1 / 15

3. Definition and theories on bilingualism (Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 20-28)

3. Definition and theories on bilingualism (Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 20-28). General definition : the ability to speak two languages fluently Bloomfield’s (1933): the mastery of two or more languages at native-like level.

jenski
Download Presentation

3. Definition and theories on bilingualism (Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 20-28)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 3. Definition and theories on bilingualism(Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 20-28) General definition: the ability to speak two languages fluently • Bloomfield’s (1933): the mastery of two or more languages at native-like level. • Andersson and Boyer (1978): the use of two languages for curricular instruction in non-language subjects. • B1 level or higher is necessary for instruction to be effective; at this level users are independent and competent • Balanced bilingualism: when two languages are used at more or less the same level. • Semilingualism: It occurs when the mastery of one language is considerably higher than another. • BICS (basic interpersonal communicative skills): the ability to maintain a simpleconversation, for example in a shop or in the street. It is developed with contextual cues (including gestures) and often occurs in face-to-face situations (Cummins, 1980). • CALP (Cognitive/academic language proficiency): the ability to cope with study programmes in academic contexts. It is developed in reduced contexts (i.e. the classroom, conferences, seminars, etc.) (Cummins, 1980).

  2. 4. Theoriesonbilingualism(Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 20-28) 1. Balance theory • It represents two languages coexisting in equilibrium, the second language increases at expense of the first. • Represented with an image of two linguistic balloons inside the head of the learner; the monolingual individual has one large balloon whereas the bilingual individual has two smaller ones (see Baker 1993:190). • Cummins (1980, 1981): separate underlying model of bilingualism with the twolanguages operating in isolation. • Rejected by research studies: linguistic competence is transferred ad interactive. L1 capacity L2 capacity Bilingual individual Monolingual individual

  3. Theories on bilingualism 2 2. Common underlying proficiency Cummins (1980, 1981) illustrates it with an image of two separate icebergs which are joined at the base: • Based on these principles: • When using two or more languages, ideas come from a common source. • Individuals can function with two or more languages with relative ease. • Cognitive functioning may be fed by monolingual or plurilingual channels. • The language used by the learner must be developed to process the classroom cognitive • challenges. • Listening, speaking, reading and writing in the L1 or L2 help the development of the cognitive • system as a whole. • L2 negativeattitudes and a limited competence level affects academic performance • negatively

  4. Theoriesonbilingualism 3 3. Threshold theory Cummins (1976) and Skutnabb-Kangas (1979): • Describes the relationship between cognition and the level of bilingualism. • The closer the students are to being bilingual, the greater the chance they have of obtaining cognitive advantages. • It has been represented as a house with three floors and two linguistic ladders (L1 and L2) on each side (Baker 1993:194): Upperfloor Balancedbilinguals - Adequatecompetence in L2 forthestudents’ age. - Cognitiveadvantages. 2nd threshold Mediumfoor Lessbalancedbilinguals - Adequatecompetence in L2 forthestudentsage. - No negativeeffects. 1st threshold 1st floor Limitedbilinguals - Lowestlevel of competence. - Cognitivenegativeeffects. L1 L2

  5. Theoriesonbilingualism 4 Linguistic interdependence hypothesis • Based on the relationship between the development of L1 and L2. • Proposed by Vygotsky (1934, 1986) and Cummins (1978). • Competence in L2 depends in part on the level of competence already acquired in L1. • The higher the level of development in L1 the easier it will be to develop the L2.

  6. 4. Types of bilingual education (Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 28-30) • Bilingual education by submersion • The objective of the bilingual programme is the integration of students in the monolingual community. • This is the case of many bilingual programmes in the United States • The students are submersed in the foreign language from the beginning (or after some form of transitory bilingual instruction). • Sink or swim modalities: students are thrown into the ‘pool’ in order to learn to swim without floating aids. The pool is seen as the majority language (e.g. English in the United States) and students receive lessons in that language. • The basic objective is to assimilate the majority language and culture.

  7. Types of bilingual education 2 2. Immersion programmes • The objective is to promote the use of two languages at the same level in order to maintain the status of bilingualism. • Example: dual immersion programmes in Canada. • Total immersion: 100% instruction in the L2 during the first two years, reduced to 80% in the three or four years following, and by the end of primary education 50% of immersion in the L2. • Partial immersion, offers 50% immersion in the L2 throughout kindergarten and primary education.

  8. Types of bilingual education 3 3. CLIL programmes in monolingual areas • Monolingual areas in which majority foreign languages are promoted in addition to the L1 (e.g. English in Holland, Denmark, Finland, Spain, etc.). • Exposition to the L2 outside the classroom is very limited or non-existent. • Use of two majority languages in the school. • CLIL programmes are used.

  9. 5.1. Negative effects of bilingual education(Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 32) • Rossell and Baker (1996): the results of bilingual programmes are inferior to total immersion programmes offered in the USA for ethnic minority groups. • Glen (1997): it is better for students to participate in sink-or-swim programmes than in bilingual ones. Some difficulties and problems: • Abandonment of the L1 in favour of the L2. • The mixture of L1 and L2 in a single system: problems of interference, particularly in children in infancy. • Possible negativelinguistic and cognitive development. • Difficulties in linguistic expression due to phonetic, semantic, lexical and morphosyntactical interference from the L1 and L2. • Written expression in L2 is often influenced by L1 as a result of lack of competence in the second language. • Anxiety, insecurity or frustration in oral communication in L2 with negative effects in acquisition of written skills.

  10. 5.2. Benefits of bilingual education(Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 33-36) • Peal and Lambert (1962) found a positive correlation between bilingualism and highintelligence quotient, bilingualism helped mental agility and the formation of abstract concepts. • Byalistok (1991) and Diaz and Klingler (1991): positive relationship between bilingual individuals and thought processes, organisation skills, reasoning and visual and spatial skills. • Considerable cognitive advantages (Cenoz 2003, Lasagaster 2000, Siguán 1986, 1992, 1996) and near native performance levels after 6-7 years of immersion. • The competences in subjects taught in the L2 are similar to those acquired in L1 and there are no significant differences. • The level of knowledge in L1 has a strong influence in the results obtained in L2 instruction (linguistic Interdependence hypothesis) (Chiswick 1991, Cummins 2000). • Better intercultural education over the long term (González,Guillén,Vez 2010, Riagáin/Lüdi 2003). • It helps the learning of a third language (Lasagabaster 2007). • Greater metalinguistic capacity than monolinguals (Galambos,Goldin-Meadow 1990). • Greater attitudinal competence (savoir-être) towards languages than monolinguals.

  11. Some fundamental interacting variables in bilingual education • Students’ motivation and commitment • Students general skills and L1 development • Positive family, social and cultural environment • Teachers’ adequate training and incorporation of L2 native teachers • The teachers’ characteristics and approach • Quality of the programme offered • Available resources • The L2 should be used for at least 50% of class time • Additive bilingual environment: students study L2 without jeopardising performance in L1.

  12. Effectiveclassroomtechniques in bilingualeducation(Snow 1990, Madrid y Hughes 2011, Madrid y Madrid 2013) • Integrated curricular design • Maximum use of the L2/Ln and minimum use (or no use) of the L1 • Helping the students construct their knowledge establishing connections between the new and the learnt knowledge to favour its integration in the students’ cognitive network • Provision of rich contextual support (e.g. through paralanguage, etc.). • Reiteration of instructions and organisational guidelines. Repetition of what is said and done in class. • Use of graphs, conceptual maps, synthesis and summaries. • The ample use of visual materials, realia, and resources which allow the senses to engage in learning. • Intensive group and cooperative work. • The teacher becomes the linguistic model, so a careful pronunciation and clear oral expression are vital. • Variety of methods and learning tasks. • The need for high levels of comprehensible input (Krashen 1985). • Adequate error treatment

  13. 6. Bilingual programmes in Spanish autonomous communities(Madrid and Hughes, 2011: 40-49) 6.1. Autonomous Communities with co-official languages • Bilingualism and trilingualism has been intensely developed in the Spanish regions with a co-official language (Muñoz 2005, Siguán 1992, Vila 1992). • In Catalonia, the curriculum is taught predominantly in Catalonian. • In the Basque Country, three models of bilingualism have been applied (see Bilbatua 1992, Cenoz 2005, Etxeberría, 2003, Lasagabaster 2000, 2001, 2005): • Teaching in Spanish with Basque being a separate language subject; • Teaching in Basque and Spanish; • Teaching of the curriculum in Basque (predominant) • Galicia has introduced Galescolas, though Spanish still holds an important position within the education system (Sobrado 2004).

  14. 6.2. Andalusia • The Plan de Fomento del Plurilingüismo: Una política lingüística para la sociedad andaluza was established to promote plurilingualism in 2005 (BOJA nº 65, de 5 de abril). • Aims to provide the Andalusian population with sufficient plurilingualcompetencies to deal with the technological, social and economic changes of today’s society (see Barrios 2007, 2010; Madrid 2005, 2006). • In June 2011), there were: • 762 bilingual schools, 394 in the Primary sector and 368 in Secondary Education. • Most of them (693 schools) use English as a vehicular language for he curriculum, • 57 schools use French and 12 institutions use German. • This means that 73560 students are receiving bilingual education in Andalusia. • There are 4415 teachers implied in the project and 1234 native assistant teachers.

  15. Effects and benefits of theAndalusianplurilingualprogramme(Jaimez y López Morillas, 2011) • Increase in the number of hours of language study in the school curriculum • Greater coordination and teamwork of language and content teachers. • Promotion of the integration of ICT in the teaching practice. • Elaboration of the Andalusian Integrated Curriculum of Languages (CIL). • Increase in participation in European programmes. • Promotion of schools twinning and exchange visits. • Increase in immersion courses for pupils and teachers. • Creation of a specific training plan for teachers in Bilingual Schools, including periods of Language Immersion. • Expansion of the network of Official Language Schools. • Expansion of distance language learning. • Aid for the creation of curricular resources, and elaboration of CLIL digital materials. • Incorporation of the figure of the native-speaking teaching assistant. • Training programmes for language teachers and on methodology, based on the CEF, for teachers of non-language subjects • Development of intensive L2/Ln courses for all teachers at the Official Language Schools.

More Related