Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English

232 Research in the Teaching of English Volume 41 November 2006SWANSON, T. J., HODSON, B. W., & SCHOMMER-AIKINS, M. (2005). An examination of phonologicalawareness treatment outcomes for seventh-grade poor readers from a bilingual community.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(4), 336-345.THUNE, E., BAZZANELLA, C., & LEONARDI, S. (2006). Gender, language and new literacy: A multilingualanalysis. London: Continuum International.UCHIKOSHI, Y. (2005). Narrative development in bilingual kindergarteners: Can Arthur help?Developmental Psychology, 41(3), 464-478.VAN SLUYS, K. (2006). “Seeing the possibilities”: Learning from, with, and about multilingualclassroom communities. Language Arts, 83(4), 321-331.VAUGHN, S., LINAN-THOMPSON, S., & MATHES, P. G. (2006). Effectiveness of Spanish interventionfor first-grade English language learners at risk for reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities,39(1), 56-73.VILLALVA, K. E. (2006). Hidden literacies and inquiry approaches of bilingual high school writers.Written Communication, 23(1), 91-129.YOUNG, T. A., & HADAWAY, N. L. (EDS.). (2006). Supporting the literacy development of Englishlearners: Increasing success in all classrooms. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.ZENTELLA, A. C. (ED.). (2005). Building on strengths: Language and literacy in Latino families andcommunities. New York: Teachers College Press.ZHA, S., KELLY, P., & PARK, M. K. (2006). An investigation of communicative competence of ESLstudents using electronic discussion boards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,38(30), 349-367.Technology/MediaAUSTIN, E. W., CHEN, Y., PINKLETON, B. E., & JOHNSON, J. Q. (2006). Benefits and costs of ChannelOne in a middle school setting and the role of media-literacy training. Pediatrics, 117(3), 423-433.Compares instructional effects of media analysis on middle-school students’ understanding ofChannel One programming—with some students receiving media analysis instruction versus acontrol group that did not receive instruction. Finds that students in all groups remember moreads than news stories. Students receiving instruction recall more news stories and ads and viewedthe ads from a more critical perspective than control group students; about a third of the studentsthought that the school had control over the ads. Suggests the need for media-literacyinstruction in conjunction with using Channel One programming.BEEGHLY, D. G. (2005). It’s about time: Using electronic literature discussion groups with adultlearners. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(1), 12-21.Investigates how 40 graduate students’ participation in Blackboard online discussions aboutteaching YA literature affects their discourse and learning. Finds that discussing a book onlineover a period of time enhances both their individual understandings and the quality of theirgroup’s discussion due to time for reflection and organizing thoughts before posting discussionitems. Attributes some of the success of the online discussions to face-to-face support in class.BLACK, A. (2005). The use of asynchronous discussion: Creating a text of talk. ContemporaryIssues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(1), 5-24.Reports on the use of asynchronous discussion as part of a college-level literacy course. Notesthat this preferred discussion form creates a “text of talk” of students’ reflection and scaffolding.Cautions that although this text of talk that has the potential to promote reflection, given theresponse time and removal of the instructor as the dominant presence as in face-to-face discussions,instructors need to structure online discussions to promote both communication and