Alphabetic Literacy Affects Oral Second Language Processing Elaine Tarone, University of Michigan Dr.

Elaine Tarone is a professor from the University of Michigan. She presented a replicated study on the affects of alphabetic literacy and oral second language processing in a non-literate, refugee community. The participants in this study were composed of 35 adolescent and adult, Somali refugees from a community close to the university. The students varied in L1 literacy levels, but almost all had no schooling other than what they received after arriving in the U.S. In presenting this topic of research, Dr. Tarone mentioned that a majority of research focused on oral language was focused on literate L2 learners. This is interesting considering the fact that she mentioned one in five adults worldwide are illiterate and many still manage to be multilingual. The research done in this study presents an opportunity to better understanding the oral production process in non-literate L2 learners, but also to improve the teaching approaches used with these students. The research she presented on the subject suggested that having the ability to decode alphabetic script would lead to greater phonological awareness. This would seem to imply that the students with the highest literacy level in their L1 would perform better in the oral production and processing of their L2. This study also deals with current issues in SLA research, in which L2 learners must notice and focus on forms to acquire those specific items. The procedure for each session was divided into three parts. The students participated in recall and recasts, elicited imitation and IL narratives. The results of this study confirm that students with higher literacy levels performed better than those who were either low or non-literate. In the case of recall and recasts, the higher literacy group corrected or modified the form better than the low literate group. The lower literacy group has difficulty noticing the gap, which can affect the acquisition of their L2.

This presentation prepared me for a similar situation with recall and recasts that I experienced working with adolescent, refugee girls. In a one-on-one tutoring session, the student was asked to read a short paragraph and then stopped and asked the definition of particular word. In this case, the word was landmark and the student couldnt give me an exact definition, but they were able to give me some examples of a landmark. I thought this was good. The student had made a connection between a word and what that word could possibly represent. I felt it was also an accomplishment because the student was able to come up with an example on their own without any hints or help from me. At this point, the director came out of her office and told me she had to put the word in a complete sentence and then made the student repeat the sentence over and over again until she said it correctly. The fact that the student wasnt really recognizing or noticing the gap between what she was saying and what the director was saying didnt seem to accomplish much. In this instance, I dont feel like the student walked away with a better understanding of English sentence structure, or the meaning of landmark. Just like in the case of the Somali students there has to be some recognition of the forms trying to be acquired.