• Like
Tesolgram Post Convention 2008
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Tesolgram Post Convention 2008

  • 993 views
Published

 

Published in Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
993
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
41
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. P R T E S O L PRTESOL-GRAM A publication of PRTESOL: An organization concerned with the teaching of English to speakers of other languages. A Quarterly Newsletter Volume 35, Issue 3 WINTER 2008 PRTESOL BY-LAWS Post-Convention Highlights Professional Articles President’s final message Language Acquisition: A Critique of Page 16 the Theories We Apply to the Page 3 Teach Me how to Laugh Classroom and Why We Don’t Know Regional Chapters: Directory of new Luz Estrella Méndez Del Valle, Ph D More Chapter Presidents Ann Albuyeh, Ph.D. Page 7 Page 11 Page 4 Writing Quotations Convention Pictures True progress is bilingualism for all: A Page 14-15 Page 26 response to Porter’s plenary address at the 2008 PR TESOL Conference 2009 Calendar of Events Financial Report 2008 Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth, PhD Page 27 Page 24 Back cover Post-Convention Issue The 35 Annual PRTESOL Convention has taken its rightful place in history. Teachers from all over Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic met for two exciting days of training, learning, sharing, planning, and having fun. What a joy it was to meet so many of our readers. Teaching English is a science (lingistics, phonology, morphology, etc), but it is also an art. The art of communicating, of motivating students, of creating materials, designing lessons, even decorating the classrooms. We look forward to 2009 with high hopes of seeing PRTESOL grow in influence around Puerto Rico and the Caribbean helping teachers at all levels in both the science and the art of teaching English. Prof. Carmelo Arbona, PRTESOL-Gram Editor Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 2. P R T E S O L - G R A M TESOLGRAM Advertising TESOLGRAM Are you looking for the best audience for your ESL TESOLGRAM is a periodical service to English resources? language educators and administrators published by You get maximum exposure for our advertising dollar Puerto Rico TESOL, P. O. Box 366828, by placing your ad with Puerto Rico TESOL. ESL San Juan, PR 00936 -6828. teaching professionals, department heads, consultants, and school administrators in both the public and private Newsletter Staff sectors will see your ad. Circulation: 1,000. Editor: Carmelo Arbona Assistant Editor: Dr. José R. Sellas Aponte To receive consecutive run discount, the discount must be requested in advance and total amount (price in Contributions parentheses) must be paid in advance. Articles on English language teaching, theory, and education in general, creative writing, book reviews, poems, and short stories are welcome. Submissions QUARTER FEES FULL HALF must be typewritten, double -spaced, and no longer PAGE PAGE PAGE than five pages. They should be sent in a diskette or e- 1. Per mailed along with a letter authorizing its publication. If issue / $275 $175 $95 photos are sent along with the articles they should be single run properly identified on the back with the name of individuals appearing in the photos. Include school 2. (Two affiliation; return address, e -mail address, and $249.00 $159.00 $86.00 consecutive telephone number. Articles are subject to editing for issues - 10% ($498.00) ($318.00) ($172.00) style, space, and other considerations. If photo files are discount) sent, please send them in .jpg, .gif, or .bmp formats. 3. (Three Copy Deadline for 2008 $223.00 $143.00 $76.00 consecutive Articles and advertising copy must be submitted by: issues - 20% ($669.00) ($429.00) ($228.00 February 1 for the spring issue, discount) May 1 for the summer issue, August 30 for the fall (pre-convention issue) 4. Cover November 15 (post-convention issue) for the (once inside winter issue. back- black $300.00 Bibliographies should follow APA or TESOL Quarterly and white) style. *(three *$720.00 consecutive INSIDE THIS ISSUE: issues - Message from the President 3 20%) Cell Phone Use: A Convenience, A Hazard or An Addiction 4 Copyright Notice About Faculty Resource Network 5 May reproduce articles for classroom use. Quotations up Teachers: Who are They? 6 to twenty - five (25) words are permitted if credit to the Videogames as a Potential Tool for Classroom author and the TESOLGRAM are included. In other Instruction 7 situations, written permission is required. Pre-Convention Section 9-16 Convention Registration Guidelines Keynote Speakers p.10 Hotel Information p. 11-12 Pre-Registration form p. 13 Concurrent Sessions p. 18-21 2008 PRTESOL Membership form p. 22 PRTESOL-Gram 2 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 3. P R T E S O L - G R A M POST-CONVENTION MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT Dr. José R. Sellas Aponte President, PRTESOL 2008 Greetings! PRTESOL Family, It is with great pleasure and joy in my heart that I write my final message as President of the PRTESOL Organization during 2008. We have had an extremely challenging year. It has been a year of many surprises, a year of high expectations, a year where PRTESOL demonstrated that it is one of the finest organizations on this beloved issland. As I reflect upon everything that was carried out during this year, I am extremely proud of our accomplishments. Here is a brief summary of PRTESOL’s major achievements during 2008. We carried out 6 successful Regional Conferences during this year where we impacted hundreds of classroom teachers and professors Island wide. We had over one hundred ESL Professionals participate of our Summer Institute in UPR, Humacao. We had special activities that were carried out by the Chapters, in addition to the Regional Conferences. These special activities provided additional benefits to teachers, classroom students, and their parents. The 6th Annual – Dominican Republic Outreach was held in Dominican Republic with positive results. Regarding membership, we had over 500 ESL Professionals with active membership status during this year. Over 100 of these became members for the first time in 2008. In addition to this, we have approximately 20 active members from the United States and over 100 active members from Dominican Republic. This shows that we have a solid reputation as a prestigious organization. We had three successful publications of the PRTESOL-Gram that included professional articles, pictures of our different activities, and the general information we wanted to share with our membership. Our first PRTESOL-Gram came out in summer 2008 and we sent over 900 copies by mail. Our Pre-Convention Issue came out in fall 2008 and we sent out over 700 copies by mail. Our post-convention PRTESOL-Gram will be sent to over 700 members. I am extremely satisfied with the evolution of this Newsletter, and proud to have carried out 3 successful publications during my Presidency. The PRTESOL-Website was one of our most challenging and rewarding tasks. Even though it was an immense challenge at the beginning of the year, by the end of the year the PRTESOL-Website was up and running adequately. In addition to our main website, we have three Regions that have created Chapter Websites. And we look forward to the moment, that all six chapters have websites linked to the main website. We relied heavily on E-Mail to keep in touch with Board Members and also with our Membership. This type of communication became a primary source for the instant promotion of all our activities, by the forwarding of messages to the majority of our membership. This year PRTESOL has take a gigantic step embracing advanced communication technology. Two of our most important accomplishments this year dealt with the PRTESOL By-Laws and the PRTESOL Election. This year the 2008 PRTESOL By-Laws were ratified through the mail by over 100 members. The By-Laws of PRTESOL had not been revised since 2003. In addition to this, over 100 members voted by mail in the PRTESOL Election. This is the first time in many years that we have broken the mark of over hundred votes counted for each area. This demonstrates the unconditional support of our membership throughout the year to the PRTESOL Organization. Our Membership understands the importance of professional development and that the PRTESOL Organization marks the pace of ESL professional development on the island. The most important accomplishment for the PRTESOL Organization this year was the 35th Annual PRTESOL Convention & Exhibit, titled: The Next Generation of ESL: Tapestry for Success. Our two-day Convention at the Gran Meliã Hotel in Rio Grande, Puerto Rico was fabulous: 60 presentations, over 30 exhibit tables, over 300 attendees, the PRTESOL Band, 10 ushers that guided and helped our attendees, 2 outstanding keynote speakers, and the extraordinary PRTESOL Board of Directors making sure that every aspect was perfect. Everyone is well aware of the economic difficulties that Puerto Rico and the world are undergoing at this time. I feel extremely satisfied to know that our membership had faith in us and supported our convention. Finally, I would like to thank all the PRTESOL 2008 Board Members for your outstanding contribution and hard work throughout this year. We have accomplished many things this year. To our attendees, keynote speakers, presenters, entertainers, exhibitors, sponsors, ushers, hotel personnel, family, and friends thank you all for your contribution to the success of the 35th Annual PRTESOL Convention & Exhibit. I want to extend a warm welcome to Prof. Miguel Camacho our new PRTESOL President and the Board of Directors for 2009. May this year’s journey be smooth and rewarding! God Bless You All! Best Wishes, José R. Sellas Aponte PRTESOL President 2008 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 3
  • 4. P R T E S O L - G R A M Language Acquisition: A Critique of the Theories We Apply to the Classroom and Why We Don’t Know More Ann Albuyeh, Ph.D. Professor, English Linguistics University of Puerto Rico- Río Piedras Abstract Theories of how people learn language have been around for hundreds of years, but the application of such theories to second language teaching really dates from the 1950’s. Since theories of Second Language Acquisition have been applied to classroom methodology, the degree of optimism they have inspired has been negatively reflected by a notable lack of results in the classroom. This fact, no doubt, explains the following observation made by Rod Ellis (1994, 685) in his ground-breaking book The Study of Second Language Acquisition: “Theories of SLA [Second Language Acquisition] are not usually dismissed as a result of empirical study or powerful argumentation, but, instead, tend to slip slowly and gently into oblivion.” If one is easily discouraged, the fact that in 2008—after some forty years of sustained research—“the jury is still out” on the most basic questions regarding language acquisition might be cause for despair. And so, Muriel Saville-Troike’s excellent book, pondering Second Language Acquisition over a decade later than Ellis’s, can present us with a coherent picture of the range of confusing views regarding: 1) What is learned?, 2) How is it learned? and 3) Why is the success rate so variable? – but no definitive answers to even one of these questions. This paper will explore the problems involved in both theorization and classroom application; outline an original – but possibly equally doomed! – suggestion regarding how language acquisition works, and outline a not-so-original application of this to the classroom, intended to avoid the pitfalls of the past. 1. Introduction Although I’ve been teaching English as a Second Language on and off for 35 years now, by mere coincidence I was exposed to language acquisition theory more than a decade before I had every taught in a classroom. In the late 1950’s, while still in grade school, I had the good fortune to have a babysitter who was an elementary education major at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and, no doubt out of boredom, liked to tell me about what she was learning in her classes. Tracking the linguistic behavior of my infant brother over the two years she babysat for us, Peggy described to me, in simplified form, what she had been taught about how children learn language. As I realized when I myself attended the UW-Madison as a young adult, what she had described was the theory of behaviorism as applied to language acquisition. But by the period I’m talking about, the 1970’s, linguists discussing language acquisition at the UW-Madison, spoke of behaviorist theory with ill-concealed condescension. I learned that what Peggy had been taught, and had no doubt subsequently applied to her own teaching, was just plain wrong. Innateness was the ticket, and some fellow university student babysitter may have described LAD, Noam Chomsky’s “Language Acquisition Device” to his or her young charges during the 1970’s just as Peggy had passed on to me the accepted truths surrounding behaviorism a generation earlier. As much as any other field, (and I’ll bring up a parallel point about math education a little later), Teaching English as a Second Language has been plagued both by the force of such theoretical shifts and a natural tendency in the academy to frame theoretical discussion as an “us vs. “them” debate in which “we” are right and “they” are wrong. In fact, from the late 1950’s when Peggy was simplifying the tenets of behaviorism for my benefit, formal, highly publicized debates (which continue to be published) were held between the famous linguist Noam Chomsky and the even more famous psychologists, the behaviorist B. F. Skinner and cognitive development psychologist Jean Piaget. I’m going to first consider these influential views regarding how children learn language, whether first or second, and then bring up adults later in the paper. 2. Philosophical Underpinnings to Views of Language Acquisition It’s worthwhile to consider the fact that the different views regarding language acquisition held by these three famous scholars, which have continued to inspire language learning theories to the present day, owe as much or more to the opposing Western philosophical world views which directed their thinking than to experimental research results or the like. The nineteenth-century English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote: “The great majority of men live like bats, but in twilight, and know and feel the philosophy of their age only by its reflections and refractions.” Because I think Coleridge was right, I’m going to briefly discuss the philosophical schools influencing the thinking of Skinner, Chomsky and Piaget, and subsequent generations of language theoreticians, to emphasize to what extent, bat-like, we teachers of English as a Second Language have been buffeted about by these reflections and refractions of the major Western philosophies. (Continued, page ??) 4 visit www.puertoricotesol.com
  • 5. P R T E S O L - G R A M As has often been pointed out, modern epistemology, the branch of philosophy which investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge, has two bases: empiricism and rationalism. Polar world views, the former focuses on the material world, the latter on reason and the mind. To understand to what extent shifting back and forth between the two philosophies has epitomized the western academy, we have to march back in time to fifth-century BC Greece, and contemplate the influence of Socrates who taught Plato who taught Aristotle – the three scholars credited with laying the philosophical foundation of Western culture, no less. Aristotle’s stress on sense perceptions led in the seventeenth century to John Locke’s affirmation of the foundational principle of empiricism: “There is nothing in the intellect that was not previously in the senses” (Tarnas 1991, 333). The empiricist philosophies of Locke, and later Berkely and Hume led to a “scientific materialism” which was reflected centuries later in the narrowed scope of behaviorist theory and more happily the experimental rigor of its methodology as propounded by the psychologist J. B. Watson in 1924, and generations of scientists thereafter. Famously, of course, linguists such as Leonard Bloomfield applied the theoretical and methodological perspective of behaviorism to their own teachings and research from the 1930’s on. Rationalism has a parallel history, moving from Aristotle’s student Plato to the seventeenth-century philosophers Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz, who in turn influenced the modern linguist Chomsky, culminating in his 1966 publication of a work entitled: Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. 3. The Three Most Influential Theories Regarding How Language is Acquired For those who aren’t familiar with them or who may appreciate having their memory refreshed, here is a thumbnail sketch of the different views of language acquisition upon which even the most recent first and second language acquisition theories rest. Behaviorism tends to conceive of the brain at its initial state as a tabula rasa, a blank slate, to which knowledge is added through sense experience and interaction with the environment, i.e. the focus is on Nurture. Learning typically involves stimulus-response conditioning. In language acquisition this view highlights imitation and feedback. Through the successful imitation of adults and the accidental combination of rewarded sounds, words are learned which are then combined to form short phrases which in turn are combined to form sentences. Skinner conceived of language as “behavior reinforced by other persons” and asserted that language behavior can be accounted for in a way that is in principle no different from the learning behavior of rats in the laboratory. Thus, importantly, in this view language learning is seen as just one type of general learning (See e.g. Malmkjaer 1991, 53—57). Rationalist thought posits the existence of mental structures in the initial state, i.e. at birth. In language acquisition as conceived of by Chomsky this translates into the proposal that a baby is born with a brain equipped to learn language. The baby’s brain contains innate structures which have sometimes been referred to as LAD (Language Acquisition Device) as mentioned above, or sometimes thought of as a “Universal Grammar” consisting of linguistic principles and parameters. The term “principles” refers to sometimes highly abstract and specific properties of grammar, often broadly defined to include many aspects of language. These principles have in practice reflected the current version of linguistic analysis being carried out by Chomsky and his followers. The idea is that although a given language will only contain a subset of the total number of principles, no human language will have a structure that contradicts any one of them. An example of an innate principle is the “Projection Principle.” This principle would predispose a child to expect that syntactic structure is determined by entries in the lexicon. For example, the choice of the verb give entails the use of a specific syntactic pattern including a subject and an object. “Parameters” involve fixing a value or resetting a default based on exposure to linguistic data. Parameters have two or more possible values and the setting of one may imply the setting of others For example, a parameter may involve whether a language is the type that allows the dropping of subject pronouns or not. Thus, the setting would be “Yes, this language does drop subject pronouns” for Spanish, or “No, it doesn’t” for English. (See e.g. Akmajian et al 1995, Field 2004.) Since the current tendency is to see the brain as being somehow hard-wired for language learning, with innate capacities and cognitive structures already in place, interaction with the environment, following an Innateness view of language acquisition, is downplayed, i.e. the focus is on our genetic endowment and Nature. As you can see from the specificity of the proposed principles and parameters, language learning is unique, special, and distinct from general learning. If you think that Chomsky’s innateness views are stupid—an intelligent person told me that just the beginning of last semester, or if, as in my own case, you were trained to think that the behaviorist views of B. F. Skinner are stupid (well, my professors didn’t use that word, but that’s what they meant)—you might reflect on the following. The most profound minds in the history of Western culture have swung back and forth between these opposing views of what knowledge is and how it is gained for over two thousand years. There have been philosophers who have positioned themselves midway between the two extreme viewpoints, and who have also significantly influenced modern thought regarding language acquisition. The eighteenth-century philosophy of Kant is a case in point. Kant criticized Leibniz and the rationalists for believing that reason alone without sense experience can Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 5
  • 6. P R T E S O L - G R A M calculate the universe, and he criticized Locke and the empiricists for believing that sense impressions alone, without a priori concepts of understanding could ever lead to knowledge (Tarnas 1991, 345). A self-proclaimed advocate of “dynamic Kantism,” Piaget rejected both Skinner’s extreme behaviorism and the extreme innateness arguments of the newcomer Chomsky. Identifying himself as “anti-empiricist,” Piaget pointed to the “insufficiency of an ‘empiricist’ interpretation of experience,” arguing that “no knowledge is based on perceptions alone.” But although his focus on the mind makes him essentially a rationalist, Piaget also rejected the strong innateness claims of Chomsky (hence his debate with the younger linguist), arguing “nor do any a priori or innate cognitive structures exist in man . . . the functioning of intelligence alone is hereditary” (Piatteli-Palmarini 1980, 23). Agreeing with Skinner and opposing Chomsky in this regard, Piaget also conceives of language learning as merely a case of general learning. Using a computer analogy doesn’t totally work here, but you could say that what Chomsky is claiming is innate is what’s on the hard-drive of the brain and what Piaget is claiming is innate is part of the software, a learning program. You might describe Piaget’s view, therefore, as claiming that knowledge structures develop in the mind as a result of the ongoing interaction which occurs between this learning program and the environment. According to Piaget, the child’s genetically determined developmental program dictates the stages and the pace of the learning. The learning progresses as a result of twin processes called “assimilation” and “accommodation.” In assimilation, the learner’s existing knowledge structures modify perceptual input. In other words, the interpretation of the perceptual input is limited by the level of knowledge which the child has at any given point. In accommodation, the knowledge structures themselves become modified as they adapt to perceptual input. In other words, contact with the environment leads the child to modify and advance his/her state of knowledge. Through these two processes, the learner in effect climbs step by step to new generalizations in the development of language. For example, a child is at the most basic level 1 linguistically. Using this basic linguistic knowledge the child interprets language input in a limited way. But this partially successful interpretation of language input itself adds to the knowledge the child has of the language. This allows the child to progress to level 2 of linguistic knowledge. Then the child uses this level 2 linguistic knowledge to interpret language input with a bit more success. This more successful interpretation of language itself adds to the child’s growing language corpus and that allows the child to progress to level three of linguistic knowledge. Then the child uses level 3 linguistic knowledge to interpret language input with even more success. This more successful interpretation of language in turn adds to how much language the child knows leading to level 4 of linguistic knowledge. And so on, until the child has mastered the language. Second language acquisition theories which focus on input and interaction as well as “interlanguage” stages owe a debt to Piaget’s model. Significantly, Piaget’s developmental stages which relate most obviously to language acquisition occur within a time frame which is roughly parallel to that proposed as the “critical period” for language learners. As many of you know, the Critical Period Hypothesis was proposed by Eric Lenneberg in 1967. This notion has been supported in various versions these last four decades and in its most usual form hypothesizes that from about 18 months to nearing the onset of puberty there exists a sort of “window of opportunity” for successful and complete language acquisition. Once this critical period is passed, language learning is both more difficult and probably destined to never achieve complete fluency (See e.g. Field 2004, Lust and Foley 2004.) 4. Second Language Acquisition Theories If Nature vs. Nurture is essentially a problem which no one should imagine will be solved in the near future, it hasn’t stopped linguists and psychologists from lining up on either side of the debate. (In point of fact, second language acquisition theorists have mostly focused on Nurture.) As Vivian Cook pointed out in 1988, the opposition between these two approaches in language acquisition has been a “long and acrimonious” one in which “neither side concedes the other’s reality.” Something made equally obvious by the historic Chomsky, Skinner, Piaget debates of decades past referred to above and any review of the literature carried out today. The recent state of the Nature vs. Nurture debate is outlined in Ewa Dąbrowska’s 2004 book entitled Language, Mind and Brain, and illustrated throughout the review of second language acquisition theories presented in Mitchell and Miles (2004) and Saville-Troike (2006), for example. Dąbrowska asserts that still today: “One of the most controversial issues in contemporary psycholinguistics is the extent to which our linguistic abilities depend on ‘general purpose’ cognition,” i.e. following Skinner and Piaget vs. what she terms the “modularity hypothesis,” i.e. that language learning is separate, following Chomsky and his supporters. (Dąbrowska in her book argues against the latter view.) It may be because I proposed my own second-language learning theory in my 1985 Ph.D. dissertation that I think this, but in my opinion, the field of second language acquisition has been more guilty than most in producing a regrettable proliferation of “theoria.” Certainly this concern was voiced as early as the 1990’s when linguists such as Roger Griffiths (1990), Michael Long (1993) and Rod Ellis (1994) raised the alarm. Weary of the theoretical overload, Ellis complains about “too much theorizing and not enough empirical research.” However, I don’t think the real problem has been any lack of empirical research. There 6 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 7. P R T E S O L - G R A M actually have been a lot of empirical studies done in the last few decades. (I also carried out empirical research in Mexico to test my theory.) In fact, from the Contrastive Analysis Theory, which focused on teaching the differences between L1 and L2, to the multiple manifestations of Stephen Krashen’s theories, with their various claims regarding how people learn second languages, much sustained empirical research has been carried out—but for all the heroic efforts of the researchers the findings have been, to say the least, inconclusive. Certainly for any happy detail of language learning that has been uncovered, it is no coincidence that a number of people in the field have made recourse to the story of the blind men and the elephant. (I used this myself a number of years ago only to discover that some other linguist had also proposed it, and I’ve since seen it referred to again in relation to second language acquisition.) Of course, each blind man’s concept of what an elephant was depended on which part he happened to grab a hold of. Lacking the critical understanding of the brain which will light up the whole picture, our philosophic predispositions, the happenstance of the decade in which we received training, the structure of the languages which we are observing (a point made by Ewa Dąbrowski), any number of constraints on our perspective—all of these factors inevitably lead us to the kind of partial truth which rendered each of the blind men both right and essentially wrong when they tried to describe the whole animal. Yes, it will finally be possible to understand the processes of both first and second language acquisition, but I can confidently say it will not happen in our lifetimes. That this view is not mere pessimism, but just a reflection of the reality we face, is supported by Saville-Troike’s (2006, 175) comment regarding basic disagreements as to what constitutes knowledge of a second language: “Resolution of the disagreement is not likely in our lifetimes, and perhaps it would not even be desirable.” She continues with a non-elephant analogy: “I have suggested that we recognize these differences as being like different views we get of Mars through seeing it with different color filters. They complement one another and all are needed to gain a full-spectrum picture of the multidimensional nature of [Second Language Acquisition].” 5. A Possible Model of Second Language Acquisition: My Newer Theory Here’s a hypothesis: 1) What is provided by Nature? Everyone is born with a language specific hard-wired learning device such as hypothesized by Chomsky which exists in the brain as a result of thousands of years of evolution. Like the discussion of what neuroscientists are discovering about the brain and mathematical learning which I’ll discuss below, the “messy, random process” of evolution has resulted in a complex intermingling of language circuitry with other brain functions, making our sorting out of where this “hard-wiring” is and how it functions even harder to identify. You have this for your whole life and it allows you to learn not only aspects of your first language but any additional languages, including learning languages as an adult. 2) What is provided by Nurture? I’m hypothesizing that behaviorists were also always right about the learning of particular aspects of language e.g. function words and inflections, and that these aspects of language are learned from input and interaction in a more or less stimulus-response conditioning manner such as hypothesized by Skinner. Also I’m guessing that this allows you to learn aspects of not only your first language, but any additional languages, including those learned as an adult. 3) How does Nature interact with Nurture? Of course, Piaget focused most on child development, and I think there will turn out to be a good reason for this focus with regard to his concept of language learning. If I can continue with the idea of Piaget’s learning model as a software program (when we discuss the brain more specifically below, you’ll see this isn’t quite adequate), my guess is that since the function of Piaget’s general learning program is to allow child cognitive development, it plays itself out and ceases with the onset of puberty. My hypothesis is that this learning program provides a boost to the general learning achieved through a behaviorist stimulus response model. In other words, language learning which relies heavily on input and interaction (e.g. the learning of function words, inflections, pronunciation, etc.) receives substantial assistance from this general learning software between infancy and puberty. This additional assistance accounts for the perfect acquisition of first and additional languages by children who receive sufficient exposure. This software would “run out” at puberty, and this would account for the effects of the “Critical Period” proposed by Lenneberg. 6. Factors that Matter More in Second Language Acquisition than First Language Acquisition The first group of factors affecting second language acquisition involves internal differences between first and second language acquisition. Obviously, a big consideration here is how knowing a first language affects the learning of a second. At the brain level the questions include: Is the same brain circuitry involved in learning a second language? It seems that the answer will be “No” or at least “not completely.” Another question involves where the second language is stored. Is there an overlap between first and second languages? For example, if the languages are Spanish and English, how are the lexicons Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 7
  • 8. P R T E S O L - G R A M stored? Do the words casa and house share a single storage point? Are they organized with words from their respective languages, but these words are co-indexed somehow? Moreover, if parameters have been set for L1, how are they reset for L2? If the Spanish parameter for no required subject pronoun has been set, how will the brain add a contradictory setting for English? Furthermore, how is processing first one language and then another achieved as language acquisition proceeds? Additionally, if L2 is typologically very different from L1 (say Spanish and Chinese) does restructuring of the brain proceed in a different way than if L2 and L1 are similar (say Spanish and Italian)? Also, age is a significant internal biological factor. Not only may there be fewer learning processes available to the older learner of a second language, but conversely the older learner may profitably take greater advantage of already developed analytic abilities. The second group of factors affecting second language acquisition more than 1rst language acquisition involves external differences between the two. Social contexts of second language acquisition can be quite different, as can the effect of social factors on learning. As Saville-Troike points out typically, motivation, issues of identity, and the relevant status of L1 and L2 in either a national or global context are considerations which have important consequences for second language acquisition. Additionally, institutional requirements, and the institutional constraints imposed on learners are relevant to much second language acquisition. Furthermore, in a social context, biological factors such as age, and sex, and also group categories like ethnicity, educational level, occupation and economic status affect the learning of second languages. In my opinion, to date, research into external factors has yielded more useful data for the teaching of ESL than any research into the internal factors of second language acquisition. 7. Applying These Views to Education: Lessons from Another Field In March of this year, The New Yorker published an essay which I found both comforting and scary. Called “Numbers Guy: Are Our Brains Wired for Math?,” the author of this “Annals of Science” piece, Jim Holt, describes the research of the Paris-based neuroscientist Stanislas Dehaene. Paralleling the breakthroughs in language-brain mapping that began with the nineteenth-century work of Paul Broca and Carl Wernicke, Dehaene studied a brain-damaged patient who was exhibiting a number processing deficiency grouped under the general name “acalculia.” Acalculia is to math difficulties what aphasia is to language problems. In the late 1980’when Stanislas Dehaene first brought the language -brain mapping successes of the American cognitive psychologist Michael Posner to the attention of Dehaene’s Ph.D. advisor, his advisor wasn’t interested. Focusing on determining the abstract organization of cognitive functions, Dehaene’s doctoral advisor “didn’t see the point of trying to locate precisely where in the brain things happened” (Holt 2008, 44). In my opinion, this is a shortsightedness regrettably often seen among both researchers and educators interested in second language acquisition. His advisor, notwithstanding, Dehaene has become a pioneer in a field called “numerical cognition.” Not surprisingly, in the context of our current discussion, these neuroscientists, in the words of Holt (2008, 43), are also “puzzling over which aspects of our mathematical ability are innate and which are learned and how the two systems overlap and affect each other.” In case Piaget’s compromise position with regard to the Nature/Nurture debate outlined above sounded like a happy solution, the evidence from applying Piaget’s theories to mathematics education provides a sobering lesson. Holt (2008, 45) castigates the “new math” teaching methodology (I can’t remember much of it, but I was taught this in the Madison school system), “now widely thought to have been an educational disaster” both in the US and abroad. Holt explains: The new math was grounded in the theories of the influential Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, who believed that children are born without any sense of number and only gradually build up the concept in a series of developmental stages. . . . and that there was therefore no point in trying to teach them arithmetic before the age of six or seven . . . .By now it is generally agreed that infants come equipped with a rudimentary ability to perceive and represent number. If I found it comforting to know that it’s not only the linguists and psychologists who are still tackling the basic questions regarding Nature vs. Nurture, I found it worrisome to reflect on the innocent faith in experts which apparently led countless educators to “do the wrong thing” in the classroom. This has, of course, been the experience of countless other educators, from my babysitter Peggy no doubt to myself and other ESL teachers, as I’ll illustrate below. 8. Science to the Rescue What’s the problem here? How could essentially the same debate continue for two millennia, and how could the modern research of decades provide educators with so little to go on? To paraphrase the first Clinton campaign: the short answer: “It’s the brain, stupid.” The good news is that the gross mapping of lesion sites with both linguistic and mathematical aberrations has in just the last decade or so been superseded by the sophisticated technologies of MRI’s, Magnetic Resonance Imaging methods, and the like. And although our picture of what is going on is still relatively crude for example, the same spot in the brain might light up for two tasks but different neurons could be involved for each one—such technology has the capability of 8 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 9. P R T E S O L - G R A M supporting or refuting details of models proposed for theoretical reasons. In the words of Dehaene, “Psychology has become a little more like physics” (Holt 2008, 45). Over the last few years, neuroscientists such as Judith Rapaport at the National Institute of Health and Paul Thompson at UCLA have been using MRI’s to track the growth and changes in the brain from infancy to puberty. Rapaport states “One of the things we were able to find out, almost at once, was how unexpected the findings are . . . just by following a normative population,” i.e. not looking at aphasia patients but doing MRI’s on normal individuals (De Francesco 2002, 2). An important finding of Rapaport’s team is that development is uneven across the brain. For example, different parts of the brain reach their peak in terms of volume or growth at different ages. Thompson’s color-coded MRI mapping of children’s growing brains illustrates a complex pattern of growth and loss. In particular, Thompson and his colleagues found an unexpected wave of tissue growth which spread from the front to the back of the brain. They found that the frontal brain circuits which control attention and are responsible for learning new skills and being able to think ahead underwent their greatest growth period in children between the ages of three and six (DeFrancesco 2002,.3; PBS 2002, 2). As the brain continued to change, key reorganization was evident in the MRI’s of children of approximately 7 to 11 years of age. Between the ages of 11 and 15, the region known to house language centers underwent a rapid growth spurt and then declined abruptly. This, of course, may be an important reason for the perceived differences in child and adult language learning which motivated hypotheses regarding a critical period which ends around puberty, referred to above. In a PBS interview, Thompson reports that “Perhaps the biggest surprise of all was how much tissue the brain loses in the teen years. Just before puberty, children lost up to 50 percent of their brain tissue in their deep motor nuclei [which] control motor skills such as writing, sports, or piano” (PBS 2002, 2—3) Thompson and his colleagues’ work has been compiled in a “brain atlas,” which you can access on the Laboratory of Neuro Imaging UCLA website (www.loni.ucla.edu) and Thompson 2000 (reproduced on the same site), which show color brain scans which are the first maps of brain growth in individuals and teens. In the same PBS interview, William Greenough, a neuroscientist at the Center for Advanced Study at the University of Illinois stated: The principle news based on both newer techniques like fMRI and other technologies is that the brain is a very dynamic place and continues to be so throughout development and even into adulthood. New synaptic connections continue to form between neurons throughout life. Patterns of myelination [the process by which brain cells are covered with a fatty white substance called myelin, which aids in the transmission of information between cells], while perhaps most dynamic from early development through adolescence, continue to change at least into the 4th decade of life. . . . Perhaps most exciting is that at least some regions of the brain continue to generate new neurons in adulthood, and those neurons appear to participate in the learning and memory process (PBS 2002, 2). Kurt Fischer, director of the Mind, Brain and Education Program at Harvard points to how much still remains to be discovered. Most of the recent advances in brain science have involved knowledge of the biology of single neurons and synapses, not knowledge of patterns of connection and other aspects of the brain as a system. In time, the new imaging techniques will help scientist and educators to understand how brain and behavior work together, but we have a very long way to go (PBS 2002, 3). 9. Conclusion: What to do in the Meantime; What to Take to the Classroom A graduate student and ESL teacher in the Puerto Rico school system told me this semester that educational policy now favors an eclectic approach to teaching methods. This was good news. I remember teaching Language Acquisition not so long ago to graduate students who told me that the Department of Education had required them to go out and buy one of Stephen Krashen’s books, The Input Hypothesis, if I’m remembering correctly, and apply it to their ESL teaching because he had been in Puerto Rico presenting this theory. This was just one of a series of five theories that Krashen put forth—that very fact tells you that his ideas were not writ in stone—and these hypotheses were merely in the process of being tested out by him and other linguists to mixed results. In fact, Rod Ellis’s award-winning 800-plus page survey of the study of second language acquisition (1994, 685) which I referred to above specifically points to Krashen’s infamous Monitor Theory as an example of the way in which second language acquisition theories “slip slowly and gently into oblivion.” As the Piaget- new math disaster illustrates, it has been dangerous to adapt teaching methods to the theorizing of even scholars of greater renown, and some would say with a better track record too, than some of the Second Language Acquisition theoreticians who have influenced teaching methodology. Moreover, if as appears likely, second language acquisition involves multiple structures in the brain and both language specific and general learning processes—and. in the latter case, it appears some which continue beyond childhood and some which don’t—surely language teaching would have to rely on multiple methods to capitalize on all of these factors. In fact, I think that the success of some of the computer programmed teaching, especially supplementing face to face language use, is to a Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 9
  • 10. P R T E S O L - G R A M great extent a result of the variety built into the tasks of the computer learning programs and the eclectic nature of the second language instruction that’s offered. Therefore, whether you prefer the analogy of the blind men and the elephant or the multi-lenses with which to view Mars, it’s my firm belief that we let theorizing and even empirical research designed to test second language acquisition theories intrude on teaching methodology at our peril. On the contrary, it will be the eclectic, multi-task methods drawn from the classroom experience of generations of ESL teachers, combined with the more recent stunning technological breakthroughs, that will prove to be the source of successful, innovative ESL teaching for years to come. [The paper concluded with an eight-minute excerpt of a PBS DVD entitled “The Secret Life of the Brain,” which included the study of the brain of a child learning both Spanish and English, cited below.] Works Cited Albuyeh, Ann. “The Constituent Analysis Theory of Complexity.” Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1985. Akmajian, Adrian, et al. Linguistics: an Introduction to Language and Communication, 5th ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. Chomsky, Noam. “Review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior.” Language 35 (1959): 26—58. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. New York: Harper and Row, 1966. Coburn, Kathleen., ed. Inquiring Spirit: A Coleridge Reader. London: Minerva Press, 1951. Cook, Vivian. Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Dąbrowska, Ewa. Language, Mind, and Brain: Some Psychological, and Neurological Constraints on Theories of Grammar. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2004. DeFrancesco, Laura. “Watching How the Brain Grows: MRI Offers New Insights into Brain Development.” The Scientist 16[3]:27 (February 4, 2002), 6 pages. http://www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/MEDIA/PNAS/thescientist.html/ [June 11, 2008]. Ellis, Rod. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994 Field, John. Psycholinguistics: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge, 2004. Griffiths, Roger. “Speech Rate and NNS Comprehension: a Preliminary Study in Time-Benefit Analysis. Language Learning, 40 (1990): 311—36. Holt, Jim. “Numbers Guy: Are Our Brains Wired for Math?” The New Yorker, March 3, 2008, 42—7. Krashen, Stephen. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman, 1985. Long, Michael. “Assessment Strategies for SLA Theories.” Applied Linguistics, 14 (1993): 225—49. Lust, Barbara and Claire Foley, eds. First Language Acquisition: The Essential Readings. London: Blackwell Publishing [check, now part of Wiley], 2004. Malmkjaer, Kirsten, ed. The Linguistics Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, 1991. Mitchell, Rosamund and Florence Miles. Second Language Learning Theories, 2nd ed. London: Hodder Arnold, 2004. PBS Online and WGBH/Frontline. “How Much Do We Really Know about the Brain?” Frontline: Inside the Teenage Brain. 2002. Reported in http://www,loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/MEDIA/PNAS/pbs_brain_interview.html/ [ June 11, 2008]. Piatteli-Palmarini, Massimo. Language and Learning: The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Saville-Troike, Muriel. Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006 The Secret Life of the Brain, prod. by David Grubin, 5 hours, PBS, 2002, DVD. Skinner, B. F. Verbal Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1957. Tarnas, Richard. The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas that Have Shaped Our World View. New York: Harmony Books, 1991. Thompson, Paul, et al. “Growth Patterns in the Developing Human Brain Detected Using Continuum-Mechanical Tensor Mapping.” Nature 404 (March 9, 2000), 190-193. http://www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/JAY/nature_paper.html/. [June 11, 2008]. 10 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 11. P R T E S O L - G R A M PRTESOL 2008 Elections Meet the Regional Chapter Boards During the Convention each regional chapter held meetings and events including elections. It is vital that every member attend his or her chapter meeting. Find your chapter below and make sure you take an active role in all your chapter’s activities. President:
Dr.
Evelyn
Lugo,
Universidad
 METRO
CHAPTER del
Este,
Carolina President:
Dr.
Gladys
Cruz,
 email:
easterntesol@gmail.com
 InterAmerican
University
 Bayamón
Campus website:

http:// easterntesolpr.webnode.com
 email:
gcdehoyos@yahoo.com



 website:

http://metro.prtesol.angelfire.com NORTHERN
CHAPTER SOUTHERN CHAPTER President:
Carla
Rodríguez,
Student
 President:
Celeste
Morales,
University
of
 Inter
American
University,
Arecibo Puerto
Rico,
Ponce
Campus email:
cjrodriguez79@yahoo.com
 email:
ccmoralespr@hotmail.com

 WESTERN
CHAPTER CAGUAS President:
Prof.
Enrique
Chaparro,
 President:
Denise
Ferrer,
Department
of
 Manuel
Morales
Feliciano
Elementary,
 Education
 Aguada

 email:
denisemferrer@hotmail.com

 email:
bike130@hotmail.com
,
 enrique_chaparro@alpha.sg.inter.edu
 



  IN MEMORIAM Professor Idia Rodríguez González, of the University of Puerto Rico in Arecibo (UPRA) died on Friday, January 23, 2009 of pancreatic cancer. Idia had been a long-time member of PRTESOL and a member of the committee that revived the Northern PRTESOL Chapter in 1990. She later served as President of the Northern Chapter from 1994-96. Idia also served as Higher Ed representative and was a familiar face both as attendee and workshop presenter at many a PRTESOL conference throughout the years. Before her illness, she had been director of the Honor program at UPRA and had been coordinating The Center for Faculty Development at the Arecibo campus. Totally involved in campus life, she served from 2000-2003 as Academic Senator and from 1996 to 2000, she was director of the English Department as well as a member of the Administrative Board. The University and the English Department benefited enormously from Idia’s service as a professor, administrator, and colleague. She was a versatile and dynamic professor who served on numerous committees within the University. She was a vibrant and resourceful colleague who will be sorely missed. Professor Rodríguez had a Master’s Degree in secondary education from the University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. She is survived by her husband, Edgardo Cabán and her two sons Edgardo and Leonardo. Her funeral was held on Sunday, January 25 in Arecibo. Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 11
  • 12. P R T E S O L - G R A M Teach Me How to Laugh: Humor in the Teaching-Learning Experience Luz Estrella Méndez Del Valle, PhD UPR, Utuado “A merry heart does good, like medicine, but a broken spirit dries the bones.” Proverbs 17: 22 Abstract Humor through time, has been considered an important factor in human socialization (Pollak and Freda 1; Cassidy 1; Granick 74). It has the capability of easing an individual’s daily routine, and making life more bearable during moments of great strain (Goldstein and McGhee xiii; Granick 73; Millicent 268). Research reveals that humor can reduce the negative feelings that provoke sickness, tension, and stress burnouts (Cousins 1979; Check 1997; Laurence and Dana 1982; Coleman 1992; Ziegler 1998; McMahon 1999; Cornett 2001; Lawson 2001; Weaver and Cotrell 2001; Olsson 2002). Because of this, many researchers have suggested the presence of humor in the classroom setting. According to their findings, humorous classroom interactions reduce the anxiety students confront when being exposed to rigorous study and unknown concepts (Monnot and Kite 1974; Gomes de Matos 1974; Trachtenberg 1979; Maurice 1988; Deniere 1995; Khelr et al.1999; Thorne 1999; Korobkin 1988). Moreover, many students consider a good sense of humor as one of the most important characteristics a teacher should have (Pollack and Freda 1; Berk 4). Hence, the purpose of this particular study was to briefly review the definitions, theories and taxonomies concerning the concept of humor offered by various researchers (Robinson 1977; Morreall 1983; Glasser 1986; Granick 1995; Long and Graesser 1998; Ziegler 1998; Cornett 2001; Schmitz 2002). The investigation focused on how humor affects the classroom setting, and how it is used as a motivational tool in teaching (Vizmuller 1980; Koestler 1964; Nilsen 1999; Minchew 2001). Through the use of a brief questionnaire, this study examined how a specific group of college professors teaching at a campus located in the central mountain region of Puerto Rico used and perceived humor in their classroom interactions. The study objective was to assess these college professors’ perceptions and usage of humor in order to reaffirm what other studies have stated: humor is also a powerful motivational instrument for college level instruction (Cohen and Herr 1982; Moses 1985; Lowman 1994; White 2001). Findings : 1. College teaching dynamics have dramatically evolved from the strict monotonous lecture to the energetic interaction of thought, creativity and technology (Korobkin 1988). 2. Humor has not weakened the educator’s standing. On the contrary, teachers have become strong role models that use humor to transform their teaching strategies, enhance the classroom setting, and the way in which their students view the world (Khelr et al. 1999). Sixty-five percent (65%) of the respondents admitted using types of humor in their classroom interaction. 3. Personal experience (93%) and funny anecdote (93%) were preferred in general as a group and by gender. 4. Gender differences showed that women were more willing to make fun of themselves in front of their students contrary to men. On the other hand, sarcasm (15%) was rejected by all respondents (Ziegler 1998; Sudol 1981). 5. Sixty-four percent (64%) of the respondents used various media channels for humorous interaction in their classrooms. Books (90%) and articles/news prints (85%) were preferred by group and gender. 6. The findings on the whole disclosed the faculty’s perceptions on the effects humor has in their teaching dynamics. Eighty-five (85%) of the participants stated that humor should be used to: relieve stress, motivate, create a healthy environment, promote thinking and gain attention. Humor as a mechanism to discipline students negative attitudes, developing students’ self-image, helping students understand other cultures and handling unpleasant situations was totally rejected by the respondents. Overall, humor wisely used has the capacity of changing poor pupils into outstanding achievers. 12 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 13. P R T E S O L - G R A M Works Cited Berk, Ronald. Professors are from Mars and Students are from Snickers. Virginia: Stylus Publishing, 2003. Cassidy, A. “And Then the Elephant Said…” Parent Magazine 71 (1996): 96 – 98. Check, John. “Humor in Education.” Physical Educator. 54.3 (1997): 165 – 168. Cohen, P, and G. Herr. “Using an Interactive Feedback Procedure to College Teaching.” Teaching of Psychology. 138 (1982): 138-140. Coleman Jr., Gordon. “All Seriousness Aside: The Laughing-Learning Connection.” International Journal of Instructional Media. 19.3 (1992): 1-7. Cornett, Claudia. Learning through Laughter: Humor in the Classroom. Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, 1986. Cousins, Norman. Anatomy of an Illness Perceived by the Patient: Reflections on Healing and Regeneration. New York: Norton, 1979. Deniere, Marc. “Humor and Foreign Language Teaching.” International Journal of Humor Research. 8.3 (1995): 285 – 298. Glasser, William. Control Theory in the Classroom. New York: Harper and Row, 1986.Goldstein, J., and McGhee, P. The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues. New York: Academic Press, 1972. Gomes de Matos, Francisco. “Humo(u)r, A Neglected Feature in Foreign Language Teaching.” Creativity: New Ideas in Language Teaching. 8 (1974): 1-2. Granick, S. “The Therapeutic Value of Laughter.” USA Today. 124 (Sept. 1995): 72-74. Khelr, Neeleam, Susan Molstad, and Roberta Donahue. “Using Humor in College Classroom to Enhance Teaching Effectiveness in Dread Courses.” College Student Journal. 33.3 (1999): 400 – 407. Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation. London: Hutchinson, 1964. Korobkin, Debra. “Humor in the Classroom: Considerations and Strategies.” College Teaching. 36.4 (1988): 154- 158 Laurence, Peter, and Bill Dana. The Laughter Prescription. New York: Ballantine Books, 1982. Lawson, Wendy. “Engaging with Humor.” Adult Learning. 12.8 (2001): 1- 4. The Living Bible. London: Tyndale House, 1973. Long, Deborah, and Arthur Graesser. “Wit and Humor in Discourse Processing.” Discourse Processing. 11 (1988): 35-60. McMahon, Maureen. “Are We Having Fun Yet? Humor in the English Classroom.” English Journal. 88.4 (1999): 70 – 72. Maurice, Keith. Laugh while Learning another Language: Technologies that are Functional and Funny. English Teaching Forum. 26.4.2 (1988): 20-24. Millicent, Abel. “Interaction of Humor and Gender in Moderating Relationships Between Stress and Outcomes.” Journal of Psychology. 132.3 (1998): 267 – 277. Minchew, Sue. “Teaching English with Humor and Fun.” American Secondary Education. 30.1 (2001): 58 – 65. Monnot, Michel and Jon Kite. “Puns and Games: Paronomasia in the ESL Classroom.”TESOL Quarterly. 8.1 (1974): 65-71. Morreall, John. Taking Laughter Seriously. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983. Moses, I. “High Quality Teaching in a University: Identification and Description.” Studies in Higher Education. 10 (1985): 301-313. Nilsen, Aileen, and Don Nilsen. “The Straw Man Meets His Match: Six Arguments for Studying Humor in the English Classroom.” English Journal. 88.4 (1999): 34-42. Pollack, Judy, and Paul Freda. “Humor, Learning and Socialization in Middle Level Classroom.” Clearing House 00098655, 70.4 (1997): 1- 5. Robinson, Vera. Humor and the Health Profession. New Jersey: Charles B. Slack, 1977. Schmitz, John. “Humor as a Pedagogical Tool in Foreign Language and Translation Courses.” Humor. 15-1 (2002): 89-113. Sudol, David. “Dangers of Classroom Humor.” English Journal. (1981): 26-28. Thorne, Michael. “Using Irony in Teaching the History of Psychology.” Teaching of Psychology. 26.3 (1999): 222- 225. Trachtenberg, Susan. “Joke Telling as a Tool in ESL.” English Teaching Forum. 13.1 (1979): 89-99. Vizmuller, Jana. “Psychological Reasons for Using Humor in a Pedagogical Setting.” The Canadian Modern Language Review. 36.2 (1980): 266-271. Weaver, Richard, and Howard Cotrell. “Ten Specific Techniques for Developing Humor in the Classroom Setting.” Education. 108. 2 (2001): 167- 179. White, Gayle. “Teacher’s Report of How They Used Humor with Student’s Perceived Use of Such Humor.” Education. 122.2 (2001): 337 – 348. Ziegler, John. “Use of Humor in Medical Teaching.” Medical Teacher. 20.4 (1998): 341-344. Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 13
  • 14. P R T E S O L - G R A M The 35th Annual PRTESOL in Pictures Exibitors made available a wide range of materials and resources Regional chapters met and elected new leadership. Hundreds of teachers met at the Gran Melia Hotel and Resort for two dynamic days of professional renewal. Workshops gave teachers effective tools they can use. Exhibitors eager to help teachers. The 2008 PRTESOL Board of Directors conclude a successful year. 14 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 15. P R T E S O L - G R A M The 35th Annual PRTESOL in Pictures An excellent lunch is the perfect time for participants to share with new friends or renew friendships with former classmates and mentors. Professor Inocencia Nieves, winner of the Lifetime Achievement Award, is congratulated by Prof. Miguel Camacho. Participants had the opportunity to choose from over 60 workshops, and they also enjoyed two excellent keynote speakers, Dr. Mario Herrera and Dr. Rosalind Porter. Some of the many winners of excellent prizes at the many raffles. Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 15
  • 16. P R T E S O L - G R A M B.
 At
 least
 one 
 general 
 mee1ng,
 known
 as
 the
 Annual
Conven1on,
will
be
held
each
year.
 C.
 The
membership
will
be
no1fied
of
the 
program
 for
the
general
mee1ng
at
least
30
days
prior
 to
 
 the
scheduled
date.
 D.
Members
present
will
cons1tute
quorum.
 The
Bylaws
of
Puerto
Rico
TESOL E.
 The
 agenda
 of
 the
 business
 mee1ng
 shall 
 be
 distributed
 to
 the
 membership
 at
 the 
 annual
 An
Affiliate
of
Teachers
of
English
to
Speakers
of
Other
 conven1on.
 Languages,
Inc.
 I.
 Name:
The
name 
of
this
Organiza1on
is 
Puerto
 V.
Officers Rico
 TESOL
 (PRTESOL),
 an
 affiliate
 of
 TESOL
 (Teachers 
 of
 English
 to
 Speakers
 of
 Other
 A.
 Officers 
 of
 PRTESOL
 are
 the
 President,
 Vice‐ Languages)
 President,
and
Immediate
Past‐President.
 B.
 They
 must
 be
members 
of
PRTESOL
 and
TESOL
 Interna1onal. II.
 Purpose
 C.
 The
 officers
 of
 PRTESOL
 and
 the
 Execu1ve
 PRTESOL,
incorporated
by
the
Puerto
Rico
State
 Secretary,
 the 
 Membership
 Secretary,
 and
 the
 Department
 under
 the
 Ley
 General
 de
 Treasurer
 shall 
 compose
 the
 Execu1ve
 Corporaciones
para
el
Estado
Libre
Asociado
 de
 CommiWee. Puerto
 Rico
 (January
 9,
 1956),
 is 
 a
 non‐profit
 professional
Organiza1on
that
is
dedicated
to: D.
 The
 term
 of
 office
 for
 the
 President,
 Vice
 President,
 and
 the
Immediate
Past
 President
 is
 1. promo1ng
 scholarship
 and
 professional
 the
period
established
in
Ar1cle
XIV.
 development; E.
 The
terms 
of
office 
for
 the
Treasurer,
 Execu1ve
 2. providing
opportuni1es
for
study
and
research;
 Secretary,
 and
 Membership
 Secretary
 are
 3. dissemina1ng
informa1on
and
research
on
the
 established
in
Ar1cle
XIV. teaching
 of
 English
 to
 speakers
 of
 other
 F.
 The
 elected
 and
 appointed
 officers
 shall
 languages;
 perform
du1es
as
prescribed
in
Ar1cle
XIV.
 4. w o r k i n g
 c o o p e r a 1 v e l y
 t o w a r d s 
 t h e
 improvement
 of
 instruc1on
 in
 all 
 programs
 which
 seek
 to
 provide
 students 
 with
 the
 VI.
Board
of
Directors
 opportunity
 to
 become 
 proficient
 English
 A.
 It
 shall 
consist
 of
 the
President,
Vice‐President,
 language
learners; Immediate 
 Past‐President,
 five 
 representa1ves
 5. coordina1ng
 informa1on
 with
 the
 local,
 elected
by
 the
total
membership,
 the 
Regional
 stateside,
 and
 interna1onal 
 professional
 Chapter
 Presidents 
 or
 Vice‐Presidents,
 the
 organiza1ons
with
similar
goals; Execu1ve
Secretary,
the
Membership
Secretary,
 t h e 
 Tr e a s u r e r,
 t h e
 C o m m u n i c a 1 o n ’s
 6. promo1ng
 the
 recogni1on
 of
 English
 as 
 an
 Chairperson,
 Sponsorship
 Chairperson
 and
 the
 addi1onal
 
 language
 tool
 for
 communica1on,
 Publishers’
Liaison.
The
last
six,
all
appointed
by
 and
not
as 
a
supplan1ng
means 
of
expression
at
 the
 Board,
 have
 a
 voice
 but
 no
 vote
 on
 the
 the
 expense
 of
 the
 second
 language
 learner’s
 Board
of
Directors.
 na1ve
language
and
culture. B.
 The
elected
members 
shall
serve
terms 
of
office
 specified
in
Ar1cle
XIV
and
may
 not
 hold
more
 III.
Membership than
one
vo1ng
posi1on
on
the
Board.
 A.
 Membership
in
PRTESOL
is
open
to
all
who
are
 C.
 The
 five
 elected
 representa1ves 
on
 the
 Board
 concerned
 with
 the
 teaching
 of
 English
 to
 shall 
represent
 the 
Organiza1on’s 
membership
 speakers
of
other
languages.
 a s
 a
 w h o l e 
 b u t
 s h a l l 
 b e
 c h o s e n
 a s
 B.
 All 
 paid‐up
 individual
 or
 joint
 members
 are
 representa1ves 
 of
 the
 following
 professional
 en1tled
to
vote
in
elec1ons 
and
be
admiWed
to
 areas:
 Elementary
 Educa1on,
 Secondary
 all
mee1ngs
held
by
PRTESOL.
 Educa1on,
 Higher
 Educa1on,
 Private 
 School,
 C.
 Representa1ves 
of
 ins1tu1onal 
members
enjoy
 and
 Student
 Representa1ve
 (ESL
 or
 teacher
 all
membership
privileges
except
vo1ng. training.
 This 
 person
 must
 have
 an
 ac1ve
 D.
 Membership
shall
be
for
twelve
months. program
 of
 12
 undergraduate
 credits 
 or
 6
 graduate
credits.).
 D.
 Only
 PRTESOL
 members 
 who
 are 
 English
 IV.
General
MeeHngs
 Educators
or
students
of
English
Educa1on
may
 A.
 A
 general
 mee1ng
 is 
 one
 in
 which
 the
 total
 form
part
of
the
Board
of
Directors. membership
is
invited
to
aWend. 16 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 17. P R T E S O L - G R A M E.
 To
avoid
any
 semblance
of
 a 
possible
conflict
 of
 C.
 Each
 chapter
 may
 accept
 members 
 from
 other
 interests,
 none 
of
 the 
posi1ons 
of
 the
 Execu1ve
 local 
chapters
who
have
indicated
a 
preference 
of
 CommiWee
 of
 the 
 Board
 of
 Directors 
 will
 be
 affilia1on
other
than
by
geographical 
designa1on,
 occupied
 by
 mul1ple
 members 
of
 a 
family
 unit,
 but
no
member
can
be 
affiliated
to
more
than
one
 even
though
they
may
be
PRTESOL
members. local
chapter.
 X.
Amendments VII.
Annual
ElecHon A.
 Amendments 
to
the 
Bylaws 
may
be
ini1ated
by
 a
 A
 One
secret
 mail 
ballot
 shall
be 
provided
 to
each
 majority
 of
the
Board
of
Directors
or
submiWed
in
 eligible
 member
 for
 the
 annual
 elec1on
 of
 the
 a 
 pe11on
 to
 the 
 Board.
 The
 Membership
 Vice
President
and
other
yearly
vacancies. Secretary
 shall
 validate
 a
 pe11on
 to
 amend
 the
 B.
 Under
 no
 circumstances 
 will 
 lost
 ballots
 be
 Bylaws 
 if
 it
 is
 signed
 by
 at
 least
 twenty‐five
 reissued. members. C.
 Ballots 
 with
 the
 slate
 of
 candidates 
 and
 B.
 The
 Membership
 secretary
 is 
 required
 to
 informa1on
about
the 
candidates
shall
be 
sent
to
 announce
 the 
 valida1on
 of
 the
 pe11on
 to
 the
 every
 member
 at
 least
 thirty
 days
 before
 the
 President
 and
 the
 Board
 at
 the 
 next
 Board
 Annual 
 Conven1on.
 In
 addi1on
 to
 the 
 slate 
 of
 mee1ng
aeer
receipt
of
the
same. candidates,
the 
ballots 
shall 
provide
a 
space
for
 a
 C.
 The
Membership
Secretary
will 
mail
the 
proposed
 write‐in
candidate
for
each
posi1on.
 amendment
 to
 the
 vo1ng
 membership
 within
 D.
 Ballots
will 
be 
accepted
up
to
the
first
day
of
the
 twenty‐one
 days 
 of
 its 
 announcement
 to
 the
 Annual
Conven1on
by
noon.
 Board. E.
 The
 Nomina1ng
 CommiWee,
 the
 Execu1ve
 D.
 A
proposed
amendment
must
be
ra1fied
by
 two‐ Secretary,
 and
 the
 President
 shall
 oversee
 the
 thirds
 of
 the
 ballots
 cast
 within
 15
 days 
 of
 its
 coun1ng
of
the 
ballots 
and
shall 
cer1fy
the
annual
 mailing
to
become
effec1ve. elec1on
results.
 E.
 Ballots 
 will 
 be
 counted
 and
 cer1fied
 by
 a
 F.
 A ny
 c a n d i d a t e
 w h o
 w i s h e s
 t o
 h a v e
 a
 commiWee 
 of
 three
 appointed
 by
 the
 President
 representa1ve 
 present
 at
 the 
 coun1ng
 of
 the
 with
the
approval
of
the
Board. ballots 
 may
 do
 so
 by
 making
 a 
 wriWen
 request
 F.
 The
results 
shall 
be
announced
to
the
Board
at
the
 that
 specifies
 the 
 name 
 and
 address
 of
 the
 Board
mee1ng
aeer
the 
deadline
for
receiving
the
 representa1ve.
 The
 representa1ve
 must
 be
 a
 ballots. member
 of
PRTESOL.
This
person
may
 watch,
but
 G.
 Whenever
 the
Bylaws
 are 
amended,
 the
 revised
 may
not
par1cipate
in
the
coun1ng
of
ballots.
 version
 of
 the
 Bylaws 
 shall
 be 
 published
 and
 G.
 Unless
 there
 is
 a 
 viola1on
 of
 the
 Bylaws,
 the
 distributed
to
the 
membership
within
120
days
or
 cer1fied
 results 
 of
 the
 official 
 coun1ng
 of
 the
 published
in
the 
next
issue
of
the
PRTESOL‐GRAM
 ballots
are
final.
 and
be
made
available 
for
 downloading
purposes
 H.
 The
results 
of
the
elec1on
shall 
be
announced
to
 from
the
PRTESOL
official
website. the
 membership
 before 
the 
close 
of
 the 
Annual
 Conven1on
 and
 subsequently
 acknowledged
 through
the 
Organiza1on’s
different
 publica1ons,
 such
 as 
 the 
 PRTESOL‐GRAM
 and
 its
 official
 XI.
AffiliaHon
 PRTESOL
 shall 
comply
 with
 the 
requirements 
 of
 website.
 TESOL
 to
 retain
 affiliate
 status
 and
 enjoy
 all
 benefits
due
it.
 VIII.
CommiLees A.
 The
Standing
CommiWees
of
PRTESOL
shall
be
the
 The
 President,
 Vice 
President,
 or
 Past
 President
 Nomina1ng
 CommiWee,
 Membership
CommiWee,
 shall 
act
 as 
representa1ves 
to
the
TESOL
 Affiliate
 Program
CommiWee,
Communica1ons
CommiWee,
 Council.
 The
 Board
 of
 Directors
 will 
 select
 Award
and
Scholarship
CommiWee,
 Socio‐poli1cal
 alternate
representa1ves. Concerns 
 CommiWee,
 Conven1on
 Evalua1on
 CommiWee,
and
CommiWee
on
the
Bylaws. B.

 The 
 CommiWees 
 shall
 perform
 du1es 
 as
 XII.
ConsultaHve
Authority Robert
s
Rules
of
Order,
latest
edi1on,
shall 
govern
 prescribed
in
Ar1cle
XVI.
 the
 conduct
 at
 all 
 mee1ngs 
 to
 which
 they
 are
 The
 Board
 of
 Directors 
 may
 establish
 Ad
 Hoc
 applicable 
and
in
which
they
 are
not
 inconsistent
 CommiWees. with
the
Bylaws.
 C.
 CommiWee
 membership
 and
 chairs
 shall
 end
 according
to
the
period
established
in
Ar1cle
XIV. XIII.
Membership,
Dues,
and
Fees
 A.
 The
 term
 of
 membership
 shall
 be 
 for
 twelve
 IX.
Regional
Chapters
 months.
 A.
 Each
 Chapter
 shall
 be 
 composed
 of
 those
 B.
 Dues
shall
not
be
retroac1ve. members
 of
 PRTESOL
 who
 reside
 or
 work
 in
 a
 C.
 Fees 
 for
 adver1sing,
 exhibi1ons,
 the
 Annual
 par1cular
region. Conven1on,
 and
 other
 ac1vi1es 
are 
determined
 B.
 Each
Chapter
shall
abide
by
the
PRTESOL
Bylaws.
 by
the
PRTESOL
Board
of
Directors.
 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 17
  • 18. P R T E S O L - G R A M D.
 Membership
 dues 
 shall 
 be
 determined
 by
 the
 special 
 elec1on
 by
 the
 membership
 will 
 be
 Board. held
 to
 fill 
 the 
 posi1on.
 If
 the
 posi1on
 Ins1tu1onal
membership
will
en1tle
the 
member
 becomes
vacant
aeer
June
30,
the
Nomina1ng
 to
 receive 
 the
 PRTESOL‐GRAM
 and
 other
 CommiWee
will 
add
the
posi1on
of
President
 Organiza1onal 
 informa1on.
 The
 dues 
 for
 said
 to
the
ballot. membership
will
be
determined
by
the
Board. 3.
 Assumes
the
office
of
President
if
it
 becomes
 E.
 Informa1on
 about
 dues 
 and
 fees 
 shall 
 be
 vacant
 and
will 
con1nue
in
 this
office
during
 published
in
the
PRTESOL‐GRAM
 at
the
beginning
 the
following
year. of
each
year. 4.
 Assists 
the 
President
in
organizing
the 
Annual
 F.
 No
 regional
 chapter
 may
 impose
 a 
 separate
 Conven1on.
 membership
fee
to
its
cons1tuents.
 5.
 Chairs
the
Annual
Conven1on
Program. 6.
 Is
a
vo1ng
member
of
the
Board
of
Directors. XIV.
DuHes
of
Board
Members
 7.
 Acts 
 as
 liaison
 with
 regional 
 chapters
 to
 A.
 President
 coordinate
the
calendar
of
regional
ac1vi1es.
 1.
 The
 president
 begins
 a
 one‐year
 presiden1al
 8.
 Serves
as
parliamentarian. term
 thirty
 (30)
 days 
 aeer
 the
 Annual
 Conven1on.
The
president
will 
preside 
over
all
 D.
 Treasurer PRTESOL
 mee1ngs
 during
 the
 term
 s/he
 1.
 Is 
appointed
by
 the
 Board
for
 a
term
of
 one
 assumes
office. year.
 2.
 The
president
prepares 
an
annual 
plan
for
the
 2.
 Assists 
the
president
in
preparing
a
budget
for
 year.
 the
year. 3.

 The
 President
 and
 the
 treasurer
 will
prepare
 3.
 Presents 
 an
 annual
 financial 
 report
 to
 the
 an
annual
budget
that
will
be
submiWed
to
the
 Board
at
 the
last
mee1ng,
a 
wriWen
summary
 Board
 of
 Directors 
 for
 approval 
 at
 the
 first
 report
 to
 the 
 membership
 at
 the 
 Annual
 mee1ng.
 The 
President,
 not
 the 
organiza1on,
 Business 
 Mee1ng.
 It
 is 
 published
 in
 the
 will 
 be 
 responsible
 for
 any
 amount
 not
 PRTESOL‐GRAM.
 approved
by
the
Board
of
Directors.
 4.
 Presents 
 a 
 current
 report
 of
 the
 financial
 4.
 The
 President,
 along
 with
 the 
 Board
 of
 status
 of
 the 
 Organiza1on
 at
 each
 Board
 Directors,
 will 
organize 
the
annual
conven1on
 mee1ng.
 It
 shall 
 cons1tute
 the
 first
 item
 of
 according
to
the
proposed
budget.
 business 
following
the 
reading
and
approval
of
 5.
 The
 president
 appoints 
 all 
 Chairpersons 
 of
 the
minutes
of
the
previous
mee1ng.
 S ta n d i n g
 C o m m i W e e s 
 n o t
 o t h e r w i s e
 5.
 Organizes,
 with
 the
 Membership
 Secretary,
 designated
by
the
Bylaws.
 the
registra1on
of
the
Annual
Conven1on.
 6.
 The
president
 serves 
as
an
ex‐officio
member
 6.
 Presents 
 the
 Board
 with
 the 
 report
 of
 an
 of
 all
 commiWees 
 except
 the
 Nomina1ng
 outside
 audit
 of
 the
 Organiza1on’s
 financial
 CommiWee
 and
 the
 Conven1on
 Evalua1on
 status
at
the
end
of
each
year.
 CommiWee. 7.
 As 
 an
 appointed
 member
 of
 the
 Board,
 the
 Treasurer
has 
a
voice
but
no
vote 
on
the
Board
 B.
 Immediate
Past‐President
 of
Directors.
 1.
 Serves 
as
vo1ng
 member
 of
 the
 Board
upon
 comple1on
 of
 his 
 or
 her
 term
 of
 office
 as
 E.
 Membership
Secretary
 President.
 1.
 Is 
appointed
by
 the
 Board
for
 a
term
of
 one
 2.
 Acts 
 as 
 the
 Liaison
 Officer
 with
 TESOL
 and
 year.
 other
professional
organiza1ons.
 2.
 Keeps
 an
 up‐to‐date
 membership
 list
 for
 3.
 Receives
 a 
 life1me
 membership
 in
 PRTESOL
 purposes 
of
correspondence,
dissemina1on
of
 with
 the 
approval 
of
 the 
Board
before 
his
or
 informa1on,
 distribu1on
 of
 the
 PRTESOL‐ her
comple1on
of
term
of
office
as
President. GRAM,
 for
 use
 in
 determining
 the 
 vo1ng
 4.
 Chairs
 the
 Bylaws 
 and
 Policy
 Manual
 membership
for
all 
elec1ons 
and
for
valida1ng
 commiWee.
 pe11ons.
 5.
 Should
 this
 office
 become 
 vacant,
 it
 shall
 3.
 Presents 
an
annual 
membership
report,
which
 remain
 vacant
 un1l
 the 
 current
 President
 shall 
include
informa1on
on
the 
geographical
 completes 
 her/his 
 term
 of
 office.
 
 In
 such
 and
 professional
 distribu1on
 of
 the
 cases
 the
 President
 shall 
 assume
 the
 membership.
 This
report
 will
be
presented
to
 responsibili1es
of
Liaison
Officer. the
Board
 and
to
the
Nomina1ng
CommiWee
 Chair.
 C.
 Vice‐President 4.
 Prepares
the
mailing
of
correspondence
to
all
 1.
 Succeeds
to
 the 
presidency
 upon
comple1on
 members. of
the
current
President’s
term
of
office. 5.
 Organizes 
 the 
 registra1on
 of
 the
 Annual
 2.
 Shall
act
as
President
whenever
the
President
 Conven1on.
 is 
 absent.
 If
 the
 posi1on
 of
 Vice‐
 President
 6.
 Confirms
 membership
 by
 issuing
 a 
 valid
 should
 become
 vacant
 before
 June 
 30,
 a
 membership
 card
 to
 all
 members
 and
 is
 18 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 19. P R T E S O L G R A M responsible
 for
 sending
 renewal
 no1ces 
to
 I.
 Webmaster members
 to
 remind
 them
 to
 send
 in
 their
 1.
 Manages
and
monitors
the
web
site. membership
dues. 2.
 Keeps
 the
 membership
 informed
 on
 the
 7.
 Supplies 
 regional 
 chapter
 presidents
 with
 Organiza1on’s
ac1vi1es. up‐to‐date
 lists 
 of
 members 
 in
 their
 3.
 Provides 
basic
 documents 
and
 ar1cles
 that
 corresponding
regions
at
least
twice
a
year. can
be
downloaded
by
the
membership.
 8.
 is 
responsible 
 for
 1)
 valida1ng
 pe11ons 
to
 4.
 Polls
the
members
on
issues
of
importance. amend
 the
 Bylaws,
 2)
 distribu1ng
 such
 5.
 Makes 
 provisions
 to
 assure
 ownership
 by
 pe11ons 
 to
 the 
 Board,
 and
 3)
 mailing
 PRTESOL
of
said
web
site
domain. proposed
amendments
to
the
membership. 9.
 Chairs
the
Membership
CommiWee. J.
 Publishers’
Liaison 10.
 As 
an
appointed
member
of
 the
Board,
the
 1.
 Shall,
 on
a
regular
 basis,
 be
responsible 
for
 Membership
 Secretary
 has
 a 
 voice
 but
 no
 making
 recommenda1ons
 to
 the
 Execu1ve
 vote
on
the
Board
of
Directors.
 Board
regarding
its 
rela1onship
with
current
 publishing
 companies 
who
 collaborate 
with
 F.
 ExecuHve
Secretary
 the
Organiza1on
and
with
other
prospec1ve
 1.
 Is 
 appointed
 by
 the
 Board
 for
 a 
 one‐year
 sectors 
 of
 industry
 wishing
 to
 become
 term.
 involved
in
PRTESOL.
 2.
 Records 
the
minutes 
of
all 
mee1ngs;
no1fies
 2.
 Makes 
 recommenda1ons
 to
 the
 Board
 of
 the
Board
 and
 the
membership
of
 monthly
 Directors
on
exhibi1on
fees,
adver1sing
fees,
 mee1ngs;
 validates 
 the
 receipt
 of
 all
 publisher
 membership
 status,
 and
 on
 any
 correspondence;
 distributes 
 mail 
 to
 the
 other
per1nent
issues. corresponding
 Board
 member(s)
 and,
 with
 the
 consulta1on
 of
 the 
Board,
 responds
to
 K.
 E l e c te d
 Re p re s e n t a H v e s :
 E l e m e n ta r y
 all
leWers.
 Educa1on,
 Secondary
 Educa1on,
 Higher
 3.
 Supplies 
all
new
Board
members 
with
a
copy
 Educa1on,
 Private
 School,
 and
 Student
 of
the
official
PRTESOL
Bylaws.
 Representa1ve.
 4.
 Shall
 supply
 a 
copy
 of
 the
 official 
PRTESOL
 Bylaws 
 to
 any
 member
 of
 PRTESOL
 who
 1.
 The
five
 elected
representa1ves
shall
serve
 requests
one.
 two‐year
 terms.

The
new
members 
shall 
be
 5.
 Oversees,
 in
 coordina1on
 with
 the
 elected
 following
 the
 same
 procedures 
 as
 Nomina1ng
 CommiWee
 and
 the
 President,
 other
elected
officers.
 the
 coun1ng
 of
 the 
annual 
elec1on
 ballots
 and
the
cer1fica1on
of
the
results.
 2.
 Elected
members
may
 serve
 no
more 
than
 6.
 As 
an
appointed
member
of
 the
Board,
the
 two
consecu1ve
terms
in
the
same
office.
 Execu1ve
Secretary
 has 
a 
voice
but
no
vote
 on
the
Board
of
Directors. 3.
 The
 Elementary
 Educa1on,
 Secondary
 7.
 Promo1onal
flyers,
posters,
etc,
should
have
 Educa1on,
 Higher
 Educa1on,
 Private
School,
 the
 PRTESOL
 address
 and
 not
 personal
 and
Student
Representa1ves:
 addresses
because
of
money
issues. a.
 Represent
 the
interests
of
the 
members
 in
their
par1cular
professional
areas;
 G.
 CommunicaHons
Chairperson b.
 Par1cipate
 in
 ac1vi1es
 and/or
 affiliate‐ 1.
 C o o r d i n a t e s 
 t h e
 d i s s e m i n a 1 o n
 o f
 level 
 commiWees
 related
 to
 their
 informa1on
 to
 the 
 membership
 and
 the
 professional
 areas 
and,
 in
 this 
capacity,
 general
public. will
 serve
 on
 affiliate‐level 
 commiWees
 2.
 Chairs
the
Communica1ons
CommiWee. charged
 with
 promo1ng
 and
 judging
 3.
 As 
an
appointed
member
of
 the
Board,
the
 presenta1on
proposals
at
all
professional
 Communica1ons
 Chairperson
 has 
 a
 voice
 ac1vi1es;
 but
no
vote
on
the
Board
of
Directors. c.
 Promote
and
help
organize
ac1vi1es 
and
 presenta1ons 
 for
 members 
 in
 their
 
H.
 PRTESOL‐GRAM
Editor professional
areas;
 1.
 Solicits,
 selects,
 edits,
 and
 publishes
 
d.
 Will
 prepare 
on
 an
 annual
 basis 
up‐to‐ professional 
 ar1cles,
 book
 reviews 
 and
 date
 lists
 of
 all
 members
 in
 their
 informa1on
 of
 interest
 and
 value
 to
 the
 cons1tuency
 based
on
the
Membership
 membership. Secretary’s
mailing
list
and
will 
use
these
 2.
 Solicits
adver1sing
for
the
PRTESOL‐GRAM. lists 
to
ac1vely
recruit
new
members 
and
 3.
 Appoints 
 the
 Assistant
 PRTESOL‐GRAM
 communicate
with
current
members; Editor.
 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 19
  • 20. P R T E S O L - G R A M e.
 Recruit
 possible
 new
 members 
 for
 the
 Board
 mee1ngs
 at
 the
 beginning
 of
 each
 Organiza1on 
through
 the
 promo1on
 of
 year
 either
 through
 a 
 mailing
 or
 in
 the
 different
campaign
ini1a1ves;
 PRTESOL‐GRAM. f.
 Par1cipate
 ac1vely
 on
 the 
 PRTESOL
 6.
 Members 
are
invited
to
aWend
any
mee1ng
 Board
and
its
commiWees;
 of
the
Organiza1on.
 g.
 Assist
 with
 the
 Annual 
Conven1on,
 the
 Summer
 Ins1tute,
 and
 any
 other
 B.
 Quorum:
 professional
 ac1vi1es
 related
 to
 
1.
 Thirty‐five 
 percent
 (35%)
 of
 vo1ng
 Board
 PRTESOL; members
shall
cons1tute
quorum. h.
 Will
 receive
 an
 annual 
 alloca1on
 of
 
2.
 If
 the 
 absence
 of
 quorum
 does
 not
 allow
 money,
 the
 amount
 to
 be
 determined
 holding
 two
 consecu1ve 
 regular
 mee1ngs,
 annually
 by
 the
Board,
 to
 be 
budgeted
 the
 President
 and
 Treasurer
 may
 carry
 on
 for
promo1onal
ac1vi1es,
and
will 
issue
 whatever
 business 
 is 
 necessary
 for
 the
 a 
budget
 report
at
 the
Annual 
Business
 func1oning
of
the
Organiza1on. Mee1ng. L.
 Regional
 Chapter
 President
 and
 Vice
 C.
 ALendance: President:
 1.
 All 
members
of
the
Board
of
Directors
must
 1.
 Are
 elected
 on
 a
 yearly
 basis 
 by
 their
 aWend
the
regular
mee1ngs
of
the
Board.
 chapter
 members 
on
site 
during
the
annual
 2.
 If
a
member
 cannot
 aWend
a 
mee1ng,
s/he
 conven1on. must
inform
the
Execu1ve
Secretary
prior
to
 2.
 Can
 be
 represented
 at
 Board
 mee1ngs
 by
 the
mee1ng,
who
will
then
record
it
 in
the
 the
 Chapter
 Vice‐presidents 
whenever
 the
 minutes
as
Absent‐Excused.
 Chapter
 President
 is 
 unable
 to
 aWend
 a
 3.
 A
 vacancy
 may
 be 
 declared
 if
 a
 vo1ng
 mee1ng.
 The
 Chapter
 Vice‐president
 shall
 member,
 an
 appointed
 member,
 or
 any
 assume
the
voice
 and
 vote 
of
 the 
Chapter
 member
 of
the
board
of
directors
has 
three
 President
at
the
mee1ng.
 (3)
absences
in
a
year
 whether
 or
 not
 they
 are 
excused.
Declaring
a
vacancy
 requires 
a
 M.
 Overall
Responsibility 2/3
vote
of
the
Board.
 1.
 If
a 
board
member
does 
not
comply
with
his
 4.
 Vacancies 
caused
by
 resigna1on
or
declared
 or
 her
 du1es,
 the 
 vo1ng
 board
 members,
 so
by
the
Board
of
Directors 
should
be 
filled
 aeer
 discussion
 and
 vote,
 will
 declare
 the
 by
 this 
body
 to
complete 
the
predecessor’s
 posi1on
vacant
 and
will
vote
for
 or
 appoint
 year
 of
 office.
 
 The
 vacancy
 is 
 then
 another
PRTESOL
member
for
the
posi1on.
 submiWed
once
again
for
 the 
membership’s
 determina1on
 in
 the
 Organiza1on’s 
 next
 electoral
process. XV.
Board
MeeHngs
 5.
 A
 mo1on
 to
 remove
 any
 Board
 Member
 A.
 Regular
MeeHngs:
 from
 office
requires
a
2/3
 vote 
in
 favor
 by
 1.
 There
 will
 be
 from
 6
 to
 8
 board
 mee1ngs
 the
Board
of
Directors.
 per
year.
 A. No
more 
than
four
(4)
hours,
 if
done
on
 D.
 Extraordinary
MeeHngs: Saturday. An
 extraordinary
 mee1ng
 may
 be
 called
 if
 a
 B. Board
 Mee1ngs 
 may
 be
 weekend
 majority
of
the
Board
deems
it
necessary.
 mee1ngs
 (Residen1al).
 The 
 residen1al
 will
 begin
 on
 Friday
 night
 and
 end
 on
 E.
 Annual
Business
MeeHng
 Sunday
by
noon.
Example:
a
weekend
in
 1.
 Prior
 to
the
mee1ng,
 the
membership
shall
 January,
 March,
 June,
 August,
 and
 be
 no1fied
 of
 all
 items 
 of
 business 
 to
 be
 October.
 considered.
 2.
 The
1me
and
 place
of
 all 
regular
 mee1ngs
 2.
 Those
 members 
 present
 shall
 cons1tute 
 a
 are 
determined
at
the
first
mee1ng
presided
 quorum
necessary
to
conduct
the
mee1ng.
 over
by
each
new
President.
 3.
 An
agenda 
is 
made
available 
by
 mail
and/or
 XVI.
 CommiLees
 e‐mail 
 to
 all
 Board
 members
 at
 least
 one
 A.
 DuHes
of
the
CommiLees:
 week
 prior
 to
 the
 regular
 mee1ng
 and
 is
 1.
 NominaHng
CommiLee:
 available
to
any
member
of
the
Organiza1on
 a.
 The
Board
 shall
select
 the
Chair
 of
 the
 upon
request.
 Nomina1ng
 CommiWee,
 and
 the
 Chair
 4.
 Vo1ng
may
not
be
done
by
proxy. selects
 the 
 two
 other
 members 
of
 the
 5.
 The
 membership
 will 
 be
 provided
 a
 commiWee 
 with
 Board
 approval.
 These
 schedule
 of
 the
 1me,
 date,
 and
 place
 of
 three
 members
 shall
 reflect
 the 
 broad
 20 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 21. P R T E S O L - G R A M spectrum
 of
 the
 total 
 membership
 both
 d.
 It
 is 
 responsible 
 for
 the
 call
 for
 papers,
 professionally
 and
 geographically.
 This
 selec1on
 of
 papers,
 and
 programming
 of
 distribu1on
 shall
 be
 based
 on
 the
 the
presenta1ons. membership
 report
 of
 the 
 Membership
 e.
 It
 is 
 responsible 
 for
 overseeing
 the
 Secretary.
 crea1on
and
prin1ng
of
the
program.
 b.
 Its 
members
may
 not
be
members 
of
the
 Board
nor
candidates
for
a
board
posi1on.
 4.
 CommunicaHons
CommiLee
 c.
 Its 
 members
 shall 
be
 confirmed
 no
 later
 a.
 Will
 be 
 chaired
 by
 the 
 Communica1ons
 than
March.
 Chairperson,
 who
shall 
be 
appointed
with
 d.
 The
commiWee
shall
oversee:
 the
prin1ng
 the
approval
of
the
Execu1ve
Board. and
 mailing
 of
 the
 call 
 for
 nomina1ons;
 b.
 Is 
composed
of
the 
PRTESOL‐GRAM
editor,
 the
receiving
of
nomina1ons;
 the
prin1ng
 Assistant
Editor,
the 
Webmaster
and
other
 and
mailing
of
the
official 
ballots;
and
the
 interested
members. coun1ng
of
the
ballots.
 c.
 Shall
 oversee 
 the
 appointment
 of
 the
 e.
 The
 commiWee
 establishes 
 the
 slate
 of
 P R T E S O L ‐ G R A M
 E d i t o r
 a n d
 t h e
 candidates
for
the
annual
elec1on.
 Webmaster. f.
 The
commiWee
ac1vely
 iden1fies
poten1al
 d.
 Selects,
 edits,
 and
 publishes 
 ar1cles
 and
 candidates
for
the
Board
of
Directors. news
 of
 interest
 and
 value 
 to
 the
 g.
 The
 commiWee,
 verbally
 and
 through
 membership.
 This
 may
 include
 financial
 wriWen
 communica1on,
 familiarizes
 all
 a n d
 m e m b e rs h i p
 r e p o r t s 
 o n
 t h e
 nominees
 with
 the
 du1es 
of
 their
 office
 Organiza1on. and
 the 
 requirements 
 and
 restric1ons
 e.
 The
 PRTESOL‐GRAM
 is 
published
 at
 least
 imposed
 by
 the
 Bylaws 
 prior
 to
 their
 twice
a
year
while 
other
publica1ons,
such
 acceptance
as
nominees. as 
 the
 Bulle1n
 from
 the
 Board,
 will 
 be
 h.
 The
 commiWee
 no1fies 
the 
Board
 of
 the
 published
as
needed.
 slate
at
 least
 sixty
 days
before 
the
Annual
 Conven1on. 5.
 Award
and
Scholarship
CommiLee
 i.
 The
 commiWee 
 oversees
 the
 mailing
 of
 a.
 This 
 commiWee
 is
 responsible
 for
 ballots 
 with
 the
 slate 
 of
 candidates
 and
 iden1fying
outstanding
language 
students,
 their
 biographical 
 informa1on
 to
 every
 te a c h e rs ,
 o r
 s c h o l a rs
 w i t h i n
 t h e
 m e m b e r,
 a s 
 d e t e r m i n e d
 b y
 t h e
 membership
of
PRTESOL.
 Membership
 Secretary,
 at
 least
 forty‐five
 b.
 It
 should
establish
 criteria 
for
 the 
awards
 days
before
the
Annual
Conven1on.
 and
 grants 
 which
 provide
 recogni1on
 to
 j.
 All 
ballots
shall
provide 
a 
space
for
a
write‐ the
above
individuals. in
candidate
for
each
posi1on.
 c.
 It
 should
 seek
 sources
 of
 funding
 and
 support
for
these
awards
and
grants. 2.
 Membership
CommiLee d.
 It
should
encourage 
PRTESOL
members
to
 a.
 This 
 commiWee
 is
 responsible
 for
 apply
 for
awards 
and
grants 
by
 publicizing
 promo1ng
the
Organiza1on
and
recrui1ng
 them
in
mailings. members.
 e.
 It
should
establish
and
carry
out
the
norms
 b.
 It
 maintains 
 an
 updated
 membership
 for
 reviewing
 and
 selec1ng
 the 
recipients
 roster. of
the
awards
and
grants. c.
 It
 is
 responsible
 for
 an
 annual
 renewal
 f.
 It
 should
 inform
 both
 the
 Board
 and
 drive
 to
 draw
 new
 members 
 to
 the
 membership
 of
 the 
 names 
 of
 the
 Organiza1on. recipients
of
these
awards
and
grants. d.
 It
 is 
responsible 
for
 designing
recruitment
 materials.
 6.
 CommiLee
on
the
Bylaws
 a.
 Between
 the
 announcement
 of
 the 
 new
 3.
 Program
CommiLee
 Board
 at
 the 
annual
 conven1on
 and
 the
 a.
 This 
 commiWee
 is
 responsible 
 for
 the
 first
 mee1ng
 of
 the
 New
 Board,
 this
 prepara1on
of
the
program
for
the
Annual
 commiWee 
 will 
 discuss 
 the
 PRTESOL
 Conven1on. Bylaws 
and
provide 
orienta1on
to
prepare
 b.
 It
 provides 
 a 
 printed
 program
 of
 the
 new
 Board
 members 
to
 fulfill 
their
 roles
 conven1on
 and
 collects 
 copies 
 of
 the
 on
 the
 Board.
 The
 Immediate
 Past‐ papers
presented.
 President
shall
chair
this
commiWee. c.
 It
 shall
 maintain
 a 
 list
 of
 speakers,
 b.
 The 
 commiWee
 shall
 also
 periodically
 consultants,
 and
 workshop
 leaders
 who
 assess 
or
evaluate
the
Bylaws 
for
 possible
 have
 appeared,
 or
 may
 par1cipate,
 in
 improvement
and
discrepancies.
 programs
sponsored
by
the
Organiza1on.
 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 21
  • 22. P R T E S O L - G R A M 7.
 Socio‐PoliHcal
Concerns
CommiLee
 Communica1ons
 Chairperson;
 and
 the
 a.
 This 
 commiWee
 is
 responsible
 for
 C o m m i W e e 
 o n
 t h e 
 B y l a w s
 t h e
 exploring,
 iden1fying
 and
 informing
 Immediate
Past
President.
 about
 per1nent
 issues
 that
 affect
 3.
 CommiWee
 Chairpersons 
 select
 and
 teachers,
students,
and
ESL
and
bilingual
 present
 to
 the
 Board
 for
 approval
 the
 educa1on
programs
in
Puerto
Rico. names 
 of
 their
 proposed
 commiWee
 b.
 It
should
plan
workshops,
panels,
and/or
 members
no
later
 than
thirty
 days 
aeer
 conferences
concerning
these
issues.
 their
appointment
as
chairperson.
 c.
 It
 should
 publish
 and
 educate
 u1lizing
 4.
 Chairpersons 
 of
 Standing
 CommiWees
 t h e
 P R T E S O L ‐ G R A M
 a n d
 t h e
 should
 present
 a 
periodic
 report
 to
the
 Organiza1on’s 
 other
 official
 publica1on
 Board.
 instruments. d.
 It
 should
 gather
 informa1on
 about
 XVII.
 Expenses
 per1nent
legisla1on
and
assist
the
Board
 A.
 The
 Board
 of
 Directors 
 authorizes 
 the 
 in
developing
policy
statements. compensa1on
 of
 all
 services
 deemed
 necessary
 for
 the 
 reasonable 
 conduct
 of
 8.
 ConvenHon
EvaluaHon
CommiLee
 the
Organiza1on’s
goals.
 a.
 The
PRTESOL
 Board
 of
 Directors 
selects
 B.
 The 
 President
 and
 the
 Treasurer
 are 
 the
 Chair
 of
 the 
Conven1on
 Evalua1on
 authorized
to
pay
regular
expenses
that
are
 CommiWee.
 Its 
 members
 exclude
 any
 below
 the
 amount
 established
 by
 the
 current
 members 
of
 the
 Board
 and
 all
 Board
 of
 Directors 
 each
 year.
 Amounts
 current
 candidates
wishing
to
run
for
 a
 above 
that
 require
the
Board
of
Directors’
 board
posi1on. approval.
 b.
 T h e 
 c o m m i W e e 
 o v e r s e e s 
 t h e
 C.
 As 
the
financial 
officer,
 the
Treasurer
 pays 
 d eve l o p m e nt
 o f
 t h e 
 co nve n 1 o n
 all 
uncontested
 bills
 within
 thirty
 days
 of
 evalua1on
instrument,
 the
prin1ng
 and
 receipt.
 distribu1on
 of
 the 
 instrument,
 and
 its
 D.
 The 
 membership
 may
 ques1on
 the 
 collec1on
at
the
conven1on. expenditures 
 at
 any
 regular
 or
 business
 c.
 The
commiWee 
tabulates 
and
reports
to
 mee1ng
and
demand
an
accoun1ng
of
the
 the
Board
of
Directors
the 
results 
of
the
 finances. evalua1ons 
 concerning
 the
 conven1on
 E.
 The
 membership
 dues
 will 
 be 
 used
 and
the
performance
of
presenters.
 exclusively
 to
 provide
 services
 to
 the
 members
such
as:
membership
card
and/or
 9.
 Sponsorship
CommiLee cer1ficate,
 publica1ons,
 promo1onal
 a.
 This 
 commiWee
 is
 responsible
 for
 documents 
related
to
conferences,
elec1on
 obtaining
 dona1ons 
 and
 sponsorships
 ballots,
and
any
other
mailing. for
the
Organiza1on
and
the 
conven1on.
 F.
 An
 audited
 Financial
 Report
 will 
 be 
 It
 will 
also
assist
in
solici1ng
adver1sing
 submiWed
to
the
Board
of
Directors 
by
 the
 for
the
organiza1on’s
publica1ons. end
of
each
year. G.
 At
 the
 end
 of
 each
 term,
 the
 officers 
 10.
 Special
Interest
Group
CommiLees (President,
 Past
 President
 and/or
 Vice
 a.
 They
 may
 be
 created
 to
 serve
 specific
 President)
 will 
 update
 all
 paperwork
 needs.
 concerning
 the
 Good
 Standing
 status 
 of
 b.
 They
 will 
 present
 a 
 statement
 of
 PRTESOL,
 Department
 of
 State,
 and
 purpose
and
report
periodically
on
their
 Treasury
 Department,
 or
 any
 other
 ac1vi1es.
 document
requested
by
the
State. H.
 Board
 members 
 that
 travel 
 from
 distant
 C.
 CommiLee
Chairpersons
 areas
to
aWend
board
mee1ngs 
will 
receive
 1.
 All 
 of
 the
 chairpersons
 of
 standing
 a 
 flat
 rate 
 s1pend
 for
 gas 
 and
 tolls.
 The
 commiWees 
 shall
 be
 appointed
 from
 amount
will
be
determined
by
the 
Board
of
 among
 the
 Board
Members 
except
 the
 Directors
at
the
beginning
of
each
year.
The
 Nomina1ng
CommiWee 
and
Sponsorship
 amount
 will
 depend
 on
 the 
 financial
 CommiWee.

 situa1on
of
the
organiza1on. 2.
 The
 Chairpersons 
 of
 the 
 following
 I.
 The
 President
 and
 Vice‐President’s
 trip
 to
 Standing
 CommiWees
 are:
 Membership
 the
Annual 
TESOL
 Conven1on
will 
include:
 CommiWee
 the
 Membership
 Secretary;
 fl i g h t
 1 c k e t ,
 h o t e l 
 s t a y,
 m e a l s ,
 Program
CommiWee
the
Vice‐President;
 transporta1on,
 and
 conven1on
 fee.
 The
 C o m m u n i c a 1 o n s
 C o m m i W e e 
 t h e
 s1pend
 will 
 depend
 on
 the
 financial
 22 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 23. P R T E S O L - G R A M situa1on
of
 the 
organiza1on.
 The 
President
 O.
 All 
 documents 
 related
 to
 a
 chapter
 and
Vice‐President
will
submit
all
receipts.
 conference
(flyer,
registra1on
fee,
preliminary
 program)
 will
 be 
submiWed
 to
 the
 Board
 of
 XVIII.
 Regional
Chapters
 Directors
at
least
two
months
in
advance. A.
 Each
 Chapter
 shall
 elect
 its 
 own
 governing
 P.
 The
 Chapter
 Board
 will
 prepare
 an
 annual
 body
 at
 the
PRTESOL
 Annual 
Conven1on.
 
 It
 budget
that
will
be
submiWed
to
the
Board
of
 will
 consist
 of
 at
 least
 a 
 President,
 Vice‐ Directors
 for
 approval 
 at
 the
 first
 Board
 President,
and
Treasurer. Mee1ng. B.
 The
 officers
 will
 exercise 
 their
 func1ons 
 in
 harmony
 with
 those 
of
 PRTESOL
 and
 in
 line
 with
the
spirit
of
the
Bylaws.
 C.
 Chapters 
 should
 organize 
 annually
 at
 least
 XIX.
 Policy
Manual one 
professional 
ac1vity
 to
serve
local
needs;
 The
 Board
 of
 Directors
 shall
 ini1ally
 establish
 it
 may
 be
 a 
 conference,
 a 
 symposium,
 addi1onal 
 procedures
 and
 policies 
 for
 the
 colloquium,
 workshop,
 seminar,
 luncheon,
 opera1on
of
PRTESOL.
These
shall 
be 
referred
to
 dinner,
or
ou1ng.
 as 
 the
 PRTESOL
 Policy
 Manual.
 
 They
 shall
 be
 D.
 Each
 governing
 body
 should
 meet
 according
 amended
 thereaeer
 in
 accordance
 with
 the
 to
chapter
needs.
 procedures
established
in
the
Policy
Manual.
 E.
 New
 chapters 
 will 
 receive
 a
 s1pend
 to
 underwrite 
start‐up
costs.
This
s1pend
will 
be
 determined
by
the
Board
of
Directors. Ra#fied
at
the
 F.
 Each
 chapter
 will 
 receive
 an
 appropriate
 Annual
Business
Assembly
 annual
s1pend
in
compliance
with
the
Bylaws.
 of
PRTESOL
at
the
 The
amount
will 
be
determined
by
 the
Board
 35th
annual
conven#on
on
 of
Directors. Friday
November
21,
2008. G.
 Financial
 and
 chapter
 reports 
 will
 be
 submiWed
 in
 wri1ng
 to
 the 
 execu1ve
 secretary
 at
 the 
mee1ng,
 or
 sent
 through
e‐ mail
a
week
before
the
Board
mee1ng.
 H.
 A
chapter
may
 be 
decer1fied
by
the
PRTESOL
 Board
of
Directors 
for
failure
to
adhere
to
the
 Bylaws
of
PRTESOL. I.
 A
yearly
 financial
and
membership
report
will
 be
 presented
 to
 the
 PRTESOL
 Board
 and
 to
 the
chapter
 members 
at
 the
annual 
mee1ng
 that
is
held
during
the
PRTESOL
Conven1on. J.
 A
 copy
 of
 the 
financial 
documents 
from
 the
 bank
 will 
 be 
 submiWed
 to
 the
 PRTESOL
 Treasurer
and
to
the 
new
chapter
president
at
 the
end
of
the
year. K.
 Each
 chapter
 should
 have
 a
 bank
 account
 under
 its
 name
 and
 not
 under
 a 
 personal
 account.
This 
will
guarantee
that
 the 
chapter
 may
 charge
a
fee
for
 their
 ac1vity,
 exhibitors,
 and
to
request
sponsorship. L.
 Each
 chapter
 must
 have
an
Execu1ve
Board:
 President,
 Past
 President,
 Vice‐President,
 Secretary,
 Treasurer,
 and
 Membership
 Secretary.
 In
 Addi1on,
 the
 chapter
 may
 include
 the
 following
 representa1ves:
 Member‐at‐Large,
 Secondary
 Representa1ve,
 Elementary
 Representa1ve,
 Private
 School
 Representa1ve,
 and
 Higher
 Educa1on
 Representa1ve. M.
 If
 a
chapter
 receives 
a 
s1pend
 but
 does 
not
 celebrate 
 any
 ac1vity
 for
 its 
 members,
 the
 chapter
will 
return
the 
money
to
the
Board
of
 Directors,
 no
 later
 than
 a 
 month
 aeer
 the
 scheduled
conference. Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 23
  • 24. P R T E S O L - G R A M True progress is bilingualism for all: most educated people in the world have- an A response to Porter’s plenary address opportunity to know a second language and become at the 2008 PR TESOL Conference* aware of another culture both through academic pursuits and acquaintance with international children. Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth, PhD Krashen (2004) reviewed several recent studies on bilingual programs and cautions that while results to Plenary speaker Rosalie Porter’s date are promising, more information is needed on two characterization of bilingual education as a recent way bilingual programs to judge them relative to other experiment that prevented immigrants from learning bilingual models. The Oyster School in Washington English is not accurate. Her suggestion that ESL is an DC (Freeman, 1998) which teaches in Spanish and alternative to bilingual education sets up a false English is one of the most well known, but many exist. dichotomy. And finally, her claim that the elimination of The Dual Language and Asian Studies High School in bilingual programs has resulted in “progress” and New York City develops Chinese, learners’ first success for English learners is contrary to the facts. language, while teaching them English and teaches Actually, the value of bilingual education in promoting English-speaking students Mandarin. Ranked 31 on successful acquisition of the second language (English the U.S. News & World Report’s list of top high US in the US) and the benefits of knowing more than one high schools (Stotsky, 2008), every student in the first language have been replicated in scientific studies not two graduating classes has gone to college, except for only in the US but in research on a global scale. one who joined the military. However, despite her acknowledgement that the dual model is successful, Defining and Designing Bilingual Education Porter dismisses it as a possibility for US immigrants, First and foremost, as indicated by the name of the ostensibly because ELL’s change schools more construct, bilingual education involves the frequently than natives do. There is no logic to this acquisition of two languages and has been going on argument. By the same reasoning, we should not the in US since the country began (Kloss, 1998). In the expose children to an innovative approach to learning mainland US context, one of these languages is math or science because other schools do it English and the other is the mother tongue of the differently. In reality, children who arrive in new learner. While some programs for immigrants may schools continue to adjust to changes in programs and exist that do not actually expose learners to English policies which should always be the best that we can input, these are not bilingual programs- they are offer. And many children remain in the same school monolingual programs. So Porter and I agree that any and district throughout their education. US program that fails to teach students English should Another term, sometimes associated with be changed. Indeed, Porter framed her discussion by bilingual education, is immersion. This refers to noting that when mainland Latinos were asked teaching children in a single language. It is the “sink or whether they want their children to learn English they swim” approach recommended by groups espousing responded with a resounding “yes.” What she failed to an “English only” policy. In Canada, the term was point out is that there is overwhelming evidence that associated with schools that taught native English the most effective way for non-natives to acquire speakers exclusively in French. These mostly middle English is through bilingual programs. class students from literate English speaking Another important issue ignored by the speaker backgrounds who lived in an English dominant society is the fact that in designing a bilingual program for learned French in school and developed English learners, there are many models to choose from. The language and literacy outside of school, what Krashen major categories include transitional bilingual (2003) calls “de facto bilingual education.” The education, maintenance bilingual education, and 2- Canadian French learners had continual English input way or dual immersion programs. Under each of these and were motivated to retain and develop their English umbrellas many additional options are possible. All as it was the more powerful language in the country. bilingual programs begin by presenting some content However, for immigrant populations in the US, English in the native tongue while developing the learners’ immersion is a very different experience. Their first command of English. The transitional model initially language input is limited and English is the language provides both L1 and L2 instruction using a biliterate of power and prestige. The result is first language loss approach and shifts to an all English program over and limitations on English acquisition as learners must time, usually just a few years (Crawford, 1999). wait until their English is strong enough to use it as a Maintenance bilingual programs increase learning medium of content learning. through English as learners’ acquisition moves forward The term immersion must be distinguished from while developing academic language and literacy in bilingual immersion which uses both languages. the mother tongue. The additive value of such Interestingly, in her text Forked Tongue (1990) and in programs, also referred to as “late exit” have also the handout for her talk Porter mentions the Bilingual been confirmed in the research (Ramirez et al, 1991; Immersion Pilot Project in El Paso, Texas. In this Thomas and Collier, 2002). study, half the students were enrolled in a transitional This brings us to the 2-way bilingual or ‘dual’ bilingual program and the other half in a ‘bilingual model and a second area of agreement with Porter immersion’ program. Porter writes in her book, quot;The who believes this is a positive approach. Dual bilingual Bilingual Immersion students outscored students in the education helps all participants by giving them what TBE program at every grade level.” However, Dicker 24 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 25. P R T E S O L - G R A M (2003 and personal communication) in her analysis, initially used to attack bilingual education, are major points out that the bilingual immersion program characteristics of the English only programs.” (p.52) actually exposed students to more Spanish than the alternative approach! Hence, contrary to Porter’s The experience of ELL’s in English only classes and implication, the program in which students received what the research actually says. more first language Spanish input resulted in a better outcome! Perhaps the most poignant aspect of Porter’s presentation was her frequent reference to her own The results of the English only mandates experience as an English language learner in an Now we come to what for me was the most English immersion setting. Born in Italy, Porter's first frustrating part of Porter’s talk. She insisted that language was Italian. She came to the United States immigrants in the states in which bilingual programs at the age of 6, knowing no English. She said that sat have been eliminated are now successfully learning in the back of the class not understanding anything English while bilingual programs did not teach them and cried every day when she came home. But in English, the source of the term ‘progress’ in her bilingual programs students don’t need to go through presentation. The facts say otherwise. Ostensible such a traumatic experience. They can start learning short term gains reported for English only approaches and progressing right away using their native have been criticized on several levels. (See Butler et language. Thomas and Colliers (2002) compared a al 2000; Monzo 2005, on California, Wright, 2005 on range of treatments for English language learners and Arizona, and on MA: Markey, 2008 and Sacchetti,, M., found the following order from most to least successful and Jan, T. 2006 on Massachusetts.) Goldenberg, outcomes: Two way/dual bilingual programs, 2008 notes, maintenance bilingual, transitional bilingual, ESL, and “Local or state policies, such as in California, Arizona, least successful was English immersion which has and Massachusetts, that block use of the primary also been referred to as submersion, in light of its language and limit instructional modifications for devastating impact on learners’ first language, culture, English learners are simply not based on the best and self esteem. scientific evidence available. Moreover, these policies Since then several meta-analyses have make educators’ jobs more difficult, which is reviewed research studies on bilingual vs. unconscionable under any circumstance, but monolingual approaches to educating English learners especially egregious in light of the increased on the in local and international contexts: all have accountability pressures they and their students reached the same conclusion: Students in bilingual face” (pp42-23). programs have better outcomes in learning English, Let us consider the vote in Massachusetts literacy skills and content while reaping cognitive and energetically promoted by Porter, widely known as economic benefits, and retaining the advantage of “Question 2.” Its mandate is as follows: All children . . . knowing an additional language and culture (Krashen shall be taught English by being taught in English and & McField, 2005; Goldenberg, 2008). all children shall be placed in English language classrooms. Children who are English learners shall A final note: be educated through sheltered English immersion Amazingly absent from Porter’s entire talk was during a temporary transition period not normally a consideration of ESL and bilingual education in the intended to exceed one school year. (Question 2 Puerto Rican context where English is typically a Section 4 of G.L. c. 71A) foreign language, or where an alternative variety of First, the idea that English learners can acquire Puerto Rican English exists for bilinguals (Fayer et al., sufficient English to function successfully in 1998). Is Porter suggesting that immigrants and return mainstream classes after only one year of ESL migrants to the island be placed in Spanish instruction is simply preposterous. While some highly immersion? Would she suggest duplicating the loss of educated non-native speakers may find this time language engendered by the English only policy she period sufficient for a reasonable transition, most espouses? immigrant students require a much longer transition And what would Porter’s recommendation be period which researchers find may range from 3-7 for Puerto Ricans who have migrated to the mainland years, depending on the circumstances (Genesee et US? Although Puerto Ricans are US citizens, Brisk al., 2006). Students must learn not only conversational (2006) points out that they are often treated as English but also must become familiar with academic immigrants by the general American public. And English, the language, the constructs, and the abstract furthermore, attacks on bilingualism are directed cognitive approach involved in academics (Cummins, mainly against immigrants of Spanish speaking 2000). The best that can be said of a one year background. approach is that it is probably better than nothing and In Puerto Rico, my home away from home, I will help some children while leaving many others to am proud that my friends, colleagues, and extended flounder in a setting in which they cannot succeed. family live in a place where a second language is Furthermore, Brisk (2006) notes that “infringement on taught to everyone from the beginning of schooling. local and parental control, two of the arguments Our goal should not be to eliminate bilingualism. Rather, in Puerto Rico and on the mainland, we Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 25
  • 26. P R T E S O L - G R A M should continue to work with researchers, teachers, and Question 2 ,Section 4 of G.L. c. 71A curriculum developers to improve our language teaching www.doe.mass.edu/ell/chapter71A_faq.pdf Retrieved and give all learners the gift of two languages. That’s from the Internet, December 20, 2008. progress. Ramírez, J. David; Yuen, S.; & Ramey, D. (1991). *Acknowledgement Final Report: Longitudinal Study of Structured I want to thank several colleagues who have helped me Immersion Strategy, Early-Exit, and Late-Exit with references and thoughts including: Angel Arzan, Transitional Bilingual Education Programs for Language- Theresa Austin, James Crawford, Sue Dicker, Timothy Minority Children. San Mateo, Calif.: Aguirre Ebsworth, Kate Menken, and Stephen Krashen. International. Sacchetti,, M., & Jan, T. (2006, May 21). Bilingual law fails first test: Most students not References learning English quickly. The Boston Globe. Retrieved Brisk, M. (2006). Bilingual Education: From December 28, 2008 Compensatory to Quality Schooling. Mahwah, NJ: http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/ Erlbaum. 2006/05/21/bilingual_law fails first test/ Butler,Y., Orr,J., Gutierrez M., & Hakuta,K (2000) Stotsky, S. (2008) School with ESL students Inadequate conclusions from an inadequate ranked with nation’s elite. Downtown Express. 21:33. assessment: What can SAT9 scores tell us about the Retrieved from the Internet Dec 20, 2008. impact of proposition 227 in California?: Bilingual Thomas, W., & Collier, V. (2002). A National Research Journal. 24:1-2, 141-216. Study of School Effectiveness forLanguage Minority Crawford, J. 1999. Bilingual Education: History, Students’ Long-Term Academic Achievement. Santa Politics, Theory & Practice, 4th Ed. Los Angeles, CA: Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: Center for Research on Bilingual Education Services., Inc. Education, Diversity & Excellence Crawford, J. (1996) Revisiting the Lau Decision – Wright, W. (2005) English language learners left 20 Years After: Proceedings of a National behind in Arizona. The nullification of accommodations Commemorative Symposium Held on November 3-4, in the intersection of federal and state policies. Bilingual 1994, in San Francisco, California . Oakland, CA: ARC Research Journal, 29: 1, 1-29 Associates. . Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and Writing quotations Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. If you would not be forgotten, Dicker, S. (2003) Languages in America: A as soon as you are rotten, Pluralist View (2nd edition). Clevedon: Multilingual either write things worth reading Matters. or do things worth the writing. Fayer,J., Castro, J., Marta Díaz, M. & Plata, M Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790) (1998). English in Puerto Rico. English Today, 14, 39-44. Freeman, R. (1998) Bilngual Education and No race can prosper till it learns that Social Change. Clevedon:UK: Multilingual Matters there is as much dignity in tilling a Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W., & field as in writing a poem. Christian, D. 2006. Educating Booker T. Washington (1856 - 1915) English Language Learners. New York: Cambridge University Press. Detail makes the difference between Goldenberg, C. (2008) Teaching English boring and terrific writing. language learners: What the research does and does It’s the difference between a pencil not say. American Educator. 80-23, 42-44. sketch and a lush oil painting. Kloss, H. (1998). The American Bilingual As a writer, words are your paint. Use Tradition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. all the colors. Krashen, S. (2003) Condemned without a Trial: Rhys Alexander, Writing Gooder, 12-09-05 Bogus Arguments against Bilingual Education Westport CT: Greenwood Press True glory consists in doing what Krashen, S. (2004). The Acquisition of Academic deserves to be written; English by children in two-way programs: What does the in writing what deserves to be read; research say? Presented at the annual NABE and in so living as to make the world Conference, Albuquerque, NM http://sdkrashen.com/ happier for our living in it. articles/the_2-way_issue/all.html Retrieved from the Pliny The Elder (23 AD - 79 AD) Internet Jan 12, 2009. Krashen, S. & McField, G. (2005) What works? There are three rules for writing the Reviewing the latest evidence on bilingual education. novel. Unfortunately, no one knows Language Learner. 7-10, 24 what they are. Monzo, L. (2005) The aftermath of proposition Somerset Maugham, 227. Bilingual Research Journal, 29:2, 365-386 The New York T imes Book Review, Porter, R. P. (1990). Forked Tongue: The Politics September 30, 1984 of Bilingual Education. New York: Basic Books 26 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org
  • 27. P R T E S O L - G R A M 2008 PRTESOL FINANCIAL REPORT Amount EXPENSES 2008 Awards $992.14 Bank Fees $501.80 Chapter Stipends $2500.14 Department of State Fee (Hacienda) $616.00 Lunch - Monthly Board & Executive Board Meetings $1523.46 PRTESOL Equipment $1352.12 President's Trip to Convention $3065.84 Photocopies $459.34 Publications $3987.75 Summer Institute $400.00 Telephone Calls $78.80 Global TESOL International Dues $300.00 U.S. Postal Service (Box, Fees, Postage) $1376.74 Office Supplies $2376.99 Travel Expenses $739.45 Board Shirts $689.08 PRTESOL Insurance Policy $563.00 Dom. Rep. Out Reach $1000.00 TOTAL $22522.65 CONVENTION EXPENSES Convention Site – Gran Melia of PR $41616.06 Flowers $155.00 Banners $356.31 Caribe Audio Visual $2255.00 Convention Entertainment $150.00 Programs $1605.00 Student Usher’s $189.10 Subtotal $46326.47 Total $68849.12 Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages PUERTO RICO AFFILIATE General information on Banks Accounts INCOME Beginning Balance 01/31/08 $27634.52 Onsite income $12594.60 Membership Dues $6780.00 Exhibitor Fees $23125.00 Pre-Registration $12950.00 Total $55449.60 Total Balance 83084.12 Expenses 68849.12 Ending Balance 14235.00 Pending Income Park-Ville School $680.00 TOTAL 680.00 Respectfully Submitted Enrique Chaparro Ramos José R. Sellas Aponte 2008 PRTESOL Treasurer 2008 PRTESOL President February 1st, 2009 February 1st, 2009 Visit www.puertoricotesol.org 27
  • 28. P R T E S O L - G R A M Nonprofit PRTESOL Organization P. O. Box 366828 US Postage San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936 -6828 PAID San Juan, PR Permit 3329 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED PRTESOL VOLUME 35, Issue 2, Fall 2008 MARK YOUR CALENDAR FOR PRTESOL EVENTS IN 2009 (dates and locations are tentative) MARCH 7 JUNE 6: SEPTEMBER 26: SPECIAL SESSION: SUMMER INSTITUTE, SOUTHERN CONFERENCE, BRAIN BASED LEARNING, Ponce UPR Aguadilla Ponce MARCH 14: AUGUST 22: OCTOBER 3: NORTHERN CONFERENCE, CAGUAS CONFERENCE, METRO CONFERENCE, Escuela Libre de Música, Caguas IAU Bayamón IAU Arecibo


 APRIL 18: SEPTEMBER 12: NOVEMBER 20-21 WESTERN CONFERENCE, UPR EASTERN CONFERENCE, 36 ANNUAL CONVENTION Mayagüez Fajardo