Applied Linguistics in TESOL应用语言学在英语教学.doc

Applied Linguistics in TESOLRESA ESOL Endorsement ProgramInstructor: Add in name, contact information, course schedule & location. Review & select readings; modify final reading list as needed.Course Description:This 5 PLU course explores theories of language acquisition, with a focus on the nature and development of first and second language, the elements of linguistics, language varieties, and the influences on the acquisition of listening, speaking, reading and writing skills of English as an additional language across age levels.This course is one of three courses that constitute the Georgia state add-on endorsement for TESOL in public schools.Objectives: To gain knowledge of the nature and structure of language, including general principles and terminology of linguistics To learn to recognize and dispel language myths To develop understanding of language varieties To increase appreciation for the challenges that English language learners experience on all levels To gain knowledge of the processes of and relationships between language acquisition and language instruction and assessments in listening, speaking, reading and writingState ESOL Content Standards Addressed in this Course:STANDARD I: The program shall require demonstrated competence in the knowledge of the nature of language, language varieties, and the phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and discourse of the English language. STANDARD II: The program shall require demonstrated competence in listening, speaking, reading, and writing standard English on technical, abstract, and non-technical or general topics. STANDARD III: The program shall require demonstrated competence in the knowledge of and experience in first and second language acquisition across age levels. STANDARD IV: The program shall require demonstrated competence in the knowledge of the effects of cognitive, affective, and socio-cultural variables on language learning. STANDARD V: The program shall require demonstrated competence in language assessment techniques and instruments, and the evaluation of students. STANDARD VIII: The program shall require demonstrated competence in the knowledge of current educational trends, issues, policies, and practices, and their relationships to program planning, instruction, and assessment of ESOL students. STANDARD IX: The program shall require demonstrated competence in the use of available technology, particularly multimedia, and shall include the application of computer hardware and software and techniques for evaluating software for ESOL instruction. STANDARD X: Supervised field experience in ESOL education shall be integrated throughout the program. Course Readings: (Note: This is a reading-intensive course!) Packet of Course and Web Readings Ariza, E. N., Morales-Jones, C. A. Yahya, N., Zainuddin, H. (2003). Why TESOL?: Theories and Issues in Teaching English As a Second Language for K-12 Teachers (2nd Edition). Course Requirements and Activities (Note: it is expected that you complete all requirements in order to receive credit. See Course Completion Sheet.)1. Class Participation and AttendanceYour participation is vital! Therefore, you must be on time and present at all classes, and must be actively involved in discussions and activities. Plan to complete all readings before class. Each days participation will be worth 0 to 4 points, depending on the level at which you participate and the mastery of the concepts you demonstrate.To receive credit for this course, in addition to completing other assignments, you must earn at least thirty-two (32) participation points. Additionally, you may not miss more than five (5) hours of class (including absences, tardiness, and leaving early).Expected time allotted: ten class sessions at 4 hours each = 40 hours2. Response to Readingsdue weeklyEach week, you will turn in a reading response based on prompts provided by the instructor. This activitys purpose is both to show that you are keeping up with the readings, and to allow you the opportunity to reflect on and to apply the information from the readings to your own experiences and prior knowledge. Each response sheet will receive from 0 to 3 points (see rubric). Late assignments will be docked by one point. You must earn at least twenty-one (21) points on responses to readings to receive credit for this course.Expected time allotted: nine reading sets at 2 hours each = 18 hours3. Internet Research into Language and Linguistics due Class Session 6Your internet research project will consist of two parts. (See grading rubric.) First, you will create an annotated bibliography of web resources (at least 5) focusing on a particular language or language variety (e.g., Korean, African American Vernacular English, Tex-Mex Spanish, Vietnamese, etc.) This will list both the URL and your annotation of what the site contains and a short evaluation of to what extent and for whom its useful. Second, you will investigate and analyze a language policy website (see approved list). For the site, you will include: an overview of the language issue(s) covered; at least 5 specific arguments or points made on the website; and an analysis of the strength of the arguments/ideas in light of our course readings and discussions.You must receive at least eight (8) points on this assignment to receive credit for this course.Expected time allotted: 2 hours4. Field Experience: Linguistic Case Study To be included in final Endorsement portfolioThis activity entails an in-depth linguistic case study of a student who has learned/is learning English as an additional language. Specifically, you will transcribe and analyze a 20- to 30-minute recording of the students natural speech (not an interview), focusing on the language from the perspectives of phonology, morphology/syntax, pragmatics, first-language influence, and/or other areas that seem relevant. You will contextualize your description of the language learner and language learning situation, to consider how that might influence the language sample. You must explicitly link your discussion of the learners language to elements we have discussed in class and from our readings. Be sure to consider the learners achievements with the language, not simply perceived deficits. Finally, you will provide instructional/assessment recommendations for the student based on your analysis. You will turn in the transcript and your case study analysis (about 3-5 pages), and will make a short oral presentation on your findings to the class. See the Rubric for more details. Your must receive at least 24 points on this assignment to receive credit for this course.Expected time allotted: 8 hours.Course CalendarDateTopicReadingAssignments & ActivitiesSession 1Introduction & Course Overview; LanguageAriza et al., Ch 1-4In class: Language definition;Video viewing response;Language autobiographySession 2Lang. Structure; Proficiency: Syntax, semantics, morphology, phonology Ariza et al., Ch. 5-9Response to Reading #1In class: Phonology/IPA exercise; Terminology activity; case analyses. “Connections between Thought & Language” reading.Session 3Pragmatics & Discourse,First Language Acquisition Ariza et al., Ch. 10-12 and Ch. 15-17Response to Reading #2In class: Video viewing response; L1 Variables activitySession 4Language variation, SociolinguisticsReagan & Osborn, 2002“Words that Shouldnt Be,” “From Sea to Shining Sea,” “What Speech Do We Like Best,” and “What Lies Ahead” at /speak/ Response to Reading #3In class: Video viewing responseSession 5Standard language, School language, Bilingualism and Bilingual EducationAriza et al., Ch. 13-14Piper, Ch. 4Response to Reading #4In class: Internet Dialect Activities; Sociolinguistic case studiesSession 6Acquiring L2,Theories & Variables in SLACummins, 1994 Ariza et al., Ch. 18-21Response to Reading #5Internet Research Project In class: Presentation of Internet Research Findings Session 7Disorder or Difference?Individual Differences in Language LearningPiper, Ch. 7 OR Hall Haley (2000).GA DOE ESOL/SSTEchevarria et al., 2004Marinova-Todd, Marshall, & Snow, 2000Response to Reading #6In class: Language disorder and difference case studiesSession 8Assessment & Evaluation,Legal foundations,Program ModelsAriza et al., Ch. 22-26Dutro & Moran, 2003Response to Reading #7In class: Assessment recommendations and case studiesSession 9Identity & Language;Language socialization2 of the following: Edelsky, 1996Norton Peirce, 1995Willett, 1995Response to Reading #8In class:Small-group reading discussion; Self-TestSession 10Language Myths Course Summary and presentationsMcLaughlin, 1992Response to Reading #9 Linguistic Case Study dueIn class: Concept-mapping activity; Oral presentationsAdditional Readings:1. Reagan, T. G., & Osborn, T. A. (2002). Whose language is real? Language variation and language legitimacy. In The foreign language educator in society: Toward a critical pedagogy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 2. Cummins, J. (1994). The acquisition of English as a second language. In K. Spangenberg-Urbschat & R. Pritchard (Eds.), Kids come in all languages: Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 36-62). Newark, DE: IRA.3. Piper, T. (1998). Chapter four: Learning two or more languages. In Language and learning: The home and school years (2nd ed.), pp. 91-117.4. Piper, T. (1998). Chapter seven: Michaels miracle. In Language and learning: The home and school years (2nd ed.), pp. 167-190.5. Hall Haley, M. (2000). Culturally and linguistically diverse exceptional students: Refocusing the lens. ESL Magazine.6. Marinova-Todd, S.H., Marshall, D.B., & Snow, C.E. (2000). Three misconceptions about age and L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 34(1), 9-34.7. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., Short, D. (2004). Chapter 10: Issues of reading development and special education for English learners. In Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (2nd ed.), pp. 163-177. Boston: Pearson Education.8. ESOL Guide to Special Education & SST, available online at www.glc.k12.ga.us/pandp/esol/teachguidesst.htm9. Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2003). Rethinking English language instruction: An architectural approach. In G. Garcia (Ed.), English learners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy, pp. 227-258. Newark, DE: IRA.10. Edelsky, C. (1996). Chapter 1: Not acquiring Spanish as a second language: The politics of second language acquisition. In With literacy and justice for all: Rethinking the social in language and education, 2nd ed. (pp. 15-28). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.11. Norton Peirce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9-31.12. Willett, J. (1995). Becoming first graders in an L2: An ethnographic study of L2 socialization. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 473-503.13. McLaughlin, B. (1992). Myths and misconceptions about second language learning: What every teacher needs to unlearn. Educational Practice Report 5. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Available online at /pubs/ncrcdsll/epr5.htmGuided Response/Class Discussion RubricRESA ESOL Endorsement ProgramThis rubric is to be used by the instructor to track in-class participation and mastery of constructs via small-group and whole-group discussions, etc.If more than one major concept is discussed during a single class, the daily participation grade should be averaged across topics and/or weighted based on the importance of the topic(s).Date: _Topics/Content Standards Discussed: _Objectives Not Acceptable Partly Acceptable Mostly Acceptable Fully AcceptableUnderstanding of concept, theory, or idea and its applications 1 point Does not show any recognition or understanding of the concept or idea2 pointsDemonstrates awareness of key terms, but does not fully comprehend concept, how to apply it, or how it relates to other course constructs (e.g., examples are off-topic or irrelevant)3 points Demonstrates full comprehension of terms and concepts, and shows understanding of at least one way to apply this knowledge to classroom settings or TESOL4 points Demonstrates full comprehension of topic and its application, and explicitly analyzes, evaluates or synthesizes (e.g., via links to background knowledge or other course concepts)Topic:Topic:Topic:Participant NamePointsPointsPointsComments:Reading Response RubricRESA ESOL Endorsement ProgramThis rubric is to be used by the instructor for rating weekly written responses to prompts on the weeks readings.Date: _Readings Covered:Topics/Content Standards Discussed: _Objective Not Acceptable Partly Acceptable Fully Acceptable Understanding of concept, theory, or idea and its applications 1 point Does not answer all questions; OR several responses are off-topic or irrelevant or show misunderstanding of ideas or terms2 pointsAnswers all or almost all questions relevantly, but minimally; demonstrates awareness of key concepts and terms through correct usage3 points Demonstrates mastery of terms and concepts, by answering all questions fully; connects topics to prior knowledge, other readings, and/or classroom applicationsParticipant NameReading ResponseScore:Comments:Internet Applied Linguistics RubricRESA ESOL Endorsement ProgramName: _Part A: Annotated Bibliography of Web Resources on Language/Language VarietyTopic: _Part B: Language Policy Website AnalysisWebsite Analyzed: _Instructor Feedback and Points:Objectives Not Acceptable Partly Acceptable Fully Acceptable EarnedPoints Annotated Bibliography Links 0 points More than one link is not functional or does not go to sites reviewed. 0.5 points All but one link are functional and go to the sites reviewed. 1 point All links are functional and go to the sites reviewed. Number and relevance of websites for Annotated Bibliography 0 points Fewer than 4 websites are included; OR 2 or more of the websites included are not relevant to the topic. 1 point 4 websites are included and they are thematically grouped; OR, 5 websites are included but the thematic grouping is not completely relevant. 2 points At least 5 websites are included and they are appropriately thematically grouped. Quality of Annotations 0 points More than one annotation does not tell how/for whom the website is useful 1 point All but one annotation tell how and for whom the website is useful; OR, all annotations tell this information, but without sufficient detail. 2 points All annotations tell how and for whom the website is useful, with sufficient detail. Topics identified0 points For the Language Policy website, the language issue covered is NOT clearly identified; AND for the annotated bibliography, the topic focus is NOT clearly identified. 0.5 points For the Language Policy website, the language issue covered is clearly identified; OR, for the annotated bibliography, the topic focus is clearly identified; but not both. 1 point For the Language Policy website, the language issue covered is clearly identified; AND for the annotated bibliography, the topic focus is clearly identified. Language Policy Website Explanation of Positions 0 points 3 or fewer arguments or points made by the language policy website are clearly identified and explained. 1 point At least 4 specific arguments or points made by the language policy website are clearly identified and explained. 2 points At least 5 specific arguments or points made by the language policy website are clearly identified and explained. Policy Website Evaluation of Positions 0 points Points or issues from the website are not evaluated, or your evaluations are not supported by course readings or discussions. 1 point Fewer than 3 specific points from the website are evaluated by you, with explicit reference to course readings or discussions. 2 points At least 3 specific points from the website are evaluated by you, with explicit reference to course readings or discussions. 8 points minimum expectedScore:Field Experience: Applied Linguistics Case Study RESA ESOL Endorsement ProgramName: _Case Study: _Objectives Not Acceptable Partly Acceptable Fully Acceptable EarnedPoints Transcript is of sufficient length and depth. 1 point Transcript represents less than 20 minutes of recorded conversation and does not follow transcription conventions. 2 points Transcript represents at least 20 minutes of recorded conversation OR follows transcription conventions. 4 points Transcript represents at least 20 minutes of recorded conversation AND follows transcription conventions. Case study write-up is sufficient length and depth, carefully written and edited. 1 point Case study analysis is less than 3 pages, AND has 3 or more editing errors. 2 points Case stud