Nade Digest Fall 07

7/29/2019 Nade Digest Fall 07

1/74

DigestPromoting Communication Among Developmental Education Professionals

Volume 3, Number 2Fall 2007

National Association forDevelopmental Education

1 Motivating Basic Writers through Self-Assessment andGoal-Setting

SUSANNA K. HORN, UNIVERSITYOFAKRONWAYNE COLLEGE

13 Cooperative Study Groups: Give Your Students the Homeeam Advantage

TONYLERMA, THEUNIVERSITYOFTEXASATBROWNSVILLEAND

TEXASSOUTHMOSTCOLLEGE

23 Te Road Less raveled: Poetry and Videotape in aDevelopmental Reading Class

SHERRILATIMER, UNIVERSITYOFCENTRAL ARKANSAS

SHANNONJOHNSON, UNIVERSITYOFCENTRAL ARKANSAS

33 Student Voices: Te Literacy Histories of DevelopmentalReading Students in a South exas College

ARLENEREADY, UNIVERSITYOFTEXASATBROWNSVILLEAND

TEXASSOUTHMOST COLLEGE

PAULA PARSON, UNIVERSITYOFTEXASATBROWNSVILLEANDTEXAS

SOUTHMOST COLLEGE

47 Te Style of Which Tis is Written: Neutralization ofPrepositions in English

SUSANJ. BEHRENS, MARYMOUNTMANHATTANCOLLEGE

CINDYMERCER, MARYMOUNTMANHATTANCOLLEGE

59 What Were Tey Tinking? Decision- Making in theExperiences of College Students at Risk

STEPHENO. WALLACE, SHIPPENSBURG UNIVERSITYOFPENNSYLVANIA


2/74

Editorial Comments

Tis Fall 2007 issue marks the 4th anniversary of the NADE Digest. We want to extend

our appreciation to all the authors who submitted work for publication; your ideas reflect

the creativity, scholarship, and dedication so indicative of developmental education profes-sionals. Tanks to our hard-working editorial staff of reviewers; your thoughtful comments

and close readings resulted in an outstanding diversity of articles and a strong foundation

on which to build.

Building on strong foundations is integral to our first article, Motivating Basic Writers

through Self-Assessment and Goal Setting. Susanna K. Horn encourages her students to

view themselves as a community of writers through building on past successes, critically

assessing their writing, setting appropriate writing goals, and following through on them

with workable strategies.Speaking of strategies, who among us hasnt used a sports analogy in the classroom

to spark interest? ony Lerma provides several come-from-behind stories to illustrate the

positive effects of cooperative learning in his College Algebra classes. Cooperative Study

Groups: Give your Students the Home eam Advantage reveals that self-esteem and suc-

cess rates rose when his students worked in study groups.

Sherri Latimer and Shannon Johnson detail how reading, writing, analyzing and per-

forming poetry improved their students reading skills in Te Road Less raveled: Poetry

and Videotape in a Developmental Reading Class. Students selected one poem to read

aloud, and then reviewed the videotapes, resulting in more focused reading, stronger ana-lytical skills, and a new appreciation for vocabulary and syntax.

Once again, the significance of building a strong foundation is explored in Student

Voices: Te Literacy Histories of Developmental reading Students in a South exas Col-

lege. Authors Arlene Ready and Paula Parson argue that developmental reading curricu-

lum must include explicit strategies to help students acquire and maintain positive reading

experiences if they are to become successful readers and lifelong learners.

Are you enamored with prepositions? Or are you afraid from them? Concerned on the

direction English is going to? Susan J. Behrens and Cindy Mercer offer an interesting lin-

guistic background and study of how their students, both native and non-native speakers

of English, employ prepositions. Te Style of Which this is Written: Neutralizations of

Prepositions in English urges us not to ignore prepositions as small words of little impor-

tance, rather to instruct our students in their significance while appreciating the flexibility

of this dynamic, if diminutive, part of speech.

In our last article, What Were Tey Tinking? Decision-Making in the Experiences of

College Students at Risk, Stephen O. Wallace uses an ecological framework to examine

how and why students make decisions. Wallaces article provides a firm foundation for

understanding students decision-making process.Finally, as NADEs 2008 conference theme reminds us, developmental educators must

continue to devise revolutionary methods with which to improve the success of our stu-

dents. We hope these articles provide innovative ideas for all of you to implement in your

own classrooms.Mary Ann Bretzlauf, Laura Villarreal,& Mollie ChambersCo-Editors


3/74

NADEDigestEditors M A Bz, College of Lake County

M C, Lorain County Community College

L M. V, University of exas at Brownsville

Editorial Advisory CommitteeW A. B, Grambling State UniversityR A. B,Morris CollegeE B, roy UniversityK G Kflc, University of Minnesota, MorrisP . K, West Chester University

C M, University of South Alabama Jff M, Henry Ford Community College J E. P, Kent State University

S W, Dutchess Community College

H E. W, Ferris State University

NADE Executive Board 2007-2008

P G McB, Central New Mexico Community College Vc P Mc H, Southwestern Michigan College P-Ec R K, Collin County Community College Sc S E, Dixie State College J L,Aims Community College

TNADE Digest is published c c cc . NADE c Digest fi. I ($50 US) c cc cc - cfi. T .I ($350 US) c c fi. I c NADE Digest $20 US c $10 US - . A $4 fi c US.Cc NADE ffi c, 500 N E P S B2 PMB 412 G,

AZ 85338, .. - c c .

2007 by the National Association for Developmental EducationAz c - NAc D Ec. Az q - q c , c , c, cc .


4/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 1

Motivating Basic Writers throughSelf-Assessment and Goal-Setting

It has long been established that self-assessment and goal-setting are regularfeatures of the writing process of experiencedwriters. It has also been demonstrated thatstudents develop more power and controlover their writing when they are encouragedto become their own evaluators. Terefore, tohelp beginning writers think and act morelike successful writers, teachers must integratereflection and self-assessment as core compo-nents of English writing instruction. Tisarticle summarizes how one Basic Writingcourse actively engages students in consis-tent formal and informal self-assessment and

goal-setting activities that encourage them todevelop a writerly mindset as they modifytheir behaviors to better approximate those ofexperienced writers.

H c c ffi c j fi ? G c (E, 1982; G, 1983; M,1972), c c fi c / , , ffc c, ff z cc c

- (Z, 1990). T -c E (1971, 1983), P (1979, 1980), F H (1981), S (1980) - - c c , c fi c

SUSANNA K. HORNhe University of Akron

Wayne College


5/74

2 Motivating Basic Writers

cc. A Bc W c (1998) L (1997), ON (1998),O (2001), , c - - c cc c - cc. ON (1998), c, c c c ; , flc - c c E

c. T c z Bc W cc c - - c c c .

FIRS IMPRESSIONS: CREAINGACOMMUNIYOF

LEARNERSAND WRIERSR fl

, c fi c c- c c , cc . B c ? fi- -

I , fi c z c , ff, c, . M, c .

W - cc

-, q . T five c - c c c :


6/74


1. Dc (, c j, ,, c.).

2. C j / c . Uc cc.

3. A . B . , c , .

4. L c . I , DO

?5. N , .

A c -, c c c, z fi .T c fi c: N, Mj, A

E/I, K M, W G. Tc c ff c cc, , c c . A K c, c z ff cc/c,c , , -. Tc W G c q - . T W G c c c cc c . L (1999) c c c

fi c (. 85). F ; z c, -, , ff, fi c c ccc .


7/74


SHOWING OFF: BEGINNING SENENCE WORK WIH INDIRECSELF-ASSESSMEN

c qc c, c - . E, c E q c c. c , I c c c c c S Off c z ,

c , ff c c. T c c c . T c c c ; c cc c c;

fi , c, c /- .Sc -ff c , c , -ffi cc c c c, cc j c ff cc c.

VISUALIZINGHE GOAL: USING EXEMPLARSANDFOLLOWINGACHECKLIS

B - q , c cc c c. A c

, c c c q. E cffc c c cc, . A cc


8/74


jc c, ccc c c, c cc c

. W c cc , c q c .

REFLECING BEFORE CONSULING: SELF-ASSESSMEN PRIOROPEERRESPONSE

E c c, Bc W c, c - , c c . M q c , c . N, c c flc c, c , c c fi P C N

: T I c , M cc BEFORE I c . I 1 , c , c, cc. I 2, q , c ffc . I , c 3, M

c c . I 4, H I c c c, c fi . T c , c c - c c .

REFLECINGONAMANUSCRIP: SELF-ASSESSMENOFACOMPLEED ESSAY

I W P C N, c -c - flc, c c


9/74


c cc fi . T fi cc : W I c

c T I . T c - c: T , W I c, I I .T fi c c -, c c / : Ac (

, cfic c ) M c / q I . A , flc cc, c j fi c.

CONFERENCING: LOOKING BACKO SE GOALSAND PLANSRAEGIES

A c , c,/ c c , c q c c c, cc . D ---

cc, c c c c c, c c, ,z, c c, , cc. T c c cfic cc c c . F , E , c

c R c c , . Sc - c c , , ; -c


10/74


, c , c c, cc , c.

CONSISEN SCAFFOLDING: CONINUALGOALSEINGANDSRAEGYPLANNING

V (1962) z c c ; c c - - . D q q

c (T & G, 1988), c c(H & C, 1994); , - ffc c , c c (L & G, 2003).F, c c,

, c . F c, , qc c q, q c c : M q () ____________.

P I . W , I __________________. Q I cA qc- c c , flc c cc . S j I

I , ff. c c G c. , c , . I BORING! I


11/74


c I . I c

c c . H, c, . , ffc c , cc z cc c c .

SUMMARIZING ACHIEVEMEN: HE WRIING-ASSESSMEN BUSINESSLEERc q

c flc , c ffc c c . F , cc

c . Sc c c, c c c , fi j c , c z cfic (c / c), c c

/ . Cc fi flc/- --,-- c c cc/c c c .

LEAVINGALEGACY: A REFLECIVE MEMO

T fic , c c , , c c c cc j c


12/74


c . T --cc--Bc-W c c , , c. T

c c. A c c cc c I q c c, c , z c fi- . W

, c c c c fi , c cc c z ficc flc, c , .

DEVELOPINGAMOIVAING MINDSE Many first-year students approach college with uncertainty, butthe first day of Basic Writing class can be structured to help studentsrealize that they are already experts who understand the tremendouseffort it takes to succeed, whether in music, sports, hobbies,interpersonal relations, household management, or professionalareas. Teir new challenge is to think and act more like experienced

writers. o help students come to know the sometimes hard-wonjoy of writing, perceptive instructors should encourage them todraw upon their past successes, to apply their self-assessment skillsto the writing process, to set suitable writing goals, and to followthrough with appropriate strategies. Te process is an ongoing one;therefore, self-assessment and goal setting must be integral elementsof the course not occasional assignments, but vital aspects of

Basic Writers development, present every time they write. Ideally,these processes will become fundamental to our students personaldevelopment as well important features of a scholarly mindset, amindset that constantly questions, probes, and challenges studentsto shape, to reach for, and to grasp their goals.


13/74


REFERENCESBc, P., & W, D. (1998). A c

.Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &Practice, 5(1), 7. R J 16, 2005, AccSc P .

E, P. (1982). Writing without teachers. L: O UP.

E, J. A. (1971). Te composing processes of twelfth graders.U, IL: NCE.

E, J. A. (1983). Te web of meaning: Essays on writing,teaching, learning, and thinking. (D. G & M. B,E) Mc, NJ: B/C.

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). Cognitive process theory ofwriting. College Composition and Communication,32, 65-87.

G, D. H. (1983). Writing: eachers and children at work.

E, NH: H.H, R. W., & C, L. (1994). Cc cc - Sc, D. B. Z (E.) Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educationalapplications(. 255-281). H, NJ: LcE.

L, R. (1999). Tinking about teaching and learning:Developing habits of learning with first year college anduniversity students. S, VA: S.

L, D., & G, D. (2003). G- - 7. Educational Research, 49-59.

L, E. P. (1997). T : A .English Journal, 86, 41-44.

M, D. M. (1972). c c c.Te Leaflet, 71, 11-14.

ONeill, P. (1998). From the writing process to the respondingsequence: Incorporating self-assessment and reflection in theclassroom.eaching English in the wo-Year College,26, 61-70.


14/74

O, R. J. (2001). Ic c . College eaching,49(3), 96-98.

P, S. (1979). T c c c. Research in the eaching of English,13(4), 317-336.

P, S. (1980). U c. College Compositionand Communication,31, 363-369.

S, N. (1980).R c adult writers. College Composition andCommunication,31, 378-388.

Tarp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Tought and language. Cambridge, MA:MIPress.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academicachievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist,25(1), 317.

__________________________________________Susanna Horn is the coordinator of Basic Writing and Writing Consultants atthe University of Akron Wayne College. She has worked with Basic Writingstudents for over twenty years and has co-authored with Ken Pramuk the textbookA Course in Basic Writing. Dr. Horn loves helping students understand theirpotential as learners in general and as writers in particular. Nothing thrills her morethan watching students as the learning wheels turn in their brains. Contact Sue [email protected].

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 11


15/74


"EWFSUJTJOHJOUIF/"%&%JHFTU

F/"%&%JHFTUXFMDPNFTBEWFSUJTJOHGSPNQSPGFTTJPOBMPSHBOJ[BUJPOTSFMBUFE QVCMJDBUJPOT BOE DPOGFSFODFT BOE WFOEPST BTTPDJBUFE XJUI%FWFMPQNFOUBM&EVDBUJPO8FSFTFSWFUIFSJHIUUPSFGVTFPSSFGVOEQBZNFOUGPS BET GPVOE JOBQQSPQSJBUF GPS PVS NFNCFST CZ UIF /"%& #PBSE PG%JSFDUPSTPSJUTSFQSFTFOUBUJWFT"ETQBDFJTMJNJUFEBOEXJMMCFQSPWJEFEBTBWBJMBCMF4VCNJTTJPOTNVTUCFJOFQTPSUJGGPSNBU"ETBSFHSBZTDBMF

"E4J[FTBOE3BUFT

1BZNFOUJTEVFXJUITQBDFSFTFSWBUJPO$IFDLTTIPVMECFNBEFQBZBCMFUP/"%&BOENVTUCFSFDFJWFEQSJPSUPUIFTQBDFSFTFSWBUJPOEBUFPGFBDIJTTVF4FOEQBZNFOUUP/"%&"UUO%JHFTU"ET5JO"WF'JOEMBZ0)4FOEDBNFSBSFBEZmMFTUP%JHFTU&EJUPSPDF!OBEFOFU

4QBDF3FTFSWBUJPOBOE$BNFSB3FBEZ%FBEMJOFT

30/"%&$%

3FDJQSPDBM 0SHBOJ[BUJPOT BOE /"%& $IBQUFST JO HPPE TUBOEJOH NBZJODMVEF B EJTDPVOU PO UIF BCPWF SBUFT "E SFRVFTUT NVTU JODMVEFTJHOBUVSFTPGUIF1SFTJEFOUBOE5SFBTVSFSPGUIFPSHBOJ[BUJPOSFRVFTUJOHUIFEJTDPVOU

0OF*OTFSUJPO 5XP*OTFSUJPO $PTU $PTU5PUBM'VMM1BHF

Y

)BMG1BHF Y

*OTJEF$PWFS 'SPOUPS#BDL

Y

3FTFSWBUJPO $PQZ

4QSJOH*TTVF0DUPCFS /PWFNCFS

"QSJM

'BMM*TTVF .BZ +VOF4FQUFNCFS

Send payment to NADE, Attn: Digest Ads, 500 N Estrella Parkway Ste

B2 PMB 412 Goodyear, AZ 85338. Send camera-ready files to Digest

Editor offi [email protected].


16/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 13

Cooperative Study Groups:Give Your Students

the Home eam Advantage

In this article I discuss the factors that ledme to implement study groups in the teach-ing of mathematics. An important in-

fluence in this decision began with anexperimental study conducted with twoCollege Algebra classes in which studentswere randomly assigned to treatment groups.While there was no statistical differencebetween the study groups on the posttestthat was used to measure achievement, it isimportant to note the positive effect on the

students. In addition, suggestions are given onhow to implement cooperative study groups in

your mathematics classroom.

A 39, J C c fi 1991 U.S. O . I c c fi c. I

c c - N Y c c J . W J c N Y c - , qc c c c cc, , .

O J 3, 1993 Bff B c H O fi NFL ff. I fi O

B c 28 3 .T c O

c 35 3 . H, c c , B

ONYLERMAhe University of exas at

Brownsville and exasSouthmost College


17/74

14 Cooperative Study Groups

c cc NFL . T cc, B fi c

c c c . T c c c - .

O N 6, 2004 L c c 28- fic fi O S.C 56 35. T c cc c.

M j cc cc c. T c, . O cc -c. T cc. H,

c cc. I , c - c c ccc.

COOPERAIVE LEARNINGTe support and encouragement that an athlete receives can

also be advantageous for the student who is trying to succeed in amathematics course. It is for this reason that I strongly encouragemy students to form cooperative study groups in all of my classes.Cooperative learning is the instructional practice of placing stu-dents into small groups, or teams, and having them work togethertoward a common goal. Each member of the team is responsible,not only for learning what is taught, but also for helping team-

mates learn.I c c . T

I c. H, I , I c .


18/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 15

T Ac Mc Ac -Y C(AMAYC) S (C, 1995)

c c, c c , -c c.C jc c-

c c fi c c ffc ccc (L & Z, 1997). A K-12 c -, c c cq

, c c c, c -c, (S, 1992).

O fi c c c - c (J & J-, 1989). C c

cc c (S, 1987).B c , c c c (K, 1986). B c c , - z ff, c c c

(J & J, 2003).T , c z

c . C cc .T cc c . C ff c fi -

c cc. I c - c ; c c c - c (Dc, 1962; J & J, 1989).


19/74


S c c- , . J

c c, students also encourage each other to succeed. As theinstructor, I am the biggest fan because I want all my students tobe successful.

HE EXPERIMENAND MODELWhile I initially recommended that my students form study groups

to prepare themselves for tests, I took a more structured approachtoward cooperative study groups when I conducted an experimentalstudy with two college algebra classes in order to examine the effectsof cooperative study groups upon achievement in College Algebra.Te model that I used for the study is given below.

1. S . T c

c .2. Ec

c c c . T cc -c .

3. Ec c c.4. C

c.5. G c c

c c. T . M . I I cc cc

c .6. G c

/ .7. I . S c

j .


20/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 17

HE SUBJECSS C A c

. T c . T - c c. - c - . - c c c . T, c cc . M cc

c. T c .

MEHODOLOGYEach student in the experimental study was exposed to the same

instructional approach. Tis consisted of a lecture-discussion deliv-ery where students took notes and asked questions. Both classes were

given the same homework assignments and chapter tests. It is impor-tant to note that each student was aware that some individuals wereworking in a group and some were not. I was the instructor for bothCollege Algebra classes involved in the experimental study.

HE RESULSAND NOESTe statistical analysis indicated no significant difference in the

mean scores of the experimental and control groups on the posttestthat was used to measure achievement at the .05 level (t = -0.381,p = .706). Te descriptive statistics for the posttest means of the studygroups are presented in able 1. Te mean given is the number correctout of 34 problems.

1

Descriptive Statistics for Posttest ResultsM G S D

E GC G

24.4425.13

2.856.10

W fic ffc , -


21/74


c . T c c

. I , S c c.

S -c.

S c

c c.I q , I c c c .

D - , I c cc c c c- . T c

c c c .T cc c I

, M 1314 (C A), M 1325 (BCc), M 1332 (M L A), c, M 0422 (I A). T cc c z c c F 1. T cc flc -

c C c. T c c .

A c F 1, c cc . F, j c c c c. I , c c c c-

c. T c cc . I c cflc c / c c. H, - .


22/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 19

O c I c

c c , . I c c c , 5%. C c cc c c c c c. E cc c

c cfic.S T . T c q

. E c cc c

c . Support from group members encouraged them to stay focused. T c c .

IMPLEMENING SUDYGROUPST -

c c c.

G c . M cc cc . T c c . I c c . I c

0

20

40

60

80

CollegeAlgebra

BusinessCalculus

Math forLiberal Arts

IntermediateAlgebra

Math Courses

Percentpassing

Classes that used study

groups

Classes that did not usestudy groups

F 1. Comparison of the use of study groups in several math courses


23/74


. I .Oc , c -

cc c c .T c c . I c - . I c .

M c c c c c

c. H, I c c ffi c. F , c, .T c fi . H, c

. W , .

Oc , / . T , , - c .

Te periodic reports mentioned earlier, serve as minutes for the groups

sessions and keep me updated on the group activities. Tese informalreports are submitted every other week by one of the group membersand must be signed by all members. Te reports simply detail theactivities of the group sessions such as time and place where the groupmet, duration of the meetings, a brief overview of the meetings, andproblems or concerns that the group encounters. Members take turnssubmitting these reports to me. I used the data from these reports to

determine the role of each student during the study sessions.Most of group sessions are held outside of class where the study

groups work on homework assignments or study for tests. Occa-sionally, I do assign group projects in class. Tis allows me to havefirst-hand knowledge of the level of participation of each student.


24/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 21

Te in-class projects count as homework grades which accountsfor 30% of the semester grade. Te in-class project usually involves

solving three or four problems from the lecture and is assignedthe last 15 or 20 minutes of the class period. Each group mem-ber receives the same grade on all group assignments, however allstudents work individually on the exams. If a student is notdoing his/her share of the work during the group session, it will beevident when I grade their exam.

CONCLUSIONH . W c c , c . F-, I - c.

D I

c c, I c j .I , ,c, c , c c.S z -c , , c .

C ffc c c c . I - I c - .

J c , -

c . I c , c c c . G cc !


25/74


REFERENCES

C, D. (E.). (1995). Crossroads in mathematics: Standards

for introductory college mathematics before calculus. M,N:AMAYC.

Dc, M. (1962). C : S c. I M. R. J (E.), Nebraska symposium on motivation(. 275-319). Lc, NE: U N P.

J, D., & J, F. (2003).Joining together: Group theoryand group skills(8 .). B: A & Bc.

J, R. ., & J, D. W. (1989). Cooperation and competi-tion theory and research. E, MN: Ic B C.

K, S. (1986). C cc c c. I C. C (E.) Beyond language: Social and cul-tural factors in schooling language minority students. L A-: C S U E, D,

A C.L, R., & Z, O., (1997). Fc c c c . Journal of Re-search in Mathematics Education,28, 331-54.

S, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning: Student teams(2 .).W, DC: N Ec Ac.

S, G. O. (1992). C c.

Mathematics eacher, 85(1), 63-66.________________________________________ony Lerma is currently an associate professor of Mathematics at the University ofexas at Brownsville and exas Southmost College. He holds a M.S. degree fromSouthwest exas State University and a Ph.D. in Mathematics Education from theUniversity of exas at Austin. His research interests include cooperative learning.


26/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 23

Te Road Less raveled:Poetry and Videotape

in a DevelopmentalReading Class

Developmental reading students respondpositively to poetry. Tis genre engages themand intimidates less than prose. Reading

poetry aloud further improves their readingskills because students feel compelled to in-crease their knowledge and abilities and topay closer attention to the text when they arerequired to perform. Videotaping perfor-mances heightens this desire to read well andallows students to assess their abilities when

viewing the tape.

P c c E . I c ffc . I 2002, 11% c (P,L, & G, 2003). G

c , cc fi . B z c c c c . R, z, c fi. R c c .V c c . c c c.

SHERRILAIMERUniversity of Central

ArkansasSHANNONJOHNSONUniversity of Central

Arkansas


27/74

24 Te Road Less raveled

READINGAND APING POERYW c ? P ffc c

fi . T c c c . R , , , fi . A, c.

T . A c jc c c . (O c , c fi cc c jc.) A c .

Reading poetry opens up a whole new world for students.While most poetry assignments start and stop with silentreading, the genre lends itself to being read aloud. Indeed, manypoems were written for oral performance. Reading aloud in class forcesstudents to pay closer attention to the poems in front of them, if forno other reason than they are performing in front of their peers. Byreading aloud students can hear themselves which helps them identify

problems and monitor progress (Opitz, Rasinki, & Bird, 1998). Oralreading gives students a deeper appreciation of the way a poem sounds,its rhythm, rhyme, alliteration, onomatopoeia, and other elements. Itmakes reading the poem a richer experience for the reader and allowshis peers to enjoy it as an audience. Reading aloud improves studentsconfidence and competence (Ash, 2002). o heighten this effect andto give students an opportunity to view their work and improvement,

videotaping readers is a fun way to get students excited about reading.

HE POERYPROJECD 2007 cc

c


28/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 25

. T c jc. T c c

c- . A 16 , c c. T c .T c c . B c c . B c

c . T c , , c. T c .S z, . T c , ,, c, , . T z c j.

S c flc .Oc c , q

c . T c c z, c, , . T . M (c fi c)

c . A c c c. S c c . Sc , c . Oc c , q

cc c .

Te next phase of the assignment was for the class to gather ina circle and talk about the poems, authors, and books they had


29/74


chosen. During these discussions, students were allowed to readtheir poems if they wished. Listening to both the poetry and the

discussion helped them develop listening comprehension andvocabulary. Several students eagerly volunteered to read, while othersdid not want to read at all. Te instructors took part in this exercisediscussing their poems and reading them aloud modeling goodreading and verbalization skills. Tis practice allowed students toread in a supportive environment which increased their comfort andcompetence in reading. Te instructors participation demonstrated

several things for the students: possible elements to analyze in apoem, types of questions to ask, and how to read poetry orally. Tisexercise also exposed students to different poets and different typesof poetry. One of the highlights of this activity was that severalof our international students read or recited poems in their nativelanguages. Tus, we were treated to poetry in Spanish, Arabic, andKorean. Tis was an especially valuable experience for the native

Arkansans who had never strayed far from their rural homes.

WRIING POERYS c

c . T . T c . S

c . O j . A c, ff c. S c c cc c .T flc c c .

P c fl - c fi , c , c. A c jc c , , , . W


30/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 27

, .O

c c c .T c c . S c. T . A, q c.

READING POERYALOUDo prepare our students for the final phase of the unit, reading

poetry aloud before a video camera, we played them an episode ofthe HBO program Russell Simmons Presents Def Poetry. Te showfeatured a variety of poets reading their work. Students were toldto focus on the poets presentation: their enunciation, pace, body

movements, facial expressions, etc. Afterwards we discussed readingpoetry as a type of performance asking them to think about howthey would read their poem to bring out its meaning and emotion.

S q c c . c , c c

c c. S c c fi c.B c, c . T c,c, . T c z .

I , c c, c, j . F , cc c . T


31/74


c . T c

. S, c c. O c c c them in theirpresentations. Reading aloud before a camera forced our students topay closer attention to the texts they were working with.When everyone had been taped reading, we viewed the tape together

as a class. Watching the tape gave the students an opportunity to see andhear themselves recite the poems they had chosen. Tey were able tolisten and determine what was good and bad about their performancesand were able to learn from their mistakes. Although students weresometimes critical of themselves, they were very supportive andencouraging of their peers. Everyone found it entertaining and watchingthe tape proved to be a welcome break at the end of the semester.

ASSESSMENT fi c c

c .T c . W . O , ,

. A c, j c . S c c .U c . B

c . A c c c cc . T j c c .


32/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 29

W fi , q

c c . W . T c c . S c c. Ic . G, c j c ,

. T c c . P c . T c . N c cc c .

IMPROVEMENSA jc fi

, . T . Bc c c . Bc , cc

c. B fi .M q c c , , cfic. S . A, . W , c

c, , c, , , c. ; c .I c cc


33/74


c. T j

c ficc.

IMPLICAIONS Tese poetry exercises, like the entire course, have a higher goal:to enable students to read on a college level. Reading poetry aloudand before a video camera develops skills that students can applyto their reading assignments in any course. Firstly, these activities

help students become more focused readers. By having to readaloud students are forced to read every word; they become aware ofwhich words and concepts they do not understand and realize theimportance of elements such as word order, punctuation, changeof font or font size, use of bold, italics, underline, etc. Tey learnhow to identify what problems they have with the text and how toovercome those diffi culties. Tese abilities are crucial for any type

of reading.S, c

z . B c c . A c , q , c . R c

c , cc . T c c .

CONCLUSIOND c . T,

cc fi c . I , . T , c, ffc. B . T c


34/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 31

- .R, , c

c c . V : c c c . C, c, , c c z ; ficc . I ,

c c c c. B c fi , , , c c.

O c , , c. N c c

. T c c c. B . G , c , c . V ,

ffc.

________________________________________

REFERENCES

A, G. E. (2002). c R S: A c c . Reading Online, 5(7).

R A 26, 2007, ://../c/_.?HREF=/.

Oz, M. F., R . V., & B, L. B. (1998). Good-bye roundrobin, 25 effective oral reading strategies. P, NH:H .


35/74


P, B., L, L., & G, B. (2003). Remedial educationat degree-granting postsecondary institutions in fall 2000:

Statistical analysis report. R A 26, 2007, ://c../2004/2004010.

________________________________________Sherri Latimer is currently the itle III Activity Director at the University of CentralArkansas. itle III funds were used to purchase the video equipment used in thisproject. She will return to teaching history in the developmental program at theUniversity of Central Arkansas this fall. Dr. Latimer holds a Ph.D. in Classics fromthe University of Cincinnati and is currently attending the University of Arkansas atLittle Rock William H. Bowen School of Law.

Shannon Johnson is a full-time reading and writing instructor in the University ofCentral Arkansas developmental program. A writer, she is on the verge of completing herfirst novel. She holds a Master of Liberal Arts degree from Henderson State University.


36/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 33

Student Voices: Te Literacy Historiesof Developmental Reading Students

in a South exas College

Te purpose of this study was to develop aprofile of the literacy histories of developmen-tal reading students enrolled in a South exascollege. A literacy history questionnaire wasused to collect written responses regardingthe students early literacy experiences priorto entering the college setting. Analysis of thewritten responses indicated that the studentshad a positive attitude towards reading dur-ing elementary school which declined as theymoved into the upper grades. Te positive as-pect of the results is that the students did not

have an overwhelmingly negative attitude to-wards reading, thus leaving their instructorswith the opportunity of helping them developa more positive attitude towards reading ingeneral. Suggestions for classroom practicewill be discussed.

E c c c cc cc c . Y fi c c -, c - c c. T q c

? W c - ? T c c c.

ARLENEREADYUniversity of exas at

Brownsville and exasSouthmost College

PAULA PARSONUniversity of exas atBrownsville and exasSouthmost College


37/74

34 Student Voices

O c z - c

c. T c c ficc c , -, . M ccc c -

c (B, 2000;, R, & K, 2000). H, c c c c ffc - . Rc cc c c c j

cc (B, Sc, & Mc, 1997; K, F, R-, & H, 2004). I c , c c , c , c c ficc - (M, 1994). Rc c

c c c c c (A, R, Az, & F, 2000). T, - c c, c c c c c c c -

c c cc cc.

SEINGAND PARICIPANSA c


38/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 35

cc S 2005. A - 100 c

c c . I c c 97 fi H-c, fi -Hc, fi Ac-Ac Bc. W , 46 c S, 54c E. F- c

44 .

MEHODOLOGYA c q c V S

(2003) cc c c c (A). T - c c c

q c 2005. Pc c c c c(W & F, 2001). Bc c c-c c- (CDI) c c- c,

c CDI R L ff c q. T c q c. T c cc c q .

Ec c c z cz c-

c B B (1992). O q 2, 9, 10, 13 cc c c c c c


39/74

36 Student Voices

. S cc c cc q -

.

QUESION 2: WERE YOU READ TOASA CHILD? IF YES, BY WHOM?WHATDOYOUREMEMBERABOUTBEINGREADTO?

S c c , , , c, c. M c j. S

, - c . O c -c : I c c cc c ff c. S c c-c . F , : I B

B. H I c . A c c: I c Mc . S . S c S E. S c

c, c c -j c. O , I c , .

O c, ccc . F , , M -

. M 13 . M c.A c c c.


40/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 37

QUESION 9: HOW DID YOU FEELABOUT READING INELEMENTARYSCHOOL? JUNIORHIGH? HIGHSCHOOL?

T c c c j c. M c , I , I , Ij , I c . O c c c ffi c E.

F , , I . K cc. S, , I [] c I . A , c - .

M -

j . S cc, I ffi c, I , I I , I , I c I . O - j c , I c . S c c j c.

O , I c I - c j I c I . T c . O , c c. S c I , I , I , I

, I ffi c. T c. F , - , I c I c , c .


41/74

38 Student Voices

QUESION 10: DID YOUR READING/WRITINGABILITY IMPACT YOURFEELINGSABOUTYOURSELFASAPERSON? IFSO, HOW?

S c c ffc c -. F , , S -fic, , I c c . A c . O , Y

I . A c: I c I . A I Mc-Ac I cc . S -c c ffc - . S c

. O , I c c fl c - . T c c . O c ffc . S ,

N, c cfi .

QUESION 13: ARE YOUA READER/WRITERNOW? IF SO, DESCRIBEYOURSELFASA READER; IFNOT, WHY DO YOU SUPPOSE THIS IS SO?

WHATAREYOUCURRENTLYREADING? WRITING?

M c

cc. M c c .S c. M .


42/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 39

A c c . F ,

c c-. I I ff c , I c c.

A few students described themselves as writers but in their nativelanguage. One student wrote, I am a writer, but I write more inSpanish, because it is my first language. If I have to read or write inEnglish Im death, because I dont have many vocabulary.

O, c , , . A c - flc ff. F , :

I . I c . B I I c

I - ff . B I c I , c ffi c I .

DISCUSSIONT c q c

c c c c j , -, c c, c c , - c . T fi c c c c (A-

, , & G, 1985; D & J, 1980; Fz,1997; P & P, 1986; S, 1990). I - . A , c


43/74

40 Student Voices

c c -c c cc

- (H & Cc, 2003;McN & Vz, 2001). T c , c - - .

SUGGESIONSFORCLASSROOMPRACICEB c c q, c c c c c. T c q- c c - c

c c c c c c c .F , ff c c c, cc c c- H, c H c- c. T c

c. O c c c c . S . T c cc - .W c , c -

(Ec, 1991, . 77). R- fic c c c c c. O c- c c cc ,


44/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 41

jc cc. S

c c c c cc , c c c.D c c c- c, c cc, c c c , c , c -

c fic c (, 1993).

CONCLUSIONT c c -

j . A c , c -

c, c c. I c c, c c c c c c - , cc . S c c cc

cc . A c c , ffc cc c - c .

___________________________________________________

REFERENCES

A, W. P., R, V. J., Az, M. C., & F, M. M.(2000). Fc flc . I R. F. F &D. C. C (E.), Handbook of college reading and


45/74

42 Student Voices

study strategy research. (. 201-219). M, NJ:Lc E Ac, P.

Anderson, M. A., ollefson, N. A., & Gilbert, E. C. (1985). G : A c-c ffc . Gifted Child Quarterly,29, 186-189.

B, L., Sc, D., & Mc, K. (1997). H flc . Educational Psycholo-gist,32(2), 69-82.

B, R. C., & B, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research foreducation: An introduction to theory and methods (2 .).B: A & Bc.

B, H. (2000). H 2000: Dc, c, c. Journal of DevelopmentalEducation, 23(3), 2-9.

D, E. J., & J, F. (1980). R c c. Reading Horizons,21(1), 39-43.

Ec, C. A. (1991). M .English Journal, 80(6), 76-78.

Fz, S. A. (1997). Attitudes of youth toward reading before and after a motivation project. (ERIC DcRc Sc N. ED412947)

H, W., & Cc, R. D. (2003). .Assessment in Education,10(2), 169-207.

K, A. A., F, . M., R, M., & H, N. (2004).P c. Pediatrics,113(6), 1944-1952.

M, G. C. (1994). M flc

. I R.B. R, M.R.R, & H. S (E.), Teoretical models and processesof reading(4 ., . 1131-1161). N, DE: I- R Ac.


46/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 43

McN, L., & Vz, A. (2001). Te harmful effects of theAAS system of testing in exas: Beneath the accountabil-

ity rhetoric, H S K-12 Cc, HU, 4 Dc, 1998.

P, A., & P, E. (1986). A .Journal of Educational Re-search,79(5), 313-315.

S, M. C. (1990). A c . Journal

of Educational Research, 83(4), 215-219., R., R, K., & K, M.S. (2000). Mc

cc c.Journal of Developmen-tal Education,24(1), 12-17.

, D. A. (1993, M).At risk non-traditional communitycollege students. P -

cc N I Sff Oz D c Ecc Cc A, A, X.

V, M., & S, B.A. (2003). Reading specialists in the realworld: A sociocultural view. B: A & Bc.

W, N. E., & F, J.R. (2001). Educational research:A guide to the process(2 .). M, NJ: Lc E-

Ac.


47/74

44 Student Voices

APPENDIXLIERACYHISORYPROMPS

T q c c (/) flc c . T -c c . P .1. W ?

2. W c? B ? W - ?3. D ?4. D , , / z

? D c c z? D -? D ?

5. C c ? D c (.., c, - , ) c?

6. D c? I , - ? W ( ) fi c?

7. C c, c, -c , , c?H flc ?

8. D fi (c )? D / c? I , ? I , ?

9. H c? J

? H c?10. D / c

? I , ?


48/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 45

11. D c (.., ,, cc fic, c) c ? W

c ?12. W - c ? N?Nfic ? W?

13. A / ? I , c ; , ? W c ? W?

________________________________________F M V & B A. S. R Sc R W: A Scc V. P A & Bc, B,MA. C 2003 P Ec. A

.

________________________________________

Arlene Ready is an Assistant Master echnical Instructor with the Department of

Developmental Reading at UB/SC. She has a M.Ed. as a Reading Specialistand has taught developmental reading students for seven years. She is currently adoctoral student in a curriculum and instruction program with an emphasis in

reading.

Paula Parson is a full professor of language and literacy in the School of Educationat UB/SC. She previously taught developmental reading students for eight yearsand has been the co-director of the Sabal Palms Writing Project for eight years.


49/74


50/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 47

Te Style of Which Tis isWritten: Neutralization of

Prepositions in English

We have noticed a change in the use of prepositions in English. In our work withstudent essays, we increasingly encounternon-standard uses of prepositions, such ascc , , and

. Tis trend is evident in both native andnon-native American English speakers.We believe that the English preposition-al system is moving towards an eventualneutralization of the distinction in the prep-ositional category. Parallels are evident in thevariability of prepositions in Old English, as

well as in modern creolized languages, whichexploit a few all-purpose prepositions, themeanings of which are evident by context.Our findings highlight the nature of Englishas always changing, as it assimilates featuresfrom each new generation of speakers. Wediscuss the datas implications for develop-mental education teachers, who are increas-ingly confronted with non-standard preposi-tional use.

E c , ( c M, 2004, . 27). W ? T c c c c, , c-, c c. S jc c onthe table, c on Wednesday, c onto a shelf, c c on the case.

I M MC, c -

SUSANJ. BEHRENSMarymount Manhattan

CollegeCINDYMERCERMarymount ManhattanCollege


51/74

48 Te Style of Which Tis is Written

, c think to, based off of have concerns on. S-, cc cc

Ac E . A 65% c N Y, c cc flc c.

Lc cc, cc c , c .L c c c cc-

. I , c cc c cfic, E . Hc, c different than different from.I , .

D c c . T

c, , -jc c, . W c.

RESEARCHFROM ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERSMc c E L L (ELL)

c q . L

(2001) ELL c c (c, c, c) -c c . P -c, beyond comprehension behind a candidate, - ELL c L.

F (1999) -

c cc, , - c .E cc c ELL , Bc, Y, C (2005) c c jc , -


52/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 49

c : 29% . Bc .

c c c - the other error types, e.g., past tense markers and directarticle use, prepositional errors were more resistant. Further, im-provements were not evident until at least eight weeks into thestudy. Teir results support Ferris view of prepositional errors asuntreatable.

I (2002) J E

c c c c. I c , jc c c c c, ..,John swam under the bridge c c , c c J . T c E , cz .

E C-A L L (CALL) E , L, W, Y(2004) ELL q cfic cc . T c c c .

M (2004) c B E E-

K c -: K E. T c fic z . Tc on onto c . c. IK E, c , on c: the box is on the table, light falls on the water; putthe sling on your arm. T c in into (,

c . c) fi c in: coming in thecountry; fall in the trap. T fic c fi I.

B E at on z in KE: in the party, in the island. S


53/74


K E: off, down, under-neath, beneath, past. Down, ,

c down the road. Beneath un-derneath c under. Past .

M c c K- E. T c -. T , -z fic, cc-

ffc. T cc, c c c. H, cc , c. I,E cc ffc its lack of noundeclensions and irregular plurals and tense markers.

R (2000) P P NG. P , , c, , c-

, fi c . A cz E- , c -, , - c , c ( c c). P : long bilong.S Mi go long taun (I went to town) Haus bilong

papa bilong mi (Te house of the father of me). C c c . D c flc, c . T c c flc , cc , c c .

OLD ENGLISHI E , -

c E . K(1993) c O E


54/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 51

c q ; c ,

, c. (T c -c .) T with, , c , , cc , . , c to Marysa friend of mine, E jc .O E, , c, c -, c fi .

NON-SANDARD USAGESOF PREPOSIIONSDc ffc c E

c. E c c c . S different from different than (.., S, W, K, 2005); -, , . C (2004) c -

E: going up mymates housegot off of the bus(. 482). A c- c based on/based off of wait in line/wait online.

OURSUDYW c

. I j , , c . R E , zz , ,c . O c Ac E-, - M M C.

O 88 - c,73% : to, in, on, with,about, of, for. M c - c c . W -c . T,


55/74


c cc c (in the store), c (to the store), (at 7p.m.), fi . O

c - c c?I arrived to school.1

1 q c-c . T c c . F , to 15 17% 88 c cc. o c ff-

13 15% .

able :Data on prepositional shifts

* X represents any other preposition.

S . M - about, c c c (.. cc, , c ) -: to talk about, the report is about, a book about. T about c , -of, on, with, to, . N about.

E:1. ?M c c .

1 The question mark indicates structures judged ill formed by native speakers. For

this project the authors used their judgments of English to determine an utterance ill

or well formed.

PrepositionPreposition > X*

Examples PercentageX* > Preposition

Examples Percentage

TO 15 17% 13 15%

IN 14 16% 7 8%

ON 4 5% 17 19%

WITH 8 9% 5 6%

ABOUT 11 13% 0 0%

OF 11 13% 10 11%

FOR 2 2% 9 10%


56/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 53

2. ?T cc.

3. ?T cc c .T abouton, c , c . T cc , cc . T c - , c c c. I , :1. T V Iq W.

T V Iq W.2. D ?D ?

Another impetus for students preference could be the slightly moreformal style ofon. Students might judge the phrase an article on prep-ositionsto be more scholarly than an article about prepositions.

T in fic . T c

in c (16%) in c (8%). C, c on c c: 19% , on. N -, in c c c on :1. ? c

2. ? For , c 2% (to, in, of, with) 10% , .1. ? 2. ?c 3. ?

4. ?z L to, for ,

, cjc : S ,for . O for c a reasonfor, wait for, fight for, search for.


57/74


I c, c c -c . Of c (on, for, from, for,

with, to, at, in) 13% c (to, about, for, in, on, of, with) 11% c.W for to, c c: for to c . T c c c E , fl.

M c . F

, purpose for c reason for . 2 c .

able :Analogies underlying prepositional shifts

P & P A E

OF >FOR

C c c.

FOR > OFcc

H fi cc c c .

O > OF

T cc q

OF > Ojc

H c jc .

WIH > OF

T

O > WIHcc

W c ff c

WIH > O W

O > FROMc

I

FROM > O

S


58/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 55

A , cc: T Ac E fl,

q ffc. S fic , c c - into onto, c about in.

I c , flc c cc:purpose of / reason for; bored with / tired of.

APPLICAIONO EACHINGE ELL c- . T c c c , z c . S -c c c c , ..,interested in, bored with z c, I am interestedin boxing.

Rc, , c c - c c c . L (1996) -c on, c cc jc c(. 229). H c , engine died on us, c cc (engine died)

(on us).Sc c c ELL .

W c c E ? H cc c cc?W c ,

c

: Distinguish between language change and bad gram-

mar: Ic cc c c . T, c


59/74


cc .

Making students aware: Ic c , c- - .P c; , c , q cz . W

c, c c c c flc. rack language change among new generations: Ic

cc , - , E.Ic cc

cc . F c,based off of c cc, afraid from . B cc , c ffi c .

Use supplemental tools: U c c c , c c ,

c c, c . A c c Perfect Prepositions G K.

CONCLUSIONO c C ( c M, 2004)

E c ffi c

. C c ffc c-, c . O cfi c fl. E c c: c c ;


60/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 57

cj ; jc ; c fl,

who/whom c ffc I me fi myself.I , , c

z, c c c . A , , c, ff ccc . F c c

c c cc, , c, c, c . Rc j cc , c c.S to the doctorc ccjc c, c c . W ffc

.As academics trained in the descriptive, anti-prescriptive

discipline of linguistics, we are in a position to note thesechanges without inferring lack of English skills on the part of ourstudents. Furthermore, we consider dialect differences thatdiverge from Standard American English a natural part of a languagesorganic nature. We raise the issue of the current state of prepositions

as evidence that language constantly changes, and that good teachersare attuned to the linguistic competence of their students.

___________________________________________

REFERENCES

Bc, J., Y, S., & C, D. (2005). T ffc

ff cc c ESL .Journal of Second Language Writing,14, 191-205.

C, D. (2004). Te Stories of English. Wc, NY: OP.

F, D. R. (1999). T c cc L2


61/74


c. A c (1996). Journal of SecondLanguage Writing,8, 1-10.

I, S. (2002). J cq E-- c/c PP. Sec-ond Language Research,18(1), 3-27.

K, G. (2006). Perfect Prepositions. N Y: U, Ic.

K, P. (1993). Gc O E c Ac c. English Studies,1, 1-50.

L, S. (1996). P: M . EL Journal,50(3), 225-236.

L, S. (2001). P UK c: P .AppliedLinguistics,22(1), 79- 103.

L, J.-J., W, H.-M., & Y, S.-W. (2004). Effc cfic

c c . Computers & Education, 42, 45-63.

M, S. (J 2004). P K.English oday, 77(20), 27-32.

Romaine, S. (2000). Language in Society: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

S, W., W, E.B., & K, M. (2005). Te Elements ofStyle. N Y: P P.

________________________________________

Susan J. Behrens is an Associate Professor of Communication Sciences andDisorders at Marymount Manhattan College, where she teaches linguistics. She isalso an Associate of the Institute for Writing and Tinking at Bard College. Tanksto Peter Baker, John Costello, and Don Kortlander for useful discussions.

A linguist by training and passion, Cindy Mercer has settled into the roleof executive director of Academic Achievement at Marymount Manhat-tan College, where she supervises all academic support services for thecampus. She received her Ph.D. in Slavic linguistics from Indiana University.Her interests include languages, rhetoric and composition, and service learning.


62/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 59

What Were Tey Tinking?Decision-Making in the

Experiences of CollegeStudents At Risk

Te ability to make appropriate deci-sions is a key to college success. Some collegestudents appear to not make satisfactoryacademic progress, not because they lackability or desire, but because they make academicdecisions that seem to put them at risk.Assisting students to make appropriateacademic decisions is a primary objective fordevelopmental education professionals. Tisarticle proposes an ecological framework for

investigating decision-making in the expe-riences of college students at risk. By help-ing students at risk to better understand thedynamic forces that shape their senses of identity and that affect their decision-mak-ing experiences, we can better assist them tomake decisions appropriate to achieve their

academic and personal goals.

C c - c, c c cc. S c c cc , c c -, c cc c

. E . O AC c 16 c j j.A j- j c c

SEPHENO. WALLACEShippensburg University

of Pennsylvania


63/74

60 What Were Tey Tinking?

. S c c cc ffi c, - cc . A -

cc c jc c . T c cc - c- c c- . B c c ffc cc c, c c cc .

c c c-

c , c c . I c c c - c, cc . R cc, T c c ! , W ? T cc c . T q

c. S c- c, c c . c , z- c c - c .

Scz (1967) -.

O c c c cc c, c c, j c fi, c c.I j c , jc c. T c -

c c. Scz q c q c c . T c c cc c c - c, c,


64/74

c. cc c , c -

c c . Scz c c ; , c c c- c. T c c . Scz c , c cc c

c. W c, c -c. T c, .

F cc c , ficflc . S ccc c. I, c c-

c, c , , c, c.T, q c-c c cc -c flc c-.

ENVIRONMENALINFLUENCE CONEXSEcology theory proposes that all aspects of human develop-

ment are interconnected, much like the threads of a spiders web;therefore, the focus should be on understanding the whole con-text rather than attempting to isolate the various aspects. Bron-fenbrenner (1989) argues that the developing individual is em-bedded in a series of progressively more complex and interactive

systems. What happens in one setting influences the others. Forexample, family problems at home can impact a students aca-demic performance at school, and changes in federal and statepolicies may greatly impact the opportunity for some students topursue college degrees.

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 61


65/74


E flc c c c , , c c, .

A c c B- G-X M flc . B (1986) z c, c , , c,flc . E c flc c c fi- c c-cc

c - (B, 1963; S, 1981; S & R, 1993;Y-A & B, 1991). H, P- D-J (1997) fic flc c c., c c-c c c

c c- (S, 2006).

T flc c-. A- (1993) flc - . H c , , cc

c . Sc(2006) fi c c-c -c c c . A c c - flc c cc c.W Bc (2000) cc c- cc. I c, c

c (R, 1994). Tc c c j c -. A c fi c c -


66/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 63

c flc V c CSI G A? I , c -

q cc ?T cc flc c cc fi ff (B & S, 1996). A Ec Sc (2000) c c cc 21 c cc c . T

jc c .B flc c, c

ffc flc, c , , c c, . T c c- -

. T c c- c c c c c.

IDENIYDEVELOPMEN CONEXST

c- c

c c . S cc c , c z -, , (W, 2001, .71). H c fi c c c- c, , cc, c-c,

c-c, c/c c.Pcc c c

c - c , c fi , ,


67/74


(E, F, & G-DB, 1998). E - c, E

. E (1968) Mc (1980) cc -cc -. Acc , c c c- cc c c cc j z .C c c. S

c- c flc c.

Cc (1969) fi c cfic c . H c c c ,c, cc j. H cc c

cc -c . Ac (1982) c fi c. A C, H, S(1994) c c c-cc . B c , - cc c

.A c F (1981), O (1991), (1993)

c c c c - c- c c. F (1981) c jc, c , cc c , c - c

c cc -c . O (1991) z Ac c c ff c cc, c


68/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 65

. (1993) c -

, q cc , c , q -. T -c c c fi c . T c cc c c, . T

c c.T c c - c c c, , -c, c, c, cc, c c flc , c, c. T cc c cc cc c c-

c. T ffc ffc c c . S,, c cc c, c c c c c.

USEFULNESSOFHE ECOLOGICALFRAMEWORK

M c c flc c- c . T c c cc c cc c c c- c. T c c . B

c c ffc c- c, c c c cc . T j , fi .


69/74


R c c , , W ?

________________________________________REFERENCES

Ac, S. L. (1982). T -. Child Development, 53(6), 1551-1556.

A, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical yearsrevisited. S Fcc: J-B.

B, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action.E Cff: Pc H.

B, M. & S, D. (1996, J). S c-:I c cc c. College Student Jour-nal,30(2), 182-186.

B, C. V. (1963). Ac cc - c-.American Sociological Review,28(3), 385-391.

B, U. (1989). Ecc . In R.Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development: Six theories of childdevelopment-Revised formulations and current issues(Vol. 6, pp.187-250). Greenwich: Jessica Kingsley Publisher.

Cc, A. W. (1969). Education and Identity. S Fcc:J-B.

C, D., H, M., & S, J. (1994). S : Scfic c .Journal ofCollege Student Development,35(2), 98-102.

Ec Sc. (2000). College eligible students toincrease. E..S. Cc Sc. Pc, NJ.

E, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. N Y: W. W.N & C.

E, N. J., F, D. S., & G-DB, F. (1998).Student development in college: Teory, research, and practice.SFcc: J-B.


70/74

NADE Digest,3 (2), F 2007 67

F, J. (1981). Sc Bc . IA. Cc (E.) Te modern American college. (. 279-

293). S Fcc: J-B P.Mc, J. E. (1980). E, . I J. A(E.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. N Y: JW & S Ic.

O, J. (1991). I c- c. I J. O & M. G (E.),Minor-ity status and schooling: A comparative study of immigrant and

involuntary minorities (. 3-33). N Y: G P-.

P, C., & D-J, M. (1997). P flc c c j. College StudentJournal,31(3), 301-313.

R, . R. (1994). Perceptions of the future held by elementary schoolchildren: A descriptive analysis. P M-S Ec Rc Ac-, N, .

Scz, A. (1967). Te Phenomenology of the Social World.(G. Walsh & F. Lehnert, rans.). Evanston, Ill: NorthwesternUniversity Press.

S, . E. (1981). Ac c

c . Journal of Marriage and theFamily. 43(1), 85-93.

Sc, A. (2006). P flc c- c ccc . Education and Ur-ban Society,39(1), 128-146.

S, F. K., & R, P. W. (1993). A c c c c.Journal of

College Student Development,34(4), 276-282.S, V. (2006, Mc 21). Putting parents in their place: Outside

class. W P, . A08.

, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the causes and cures ofstudent attrition. Cc: U Cc P.


71/74

68 Student Voices

W, K. H., & Bc, A. (2000, J). Fc ffc cc c c

c. Professional School Counseling,3(5), 367-374.W, A. (2001). Educational Psychology. B: A Bc.

Y-A, D. C., & B, S. L. (1991). A c fi- c-c . Journal of College Student Development,32(2), 116-122.

________________________________________Stephen O. Wallace currently serves as the Coordinator of Developmental Educa-tion and Advising Development at Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania. Alifelong learner, he has earned four graduate degrees including Ph.D. in Educa-tional Administration and M.Ed. in Adult and Higher Education. Dr. Wallacehas made presentations on serving students at risk at the Council for Opportunity in

Education annual convention and the Pennsylvania Association of DevelopmentalEducators annual conference.


72/74

$BMMGPS.BOVTDSJQUT

F NADE Digest JT B QVCMJDBUJPO PG UIF /BUJPOBM "TTPDJBUJPO GPS%FWFMPQNFOUBM&EVDBUJPO8FJOWJUFBSUJDMFTPGJOUFSFTUGPS%FWFMPQNFOUBM&EVDBUJPO QSPGFTTJPOBMT JODMVEJOH EFWFMPQNFOUBM FEVDBUPST MFBSOJOHBTJTUBODFQFSTPOOFMBDBEFNJDDPVOTFMPSTBOEUVUPSTXIPBSFJOUFSFTUFEJO UIF EJTDVTTJPOPG QSBDUJDBM JTTVFT JO QPTUTFDPOEBSZ EFWFMPQNFOUBMFEVDBUJPO"SUJDMFTTIPVMESFMBUFUPJTTVFTUIBUJOGPSNBOECSPBEFOPVSVOEFSTUBOEJOHBOEQSBDUJDFPGUFBDIJOHBOEMFBSOJOHJOEFWFMPQNFOUBMFEVDBUJPO

FNBOVTDSJQUNVTUOPUFYDFFEXPSETPSQBHFTJODMVEJOHSFGFSFODFTUBCMFTBOEmHVSFTFCPEZTIPVMECFJOBQPJOUGPOUEPVCMFTQBDFE XJUI POFJODI NBSHJOT0OMZ UIF UJUMF PG UIF BSUJDMFBOEUIFQBHFOVNCFSTIPVMEBQQFBSPOFBDIQBHF"VUIPSTOBNFTTIPVMEOPUBQQFBSPOBOZCPEZQBHFT

.BOVTDSJQUBOESFGFSFODFTNVTUBEIFSFUP"1"FHVJEFMJOFT

F NBOVTDSJQU DPWFS QBHF NVTU JODMVEF UIF UJUMF PG UIF BSUJDMFNBYJNVNDIBSBDUFSTUIFOBNFTBOEJOTUJUVUJPOBMBMJBUJPOTPGBMMBVUIPSTBOEBOBCTUSBDUNBYJNVNXPSET

FMFBEBVUIPSNVTUQSPWJEFXPSLIPNFBOEFNBJMBEESFTTFTBOEQIPOF BOE GBY OVNCFST "MM DPSSFTQPOEFODF XJMM CF XJUI UIF MFBEBVUIPS

F NBOVTDSJQU NVTU OPU IBWF CFFO QVCMJTIFE QSFWJPVTMZ OPS CFTDIFEVMFEGPSQVCMJDBUJPO

.BOVTDSJQUTNVTUCFFMFDUSPOJDBMMZTVCNJUUFEJO.48PSEPS35'UP-BVSB7JMMBSSFBMBU-BVSB7JMMBSSFBM!VUCFEV

F gestJTQVCMJTIFEUXJDFBZFBSJOUIFTQSJOHBOEGBMM.BOVTDSJQUTBSFBDDFQUFEDPOUJOVPVTMZ

.BOVTDSJQUT XJMM CF TFOU UP UXPPSNPSFNFNCFST PG UIF &EJUPSJBM"EWJTPSZ$PNNJUUFFPSPUIFSFYQFSUTGPSNBTLFESFWJFX

'PSNPSFJOGPSNBUJPODPOUBDU-BVSB7JMMBSSFBM-BVSB7JMMBSSFBM!VUCFEV


73/74

"EWFSUJTJOHJOUIF/"%&%JHFTU

F/"%&%JHFTUXFMDPNFTBEWFSUJTJOHGSPNQSPGFTTJPOBMPSHBOJ[BUJPOT

SFMBUFE QVCMJDBUJPOT BOE DPOGFSFODFT BOE WFOEPST BTTPDJBUFE XJUI%FWFMPQNFOUBM&EVDBUJPO8FSFTFSWFUIFSJHIUUPSFGVTFPSSFGVOEQBZNFOUGPS BET GPVOE JOBQQSPQSJBUF GPS PVS NFNCFST CZ UIF /"%& #PBSE PG%JSFDUPSTPSJUTSFQSFTFOUBUJWFT"ETQBDFJTMJNJUFEBOEXJMMCFQSPWJEFEBTBWBJMBCMF4VCNJTTJPOTNVTUCFJOFQTPSUJGGPSNBU"ETBSFHSBZTDBMF

"E4J[FTBOE3BUFT

1BZNFOUJTEVFXJUITQBDFSFTFSWBUJPO$IFDLTTIPVMECFNBEFQBZBCMFUP/"%&BOENVTUCFSFDFJWFEQSJPSUPUIFTQBDFSFTFSWBUJPOEBUFPGFBDIJTTVF4FOEQBZNFOUUP/"%&"UUO%JHFTU"ET5JO"WF'JOEMBZ0)4FOEDBNFSBSFBEZmMFTUP%JHFTU&EJUPSPDF!OBEFOFU

4QBDF3FTFSWBUJPOBOE$BNFSB3FBEZ%FBEMJOFT

30/"%&$%

3FDJQSPDBM 0SHBOJ[BUJPOT BOE /"%& $IBQUFST JO HPPE TUBOEJOH NBZJODMVEF B EJTDPVOU PO UIF BCPWF SBUFT "E SFRVFTUT NVTU JODMVEFTJHOBUVSFTPGUIF1SFTJEFOUBOE5SFBTVSFSPGUIFPSHBOJ[BUJPOSFRVFTUJOHUIFEJTDPVOU

0OF*OTFSUJPO 5XP*OTFSUJPO

$PTU $PTU5PUBM'VMM1BHF

Y

)BMG1BHF Y

*OTJEF$PWFS 'SPOUPS#BDL

Y

3FTFSWBUJPO $PQZ 4QSJOH*TTVF

0DUPCFS /PWFNCFS"QSJM

'BMM*TTVF .BZ +VOF4FQUFNCFS

Send payment to NADE, Attn: Digest Ads, 500 N Estrella Parkway Ste

B2 PMB 412 Goodyear, AZ 85338. Send camera-ready files to Digest

Editor offi [email protected].


74/74

Digest

5J

O"WFOVF

'JOEMBZ0)

500NE

strellaParkway

SuiteB2,PMB412

Goodyea

r,AZ85338

Documents

Nade Digest Fall 07