<p> This thesis presents findings from an ethnographic study of adult English Language Learners (ELLs) who are support staff employees in a large metropolitan hospital and are taking integrated English as a Second Language (ESL) classes at their work site. This research is rooted in a theoretical framework that intersects studies on discourse (Fairclough, 1995; Gee, 2008), language socialization (Burdelski &amp; Cook, 2012; Flowerdew, 2013; Vickers, 2007), and agency and identity development (Norton, 1997, 2006, 2010; van Lier, 2008) to discuss the experience of adult ELLs who enter an English-dominant healthcare workplace. The teacher-researcher used ethnographic methods to examine: (a) the support staff employee discourse as determined by language and behaviors; (b) the impact of the workplace ESL classes on socializing employees into this discourse; (c) how support staff employees develop agency and second-language identities in their work environment. Data included field notes from work observations of six support staff employees from three departments&mdash;Housekeeping, Food Service, and Patient Care Services&mdash;all of whom participate in the ESL classes, and audio-recorded interviews with these six employees and three support staff supervisors. Relevant literature in the fields of workplace education and language socialization at work is reviewed and discussed. A description of the hospital&rsquo;s support staff discourse is described in the findings, along with areas of language socialization that are developed by participating in workplace ESL classes and how this leads to increased agency and identity development at work. Data analysis exhibits that learning English through an integrated workplace education program provides employees a community of practice in which to develop the language skills and confidence they need to advocate for themselves and others at work. By qualitatively examining how healthcare support staff can be better incorporated into the workplace and develop professionally, this study has implications for training and education programs for a growing immigrant healthcare worker population. </p>

<p>Prepositions are hard to learn ? even for the advanced language student (Celce- Murcia & Larson-Freeman, 1999). One reason these lexical items are particularly troublesome is that their meanings vary substantially across languages (Feist, 2008a; Levinson & Meira, 2003). In addition, prepositional meanings are complex, with their uses influenced by geometric, functional, and physical aspects of the scenes they describe (Coventry & Garrod, 2004; Feist 2000, 2008a; Vandeloise, 1991). In light of this complexity, the purpose of this study was to figure out what advanced ESL students understand about English prepositional meanings. In my first experiment, advanced ESL learners from ten different language backgrounds studying at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette were asked to look at images and choose the best fit preposition to describe each spatial scene (created by Feist, 2000). Students were given a choice of in or on to best describe spatial scenes which varied along geometric, functional, and physical parameters. Their responses were then analyzed to determine which factors influenced ESL learners? prepositional meanings. In addition, the pattern of influences on ESL learners? use of English prepositions was compared to the influence previously observed in native English speakers (Feist , 2000) to determine how the ESL students? prepositional meanings compared to those of native English speakers. This may help elucidate whether even advanced nonnative speakers are missing subtle influences in prepositional semantics or if they possess a complex understanding that is similar to native speakers. My second study, which was formed out of the discussion of the first, explored one potential strategy used by advanced nonnative speakers in prepositional selection. How do students choose one preposition over another? Understanding what students know about in and on can help researchers develop pedagogical practices which guide learners on a path toward more native-like understanding of prepositional semantics.

<p> The last decade has witnessed growing awareness and use of paired speaking tasks in the field of second language (L2) assessment, resulting in calls for more studies on interactional competence (Ducasse &amp; Brown, 2009; May, 2010; Taylor &amp; Wigglesworth, 2009). This dissertation study aimed to account for the nature of peer-peer interaction in L2 paired speaking tasks through the perspectives of second language acquisition and task-based language assessment. This has been accomplished by addressing the following issues: first, understanding the construct of interactional competence at both macro- (i.e., overall interaction quality determined by degree of collaboration and task completion) and micro-levels (i.e., particular features in interactions); second, evaluating rating scales for interactional competence in terms of reliability and validity; third, examining the extent to which the distribution of interaction features predicted interaction scores; and lastly, investigating how task type affected interaction performance regarding interaction features, interaction patterns, and interaction scores. In total, 70 language learners in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program were paired and responded to four 2.5-minute interaction tasks. All interactions were scored on overall interaction quality by four raters using a new scale developed by the researcher and two existing scales. Then each individual interlocutor&rsquo;s performance was coded for interaction features ranging from interactive listening to interactional management features. The data obtained were analyzed to answer the following questions: (1) Were hypothesized relations among interaction features supported empirically? (2) Was the new scale a reliable and valid measure? and (3) Did interaction features account for variance in interactional competence scores? Results helped refine understanding of interactional competence. First, the results of confirmatory factor analysis did not support the original model of interactive listening and interactional management features. Instead, interaction performance was better characterized by different communication functions of argument, discussion, support, and connection. Second, compared with the two existing scales, the new scale was a more reliable and valid measure. Third, features of topic connection, turn interruption, and turn overlapping were important indicators to predict scores generated by the new scale. Findings have implications for second language acquisition, L2 speaking assessment, and instruction. First, interactional competence could be operationalized in aspects of interaction features and patterns. Second, speaking assessment should include paired speaking tasks to reflect test-takers&rsquo; interactional speaking abilities. In addition, interaction rating scales should measure levels of interactions and task completeness status. Rater calibration is needed to ensure that consistent judgments can be delivered. Last, teachers can direct students&rsquo; attention to different interaction patterns and specific features, which characterize effective conversations. In summary, findings provide further understanding of interactional competence and offer insights into how to measure interaction competence in language classrooms.</p>

Zugl.: Innsbruck, University, Diss., 2006.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1998. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Texas, Dec., 2009. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-78).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-78) Also available in print.

<p> This dissertation is an inquiry into the social experiences of first year international graduate students, and how those social experiences inform their academic writing development. Drawing from the sociocognitive perspective (Atkinson, 2002; Lantolf, 2000), this study recognizes that the university is social in nature, and language learning occurs in the mind, body, and world (Atkinson et al., 2007). The international graduate students in this study were recruited from the first quarter academic writing class in fall 2014 (n=113), and were surveyed at four time points throughout the academic year. The dissertation focuses on four students, Luiza from Brazil, Camila from Chile, Q from Korea, and Kira from China as illustrative examples of the social environments that students have as well as trajectories of writing development. The focal students participated in three interviews throughout the year and written texts were also collected at three time points (at the end of the fall, winter, and spring quarters). Findings from the students&rsquo; social environments suggest that students tend to gravitate towards co-nationals in social settings. In terms of receiving writing support, students in the study relied primarily of colleagues and friends, followed by professors. Writing tutors and family members were sought out the least for writing support. Peers tended to be more accessible and approachable than professors, while professors were rated as more helpful than peers. In terms of the writing development of the students, this study focuses on clausal, phrasal, and lexical complexity. Findings from the textual analysis portion suggest that the writing of the focal students became more complex based on these measurements. In particular, students generally scored higher on the number of modifiers per noun phrase measure throughout the year, suggesting that their noun phrases were becoming more complex, although there were some deviations to this pattern. Also, students used more words from the academic word list and field specific jargon throughout the year. The implications of this study are relevant to writing professors, STEM professors, international student services, and the university as a whole.</p><p>

This study focuses on the education of students who have been adopted internationally and are now learning English in school. Teachers typically have little training for—or experience with—working with these learners. Largely an unstudied area, this dissertation aims to shed light on how teachers develop teaching practices for this population. The present study takes as its theoretical framework a sociocultural perspective on second language acquisition (Lantolf 2000), a social semiotic approach to language (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004), and a critical discourse analysis perspective (Fairclough 1992). I specifically examine the literacy practices (Barton 2001, Gee 2008, Street 1995) of adopted Ethiopian students' teachers with attention to student identity, agency, and literacy development (Dyson 1993, Ibrahim 1999, Luke and Freebody 2000, New London Group 2000, Peirce 1995). During an eight-month period of ethnographic fieldwork (Emihovich 1989) I researched how white, English-speaking teachers and other school staff in three Vermont schools discursively constructed their Ethiopian students. I endeavored to examine how faculty assumptions about students shaped classroom literacy practices, implicating student identity and learning (Harklau 2000, Hawkins 2005, McKay and Wong 1996, Norton 1997, Thesen 1997, Toohey 1998, Willett 1995). Analysis reveals that teachers and other faculty drew on culturally dominant discourses about language, ethnicity, race, class, and health in developing understandings about their adopted students. While articulating the best of intentions toward their Ethiopian learners, teachers unknowingly took up assimilationist, colonialist, “model minority,” classist, and medicalized perspectives about their students that, in turn, informed their educational decision-making. In other words, faculty members positioned adopted Ethiopian learners in ways that constructed them as certain kinds of students (Gee 2008), and, based on those representations, teachers structured literacy activities that afforded them differential learning opportunities. I discuss at length the implications of this study for public education and research. There is a need for teachers and other school professionals to assume perspectives on learning grounded in theories of power, identity, and a contextual understanding of language. Education reform that fosters professional collaboration within schools is necessary. Finally, future education research from sociocultural and critical perspectives focusing on internationally adopted students is warranted.