Interview A Registered Nurse From Georgia University...

In order to gain insight on the most frequently seen healthcare problem, I chose to interview a registered nurse from Georgia Regents Medical Center, Mrs. Denead Buoy RN, MSN. I chose this medical provider because she has had experience in her field for seventeen years. During the interview, I gained valuable information about a disease that she mentioned she sees commonly in her in-patient unit. The disease she noted was diabetes mellitus. During the interview, she gave me information about the disease in terms of its causes, its frequency, and the reason she decided to identity this disease. When speaking with healthcare provider Denead Buoy, RN, MSN, she explained that diabetes mellitus is a condition in which one has elevated blood glucose levels due to an inadequate insulin production or because the body responds inappropriately to the absorption of insulin into cells. In some patients, both of these options could be the problem. On average there are about 15 patients in her in-patient unit; out of the 15 patients that she gets, usually 8 to 10 either has had a history of diabetes or has diabetes mellitus as their primary problem (D. Buoy, personal communication, October 17, 2014). Buoy stated that even if the disease is not the primary reason they were admitted into the hospital, diabetes is usually related to their primary condition. Diabetes mellitus has a worldwide prevalence of 8.3 percent of the population with the amount of new cases diagnosed per yearShow MoreRelatedInterview With A Registered Nurse From Georgia University Medical Center947 Words   |  4 Pa gesinsight on the most frequently seen healthcare problem, I chose to interview a registered nurse from Georgia Regents Medical Center, Mrs. Denead Buoy RN, MSN. I chose this medical provider because she has had experience in her field for 17 years. During the interview, I gained valuable information about a disease that she stated she sees commonly in her in patient unit. The disease she noted was diabetes mellitus. During the interview she gave me information about the disease in terms of its causesRead MoreMy Career Goal Of Advance Practice Registered Nurse1615 Words   |  7 Pagesconscientious, dedicated and qualified skilled Registered Nurse with 20+ years background, experience within Emergency Department, Medical/Surgical ICU, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, and Case Management setting where a diverse professional skill are utilized with excellent assessment and analytical skills seeking Nurse Corps Scholarship to advance my career goal of Advance Practice Registered Nurse ïÆ'Ëœ Have extensive experience in working with a broad range of medical conditions, patient care demographicsRead MoreThe Career Goal Of Advance Practice Registered Nurse1614 Words   |  7 Pagesconscientious, dedicated and qualified skilled Registered Nurse with 20+ years background, experience within Emergency Department, Medical/Surgical ICU, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and Case Management setting where a diverse professional skill are utilized with excellent assessment and analytical skills seeking Nurse Corps Scholarship to advance my career goal of Advance Practice Registered Nurse ïÆ'Ëœ Have extensive experience in working with a broad range of medical conditions, patient care demographics andRead MoreNursing Essay41677 Words   |  167 Pagesedu/catalog/12956.html THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriateRead MoreImportant Law Enforcement Facts19721 Words   |  79 Pages | |There were 230 police deaths in 2001 nationwide, which represents a 49 percent increase from the 154 officers who died in 2000. | |   | |In 2002 there were 147 police deaths nationwide – a significant decrease from 2001. | |   Read MoreHemp Cultivation in China42289 Words   |  170 Pagesinfluence of Western agricultural advisors, modern cultivation equipment and the introduction of improved hemp varieties. Continued on pg. 60 Shandong cultivation 57 Letters 59 Fiber hemp cultivars 66 Medical Cannabis review 74 New cannabinoid antiemetic 76 Ukranian seed 79 Tasmanian research 82 Interview 86 ICRS symposium 88 Colorado hemp act 92 Canada report 96 Austria report 98 German textiles 101 Book reviews 103 NAIHF 104 Debate Corner 106 Journal of the International Hemp Association, Volume 2Read MoreMasculinity in the Philippines12625 Words   |  51 Pagesphilippine studies Ateneo de Manila University †¢ Loyola Heights, Quezon City †¢ 1108 Philippines Philippine Commonwealth and Cult of Masculinity Alfred W. Mccoy Philippine Studies vol. 48, no. 3 (2000): 315–346 Copyright  © Ateneo de Manila University Philippine Studies is published by the Ateneo de Manila University. Contents may not be copied or sent via email or other means to multiple sites and posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s written permission. Users may download and printRead MoreDarden Mba Resumes16768 Words   |  68 Pagesof Business Administration University of Virginia Candidate for Master of Business Administration, May 2011 ï‚ · Awarded Batten Innovation Scholarship (merit-based full tuition scholarship); ï‚ · GMAT: 730; AWA: 5.5 ï‚ · Member of Finance Club, Energy Club and Darden Capital Management Club Charlottesville, VA Nanyang Technological University Singapore Bachelor of Engineering (Computer Engineering) and Minor in Business, June 2006 ï‚ · Awarded full scholarship (among top 50 from over 10,000 candidates) ï‚ · ReceivedRead MoreConflict Management and Emotional Intelligence63003 Words   |  253 PagesSouthern Cross University ePublications@SCU Theses 2010 Conflict management and emotional intelligence Yu Fai Leung Southern Cross University, keith.leung.yu.fai@gmail.com Suggested Citation Leung, YF 2010, Conflict management and emotional intelligence , DBA thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW. Copyright YF Leung 2010 ePublications@SCU is an electronic repository administered by Southern Cross University Library. Its goal is to capture and preserve the intellectual Read More_x000C_Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis355457 Words   |  1422 PagesIntroduction to Statistics and Data Analysis This page intentionally left blank Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis Third Edition Roxy Peck California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Chris Olsen George Washington High School, Cedar Rapids, IA Jay Devore California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Australia †¢ Brazil †¢ Canada †¢ Mexico †¢ Singapore †¢ Spain †¢ United Kingdom †¢ United States Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis, Third Edition Roxy

The North American Free Trade Agreement Essay - 1863 Words

The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, is an accordance between the United States, Mexico, and Canada that was put into effect in January 1994. This agreement was unprecedented because it integrated three countries that were at extremely different levels of economic development. It changed the economic relationship between North American countries and encouraged trade and investment among the three countries to grow considerably. The purpose of the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement was to integrate Mexico with the United States and Canada to help its developing economy. The well-developed economies of the United States and Canada were hoped to bring growth to Mexico in the form of employment for its citizens. The competiveness of the United States and Canada would benefit from the low cost investment of Mexico and its market for exports. It was discussed and passed during President George H.W. Bush’s term and put into action by his predecessor, President Bill Clinton. These Presidents believed that this agreement could create many new jobs a year. The United States, Mexico, and Canada all benefited from the North American Free Trade Agreement. While there are opponents of those agreement, the positive effects outweigh the negative effects. It eliminated most tariffs and barriers to trade among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The trades that were put into focus were agriculture, automobiles, and textiles. Financial services were also aShow MoreRelatedNorth American Free Trade Agreement Essay1398 Words   |  6 Pages North American Free Trade Agreement During the most recent race for the White House we heard very little of substance from both parties, but one thing both parties seem to agree on is that free trade has been bad for the U.S. worker. One candidate proclaimed that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has cost the United States hundreds of thousands of jobs and another distanced herself from free trade agreements all together. It has been over twenty years since the implementation ofRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement1711 Words   |  7 PagesThis paper will discuss four components of the North American Free Trade Agreement: Background, events, pros and cons. Upon the research, you will discover four online articles to provide more detail and examples. This research will indicate how it was developed and the reasoning on why it would benefit the nation. Also, it will provide events that occur after the agreement was signed by congress and the recession the countries experience during the e arly 2000s. There will be a chart locatedRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement Essay1420 Words   |  6 Pagessubstance from both parties, but one thing both parties seem to agree on is that free trade has been bad for the U.S. worker. One candidate proclaimed that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has cost the United States hundreds of thousands of jobs and another distanced herself from free trade agreements all together. It has been over twenty years since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement and many have criticized it as a bad deal for the U.S. It can be shown thatRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement1036 Words   |  5 PagesThe North American Free Trade Agreement also referred to as NAFTA produced results on January 1, 1994. A trade agreement was made between each of the three of nations of North America. The United States, Canada, and Mexico. The Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, the Mexican Presiden t, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and previous U.S. President George H. Shrub initiated the agreement. Connections between the nations were at that point on great terms, particularly between The United States and CanadaRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement Essay1356 Words   |  6 PagesThe North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is an agreement negotiated by three countries; Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The main purpose of NAFTA is essentially to reduce trade barriers in order to promote international commerce, and open up different industries to trade, in particular textiles, agriculture, and automobile sectors. The introduction of NAFTA completely transformed North American economic relations and led to unparalleled cooperation between the U.S. Canada and MexicoRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement1486 Words   |  6 PagesThe North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an agreement signed by three countries in creating rules in trade in North A merica. NAFTA, when being presented, was described as genuine for helping Mexico and Canada. But was NAFTA really helpings those counties or really just helping North America? Initially North America was being genuine about NAFTA when talking to Mexico and Canada but in reality the NAFTA caused some uneven development as the years went by. I have two stories thatRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement1804 Words   |  8 Pagesunderstanding the elements of trade blocs that enable open markets between member nations while also decreasing the cost of conducting business within a country is essential in making strategic logistical decisions. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has provided one such trade bloc that encompasses the countries of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Since the inception of NAFTA in 1994, significant financial results have been achieved regarding increases in trade revenue and increases inRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement1018 Words   |  5 PagesThe North American Free Trade Agreement, known as NAFTA, is a trilateral trade agreement between Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Signed January 1, 1994, NAFTA’s main purpose was to reduce trading costs, increase business investments, and help the United States be more competitive in the g lobal marketplace. The agreement would eliminate all tariffs on half of all U.S. goods shipping to Mexico and introduce new regulations to encourage cross-border investments. According to President Bush, tradeRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement920 Words   |  4 PagesThe North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) shoved the American worker down a flight of stairs in the name of Globalization NAFTA or a bill similar had been floating around Washington since 1979 a year before Reagan took office. NAFTA truly went no where for over a decade. The â€Å"North American Accord† was first proposed by the Reagan and the GOP were always in favor of passage but, it was the Progressive wing, along with many other pro-union members in the Democratic party who held NAFTA atRead MoreThe North American Free Trade Agreement2468 Words   |  10 Pages1.1 Introduction The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was is the biggest free trade region in the globe, creating economic development and helping to raise the living standard for the citizens of all three member states. By strengthening the policies and procedures governing trade and investment, the NAFTA has indicated to be a solid foundation for developing Canada’s prosperity and has set an important example of the advantages of trade liberalization for the rest of the globe. Two decades

Teaching English Free Essays

Teaching Readers of English â€Å"A book of this kind is long overdue. . . We will write a custom essay sample on Teaching English or any similar topic only for you Order Now . It is a giant contribution to the ? eld. With its emphasis on a socioliterate approach to reading and literacy, it nicely captures the prevailing view of academic literacy instruction. Its extremely skillful and well-developed balancing act between theory and practice allows it to appeal to a wide variety of readers. Pre- and in-service teachers, in particular, will bene? t immensely. † Alan Hirvela, The Ohio State University â€Å"A compendium like this that addresses reading issues at a variety of levels and in a variety of ways is most welcome. . . Congratulations on excellent work, a fabulous partnership, and on moving us all forward in our thinking about reading issues! † Vaidehi Ramanathan, University of California, Davis A comprehensive manual for pre- and in-service ESL and EFL educators, this frontline text balances insights from current reading theory and research with highly practical, ? eld-tested strategies for teaching and assessing L2 reading in seconda ry and post-secondary contexts. John S. Hedgcock is Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Dana R. Ferris is Associate Professor in the University Writing Program at the University of California, Davis. Teaching Readers of English Students, Texts, and Contexts John S. Hedgcock Monterey Institute of International Studies Dana R. Ferris University of California, Davis First published 2009 by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Simultaneously published in the UK by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor Francis e-Library, 2009. To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www. eBookstore. tandf. co. uk.  © 2009 Routledge, Taylor and Francis All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identi? ation and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 0-203-88026-9 Master e-book ISBN ISBN 10: 0–415–99964–2 (hbk) ISBN 10: 0–8058–6347–8 (pbk) ISBN 10: 0–203–88026–9 (ebk) ISBN 13: 978–0–415–99964–9 (hbk) ISBN 13: 978–0–8058–6347–5 (pbk) ISBN 13: 978–0–203–88026–5 (ebk) Brief Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv Credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix 1 Fundamentals of L1 and L2 Literacy: Reading and Learning to Read . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 L2 Reading: Focus on the Reader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3 L2 Reading: Focus on the Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 4 Syllabus Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Reading Course . . . .115 5 Designing an Intensive Reading Lesson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 6 Reading for Quantity: The Benefits and Challenges of Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 7 Using Literary Texts in L2 Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .242 8 Vocabulary Learning and Teaching in L2 Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . .283 9 Classroom L2 Reading Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .417 Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .423 Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv Credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix 1 Fundamentals of L1 and L2 Literacy: Reading and Learning to Read . . . . . . . .1 The Nature of Literacy and Literacies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Working with Writing Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Reading Processes: Fundamentals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Describing and De? ning Reading Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Bottom-Up Views of Reading and Reading Development . . . . . . . . . .17 Top-Down Views of Reading and Reading Development . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Interactive and Integrated View s of Reading and Reading Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Understanding L2 Reading Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 The Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Components of L2 Reading: Skills and Subskills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 L2 Reading Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 2 L2 Reading: Focus on the Reader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Who Are L2 Readers? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 International (Visa) Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 EFL Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 Immigrant Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 Generation 1. 5 Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 viii Contents Implications of Multiple Student Audiences for Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 L2 Reading in Non-academic Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 What a Reader Knows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 In? uences of Family and Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 School In? uences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Types of Reader Schemata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 What the L2 Reader Knows: Final Thoughts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Individual Differences among L2 Readers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Learning Styles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Learner Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69 Focus on the Reader: Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Needs Assessment and Course Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Text Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Classroom Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 3 L2 Reading: Focus on the Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 What Is a Text? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Orthography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Words. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81 Morphosyntactic Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84 Text Cohesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Typography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Text Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Text Information: Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91 Focus on the Text: Implications for Text Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92 Selecting and Analyzing Texts for Intensive Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92 Text Selection Issues: Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Focus on the Text: Building Bottom-Up Skills and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . .98 Bottom-Up Skills: Approaches and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98 Summary: Textual Elements and Bottom-Up Instruction. . . . . . . . . .103 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .108 Appendix 3. 1: Second Chances—If Only We Could Start Again . . . . . . . .112 Appendix 3. 2: Sample Mini-lesson on Morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113 Contents 4 ix Syllabus Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Reading Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Needs Assessment: Understanding Learner Needs and Institutional Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Demographic Pro? le . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 L2 Pro? ciency and Literate Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Student Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 Student Preferences, Strategies, and Styles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123 Designing and Administering NA Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124 Establishing Goals and Objectives for Teaching and Learning . . . . . . . . . .125 Developing an L2 Literacy Syllabus: Design Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Crafting the Course Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Constructing the Course Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Selecting and Working with Textbooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135 Planning L2 Literacy Lessons: Principles and Precepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139 Specifying Lesson Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139 Organizing a Daily Lesson Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140 Lesson Planning Mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .147 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .148 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149 Appendix 4. 1: Sample Needs Assessment Questionnaire for a Reading Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Appendix 4. 2: Sample EAP Reading Co urse Syllabus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Appendix 4. 3: Textbook Evaluation Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 5 Designing an Intensive Reading Lesson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Background: Intensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Stages of Intensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .162 Before Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 During Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 After Reading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Putting It All Together: Designing an Intensive Reading Lesson . . . . . . . . . 190 Suggestions for Intensive Reading Lessons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .190 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .192 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .193 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .194 Appendix 5. 1: The Rewards of Living a Solitary Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .196 Appendix 5. 2: Sample Text-Surveying Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 x 6 Contents Reading for Quantity: The Benefits and Challenges of Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .205 Extensive Reading: De? nitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 Perspectives on Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .208 Bene? ts of Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .210 Extensive Reading Improves Comprehension Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . .210 Extensive Reading Develops Automaticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .211 Extensive Reading Builds Background Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 Extensive Reading Builds Vocabulary and Grammar Knowledge . . . .213 Extensive Reading Improves Production Skills (Speaking and Especially Writing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .215 Extensive Reading Promotes Student Con? dence and Motivation . . . 216 Summary: The Case for Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 (Perceived) Problems and Challenges with Extensive Reading . . . . . . . . . .217 Time and Pre-Existing Curricular Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .218 Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .218 Student Resistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Curricular Models for Extensive Reading in L2 Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Overall Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .220 Extensive Reading in a Language Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Extensive Reading in a Foreign-Language Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Extensive Reading in Non-Academic Class Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . .222 Extensive Reading in Academic Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 Practical Matters: Implementation of Ext ensive Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . .225 Getting Students on Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .226 Providing Access to Reading Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 Helping Students Find and Select Appropriate Materials . . . . . . . . . .230 Designing Classroom Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .232 Developing Accountability and Evaluation Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . .234 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .236 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .237 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 7 Using Literary Texts in L2 Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .242 Contexts for L2 Literature Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Bene? ts of Literature for L2 Readers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Cultural Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Rich Language Exposure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .249 Input for Language Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .250 Enjoyable and Motivating Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Improved Student Con? dence in L2 Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Personal Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252 Contents xi Stimulating Writing Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252 Critical Thinking Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3 Bene? ts: Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .254 Using Literature with L2 Readers: Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 Teacher Discomfort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .255 Student Resistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Time Constraints. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .257 Text Dif? culty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .258 Possible Drawbacks: Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Teaching Literature in the L2 Reading Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 How Much Literature? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 What Kinds of Texts?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Where Do Literary Texts Fit in Intensive and Extensive Reading Approaches? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Literature in an Extensive Reading Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 Speci? c Considerations for Teaching Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 Literary Metalanguage: To Teach or Not to Teach? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .265 Teaching Fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .265 Teaching Poetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Teaching Drama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .270 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .274 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .274 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .275 Appendix 7. 1: The Story of An Hour (Kate Chopin [1894]) . . . . . . . . . . . .280 Appendix 7. 2: The Road Not Taken (Robert Frost [1916]) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 8 Vocabulary Learning and Teaching in L2 Reading Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . .283 Components of Word Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .284 The Role of Lexical Knowledge in Developing L2 Reading Skills and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .291 Interactions between Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading . . . . . . . . . 291 Incidental Vocabulary Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .292 Direct Vocabulary Instruction: Explicit Interventions in Teaching Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Lexical Enhancement and L2 Reading: Challenges and Tools . . . . . . . . . . . 296 Vocabulary Size and Reading Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 Word Frequency Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .300 Direct Vocabulary Teaching and L2 Reading Instruction: Practices and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 Spend Time on Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 Teach Effective Inferencing Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 Teach Effective Dictionary Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .306 Consider Working with Graded Readers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 xii Contents Ask Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .309 Match De? nitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Practice Semantic Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Encourage Use of Word Cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Assign Vocabulary Notebooks or Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .314 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .315 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .316 9 Classroom L2 Reading Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 The Purposes of L2 Reading Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 Principles and Concepts of L2 Reading Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .329 Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .329 Validity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .330 Authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .331 Washback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .333 Product and Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334 A Framework for Designing Classroom L2 Reading Assessments. . . . . . .335 Reading Assessment Variables: Standards, Readers, and Texts . . . . . . . . . .337 Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .337 Reader Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .338 Text Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .339 Task and I tem Development in L2 Reading Assessment: Principles and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 Controlled Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 Constructed Response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .353 Maximizing Controlled and Constructed Response Approaches in L2 Reading Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .360 Alternative L2 Literacy Assessment Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .362 Reading Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .363 Literacy Portfolios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 Self-Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367 Summary: Toward a Coherent Literacy Assessment Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .369 Further Reading and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .370 Re? ection and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .371 Application Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .372 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .375 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .417 Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .423 Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 Preface This book presents approaches to the teaching of second language (L2) readers in the context of current theoretical perspectives on L2 literacy processes, practices, and readers. Teaching Readers of English is designe d as a comprehensive teacherpreparation book, as well as a resource for in-service teachers and L2 literacy researchers. The volume focuses on preparing instructors who work with L2 and multilingual readers at the secondary, post-secondary, and adult levels. Teaching Readers of English likewise examines vocabulary development, both as a tool for facilitating effective reading and as a language-learning goal in itself. We have attempted to craft the book to appeal to several distinct audiences: Teacher educators and graduate students in TESOL preparation programs; In-service ESL and EFL instructors currently engaged in teaching reading and related literacy skills; Pre-service teachers of secondary English and their instructors; In-service teachers of secondary English; Researchers involved in describing L2 literacy and investigating L2 reading pedagogy. Teaching Readers of English addresses the needs of the ? rst four groups by providing overviews of research related to L2 reading, as well as numerous opportunities to re? ect on, develop, and practice the teaching skills needed for effective ESL and EFL literacy instruction. We hope that researchers in the ? eld will also bene? t from our syntheses and analyses of the literature on various topics in L2 literacy education. Preview and post-reading review questions in Preface xv each chapter are designed to stimulate readers’ thinking about the material presented. Application Activities at the end of each chapter provide hands–on practice for pre- and in-service teachers, as well as resources for teacher educators. Because of this book’s dual emphasis on theory and practice in L2 literacy instruction, it would serve as an appropriate primary or supplementary text in courses focusing on L2 reading theory, as well as practical courses that address literacy instruction. As a discipline, L2 reading is still viewed by some as an emergent ? eld. Consequently, few resources have been produced to help pre- and in-service L2 educators to become experts in a discipline that is becoming recognized as a profession in its own right. Therefore, one of our primary goals in Teaching Readers of English is to furnish readers with a synthesis of theory and practice in a rapidly evolving community of scholars and professionals. We have consistently and intentionally focused on providing apprentice teachers with practice activities, such as reader background surveys, text analyses, and instructional planning tasks that can be used to develop the complex skills entailed in teaching L2 reading. Although all topics of discussion are ? rmly grounded in reviews of relevant research, a feature that we feel distinguishes this volume from others is its array of hands-on, practical examples, materials, and tasks. By synthesizing theory and research in accessible terms, we have endeavored to craft chapter content and exercises in ways that enable readers to appreciate the relevance of the ? eld’s knowledge base to their current and future classroom settings and student readers. Overview of the Book We have sequenced the book’s chapters to move from general themes to speci? c pedagogical concerns. Situated in a broad literacy framework, Chapter 1 presents an overview of reading theory and pedagogical models that have in? uenced and shaped approaches to L2 literacy instruction. It also presents a comparative discussion of writing systems, culminating with a discussion of the dynamic interactions of skills and strategies that comprise L2 reading. Most importantly, Chapter 1 introduces an argument that we pursue throughout the volume; that is, whereas certain literacy processes transcend linguistic and cultural boundaries, unique characteristics and challenges set L2 reading apart from L1 reading. We embrace the view that teaching learners to read successfully in an L2 such as English requires thought, analysis, and attention. Chapters 2 and 3 focus respectively on the two most important elements of the interactive process known as reading: readers and texts. In Chapter 2, we discuss and de? ne more precisely what characterizes an L2 reader, acknowledging the growing complexity of the term and the diversity of the student audience. Chapter 2 examines numerous background variables that in? uence literacy development, including the unique characteristics of individual readers. Chapter 3 provides a de? nition and in-depth analysis of the structural properties of text, xvi Preface with a speci? c focus on challenges faced by readers in their encounters with (L1 and) L2 texts and with English texts in particular. Chapter 3 concludes with a practical discussion of the linguistic components of texts, suggesting that teachers in some contexts may wish to present direct lessons targeting these features. In all of these chapters, we aim to present a perspective on L2 reading instruction that is ? mly grounded in the precept that literacies are socially constructed. Based on the socioliterate premises outlined especially in Chapters 1 and 2, Chapter 4 addresses fundamental concerns related to the teaching of any L2 literacy course: needs assessment, syllabus design, materials selection, and lesson planning. Chapter 5 (intensive reading) and Chapter 6 (extensive reading) present detailed examinations of the two major curricular approaches to teaching L2 reading. The remaining chapters then focus on speci? c topics of persistent nterest to L2 literacy educators: the use of literature in L2 reading instruction (Chapter 7), vocabulary learning and teaching (Chapter 8), and approaches to reading assessment (Chapter 9). Although the organization of individual chapters varies according to topic, all contain the following components: Questions for Re? ection. These pre-reading questions invite readers to consider their prior experiences as students and readers and to anticipate how these insights might inform their professional beliefs and teaching practices; Further Reading and Resources. A concise list at the end of each chapter provides a quick overview of the print and online sources cited, as well as other outlets of relevant information; Figures and Tables. These textual illustrations provide sample authentic activities, lesson plans, sample texts, and so on, which teachers can use and adapt in their own instructional practice; Re? ection and Review. These follow-up questions ask readers to examine and evaluate the theoretical information and practical suggestions introduced in the main text; Application Activities. Application Activities follow each Re? ction and Review section, presenting a range of hands-on practical exercises. Tasks include collecting data from novice readers, text analysis, evaluating real-world reading materials, developing lesson plans, designing classroom activities, and executing and evaluating classroom tasks and assessments. Several chapters also include Appendices that contain sample texts and instructional materials. As readers, writ ers, researchers, teachers, and teacher educators, we ? nd the ? eld of L2 literacy development (which entails both reading and writing) to offer many challenges and rewards. It was our classroom experience working with Preface xvii multilingual readers and with L2 teachers that initially ignited our interest in compiling a book that would help teachers develop both professional knowledge and con? dence as teachers of reading. We hope that this book will provide its readers with accurate information, meaningful insights, and practical ideas for classroom teaching. It is also our hope that Teaching Readers of English will convey our enthusiasm and passion for this rapidly evolving and engaging ? eld of intellectual inquiry and professional practice. John’s Acknowledgments Thanks are due to the Monterey Institute for my Fall semester 2007 sabbatical leave, which I dedicated to exploring the L2 reading literature anew and to writing early draft material. I owe special thanks to the M. A. students in my Spring 2008 ED 562 (Teaching Reading) course, who diligently read the draft version of the book, responded thoughtfully and substantially to the material, and reminded me how enjoyable it can be to look at teaching in novel ways. Their hard work, enthusiasm for reading, and passion for teaching were infectious and energizing. As always, I am also indebted to the Library staff at the Monterey Institute, who not only supply me continually with volumes of books and articles, but who also cheerfully grant me more special privileges than I deserve. Like Dana, I would like to credit an early source of inspiration for me, Professor Stephen Krashen, whose teaching and research drew me to literacy studies when I was a graduate student. Finally, I offer my profound thanks to Simon Hsu for his perpetual reassurance, moral support, and good cheer through the ups and downs of the writing process. Dana’s Acknowledgments I am grateful to my graduate students and former colleagues at California State University, Sacramento who have helped me to develop and pilot materials used in this book. In particular, I would like to thank the CSUS M. A. students in my Spring 2008 English 215A (ESL Reading/Vocabulary) course, who patiently worked with the draft version of this book, responded enthusiastically, and gave great suggestions. As always, I am thankful for the opportunity to have my thinking and practice informed and challenged by these individuals. I am also grateful for the sabbatical leave I received from my former institution, CSUS, for the Spring 2007 semester, which allowed me extended time for this project. Working on this book has also made me again appreciative of the contributions of two of my graduate school professors—Stephen Krashen and the late David Eskey of the University of Southern California—not only to the ? eld of L2 reading research but also to the formation of my own knowledge base and philosophies on the subject. Both were excellent teachers and mentors, and I am indebted to them for their work, their example, and the ways they encouraged me as a student. viii Preface On a personal level, I would like to extend my love and gratitude to my husband, Randy Ferris, my daughters, Laura and Melissa Ferris, and my faithful yellow Labrador retriever, Winnie the Pooch, who was a great companion and thoughtful sounding board during my sabbatical! Joint Acknowledgments Our work on this project would ha ve been much less rewarding and enjoyable without the gentle guidance and persistent encouragement of our outstanding editor, Naomi Silverman. Her expertise and unfailingly insightful advice assisted us in innumerable ways as our ideas evolved and as the collaborative writing process unfolded. Despite her sometimes crushing workload, Naomi managed to help us out whenever we needed her input. We offer our profound thanks for her con? dence in us and for her many contributions to this book’s evolution. In addition, we deeply appreciate the incisive and exceptionally useful feedback on earlier versions provided by Barbara Birch, Alan Hirvela, and Vaidehi Ramanathan. Finally, we are grateful for the diligent work of Meeta Pendharkar and Alfred Symons at Routledge, and of Richard Willis, who saw the project through its ? nal stages of development. John Hedgcock Dana Ferris Credits Figure 1. 3 is derived and adapted from a drawing in Bernhardt (1991b), Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, empirical, and classroom perspectives (p. 15), originally published by Ablex. Figure 1. 4 is adapted from Birch (2007), English L2 reading: Getting to the bottom (2nd ed. , p. 3). Figure 4. 4 is adapted from Ferris and Hedgcock (2005), Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice (2nd ed. , p. 100). Figures 1. 4 and 4. 4 are used with permission from Taylor and Francis. Figure 1. originally appeared in Bernhardt (2005), â€Å"Progress and procrastination in second language reading† (Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, pp. 133–150). Figure 8. 1 was adapted from a similar ? gure in Nation (2001), Learning vocabulary in another language. We thank Cambridge University Press for its policy concerning reproduction and adaptation of these resources. The â€Å"Second Chances—If Only We Could St art Again† selection by Brahm in Appendix 3. 1 originally appeared in the Sacramento Bee in 2001; the text appears here with permission. Sarton’s (1974) essay, â€Å"The Rewards of Living a Solitary Life† (Appendix 5. ), ? rst appeared in the New York Times, as did the Greenhouse (2003) essay, â€Å"Going for the look—but risking discrimination† (Appendix 5. 2); both selections are used with permission. Figure 9. 2 is based on and adapted from Urquhart and Weir (1998), Reading in a second language: Process, product, and practice (Addison Wesley Longman). xx Credits Figure 9. 11 is a slightly altered rubric from Groeber (2007), Designing and using rubrics for reading and language arts, K-6 (p. 23). This ? gure appears with permission from Corwin Press. Chapter 1 Fundamentals of L1 nd L2 Literacy Reading and Learning to Read Questions for Re? ection Do you have any recollection of learning to read at home or at school in your primary language or in a second/foreign language? If so, what were those processes like? How were they similar or different across languages? How is text-based communication similar to and distinct from speechbased communication? How is learning to read and write distinct from acquiring speech and listening skills? Why? What are some of the principal challenges that you associate with reading certain kinds of text? What are the main obstacles that novice readers face in learning to read? Why do you think it is important for novice ESL and EFL teachers to become acquainted with the principles and practices of reading instruction (in contrast to other skills, such as speaking, listening, writing, or grammar)? The high premium that many people place on literacy skills, including those necessary for performing well in school and in the workplace, emerges largely from the degree to which educated adults depend on text-based and digital resources for learning and communication. When educated people think about 2 Teaching Readers of English how and why literacy is important, few question the fundamental notion that reading is a crucial building block, if not the chief cornerstone, of success at school, at work, and in society (Feiler, 2007; Gee, 2008; McCarty, 2005). In primary education around the globe, one of the ? rst things children do at school is participate in literacy lessons and â€Å"learn to read. † Of course, â€Å"the developmental transformations that mark the way to reading expertise begin in infancy, not in school† (Wolf, 2007, p. 223). In many parts of the world, primary-level teachers receive specialized education and training in teaching children to read, sometimes in two or more languages. As children advance toward adolescence, they may undergo sustained literacy instruction designed to enhance their reading comprehension, ? uency, and ef? ciency. Formal â€Å"reading† courses taper off as children progress toward and beyond secondary school—except, perhaps, for foreign or second language instruction. Many language teachers assume that teaching and learning a foreign or second language (L2)1 depends on reading skills. In fact, they may devote considerable time and effort to promoting L2 reading skills among their students, often under the assumption that learners already have a developed system of literate knowledge and skill in their primary language(s) (L1s). In contrast, teachers in disciplines such as science and mathematics, social studies, and the arts may need to assume that their pupils or students already know â€Å"how to read. † Such educators may not provide much, if any, explicit instruction in the mechanics of processing texts. Similarly, many teachers of writing at both the secondary and tertiary levels often assume that students know â€Å"how to read† (or at least that students have been taught to read). Paradoxically, while formal education, professional activities, and use of the Web depend on reading ef? cacy, many educators ? nd themselves under-equipped to help their students develop their reading skills when students need instructional intervention. In other words, we may not recognize the complexity of reading because, as pro? ient readers, we often take reading ability for granted, assuming that reading processes are automatic. It is easy to overlook the complexity of reading processes, as many of us do not have to think much about how we read. After all, you are able to read and understand the words on this page because you have somehow â€Å"learned to read† English and have successfully automatized your ability to decode alphabetic symbols and interpret meaning from text. Precise ly how you achieved this level of skill, however, is still not fully understood (Smith, 2004; Wolf, 2007). Our experiences as students, language teachers, and teacher educators have led us to a profound appreciation of the complexity of the reading process and for the fact that, for many novice readers—whether working in L1 or L2—reading processes are far from automatic. We have also come to recognize the sometimes overwhelming challenges of teaching reading to language learners. Reading, learning to read, and teaching reading are neither easy nor effortless. In this chapter, we consider fundamental aspects of the reading process that make it a complex social and cognitive operation involving readers, writers, texts, Fundamentals of L1 and L2 Literacy 3 contexts, and purposes. We will introduce contemporary principles of literacy and literacy development to familiarize readers with de? nitions of key constructs in the interrelated ? elds of literacy studies, L1 and L2 reading research, and pedagogy. Our aim is to help readers develop a working knowledge of key issues, insights, and controversies in L2 literacy education by presenting an overview of key theories, models, and metaphors. Our chief focus is on the literacy development of multilingual learners in secondary and postsecondary educational settings. Naturally, we refer to research on L1 literacy development among children, which has richly informed agendas for L2 literacy research and instruction. In the ? rst part of this chapter, we consider contemporary views of literacy as a socio-psychological construct that frames reading development and processes among L1 and L2 learners. By comparing research and theory associated with prevailing processing metaphors, we explore instructional issues of particular relevance to the teaching of L2 reading. These issues include the niqueness of L2 reading processes, interactions between L1 and L2 literacy, and the importance of strategies-based instruction in promoting L2 literacy. The Nature of Literacy and Literacies Before examining the mechanics of reading, we must situate reading processes and instruction with respect to the sociocultural and educational contexts where reading skills are valued. As Urquhart and Weir (1998) noted, â€Å"the teacher of reading is in the business of attempting to improve literacy† (p. 1). Although reading skill is central to any de? ition of literacy, L2 educators should understand that literacy entails not only cognitive abilities (Bernhardt, 1991a, 1991b), but also knowledge of sociocultural structures and ideologies (Cope Kalantzis, 2000; Cummins, Brown, Sayers, 2007; Gee, 1991, 2003; Goldenberg, Rueda, August, 2006; Lewis, Enciso , Moje, 2007; Perez, 2004b, 2004d; Robinson, McKenna, Wedman, 2007). Literacy, after all, is â€Å"a part of the highest human impulse to think and rethink experience in place† (Brandt, 1990, p. 1). We can refer to reading and writing as literate processes, and we frequently use the term literacy as a countable noun when describing skills, knowledge, practices, and beliefs allied with speci? c disciplines and discourse communities (e. g. , academic literacy, workplace literacy, computer literacy, ? nancial literacy, and so forth). Across disciplines, wrote Barton (2007), â€Å"the term literacy has become a code word for more complex views of what is involved in reading and writing† (p. 5). A literate person can therefore become â€Å"competent and knowledgeable in specialized areas† (Barton, 2007, p. 9). Literacies are multiple, overlapping, and diverse: â€Å"People have different literacies which they make use of, associate with different domains of life. These differences are increased across different cultures or historical periods† (Barton, 2007, p. 37). Eagleton and Dobler (2007), for example, insisted that â€Å"current de? nitions of literacy must include digital texts such as those found on the Web† (p. 28). 4 Teaching Readers of English Contemporary conceptions of literacy do not characterize literacy merely as a cluster of isolated processing skills. Scribner and Cole (1981) framed literacy as a system of socially organized literacy practices. This view led to an â€Å"emerging theory of literacy-as-social-practice† (Reder Davila, 2005, p. 172), now widely known as the New Literacy Studies (NLS) (Barton Hamilton, 1998; Street, 1984, 1995). As a socioculturally organized system, literacy consists of much more than an individual’s ability to work with print-based media. Reading and writing may be the most visible or tangible processes in literacy development, but literacy practices go beyond reading and writing alone (Eagleton Dobler, 2007; Kern, 2000; Purcell-Gates, 2007). Literacy practices refer to â€Å"common patterns in using reading and writing in a particular situation. People bring their cultural knowledge to an activity† (Barton, 2007, p. 36). In an NLS view, literacy is more than a skill or ability that people â€Å"acquire†Ã¢â‚¬â€it is something that people do in the course of everyday life. We can refer to what people do with their knowledge of literate practices as literacy events. Heath (1982) de? ned a literacy event as â€Å"any occasion in which a piece of writing is integral to the nature of the participants’ interactions and their interpretative processes† (p. 3). Barton’s (2007) synthesis of the complementary relationship between literacy practices and literacy events illustrates the inherently social nature of literacy: Together events and practices are the two basic units of analysis of the social activity of literacy. Literate events are the particular activities where literacy has a role; they may be regular repeated activities. Literacy practices are the general cultural ways of utilizing literacy which people draw upon in a literacy event. [I]n the example . . . f a man discussing the contents of the local paper with a friend, the two of them sitting in the living room planning a letter to the newspaper is a literacy event. In deciding who does what, where and when it is done, along with the associated ways of talking and the ways of writing, the two participants make use of their literacy practices. (p. 37) Literacy is further understood in terms of the individual’s relationship to literate communities and institutions (e. g. , fellow readers and writers, teachers, employers, school, online networks, and so on). Scholars such as Freire (1968), Gee (1988, 1996), and Street (1984) have proposed that literacy can privilege some people while excluding others, as societies and discourse communities use literacy to enforce social controls and maintain hierarchies. The NLS approach assumes (1) that context is fundamental to any understanding of literacy and its development (Barton, 2007; Barton Tusting, 2005; Collins Blot, 2003) and (2) that literate and oral practices overlap and interact (Finnegan, 1988; Goody, 1987; Olson Torrance, 1991; Stubbs, 1980; Tarone Bigelow, 2005). Because it is grounded in social context, NLS research offers implications for how we might view reading processes, reading development, and reading Fundamentals of L1 and L2 Literacy 5 pedagogy. As already suggested, one insight that departs from conventional notions is that literacy consists of much more than reading and writing (Czerniewska, 1992; Kern, 2000; Purcell-Gates, 2007; Purcell-Gates, Jacobson, Degener, 2008; Smith, 2004, 2007). Literacy practices and literacy events are not limited to libraries and schools. Literacy development is a process that begins early in childhood, long before children attend school, and involves many different skills and experiences† (Lesaux, Koda, Siegel, Shanahan, 2006a, p. 77). Although L2 reading teachers may be con? ned to the classroom in their encounters with learners, literacy education should not be limited to promoting school-based literacies alone (Freire Macedo, 1987; Gee, 2000; Kalantzis Cope, 2000). After all, literacy is â€Å"rooted in people’s intimate everyday experiences with text† (Reder Davila, 2005, p. 173). These daily experiences can range from the most mundane (e. g. scribbling a grocery list, dashing off a quick e-mail message, checking MapQuest for driving directions) to those with high-stakes consequences (e. g. , composing a college admissions essay or crafting a letter of resignation). Classrooms, of course, are unquestionably key sites for cultivating school and non-school literacies (Perez, 2004a). Students must develop literate skills that will enable them to succeed in school, although some of these skills may never be part of the curriculum (Alvermann, Hinchman, Moore, Phelps, Waff, 2006; Bloome, Carter, Christina, Otto, Shuart-Faris, 2005; Gee, 1996, 2005; Kutz, 1997; Perez, 2004c). In other words, surviving and thriving in school require much more than developing literacy in the traditional sense: Learners must also develop new behaviors and attitudes while cultivating social alliances. Novice readers must learn â€Å"a set of complex role relationships, general cognitive techniques, ways of approaching problems, different genres of talk and interaction, and an intricate set of values concerned with communication, interaction, and society as a whole† (Wertsch, 1985, pp. 35–36). Literate practices and literacy events of all sorts involve interaction and social activity around written texts, which are the products of a kind of technology— writing itself (Bazerman, 2007; Grabe Kaplan, 1996; Olson, 1994; Olson Cole, 2006; Ong, 1982; Wolf, 2007). 3 As such, writing is a value-laden cultural form, â€Å"a social product whose shape and in? uence depend upon prior political and ideological factors† (Gee, 1996, p. 58). Because â€Å"the immediate social context determines the use and nature of texts† (Reder Davila, 2005, p. 75), texts and their uses are inherently tied to power at some level: â€Å"[L]iteracy can be seen as doing the work of discourse and power/knowledge† (Morgan Ramanathan, 2005, p. 151). In this view, literacy and literacy development are never neutral, as literate activity involves learners, teachers, and many others (Gee, 2002). Moreover, â€Å"all literacy events carry ideological meanings† (Reder Davila , 2005, p. 178), although we may not be aware of these meanings in the learning or teaching process. Nonetheless, L2 literacy educators can bene? from cultivating a critical awareness of how â€Å"literacy practices provide the textual means by which dominant values and identities (e. g. , avid consumers, obedient workers, patriotic citizens) are normalized and, at times, resisted† (Morgan Ramanathan, 2005, pp. 152–153). 4 6 Teaching Readers of English Such critical perspectives, informed by NLS research and theory, are valuable for reading teachers: They remind us that literacy practices and literacy events pervade culture and everyday life. Literacy emerges as a kind of knowledge and skill base, as well as a socialization process (John-Steiner Meehan, 2000). Describing early literacy development, Smith (1988) argued that children become successful readers â€Å"only if they are admitted into a community of written language users,† which he called the â€Å"literacy club† (p. 2). Before they can read or write a single word, children become members of a literacy club similar to the community of oral language users into which infants are inducted at birth. â€Å"The procedures are the same, and the bene? ts are the same—admission to the club rapidly results in becoming like established members in spoken language, in literacy, and in many other ways as well† (Smith, 1988, p. ). Unique conditions affect adolescents and adults acquiring L2 literacy, yet the principle that literacy is socially embedded unquestionably applies to developing literacy in an additional language. Kern (2000) de? ned L2 literacy as â€Å"the use of socially-, historically-, and culturally-situated practices of creating and interpreting mea ning through texts† (p. 16). Being literate in another language requires a critical knowledge of how textual conventions and contexts of use shape one another. And because literacy is purpose-sensitive, it is dynamic â€Å"across and within discourse communities and cultures. It draws on a wide range of cognitive abilities, on knowledge of written and spoken language, on knowledge of genres, and on cultural knowledge† (Kern, 2000, p. 16). These dynamic aspects of literacy must include digital literacy (sometimes called cyberliteracy or electronic literacy), which we associate with â€Å"technologymediated textual, communicative, and informational practices† (Ingraham, Levy, McKenna, Roberts, 2007, p. 162). Literacy and reading in the 21st century must be characterized in terms of â€Å"an ecology that includes broad-based access to many different media† (Mackey, 2007, p. 13). These media include television and ? lm, as well as digital audio and video ? les that can be stored and retrieved at will on a computer or other device in a range of formats (Eagleton Dobler, 2007; Gee, 2003; Hawisher, 2004; Kapitzke Bruce, 2006; Olson Cole, 2006). Laptop computers, MP3 players, iPods, handheld devices, and mobile telephones make print and non-print sources available almost anywhere. The social milieu in much of the world is saturated with digital media. In fact, â€Å"very few Western young people come to print texts without a vast background of exposure to texts in many other media† (Mackey, 2007, p. 3). We must expect L1 and L2 students in many settings to know how to navigate websites and electronic texts, view artwork and photographs, listen to audio recordings, and watch live action, video, and animations, all with impressive facility (McKenna, Labbo, Kieffer, Reinking, 2006; McKenna, Labbo, Reinking, Zucker, 2008; Thorne Black, 2007; Valmont, 200 2). Moore (2001) estimated that more than 80% of the data available in the world is â€Å"born digital, not on paper, ? che, charts, ? lms, or maps† (p. 28). That proportion has unquestionably risen above 80%, and the availability of computers in Fundamentals of L1 and L2 Literacy 7 school settings has also increased. Parsad and Jones (2005) reported that, as of 2003, nearly 100% of U. S. schools had Internet access, 93% of classrooms were wired, and the mean ratio of learners to wired computers was about 4. 4 to 1. Access to wired computers in schools with high minority enrollments and in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods unfortunately drops below these averages (DeBell Chapman, 2003; Parsad Jones, 2005; Wells Lewis, 2005); only about 16% of the world’s population currently use the Internet (de Argaez, 2006). Nonetheless, as a consequence of increasingly widespread Internet access and the proliferation of laptop and desktop computers with CD-ROM and DVD capabilities, many of today’s students â€Å"can instantaneously access more information delivered in multiple formats than at any other time in the history of education† (Valmont, 2002, p. 92). For this growing learner population, â€Å"literacy in a polysymbolic environment† includes expertise in decoding and encoding print-based media, as well as â€Å"interpreting and constructing in visual and other symbolic worlds† (Valmont, 2002, p. 2). More speci? cally, digital literacy entails not only producing written and oral messages, but also generating and interpreting sounds, images, graphics, videos, animations, and movements (Cummins et al. , 2007; Eagleton Dobler, 2007). In the remainder of this chapter, we explore L1 and L2 reading and reading development from a sociocognitive perspective. We believe that L 2 reading teachers can best serve their students by viewing the learning and teaching of reading as much more than skill-oriented practice (Lee Smagorinsky, 2000; Meyer Manning, 2007). We must engage students â€Å"in real literacy events,† which Kern (2000) explicitly distinguished from â€Å"just rehearsing reading and writing skills. † To develop L2 literacy, students must â€Å"learn not only about vocabulary and grammar but also about discourse and the processes by which it is created† (p. 17). To synthesize salient insights from research and theory in NLS and related ? elds, we propose the following global principles, which we can apply to our work as literacy educators: Literacy is a cognitive and a social activity, which we can describe in terms of literacy practices, which are played out during literacy events. Literacies are multiple and associated with different participants, purposes, social relations, settings, institutions, and â€Å"domains of life† that support literate knowledge (Barton, 2007, p. 37). Literacy events reference socially constructed symbol systems that facilitate communication, create meaning, and represent the world. These systems require users to understand, adopt, and even reshape conventions (genres, discourse structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling). As symbolic systems that draw on writing and speech, literacies enable us to represent and cognize about ourselves, others, and our world (Kern, 2000). Teaching Readers of English Literacy requires problem-solving. Reading and writing â€Å"involve ? guring out relationships† among words, larger units of meaning, and â€Å"between texts and real or imagined worlds† (Kern, 2000, p. 17). Literacy entails knowledge of language and the ability to use it, as well as cultural understanding, belief sys tems, attitudes, ideals, and values that â€Å"guide our actions† in literate communities (Barton, 2007, p. 45). Literacy events shape us and our literacy practices as we engage in literacy events over our lifetimes. â€Å"Literacy has a history,† which de? es individuals as well as literate communities (Barton, 2007, p. 47). Literacy in the industrialized world â€Å"means gaining competent control of representational forms in a variety of media and learning how those forms best combine in a variety of genres and discourse† (Warschauer, 1999, p. 177). Working with Writing Systems As a de? ning function of literacy, reading is a chief focus of this chapter. Before reviewing models of L1 and L2 reading, we will consider factors that set reading apart from other skill areas. First, however, we would like to stress that language pro? iency and literacy should be viewed as interdependent. In outlining their model of how children develop language skills, language awa reness, and literacy, Ravid and Tolchinsky (2002) asserted that â€Å"the reciprocal character of speech and writing in a literate community makes [language and literacy] a synergistic system where certain features (e. g. , basic syntax) originate in the spoken input† (p. 430). Meanwhile, features such as complex syntax and specialized vocabulary â€Å"originate in the written input. Together . . . they form a ‘virtual loop’ where speech and writing constantly feed and modify each other† (p. 30). Because written language—whether in print or hypertext form—exhibits properties that are distinct from speech (Biber, 1988, 1995; Wolf, 2007) and because texts may predetermine the range of meanings that they express, â€Å"spoken language and written language can rarely be the same† (Smith, 2004, p. 42). As a tool that â€Å"increases human control of communication and knowledge,† writing â€Å"uses a written symbol to represent a uni t of language and not an object, event, or emotion directly† (Birch, 2007, p. 15). Writing practices and conventions are always deeply â€Å"socially contextualized,† nlike oral language, which entails a comparably â€Å"universal set of How to cite Teaching English, Papers

Sustainability Accounting and Accountability Accounting and Finance

Question: Discuss about the Sustainability Accounting and Accountability for Accounting and Finance? Answer: Importance of Audit Quality The main purpose of audit report is to enhance in the degree of confidence by most of the users of company based financial reports. It is noticed that users have the liberty to include creditors, shareholders as well as stakeholders for maintaining business relationship within the working of the company. High quality audit report will help in demonstrating true financial position and attracting the partners for new ventures for the same (Scott 2014). It is important to consider the fact that audit serves as disruption for the company in accordance with the normal workflow. Factors affecting the criticism on audit quality There are various factors associated with audit quality and these are as follows: Internal control Audit quality is mainly obtained from the process of identification and administrating with the financial activities for reaching the quality objectives in an overall manner (Kaplan and Atkinson 2015). Audit firm aims at high-quality audit committees and minimizing in the internal control weaknesses for future business activities. Firm Size Most of the large business organization perform powerful test for measuring the audit quality in the operational matters. There is positive relationship between the firm sizes of audit firm as well as audit quality for the same. There are vast differences between the forecasted as well as reported incomes for the large companies. Fees of Auditors Audit fees relates with the charges that is paid by the companies especially to the external auditors. They are paid for rendering audit services as well as non-audit services. These services include management advisory as well as professional consultancy services (DRURY 2013). These fees include various wages and benefits especially for the office as well as field personnel in audit support activities. Audit fees are quality differentiated in the competitive market for viewing at the quality differences in an overall manner. Independence of auditors Independent audit committee helps in enhancing in the independence of an external auditor. This ensures professional advices with response to management activities for the same. Audit committee mostly conduct informal as well as private meetings for discussing the material issues for future business activities (Brown 2014). Audit independence helps in maintaining auditor-client negotiation for most of the financial reporting issues for the quality external auditors. Reputation of auditors This particular research will help in investigating on audit failure based upon the reputation of auditors. Reputation of an auditor depends on the perceived as well as actual levels in the auditing reports (Deegan 2012). It is important to understand the fact that high-quality job will help in increasing the level of profitability as well as audit results. Industry specialization In this particular research, relation between audit quality and the industry of an auditor will help in detection of audit results. Qualification and proficiency of auditors The main aim of audit report is to assure the outsiders on matters relating to material misstatements in the financial statements (Bebbington, Unerman and O'Dwyer 2014). It is required to develop in the leadership as well as management skills and level of proficiency in an overall manner. Critical appraisal by the professor regulators and effectiveness of proposed measures in improving audit quality Accounting or auditing scandals are the events, where the trusted executives of an organization provide misleading financial facts to influence various factors such as profit, taxes etc. Misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating the value of corporate assets, understating expenses or under reporting the existence of liabilities are the most common forms of auditing scandals (Hay 2015). Various companies such as TESCO have been found involved in various audit scandals. Recently, after identifying revenue recognition irregularities in the half-year results of TESCO, it is found that the management of TESCO overstated their profits by 263 Million in 2015 (Mohamed and Handley-Schachler 2015). The regulators and the Conduct Authority (FCA) decided to penalize the organization accordingly. The management of TESCO estimated that their supermarket business would go to earn 1.1 Billion as half-year trading profit in 2015. The company enh anced their profit by embarking on aggressive accounting excessively. However, the half-year trading profit became 263 Million (originally 250 Million). After the incident, the management started reviewing the figures to identify why they end up inflating first half- year profit prediction in 2015. They realised that they overstated the figures during the final preparations for their latest interim results (Haddock-Millar and Rigby 2015). Although, PwC is the usual auditor, but Deloitte actually conducted a comprehensive and independent review to analysis the situation by involving the delayed accrual of costs and the accelerated recognition of commercial income. Deloitte found that TESCO indeed overstated their profit. 2014-15 Overstated profit by 118 Million during the first half of 2015 2013-14 Overstated profit by 70 Million 2012-13 Overstated profit by 75 Million Table 1: Investigation of Deloitte (Source: Sharma and Kelly 2015) Balanced Scorecard for the audit quality that includes four major categories: Input Process Outcomes Context Incentives and motivation Regulatory Enforcement Potential reputation loss Potential litigation cost Audit process judgement Experience as well as experience of an auditor Time of audit accountability Adverse outcomes Restatements of accounting criteria Litigation against an auditor Audit Partner Partner Incentives Audit Partner Compensation Professional Skepticism Moral Reasoning Tenure of audit Professional Identification Audit Production Corporate Governance Earnings Manipulation Political Risk of audit firm Disclosure policies Financial Reporting Quality Earnings Neutrality Earnings Conservatism Earnings creditability Abnormal audit firms Knowledge and expertise Assessment of risk Audit Reports Non audit fes The group CEO of TESCO, Dave Lewis accordingly accepted their mistakes and duly indicated the incident as a serious issue. He also concentrated on both transparency and integrity. He also assured that the management would take necessary actions based on the investigation outcomes. The full-year trading profit of TESCO went down due to challenging trading conditions and the market share of the company also decreased due to the presence of various potential competitors. Additionally, the audit scandal also affected the market reputation of TESCO (Tsegba and Upaa 2015). TESCO has been one of the market leaders within the UK grocery sector, but the business is now facing threats from various rivals. As a result, the market share and the profitability of TESCO significantly decreased, especially during 2014 and 2015. This was the situation that mainly influenced TESCO to involve in aggressive accounting scandal. The threats of a publicly traded company, which is focusing on the short-term perspectives, can be evaluated from the case of TESCO (Yu 2015). Due to increasing pressure from the investors, the company was hardly able to concentrate upon establishing a long-term sustainable business with innovation and better customer relationships. The company often forecasted that their earnings would never going to match the demands of the investors. They tried overstating figures in order to retain support and attractiveness of their business organization (Hay 2015). They realised that TESCO was not going to reach their sales target and they dealt with the ir suppliers to make such payments by offering various benefits in the next financial year. Such benefits are actually kept secret unethically and TESCO actually had to pay the money back to their suppliers in the worst-case scenarios. Aggressive accounting is acceptable to limited extent, but TESCO went too far with that. Six major Japanese banks: Master Trust Bank of Japan Ltd, Mitsubishi UFJ Trust Banking Corp, Trust Custody Services Bank Ltd, Japan Trustee Services Bank Ltd, State Street Trust Banking Co, and Nomura Trust Banking Co sued Olympus Corporation for submitting misleading financial statements for 13 years starting in the 1990s (Tsegba and Upaa 2015). The key purpose of Olympus Corporation was to attract more investors in the short run. Starting from 1990s, the Japanese equity market started declining and Olympus Corporation started incurring loss. However, under the accounting standards of Japan back then, Olympus Corporation did not report their unrealized losses. The company has also tried hiding their loss with overpriced acquisitions. However, due to the introduction fair value accounting by the Business Accounting Deliberation Council, Olympus Corporation had no option but to mention their loss (Sharma and Kelly 2015). Conclusion and Recommendations From the above study, it is easy to gather information on audit quality. This research on audit quality helps in understanding concepts related to corporate transparency as well as market efficiency in an overall manner. There were various undoubted effects related to transparency as well as reliability on the corporate reporting system. It mainly tracks the audit quality and its lacking in the regulation activities. This increases in the level of complexity as well as subjectivity of the research work. Audit quality framework will help in satisfying the main aspect that includes the degree of compliance for the predetermined criteria for the same. In order to understand the audit quality, it is essential to assure the reliability pattern in the corporate reporting system. It helps in regulators for setting the shareholders role and identification of quality drivers in the input process in an overall manner. Reference List Bebbington, J., Unerman, J. and O'Dwyer, B., 2014.Sustainability accounting and accountability. Routledge. Brown, R., 2014.A history of accounting and accountants. Routledge. Deegan, C., 2012.Australian financial accounting. McGraw-Hill Education Australia. DRURY, C.M., 2013.Management and cost accounting. Springer. Frc.org.uk,. "Financial Reporting Council". N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Haddock-Millar, J. and Rigby, C., 2015, January. BUSINESS STRATEGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT: TESCO PLC'S DECLINING FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND UNDERLYING ISSUES. InGlobal Conference on Business Finance Proceedings(Vol. 10, No. 1, p. 127). Institute for Business Finance Research. Hay, D., 2015. The Frontiers of Auditing Research.Meditari Accountancy Research, Forthcoming. https://www.accaglobal.com, ACCA. "Global Body For Professional Accountants | Accountancy | ACCA | ACCA Global".Accaglobal.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Iaasb.org,. "Auditing Assurance | IFAC". N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Icaew.com,. "Audit Quality Forum 10Th Anniversary - Can Business Ever Get It Right? | ICAEW". N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Icaew.com,. "Welcome To ICAEW.Com | ICAEW". N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Kaplan, R.S. and Atkinson, A.A., 2015.Advanced management accounting. PHI Learning. Mohamed, N. and Handley-Schachler, M., 2015. Roots of Responsibilities to Financial Statement Fraud Control.Procedia Economics and Finance,28, pp.46-52. Scott, W.R., 2014.Financial accounting theory. Pearson Education Canada. Sharma, U. and Kelly, M., 2015. The changing role of accounting education and management control systems in the age of sustainability.International Journal of Critical Accounting,7(3), pp.289-303. Tsegba, I.N. and Upaa, J.U., 2015. Consequences of Financial Statement Fraud: A Developing Country Perspective.International Journal of Business and Management,10(8), p.115. YouTube,. "Audit Quality With David York, Head Of Auditing Practice At ACCA". N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan. 2016. Yu, Y.F., 2015. Accounting fraud motivation.

Innovation at Philips Lighting

Brackets (and how to use them) - Emphasis

Brackets (and how to use them) Brackets (and how to use them) So, those emoticon smiles: what else can they be used for? Round brackets Imagine the contents of round brackets (or parentheses) as an aside that might be said behind your hand (an actor on a stage might anyway). These punctuation marks come in handy to: include optional information You dont have much time left to finish your Christmas shopping (only six shopping days!). introduce an abbreviation or explain a term At this time of year, many people suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD); although equally problematic during December is pogonophobia (a fear of beards). cross-refer If youre wondering where to put punctuation around brackets, youll soon find out (see below). To learn more about pogonophobia, see The Big Book of Phobias (p92). add authorial commentary (if appropriate to the context) The effects of SAD can be quite debilitating (believe me). cover several possible eventualities The Christmas e-bulletin should be well-received by its already tipsy reader(s). Square brackets But parentheses are not to be confused with square brackets. These can be used to: add an editors note or direction Emphasis staff will be required to wear Santa hats to work throughout December [Catie to purchase these]. clarify meaning in a quote without changing any of the original words She said, If you make me wear that thing [the Santa hat] to work, Im quitting. In these cases, you can just replace the word(s) being clarified eg I said: if you make me put on [the Santa hat], Im quitting. Humbug! Punctuating brackets It can be confusing working out where to put the punctuation around brackets (but were here to help): The first rule is quite straightforward. (If you are writing a full sentence inside them, the full stop or alternative should be inside the brackets.) But the full stop will be on the outside if the brackets contain only part of the full sentence (as these do). Put a comma outside the brackets (as demonstrated here), when those brackets appear at the end of a clause within the sentence. If the bracketed aside needs a question mark or exclamation mark, youll still need to add a full stop on the outside to complete the sentence (like this!).

Business & Society Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Business & Society - Research Paper Example ss organizations to act ethically to promote an enabling environment, which is conducive for business thus, ensuring no single company gets an unfair advantage over the others. Business ethics is not only limited to the manner in which organizations conduct themselves in the business environment but also to the manner in which they respond to legal obligations like adherence to laws & regulations governing the business environment in which they operate. Corporate social responsibility is also another front in which companies demonstrate business ethics. It is not in order for a firm to conduct business in a certain locality and make large turnovers without giving back to the society that is responsible for its success. A business firm will be deemed unethical if it fails to give back to the society in terms of corporate social responsibility activities since the society provides the enabling environment for it to exist and flourish economically (Shaw, 2008). Bayou Hedge fund is an American Company operating in the financial industry. It was established in 1996 by Samuel Israel. This fund group comprised a number of pyramid scheme companies that came together under the umbrella Bayou Hedge fund group. In its inception, the founder Mr. Samuel Israel duped investors to commit their money into the company in the hope that it will triple in a period of less than 5 years. Many investors bought the scrupulous idea and committed a substantial amount of money into Bayou hedge group. Records show that the initial amount of money that was raised by investors was approximately $450 million. The group’s founder convinced the investors who had come on board that in a period of five years that is 1996-2001, the investment would have regenerated to $4 billion. I think the investors failed to conduct due diligence feasibility on their investment as they would have come up with formidable reasons to forego the option of investing in the company, h owever, the deal was too sweet