TEACHING AN ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO CHILDREN AT PRIMARY SCHOOL: Insights from international research and policy development Richard Johnstone Kumamoto,

TEACHING AN ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE

TO CHILDREN AT PRIMARY SCHOOL:

Insights from international research

and policy development

Richard JohnstoneKumamoto, Japan, February 2010

THANKS

2

Most grateful for the invitation to talk at your conference. Delighted to be here in Japan. Hoping to have an opportunity to chat with you during the

conference. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask

them at the end of my talk or at other times. Thank you very much

A POLICY EXAMPLE: EUROPEAN COMMISSION (EC) ACTION PLAN

3

Action Plan for the promotion of language learning and linguistic diversity (2003) :

strongly recommends the teaching of an additional language (AL) to young children from an early age, with a second AL introduced by the end of Primary School education.

The Action Plan aims: to develop their proficiency in languages to help them acquire a wider sense of belonging,

citizenship and community, and to develop a clearer understanding of their opportunities,

rights and responsibilities as mobile citizens of a multilingual Europe.

THREE MODELS OF LANGUAGE EDUCATION FOR YOUNGER LEARNERS

4

1. Modern Language at Primary School (MLPS), or 1. Foreign Language at Elementary School (FLES)

Drip-feed, i.e. fairly small time allocation, with various possible starting-ages

May be separate subject or ‘embedded’ But, thus far large-scale policy outcomes mixed at best This is the model which I will mainly be discussing in my talk

2. Language Awareness Introduce children to a variety of languages & cultures Develop an underlying awareness / knowledge of language

3. Bilingual Education Early total or partial immersion High in ‘time’ & ‘intensity’ Outcomes can be highly impressive, given suitable context &

conditions

Early Language Learning (ELL)Policy Development

5

First wave: 1960s to early 1970s Negative or mixed evaluation (Burstall et al, 1975)

Second wave: 1990s ….. Mixed evaluation (Blondin et al, 1998) Children’s attitudes were very positive but …….

Inadequate supply of well-trained teachers Lack of continuity between primary and secondary schools Pedagogy which tended to lead to fairly fluent pre-fabrication

(formulaic production) but often not to creativity or accuracy. Lack of sustainability after initially successful pilot schemes

Third wave: 2000+ ….. The globalisation of Early Language Learning

ADDRESSING KEY FACTORS – MLPS (CROATIA)

6

Djigunovich and Vilke (2000): Children beginning early (aged 6) 45 minutes per day for five days per week class size of 15 for languages early incorporation of grammatical concepts after these are

firmly established in first language (Croatian) emotional warmth, intellectual challenge teachers who possessed a fluent command of the language

and a good pronunciation and intonation all four skills introduced early, with high fluency, accuracy

and complexity in combinations of L, S, R, W by Year 4 (aged 9)

A longitudinal study of the same children’s motivation showed it was equally high in Years 1 and 3 but its nature

had changed considerably from ‘motivation by fun’ to ‘motivation because I’m a

successful language learner’

QUESTIONS7

When learning an additional language: In what ways do younger learners have an advantage

over older learners? In what ways do older learners have an advantage over

younger learners?

YOUNGER & OLDER LEARNERS COMPARED

Still access their intuitive language-acquisition capability?

More sensitive to the sound system

Less ‘language anxious’ More time available overall Productive links between first

and additional languages Acquisition and learning

processes over time complement each other

Positive influence on general development: cognitive, social, emotional, cultural, hence identity.

Make use of existing conceptual map of the world

Experienced in discourse, e.g. manage conversations (e.g. Scarcella & Higa, 1985)

Wider range of strategies, e.g. note-taking summarising reference materials

Sense of WHY, WHAT and HOW, to guide their learning

8

Younger learners Older learners

KEY MLPS FACTOR: CONTINUITY 9

It works well when across the two sectors (Primary-Secondary) there is the following: exchange of information and support reciprocal visits collaborative planning mutual esteem

Large-scale project in New South Wales,Australia: Chesterton et al (2004) Joint planning by teachers covering 3 years at Primary

School and 2 years at Secondary School

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ELL PEDAGOGY

1. Dependence on input in the classroom, e.g. teacher, audio

2. Assume children will develop implicit, intuitive knowledge of the additional language system

3. Initially Listening & Speaking before Reading & Writing

4. Lots of learning by heart, fun, songs, drama, games

5. Praise plus limited correction

6. Progressing through successive stages of a course

1. Varied Input (including ICT) + interaction

2. Transfer explicit knowledge of language concepts from first language

3. Early introduction reading & writing, to complement listening & speaking

4. Development of learner strategies, e.g. diaries, portfolios

5. Praise plus corrective feedback, importance of ‘noticing’ forms

6. Climbing an explicit ladder of performance, e.g. level 1 to level 6

10

THEN…. NOW ….

PROGRESSION: UPS & DOWNS11

Mitchell (2003) claims that second language learning is not like climbing a ladder; but is a complex and recursive process with multiple interconnections

and backslidings, and complex trade-offs between advances in fluency, accuracy and

complexity. Pelzer-Karpf & Zangl (1997) found that children’s

utterances seemed impressive in Years 1&2 but then in Year 3 went through a phase of ‘Systemturbulenz’

in which their grammar control seemed to fall apart when the cognitive demands of their tasks were raised to the

point that temporarily their grammar-systems could not fully cope But by Year 4 it sorted itself out.

CREATIVITY AND ACCURACY12

How to help learners become both creative and accurate in their spontaneous spoken output? Lyster (2004) studied ‘form-focused instruction’ (FFI)

and ‘corrective feedback’ (CF) with Grade 5 children. FFI and CF were found to be more successful than an

approach based on no-FFI and no-CF. He also found it useful to encourage pupils in ‘noticing’

particular formal features of the target language This helped them develop an awareness of language

and to refine their internalised language systems as they progressed

EARLY READING13

Mertens (2003) found that children in Grade 1 learning French benefited from being introduced to written French immediately showed results superior to those in purely oral approaches

Vickov (2007) claims that children at Grade 1 in Croatia were not disadvantaged in their writing in Croatian by being

introduced to writing in English. Dlugosz (2000) found that the introduction of reading in

the foreign language at kindergarten even when reading in the first language was also only just

starting helped speed the process of understanding and speaking the

foreign language.

CHILDREN’S MOTIVATION: ACTIVITIES

14

Wu (2003) studied children aged 5 learning English primary school in Hong Kong, monolingual Cantonese classroom activities which fostered intrinsic motivation

These included a predictable learning environment, moderately challenging tasks, necessary instructional support, evaluation that emphasises self-improvement attribution of success or failure to variables that the

learner can do something about.

CHILDREN’S INTRINSIC MOTIVATION: DEVELOPMENT

15

Nikolov (1999) followed three cohorts of children for eight years, taught by the same teacher.

It was found that learners’ motivation could be maintained by intrinsically

interesting and cognitively challenging tasks Intrinsic motivation

Initially associated with ‘fun’ activity Then becomes linked to ‘curiosity’ and ‘challenge’ Then becomes associated with perception of self as

successful language learner

THE EARLY LEARNING OF AN ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN PRE-PRIMARY OR PRIMARY SCHOOL EDUCATION

Does it detract from a child’s sense of national identity? Does it make a Japanese child feel less Japanese?

Does it detract from a child’s proficiency in their first language / the national language? Does it hold back the development of a Japanese child’s

command of the Japanese language? I believe that the answer to both questions is:

No. On the contrary, it can enhance both their sense of national

identity and their proficiency in their first/national language, provided that the additional language is well taught.

16

CONCLUSION: SUCCESSFUL LEARNER

Plans, practices, revises Reviews, Self-assesses Processes input, e.g.

notices, guesses, infers, predicts

Seeks opportunities to use the additional language ‘for real’

Seeks feedback: negative as well as positive

Relates learning & use of the additional language to the learning of other things

Uses reference material appropriately

Interacts and negotiates meaning, e.g. probes, seeks clarification

Offers help, seeks help Takes personal

responsibility

Is aware of and manages different types of discourse

Produces spontaneous as well as non-spontaneous output

Focuses on form as well as on meaning, at different times

Controls anxiety and uses this productively

Feels confident, self-efficacious

Seeks underlying pattern Pays attention, focuses

attention, sustains attention

Develops strategies, uses these and reflects on / revises them

Self-motivates, self-rewards, is curious and seeks challenges

…… Other?

17

SUCCESSFUL ELL TEACHING: 1

18

Planning: Seeking to develop not only AL proficiency but also broader

aims, e.g. citizenship, intercultural learning, social skills Collaborating and joint planning with other colleagues in the

school, with parents and with teachers in secondary schools Planning long-term for sustainability, as well as short-term for

success Adopting an inclusive approach, bringing encouragement,

emotional warmth appropriate support to all pupils Understanding that true progression in a language is not based

on the ‘ladder’ model but is a more complex and recursive process.

Building on children’s first language, whatever that may be, helping them to develop explicit conceptual knowledge of this which is then transferred systematically to the additional language they are learning.

SUCCESSFUL ELL TEACHING: 2

19

Providing: a clear example to pupils of oneself as an enthusiastic,

though by no means perfect, AL learner and user encouragement, sustained and varied input, interaction,

feedback, a supportive learning environment and guidance

a challenge which stimulates pupils’ interest and �curiosity

corrective as well as positive feedback, while ensuring �that this does not undermine confidence or self-esteem

open-ended questions and stimuli, encouraging children �to be free and creative.

SUCCESSFUL ELL TEACHING: 3

20

Encouraging learners: to be strategic &reflective, to engage in self-assessment &

self-monitoring to begin reading, writing from an early stage to draw holistically on their range of capacities and senses,

e.g. physical movement, sense of shape, colour, gesture ….. to derive motivation from feelings of pleasure and success in

what they are attempting to do �to focus on the structure of different kinds of discourse, e.g.

conversations, stories, reports, essays, letters … to develop skills of predicting, guessing and making

inferences to reflect on and explore the rich diversity of human

language and the immense linguistic potential that each of us possesses

REFERENCES

Blondin, C., Candelier, M., Edelenbos, P., Johnstone, R., Kubanek-German, A. & Taeschner, T. (1998). Foreign languages in primary and pre-school education. A review of recent research within the European Union. London: CILT

Burstall, C, Jamieson, M., Cohen, S. & Hargreaves, M. (1974). Primary French in the Balance. NFER: Slough.

Chesterton, P., Steigler-Peters, S., Moran, W. & Piccioli, M. T. (2004). Developing sustainable language learning pathways: an Australian initiative. Language, Culture & Curriculum, 17, 1, 48-57 balance. Windsor: NFER Publishing.

Djigunovich, J. (1995) Attitudes of young foreign language learners: a follow-up study. In: M. Vilke & Y. Vrhovac. (Eds.). Children and foreign languages. University of Zagreb: Faculty of Philosophy. 16-33.

Djigunovich, J. & Vilke, M. (2000). Eight years after; wishful thinking or the facts of life. In: J Moon & M. Nikolov. (Eds.). Op cit. 67-86.

Dlugosz, D.W. (2000). Rethinking the role of reading in teaching a foreign language to young learners. ELT Journal, 54 3, 284 - 290.

Edelenbos, P., Johnstone R. M. & Kubanek, A. (2006). The main pedagogical principles underlying the teaching of languages to very young learners. Languages for the children of Europe: Published Research, Good Practice & Main Principles. Brussels, European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/doc/young_en.pdf

European Commission. (2003). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: an Action Plan 2004-2006. Brussels: European Commission

Johnstone, R. M. (2001. Addressing 'the age factor': some implications for languages policy. Guide for the development of Language Education Policies in Europe - From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education. Strasbourg, Council of Europe Reference Study http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/JohnstoneEN.pdf

21

REFERENCES (continued)

Lyster, R. (2004a). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.

Lyster, R. (2004b). Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies, 14, 3, 321-41.

Low, L., Brown, S., Johnstone, R. & Pirrie, A. (1995). Foreign languages in primary schools. Evaluation of the Scottish pilot projects. Final Report. Stirling: Scottish CILT.

Mertens, J. (2003). Rhythm, rhymes and rules. Vom Nutzen der Schrift (nicht nur) beim frühen Englischlernen. Fremdsprachenunterricht, 47 (56) 3, 168 - 173.

Mitchell, R. (2003). Rethinking the concept of progression in the national curriculum for modern foreign languages: a research perspective. Language Learning Journal, Winter 2003.

Nikolov, M. (1999). Why do you learn English? 'Because the teacher is short.' A study of Hungarian children's foreign language learning motivation.' Language Teaching Research, 3, 1, 33-56.

Peltzer-Karpf, A. & Zangl, R. (1997). Vier Jahre Vienna Bilingual Schooling: Eine angzeitstudie. Vienna; Bundesministerium für Unterricht und kulturelle Angelegenheiten., Abteilung 1/1.

Scarcella, R. C. & Higa, C. A. (1982) Input and age differences in second language acquisition. In: S.

Vickov, G. (2007) Pisanje na engleskom u prvom razredu osnovne skole (Writing skills in English in the first Grade of primary school), Stranijezici.

Wu, X. (2003). Intrinsic motivation and young language learners: the impact of the classroom environment. System, 31 4, 501 - 517.

22

PROCESSES: COMPUTER-MEDIATED

23

Nutta et al (2002) compared a conventional text-based approach with a computer-enhanced

multimedia approach, pupils Grades 2-5 in a USA elementary school. The computer-enhanced group:

more interactive greater access to immediate feedback more precise in pronunciation smoother flow of reading produced larger chunks of language.

Concluded that: ICT can help younger learners in integrating their languages skills and

in developing important strategies of monitoring.

Reference: Nutta, J. et. al. (2002). Exploring new frontiers: What do computers contribute to

teaching foreign languages in elementary school? Foreign Language Annals, 35 , 3, 293 - 306.

PROCESSES: PEER-TUTORING24

Xu, Gelper & Perkins (2005) studied class-wide peer-tutoring (CWPT) Children at elementary school Grade 2 in the United

States Regular instances of:

cooperative play reciprocal initiation & response.

The researchers concluded that: CWPT had significantly helped the children in their social

behaviour.

Reference: Xu, Y., J. Gelfer & P. Perkins. (2005). Using peer-tutoring to increase social interactions

in early schooling. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 1, 83-106

KEEPING A PORTFOLIO 25

Short statements of what learners think they can do I can explain … a game, a recipe, how to make

something I can narrate/tell … an experience, a story, a

film I can say … what I like/dislike, and explain why I can speak/talk about … my friends, family I can read … an illustrated children’s book I can find … in a text what I am looking for

Personal diary of occasions outside school when the learner used the target language

Brief discussion of language-learning problems encountered, and of solutions which the learner has found

….. Other?

SOME OF THE CHALLENGES IN LARGE-SCALE ELL POLICY IMPLEMENTATION THAT FACE US NOW

26

Follow-through from 3+ to 18+, based on continuity Enhanced understanding of progression

Getting beyond or refining the ‘ladder’ model Setting up international ICT-mediated projects

Putting learners and their teachers in regular touch with partners abroad

Using more than one language Citizenship, intercultural & plurilingual proficiency development

Developing methodologies which work well in less-than-ideal contexts Whether in developed or less developed countries

Soliciting and maintaining political will for large-scale development To maximise societal and provision factors Important for sustainability of initially well-funded initiatives