Response Process

I agree that students need to be motivated to really enjoy reading. It is important to continue to encourage better readers as well as weaker students to start and continue to read in their L2. However, I am concerned about the 6 strategies that the author gives us. Even though we give our students many choices, challenge, control etc. I think that weaker and less skilled students will not be interested in reading. In addition, what if a student does not want to read, and is excellent in reading comprehension as well as in reading in their L1? Another strategy is about designing projects. It is a very good strategy, but what if you see your group once a week? Finally I agree that many L1 readers would also read in English: they like to read, either in French or English.

The article talks about real life material, like catalogues and magazines which refer to authentic material that the MELS program is constantly talking about. I remember myself in high school. I was always unmotivated by the readings because they were in textbooks, without even bright colour and not authentic at all. I would have preferred to read in a magazine and write a summary or present something about it. It may have motivated me to read in my L2. However, the truth is that I was not very motivated to read in L1 either. I totally recognize myself in this article. However, I was not weak in English. The content and topics of the readings were not just appealing to me. I would always remember one of my elementary school teachers (long time ago!) who showed us the first version of Harry Potter. I don’t know why I remember that moment, but he did his job. Latter, when I heard about this book and its popularity I started to read it and bought other volumes in English to read it faster. Thank you Mister C!

The Lexical Advantages of Narrow Reading

It is not the first time I read about narrow reading, and I agree that it can be useful for second language learners. Reading in a second or foreign language is demanding. I believe one needs to be in contact with any aspect of a language over and over before he or she can remember it. When one reads several texts around a similar topic, that person gets in contact with the topic’s content words repeatedly. In the text, they say that “multiple exposures to recurrent words should facilitate vocabulary learning” (p.2.16). In other words, learners get to learn and acquire the content vocabulary because they see it recurrently.
Moreover, they become more competent at reading on that topic, therefore developing confidence in their reading abilities. That could also have to positive effect of motivating them to read even more. On top of learning content words and gaining competence and self confidence, they also continue to acquire function words (article, prepositions, etc.).
Finally, if students choose the topic of their narrow reading, they should be motivated to read. However, an imposed narrow reading topic might be a bad idea… A student who is not interested in a subject might find it quite unpleasant and amotivating to read on that subject for a long time.

STRATEGY: Agreeing / arguing with the author

Literature-Based Instruction: Response

Here is my response to the text on literature-based instruction in an ESL context.

Literature-Based ESL for Secondary School Students

In this article, the authors are clearly in favour of literature based-instruction in an ESL context. Throughout the text, they present arguments which support their assumption that this type of instruction is beneficial for ESL students’ acquisition of English.
First, they build background knowledge with a variety of quotes and viewpoints from researchers such as Vygotsky, Krashen and Piaget. The whole text explains why literature-based instruction is good, in what ways it is good and how to use it.
The conclusion itself presents all the pros of the method, and almost doesn’t give any limitations. The ones it gives are related to external factors such as the costs related to the purchase of the books. Even though I am convinced about the worth of this activity, I would have liked to read some limitations or at least discussions regarding the learners themselves. For example, how do students with different types of intelligence do with this method? Do they find it harder? What do you do with students who dislike reading books?
In other words, I’m sure the method is good, but I would have liked more information regarding different students’ reaction to it.

Strategy: describe the author’s point of view.

If I was to actually teach English in a secondary school (which I doubt I will), and if this school based its curriculum on literature, I think I would be somewhat hesitant at first. My biggest fear would be not to be able to motivate the students to read the book. I would be afraid that they might think the book is boring, or they might not want to read it because they would feel like they don’t understand it. Moreover, I know students read at a very different pace, so I guess that could be problematic too. Nevertheless, I am sure I would get used to it and even improve my own reading skills and gain a lot of knowledge from the books (especially in the case of historical fiction).
In primary school, I think most teachers already do it in a way. In the first cycle for example, teachers often spend the year alternating from songs to stories. Some programs such as AIM are even completely built around stories. They are not a “content-based instruction” method, but they are still based on literature and they certainly help the students acquire the language when used properly.

Strategy: prompt (if that happened in our school…).