Marcias and Kelly (1996; quoted in Koskinen, Blum, Bisson, Phillips, Creamer, & Baker, 1999) note that the number of students in the United States identified as having limited English proficiency (LEP) rose from 2.2 million in 1990-91 to 3.2 million in 1994-95. If current demographic trends in immigration and birthrate continue, the Hispanic-origin population will become the second largest ethnic group in the United States by the year 2010 (Day, 1996; PDF version of census report available online). Although a large proportion of this population will be of school age, at this point, few school systems seem prepared to make the changes that will be necessary to serve the particular educational needs of these students. This invited article considers these needs (emphasizing English literacy development among Spanish-speaking students) and discusses how computer technology may be enlisted in the classroom to help support LEP students.

Some background may further readers' understanding of the issues discussed in this commentary, which is built on some particular beliefs. First, although many Hispanics do speak Spanish, those who have been in the United States for more than a generation may speak only English. Further, many “Hispanic” immigrants speak Spanish as a second language, if at all. More than 50 languages are spoken in Mexico alone -- and “Mexican” is only one of the nationalities we in the United States commonly lump together under the rubric “Hispanic.” Also, even when Spanish is the primary language of the home, it may be a nonstandard variant. It is assumed here that all studies concerning acquisition of English as a second language (ESL) are generalizable (at least in part), no matter what first language is spoken by the individuals in question.

The issues surrounding the application (and misapplication) of computers in the classroom are extensive and complex. Although the integration of computer technology into the schools has been much slower than was once anticipated, progress is being made. The underlying “why” and “how” issues are too complex to be treated here, however. (The reader is referred to, for example, Reinking, McKenna, Labbo, & Kieffer, 1998, or Reinking, Labbo, & McKenna, 2000, for an introduction to this problem.) A second belief implicit to this article, then, is that computers do belong in the classroom environment and that they are beneficial to learning when used thoughtfully and appropriately.

Finally, I believe that schools should strive to provide students a true bilingual education. Schools in the United States have all too often operated under a “deficit” model of learning which (implicitly or explicitly) endorses the rejection of the home culture in favor of generic, American culture (Losey, 1995; McKay, 1998, online document). Although it remains controversial, the notion that literacy and content knowledge learned in one language can be transferred to another is supported by a growing body of evidence (August & Hakuta, 1997, online document; McKay). A great deal of research remains to be done to quantify the conditions favoring such transfer, but the fact that it takes place at all suggests that immigrant students should be taught in their native language whenever possible. In this way I follow what Ruiz (1988) terms the language-as-resource orientation, which views “multilingualism as a social and individual resource that can reap economic, political, social and individual benefits” (quoted in McKay, p. 2). This view also implies that native English speakers could benefit from being taught in a bilingual program, although that is a topic for another paper. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I have assumed that literacy learning and language learning are highly interrelated processes.

Bilingualism in education is a polarizing issue in the United States; perhaps only the “reading wars” have provoked a more heated response among the general public. Yet the demographic shifts described above continue, with the population of school-age Hispanics in the U.S. growing at approximately five times the rate of non-Hispanic students (although, of course, geographical distribution is uneven). The current educational system is notoriously ineffective in meeting the needs of these students. Dropout rates among Hispanics, the highest for any major ethnic group according to the National Council of La Raza (De La Rosa & Maw, 1990; quoted in online Web site presentation by Spurgeon, 1997), alone are sufficient to support this contention; standardized test scores and other evidence offer support as well.

School interactions. In keeping with recent emphasis on education as a social process, increased attention has been focused on interactions between the teacher and student and interactions among groups of students. Losey's (1995) study of classroom interaction found that female Mexican-American students responded very infrequently in class. Losey cites studies in which mainstreamed second-language learners were placed farther away from the teacher's desk, or relegated to working with the classroom aide because the teacher was not bilingual. Other researchers have found similar discrepancies in classroom interaction involving members of other linguistic minority groups (cf. Becker, 1990). If literacy learning really is a socially embedded process (as many researchers now recognize), it follows that those groups that interact with the teacher less frequently are also learning less than they should.

Delgado-Gaitan's (1990) study found instructional discrepancies between “novice” and “advanced” groups of Mexican-American students within second- and third-grade classrooms. The lower groups were given primarily drill exercises and short, simple passages, and then were tested for factual recall. Much of the instructional time devoted to these groups was spent on disciplinary issues. The advanced groups read longer texts, and teachers supported their use of higher level thinking skills. (Of course, these differences are not unique to ESL students.) Although in this case all groups were made up of recent immigrants, in general, LEP students tend to be tracked disproportionately into lower ability instructional groups. Teacher expectations and teacher-student interaction are correspondingly lower within these groups. Limited English proficient students are also disproportionately referred for special education testing, but tend not to be referred proportionally to gifted education programs.

Home interactions. Cultural differences between home and school are a frequently cited explanation for the poor school performance of language-minority students (Delgado-Gaitan, 1990; Losey, 1995; McKay, 1998; Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). Losey notes, however, that many of these studies failed to include relevant demographic information. Other studies were carried out in laboratory settings which may not be representative of the actual home situation. Yet despite these shortcomings in the research, differing expectations do seem to be a key factor that may limit the academic performance of these students (as shown by the positive outcomes Delgado-Gaitan's advocacy approach facilitated).

Not only are interactions between home and student vital to student learning, but so too are interactions between home and school. Delgado-Gaitan (1990) contends that school and home must both accommodate to the other's needs if LEP students are to be successful. She also notes that teachers' perception of student ability went up after meeting with parents, even when the quality of student work remained unchanged. Delgado-Gaitan documents the case of one school system that succeeded in involving parents in the schools their children attended.

The widespread availability of computer technology is in the process of transforming and broadening the concept of literacy (Reinking et al., 1998). Topping and McKenna (1999) note that this emerging redefinition of literacy “implies both an area of competence and a level of competence” (p. 107). They also differentiate between computer literacy (keyboarding skills or familiarity with a particular computer platform) and electronic literacy (literacy activities delivered electronically, rather than on paper as in traditional literacy). Research in electronic literacy is proliferating rapidly, and new ideas are produced more rapidly than they can be evaluated. Yet despite this proliferation, very little has been published about computers and the cultural minority student. I present below what I consider to be the emerging issues that relate to electronic literacy and the second-language learner.

Possibly the most important issue is one of access. Hardware and software in schools is often outdated; teachers may inherit materials that are neither up to date nor pedagogically appropriate (Labbo, Murray, & Phillips, 1995-96). Technological resources are expensive, and minority status tends to be highly correlated with low socioeconomic status. Early and frequent exposure to technology in schools, even to less-than-current technology, is imperative if we are to avoid the creation of an “information underclass” (Topping & McKenna, 1999, p. 108) of students disadvantaged by a lack of access to computers.

Activism, both within and outside of the school, is often necessary to gain access to appropriate electronic resources. Teachers must familiarize themselves with available software and how to select it (Hall & Martin, 1999). This and six other suggestions for teachers' thoughtful application of technology are listed by McKenna, Reinking, Labbo, and Kieffer (1999, pp. 121-123). Of course, these apply to all classrooms and not just those made up of second-language learners.

Koskinen et al. (1999) found extensive benefits resulted from a school-home program in which ESL students took home audiotapes and books to practice repeated reading. Reading skills increased dramatically; in particular, second-language learners showed substantial growth in their ability to read increasingly difficult books both fluently and accurately. In addition, teachers and parents reported that students read more and demonstrated increased confidence and independence in literacy activities (p. 432).

If audiotapes can make this kind of difference, just imagine what well-designed electronic books could do! Unfortunately, the school in this example had to provide the tape players, and it seems unlikely that a school would be able to provide all or even some of its families with computers or e-book readers for a comparable electronic literacy curriculum. Maybe if (or when) stand-alone e-books become popular and inexpensive, a home version would be appropriate and affordable.

Of particular benefit to ESL students is the ability of computers to transform text, providing a scaffold to assist at-risk readers (see Anderson-Inman & Horney, 1998, for a rationale for choosing the term “at-risk reader”; in particular, they categorize students having inadequate linguistic experience with English within this classification). “Supported text,” Anderson-Inman and Horney's term for text with electronic scaffolding, consists of the actual text plus auxiliary information selected to provide assistance and increase comprehension. For a second-language learner, such support might consist of synonymous words in the same language (“vocabulary slides”) or an explanation of new vocabulary (using alternate or simpler terms) in the primary language (“language shifts”). Graphics, video, and sound clips may also be included in a supported text. “Supplementary resources” include explanations of culturally specific references within the text, which would likely also be a vital scaffold to comprehension for a student from another culture. Unfortunately, such supported texts are not yet commonly available, although some of their features are present in some programs.

For younger students, the computer makes production easier and frees working memory to think more about ideas and how to communicate them (i.e., higher level thinking). Labbo, Murray, and Phillips (1995-96) found that “children who had difficulty with the mechanics of writing letters often found it easier to type on the computer” (p. 318). Fluency and elaboration were also increased in computer-written as compared to handwritten products. The young ESL learner would likely reap the same benefits, and in a bilingual setting the reduced reliance on writing by hand would allow more attention to be devoted to language and literacy acquisition in both languages.

There is evidence as well that the relationship between student and electronic text may be qualitatively different than the relationship between student and conventional text. McKenna et al. (1999) recount that use of e-mail increased shy students' willingness to communicate with others, even when the others were located within the same classroom. Use of computers in reading instruction also has the potential to reduce the social stigmatization felt by members of low-ability reading groups, by making curricular differences less apparent to their classmates. Shyness and placement into low-ability groups are common experiences for students who are not proficient in English.

A shift away from transmission-oriented pedagogy (and toward inquiry-based instruction) has been an unintended beneficial consequence of the adoption of classroom technology. McKenna et al. (1999) caution, however, that widespread use of interactive classroom technology may shift the classroom balance of power in ways that the teacher may not be prepared for. Delgado-Gaitan (1990), on the other hand, is a vocal advocate for transforming power relationships between families and schools so such changes may not be entirely undesirable.

Garner and Gillingham (1998) studied native Alaskan ESL students' use of electronic mail, and found that the e-mail format motivated students to use correct English grammar and usage. Delgado-Gaitan's (1990) investigation of home literacy practices among Mexican American ESL students found that letter writing was one of the main forms of literacy practiced at home; she found that writing (conventional, nonelectronic) letters, whether in English or Spanish, motivated students to use correct grammar. This suggests that if the computer resources were available, e-mail could become a valuable tool for developing language and literacy abilities in any language.

Future research should emphasize adapting existing software for use in the schools. For example, programs now in use for speech therapy would be ideally suited to the needs of the second-language learner. In particular, program features that offer instruction in sound production and recognize and diagnose speech disorders would be valuable to these students. Currently such features are expensive, but advances in computer processing and memory may soon make these features available at lower cost to a wider audience. Increased computer capacity will also make available programs that are sensitive to variations in usage and dialect among different populations.

It seems evident that successful use of computers to improve the literacy skills of ESL students must be a cooperative effort involving parents, teachers, students, and schools. All these stakeholders would have to change in some way to make progress -- but, to quote Garth in the movie Wayne's World, “We fear change.”

Money is, of course, the first and most obvious obstacle to classroom computer use. There never seems to be enough, and what little there is, is often apportioned based more on popularity (or unpopularity) than by either real need or future potential. Given the conservative nature of the educational establishment as a whole, it takes determination and dedication to show that a new way can be a better way (especially if the new way costs more). I think that it will be individuals, rather than any group, who will finally demonstrate the uses of computers in ESL and, indeed, in education in general. I remain optimistic that individual teachers will want to choose what is best in their individual classrooms; as time goes by, more and more will become aware of all the new options that computers are making available to them and to their students.

Anderson-Inman, L., & Horney, M. (1998). Transforming text for at-risk readers. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L. Labbo, & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Back

August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy. Available: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5286.html
Back

Becker, A. (1990). The role of the school in the maintenance and change of ethnic group affiliation. Human Organization, 49(1), 48-55.
Back

Day, J. (1996). Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995-2050 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, p. 25-1130). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Available: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/mspop06.html
Back

Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1990). Literacy for empowerment: The role of parents in children's education. New York: Falmer.
Back (1st through 3rd citations)
Back (4th and 5th citations)

Garner, R., & Gillingham, M. (1998). The Internet in the classroom: Is it the end of transmission-oriented pedagogy? In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L. Labbo, & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Back

Hall, V., & Martin, L. (1999). Making decisions about software for classroom use. Reading Research and Instruction, 38(3), 187-196.
Back

Koskinen, P., Blum I., Bisson, S., Phillips, S., Creamer, T., & Baker, T. (1999). Shared reading, books, and audiotapes: Supporting diverse students in school and at home. Reading Teacher, 52(5), 430-444.
Back
Back (2nd and subsequent citations)

Labbo, L., Murray, B., & Phillips, M. (1995-96). Writing to read: From inheritance to innovation and invitation. Reading Teacher, 49(4), 314-321.
Back
Back (2nd citation)

Losey, K. (1995). Mexican American students and classroom interaction: An overview and critique. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 283-318.
Back
Back (2nd and subsequent citations)

McKay, S. (1998, July 14). Teaching English in multilingual settings [conference paper posted in the Linguistics Archive, University of Natal, Durban, South Africa]. Available: http://www.und.ac.za/und/ling/archive/mcka-01.html
Back
Back (3rd and subsequent citations)

McKenna, M., Reinking, D., Labbo, L., & Kieffer, R. (1999). The electronic transformation of literacy and its implications for the struggling reader. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(2), 111-126.
Back
Back (2nd and subsequent citations)

Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.
Back

Reinking, D., Labbo, L., & McKenna, M. (2000). From assimilation to accommodation: A developmental framework for integrating digital technologies into literacy research and instruction. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(2), 110-122.
Back

Reinking, D., McKenna, M., Labbo, L., & Kieffer, R. (Eds.). (1998). Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [Editors' note: This book is reviewed elsewhere in Reading Online.]
Back
Back (2nd and subsequent citations)

Spurgeon, M. (1997). Involving Hispanic parents in their children's education [Web site presentation]. Available: http://www.topher.net/~spurgeon/
Back

Topping, K., & McKenna, M. (1999). Introduction to electronic literacy (part 1). Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(2), 107-110.
Back

Matthews is a doctoral student in the Department of Educational Psychology of the University of Georgia (Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602, USA), where he studies gifted and creative education. His primary research interests are assessment of high ability among linguistically diverse students and identification, curriculum, and instruction for gifted bilingual students. He can be reached by e-mail at mmatthew@coe.uga.edu.

Back

If you enjoy this article, you might be interested in these related postings:

• Literacy in Multicultural Settings: Whose Culture Are We Discussing? an invited commentary by Angela Ward
• Technology and the Revival of the Hawaiian Language, an article by David Hartle-Schutte and Kahealani Nae'ole-Wong
• The New Face of Literacy in Asia: Coping with Challenges in the Coming Decade, an invited commentary by Ng Seok Moi
• A review by Cheri Foster Triplett of Chris Liska Carger's Of Borders and Dreams: A Mexican-American Experience of Urban Education

Back