An Electronic Magazine by Omar Villarreal and Marina Kirac ©


Year 6                Number 151                 July 25th 2005

8600 SHARERS are reading this issue of SHARE this week
Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being SHARED




We all know there are countless times when words are not enough. Words will always be poor to express extreme feelings and emotions such as bliss or deep sorrow. Today is one of those times. How can we express with words how we feel at the unexpected death of our dear friend and colleague Maria Elena Gomez last Tuesday?

Marina and I shared with Mariela some of those happy days at College when we were all much younger

and more recently I was fortunate enough to have her as my assistant lecturer in Evaluation and as a decided and energetic collaborator in the organization of the 30 Year Anniversary Conference of our alma mater, the Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico.

All through these years Mariela won a place in our hearts and in the hearts of her innumerable students of all ages. She was a devoted and skilful teacher with an incredible sensitivity to help those that most needed her encouragement,her support and that big smile of hers that made everyone´s day brighter. We will all remember her like that, as a generous soul, a superb teacher and a loyal friend.


Omar and Marina




In SHARE 151


1.-    Stephen Krashen on Comprehensible Output

2.-    Learning to Read and Whole Language Ideology.

3.-    Alternatives to Traditional Assessment.

4.-    First National Meeting of Teacher-Training Colleges.

5.-    First AES International Congress for ELT Professionals.

6.-    Ninth International Conference for Teachers of English.

7.-    David Nunan at Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa UTN.

8.-    Journalism applied to the teaching of English.

9.-    A Seminar on John Fowles and Graham Swift at Universidad Nacional de Cordoba.
10.-   News from ELT Team.

11.-   Pearson Education en el Aula Bonaerense.

12.-   Peru TESOL.

13.-   IX Jornadas Nacionales sobre Normativa del Idioma Español.

14.-   Storytelling Adventure in San Telmo!

15.-   Columna de “Idiomas, Arte y Cultura” en Radio Argentina.

16.-   Word son Words: Grants for Teachers.






Dr. Stephen Krashen has generously offered to SHARE this article with all of you.


Comprehensible Output


Stephen Krashen

System 26: 175-182, 1998


The comprehensible output (CO) hypothesis states that we acquire language when we attempt to transmit a message but fail and have to try again. Eventually, we arrive at the correct form of our utterance, our conversational partner finally understands, and we acquire the new form we have produced.

The originator of the comprehensible output hypothesis, Merrill Swain (Swain, 1985), does not claim that CO is responsible for all or even most of our language competence. Rather, the claim is that "sometimes, under some conditions, output facilitates second language learning in ways that are different form, or enhance, those of input" (Swain and Lapkin, 1995, p. 371). A look at the data, however, shows that even this weak claim is hard to support.


The Scarcity Argument


A problem all output hypotheses have is that output is surprisingly rare (Krashen, 1994). In the case of CO, the problem is especially severe.

A recent confirmation of the scarcity of output is Ellis, Tanaka, and Yamazaki (1994), who examined vocabulary acquisition under three conditions, tasks in which EFL students heard (1) "premodified" input (input recorded from a task performed with a native speaker and non-native speaker who could request clarification), (2) interactionally modified input (the non-native students could interact with the native speaker), or (3) unmodified input (input recorded from a native speaker doing the task with another native speaker). Of interest to us here is the finding that "of the 42 learners in the IM (interactionally modified) group, only seven engaged in meaning negotiation. The others simply listened" (p. 211).

Even when acquirers do talk, they do not often make the kind of adjustments the CO hypothesis claims are useful in acquiring new forms.

Pica (1988) concluded that instances of comprehensible output were "relatively infrequent" (p. 45). In her study of ten one-hour interactions between low level ESL acquirers and native speakers (teachers), only 87 potential instances of comprehensible output were found, that is, interactions in which the native speaker requested "confirmation, clarification, or repetition of the NNS utterance" (p. 93). These 87 interactions contained only 44 cases in which the non-native speaker modified his or her output (about four per hour), and of these 44, only 13 modifications involved grammatical form, about one per hour.

In Pica, Holliday, Lewis, and Morgenhaller (1989), intermediate ESL acquirers interacted with native speakers. Because the situation in Pica (1988) did not promote negotiation (an interview), some of the conversations in this study were in situations designed to require negotiation and comprehensible output. Of 1952 native speaker utterances, 327 were "signals indicating clarification or confirmation of what the NNS had said" (p. 74). In reaction to these 327 utterances, the non-native speakers produced 116 responses containing "modified output." In other words, they produced comprehensible output in response to about 6% of the native speaker's utterances (116/1952).1

Interactions were also contrived to promote negotiation in Van den Branden (1997). Eleven and 12 year old speakers and acquirers of Dutch interacted with peers or with a teacher in an activity in which speakers had to describe a drawing to a partner. In peer-peer dyads, 51 instances of negotiation of meaning were recorded, and of these, the speaker modified their output 20 times. In peer-teacher dyads, there were 49 instances of negotiation of meaning and 20 instances of alteration of output. In both cases, this amounted to about one every five minutes. We do not know if the alteration improved the grammatical accuracy of the output; we are only told that "these modifications often involved, or included, formal modifications ..." (p. 616). Even if every case resulted in improvement, however, this data confirms that even in contrived situations, comprehensible output is infrequent.

Lyster and Ranta (1997) recorded 18.3 hours of French immersion language arts and subject matter lessons involving fourth and fifth graders. The lessons contained a total of 3268 student turns, of which about 1/3 (1104, or 34%) had at least one error. While teachers provided some kind of feedback to 62% of these errors, only 73 were in the form of a clarification request, "a feedback type that can refer to problems in either comprehensibility or accuracy, or both" (p. 47). Of these 73, 20 were followed by student repair, or correction. This amounts to about one per hour, a result very close to that reported by Pica (1988) for conversations. In this case, however, only the one student producing the repair had the benefit of comprehensible output.

The situation in writing is similar. Cumming (1990) examined the think-aloud protocols of second language writers, hypothesizing that instances in which writers appeared to be attending to both form and meaning at the same time are potential instances for language acquisition, according to the comprehensible output hypothesis. Only 30% of the verbal reports made by the writers in his sample were of this kind (p. 490). In addition, the nature of the episodes makes it unlikely that they play a major role in language acquisition: Most of the episodes were writers' searching for the right word, or searching for first language equivalents. The latter is the familiar strategy of falling back on the first language when competence is lacking in the second language (Newmark, 1966).

In Swain and Lapkin (1995), grade 8 early French immersion subjects were asked to write a short essay in French (one to two paragraphs) and then edit it, and to "think aloud" as they made decisions. For the draft and editing stage combined, there were "190 occasions in which students consciously recognized a linguistic problem as a result of producing, or trying to produce, the target language" (p. 384). This amounts to an average of 10.6 per student. If students wrote a short essay everyday (which they do not), this would mean about ten chances to improve through writing per day - not very much. As was the case with Cummings' study, many of the decisions were lexical (looking for the right word), not grammatical (50% in the first draft). In addition, Swain and Lapkin note that there was no evidence that any of the episodes they described led to improvement.


Acquisition Without Output


There are numerous studies that confirm that we can develop extremely high levels of language and literacy competence without any language production at all (Krashen, 1994). Laboratory studies show that subjects typically acquire small but significant amounts of new vocabulary knowledge from a single exposure to an unfamiliar word in a comprehensible text (Nagy, Herman, and Anderson, 1985), enough to account for expected vocabulary growth, and similar results have been reported for second language development (Pitts, White, and Krashen, 1989; Day, Omura, and Hiramatsu, 1991; Dupuy and Krashen, 1993). It has been argued that a similar effect exists for spelling (Krashen, 1989). In addition, there are case histories of those who have developed very high levels of competence from input alone (Richard Boydell suffered from cerebral palsy and acquired language through listening and reading alone, see Krashen, 1985; Malcolm X and Richard Wright credit their literacy development to wide reading, discussed in Krashen, 1993).

Ellis (1995) is an additional analysis of Ellis et. al. (1994), discussed above, and provides another instance of acquisition without output. The "premodified" group, a group that did no speaking at all, made modest but clear gains in vocabulary, gaining, in fact, more words per minute than the group that interacted with the native speaker.2


Does CO Lead To Language Acquisition?


Nobuyoshi and Ellis (1993) claim to have provided data showing that comprehensible output results in actual improvement. In their study, six adult EFL students in Japan of "fairly low-level proficiency" but who were "capable of using at least some past tense verb forms correctly" (p. 206) were asked to participate in a jigsaw task with their teacher in which they described actions in pictures that, they were told, occurred the previous weekend or previous day. During the first session of the study, the three experimental subjects received requests for clarification if the verb was not in the past tense or if the past tense was incorrectly formed. During the second session, one week later, they received only general requests for clarification (when the teacher did not understand). The three comparison subjects received only general requests for clarification each time.

Nobuyoshi and Ellis report that comparison subjects did not improve their past tense accuracy. Two experimental subjects (E1 and E2) were able to improve their performance in response to requests for clarification at the first session, but the third experimental subject (E3) did not. Nobuyoshi and Ellis claim that E1 and E2 sustained their gains to time 2, with E1 increasing accuracy from an original level of 31% to 89% and E2 increasing from an original 45% to 62%. Nobuyoshi and Ellis conclude that their study "provides some support for the claim that 'pushing' learners to improve the accuracy of their production results not only in immediate improved performance but also in gains in accuracy over time" (p. 208).

As Nobuyoshi and Ellis point out, however, their conclusions are based on a very small sample size. In addition, they are based on a very low number of obligatory occasions. E1, who showed the clearest gains, went from 4 correct out of 13 at time 1 to 8 correct out of 9 at time 2. E2 went from 9 correct out of 20 at time 1 to 16 correct out of 26 at time 2. E1's gains are statistically significant (Fisher Exact Test, 2 tail, p = .0115) but E2's gains are not (chi square = .69). Thus, for one subjects there was no evidence of the value of comprehensible output (E3), and for another, gains were not statistically significant. Data supporting a central hypothesis should be made of sterner stuff.

Note also that all three subjects had studied the past tense rule, and had been clearly focused on it in session 1. It is reasonable to expect that when subjects are focused on form, then put back in the same environment, they will be focused on form again, especially if the conversational partner is their teacher. The significant effect on E1, in other words, may have been a performance effect - E1 was simply more inclined to try to use a consciously learned rule for the past tense and was a more successful Monitor user than E2 or E3.

Van den Brandon's subjects (Van den Brandon, 1997, discussed earlier) who participated in sessions that encouraged negotiation of meaning increased their output relative to a control group that did not engage in interaction, but were not superior in grammatical accuracy. Each subject, however, only had seven to nine minutes of interaction.

Tarone and Liu (1995) suggest that CO may have played a role in the second language development of Liu's subject "Bob." Bob was recorded interacting with peers, with teachers, and with an "adult-friend" (Liu). Tarone and Liu note that language use was much more complex in the latter interactions, and, in general, "new structures appear first in interactions between Bob and the researcher, spread to the interactions with his peers, and appear last in his interaction with his teacher" (p. 119). They note that it is likely that Liu provided Bob with more complex input, but also suggest that Bob's attempts to produce CO in interacting with Liu played a role. While interacting with Liu, Bob used English in a much wider range of speech acts than in the other situations, and this may have pushed Bob to "go beyond the limits of his interlanguage competence" in production" (p. 121). Tarone and Liu show that the CO hypothesis, as well as the Input Hypothesis, is consistent with what is known about Bob's development. As they note (p. 123), data is lacking on the frequency of CO, which prevents us from determining whether CO resulted in language development and whether Bob produced significant quantities of CO.


The Discomfort of CO


The CO hypothesis predicts that we acquire language when there is a communicative breakdown and we are "pushed to use alternative means to get across .. the message ... precisely, coherently, and appropriately" (Swain, 1985, pp. 248-249). In addition to the research that shows that CO is an unlikely candidate, there is additional evidence that "pushing" students to speak is unpleasant for them. When asked what aspects of foreign language classes are the most anxiety-provoking, students put "talking" at the top of the list (Young, 1990). Laughrin-Sacco (1992) reported that for students in beginning French classes, "for nearly every student ... speaking was the highest anxiety-causing activity" (p. 314).

Ten "anxious" foreign language students interviewed by Price (1991) stated that their greatest source of anxiety "was having to speak the target language in front of their peers" (p. 313). Of great interest here is the finding that another source of stress "was the frustration of not being able to communicate effectively" (p. 105).

These results suggest that it is "pushed output," having to utilize structures they have not yet acquired, under demanding conditions, that students find uncomfortable. Methods based on comprehensible output put students in this situation constantly.


CO and the Interaction Hypothesis


The CO hypothesis is linked to what is sometimes called the "interaction hypothesis," the hypothesis that we acquire language from interacting with others. As stated in this way, the interaction hypothesis is vague - Is interaction necessary or just helpful? Is it the only way to acquire language or one way to acquire language? Also, what occurs during interaction that causes language acquisition?

I have argued that a part of interaction that does not contribute to language acquisition is the output produced by the language acquirer. In addition, there is evidence that a strong version of the interaction hypothesis, one that asserts that interaction is necessary for language acquisition, is not correct. Such a hypothesis denies that acquisition can occur from reading and listening. In addition to the massive data showing that reading can promote language development, the results of Ellis et. al. (1994), discussed above, confirm that acquisition is possible without actually participating in the interaction. A weaker version of the interaction hypothesis is that interaction can be a good source of comprehensible input (Krashen, 1982).


The Need Hypothesis


The CO hypothesis is closely related to the "need hypothesis." I have never seen the need hypothesis discussed explicitly in print, but it is widely assumed to be true. The need hypothesis says that we acquire language only when we "need" to communicate, when we need to make ourselves understood. If this hypothesis is correct, language acquirers must be forced to speak the second language. The need hypothesis thus implies that "submersion" is a good thing, in that it forces students to try to communicate.

The need hypothesis is not correct. An excellent counter-argument was presented by Garrison Kieler on the Prairie Home Companion, in a segment called "The Minnesota Language School." The Minnesota Language School operates on the assumption that we acquire language when we need to use it. Their method is to take someone who speaks no German at all, fly them up in a helicopter, and threaten to push them out if they don't start speaking German immediately. If the need hypothesis were correct, this would work.

According to the input hypothesis, need can be helpful when it puts the acquirer in a position to get comprehensible input. All the need in the world, however, will not result in language acquisition if there is no comprehensible input. In addition, interesting and comprehensible input will result in language acquisition whether need is present or not.


Summary and Conclusion


The comprehensible output hypothesis has numerous difficulties.

- Output and especially comprehensible output is too scarce to make a real contribution to linguistic competence.

- High levels of linguistic competence are possible without output.

- There is no direct evidence that comprehensible output leads to language acquisition.

In addition, there is some evidence that suggests that students do not enjoy being "pushed" to speak.

The original impetus for the CO hypothesis was the observation that students in French immersion, despite years of input, were not as good as observers felt they should be in grammatical aspects of their second language (Swain, 1985). Input, it was suggested, was therefore not enough. It can be argued, however, that we haven't yet given comprehensible input a real chance. We have yet to see how students will do if their classes are filled with comprehensible input, if they have access to a great deal of very interesting reading and listening materials (films, tapes), and if the acquisition situation is genuinely free of anxiety. (There is evidence that children in French immersion do very little pleasure reading in their second language; Romney, Romney and Menzies, 1995).

Given the consistent evidence for comprehensible input (Krashen, 1994) and failure of other means of developing language competence, providing more comprehensible input seems to be a more reasonable strategy than increasing output.





Swain (1995) notes that in this study "in response to clarification and confirmation requests, over one-third of the learners' utterances were modified either semantically or morphosyntactically" (p. 131). This is correct. My concern here, however, is how frequent CO is in general. CO in response to requests for clarification was frequent in this study, but not overall.


As noted earlier, only seven of the 42 subjects in the interaction group actually spoke: Ellis et. al. found, however, that these seven "did not enjoy a clear advantage in either comprehension or vocabulary over those who just listened" (p. 212).



Cumming, A. (1990) Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication 7, 482-511.

Day, R., Omura, C., and Hiramatsu, M. (1991) Incidental vocabulary learning and reading. Reading in a Foreign Language 7, 541-551.

Dupuy, B. and Krashen, S. (1993) Incidental vocabulary acquisition in French as a foreign language. Applied Language Learning 4, 55-63.

Ellis, R. (1995) Modified oral input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied Linguistics 16, 409-441.

Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y. and Yamazaki, A. (1994) Classroom interaction, comprehension, and L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning 44, 449-91.

Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Krashen, S. (1985) The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. Beverly Hills, CA: Laredo Publishing Company.

Krashen, S. (1989) We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal 73, 440-464.

Krashen, S. (1993) The Power of Reading. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

Krashen, S. (1994) The input hypothesis and its rivals. In Ellis, N. (Ed.) Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, pp. 45-77. London: Academic Press.

Loughrin-Sacco, S. (1992) More than meets the eye: An ethnography of an elementary French class. Canadian Modern Language Review 49, 80-101.

Lyster, R.and Ranta, L. (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 37-66.

Nagy, W., Herman, P., and Anderson, R. (1985) Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly 20, 233-253.

Newmark, L. (1966) How not to interfere with language learning. International Journal of American Linguistics 40, 77-83.

Nobuyoshi, J. and Ellis, R. (1993) Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal 47, 203-210.

Pica, T. (1988) Interactive adjustments as an outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning 38,45-73.

Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N. and Morgenthaler, L. (1989) Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11, 63-90.

Pitts, M., White, H., and Krashen, S. (1989) Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading: A replication of the Clockwork Orange study using second language acquirers. Reading in a Foreign Language 5, 271-275.

Price, M. (1991) The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety: Interviews with highly anxious students. In Horwitz,E. and Young, D. (Eds.), Language Anxiety, pp.101-108. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Romney, J.C., Romney, D., and Menzies, H. (1995) Reading for pleasure in French: A study of the reading habits and interests of French immersion children. Canadian Modern Language Review 51, 474-511.

Swain, M. (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-256. New York: Newbury House.

Swain, M. (1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. and Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H.G. Widdowson, pp. 125-144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16, 371-391.

Tarone, E. and Liu, G-Q. (1995) Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In Cook, G. and B. Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H.G. Widdowson, pp. 107-124. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Van den Branden, K. (1997) Effects of negotiation on language learners' output. Language Learning 47: 589-636.

Young, D. (1990) An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign Language Annals 23, 539-553.


©  by Stephen Krashen







Dr. Jeffrey Jones has generously sent us this contribution to SHARE with all of you:


Learning To Read and Whole Language Ideology

by Jeffrey M. Jones, M.D.,Ph.D.


Probably no other subject provokes such bizarre interactions between teachers, school administrators, and parents as the selection of beginning reading programs in American schools. Many districts have "closet phonics teachers," who close the doors to their classrooms, get out their phonics-based teaching materials, and teach their children how to read using phonics. When a parent expresses chagrin over the lack of phonics in reading instruction or the discovery that his child cannot read, school administrators typically say, "There is lots of research to support our approach." The "approach" of course is an "eclectic reading program" or "whole language program." The educators never produce any concrete research to back up their assertions. But the parent is invited to produce research that proves the educators wrong. This is a rather stark role reversal. Shouldn't it be the education professional who is charged with producing research to convince the parent? Hopefully this essay will make life a little easier for parents caught in this predicament.


Reading is the process of constructing meaning from written texts(1). Phonics is concerned with teaching letter-sound relationships as they relate to learning to read (1,2). While English writing is based on an alphabetic code, there is not a one-to-one relationship between graphemes (printed symbols) and phonemes (speech sounds) they represent. "Cracking the code" denotes learning to associate printed letters with the speech sounds they represent. In discussing beginning to read, cracking the code refers to learning letter-sound relationships via the ability to apply phonics. When a child has learned to associate all specific printed letters with specific speech sounds, the code has been mastered, or cracked. The child then can arrive at an approximation for the pronunciation of most printed word symbols (1,2). "Phonics-first," "intensive phonics," "systematic phonics," "decoding," or "code emphasis" refer to reading programs that emphasize use of phonics at the inception of reading instruction and throughout the first 1-3 years of reading instruction. "Look-and-say," "whole-word," "sight-reading," "linguistic," or "psycholinguistic" refer to an approach to reading instruction taken by educators such as William S. Gray during the first third of the twentieth century. They wanted to turn schools away from "heartless drudgery." Gray advocated a look-and-say approach. He thought children would make more rapid progress in reading if they identified whole words at a glance, as adults seem to do. In its more conservative form, look-and-say involves teachers teaching a limited number of sight words to children before phonics analysis is introduced. In its severe form, educators backing sight reading seek to avoid phonics completely. I will use "look-and-say" to refer to reading teaching that minimizes structured use of phonics. One may hear the term "language experience" (2) used to describe a program for teaching reading. In its conservative form, such a program tends to work on speaking, listening, and writing skills as well as reading. Actually almost any good reading instruction program will interface in some way with the teaching of these skills. In its most severe form, language experience becomes the same thing as "whole language." As you will see later, the term "whole language" means different things to different educators. This is a common problem that parents face when educators talk. You frequently don't know what they really mean. Whole language can mean simply having printed material readily available to children to use and reading to kids to get them excited about reading. This is a concept with which anyone would agree. Whole language can also denote a belief system, an ideology, which, if used to guide reading instruction, can be quite destructive.


Basal reading programs are a complete package of reading materials (1). They provide an entire reading curriculum (summarized in a "scope and sequence" chart), instructional strategies for teaching reading (through teachers' manuals), a graded anthology of readings for children (readers or primers), and practice exercises (work sheets and workbooks). Basal reading programs are organized by grade level with most programs beginning at kindergarten and continuing through eighth grade. An entire basal reading program would make a stack of books and papers four feet high. To develop one of these programs, a large publishing company may invest up to $15 million. Needless to say many more millions are earned yearly selling these programs so that there are vested commercial interests in use of any particular program (1). The programs are heavily marketed, with five well known programs having 70% of the American market. (1,3)


Although educators often say teachers use whatever reading materials and techniques work for them in beginning reading instruction, in fact commercial basal programs drive reading instruction strongly. Studies have shown that basal reading programs account for 75-90% of what goes on during reading periods in elementary school classrooms (4). A number of classroom studies indicate that, for the most part, teachers follow instructional strageties prescribed in a given program's teachers' manuals and that students use the program's Readers and workbook materials (5).

Parents need to be able to ask probing questions about basal programs selected by their schools and about reading instruction in their childrens' schools. “Becoming a Nation of Readers” (BNR) is an excellent resource for interested parents (1). This 145-page monograph was prepared by the Commission of Reading of the U.S. Department of Education. Although it is the product of the Commission, its staff, and 35 consultants, it is quite readable. It clearly made waves in the educational establishment. Because the report was likely to be quite influential, the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) had difficulty bringing themselves to distribute it (6) when it was released in 1985 because BNR recommended the use of explicit phonics instruction in grades 1 and 2. The NCTE eventually produced a brief monograph to act as a reply to BNR (6), a reply that I found to be anemic in comparison to the BNR report. Unfortunately, it appears to me that the NCTE and the International Reading Association (IRA) have had a leadership over the past several years that is dominated by whole language enthusiasts. In my discussion later regarding whole language, I will reproduce some statements by Kenneth Goodman, who is past president of the IRA. The concensus of the experts who wrote BNR was that skilled reading is constructive, fluent, strategic, motivated, and a lifelong pursuit. Phonics plays a role in enabling students to develop their decoding skill to the point where it is automatic and requires little conscious attention.


Parents need to know that there is a group of educators who espouse a pure whole language ideology for reading instruction that rejects use of phonics and use of basal reading materials. I found it difficult to find a concise, logical explication of whole language. These folks tend to prove points by speaking in analogies. Because pure whole language is a set of beliefs to be acted upon and defended, I think it is best termed an ideology. Whole language adherents believe "language is whole" and that reading will happen if you just immerse kids in language. More specifically they tend to believe: (a) written language is language; (b) when a child is surrounded by speaking and naturally occuring writings ("literature" by definition) the child will learn to read "incidently" as a natural "personal" (psycholinguistic) and "social" (sociolinguistic) experience; (c) use of phonics and prepared basal reading materials to teach "skills" (used in a pejorative sense) will inhibit natural learning; (d) there is a large orally transmitted (teacher to teacher, researcher to researcher/teacher) and written body of research supporting (a) and (b); and (e) teachers who choose to use whole language to teach reading must be supported or society is infringing on their rights. Items (b) and (c) of this list appeals to Piaget's philosophy and cognitive learning theories in a vague sort of way. Item (e) seems to mix reading instruction into the teacher empowerment movement. I assert that as bizarre as these ideas seem, when one strips away the flowery rhetoric of whole language enthusiasts, the above five items constitute their credo. I will offer you several exhibits to support my summation of their belief system and then discuss each exhibit separately:

Exhibit A: Definition of whole language according to Diane Stephens in Research on


Whole Language: Support for a New Curriculum (10):

1. Learning in school ought to incorporate what is known about learning outside of school.
2. Teachers should base curricular decisions on what is known about language and learning, should possess and be driven by a vision of literacy, should use observation to inform teaching, and should reflect continuously.
3. Teachers as professionals are entitled to a political context that empowers them as informed decision makers.


Exhibit B: Excerpts from "Whole Language: What's New?" by Altwerger et al. (11):
[1] The key theoretical premise for whole language is that the world over, babies acquire language through actually using it, not through practicing its seperate parts until some later date when the parts are assembled and the totality is finally used. The major assumption is that the model of acquisition, through real use (not through practice exercises), is the best model for thinking about and helping with the learning of reading and writing.
[2] Language acquisition (both oral and written) is seen as natural - - not in the sense of innate or inevitable unfolding, but in the sense that when language (oral or written) is an integral part of functioning of a community and is used around and with neophytes, it is learned "incidentally"...
[3] Little use is made of materials written specifically to teach reading and writing. Instead, whole language relies on literature, on other print used for appropriate purposes (e.g. cake-mix directions used for really making a cake, rather than for finding short vowels), and on writing for varied purposes.


Exhibit C: Excerpts from "Twenty Questions about Teaching Language," by Goodman and Goodman (12):
[1] Early in our misuse research, we concluded that a story is easier to read than a page, a page easier to read than a paragraph, a paragraph easier than a sentence, a sentence easier than a word, and a word easier than a letter. Our research continues to support this conclusion and we believe it to be true....
[2] It is through errors...that we've learned that reading is a psycholinguistic guessing game... The Hawaiian child who reads "He was one big fat duck" for "He was a big fat duck" is letting us in on the ability to read one kind of dialect and translate into dialect in order to comprehend....
[3] ...we can teach children letter names and the sounds letters represent and we can teach them words in isolation from the context of language, but we know that these methods do not lead children to read.

At first glance the points in Stephens definition appear rather opaque. But when viewed through the lens of my characterization of whole language ideology you can actually see what she is trying to say. I recommend Engelman's book War Against the Schools'

Academic Child Abuse (13) for a more complete explication of criticisms applicable to Exhibits [B] and [C]. In any event, stripped of its rhetoric, Exhibit [B] says:

1. Written language is language.
2. Babies acquire language through actually using it, not through practicing its seperate parts.
3. Oral language is learned "incidentally" (as a aspect of doing something else).
4. Therefore, written language is best learned "incidentally" (a la cake-mix routine)

This represents distorted logic. First, written language is not language. It is a representation of a language, hopefully of a language known to the learner. When a baby starts out babbling, what language is that? Also, the fact that a six year old knows a lot more language than the two year old suggests that many specifiable "parts" and aspects were learned in four years. It has been estimated that by the time a child is six years old he has a 4,000 to 24,000 word speaking and listening vocabulary upon which to draw in learning to read (14,15). We don't start from scratch when we teach reading. We assume a basic oral language understanding. Do parents really want a six year old, who has mastered language and who knows much about word meaning and syntax from speaking and listening to be learning a language when he learns how to read or to be learning to read "incidentally?" I doubt it. Parents expect the teacher to direct the child's learning, which is to be quite specific. It does not involve learning a language but a code expressing a familiar language. The teacher may have 28 students to teach the very specific things they don't know about "written language."

Now let's look at item [1] of Exhibit [C]. Can the child read a sentence without being able to read the component words? Really? If the words are harder than sentences, and if sentences are made from words, what phenomenon lets kids transcend the more difficult unit (words) to get the easier unit (sentences)? If something is harder than something else, probably someone would fail to learn it. Engelman (13) believes there ought to be something called the "Goodman Syndrome." These children would fluently read stories, but when asked to read a page, they would make many mistakes. They would stumble horribly over individual words and find letter identification impossible. Goodman's assertion also reminds me of performer Woody Allen's joke about speed reading. "I took a speed reading course," he said, "and it really worked! I read War and Peace in 20 minutes! It was about Russia." Item [2] of Exhibit [C] seems benign at first glance. However, whether a child is Hawaiian or not, substituting words is not a good thing for him to do. If teaching practices actively encourage this behavior, we get something the Merck Manual, a standard medical reference text refers to as one of the signs of "primary reading disability" or "word blindness," namely, "the tendency to substitute words for those one cannot read." Finally there is item [3] of Exhibit [C]. With a single sentence all the research supporting the use of phonics is dismissed. Here Goodman is confusing factors important in motivating children to read with the skills important to allowing them to do so.

What is the research concerning whole language as opposed to traditional programs that emphasize use of phonics? A comprehensive review of whole language effectiveness was conducted by Stahl and Miller in 1989 (16). They looked at 5 projects conducted as part of a U.S. Office of Education study of first grade reading programs and at 46 additional studies that appeared as dissertations, transcripts of lectures, or journals, which they felt had sufficient data to permit a metastatistical analysis. They concluded "we have no evidence showing that whole language programs produce effects that are stronger than existing basal programs, and potentially may produce lower effects. The alternative, that whole language programs are too new to evaluate, also suggests a lack of evidence of its effectiveness." There is also the review of the theoretical foundations of the phonics-first versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction produced by Professor Vellutino of State University of New York in 1991 (17).

He summarizes his findings as follows:

The implications of the research for teaching children to read should be apparent. The most basic dictate seems to be that instruction that promotes facility in word identification is vitally important to success in reading. Accordingly, instruction that facilitates both phoneme awareness and alphabetic coding is vitally important to success in reading. However, there is nothing in the research that precludes the use of whole-language-type activities in teaching reading, such as use of context for monitoring and predictive purposes, vocabulary enrichment to imbue printed words with meaning, discussion that would encourage reading for comprehension, integration of reading, writing, and spelling to concretize the relationships between and among these representational systems, and so forth. [emphasis added] (17).

Finally, there are two large monographs which have reviewed the research regarding reading instruction comprehensively. Both of these, one written by Jeanne Chall (18) and the other more recently by Marilyn Jager Adams (19) have concluded that phonics instruction is of prime importance for reading instruction, especially for the first one to two years of instruction.

The whole language crowd has had a simple retort to the assembled research that makes their positon unsupportable - - they ignore it. Diane Stephens, in the monograph from which Exhibit [A] was taken extolled the pure whole language approach. She listed 38 papers which she believes represent research that supports the unfettered use of whole language. Of these papers she reviewed, only 8 appeared in periodicals where some peer review was possible. The remainder were unpublished masters or doctoral dissertations, technical reports, book chapters, abstracts in yearbooks, or transcribed lectures. Nearly all the studies she cites are "descriptive" of classrooms implementation of whole language or "case studies" of individual students learning to read. She claims 10 studies were comparative; however, when I examine her synopses of these works, only eight truly compare what at least their authors label "whole language" with "skill based" instruction. Of the latter 8 papers, only three compared outcomes of instruction in any way. The studies were short term, looking at the outcome of instruction for the year they were employed. They tended to use nonconventional means for assessing reading ability. Overall, they found little or no advantage for whole language compared to traditional programs. The total number of students in the combined variable and control groups for the three studies was < 200 students! This is the quality of data the whole language crowd expects parents to accept as "research." Stephen says that the most positive thing about the whole language classrooms she described was that each teacher "behaved as if the desired were actual." Each teacher "believed - - and was observed behaving as if - - the students were competent, sensible, and well-intentioned." Do you remember when Harold Hill in the Music Man sold musical instruments to the parents of River City for their kids? He told the parents he was teaching the kids to play by the "think method." If you understand "the think method," then you understand whole language. In my opinion, educators should obtain informed written consent from parents of children upon whom they want to practice this unproven technique.

You may say that I am much too virulent in my attack on the use of a purely whole language approach in reading instruction. After all, educators would not force teachers to use exclusively whole language as their principal teaching method. In fact they certainly have done so in many instances across the republic. Parents have heard anecdotes from teachers describing their teaching phonics "on the sly." But consider the "Reading Learner Outcomes" specified in 1992 by the Oklahoma State Department of Education in their official Oklahoma State Competencies, Grade One, pages 15-22:

The student attend[s] to the meaning of what is read rather than focusing on figuring out words....Uses context, pictures, syntax, and structural analysis clues to predict meaning of unknown words. Develops a sight vocabulary of high frequency words...Predict[s] unknown words...Uses predictions in order to read pattern books (stories with a repetitive element)....Uses fix-it strategies (predicts, uses pictorial cues, asks a friend, skips the word, substitutes another meaningful word)....The student will interpret a story from illustrations.

What is missing from this picture? The word "phonics" is nowhere to be seen. Woe be to the Oklahoma teacher who adopts the outcome: "The student shall have phonemic awareness!" The teachers of Oklahoma better hide their phonics worksheets. This is blatant imposition of a whole language ideology on Oklahoma schools. Even by the twelfth grade, the Oklahoma outcomes still admonish the student not to "focus on figuring out words." However, he must nevertheless demonstrate "a positive attitude towards self as a reader."

The State of California, often touted as being at the vanguard of educational innovation, implemented whole language standards in 1988. It was sold as a package to provide a quality education for all its students, including its "diverse learners." California's DPI audited the schools to ensure compliance and by 1992, roughly 90% of the California fourth graders scored near the bottom of all states participating in a National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) assessment of reading (20). Stanford's Michael Kirst commented, "We almost beat Mississippi - - but not quite. For California to say that is just devastating (21)." Proponents of the whole language initiative then pointed to the growing number of diverse learners to explain the state's poor performance, even though a primary purpose of the standards in the first place was to help diverse learners. In considering diverse learners, it should be noted that white fourth graders in California also scored near the bottom when compared to white fourth graders across the U.S.. What was the answer of the educators promoting whole language? They said, "The kids just need a stronger dose of whole language to fix their reading problems." California continued to promote a whole language approach. In March,1995, the state's own test showed that a majority of its 4th, 8th, and 10th graders failed to reach even minimally acceptable performance levels in reading and writing (22). Then, in April of 1995, results from the most recently administered nationally administered NAEP reading test showed that California's 4th graders ranked last among the 39 states that administered the test (22). Only the island territory of Guam, where students also took the test, had worse scores. At the time this essay was written, a proposed law requiring the state to adopt spelling books and phonetic teaching materials is making its way through the California legislature. The California experience clearly shows that when an idea takes hold within the educational establishment, reference to rational methods for evaluation may be tossed out the window.



1. Anderson, R.C., E.H.Hiebert, J.A. Scott, and I.A.G. Wilkinson (preparers). 1985. Becoming a Nation of Readers: The Report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, D.C.. U.S. Department of Education.

2. Bond, G.L., and R. Dysta. 1967 The cooperative research program in first grade reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly 2:5 - 142.

3. Shannon, P. 1983. The use of commercial reading materials in American elementary schools. Reading Research Quarterly 19:68-85.

4. Educational Products Information Exchange. 1977. Report on a National Study of the Nature and Quality of Instructional Materials Most Used by Teachers and Learners. Technical Report No. 76. New York: EPIE Institute.

5. Anderson, L. 1984. The enviroment of instruction: the function of seatwork in a commercially developed curriculum. In G.G. Duffy, L.R. Roerler, and J. Mason (Eds.), Comprehensive Instruction: Perspectives and Suggestions. New York:Longman, pp.93-103.

6. Davidson, J.L. (ed.) 1988. Counterpoint and Beyond: A Response to Becoming a Nation of Readers. 1111 Kenyon Road, Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

7. From "Mix and make." 1982. In T. Clyman and R.L. Venezky. Ginn Reading Program (level 3, unit 2). Lexington, Massachussetts: Ginn and Co., pp.36-37.

8. From "At the seashore." 1982. In A. Hughes, S.A. Bernier, N. Thomas, C. Bereiter, V. Anderson, L. Gurren J.D. Lebo, and J.A. Overberg. The Headway Program (Level B1, lesson 17). LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court, p.67.

9. Basic Reading (1-1 Book). 1963. J.B. Lippincott, p.103.

10. Stephens, Dianne. 1991. Research on Whole Language: Support for a New Curriculum. Katonah, New York: Richard. C. Owen Publishers.

11. Artwergen, B., C. Edelsy, and B. Flores. 1987. Whole language: what's new? Reading Teacher 41:144-154.

12. Goodman, K., and Y. Goodman. 1981. Twenty questions about teaching language. Educational Leadership 38:437-442.

13. Engelman S. 1992. War against the Schools' Academic Child Abuse. Portland, Oregon: Halcyon House. 215pp.

14. Seashore, R.H., and J.C. Seegers. 1949. How large are children's vocabularies? Elementary English 26:181-194.

15. Lorge, I., and J. Chall. 1963. Estimating the size of vocabularies of children and adults: analysis of methodological issues. Journal of Experimental Education 32:147-157.

16. Stahl, S.A. and P.D. Miller. 1989. Whole language experience approaches for beginning reading: a quantitative research synthesis. Review of Educational Research 59:87-116.

17. Vellutino, F.R. 1991. Introduction to three studies on reading acquisition: convergent findings on theoretical foundations of code-oriented versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 83:437-443.

18. Chall, J.S. 1983. Learning to Read: The Great Debate. Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

19. Adams, M.J. 1990. Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. Cambridge, Massachussetts: the MIT Press.

20. Education Week. September 22, 1993.

21. Kist, MN. October 27, 1993. The Oregonian .

22. Witt, H. May 14, 1995. Bad grades for new age education: low scores may lead California back to old teaching methods. The Chicago Tribune.


© by Jeffrey M. Jones






Our dear SHARER Mariana Celona has sent us this article to SHARE:

Testing Out Alternatives


Traditionally, students are judged by exam results. Margi Wald, Cheryl Delk and Alice Savage present three ways to weave assessment into everyday classroom operations.


Margi's "controlled" technique: adapting traditional forums


There are many ways to revisit traditional assessment with an eye toward enhancing feedback on teaching and learning. I use "progressive writing profiles" to help students build criteria for papers and reinforce the notion of writing as a process. Grading is broken down into stages that parallel writing stages: these profiles "grow" as the information covered in class grows. Students assess each other's writing or receive teacher feedback on only a limited number of criteria on the first draft (see Assessment Form Sample 1). As students revise based on teacher, peer and class feedback and discussion, criteria are added to writing profiles used for later drafts. Students are "graded" on material as it is covered but in the end have a complete set of criteria and are assessed based on standards for a polished final product. (Hint: create the criterion lists as a class--use the students' words, not your own, to better ensure student understanding.)

I use forms of assessment in an alternative fashion by including a reflection element in the traditional testing process. After students take a regular test, I give it a preliminary grade. In the next class period, students work together, asking each other for feedback, sharing test responses to provide good model answers, and correcting individual errors. At home, students fill out a reflection worksheet: improvements made, items missed, plans for further improvement (see Assessment Form Sample 2).

Then we discuss outcomes of the process. We look at how some students' needs overlap and should be addressed in class activities while others should be addressed in individual homework assignments. We list new course objectives and plan and implement new activities based on the results. I may give additional practice to the entire class on paraphrasing techniques and paragraph editing, while designing specific homework for students who had trouble with short answer reading questions or who want to improve vocabulary skills. (Hint: If possible, give two grades on the test - one raw score to show how far students have come and one score that incorporates the reflection element.)


Cheryl's "semi-controlled" technique: checklists

An example of semi-controlled alternative assessment tool that can be used to inform teaching and learning is the use of checklists. Combining checklists with written student self-evaluations can be very informative in speaking and listening courses when students are involved in group discussions.

Each semester, my students write discussion questions based on a single topic that they know will elicit different opinions. Sample topics include fashion trends, gun control, cross-cultural marriages, etc. One day a week is assigned for these "topic discussions." While the students are involved in their discussions (in groups no larger than six), I sit outside the group with a matrix (see Assessment Form Sample 3) that indicates the topic, names of leader and members, and discussion behaviors. Sitting for at least 10 minutes per group, I simply make a mark each time a student (1) contributes meaningfully to the discussion; (2) asks questions; (3) interrupts others to offer, add, or modify his/her own opinion; (4) signals that he/she is listening; (5) or helps other group members with vocabulary or completion of a thought.

For homework, each student writes a self-evaluation of his/her participation in the group, how others responded to each other, and what he/she can do to improve participation. The matrix is shown to the class and general observations are made about the discussion behaviors of individuals or particular groups. Students often include some of the comments they wrote in their self-evaluation. I read each and then respond one-on-one. Since the group members are shuffled for each discussion, students have the opportunity to observe and model good techniques (and avoid bad ones). I remind the students that my checklists are only snapshots of a particular period of time in the discussion. The instructor's presence as an observer becomes less obtrusive as the semester goes on, and the students see the discussion as an authentic, contextualized activity that they will most likely encounter in their future academic careers. Establishing goals for the next group topic discussion actively engages students to make decisions about what is important to focus on; the students assume responsibility for their own learning.


Alice's "freestyle" technique: feedback circles

A more freestyle approach to assessment is simply to have the class take time out to reflect on experience and share ideas and perceptions with the entire learning community. This "feedback circle" is less-controlled, and sometimes a risk for the teacher as students' responses can be unpredictable. I have found that it is possible to implement feedback circles so that they contain less evaluation and more investigation and exploration. The result is that both the learners and I have the potential to come away with a clearer picture of how learning is taking place within our particular environment. At the beginning of the semester, I end class a few minutes early and ask students to form a circle. I tell them that I want us to discuss their learning and that it is important that everyone be able to see and hear everyone else. I then seat myself among them as a further indication that I am not wearing my "teaching hat."

Because many students have not had the experience of giving feedback, I begin with specific questions about class activities. For example, after they hand in an essay, I might start with the question, "What did you write about?", encouraging students to talk about their ideas and struggles in putting thoughts on paper. The specificity of the question helps us all to stay focused on the same experience, serving two important purposes: it's an easy question to answer for those who aren't used to sharing experiences before the group, and it makes what each student says intrinsically interesting to others. Once they begin sharing the process, I can steer the conversation towards reflection by asking them to identify strategies or ideas that worked. Students may be slow to get started, but I find that if I hold my tongue and wait, I am rewarded with valuable information about their frustrations and discoveries. Later in the semester I may start the feedback session with a more abstract question as students generally grow comfortable with the process. For example, in a listening or reading class, I may ask how things are going: "What do you feel you still need?" Then I try to be as quiet as possible so that they can inform one another and me by articulating their experiences. Despite, the temptation to jump in with my own analysis, I restrict myself to playing the role of facilitator. The benefits of these feedback sessions are numerous. As the teacher, I gain confidence from knowing where my students are in their learning. For example, a student may say, "I don't really want to do these taped listening activities; what really helps me is when we have a conversation about an issue." Other students may concur, so I allocate certain days in which students bring in topics to discuss so they can practice all the grammar and vocabulary that they study in their other courses. Or if a student asks for more correction, I can check in with that student regarding which method of correction she would like. "Would you like me to stop you mid-sentence or simply restate what you say correctly afterwards?" Finally, I feel that I can better match the pace of my teaching to the pace of their learning. Since I've started doing feedback, projects frequently take longer than I initially expect but have a richness and depth that comes from students having a greater voice. As a result, the finished projects comprise less of me and more of them.

© by American Language Review






Our dear SHARER Barbara Grodzki has sent us this information:



First National Meeting of Teacher- Training Colleges

Looking Back and Thinking Ahead

September 2,3, 2005 - Córdoba


It gives us great pleasure to invite you to attend the First National Meeting of Teacher- Training Colleges organised by the Profesorado de Inglés Instituto “Juan Zorrilla de San Martin”, which will be held in the city of Córdoba on September 2, 3, 2005.


The meeting aims at providing a forum for sharing ideas and experiences in all aspects related to EFL methodology and teacher training, and in particular, to what Teacher- Training Colleges have achieved in the last decade. It is also hoped that it will be an opportunity for discussing what directions are being considered in the fields of language theory and research, curriculum development and professional growth.


Papers and experiential accounts can focus on topics such as:

Methods and approaches favoured in the teaching of EFL

(a) Instrumental Subjects

English Language (the macro skills – lexis)

Phonetics and Phonology



(b) Content Subjects

History and Culture




Psychology of Learning

Curriculum and Syllabus Design


Language learning strategies


Professional Development

The role of research as a new function in Teacher- Training Colleges

Research as a tool for professional and institutional development

Training courses offered to the teaching community


Teaching Practice

The Teaching Practice Curriculum

The Practicum

The challenges posed by teaching trainees with previous teaching experiences



The learner in focus

Admission criteria for first year students

Profile of the applicants

The heterogeneous class in the first year

Profile of would-be teachers



Specialists in ELT will be giving plenary talks and the meeting will also be a unique opportunity for teachers, teacher trainers, researchers and materials writers to get together, present their work and reflect on their practice.


The types of presentations which the meeting will include and the guidelines for submitting proposals follow.



Types of presentations

Papers (30 minutes)

The participant puts forward ideas related to an area of ELT and discusses them.

The ideas might be based on classroom experience, research or reading. The last five minutes should be reserved for questions.


Demonstrations (45 minutes)

A demonstration should be a practical session which focuses on classroom materials and/or activities which have been developed and tried out by the presenter(s).

Theoretical discussion is usually kept to a minimum to leave time for questions and comments from the audience.


Poster Presentations

A poster is a visual presentation containing an outline, which illustrates or summarizes a project, a feature of language or an area of research. This kind of presentation gives both participants and presenters the opportunity to discuss ideas in a more relaxed and often more productive atmosphere.



The closing date for receipt of proposals is July 15, 2005, but you are encouraged to submit your work as early as possible.

Receipt of proposal forms will be acknowledged by (e-)mail.


For paper submissions send a 300-word abstract.

For demonstration submissions send a 150 word abstract. For poster presentations, send a brief description (100 words).

Please do not include the names of the presenter(s) or make any reference to their institutional affiliation anywhere in your abstract.

Abstracts and other types of submissions must be typed or done on a word processor. If possible, use Word and send a diskette along with the hard copy.  This will be much appreciated if you are sending in your work via regular mail.


Electronic submissions are highly recommended and encouraged.


Abstracts may be sent by regular mail to:

Primer Encuentro Nacional de Profesorados de Inglés

Donaciano del Campillo 1563

Cerro de las Rosas

(5009) Córdoba

or by e-mail to: (with "TTC Meeting" in the subject line)






Until July 11th: $ 40 

Until August 12th:   $50 

After August 12th:  $60


Students: $15


The different methods of payment – together with registration details, forms and requirements for submissions will shortly be made available to attendees to the Meeting of TTC.


For further information, please contact:


First National Meeting of Teacher Training Colleges

c/o Prof. Celina Sánchez Maciel


Confirmed Speakers


María Lucrecia Berrone, M.A.

María Lucrecia Berrone is Lecturer in Linguistics, Grammar and History of the Language at Facultad de Lenguas, UNC. After graduating as Professor of English in this academic institution in 1971, she was awarded a Fullbright scholarship to pursue graduate studies in the USA, where she completed an M.A. in Sociolinguistics at State University of New York. Currently, she is also a lecturer in the careers of MA in Translation Studies and MA in English at Facultad de Lenguas, UNC. Her research work has focused on FL students’ textual competence and on the analysis of EGB manuals.



An Overview of Systemic Functional Grammar: a model of language in context. How SFG builds on a three-dimensional view of meaning and how choices in meaning are realized in texts. SFG as a toolkit for text and discourse analysis.



Jeff Williams

Dr.  Williams received his doctorate in Literature from Texas Tech University. His dissertation, Culture, Theory, and Graphic Fiction, analyzes contemporary comics using a cultural studies approach and various postmodern literary theories. Dr. Williams has two Masters Degrees, one in English and the other in Education, and has taught at the secondary school level. He has presented papers in various national and international conferences and has published articles on comics studies/analysis and pedagogy related to writing and literature. He is a member of the Popular Culture Association, the Modern Language Association, and Asociación Argentina de Estudios Americanos. Currently, Dr. Williams teaches literature and semantics at the Universidad Nacional de La Rioja and is a professor in the Masters Program in English Language Literature at the Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. He is the Director of the Instituto de Estudios de Cultura Popular Actual en el MERCOSUR (IECPAM-UNLaR), and is vice-president of the comics and fotonovelas area for the International Vernacular Colloquium, which is held every two years in Puebla, Mexico.



Literature and Comics in the Language Classroom.



Andrea Alliaud



El Rol de la Investigación en los <Institutos de Formación Docente



Ana Longhini

MA in English, Northen Illinois University


Topic Language Learning Strategies



Alejandra Portela 

Lecturer in English Literature and Language, Facultad de Lenguas, UNC.

Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics, University of Leicester, England

Researcher in Literary Studies and Applied Linguistics. Co-Director of the following research projects:

Formación profesional: Una visión crítica de sustento para la corrección de errores en la producción escrita

El género policial como intertexto en la ficción europea y americana del siglo XX y del siglo XXI

Memoria cultural en Europa y América 

Latest publications:

"La función del mito en la narrativa del siglo XX" (Revista Bitácora, 2004)

"El alivio, el dolor y la humillación de ser sólo apariencias en 'Las ruinas circulares' de Jorge Luis Borges y 'The Son' de Graham Swift" (Actas de las I Jornadas de Literatura de Habla Inglesa, La Plata, 2004)

"Formación docente: del aprendizaje atomizado hacia la transferencia integradora". (forthcoming, Bitácora, 2005)



An Approach to the Teaching of Literature at Teacher Training Colleges



Cecilia Ferreras


Lecturer in Phonetics and Phonology, Facultad de Lenguas, UNC.

Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics, University of Leicester, England

Researcher in applied linguistics. Head of the following research projects:

Formación profesional: Una visión crítica de sustento para la corrección de errores en la producción escrita

Latest publication:

Formación docente: del aprendizaje atomizado hacia la transferencia integradora. (forthcoming, Bitácora, 2005)



How to Handle the Teaching of Intonation at Secondary School Level



Liliana Anglada

Dr. Liliana Anglada graduated as a translator and teacher of English from the Escuela Superior de Lenguas (U.N.C.). She did her postgraduate studies in the U.S and now holds an MA in Applied Linguistics from Ohio University and a Ph.D. in English from Texas Tech University.  Among other academic scholarships and awards, she received a Fulbright scholarship to pursue her master's degree.  She has conducted workshops and taught post-graduate courses on the use of technology and the teaching of foreign languages. At present she teaches Grammar II, Linguistics I, and English Language V at the Faculty of Languages, U.N.C.  She also teaches Grammar and Anglo-American Literature at the Tertiary Institution "Juan Zorrilla de San Martín."  She has been a member of examination boards for the selection of teachers for university positions.  Her interests in the fields of teaching and research focus mainly on ESL/EFL writing instruction and computer-mediated communication.  She has presented papers in various national and international conferences and has published articles related to the two areas mentioned above.


Workshop: An Introduction to the Use of  the Internet  for EFL Teachers and Learners 



Marion La Greca

Marion La Greca graduated from Universidad Tecnológica Nacional

Instituto Nacional del Profesorado Técnico de Capital Federal in 1994 and had her Diploma in March 1996, her Postgraduate Diploma in July 1998 and her Master of Arts in Professional Development for ELT Practitioners in July 2001 from the University of East Anglia  (UEA) at Norwich Institute for Language Education in Norwich, England. (She also became an  “Ontological Coach”  in 2002 . She has been teaching Cultural Studies I & II, (corresponding to Post-graduate Studies) at Universidad Tecnológica Nacional, Fac. Reg. Villa Maria, Prov de Córdoba, since 1999.



Socio-Cultural Studies






Our dear SHARER Mónica Blanco-Kunz has got an invitation to make:


The First Anglia Examination Syndicate International Congress For ELT Professionals
”Optimising True Professionalism Within The Entire ELT Community”

5 - 6 August 2005 - Morning & Afternoon - City Of
Buenos Aires - Argentina




08.00 – 08.45 A.M.


Congress Sessions

09.00 A.M. – 08.00 P.M.




08.00 – 08.45 A.M.


Congress Sessions

09.00 A.M. – 07.45 P.M.

This 2-Day Mega-Event will boast over 25 talks, workshops as well as commercial presentations. All delegates will have the opportunity to meet leading lecturers and exchange views with a large number of ELT professionals. they will also have the chance to find out about the latest ELT publications and services in a substantial resources exhibition area consisting of more than 20 ELT-related promotional stands.

A Growing Trend In Education: Drama by Celia Zubiri (Arg)

Creativity: Painting With All The Colours Of The Wind? By Omar Villarreal (Arg)

How To Cope With A Mixed-Ability Class: An Issue Which Affects Many Teachers Today by Marcela Villan (Arg)

Accuracy, Fluency, …Agency by Susana Trabaldo (Arg)

Using Newspapers In The Classroom by Pablo Toledo (Arg)

Long-Lasting Learning by Laura Szmuch (Arg) – Jamie Duncan (Nz/ Arg)

Creativity And Communication by Laurie Sullivan (Ir/ Arg)

Holistic Activities For Whole Learning by Maria Marta Suarez (Arg)

How The Student Brain Learns by Lucrecia Prat Gay (Arg)

Dealing With The Use Of Humour In The Classroom by Alicia Lopez Oyhenart (Arg)

Sing A Song 2 by Charlie Lopez (Arg)

Sorting Out The Massive Amount Of Everyday Englishness: Elt Recipes Come In Handy, At Last! By Christian Kunz (Arg/ Uk)

Communicative Games For Young Learners by Natalia Kunz (Arg) – Karina Duarte (Arg)

The Pronunciation Of The Latest British Model by Christian Kunz (Arg/ Uk)

Innovate: Teach Grammar Lexically by Marina Gonzalez (Arg)

Successful Marketing Tools For Teachers Of English by Maria Belen Gonzalez (Arg)

Bring Songs & Music Into Your Classroom by Patricia Gomez (Arg)

How Can Books Come To Life by Fernando Armesto (Arg)

How To Enjoy Poetry by Magdalena Anzor (Arg)




Special treat for all delegates! A superb raffle prize: 4-week course at Chichester College, England in January 2006.

Venue: Universidad Austral - Av. Juan De Garay 125 – Ciudad Autonoma De Buenos Aires

Registration Fees:

Individual Rates
General Public Anglia Members Internationals
Before 18/06 $ 40.00 $ 30.00 USD 15.00
Before 15/07 $ 45.00 $ 35.00 USD 20.00
15/07 - 04/08 $ 50.00 $ 40.00 USD 25.00
On Site $ 60.00 $ 50.00 USD 30.00
Important: For The On-Site Option Previous Email/ Fax Re Confirmation Of
Attendance Required

Group Fees
10% discount for 3 - 5 delegates enrolling together
15% discount for 6 or more delegates enrolling together

To register online, log on to:

For further information, please contact us:

Kensington Schools of English - Exams And Assessment Department
Tel/ Fax: 54 11 4246-3547 -

ith the support of:

*Universidad Tecnológica Nacional *Universidad Del Centro Educativo Latinoamericano
*Chichester College *Anglia Examination Syndicate *Net-Learning

*Pearson *Richmond Publishing *Macmillan *Express Publishing *Thomson  *Oxford University Press *MM Publications *Resourceful Teaching *Excel Educational Services *Patricia Gomez Arts And Education *Sullivan & Associates *Asesoramiento Pedagogico Para Lenguas Extranjeras *Alternative Language Learning *Kensington Schools Of English

*The Buenos Aires Herald *Share Magazine *ELT Today

*E-Teaching On Line  *English And Fun *The Buenos Aires Players
*Estari Libros *Advice Bookshop *
Books Services






Our dear SHARER Professor Jaime Gómez Douzet has sent us this announcement:


IX International Conference for Teachers of English

Thinking Globally, Teaching Locally

Universidad de Tarapacá, Arica, República de Chile.

11,12 y 13 Agosto de 2005-


Sessions to be held at Hotel del Valle.
Entrada Camino a Azapa  - Tel. (56) (58) 24 -20 -83


For full details and online registration visit:


Nacional and Internacional Lecturers:



Ana Ortigosa Pastor

Ph.D. in Linguistics, University of La Rioja,Spain.

Assistant Professor in the department of Filologías Modernas at the University of La Rioja, Spain.


Julia Menard-Warwick Ph.D.

MA in TESL degree from the University of Washington.

PhD in Language, Literacy, and Culture from the Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley.

Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the University of California, Davis.


Lic. Omar Villarreal

Licenciado en Ciencias de la Educación (UCALP) Licenciado en Tecnología Educativa (FRA-UTN). Ph.D. Candidate in Modern Languages (USAL). Principal of Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa – Universidad Tecnológica Nacional –Sedes Buenos Aires.


Jaime Gómez Douzet Ph.D.

Master of Arts in English at the University of Northern Iowa. Ph.D. in Spanish from the University of Iowa. Lecturer at the TESOL program at the Universidad de Tarapacá.


Keith S. Folse, Ph.D.

Ph.D. in Second Language Acquisition and Instructional Technology from the University of South Florida. M.A. in TESOL from the University of Southern Mississippi. Coordinator of the M.A. program in TESOL University of Central Florida.


Ramon Barrientos Rivera Ph.D

Master of Arts in Linguistics at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Ph.D. in Spanish, University of Southern California, USA

Professor of English language at the Universidad de Chile, Antofagasta, Universidad de Antofagasta , Universidad de Playa Ancha, Universidad Católica del Norte, Universidad de Valparaíso and Universidad de Tarapacá.


Hilde Fanta

Professor at the Pedagogical University of Carinthia, University Klagenfurt, Universitá Federal Brasilia, University Cambridge, Stanford University; University of Applied Sciences - Technikum Kärnten.


Judith Raine Baroody Ph.D.

Counselor for Press and Culture at the U.S. Embassy in Santiago,Chile.

A graduate of the University of Virginia, National Defense University and American University in Washington, D.C.


David Horner

Acting Director of the English Department at the University of London Institute in Paris.


Dr. Ozzy Jochum Ph.D.

Professor in English at the University of Applied Sciences - Technikum Kärnten. Lecturer at University of Southampton, Cambridge University, University Klagenfurt, Pedagogical University of Carinthia.



Victor Hugo Rojas Bautista B.Ed.

B.Ed. in TEFL from U.N.E. and M.Ed. Candidate at U.N. “Federico Villarreal” in Lima. Associate Professor of TEFL at Universidad Nacional de Educación, and Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima, Perú. Head of the Language Center in the Graduate School at U.N.E.


Aldo Moreira

MA candidate in Applied Lingustics. Lecturer in ESP at Universidad Santa Maria.


Andrew Sheehan

Full-time Consultant with Programa “Inglés Abre Puertas” of the Chilean government.


Romualdo Ibáñez M.A.

M.A. in Applied Linguistics. Ph. D. Candidate in Linguistics, at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso.


Hildergard Morales M.A.

BA in TEFL at the Universidad de Chile, Arica. M.A in TEFL and M.A in Spanish as a Foreign Language. Candidate for the Ed.D in the area of Curriculum and Instruction.


Tatiana Galvan de la Fuente B.A.

Teacher of English as a Foreign Language at Facultad de Idiomas, Universidad de Baja Claifornia in Ensenada, México. B.A. in Business Administration and BA Candidate in Docencia de la Enseñanza del Idioma Ingles at the University of Baja California.


Aida Cortés Lemus B.A.

B.A. in Oceanology . B.A. Candidate in Docencia del Idioma Ingles at the University of Baja California in Ensenada Baja California, México.


Lourdes Forest

Lecturer at the Facultad Nacional de Ingeniería in Oruro, Bolivia. Degree on Pedagogy and a Higher Diploma on University Education. Specialization on ESP Teaching and Material Design at Thames Valley University in London.


Aida Mercado

Lecturer at the Facultad Nacional de Ingeniería in Oruro, Bolivia.

Degree on Pedagogy and a Higher Diploma on University Education.


Mabel Varas

Degree in Applied Linguistics from Universidad de Tarapacá.

Lecturer in Methodology and Didactics to undergraduate students from English Language Teaching Programs.


Margarita Sarlat

Lecturer at the Language Center in the Language Faculty in the Universidad Autónoma de Baja California (UABC).


Lic. Ana Ibañez Moreno

Licenciada en Filología Inglesa por la Universidad de La Rioja (España)


Marcos Lagos Suárez

Head teacher at Anglo-Saxon Institute. M.A. in Education.


Ximena Palta Ramírez

Coordinator of the Local English Teachers Network in Arica.



For further information and Registration, contact: Professor, Jaime Gómez Douzet.
Departamento de Idiomas Extranjeros - Universidad de Tarapacá
Avenida 18 de septiembre 2222 - Arica Chile, South America
Fax 56 58 205 231 or e-mail as attachment to: or < >








Thomson Learning and Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional present Dr David Nunan, University of Hong Kong.


Date and Times: Wednesday August 31st10:00 / 12:00

Venue: Auditorium INSPT de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional – Triunvirato 3174 – Ciudad de Buenos Aires.

Registration: Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa INSPT –UTN (Buenos Aires)


This presentation can be viewed same day, same time through interactive teleconference on the premises of:


Facultad Regional Villa María.

Contact: Lic.Maria Elena Dutto 


Facultad Regional Bahía Blanca.

Contact: Lic. Patricia Carnicina


Facultad Regional Mendoza.

Contact: Prof. Clarisa Israel


Facultad Regional Venado Tuerto.

Contact: Ing. María Elena Pettucci

For further info and registration, go to ,or: Licenciatura en Lengua Inglesa INSPT –UTN (Buenos Aires)

Thomson Learning Southern Cone – (011) 4582 0601 / 0607


Dr Nunan will also visit the following locations:

August 29th – Córdoba

August 30th - Rosario

September 1st - Mar del Plata

September 3rd -  Buenos Aires       


Further information and enrolment:

Libreria Blackpool (Cordoba) - (0351) 423 7172

Libreria Palito  (Mar del Plata) -  (0223) 494 6666

Librería Ameghino (Rosario) -  (0341) 449 8906 / 5637

Advice Bookshop (Santa Fe) - (0343) 431 6100





Our dear friends and SHARERS from APIBB announce:


The "Asociación de Profesores de Inglés de Bahía Blanca announces an intensive seminar on "Journalism applied to the teaching of English," to be held on Saturday, August 13th in Bahía Blanca with the coordination of Mr. Alfred Hopkins, a free lance journalist and graduate of the University of California at Berkeley.


Writing skills are essential for teachers as well as professional persons in all walks of life. But journalistic skills are of special value for teachers and learners because they have to do with investigation, observation, the information gathering process and the ability to communicate ideas and issues in a fair and interesting way.


How can we put life into our ideas? Describe situations we have seen with objectivity? Reveal what is under the surface?


What is the role of the mass media and the ‘communicator’ in modern society? The so-called "fourth estate."


How to synthesize and convince. Graphic language and image makers. The Internet, blogging and inter-active communication. Voice and diction in radio and TV programs.


The diversity and limits of style. Journalistic techniques for language learning.


The workshop will discuss these and other aspects of the trade and alert participants to the exciting language teaching possibilities of written, oral and visual communication. Work teams will conclude the day's events with the preparation of  articles, radio programs and TV shows.


Teachers and advanced students interested in participating should contact the apibb at (0291) 456 3166, e-mail    or write to APIBB, Chiclana 681 P 2,

Bahía Blanca, or click into





Our dear SHARER Maria Teresa Fernandez from the British Council writes to us:


John Fowles & Graham Swift at Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba


I'm copying you information on a new event to be held in the city of Córdoba in August. Te text goes in Spanish because the event will be held in Spanish:

Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba

August 9 – 09: 30 – 10: 45

Primer encuentro: John Fowles, la escritura como oficio.
A través de la minucia propia de un coleccionista, John Fowles trabaja la palabra con dedicación precisa y cuidadosa. The Collector y The French Lieutenant´s Woman -ambas de inmediato suceso editorial- indagan en la conciencia de sus personajes en cada detalle, en cada oración. El valor de la mirada y el contrapunto entre lo que significa narrar para un escritor decimonónico y para un artista del siglo pasado constituyen piezas fundamentales en los múltiples juegos de lectura que Fowles propone. Esta charla acerca a los lectores algunas claves de ingreso al mundo de este genial autor. También se proyectarán fragmentos de películas basadas en sus novelas y de una entrevista realizada al autor por la disertante.

11: 15-12: 30

Segundo encuentro: Graham Swift, hacia una nuevo estatuto del personaje.

Graham Swift continua el gusto por la anécdota y lo hace como un artesano, valiéndose de la palabra como materia. Waterland y Last Orders permanecen, también, en un registro que hace prevalecer tópicos obstinadamente humanos. Sin embargo, se distingue por su particular capacidad para 'oir' a los nuevos personajes urbanos: aquellos de la
Londres menos suntuosa. Así, hace hablar con sus propias voces a personajes de clase media en ambitos y oficios que les son propios. Se proyectarán fragmentos de adaptaciones de sus novelas en la pantalla grande y de una entrevista audiovisual. Además, la disertante comentara acerca de su entrevista con el autor en South London, su barrio natal y escenario de Last Orders.

If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me:

Kind regards.
Maria Teresa Fernandez
Information Assistant - British Council
Marcelo T. de Alvear 590 - Piso 4 - C1058AAF - Buenos Aires - Argentina
T +54 (0)11 4311 9814 - F +54 (0)11 4311 7747






Our dear SHARERS from ELT Team have sent us this announcement:


Next term, you will have the chance to attend several once-a-month intensive courses which different linguistic as well as teaching needs. Have a look and decide on the most suitable course for you:


Innovations in the ELT classroom:

Course with credits approved by Red Federal de Capacitación Continua Proyecto 12/05 Dictamen 6432 for EGB 2, EGB 3 and Polimodal English teachers.

This course aims to offer innovative ideas for the ELT environment based on music, drama, storytelling, poems, videos, technology, games, etc. while searching for the development of discourse competence in our students.

Course length: 6 encounters (one per month). Saturdays: 10:00 to 16:30

Starting in October! The last two meetings take place in February, 2006.



Teaching Spanish as a Second Language

This course, which is taught in Spanish, is designed for teachers of English with the objective of teaching Spanish to foreigners. The course addresses methodological, sociolinguistic and cultural issues. Novel material will be presented. An excellent opportunity to broaden your professional horizon!

Course length: 6 encounters (one per month).Saturdays: 08:30 to 13:30

Starting in August! The last meeting takes place in February, 2006




Keeping your English Active

This course is for advanced learners and teachers who feel the need to keep their English brisk and updated. The general aim is to meet for lively conversations, enlarge vocabulary, and tap into colloquialisms in a learner-friendly atmosphere.

Course length: 6 encounters (one per month) Saturdays: 13:30 to 17:00

Starting in August!



How to say it right, how to teach it better

This course, which is based on phonology, is directed to teacher trainees and teachers willing to brush up on their pronunciation. Obtain constructive feedback, receive strategic theory and learn useful tips and strategies on how to teach phonetics to students of all ages and levels.

Course length:  5 encounters (one per month)

Starting in August!



Right road to effortless writing I

This is an introductory course for advanced learners who desire to gain theory and practice in the ABCs of writing. Sentence structure, organizing information, cohesion and coherence, vocabulary, editing and drafting and brainstorming techniques are some of the topics that will be placed into practice through paragraph and essay writing.

Course length: 4 encounters (one per month)   Saturdays: 13:30 to 17:00

Starting in August!



Right road to effortless writing II

This is a practical and theoretical course for advanced learners of teacher training colleges, educators and trainees who desire to master their penmanship. Become acquainted with numerous techniques which will prove resourceful for a lifetime and which are applicable to numerous types of advanced writing tasks. Learn how to set about accomplishing quality writing.

Course length: 4 encounters (one per month)    Timetable to be confirmed.

Starting in August!


Slang Speaking

This course is for advanced learners who wish to venture into the world of slang which is embedded in films, songs, and everyday authentic language. A wealth of vocabulary will be presented and practiced especially through creative speaking activities.

Course length: 4 encounters (one per month) Saturdays 9:00- 13:00

Starting in August!


A+ for advanced students

This is an appealing course for both learners planning to take up a course of studies as an English language teacher and those already in their first years willing to improve their academic achievement.  This course focuses on practicing the English language through the four skills while tapping into strategies for success. Mastering academic skills is essential to become a successful learner and efficiently tackle listening, reading, speaking and writing contexts. 

Course length: 10 encounters (once each fortnight)    Timetable to be confirmed

Starting in August!


In-service training at school

ELTeam has organized a series of two to three-hour in-service workshops to be delivered to the staff of English Language teachers at your own school as well as schools of English. The workshops are framed around concrete issues which adhere to diverse educational contexts while focusing on the practice of EFL teaching. Several tips and practical examples are given that can be immediately applied to your teaching environment!  The topics are: the use of readers, values education, and self-esteem in the educational setting and learner strategies for tackling tests. If you’re interested in receiving in- service training, contact us to speak with the authority at your school or language institution. Special fees for Winton Member schools.

Starting in August!


Discounts offered for people interested in taking more than one course.

Sign up at 0223-4758631 (15:30 to 18:30) or for further information write to:


Organized by Winton International (RFFDC: d1-100-118) and ELTeam Consultancy







Pearson Education en el Aula Bonaerense

Training Course with credits approved by Red Federal de Formación Docente Continua RFFDC: d1-100-150       

By Prof. Leonor Corradi


Dates: 28/07 - 8 AM-6:30 PM - 29/07 -8 AM-6:30 PM and 30/07- 8 AM-12:30 PM

Venue: EGB N° 2. Dorrego 633. B° La Perla. Mar del Plata

Certificates will be issued.

Limited vacancies.  Registration is Free but essential 

Information and registration:  Pearson Education S.A, Tel:(011) 4309-6150/51,

Fax:(011) 4309-6199  E-mail:







Our dear SHARER Liliana Núñez-Aguirre from Perú TESOL has sent us this invitation:



Call for XII Peru TESOL Convention in Lima

August 1, 2, and 3, 2005


Peru TESOL is organizing its XIII Annual Convention to be held in Lima on August 1, 2 and 3. We invite you to send your proposals. Consult urgently about deadline. Speakers can apply for the lodging plan also if two or three proposals are accepted. Attached you will see all the details of the call and the corresponding form.


We appreciate your interest in sharing your knowledge and expertise with teachers of English in Peru. If you have any question, do not hesitate to contact the Convention Chair, Ms. Jenny Zegarra, at


We look forward to seeing you in Lima.




Liliana Núñez-Aguirre

Peru TESOL Liaison Officer and Honorary President

In the USA: (787) 922-8721



Peru -TESOL Call For Participation For Its Thirteenth Convention

“Pursuing Excellence In Teaching” - August 1, 2, 3 – 2005 - Lima, Peru


The Annual Convention is the most important event for Peru-TESOL and is an essential element in the professional development of its members. These meetings provide the venue for the reporting of projects and activities as well as the sharing of experiences. All those interested in participating in our Convention are invited to submit two or more session proposals.


Who can present?


Teachers, teacher trainers, candidates to Master and Ph.D. degrees, researchers, program administrators, materials and curriculum developers, as well as professionals in fields such as education, linguistics, psychology, sociology, translation and communications are welcomed. We especially encourage members of Peru-TESOL and any other TESOL affiliate in the world.


What topics are encouraged?


Innovative proposals on classroom practices, connections between teaching and learning, language interaction, integration of skills, cultural differences and similarities applied to language learning, technology supporting teaching-learning processes, and activities which improve the language skills are solicited. Interactive formats for presenting information to participants are encouraged.


What types of proposals are possible?


Two types of proposals can be submitted: a) workshops, and b) demonstrations. Presentations like plenaries, colloquia, and papers are offered only by invitation.

a) Workshop (90 minutes): A workshop has very little lecturing by the presenter; the emphasis is on the participants’ activity, which is carefully structured by the presenter. The presenter works with the group, helping participants solve a problem or develop a specific teaching technique.

b) Demonstration (45 minutes): In a demonstration, most of the time is used for showing, rather than telling, a technique for teaching or testing. Normally, the presenter's statement of the theory underlying the technique takes no more than five minutes.


What are the steps in submitting a proposal?


1. Complete the Proposal Form. Such form must be completed for each proposal.

2. One requirement of the form is to provide an abstract that must not exceed 100 words that will appear in the program book, if the proposal is accepted. The abstract helps convention participants decide which presentations will be most appropriate to their needs.


3. The title of the proposal must accurately reflect the content and be clear to the intended audience; it is limited to nine words.


4. A one-page summary of the presentation content must be sent. It is going to be refereed by the Selection Committee and does not appear in the program book. The title, type of presentation, designated interest section, and the target audience.


5. Prepare a biographical statement of 30 words to be included in the program book. Such information must include your place of origin, education and titles, teaching experience, publications, and whatever you consider relevant.


6. You can e-mail your complete proposals (form, summary, abstract, and biographical statement) to the following e-mail address:  or    (Jenny Zegarra – Convention Chair  2005)

Note:  Teachers who were in contact with Jacqueline Ojeda (  please continue to do so.


7. If your proposals are accepted, you will have to mail your photograph (white background, dark clothes, and ID size) for the program book. You can scan it and paste it in Word  and e-mail it to us.


8. The Selection Committee will send notifications of acceptance by mid-June.


What are your responsibilities as a presenter?

1. Register for the convention without expecting us to ask you for doing it. Presenters have to pay a reduced fee.   $ 20.00

2. Do not change the conceptual content of your session once it has been accepted.

3. Please bring enough and additional handouts for your presentation.  Presenters are required to leave two copies of each handout in the Coordination Room for participant services. Presenters will be notified five days in advance of the number of participants at his/her presentation.

4. Be sure to request the necessary audiovisual equipment by the deadline.

5. Your presentations can be scheduled on one or more convention days. It is strongly recommended that presenters arrive in Lima- Perú the day before the convention starts. If you cannot arrive on time, let us know.


Applying for lodging sponsorship by Peru-TESOL


1. Peru-TESOL sponsors presenters -with three proposals accepted as an individual- that have requested for it in the application form. Such sponsorship consists in providing lodging at a double or triple-room together with another speaker/s at the headquarters hotel, as well as providing breakfast and a snack for lunch. Likewise, presenters are expected to participate in the extracurricular activities especially prepared for a memorable stay.


2. Presenters can check in at noon of the day before the convention starts and check out at noon the next day the convention ends.






Fundación Litterae

IX Jornadas Nacionales sobre Normativa del Idioma Español

«El Español Para El Mundo»

4, 5 y 6 de agosto de 2005 – Sede de las Jornadas: Universidad de Belgrano (Salón General Roca) - Zabala 1837 - Buenos Aires




Jueves 4 de agosto


8.30 a 9.45             


10.00 a 10.15          

Palabras de la presidenta de la Fundación LITTERAE, Dra. Alicia María Zorrilla

10.15 a 10.45          

Inauguración - «Hacia un diccionario de fraseología de los argentinos», por el presidente de la Academia Argentina de Letras, Dr. Pedro Luis Barcia

10.45 a 11.15       

«El español de Buenos Aires y la inmigración aluvional (1880- 1920)», por la Dra. Norma Beatriz Carricaburo (Universidad Católica Argentina. CONICET)

11.15 a 11.30


11.30 a 12.00

«Caminos para un diálogo fecundo», por la Prof. María Elena Vigliani de La Rosa (Universidad Austral. Fundación LITTERAE)

12.30 a 13.00     

«Cambios en la lengua: el conflicto entre la evolución semántica y la nostalgia lingüística», por el Prof. Alejandro Parini (Universidad de Belgrano. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Fundación LITTERAE)


13.00 a 15.00    


15.00 a 15.30     

Ponencia: «La costura invisible: correctores de estilo y editores ante la diversidad de los escritos», por la Prof. Carolina Bruck (Universidad Torcuato Di Tella)    

15.30 a 16.00

Ponencia: «La corrección de textos médicos. Dificultades y desafíos», por la correctora Silvia Castello (Fundación LITTERAE)   

16.30 a 17.00

Ponencia: «La lengua española en la preparación del intérprete. Mediación lingüística en interpretación»,por la Trad. Públ. María Lourdes Nafa Waasaf (Universidad Nacional de San Juan)

17.00 a 17.15


17.15 a 17.45

Ponencia: «De Marco Denevi, Manuel de Historia o el habla de los argentinos como constitutivo esencial de la identidad», por la Lic. Ana Lía Amores (Universidad del Salvador)

17.45 a 18.15

Ponencia: «Urgencia de una nueva pedagogía en la enseñanza del español para hispanoahablantes en los Estados Unidos», por el Prof. Omar Mirabal (Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ, Estados Unidos de América)

18.15 a 18.45

Ponencia: «El lenguaje de la radio y de la televisión»,por la Licda. María Antonieta Dubourg (República Oriental del Uruguay) 

18.45 a 19.15

Ponencia: «Funciones y actos de habla en el marco del aprendizaje de español como lengua extranjera»,por la Prof. María Ester Moreno (Universidad Católica Argentina)


Viernes 5 de agosto

9.00 a 10.00

«La diversidad léxica entre España e Hispanoamérica»,por el Prof. Antonio Molero Düsseldorf)

10.00 a 10.30

«El español como lengua internacional»,por el Dr. Héctor Valencia (Universidad del Salvador. Universidad Católica Argentina)

10.30 a 11.00

«Ética, traducción y sociedad. Los jaladores: ¿una nueva estrategia de marketing o simplemente fuera de lugar?»,por la Licda. Susan Trujillo Vargadá (Universidad Femenina del Sagrado Corazón, Lima, República del Perú) 

11.00 a 11.30


11:30 a 12.00

«La palabra y el cuento»,por la escritora Victoria Pueyrredón (Directora de la Revista Letras de Buenos Aires)

12.00 a 12.30

«Las consultas lingüísticas: dudas de los hablantes argentinos»,por la Dra. Alicia María Zorrilla (Academia Argentina de Letras. Fundación LITTERAE. Universidad del Salvador. Colegio de Traductores Públicos de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires)

12.30 a 13.00

Ponencia: «El español en la radio»,la Prof. Marcela de Fátima Ocampo (Instituto Nacional de Enseñanza Superior Lola Mora. Provincia de Tucumán)

13:00 a 15.00


15.00 a 17.00

Taller: «La redacción académica»,por las Dras. Hilda Albano y Mabel Giammatteo

(Universidad de Buenos Aires)

17.15 a 17.45

«Neología y registros lingüísticos: los neologismos en suplementos juveniles de diarios nacionales»,por el Licdo. José Daniel Isla (Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento)

17.45 a 18.15

«El uso del idioma en la ficción infantil»,por la Licda. Graciela Perriconi (Universidad Tecnológica Nacional)

Sábado 6 de agosto

9.00 a 9.30

«Las características del lenguaje jurídico»,por la Prof. Mariana Beatriz Bozetti (Universidad Torcuato Di Tella. Fundación LITTERAE)

9.30 a 10.00

«Aspectos del vocabulario en la producción de alumnos brasileños de español como lengua extranjera»,por el Licdo. Paulo Antonio Pinheiro Correa (Universidad Federal de Río de Janeiro)

10.00 a 10.30

«La influencia del español en la sociedad estadounidense: tendencias educativas para integrar la creciente minoría hispana en la cultura angloparlante»,por las Licdas. Marina Liliana Guidotti y María Laura Pérez Gras (Universidad del Salvador)

10.30 a 11.00

«Una nueva perspectiva en la enseñanza de español como lengua extranjera»,por las Licdas. Ana María Bocca y Nélida Beatriz Vasconcelo (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba)

11.00 a 11.30


11.30 a 12.00

«Los neologismos en la prensa escrita argentina: el observatorio de neología de la Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento»,por las Licdas. Andreína Adelstein, Lucía Brandani, Inés Kuguel y Gabriela Resnik (Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento. CONICET)

12.00 a 12.30
«Periodismo escrito: su dimensión poética»,por la Licda. Susana Giglio de Magallanes (Universidad CAECE) 



12.30 a 13.00

«”Me rindo loco. Esa mina es un témpano”: el uso del español en la literatura contemporánea para jóvenes», por los Profs. Alberto Osvaldo Beker, Fernanda Aren y Claudia Irene Vespa (Universidad de Buenos Aires)

13.00 a 15.00


15.00 a 17.00

Taller: «La redacción académica»,por las Dras. Hilda Albano y Mabel Giammatteo (Universidad de Buenos Aires)

17.30 a 18.00
«Hacia la segunda lengua en las comunidades originarias del Chaco salteño»,

por la Dra. Ana María Fernández Lávaque, la Licda. Juana del Valle Rodas  y la Prof. Nelly Elena Vargas Orellana (Universidad Nacional de Salta)

18.00 a 18.30

«El español en la Internet: ¿progreso o regresión?»,por el Licdo. Marcelo Bianchi Bustos (Universidad Nacional del Comahue)

18.30 a 19.00

«Los libros de estilo de los medios de comunicación y su importancia para el futuro del español»,por el Prof. Alberto Gómez Font (Agencia EFE. FUNDÉU. España)


Entrega de Premios a los mejores egresados de la carrera de Corrector de Textos en Lengua Española de la Fundación LITTERAE.


Entrega de diplomas a los asistentes.              


Informes e inscripción: Virrey Arredondo 2247  2.° “B” - 1426 Buenos Aires

(de lunes a viernes, de 16.30 a 20.30) - Tel./Fax: 4784-9381/4786-1127



Aranceles para profesionales asistentes y disertantes

$ 100 (del 1 al 29 de julio)


Aranceles para estudiantes

$ 30 (del 1 al 29 de julio)


Nota: Puede depositar el monto del arancel en nuestra Cuenta N.° 9 750 032 – 7 – 128 – 5 (Banco de Galicia),a nombre de Fundación LITTERAE. Envíenos, luego, por fax el comprobante de depósito, sus datos personales y el motivo de la operación.






Our dear friend and SHARER Alfred Hopkins has got an invitation for all of us:


Time goes by like one of those good old tales Grandma used to whisper into your ear at bed time in the "Café del Tiempo," Estados Unidos 523 San Telmo, Argentina, where storytellers will exchange tall tales in English on August 20th at 3:30 p.m.

Want to tell your favorite story in English? Have you written a horror story? A tale of love in times of terror? Why not give it a chance?

You are welcome as storyteller or spectator and the only thing you have to pay is your bus fare to San Telmo and the coffee or wine that you guzzle during the show. If you dig the idea just call 4334-1561, write or check the information at







Our dear SHARER Analía Kandel has got an invitation for all of us:


Columna de “Idiomas, Arte y Cultura” de Analía Kandel

Tercer sábado de cada mes a las 15.30 hs.

en “Bureau de Arte” por Radio Argentina AM 570


AUDIOS de entrevistas anteriores en


La columna de “Idiomas, Arte y Cultura” aborda temas relacionados con aspectos lingüísticos y culturales de las lenguas extranjeras a través de comentarios, debates, gacetillas y entrevistas a especialistas, profesionales y representantes de diversas instituciones con el fin de brindar información actual y relevante a profesores, traductores, intérpretes y amantes de los idiomas y la palabra.


Próximas columnas


Al comienzo de cada columna: sorteo de libros y entradas, difusión de cursos, eventos y actividades culturales, comentarios y noticias sobre idiomas Y luego… la entrevista.


Sábado 20 de Agosto, 15.30 hs.



Roberto Arias. Periodista y capacitador de la Radio Comunitaria Mapuche FM Pocahullo

Reciente e histórico otorgamiento por parte del Comfer de una licencia a una radio comunitaria aborigen: FM Pocahullo (98.5 MHz, Aucapán, Neuquén). Sus objetivos. Su rol en la preservación del mapudungun, la lengua mapuche.


Ofelia Veltri. Directora de AACI (Asociación Argentina de Cultura Inglesa) y

BAC (British Arts Centre) AACI,la institución. cursos, servicios y actividades. BAC,   objetivos. Actividades culturales.


Sábado 17 de Septiembre, 15.30 hs.



Mariano Randazzo. Realizador, editor, musicalizador y docente en escuelas de radio

El lenguaje radiofónico: el arte de combinar los sonidos. ¿En qué consiste el idioma de la radio?


Columnas anteriores en podés escuchar fragmentos de las entrevistas más recientes.






Our dear SHARER Mary Godward writes to us:


Words on Words Reading Groups for teachers outside Buenos Aires, La Plata, Salta, Córdoba and Santa Fe


As many of you know, Words on Words this year is focusing on the development of reading groups. So far, we have worked with three groups, which each met three times (two in Buenos Aires and one in La Plata). We will also be working with other groups in Buenos Aires, Salta, Córdoba and at the FAAPI Conference in Santa Fe. Many teachers from other cities across Argentina have shown interest in developing reading groups but, as much as we would like to, we cannot go everywhere!


Therefore, to support the development of reading groups in towns we will not be visiting, the British Council will be offering three grants of $500 each (five hundred Argentine pesos) to support three teachers to attend the three sessions on reading groups to be delivered by Prof Claudia Ferradas Moi at the FAAPI Conference. This is only open to teachers outside Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Salta, Córdoba and La Plata, who think they are in a good position to facilitate the creation of a reading group. Please complete the application form attached and send it by e-mail to the British Council by 8 August 2005.


For further details, please contact us through our Livechat service (you will find the link on our web pages: or e-mail us at


Mary Godward
Manager Knowledge and Learning - British Council
T +54 (0)11 4311 9814 / 7519 - F +54 (0)11 4311 7747




“In kindergarten your idea of a good friend was the
person who let you have
the red crayon when all that was left was the ugly
black one.”

Today we would like to finish this issue of SHARE with very special Friends´Day greetings to all of you,dear SHARERS, that all through these six years together have always generously relinquished the red crayon so that we could be a little happier.




Omar and Marina.



SHARE is distributed free of charge. All announcements in this electronic magazine are also absolutely free of charge. We do not endorse any of the services announced or the views expressed by the contributors.  For more information about the characteristics and readership of SHARE visit:
VISIT OUR WEBSITE : There you can read all past  issues of SHARE in the section SHARE ARCHIVES.