Douglas & Kataoka (2008) Scaffolding in CBI of Japanese

American Association of Teachers of Japanese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to JapaneseLanguage and Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

Scaffolding in Content Based Instruction of Japanese Author(s): Masako O. Douglas and Hiroko C. Kataoka Source: Japanese Language and Literature, Vol. 42, No. 2, Japanese Language Education (Oct.,

2008), pp. 337-359Published by: American Association of Teachers of JapaneseStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30198069Accessed: 22-11-2015 00:35 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 161.112.232.103 on Sun, 22 Nov 2015 00:35:25 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=atj

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30198069

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



Scaffolding in Content Based Instruction of Japanese

Masako O. Douglas and Hiroko C. Kataoka

Abstract

In recent years, Content Based Instruction (CBI) has become increas- ingly popular as a means to teach the Japanese language. Because CBI utilizes authentic materials that are produced for native speakers of Japa- nese, they pose a great challenge for learners to understand their content due to learners' limited language proficiency. Some teaching strategies have been proposed and elaborated to assist learners in successful learning of content and language, especially in the fields of immersion education and teaching English as a second language. One of those instructional strategies, known as scaffolding, has been widely utilized in CBI. However, varying definitions and interpretations among educators result in a fragmented application of the concept to instructional practice.

This paper critically examines the existing definitions, interpretations, and utilization of scaffolding in current second or foreign language pedagogical practice. The paper also presents the results of a case study of Japanese teachers' familiarity with scaffolding strategy. It then proposes a working definition and a conceptual framework to design scaffolding activities for Japanese language education. The paper also presents a step-by-step process for developing activities, accompanied by some ac- tual examples from two content based courses developed in the Japanese program at California State University, Long Beach.1

1. Introduction

This paper critically examines definitions, interpretations, and application of a teaching strategy called scaffolding in current second or foreign language pedagogical practices, and proposes a working definition and conceptual framework for designing instructional activities of scaffold-

Japanese Language and Literature 42 (2008) 337-359 C 2008 Masako O. Douglas and Hiroko C. Kataoka



Japanese Language and Literature

ing. The paper also presents a step-by-step process for developing scaffolding activities with some examples, which we have created for advanced Japanese courses in our college.

In recent years Content Based Instruction (CBI) has become increas- ingly popular as a means of Japanese language instruction (Fujioka-Ito and Nakakubo 2007; Fujiwara 2003; Inahara 2007; Ushida 2007). The effectiveness of the CBI approach has been verified in research on second language acquisition, instructional strategies, educational and cognitive psychology, and program outcomes (see the research synthesis in Grabe and Stroller 1997). CBI is "an approach to language instruction that integrates the presentation of topics or tasks from subject matter classes (e.g., math, social studies) within the context of teaching a second or foreign language" (Crandall and Tucker 1990:187). CBI approaches ". .. view the target language largely as the vehicle through which subject matter content is learned rather than as the immediate object of study" (Brinton et al. 1989). Despite differing definitions of "content" in CBI (whether it refers to academic subject matter or non-academic content) (Curtain and Pesola 1994; Genesee 1994), CBI commonly requires the use of authentic materials that are "cognitively engaging and demanding for the learners" (Met 1991:150), that are "appropriate to the grade level of the students" (Curtain and Pesola 1994), and that concern "issues of interest or importance to the learners" (Genesee 1994). Authentic materials, which are "not originally produced for language- teaching purposes" (Brinton et al. 1989) and are characterized as "context reduced" and "cognitively demanding" (terminology from Cummins and Swain 1983), however, pose a great challenge for learners whose language proficiency is limited. This issue has been discussed widely, and strategies to support successful learning of content and language have been proposed and elaborated in the literature on immersion education (ERIC Digest 1995) and the literature on teaching English Language Learners (ELL) in the mainstream (Echeverria and Graves 2003)-the two fields where the CBI approach has mainly been utilized.

Scaffolding is one of the instructional strategies used in CBI-strategies which are essential to ensure that students will be successful content learners and language users (CARLA). To laypeople, "scaffolding" means "a temporary platform, used in building construction to elevate and support workers and materials during the construction, repair, or cleaning of a structure or machine" (Britannica Online Encyclopedia). In education it means the "temporal, but essential, nature of the mentor's

338




assistance" in supporting learners to carry out tasks successfully (May- bin, Mercer, and Stierer 1992:186). Gibbons (2002:20) states that "scaffolding is thus the temporary assistance by which a teacher helps a learner know how to do something, so that the learner will later be able to complete a similar task alone." Demonstrating learning processes and temporarily guiding learners through the learning process are key concepts of scaffolding strategy.

The theoretical roots of scaffolding can be found in the works of Piaget (cited in Krogh 1997) and Vygotsky (cited in Cole et al. 1978), who viewed learning from a constructivist perspective: learning occurs when a student internalizes new information by connecting it to his prior knowledge. Particularly relevant to the concept of scaffolding is Vy- gotsky's notion of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), which is "the distance between what children can do by themselves and the next learning that they can be helped to achieve with competent assistance" (Raymond 2000:176).

The word scaffolding appears regularly in the present-day pedagogy literature. However, the treatment of scaffolding activities found in the literature is very limited. For instance, Bradley and Bradley (2004) iden- tify only three types of activities (simplifying the language; asking for completion, not generation; using visuals) as being "especially effective for second language learners" without any particular support from empir- ical research. Rosenshine and Minster (1992) have used scaffolding to teach basic reading and writing strategies, but not higher-level cognitive skills, despite the title of their paper ("The Use of Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Level Cognitive Strategies").

These partial applications of the principles of scaffolding in the existing literature and a lack of comprehensive understanding of scaffolding further limit the application of this approach and lead to its misinter- pretation in teaching practices. This, in turn, means that the benefits of scaffolding go largely unrealized. A recent study on the effect of the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP model) on instruction reported that a systematic integration of effective practices that incorpo- rated scaffolding yielded positive learning outcomes (Echevarria, Short, and Powers 2006). The research indicates the importance of systematic, comprehensive, and regular integration of effective practices to the curriculum.

When instructional practices in Japanese language education are exam- ined, there have been no attempts, to our knowledge, to construct a com-

339




prehensive conceptual framework of scaffolding and to systematically and regularly implement scaffolding activities in practice. In fact, our in- formal study that asked 42 participants (25 post-secondary teachers, 10 K-12 teachers, and seven of unknown level) to sort out scaffolding activities from other instructional activities found that teacher familiarity with scaffolding was not high. The average score (correct answers) was 56%.

This paper aims to construct such a framework of scaffolding for teachers to use when they implement this approach regularly and com- prehensively in their curriculum. The paper consists of two sections: (1) construction of a working definition and a conceptual framework for scaffolding, and (2) description of a process of designing scaffolding activities based on this conceptual framework.

2. Working Definition and a Conceptual Framework of Scaffolding

The literature defines scaffolding in both narrow and broad senses. One definition views scaffolding as a means for "providing background knowledge . . . to help students build the schema essential for coping with authentic materials and facilitate the learning of new information" (Stryker and Leaver 1997:301). This narrow definition, scheme activation, is utilized most often in reading instruction in a foreign language class.

Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2004) and Fortune (2004) categorize scaffolding techniques into the following three types:

1. verbal scaffolding: techniques that are focused on language development (e.g., paraphrasing, writing prompts, using cognates)

2. procedural scaffolding: techniques that relate to grouping and activity structures (e.g., pairing, cooperative group techniques, TPR/ TPRS, activating prior knowledge, process writing)

3. instructional scaffolding: tools that support learning (e.g., graphic organizers, visuals and imagery, posting schedules, labeled visuals)

Among these three categories, the second one, which includes activity modes (such as pair work and cooperative group techniques) and instructional activities themselves (such as background knowledge activation and process writing) categorized in the same group, fails to provide clear criteria for categorization.

340




Hammond and Gibson (2001) categorize scaffolding in ESL instruction into two groups: macro scaffolding and micro scaffolding. The former is more likely related to curriculum design such as establishing goals and objectives of instruction, and selection of instructional activities. The latter consists of scaffoldings for instructional activities that are provided to individual learners if necessary.

A broad definition of scaffolding, on the other hand, is not confined to language skills, but applicable to all types of learning. Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976:90) define scaffolding as "a process that enables a child or novice to solve a problem, carry out a task, or achieve a goal which would be beyond his [or her] unassisted efforts." Hetherington and Parke (1986:293) offer the definition of scaffolding as a process of helping children ".. . achieve more than they can on their own by skillfully struc- turing the environment to make it easier for them." Arguing that there is no appropriate educational definition in a dictionary, McKenzie (1999) provides the following eight characteristics of scaffolding instead:

1. Scaffolding provides clear directions. 2. Scaffolding clarifies purpose. 3. Scaffolding keeps students on task. 4. Scaffolding offers assessment to clarify expectations. 5. Scaffolding points students to worthy sources. 6. Scaffolding reduces uncertainty, surprise and disappointment. 7. Scaffolding delivers efficiency. 8. Scaffolding creates momentum.

These definitions, whether narrow or broad, lack the practicality and specificity necessary for designing scaffolding activities: the former does not provide a comprehensive list of activities, or categorization is not clear; the latter does not provide a basis for developing instructional activities in language teaching. We need to construct a workable definition and a conceptual framework to refer to when we design and implement scaffolding activities in curriculum. Based on a synthesis of the definitions in the current literature, we define scaffolding as a process that includes the following elements:

1. providing temporary support from a teacher or capable peers until a learner can complete a similar task alone

2. demonstrating a learning process and joint engagement in the process

341




3. using an interactive approach which encourages genuine dialogue between the student and teacher as well as student-to-student

4. conducting activities that develop higher order cognitive skills rather than factual recall

As mentioned earlier, inherent in scaffolded instruction is Vygotsky's notion of the zone of proximal development. Our conceptual framework of scaffolding lies in this notion. That is, all scaffolding activities consist of collaborative (in the Vygotskyan definition, which includes collaborative work with teachers) learning experiences, and they need to be designed to make learners gradually integrate the process of learning introduced in the scaffolding activities.

Some examples of scaffolding strategies include:

1. giving contextual support for meaning by helping learners build the schema essential for coping with authentic materials (examples include use of visuals and readings on a similar, but not identical, topic in either the target language or the native language of the students and discussions on related issues)2

2. using non-verbal clues such as graphic organizers, tables, charts, outlines, and graphs during reading to aid comprehension

3. asking for completion, not generation, by choosing answers from a list or completing a partially finished outline or paragraph

4. breaking down complex projects or concepts into manageable units

Scaffolding activities are utilized to develop both verbal and non-verbal skills as summarized in Table 1 on the following page. Among the examples of scaffolding in Table 1, those that are marked with asterisks are not in the sample instructional activities in §4; they are briefly explained in notes 3-5.

3. Design of Scaffolding Activities

Two samples of instructional materials are presented here to show how scaffolding is integrated. The first sample, in Appendix A, is material developed for Japanese Civilization, an advanced level course with CBI in the Japanese program at our university. The second sample, in Ap- pendix B, presents material developed for another CBI course entitled Japan: Its Land, People, and Culture.

342




Table 1. Categorization of the Skills and Examples of Scaffolding

Skills Types Examples of Scaffolding Pre-activities:

scheme activation; *Role-Audience-Format- Topic (RAFT)3 in writing; vocabulary and kanji activities

In-activities:

Verbal skills reading strategy lessons; *Language Experi- ence Approach (LEA)4 for writing; comprehension check of learned content; guided reading

Post-activities: Reviewing/reconstructing learned content; discussion

*Script activation5 Non-verbal skills Strategies to read maps, graphs, and charts

Using graphic organizers Interactive dialog; guided reading; group dis- Cognitive skills cussions

3.1. Sample Materials from Japanese Civilization This sample is a part of the last unit, "Japanese Religion." Scaffolding will be explained via a section-by-section description of the material.

The first section (Appendix A, 1.1.a.) has a map of East Asia in the 5th century. To assist students in map reading, scaffolding instruction starts with non-verbal skills. The instruction proceeds as follows:

a. map reading activity A teacher encourages students to perceive the map as a whole first instead of details such as the kanji used in the map.

b. vocabulary activity Utilizing their knowledge of the names of the East Asian countries and their location, students match the names of countries in the 5th century and those today. c. kanji strategy lesson Students guess the meaning of the kanji word ~i7 m, utilizing their knowledge of the kanji they know, with a hint from two choices (a. The o L m e4, b. (1'; h"- /1). Students complete a diagram of the allies

343




of Japan in oral discussion in order to recycle the newly introduced words, including country names.

The second section (Appendix A, 1.2) consists of scaffolding for verbal skills: a vocabulary activity for reading a passage, which is combined with a kanji strategy lesson and scheme activation, reading strategies, and reading comprehension checks.

a. vocabulary activity with kanji strategy lesson and scheme activation

The kanji words in the list are in the reading passage to be read after this activity. Although most of the kanji words are newly introduced, students are encouraged to guess the meaning of words by utilizing their knowledge of kanji that are components of the words. After this activity, students activate their schema for the next reading activity by predicting the content of reading from the kanji words in the list. b. reading strategy Students scan the reading passage for the words that are in the preceding section or for the most frequently appearing words, and infer the content. c. reading comprehension check Students engage in activities to check their reading comprehension. The activities in this sample consist of providing a descriptive answer to a question and selecting correct statements based on the content of the reading passage. These activities are presented as samples for the students to make their own questions after this phase. The samples should show not only the activities that check factual knowledge (low cognitive skills), but also those that develop higher order cognitive thinking skills, namely comparing and contrasting, inferring, evaluating, and applying.

The third section (Appendix A, 1.3) aims at scaffolding for background knowledge building for the discussion in the following section and kanji strategy. In order to learn why Buddhism became a national religion, background information about political and cultural advance- ments in neighboring countries is introduced in the form of a diagram. Students utilize a kanji strategy to guess the meaning of .A, a key word in the section to follow.

The fourth section (Appendix A, 1.4) has a scaffolding activity to develop higher order cognitive skills. In an oral interaction, a teacher helps students understand the content of the diagram, compare and contrast the two politically powerful clans introduced in the material, and infer a re-

344




lationship between politics and Buddhism. Instructional dialog, a scaffolding activity, focuses on "why" and "how" questions rather than simple factual questions. In this way, students develop insights into how they use facts, logic, and assumptions to arrive at understanding through a corroborative conversation.

3.2. Sample Materials from Japan: Its Land, People, and Culture This sample comes from the third unit of the course materials. Unit 3 deals with fisheries in Japan and takes up such issues as the importance of seafood for the Japanese diet, types of fisheries in Japan, including aquaculture, and seafood imports and exports, as well as how the geog- raphy of Japan relates to both fisheries and everyday life. The sample here is the first section of the unit, which serves as the introduction to the rest of the unit.

The first section (Appendix B, 1.1.a-g) presents a group of pre-reading activities. Since the reading text includes various vocabulary and kanji with which the students may not be familiar, the scaffolding activities focus on vocabulary and kanji.

a. vocabulary activities (Appendix B, 1.1.a-e) Students first discuss their favorite dishes and their ingredients. At this time they also speculate about favorite foods of American and Japanese people. In this activity students also read a simple bar graph with names of favorite foods of Americans and Japanese. Students are already familiar with simple graph reading, so the graphs here function as a device for scaffolding vocabulary activity.

The second vocabulary activity deals with the kanji for "products." Students will guess and match the types of products and their meaning, using the previously learned kanji knowledge.

The third vocabulary activity teaches the names of common seafoods in Japan. These names are not necessary for this section of the reading with the exception of one fish name, 9 4', or sea bream. However, they are introduced here because they will appear in the next section of the lesson (not introduced in this paper) on various types of fisheries in Japan. This activity is also scaffolded by photographs of sushi and fish used to make it.

The fourth and the fifth vocabulary activities are also a combination of vocabulary with some content on nutrition. Students learn vocabulary for nutrients and the consumption of protein.

345




b. content information activities (Appendix B, 1.1.f-g) The second part of the pre-reading activities includes getting background information that will make the reading comprehension process easier and thus less stressful. Students read graphs showing the consumption of fish and meat by people (and animals) in various countries. The major vocabulary items in this section have already been covered in the vocabulary activities preceding this part, so the students can review the vocabulary as they prepare themselves to understand the content. The last activity in this section involves looking at the world map and finding the countries that consume the most seafood. Students will then be ready to tackle the reading selection, which is taken from a Japanese website.

The second section (Appendix B, 1.2) shows an example of scaffolding during reading activities.

a. reading strategy (Appendix B, 1.2.a) The first reading activity is a "global reading activity," in which students read for the main idea. As a scaffolding device, it provides students with four possible titles to choose from for both of the two paragraphs. b. reading comprehension check (Appendix B, 1.2.b(1)-(4)) In this section students read the text carefully and engage in activities to check their comprehension, paragraph by paragraph. Task types include open-ended questions, filling in a chart, multiple choice, and discussion.

c. critical thinking skills (Appendix B, 1.2.b(5)) At the end of the careful reading activities, students are asked to think of geographical features of the countries where the consumption of seafood is the highest. It is quite easy to answer the question by saying that these are all island countries surrounded by the ocean, since students were exposed to the answer earlier in the pre-reading section. It is important that the teacher use this answer as scaffolding for the next reading. Students will be learning about ocean currents in the next lesson of this unit, so the teacher should elicit responses beyond the simplest answer, "island countries surrounded by the ocean." For instance, students' attention may be directed to ocean currents that deliver a variety of fish to these islands. A good strategy to elicit various answers would be having students brainstorm in groups.

d. reading strategies (Appendix B, 1.2.b (6)) At the beginning of detailed reading activities, students are asked to mark portions of the texts that they do not understand despite re-reading. At

346




the end of the session, students are asked to discuss the marked portions and decide whether or not each portion was critical to understanding the content. They are also asked to guess at their marked portions so that they get used to making educated guesses. Encouraging students to use reading strategies is one of the most important scaffolding activities. This would work best in group discussions.

This sample does not include post-reading activities since it is only the first part of a longer unit. However, at the end of the unit there will be post-reading activities with scaffolding.

4. Summary

This paper presented a working definition and a conceptual framework for scaffolding, which is an effective instructional strategy for successful learning of both language and cognitive skills. The paper explained that systematic and regular utilization of scaffolding is essential to learning language and cognitive skills, especially when authentic materials pose a great challenge to students with limited language proficiency. Applying the proposed conceptual framework, we presented two samples of instructional materials to show a step-by-step process of scaffolding. These samples were designed for advanced level students in college courses. However, the principles and processes of developing scaffolding activities in this paper are applicable to high schools students and younger students as well, with adjustment for their age and cognitive development.

We conclude this paper by listing some considerations when developing scaffolding activities.

preparatory stage (before actually designing activities) student backgrounds

Students' age-related cognitive ability and language proficiency play a big role in developing scaffolding activities. There may be other individual considerations such as students' native languages and the chem- istry of students in the class.

instructional objectives Although we did not go over goals and objectives in this paper, these are the first to be considered in developing any activity. If the course is geared to speaking proficiency, then scaffolding for speaking activities is necessary.

347




three types of knowledge and concepts First are those that students must possess to be able to understand the scaffolding activities to be designed. The second are knowledge and concepts that are not prerequisite but are useful if students possess them. The third type of knowledge and concepts represents those that students will learn from the target activities, which compose the main objectives of the course. We design scaffolding activities to aid student learning. How- ever, if a scaffolding activity is beyond their level, it will not help students cope with even more difficult tasks for which the scaffolding activity is designed. In such cases, a scaffolding activity to precede the original scaffolding activity may be necessary.

At the same time it is beneficial to know before designing activities what the students already know and are capable of doing even if such knowledge, concepts and skills are not required in the lesson. We can then change or improvise activities if the prepared materials do not work.

vocabulary and kanji There are three types of vocabulary and kanji that the teachers should be aware of: (1) prerequisite vocabulary and kanji knowledge, without which the content becomes incomprehensible; (2) vocabulary and kanji that students can infer the meanings of by scaffolding; and (3) those that do not affect comprehension of the content even if students do not know them. Scaffolding activities are needed only for the second type of vocabulary and kanji. It is not the purpose of the CBI to have students learn all the vocabulary and kanji that appear in the text.

designing stage lumping versus splitting and sequencing

Once the activities are developed, teachers should decide whether to in- troduce the activities all at once or break them into several parts. Some- times this decision has to be made while in class. It is also important for us teachers to ask ourselves why we should do so, since sometimes too much scaffolding could mean a boring class, and too little leads to an overtly difficult session.

types of activities This applies to developing any activities, but especially scaffolding activities during which we often catch students' attention and interest. Using only one type of activity becomes boring, so various types of activities should be developed, as seen in §4 of this paper. Some activities should be done collaboratively and others, individually. Variation also

348



Masako O. Douglas and Hiroko C. Kataoka 349

sustains the attention of different types of learners and keeps the class lively.

There are perhaps many more suggestions that other teachers can make. As in any teaching activity, it is a good practice to share ideas and materials.

One issue that remains unaddressed in this paper is "unscaffolding"- in other words, when and how a teacher decreases assistance so that students can complete similar tasks by themselves. Research on this issue is scarce, to our knowledge. Thus we will examine the issue as a next stage of our study.




APPENDIX A Sample Instructional Material from Japanese Civilization

(Douglas 2007)

to conflict to present to be imported, to be itroduced

friendly relations military assistance sutma

350



Masako 0. Douglas and Iliroko C. Katacka

S #1G At~ ~Ni2~ftt5L'5WtThL'*tt

£

4 4 4. 538# ~ Kt~v I I it.4t (S ~$iL) ~m 4 4

4: )~'li' It 14 ~Tht y44 4*Vt A Vi Lz~

\1 1~ tjp sat sxtl Ski LI. .K1 n)"

1104 kWtS1~WCKt AL' #1Q4)Zbf~ t~At4:t7C0AUtKt-AL'

1* ®~h~Att. rLt ~0W54 tax~ fr~)Att' t0f545t1~

t Q0S~WAWC< AL' tKU4Z b~t~1Ttk' t0fflf4: LTKQL'ttL'tt~t~L'V4D5

4A~Ltt~®LI1tsH44 *tLP 4' 4,5UtJtk~9tA4dALt-fa' Y®th~WVAt0A ThAkt~fzAL'

tkit~t' P t1L&5Ps~t H~t AII~41L~tAA~LZL't tins,

(3LL®~tS*t4:II 05< ~ I oft t f-AL'

5 6t*5~~7~ 7®~Ot1LOL~-~5

IQMt F$~J. 4:s'50~tt~frAt h'vftP~~zcC<t AL'

a A t t~ 4, 1

351




1.4,

a, 6

b.

APPENDIX B Sample Instructional Material from Japan: Its Land,

People, and Culture (Kataoka 2007)

1.1 a.

(The following graphs will be shown after the group discussion in order to see if the students' predictions are correct.)

http://wwwl .iwate-ed.jp/kakusitu/johocontents/ed_vod/contentsdata/1 683.bmp http://wwwl .iwate-ed jp/kakusitu/joho/contents/ed_vod/contentsldata/1681 bmp

352




(Students work in pairs to make a list as they look at the pictures.)

Sushi at Sushi Gen, Honda Plaza, Los Angeles http ://www.bridgeandtunnelclub.com/bigmap/outofto wn/california/losangeles/su shigen/index.htm

(Fish photographs are omitted.)

(The following illustration will be shown after the students are given some time to attempt to make a list. The words in the pyramid on the right appear one by one as the class goes over vocabulary, )

http://www.kenyo.net/yumaniteifoodmiramid.htm

(The following illustration and graph will be shown after the group discussion. The class will go over the vocabulary of two types of protein as well as the names of food items ,)

353



354 Japanese Language and Literature

http://ww. iwate-ed p/kakusitualohclontenontsed adcontnts data1685 bm

htt h:uhwwwbob-an com/ ids/n Htonakana21.asp http :/wwwl iwate-ed jp kakusituj o/co ntents/edv od/contents/data/1684.bmp

(Students discuss the question in groups as they look at the world map and the illustration At this point the map does not have red circles and the i lustration lacks country names. After the groups report their discussion results, the names of the countries are revealed in the illustration and heir locations are shown on the map)



Masako 0. Douglas and Hiroko C. Kataoka

12. )Vt®*t~ a. ;4zoX* 0tI*A1ttte~i*t. JO)RV*1W:(~2QO) *QZ (A5157) /JL)*t~

tORI (ttY~ 4 hA-) & U-c-#u'u'tcD*ugA,-cT~ Lx,

frtil:&WtALfl t0;~#t0~LMIJ 199

Ott) tUb *b$tj Ot4*W&t'K NAt N~LttL{*t-UbA~tc4'W I77JC4rtJ'6,hPbi'xt*tZtc/fKfl2t)Lytt~ LY~>ttfltAz*t*~j{

At, tr'tA2P*tt~0 K >~kt Av~fr ~: ) 1' K ~ N~ ), 1997 ~c ThtAJ.

tW~0±Yit'1 tMi: 1 Att U lo.9kg t~0Vb~~UA, B$Ad 70.6kg 4* ~'C~*t, itJtt~A 4 4*Ot~viAt Pt7UV tAl/,,*ucb(J4 KWLct6A4 LA ~ 78.6kg At L'tttt *4W) &,*V/P *4i4 4*k(At ftC' K w,'Kf U, 7' A Ut. 4 t Ut. 7t/Zfa~CDkIAt$, 9tAbx7>~#cD3fcD1tAt4tK'mLhk\AL' $ tt A, (4*4+4*1* Food*Balance'Sheets)

http: xxw~x kaipipr or.jp marnejiten seibutsu scihutsu 9Jttml

b tt±t~ U4*UK)Vt*t,

$4fr6t;L~~j1siq4~Pe14Ii-t4sLvC< ti*L'

(1) *~AL\*At#Z*tTjRIht;S U',

(2) ~VCtt'b 4SThCt:L45t$t#I~~AVCL'.ttiA4ipCtt,

(4)J04*IzL1iAL'0)~W1$~ tMtW)flt®*L'IIIICAP&. tO -~0WtSIQ)fli*~ 5A Irc#M~tLtj*u' lit ®~tflicLtKVAL'

5

(5)tflJOfliO* L'RIICAiM ULitI!tOflIWCtt' iA-1ti~ Ut 'C K t * Lx, (6) FP4*l4lttz*fI$tIZSL'A. (~) tst th*t;froThk'. (U') tOti$ifJ' 4t'CstiL\t 4**±4*~

'$tfrb4h'Qkt'~ (5) t 4*~ftt~Jth~C4*~t4*-YJV-tC!tU#-wC< t+~Lx,

355




NOTES

1. This paper is a revised and expanded version of the original paper that was presented at ACTFL Annual Conference 2007 in San Antonio, Texas.

2. Cognitive psychologists (e.g., Anderson, Spiro, and Montague 1977, Piaget cited in Krogh 1997, Vygotsky cited in Cole 1978) have known that ability to activate background knowledge/experience and relate it to incoming new information is essential for learning. This finding is reflected in instructional activities for reading and listening in foreign language education (Omaggio Hadley 2001), or in an Advance Organizer that presents in advance major concepts/tasks for learning in general (Ausubel 1978). These activities and others that connect background knowledge/experience to new incoming information are one type of scaffolding activity.

3. RAFT, or "Role, Audience, Format, Topic," (Greece Central School Dis- trict Web Cite) is a prewriting strategy that helps learners focus on what they will write and provides a structure to help learners make decisions about audience, purpose, form, and tone of writing.

4. Language Experience Activity (LEA) has its roots in first language literacy instruction for young learners. However, it was used with some success in the mid 1980s to 1990s in second language (L2) literacy courses with students of diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and the approach is revisited with its application to beginning adult L2 literacy instruction (Wurr 2002). The principles of LEA are explained as follows (Taylor 1992): "The most basic, and in fact the original, form of the LEA is the simple tran- scription of an individual learner's personal experience. The teacher or aide (or in a mixed-ability class, a more proficient learner) sits with the learner so that the learner can see what is being written. The session begins with a conversation, which might be prompted by a picture, a topic the learner is interested in, a reading text, or an event the learner has participated in. Once a topic evolves, the learner gives an oral account of a personal experience related to that topic. The transcriber may help the learner expand or focus the account by asking questions."

5. A script is defined as "a structure that describes appropriate sequences of events in a particular context" and "a predetermined, stereotyped sequence of actions that defines a well-known situation" (Schank and Abelson 1977: 41). Schank and Abelson explain that knowledge is stored in the form of scripts: scripts for eating in a restaurant, riding a bus, watching and playing a football game, participating in a birthday party, and so on.

We have observed that, when using a second language, students often "short-circuit": they fail to follow a normal sequencing of events, skipping some steps, just as they do not fully use language learning strategies. For instance, in an activity where one conversation partner invites another to do something together on a weekend, students begin the dialogue by asking if their partners want to watch a movie at a pre-determined time instead

356




of asking the partners if they have time on the weekend, if they are interested in doing something and, if so, what they would like to do and when. A teacher needs to activate students' scripts prior to the activity, by asking them in their first language to describe scenes in sequence in order to invite someone to do something together.

REFERENCES

Anderson, R. C., R. J. Spiro, and W. E. Montague, eds. 1977. Schooling and acquisition of knowledge. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Ausubel, D. 1978. Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Bradley, Karen Sue, and Jack Alden Bradley. 2004. Scaffolding academic learning for second language learners. The Internet TESL Journal 1(5). http:// iteslj.org/Articles/Bradley-Scaffolding (accessed 29 December 2007).

Brinton, Donna M., Margaret A. Snow, and Marjorie B. Wesche. 1989. Content- based second language instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Britannica Online Encyclopedia. http://www.britannica.com (accessed January 10 2008).

CARLA (Centre for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition). http://www. carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/strategies/main.html (accessed 4 May 2008).

Crandall, JoAnn A., and G. Richard Tucker. 1990. Content-based instruction in second and foreign languages. Foreign language education: Issues and strategies, ed. by H. H. Fairchild and C. Valadez, 111-126. Newbury Park: Sage.

Cummins, Jim, and Merrill Swain. 1983. Analysis-by-rhetoric: Reading the text or the reader's own projections? A reply to Edelsky et al. Applied Lin- guistics 4(1): 22-41.

Curtain, Helena A., and Carol Ann Pesola. 1994. Language and children: Making the match. New York: Longman.

Cole, Michael, Vera John-Steiner, Sylvia Scribner, and Ellen Souberman. 1978. L. S. Vygotsky: Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Douglas, Masako. 2007. Japanese civilization. Manuscript (teaching materials developed for an advanced level Japanese course at California State Uni- versity, Long Beach; first draft under revision for second test run).

Echevarria, Jana, and Anne Graves. 2003. Sheltered content instruction. San Francisco: Pearson Education.

Echevarria, Jana, Mary Vogt, and Deborah Short. 2004. Making content com-

357




prehensible for English learners: The SlOP model. Boston: Pearson Educa- tion.

Echevarria, Jana, Deborah Short, and Kristin Powers. 2006. School reform and standards-based education: A model for English-language learners. The Journal of Educational Research 99(4): 195-210.

ERIC Digest. 1995. Integrating language and content: Lessons from immersion. ED390284. http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-3/immersion.htm (accessed 1 January 2008).

Fortune, Tara. 2004. Scaffolding techniques in CBI classrooms. http://www. carla.umn.edu/cobalt/modules/strategies/ust.html (accessed 4 May 2008).

Fujioka-Ito, Noriko, and Takako Nakakubo. 2007. Introducing content-based curriculum in intensive courses for international co-op program at the University of Cincinnati, USA. Japanese-Language Education around the Globe 17:153-68.

Fujiwara, Tomoko. 2003. Content-based approaches to listening comprehension at intermediate level. Paper presented at the Association of Teachers of Japanese Seminar, 23 March, New York, New York.

Grabe, William, and F. L. Stroller. 1997. Content-based instruction: Research foundations. The content-based Classroom. Perspectives on integrating language and content, ed. by M. A. Snow and D. M. Brinton, 5-21. New York: Longman.

Grand Rapids Public Schools. 2004. 5E instructional framework: R.A.F.T. writing strategy. http://web.grps.kl2.mi.us/academics/5E/raft.html (accessed 29 December 2007).

Genesee, Fred. 1994. Integrating language and content: Lessons from immersion. Educational Practice Report 11. National Center for Research on Cul- tural Diversity and Second Language Learning. http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/ pubs/ ncrcdsll/epr l1.htm (accessed 29 December 2007).

Gibbons, Pauline. 2002. Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. Portsmouth: Heineman.

Greece Central School District. RAFT. http://www.greece.kl2.ny.us/instruction/ ELA/6-12/Reading/Reading%20Strategies/RAFT.htm (accessed 25 Septem- ber 2008).

Hammond, Jenny, and Pauline Gibson. 2001. What is scaffolding? Scaffolding teaching and learning in language and literacy education, ed. by Jenny Hammond, 1-14. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.

Hetherington, E. M., and R. D. Parke. 1986. Child psychology: A contemporary viewpoint. New York: McGraw Hill.

Inahara, Kyoko. 2007. How to develop critical thinking using content-based instruction in the case of heritage language learners. Paper presented at the

358




Association of Teachers of Japanese Seminar, 22 March, Boston, Massa- chusetts.

Kataoka, Hiroko. 2007. Japan:. Its land, culture and people. Manuscript (teaching materials developed for an advanced level Japanese course at California State University, Long Beach; first draft under revision for second test run).

Krogh, Suzanne Lowell. 1997. How children develop and why it matters: The foundation for the developmentally appropriate integrated early childhood curriculum. Integrated curriculum and developmentally appropriate practice: Birth to age eight, ed. by C. Hart, D. C. Burts, and R. Charlesworth, 29-50. New York: State University of New York.

McKenzie, Jamie. 1999. Scaffolding for success. The Educational Technology Journal 9(4). http://www.fno.org/dec99/scaffold.html (accessed 4 May 2008).

Met, Mimi. 1991. Learning language through content: Learning content through language. Foreign Language Annals 24(4): 281-295.

Maybin, Janet, Neil Mercer, and Barry Stierer. 1992. Scaffolding learning in the classroom. Thinking voices: The work of the National Oracy Project, ed. by Kate N orman. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Omaggio Hadley, Alice. 2000. Teaching language in context, 3rd ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Raymond, Eileen. 2000. Cognitive characteristics. Learners with mild disabil- ities. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon, Pearson Education.

Rosenshine, Barak, and Carla Meister. 1992. The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership (April): 26-33.

Schank, Roger, and Robert Abelson. 1977. Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Stryker, Stephen B., and Betty Low Leaver. 1976. Content-based instruction: Some lessons and implications. Content-based instruction in foreign language education, ed. by Stephen B. Stryker and Betty Low Leaver, 286- 324. Washington: Georgetown University Press.

Taylor, Marcia. 1992. The language experience approach and adult learners. ERIC Digest, ED350887. http://www.ericdigests.org/1993/approach.htm (accessed 9 January 2008).

Ushida, Eiko. 2007. An application of standards: Japanese-language curriculum development for graduate students of international relations. Japanese- Language Education around the Globe 17:187-206.

Wood, David, Jerome S. Bruner, and Gail Ross. 1976. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17:89-100.

Wurr, Adrian J. 2002. Language experience approach revisited: The Use of personal narratives in adult L2 literacy instruction. The Reading Matrix 2(1). http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/wurr/ (accessed December 2007).

359



Documents

Douglas & Kataoka (2008) Scaffolding in CBI of Japanese