What makes the illiterate language genius?

1. What makes the illiterate language genius? Jeanne Kurvers & Ineke van de Craats Tilburg University Radboud University Nijmegen j.j.kurvers@uvt.nl i.v.d.craats@let.ru.nl

2. What makes the illiterate language genius? Is it a good working memory? or (also) something else?

3. The Study • Relationship between Working memory and L2 vocabulary Working memory and L2 basic reading skills • Comparison between Adult and child L2 learners Average and above average adult L2 learners

4. Participants • Participants: 173 • Adult L2 learners 57 no previous schooling age 18-61 • Primary school L2 children: 116 grade 1 –7 • Language background L1 different languages L2 Dutch

5. Instruments • Digit span task (WISC-R, forward) • Non-word repetition task (Gerrits) same task scored in two ways - phonemic score (how many phonemes) - span score (how many words) • Vocabulary task (TAK) • Word reading task (Decoding fluency)

6. Correlations WM measures Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for L2 children

7. Correlations WM measures Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for L2 adults

8. Correlations WM measures • The two WM tests correlate significantly for both groups. • The two measures of the NRT show higher correlations for adults. • The pattern of correlations is the same for both age groups. cf. Cheung (1996); Juffs (LESLLA Proceedings, 2006)

9. Group scores WM and Vocabulary Scores for children and adults

10. WM - vocabulary size Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for vocabulary size (children and adults) ** = significant at p < . 01

11. WM - vocabulary size • WM measures correlate significantly with vocabulary size for children, not for adults. (32 % explained variance for the digit span for children) • Are there better predictiors of the success in vocabulary learning for adult illiterate learners?

12. Literacy and CEFR levels CEF A2 functional literate Literacy C CEF A1 basic level Literacy B Literacy A CEF R= Common European Framework of Reference of Languages

13. Group scores WM (adults) Difference between the 4 level groups is significant (F=2.21, p<.03)

14. Comparable groups: Matching pairs • Individuals from the group of low/average literacy learners (level A and B) were matched with individuals of the above average learners (C/A1 and A2) on the basis of: months of L2 instruction, age, years of residence in the Netherlands, having children and native language. (in this order) • No one had any education in the home country • 12 pairs could be formed.

15. Group scores (background, vocabulary and reading) Scores for matched pairs

16. Correlations WM measures Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for matched pairs

17. Group scores (matched pairs N=12 for each group) * = p < .05 ** = p < .01

18. WM - vocabulary size Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for vocabulary size (matched pairs)

19. WM – word reading Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for word reading (matched pairs) * = p < .05

20. Background variables Pearson (2-tailed) correlations for 3 background variables (matched pairs) * = p < .05

21. Conclusions • The matched groups of above average /very good DL2/literacy learners and average learners differ significantly on : - NRT span score, - vocabulary size, - reading, - general L2 level (starting point). • There are no significant differences on - the digit span and phoneme scores. • Correlations are found between: - phoneme score and reading (p <.05) - non-word span and reading (p <.05) - length of L2-lessons and vocabulary (p <.05)

22. Discussion • The direction of causality is not clear: what was first: the larger non-word span before learning to read or is the larger span a result of learning to read? • Let us focus on the characteristics of the three best learners.

23. The three best learners Ordered with respect to vocabulary score Ordered with respect to reading score

24. Who are they? One might think that the best learners: • are young • have much language contact • are motivated • have home support • have intensive courses • are in favorable circumstances (SES) but ……

25. Who are they? • No. 1: best score for vocabulary Moroccan – 44 years old – fem. – residence: 20 years – 5th year of L2 lessons – divorced, children - speaking Dutch at home – much L2 contact – no support – high motivation – SES unfavorable • No. 2 Afghanistan – 29 years old – fem. – residence: 8 years – 4th year of L2 lessons – Afgh. Partner – less L2 contact –home support– SES favorable • No.3 Vietnamese – 60 years old –fem. – residence: 23 years – 1st year of L2 lessons – Dutch partner – speaks Dutch at home – SES favorable

26. Who are they? • No. 1: best score for reading Somali – 23 years old – fem. – residence: 5 years –3rd year of L2 lessons – Somali partner – much L2 contact – highly motivated – much support – SES favorable • No. 2 Moroccan – 28 years old – fem. – residence: 8 years – 4th year of L2 lessons – divorced, children – Dutch at home with children – much L2 contact – highly motivated – no support – SES unfavorable • No.3 Afghanistan – 28 years old – male – residence: 6 years – 2nd year of L2 lessons – no partner – no Dutch at home – much language contact – very motivated – no support – SES very favorable

27. The least successful learners Ordered with respect to vocabulary score Ordered with respect to reading score

28. Who are they? • No. 1 lowest score for vocabulary Turkish – 49 years old – fem. – residence: 10 years – 2nd year of L2 lessons – children • No. 2 Turkish – 56 years old – fem. – residence: 25 years – 1st year of L2 lessons – children • No.3 Moroccan Berber – 52 years old –fem. – residence: 15 years – 1st year of L2 lessons – children • No. 1: lowest score for reading Turkish – 49 years old – fem. – residence: 10 years – 2nd year of L2 lessons – children • No. 2 Somali - 34 years old – fem. - residence: 7 years – 2-5 years of L2 lessons – children (but high score for vocabulary: 59) • No. 3 Moroccan Berber - 49 years old – fem. - residence: 25 years – 2-5 years of L2 lessons – children (but high score for vocabulary: 57)

29. Age? Years of residence Language use? Months of L2 lessons? Not convincing Not convincing Yes, but counter evidence Yes, but What seems to count?

30. Conclusions • The best results for reading are found for learners between 20-30 years old. • The three best readers do not necessarily have a large vocabulary. • Those who have acquired a large vocabulary show a larger age difference. • The learners with the lowest scores are most older learners. • The best learners have higher NRT span scores.

31. Thanks to Eefje Cadee Noortje Grijsbach Jeske Paalvast Noortje Schilders from Tilburg / Nijmegen University who administered the tests and wrote their master theses on this subject