Matching instructional and assessment approaches with the process of second-language learning facilitates understanding the specific risks of at-risk and handicapped limited English proficient students. An instructional and assessment model that fosters the development of second-language skills by integrating writing with listening, speaking, reading, and problem solving has been developed and field tested in regular and special education classes. This model, POWER, draws on selected features of five instructional approaches or movements currently being used in a variety of instructional settings. These features include process-oriented instruction, a whole language approach, cooperative learning, cogritive mapping, and reaching and writing across the curriculum.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andersen, R. (1976, March). A functional acquisition hierarchy study in Puerto Rico. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Teaching English as a Second Language, New York.
2.
Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S.D. (1974). Is there a "natural sequence" in adult second language learning ? Language Learning, 24, 235-243.
3.
Bermudez, A.B., & Prater, D.L. (1989, April). Using brainstorming and clustering with LEP writers to develop elaboration skills. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association , San Francisco.
4.
Bermudez, A.B., & Prater, D.L. (in press). Evaluating the effectiveness of writing on the comprehension and retention of content in bilingual students. In L.M. Malave (Ed.), Theory research and applications: NABE Selected papers. Fall River, MA: National Dissemination Center
5.
Berthoff, A.E. (1978). Forming/thinkinglwriting: The composing imagination . Rochelle Park, NY: Hayden.
6.
Bloom, B.S. (1984). The thought process of students in discussion . In S.J. French (Ed.), Accent on teaching (p. 83). New York: Harper.
7.
Collier, V.R. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TeSOL Quarterly, 21, 617-642.
8.
Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122-128.
9.
Fradd, S.H. (1987). The changing focus of bilingual education. In S.H. Fradd & W.J. Tikunoff (Eds.), Bilingual education and bilingual special education: A guide for administrators (pp. 1-45). Boston : Little Brown.
10.
Fradd, S.H., & Weismantel, M.J. (1989). Developing and evaluating goals. In S.H. Fradd & M.J. Weismantel (Eds.), Meeting the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse students: A handbook for educators (pp. 340-362). Boston : Little Brown.
11.
Fradd, S.H., Weismantel, M.J., Correa, V.I., & Algozzine, B. (1988). Insuring equity in education: Preparing school personnel for culturally and linguistically divergent at-risk and handicapped students. National Association of School Psychologists .
12.
Fuller, J.K. (1978). An investigation of natural and monitored difficulty orders by non-native adult students of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation . Florida State University.
13.
Gold, D.L. (1989, January 11). Legal settlement in bilingual case mailed as model. Education Week, 1, 12.
14.
Goldman, S.R., & Rueda, R. (1988). Developing writing skills in bilingual exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 54, 543-551.
15.
Goodman, K., Goodman, Y., & Flores, B. (1979). Reading in the bilingual classroom: Literacy and biliteracy. Rosslyn, CA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
16.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as social semeiotic. Baltimore : University Park Press.
17.
Johnson, D. (1981). Student-student interaction. The neglected variable in education. Educational Researcher, 10(1), 5-24.
18.
Johnson, D.W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). The effective of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement : A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.
19.
Makino, T., (1979). Engtish morpheme acquisition order of Japanese secondary education students, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico.
20.
Moffett, J. (1981). Active voice: A writing program across the curriculum . Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
21.
Omaggio, A.C. (1986). Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
22.
Newman, J.M. (1985). Whole language: Theory in use. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
23.
Padron, YN, & Bermudez, A.B. (1988). Strategies for ESL writing . Southwest Journal of Research into Practice, 2, 12-26.
24.
Sinatra, R.C., Berg, D., & Dunn, R. (1985). Semantic mapping improves reading comprehension of learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 51, 310-314.
25.
Slavin, R. (1983). Cooperative learning. New York : Longman Press.
26.
Stevens, R.J., Madden, N.A., Slavin, R.E., & Farnish, A.M. (1987). Cooperative integrated reading and composition: Two field experiments. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 433-454.
27.
Walberg, H. (1984). Families as partners in educational productivity . Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 397-400. .
28.
Weinstein, C. (1978). Elaboration skills as a learning strategy. In H.F. O'Neill (Ed.), Leaming strategies (pp. 31-55). New York: Academic Press.
29.
Weintraub, FJ, & Ramirez, B.A. (1985). Progress in the education of the handicapped children and analysis of P.L. 98-100. Education of the Handicapped Amendments of 1983 . Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Series No. EDD 255-011)
