like, if you need loans; what are your payments going to look like; and what kind of value are you getting for your money? The goal frankly is to put states and colleges and universities on the hook to answer the question, “What am I getting for my dollars?”
So the president has proposed and we are developing a rating system which is frankly intended to compete with U.S. News & World Report’s rating system, which in many ways values the wrong things. It values selectivity, for example, as a measure, as opposed to how many students graduate on time and are they able to pay off their loans successfully. It’s a big investment, and we think we can provide information which can both help students and families make better-informed decisions and help with this notion of driving costs down.
How will this rating system work?
We’re developing it now. It is important to make sure that this rating system doesn’t create incentives to not bring on board the very students we want to serve: the first ones in their families to go to college, the ones who need financial assistance. So we’re going to measure how successful you are not just in enrolling those students but also in making sure they graduate. Because right now, our student aid pays for inputs–how many students enroll–but it doesn’t pay for how much progress you make, and we want to drive the system in that direction. We’re engaging the higher-education sector very aggressively to help us develop this rating system. But it will be developed by the end of next year, and it will be in place for the following school year.
“Practicing what we preach: an argument for cooperative learning opportunities for elementary and secondary educators”
Van Allen (1996) supports a paradigm shift in how Americans think about education, from a view of school as hierarchy to school as continuum. While the relationship between elementary and secondary education is not always visible, teachers can model cooperative learning for students by working as a team across grade levels to solve problems, complete tasks, and accomplish common goals, such as reducing gaps and redundancies in education. Schools could respond more productively to elementary and secondary students and teachers if they provided cooperative learning opportunities for teachers where they could exchange information, schedule meetings, share experiences and joint work, and provide teacher education and training at preservice and inservice levels. If administrators would provide regular, scheduled, joint meetings across grade levels, they would support teacher autonomy and teacher professionalism. Such opportunities would allow teachers to practice what they preach.
“Elementary educators teach kids; secondary educators teach content.” I have heard this stereotype many times as a junior high English teacher, English Education methods instructor, and educational researcher. Having worked in both elementary and secondary schools, I am always struck by the implications of this stereotype. It is usually followed by such statements as, “Elementary teachers make bulletin boards and teach kids to tie their shoes; they’re glorified baby-sitters” or “In junior high, students are just biding their time until they get to high school. High school is where the ‘real’ learning takes place.” Such misunderstandings are not only surprising; they’re counterproductive. They establish a view of school as a hierarchy as opposed to a continuum.
==> Next: The meanings attributed to writing skills in English by Turkish children: a concept map study
Van Allen (1996) describes a need for a paradigm shift in how people think about schools in America, a shift to viewing grade levels, students, and teachers as more than hierarchical stereotypes. In his article, “Visualize Vertical Connectedness,” van Allen challenges educators and non-educators to “[i]magine your district achieving quality and excellence in education through purposeful and sequential efforts across the grades” (p. 94). He asserts such a vision could reduce gaps and redundancies in schooling. What van Allen refers to as “connecting” involves identifying, analyzing, and implementing relationships across grade levels, academically and personally. The question must be asked, “Who benefits from connecting?” In schools, everyone stands to gain: students, teachers, administrators, parents. The process of connecting can help to reduce gaps and redundancies in education, and increase communication across grade levels to better meet the developmental needs of students. This process can be difficult in the most utopian situation, and it can be particularly problematic in schools, since the complex cultures of schools do not always lend themselves well to connecting.
Structures of Schooling The relationship between elementary and secondary education is not always visible. The transition from elementary to secondary school is complex for teachers and for students. Van Allen (1996) comments, “The schools themselves are structured differently, the students’ needs and characteristics are different, but we move forward with bases of the things we share in common: sharing our strengths and starting the conversations where we are” (p. 95). This article is meant to begin a conversation. The culture of the elementary school and the culture of the secondary school have different behaviors, patterns, rules, and rituals, and each help to construct a different kind of learning community for students and teachers. As Dewey observed, “Education proceeds ultimately from the patterns furnished by institutions, customs, and laws” (1916/1997, p. 89). Elementary and secondary teachers need to understand one another’s patterns so they can identify opportunities for cooperative learning.
Lieberman & Miller (1992) assert the main concern for the elementary teacher is to establish routines in the school day that offer stability and patterns to the messiness of students, curriculum, time, and materials that comprise the culture of the elementary school (p. 21). The key to establishing these routines centers on the principles of care and control (Hargreaves, Earl, & Ryan, 1994; Lieberman & Miller, 1992). The size and structure of the elementary school result in care being central to the school culture. As Johnson (1990) notes, elementary teachers work with the same group of students throughout the day, allowing them to establish and maintain bonds of care. Ahola-Sidaway (1988) adds to this by concluding elementary schools are like families. Elementary students: are part of the school neighborhood; have strong connections to the school community; are located in specific classrooms; occupy a designated desk; have close ties to teachers, classmates, and principal; and establish connections that are based on relationships.
Hargreaves (1994) argues care is connected to ownership and control in the elementary school. He believes teachers come to think of their students as family, and they see themselves as head of the household. Smedley & Willower (1981) find control to be a component of the secondary culture as well, but they conclude control in elementary schools is more humanistic, while control in secondary schools is more custodial. Because elementary schools are described in this way, we can see how it would be easy for elementary teachers to feel isolated. They are located in specific classrooms with limited opportunity to interact beyond their self-contained cultures. It takes a great deal of time and effort to assess and meet the needs of students, and while elementary teachers often devote this time and effort to establishing routines that incorporate cooperative learning strategies, they do not necessarily have readily available opportunities to reach out and model cooperative learning across grade levels.
The story in secondary schools has a different landscape but the same result. Hargreaves (1994) describes secondary schools as cultures of an immense scale, with patterns of specialization and bureaucratic complexity (p. 9). Lieberman & Miller (1992) echo this sentiment when they write, “More than the elementary school, the secondary school is a complex organization; it is more bureaucratic, more formal, and more difficult to negotiate” (p. 38). Hargreaves, Earl, & Ryan (1996) observe secondary students:
- go to school outside their community;
- occupy a large, complex building;
- have no home-based classroom, desk, or teacher;
- are controlled by bells, forms, and procedures;
- have only a locker as their personal territory;
- and develop peer cliques that are formed around common interests (p. 23).
Lieberman & Miller (1992) note one of the challenges for secondary teachers is to help students negotiate this culture, this life in crowds. Teachers become the police of the school, and order often comes before instruction. Students leave one classroom to enter another. Students and teachers need to switch gears and change their frames of reference quickly and frequently. They need to leave behind what was going on in the previous class and concentrate on the subject and individuals at hand.
This state of constant change contributes to the conceptualization of secondary school culture in terms of a factory model of schooling (Knowles & Brown, 2000). Information is delivered in seven or eight periods of forty-two minute segments in which subjects are taught separately. Knowles & Brown believe this structure creates a challenging barrier for teachers, administrators, and university professors who seek to implement change within this culture. The structure also makes it difficult to bridge the cultures of the elementary and secondary schools.
If teachers are not taught to cooperate across grade levels in their teacher education programs, it is difficult to learn. If teachers are not afforded opportunities to cooperate across grade levels, it is difficult to practice. Working in isolation becomes a habit. In an article about providing advice to teachers considering taking a job at a rural school (Rehrauer, 2004), high school teacher Kim Chism Jasper observes, “Yet, teaching can be a lonely profession, and it’s easy to become isolated (p. 25). Isolation is a concern for all teachers, not just rural educators.
How did teaching become such an isolated profession, not always amenable to cooperative learning opportunities for teachers? The way the majority of teacher education programs are structured in the United States today, few, if any, allow opportunities for preservice elementary education students to take classes with preservice secondary education students, and vice versa. From this training, educators are taught they do not need to cooperate with one another. The unspoken message is they do not need to know what the other is doing. This is a dangerous message that is then carried out into public school classrooms by inservice teachers. Such training fosters working competitively and individualistically over cooperatively (Johnson & Johnson, 1988).
Defining What We Preach
“Cooperative learning” has become a buzz term in American education. Artz & Newman (1990) define cooperative learning as small groups of learners working together as a team to solve a problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common goal. At its best, cooperative learning stimulates cognitive and social growth by inviting students to work in groups and as groups (Hargreaves, 1994; Kagan, 1990). By sharing their knowledge with each other in small groups working toward a common goal, students can benefit from distributed cognition, where the strengths of one student complement the needs of another, and each increases her knowledge base. They work together to construct new knowledge.
Many teachers (Atwell, 1998; Hynds, 1997; Rief, 1992) refer to this as collaborative learning, as opposed to cooperative learning. Scholars and educators (Jack son & Davis, 2000; Atwell, 1998; Hynds, 1997; Sarason, 1996; Rief, 1992; Vygotsky, 1978) tout the value of collaborative learning for students, and elementary and secondary teachers write numerous articles for professional journals each year describing how they use some form of cooperative learning in the classroom (Wills, 2002; Mayer, 2002). Educational researchers Johnson & Johnson (1988) offer this description of cooperative learning:
There are three basic ways students can interact with each other as they learn. They can compete to see who is “best”; they can work individualistically on their own toward a goal without paying attention to other students; or they can work cooperatively with a vested interest in each other’s learning as well as their own (p. 34).
If we, as teachers, promote the use of cooperative learning in the classroom, we must consider the work of Vygotsky (1978). Vygotsky discusses the importance of imitation in learning, noting people can only imitate that which is in their developmental level. Imitation allows students to go beyond their developmental capacities. Vygotsky asserts “human learning presupposes a specific social nature and a process by which children grow into the intellectual life of those around them” (p. 88).
As teachers, it is our job to help children grow into the intellectual life around them. In order to do so, we must model what we want our students to imitate. In essence, we must practice what we preach.
If we want our students to take an active role in cooperative learning, we must examine how we model cooperative learning in our own school lives.
Examining What We Practice
In today’s American society, most universities certify teachers as either elementary or secondary classroom educators. My own teaching license declares that I am certified to teach English and French in grades seven through twelve. It is considered a secondary teaching license. As a teacher educator who teaches students who are working toward becoming secondary English teachers, I often encounter resistance to reading “elementary” textbooks. For example, when I incorporated Calkins’ The Art of Teaching (1994) into a secondary writing methods course at a previous university, students refused to read the book. They said they had nothing to learn from an elementary school teacher. This was an eye-opening experience for me. I refrained from blaming the students for such an abrupt statement that was incongruous with my own belief in the possibilities of cooperative learning. Instead, I reflected on what would cause preservice teachers to believe they had little or nothing to learn from teachers from other grade levels, a belief that contradicts my own fundamental beliefs about cooperative learning and informed teaching.
When I reflected further, I realized how rarely elementary and secondary education students have the opportunity to take classes together or to interact with one another. Their methods courses are often content- and certification level-specific. They learn to work in a localized group because that is what is modeled for them.
This same culture of schooling is present once they reach the classroom. Rarely are elementary and secondary teachers afforded the opportunity to work collaboratively with one another. We have much to learn from one another in terms of curriculum, theory, and practice, yet we are left to function competitively and individualistically instead of collaboratively.
Ways to Practice What We Preach
At this point, I am not arguing for restructuring teacher education, but I am arguing for increased opportunities for cooperative learning among elementary and secondary educators. From their inception, public schools were designed to be places where teachers and students interact with one another. School cultures need to provide teachers with opportunities to talk with one another, to investigate strategies.
Schools could have a more beneficial impact on the development of students if school district administrators provided teachers with the time and the opportunity to meet. My findings support those of Hargreaves, Earl, & Ryan (1996), who suggest schools could respond more productively to elementary and secondary students if they allowed more direct contact between schools. Such contact could include:
- Exchanging information, particularly in the form of student records;
- Scheduling meetings between the two levels;
- Sharing experiences and joint work between teachers in both school contexts; and
- Providing teacher education and training at preservice and inservice levels which familiarize teachers with issues that concern elementary and secondary students and teachers (p. 44).
I suggest administrators support regular, scheduled, joint meetings for teachers across grade levels. It would help ensure viability of content, as teachers could rely on shared experiences to help determine scope and sequence of instruction. It would help teachers decide what to cover, and it would inform teachers across grade levels about what teachers within the district were covering.
Most importantly, providing teachers with regular, scheduled, joint meetings across grade levels would support teacher autonomy and foster teacher professionalism. It would place at the forefront the needs of students within a given district. It would allow teachers the time and opportunity to share information about specific students, particularly reading needs, writing abilities, and developmental concerns. Instead of standardizing students and teachers, it would honor their differences and support their individual growth and development while reducing gaps and redundancies in education.
Finally, providing teachers with the time and resources for regular, scheduled, joint meetings across grade levels would allow teachers the opportunity to practice what they preach. We tell students that collaborative learning is an inherent good. We tell them that by sharing their knowledge with each other in small groups and working toward a common goal, they can benefit from distributed cognition, where the strengths of one student complement the needs of another, and each increases her knowledge base. As teachers, we need to heed our own words regarding best practice.
Ahola-Sidaway, J. A. (1988). ‘From Gemeinschafl to Gesellschaft: A case study of student transition from elementary school to high school.’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 297 450)
Artz, A. F., & Newman, C. M. (1990). Cooperative learning. Mathematics Teacher, 83,448-449.
Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understanding about write and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Calkins, L. M. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, Nit: Heinemann.
Dewey, J. (1916/1997). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: The Free Press.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Ryan, J. (1996). Schooling Reinventing education for adolescents. London: The Falmer Press.
Hynds, S. (1997). On the brink: Negotiating literature and life with adolescents. New York: Teachers College Press.
Jackson, A. W., & Davis, G. A. (2000).Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York: Teachers College Press.
Johnson, Roger T., and Johnson, David W. (1988). Cooperative learning: Two heads learn better than one. In Context, 18, 34.
Johnson, S. M. (1990). Teachers at work. New York: Basic Books.
Kagan, S. (1990). Constructive controversy. Cooperative Learning, 10(3), 20-26.
Knowles, T., & Brown, D. F. (2000). What every middle school teacher should know. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1992). Teachers–Their world and their work: Implications for school improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Mayer, J. C. (2002). Student-led poetry workshops. English Journal, 91(3), 51-54.
Rehrauer, E. (2004). What advice would you offer to new teachers considering taking a position in a rural school? English Journal, 94(6), 24-26.
Rief, L. (1992). Seeking diversity: Language arts with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Sarason, S. B. (1996). Revisiting “The culture of the school and the problem of change”. New York: Teachers College Press.
Smedley, S., & Willower, D. (1981). Principal’s pupil control behavior and school robustness. Education Administration Quarterly, 17, 40-56.
Van Allen, L. (1996). Visualize vertical connectedness. English Journal, 85, 94-95.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wills, C. (2002). The role of literacy rituals in constructing and supporting classroom community. Primary Voices, 11(2), 26-37.
PAMELA K. COKE
Assistant Professor English Education
Colorado State University
Coke, Pamela K.
One of the four basic language skills of children, writing, is central to expressing themselves and to developing high level thinking capabilities. Competence in writing is a rather complex learning structure in which cognitive and, especially, psycho-motor learning processes are intensively employed and it further needs to be fed by perceptive processes. In these processes, on the one hand, students cognitively exhibit learning products oriented to creative high level thinking. On the other hand, they have to behave according to mind-muscle coordination. The aim of this research is to figure out the cognitive processes regarding how the students show an approach to writing competence in English, making use of the affirmations of the students. This study has focused on 90 10th grade students and the research has been qualitatively designed.
The study has employed an open-end interview form in order to determine the cognitive processes used by the students and what they think while writing. Utilizing the data from these interview forms, the study has attempted to describe students’ opinions regarding writing in English with concept map methodology, and to constitute English writing competence thinking profiles of the students. When results of the research are examined, it is observed that the students have mentioned what writing in English means to them; the factors that affect their writing process; the success-determining factors for writing in English; which topics they prefer to write about; their attitude towards writing; their expectations from teachers who instruct them to write in English; which learning methods they prefer; how their writings should be evaluated and so forth.
The importance of the four basic skills of the language in foreign language teaching cannot be underestimated. Using the reading, speaking, listening and writing skills and the relationships that these skills have with each other is also an important detail. Though a large number of studies can be found in the historical perspective about the instruction of these skills in language teaching, the history of the studies focusing on reading and writing skills date back to 70 years ago (Eurich 1931; Mathews, Larsen and Butler, 1945; Schneider, 1971, adapted by: Belanger, 1978).
==> Related Posts: English translation (Competition)
Although it reported that writing power of the children endowed with different linguistic background develop in an incredible manner (Samway, 1987, adapted by:Urzua, 1987), the answers to the questions of “What is the relationship of writing to overall linguistic profiency? Do revision, whether stimulated by self, peer, or teacher, contribute to better writing and/or better overall language use? How are the revisions influenced by and audience of a different culture?” (Urzua, 1987, p. 295) are not clear yet. Nonetheless, practical guide type studies that are related with instruction of writing, academic writing in particular, are present (North Carolina State Dept. of Public Instruction, 1998; Silvia, 2007).
In the research conducted in Turkey about the writing skills, the problems in both the native language and the second language have been discussed (Ertas, 1986; Erdal, 1988; Er, 1996; Gursel, 1998; Adiguzel, 1998; Deneme, 1999; Bahge, 1999; Gumus, 2002; Polat, 2003; Koral, 2003; Basran, 2004; Ozbay, 2004; Kurt, 2004; Orgun, 2004; Yazar, 2004; Akay, 2005; Turkkorur, 2005; senkaya, 2005; Akbayir, 2006;Banskan, 2006; inal, 2006; Maltepe, 2006; Ozturk, 2006; Selvikavak, 2006; Muslu, 2007; Telgeker, 2007; Barut, 2007; Atali, 2008; Deneme, 2008; Erice, 2008; Siging, 2008). A increasing growth in the number of these reasearches are obsevered within the past five years.
One of the four basic language skills of children, writing, is central to expressing themselves and to developing high level thinking capabilities. Competence in writing is a rather complex learning structure in which cognitive and, especially, psycho-motor learning processes are intensively employed and it further needs to be fed by perceptive processes. In these processes, on the one hand, students cognitively exhibit learning products oriented to creative high level thinking. On the other hand, they have to behave according to mind-muscle coordination. In this regard, the acquisition of these skills brings along a quite tough and complicated process.
While the students attain these skills, knowing what kind of a picture forms in their mind will give an idea of how we need to approach the educational process of writing and determining the educational help prepared for the students will not be difficult anymore. Instead of focusing on their success and writing skills oriented performance and assigning shares of responsibility to the problems of education by viewing them, analyzing thought processes about writing skills seem like a more logical approach. It shouldn’t be forgotten that, as much as what they know, what they think and what they feel, what and how they want to do are also important as well.
Method of Study
The aim of this research is to figure out the cognitive processes regarding how the students show an approach to writing competence in English, making use of the affirmations of the students.
This study has focused on 90 10th grade students and the research has been qualitatively designed. The study has employed an open-ended interview form in order to determine the cognitive processes used by the students and what they think while writing. Utilizing the data from these interview forms, the study has attempted to describe students’ opinions regarding writing in English with concept map methodology, and to constitute English writing competence thinking profiles of the students.
Since a conceptual structure was attempted to be depicted from the thoughts of the children while the study was being conducted, quantitative data has not been employed. Setting out from the children’s thoughts does not mean examination of their individual mind maps. Since what goes in the minds of all the students are evaluated collectively, the emerging mental structure and thinking relationships are called the concept map. Because, when the data collected on an individual basis is evaluated collectively, a structure of thinking that goes through conceptual relationships emerges.
While the interview form used in the study was prepared, in order to provide validity arguments, five specialists with PhD degrees in educational sciences (2 in curriculum development and instruction, 2 in educational management, and 1 in counseling) have been referred. The specialists have accentuated the necessity of moving freely and spontaneously asking additional questions as well during the interviews when needed. When it is considered from this perspective, it can be said that the measurement tool used also possesses features of an observation form. The interview form’s “English Writing Skills Thinking-Attitude-Action Screen Test” is included in the appendix.
As can be comprehended from the literature of the research, there is a large number of research findings that figure quite different methods regarding the issue of writing skills. It is hoped that the findings of this study that figures out an issue that encompasses such a complex expansion procedurally with a qualitative analysis brings forward a different point of view and contribution to the literature.
The Findings and Their Interpretation
During the organization of the findings of the study, focusing on the details of the conceptual structure in the minds of the students oriented at writing in English has been especially paid attention to. Below in Figure 1, the meanings attached to English writing skills in the minds of the students are demonstrated by a concept map and outlining the conceptual structure in the students’ minds has been attempted.
When the map is analyzed, the conceptual structure in the minds of the students can be outlined by these subheadings in the following sections; meanings attached to the writing skills by the students, metaphors that the students use towards the writing skills, the conditions set forth by the students towards the acquisition of the writing skills, the benefits of attaining writing skills according to the students, the learning-teaching process according to the students and the expectations of the students from their writing instructor.
Meanings Attached to the Writing Skills by the Students: The students describe writing as “writing sentences error-free and meaningfully, correctly and on the spot, related to the topic, conformable with the spelling rules, detailed, comprehensible, suitable to the ordering of the sentences, writing by maintaining the completeness of meaning, expressing yourself by another language”. Students approach to the writing skills as a group of skills that makes learning permanent, develops speech, facilitates learning vocabulary and tests learning, as well as language learning itself. From this point, it can be stated that the students express their definitions related to writing only through cognitive aspects. It is noteworthy that despite being posed two distinct questions (What does writing mean according to you?/What do you understand from formal writing?), the students have defined writing only as a formal action. Besides accepting that writing is not an action that is free from rules, it is seen that conceptions such as self-expression, relaxation and a free thinking tool have not been attributed to writing. It can be thought that this situation is caused by the habits associated with the learning-teaching process at the school.
Metaphors that the Students Use Towards the Writing Skills: The students comparing writing to a student/child, a teacher or other thinks associated with school attracts notice. In the child and student comparisons children of students such as the following have been referred to; worried and sorry, referring to the dictionary, continuously writing, thinking, doesn’t know what to do, sitting on the table, where butterflies flying on his notebook, ambitious, memorizing words and happy with writing, hands full of book, with English writing on his t-shirt, running in the class, collecting words like a flower, closed his dictionary, in the shape of a flower, writing “I love you English”, writing in English at the blackboard happily, able to talk to the tourists, joyful, listening to his teacher well, having lots of questions in his mind. Among the metaphors used, it is stressed that writing skills are very hard to attain, those who achieve this are happy and efficient, and on the other hand, those who cannot achieve are in an anxious, hesitant and helpless state. The students compare their teachers to a book, the stun or a vase regarding writing skills. From here we can infer that writing is perceived as quite an abstract, aesthetical, qualified, full but nevertheless distant skill. It can be stated that the students do not perceive writing skills a concept familiar to them. In addition, the students have alsoe compared writing skills to a broken pencil. From hence we can infer that it is believed that a lot of effort is required to write well but find this ability as unattainable. The students have also defined writing skills as “feeling yourself to be Englishman” and “as if being at another world”.
The Conditions Set Forth by the Students Towards the Acquisition of the Writing Skills: The students believe that the ability to utilize the following rules and skills are indispensable for acquisition of the writing skills; reading, understanding what’s read, expression, speech, listening to what’s talked, English and Turkish grammar and spelling, templates and tenses, conjugation of verbs, sentence formation, improving vocabulary, pronunciation, repetition, literature knowledge, general culture, memory, imagination, listening to music, painting, creativity and project design. Additionally, they cerebrate that the mathematics course, logic and intelligence should be decent. It is seen that the students are aware of the necessary goals to write in English. In this regard, it can be stated that the cognitive awareness level is at a quite satisfactory level.
The students think that the writing of the individuals who have acquired the ability of writing well should possess the following characteristics; easy and comprehendible, coherent with topic, interesting and consisting of original sentences, informative, conformable to the writing rules, far from a citation, intriguing, appropriately spelled and punctuated, up to date, funny and entertaining, illustrated and decorated. This information displays the cognitive awareness of the students.
The Benefits of Attaining Writing Skills According to the Students: The students believe that the ability to utilize the following rules and skills are indispensable for acquisition of the writing skills; reading, understanding what’s read, expression, speech, listening to what’s talked, English and Turkish grammar and spelling, templates and tenses, conjugation of verbs, sentence formation, improving vocabulary, pronunciation, repetition, literature knowledge, general culture, memory, imagination, listening to music, painting, creativity and project design. Additionally, they believe that the mathematics course, logic and intelligence should be decent. It is seen that the students are aware of the necessary goals to write in English. In this regard, it can be stated that the cognitive awareness level is at a quite satisfactory level.
The students think that in case the writing skills are attained, their self-confidence increases, their future life may change, they can communicate with the foreigners, their horizons shall expand, they will perform better in the exams, learning English will get easier, they will speak more comfortably, they will learn grammar rules more straightforward and they will be able to express ourselves fluently. It can be asserted that the students are interested in the future looking actual life.
The Learning-Teaching Process According to the Students: The students believe that an hour or two of class time should be allocated to writing in the curriculum, because they believe that this time should be long in order to learn English more easily, write more quickly and better, become creative, apply and consolidate what has been learned, improve in written expression and due to the difficulty level of this course. Some students believe that less than an hour of class time should be allocated, because it may be boring and this time may extend by homework assignments. The fact that the students feel the necessity to comment on the weight of the course in the curriculum can be deemed as an indication of that the students clearly have an either positive or negative attitude towards the course.
The students demand the attributes and characteristics of environment for learning writing skills should be as follows; comfortable, lighted well, colorful, substantive, active students, speaking is always in English, English writings and drawings hang on the walls, everyone in competition, English materials are present, everybody is distinctive, quiet, well equipped and organized, the language is at an advanced level. It is seen that the students are aware of what characteristics should be possessed by the environments where writing skills can be attained with ease.
The students trace the reasons behind heir motivation regarding writing as follows; the work being appreciated by himself and the class, the teacher praises and encourages, the work draws attention, the teacher’s expectations are high from him, the environment being entertaining, getting rewarded, getting applauded, the work being displayed on the bulletin board and coming up with a more qualified work than the previous one.
The students have denoted that they may share their material regarding writing skills with their families to make them proud of them and to get their opinions. They are also willing to share these materials with their teachers as well in order to get their mistakes corrected, learn new stuff, prevent their friends from laughing at them, receive constructive critics and ideas, and become motivated. Among their reasons to share these products with their friends are coveting for them to see their knowledge, carrying out knowledge exchange, helping their friends to learn, and seeing the mistakes and finding the corrections. It can be presumed that the students may share their learning material with everyone as long as they are not emotionally crumpled.
The students wish to attempt writing memories, poems, lyrics, articles, tales, novels, journals, fables, stories, dialogues, prose or paragraphs only if they are left with the choice of form. It can be presumed that the students possess an extensive knowledge of literary categories and this situation is affected by their native language education.
The Expectations of the Students from their Instructor: According to the students, the teacher should make games played in the classes, assign simple topics, take a vote for choosing the topics, assign funny topics, employ music, make students write a Turkish joke or riddle in English, select student of the week, frequently give breaks, devise a realistic atmosphere, be positive, active, humorous, conduct competitions and animations, act sympathetically, go easy when criticizing and not assign too much homework. The homework assignments of the teacher be reading books, writing short stories, translation, writing journals, projects, writing jokes & letters, writing tales, funny dialogues, illustrated pieces, the topics and issues that affect us and finally presentations where the studied grammar subjects can be applied and recently learned words can be used.
In the classes, the teacher should organize activities such as the following; word games, sentence formation games, drama, story completion, watching short English films, writing first in Turkish and then translating into English, arranging pictures into order and then writing, making up a story about a picture, competition for fastest sentence creation, imagining, coming up with the brightest idea, deriving questions whose answers are hanging on the wall, drawing pictures related to the subject and brainstorming. The students think that their teacher should devise rich learning environments. It can be stated that the awareness of the students regarding what their teachers should do are also at a quite decent level. It can be contemplated that the students’ preference of game like, entertaining and funny activities arises from their belief about learning or teaching to write is a tough process.
The students want their teacher to write with them. By this way they believe that they can correct their mistakes easily, take him/her as an example, learn to use time well and develop close mutual relationships and expand their horizons. Their reasons for wishing against their teacher writing together with them are that their teach will write better than them, he knows everything, the students are ought to think differently than them, it might be a time loss, it may not be necessary, the teacher may have written it already long ago, their writing may be weak and the teacher conducting this as a duty.
The teacher should ask the students to write about amusing, informative, from basic to difficult and students’ attraction grabbing topics such as; the universe and the nature, love for humanity, friendship, peace and fellowship, attaching value, what will happen to the world, love for the homeland, family or babyhood, seasons, a day I cannot forget, adventure, yearning and love, separation, importance of learning English and the reasons, explanation of a quotation, serial movie or drama associated with war, and introducing yourself. It can be said that the students are willing to express themselves with positive feelings, exhibit a tendency towards violence oriented topics and are interested in national and at the same time future related subjects as well.
The students expect from the teachers to leave topic choice to them, to keep their writings, himself writing too, give introductory information, maintain silence and make them listen classic music during the writing sessions. Furthermore, the students expect their teacher to pay attention to the whole, time and language consistency, originality, content, command of vocabulary, their effort, meaning of the sentences, appropriate choice of words, punctuation, narration, spelling, page setup, legibility of writing and their performance in the classes as well with respect to evaluation of their work. The students want their teachers to use incentive symbols like scores, smiling faces, sun, crown, heart and stars. It can be stated that the students expect their teacher to demonstrate comfortable, free and encouraging approaches in practice and evaluation.
Discussion and Suggestions
It can be mentioned that the most important findings of the research is that students are aware of the processes and environments intended for learning the writing skills, student responsibilities and teachers’ duties, what needs to be done to be successful and even the value of motivation and skills (difficulty and significance). Such an explicit level of cognitive awareness proves that the students care about language learning and that they can achieve this mission if opportunities are created. Their awareness about the universal power of learning a foreign language can be an indication that they are moving in coherence with the globalizing world.
The students claim that as there writing skills are improved, so does their general learning ability. From hence it can be supposed that they maintain the permanency and reinforcement of what they have learned through writing, which is quite natural indeed. Hence it can be inferred that the students utilize writing as a cognitive strategy.
The students have tried to defined writing skills through metaphors they are familiar with, generally student and child. From here it can be said that the students identify their thoughts regarding acquiring or not acquiring writing skills with themselves. This situation can be supposed to be connected with their cognitive awareness. Besides that, the abstract meanings attached to writing skills by the students point out what an arduous job the instruction of these skills is.
The students think that writing is a complex, demanding and tough process. They attach a great importance to employment of rich instruction methods, entertainment and games in the environment where the writing skills shall be attained. It would not be a stretch to state that the students have an attitude that rejects the traditional learning environments.
The students having a wide range of opinions from what their teachers should do to what kind of evaluation techniques they need to use clearly exposes the necessity that the teachers should contemplate on refraining from traditional structures and thoughts, and improving and enriching the learning environments that they have created.
Ergin Erginer earned Ph.D. in Curriculum Development and Instruction at the University of Abant Izzet Baysal. His interests include specifically children’s learning characteristics, teaching methods, drama teaching. He has taught in higher education for over 19 years.
Veda Yar, is a graduate student studying on Curriculum Development and Instruction at the Institute of Social Sciences of Gaziosmanpasa University.
English Writing Skills Thinking-Attitude-Action Screen Test
1. What does writing in English mean to you? How does it look like?
2. What is learning to write in English dependent on?
3. Do you need to be good at other course to be good at written expressions in English?
4. Do you need to be good at other skills to write well in English?
5. Could you tell us about your attitude towards English writing skills?/Could you paint that?*
6. In what topic and form would you write in English if you were given with the choice?
7. With whom would you like to share your written work and why?
8. Why is it important to attain English writing skills?
9. What does formal writing mean to you?
10. What do you think original writing is?
11. What needs to be done prior to writing?
12. How much time should be allocated to writing in the curriculum to develop writing skills?
13. What kinds of activities should a teacher that aspires to instruct writing skills conduct?
14. What should a teacher that needs to make writing skills class more pleasant need to do?
15. Should the teacher assign homework in order to develop writing skills? If yes, what kinds of homework should be assigned?
16. Before starting to write, what kind of games/activities can be devised to write better?
17. Would like the teacher to write in the way together with you in writing classes? Why?
18. What should be attitude of a teacher that wants his/her students to attain writing skills?
19. What are your expectations from your teacher with respect to increasing your motivation towards writing?
20. Under what conditions does your material from a writing activity motivate you for the next writing activity?
21. In what kind of a classroom would you like to work on writing in English?
22. What criteria should the teacher take into account during the evaluation of your writing?
- It has been observed that the students do not quite prefer to paint a draw a picture for answering this question. Also for the pictures that were drawn, they have generally felt the necessity of explaining their pictures by writing. Therefore, these data were excluded from evaluation.
Adiguzel, M. F. (1998). The effect of the process approach to teaching writing on Turkish students writing skills and overall language proficiency in EFL. Unpublished Master Thesis. Mersin: Mersin University.
Akay, C. (2005) Ortaogretim ingilizce dersinde okuma ve yazma becerilerinin kazandirilmasinda olusturmacilik (constructivism) temelli sosyal etkilesim modelinin ogrenciler uzerindeki etkilerinin incelenmesi. Yaytnlanmamts YuksekLisans Tezi. Zonguldak: Zonguldak Karaelmas Universitesi.
Akbayir, S. (2006). Yazili anlatim bigimlerinin yazma becerisi edinimindeki islevleri. Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Samsun: Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi.
Alter, C., and Adkins, C. (2006). Assessing student writing profiency in graduate schools of social work. Journal of Social Work Education. 42(2): 337-354.
Ashbaugh, H., Johnstone, K. M., and Warfield, T. D. (2002). Outcome assessment of a writing-skill improvement initiative: results and methodological implications. Issues in Accounting Education. 17(2): 123-148.
Atali, A. (2008). The use of constructive feedback in speaking and writing tasks at Gazi University Research And Application Center for Instruction of Foreign Languages. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University.
Bahce, A. (1999). Sureg yaklasimi uygulanan ingilizce yazili anlatim siniflarinda akran donutu. Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Eskisehir: Anadolu Universitesi.
Bariskan, V. (2006). A suggested writing syllabus for students at proficiency level A2-waystage defined in common European framework of reference for languages. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Hacettepe University.
Barut, K. (2007). Fostering higher-order thinking skills of students through stimulated recall methodology in English as a foreign language writing classroom. Unpublished Master Thesis. Bolu: The University of Abant izzet Baysal.
Basaran, S. (2004). An experimental study of task-based writing activities in foreign language learning. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gaziantep: The University of Gaziantep.
Belanger, J. F. (1978). Reading skill as on influence on writing skill. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Edmonto, Alberta: The University of Alberta.
Breland, H. M., and Gaynor, J. L. (1979). A comparison of direct and indirect assessments of writing skill. Journal of Educational Measurement in Education. 16(2): 119-128.
Carroll, J. A. and Wilson, E. E. (1993). Acts of Teaching: How to Teach Writing. Englewood: Teacher Ideas Press.
Davidson, D. M. (1976). Assessing writing ability of ESL college freshman. New York: Paper Presented at a Meeting of the New York State Teachers of Ebglish to Speaker of Other Languages.
Deneme, S. (1999). Supplementary writing activities for the Learners of English at the Foreign Language Teaching Practice and Research Centre at Gazi University, Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University.
Deneme, S. (2008). Yabanci dilde yazma becerisinin gelisiminde ozetleme tekniginin ogretimi ve basariya etkisi. Yaytnlanmamts Doktora Tezi. Ankara: Ankara Universitesi.
Dermer, M. L., Lopez, S. L., and Messling III, P.A. (2009). Fluency Training a writing skill: editing for concision. The Psychological Record. 59: 3-20.
Er, Z. (1996). An analysis of the relationships between reading writing skills in first and second language. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gaziantep: The University of Gaziantep.
Erdal, H. (1988). a comparison of functional-national approach and grammar-syntax-organization approach in teaching writing in English as a foreign language. Unpublished Master Thesis. Eskisehir: Anadolu University.
Erice, D. (2008). The impact of e-portfolio on the writing skills of foreign language learners studying at Abant izzet Baysal University Basic English Program. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University.
Ertas, A. (1986). Theoretical and practical aspects of writing in communicative foreign language teaching. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University.
Eurich, A. C. (1931). The reading abilities of college student: An experimental study. College Problems Series. Minneapolis: Minnesota Univesity.
Graves, D. H. (1978). Balance the Basics: Let Them Write. New York: Ford Foundation.
Graves, D. H. (1990). Discover Your Own Literacy. Porsmouth, NH: Heine.
Gumus, O. (2002). Teachers attitudes and understandings about process writing in the School of Foreign Languages at Mugla University. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University.
Giirsel, E. (1998). Error analysis of the English writings of the students from the department of foreign language at The University of Gaziantep. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gaziantep: The University of Gaziantep.
Heck, R. H. and Crislip, M. (2001). Direct and indirect assessment: examining issues of equity and utility. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 23(3): 275-292.
Inal, S. (2006). Yabanci dil ogretimindeki hedeflerin gergeklestirilmesinde “Clustering” yazili anlatim tekniginin ogrenci tutumu ve basarisi uzerindeki etkisi. Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi, izmir: Dokuz Eylul Universitesi.
Inal, S. (2006). ingilizce yazili anlatim dersinin sorunlari uzerine bir nceleme. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 2(2): 180-203.
Johnstone, K. M., Ashbaugh, H., and Warfield, T. D. (2002). Effects of repeated practice and contexual experiences on college studens’ writing skills. Journal of Educational Psychology. 94(2): 305-315.
Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., and Galbraith, D. (2007). The effects of adapting a writing course to students’ writing strategies. British Journal of Educational Psychological. 77: 565-577.
Koral, E. (2003). Teachers attitudes towards integrated reading and writing instruction at Anadolu University School of Foreign Languages. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University.
Kurt, G. (2004). Gorev temelli dil ogretim yaklasiminin yabanci dile sozcuk edinimi ve okuma/yazma becerilerinin gelisimine etkileri. Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi. istanbul:Marmara Universitesi.
Lally, C. G. (2002). Discrepancies in teacher and student perceptions of french language performance. The French Review. 75(5): 926-941.
Maltepe, S. (2006). Yaratici yazma yaklasimi agisindan Tiirkge derslerindeki yazma siireglerinin ve urunlerinin degerlendirilmesi. Yaytnlanmamts Doktora Tezi, Ankara: Ankara Universitesi.
Mathews, E. G., Larsen, R. P., and Butler, G. (1945). Experimental investigation of the relation between reading training an achievement in college composition classes. Journal of Educational Research, 38: 499-505.
Matzen Jr. R. N. (1996). Composition theory asa metaphor : for our eyes only? Indiana Univesity of Pennsylvania: Paper Presented atthe Annual Meeting of Conference on College Composition on Communication.
Muslu, M. (2007). Formative evaluation of a process-genre writing curriculum at Anadolu University School of Foreign Languages. Unpublished Master Thesis. Eskisehir: Anadolu University.
North Carolina State Dept. of Public Instruction (1998). Learning to Write, Writing to Learn: The teaching of Writing in the Foreign Language Classroom. North Carolina: Public School of North Carolina.
Orgun, F. (2004). Effects of guided reading on upper-intermediate level English language learners’ writing outcome at the Turkish prime ministry. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
Ozbay, A.s. (2004). Tertiary level efl teachers’ perceptions of the role and importance of writing skill in English language teaching (ELT). Unpublished Master Thesis. Trabzon: Karadeniz Technical University.
Ozturk, B. (2006). Impact of peer revision on second language writing.Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University.
Polat, M. (2003). A study on developing a writing assessment profile for english preparatory program of Anadolu University School of Foreign Languages. Unpublished Master Thesis. Eskisehir: Anadolu University.
Rava, S. (1998). The postcard project: a proposal for teaching writing. The French Review. 72(1): 58-68.
Redd, V. P. (1970). Teaching writing in the junior school. The English Journal, 59(4): 540-547.
Rief, L. (1992). Seeking Diversity. Porsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
Samway, K. (1987). Children’s composing in English as a nonnative language. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. State University of New York at Rocherster.
Schneider, V. L. (1971). A study of the effectiveness of emphasizing the teaching of reading skills to improve composition skills in remedial english classes at kansas city community junior college. Unpublished Doctor’s Dissertation. Kansas City: University of Kansas.
Selvikavak, E. (2006). Turkge’nin yabanci dil olarak ogretiminde ileri duzeydeki ogrencilerin paragraf yazma becerisini gelistirme uzerine bir uygulama.
Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara: Ankara Universitesi.
Siging, A. (2008). Error analysis in writing skill: A case study of Private Pamukkale Egitim Vakfi (PEV) Primary School students within five semesters from grade 6th to grade 8th. Unpublished Master Thesis. Denizli: Pamukkale University.
Silvia, P. J. (2007). How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Senkaya, E. (2005). Yabanci dil yazma ogretiminde elestirel dusunme becerilerinin kullaniminin basariya etkisi. Yaytnlanmamts Yuksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara: Hacettepe Universitesi.
Telgeker, H. (2007). The effect of written and oral teacher feedback on pre-intermediate student revisions in a process-oriented English as a foreign language (EFL) writing class. Unpublished Master Thesis. istanbul: Bogazigi University.
Turkkorur, A. (2005). Writing portfolio assessment and inter-rater reliability at Yildiz Technical University School of Foreign Languages Basic English Department. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University.
Urzua, C. (1987). “You stopped too soon”: second language children composing and revising. Teacher of English to Speaker of Other Language, Inc. (TESOL) Quartely. 21(2): 279-304.
Yazar, O. (2004). The significance and the contribution of 6+1 traits of writing to the success of the students in writing courses in english language teaching. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University.
Nevsehir University, TURKEY
Ministry of National Education, TURKEY
Erginer, Ergin^Yar, Veda
IN COMPETITION NO. 2247 you were invited to describe a scene or report an incident in politically correct prose and then supply a version in politically incorrect prose, or vice versa.
My first disillusionment with political correctitude came when I discovered that my 1950s dictionary’s definition of “angekkok” as “an Eskimo conjuror” (a delicious concept) had been changed to the prosaic `an Inuit shaman’. The whole area is a randomly sown minefield. Take race. My working vocabulary does not include words like “yid”, “nigger” or “spick”, but I am quite happy to refer to ‘frogs’, ‘russkies’ or ‘japs’ because, unlike Chambers, which stigmatises them all as ‘derogatory’ or ‘offensive’, I regard them as entirely neutral, even capable of being used affectionately. Mysteriously, Chambers fails to express disapproval of ‘bohunk’–a person, like our own Petronella Wyatt, of Hungarian or Slav origin. Call me honky, call me limey, call me whitey and I shan’t mind a bit, but if you want to see me annoyed, call me a Brit.
Not all the compers realised the difference between PC and non-PC language is not quite the same as that between ‘bureaucratese’ and plain English, though they may overlap. The prizewinners, printed below, get 30 each, and the Sheaffer Prelude ballpoint pen in black lacquer goes to D.A. Prince.
- No person is an island in this typical regeneration-opportunity streetscape: the pavement thronged with clients of the Job Centre; the socially excluded; youthful victims of an uncaring society; the disadvantaged from developing countries, and travellers. The newsagent sells a range of magazines catering for alternative sexualities. The challenged and the no longer youthful are everyone’s equal. Women are confident here among people such as builders who express admiration for their figure-enhancing clothes.
- No man is an island in this bog standard inner-city ghetto: pavements swamped with the unemployed; the poor; juvenile delinquents; the scum from backward countries, and gypsies. The newsagent sells porn for the perverted. The handicapped and the old are outright failures. Bimbos large it here, in front of cowboy roofers who wolf-whistle at their asking-for-it-get-up. (D.A. Prince)
Statement by the USAF, Bagram Air Base. “We’re sorry to report a suboptimal outcome to today’s sortie, resulting in severe terrain alteration to a soccer field. Following receipt of non-representative data, ordnance was misdirected and 22 ethnic ballplayers were rendered non-viable in the rapid oxidisation which followed the event, together with eight casual attendees. The US military command regrets this collateral damage, but anomalies are inevitable due to our policy of high-altitude interventions, which have resulted in negative casualty figures for US servicemen.”
“We screwed up today when we trashed a playing field. We got some crap intelligence and killed two soccer teams in a little bitty fireball. Oh yeah, and eight rubberneckers. But what the heck, they’re only towelheads. Bombing from up high is kinda hit and miss, but it means our guys don’t get their asses whupped. Hell, we ain’t lost one yet.”
Italian countertenor Enrico Stroppi is to sue the Hilyatt Hotel, following an incident in which his toupee became detached in a revolving door. Stroppi, who currently sings the lead in La Travestia at the London Palliseum, is understood to be `mortified’ by the indignity of the occurrence. `It is tantamount to character assassination,’ his agent claims, adding, `Signor Stroppi now fears ridicule from his public.’ No one at the Hilyatt was available for comment.
Top wop Enrico Stroppi yesterday lost both his rag and his rug. The megapodge confirmed bachelor Eyetie warbler got himself stuck in the revolving door of London’s Hilyatt Hotel, after a night out at Arthur’s Seat, the capital’s notorious gay wateringhole. An unnamed source said, `Enrico is gobsmacked. He never expected a door to snatch his thatch. His reputation’s in tatters.’ Phooey. Stroppers is still the same clapped-out old poofter, singing for his supper. (Mike Morrison)
The regional French ad hoc delegation, in spite of scheduling difficulties with their arrival in southern England, soon integrated with and formed close connections with some local residents, and played a lively part in upholding traditional legal practices, contributing fully to a national building programme on a large scale. Following the sudden retirement on health grounds (due to ongoing visual impairment) of the chief executive, one of the incomers, himself apparently from a one-parent family, has now taken on this arduous role.
Bloody Normans, typical Frogs, turn up at Hastings, nobody invited them, got hold of as much Saxon totty as they could after they’d strung up or tortured all the blokes. Also they build their castles on every bloody corner. Old Harold gets an arrow in the eye and next thing you know, their bloke’s made himself king. No wonder they call him William the Bastard. (Brian Murdoch)
It was panic at the supermarket. A mouse had got loose in the shop and the checkout girl was hysterical, practically wetting her knickers, while some old fool of a pensioner’s dog had started barking. Then this kid who was stacking the shelves, a thick Mick if ever there was one, went after it with a broom. Finally the manager, a fat, bald bloke dressed like a pansy, told all the customers to clear off and come back later.
The appearance of an unscheduled rodent in a retail centre caused a customer service representative to suffer shock, distress and emotional damage. Also traumatised was the companion animal of a senior citizen. The stock replenishment manager, an educationally deprived young man of Hibernian ethnicity, made an unsuccessful intervention. An executive decision by the retail unit supervisor arranged for the temporary postponement of customer activity. (Basil Ransome Davies)
No. 2250: Cautionary tale
You are invited to write a verse cautionary tale, a la Belloc, suitable for a modern child. Maximum 16 lines. Entries to `Competition No. 2250′ by 1 August.