<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dear R.A.,<br>
<br>
Any dual language program worth its salt and that has as a true purpose
of developing proficiency in both L1 and L2 (first and second
languages) will engage in structured language acquisition and
development strategies within the academic program, both through L1
Language Arts and L2 Language Arts as well as within and among other
content areas (L1 and L2 language development strategies should be
found systematically throughout the academic program). This occurs
through instruction by teachers who may be designated langauge role
models. Beyond that, I would suggest that it is not merely ad hoc
social interactions of children and the negotiations of meaning that
take place that would positively influence L1 and L2 proficiency, but
also the activities that teachers *structure* specifically for the
purposes of creating enriching L1 and L2 interactions among students
from both primary language groups (both within and between the groups).<br>
<br>
Your question, however, is an empirical one and can be tested (though,
of course, programs studied should be controlled for the quality and
integrity of their program design and not merely the nominal label they
give themselves as a "bilingual" or "dual language" programs). Some of
the studies previously cited look at this issue. If anything the
concern I have heard voiced most often is that the language minority
students, who, are, for many bilingual and dual language advocates the
students we need to be most concerned about as being traditionally
underserved are the ones who still don't experience as positive and
strong a dual language and academic program as their native
English-speaking peers in the program (who may be, and often are, from
higher SES households). A prominent scholar of bilingual education
wrote about this concern 6 or 7 years ago in a Harvard Ed Review
article (the scholar is Guadalupe Valdes, and the citation: <span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: windowtext;"><i>Harvard Educational
Review, 67</i>(3), 391-429</span>, Dual Language Programs: A Cautionary
Note Concerning the Education of Language-Minorty Students).<br>
<br>
Aside from that, from a brain research perspective, recent studies seem
to indicate that the problems you mention about invented language
and/or code switching and/or diluted language development because of
these varied interactions often don't materialize. Rather second (or
more) language learners seem to properly separate languages they learn,
even when these are mixed or they have multiple adult role models using
different languages, etc.. And, importantly, the child's language
choices (how they speak: whether in L1 or L2 or some hybrid or
inventive variant) has less to do with being confused about the
languages and has more to do with the situated contexts they find
themselves in and who they are talking to. They appropriately adjust
their language to their audience and the context, but they do it
right. So you may here inventive language in one context but should
not necessarily take that as an indication the child couldn't use their
L1 and L2 as you would expect or want them to in yet another context.<br>
<br>
But I would tend to agree that if programs don't formally attend to
developing academic language competencies in both L1 and L2, then
students may not reach higher levels of professional or academic
language proficiency. But that is what the programs are SUPPOSED to be
doing, and so they should be doing that as an integral part of their
design. So we can also talk about the differences in language
proficiency that occur between dual-language programs of lesser and
higher quality; it is not simply a question of whether dual language,
as a monolithic program category, is successful at that or not.<br>
<br>
Just my two cents.<br>
<br>
In Peace,<br>
K.<br>
<br>
R. A. Stegemann wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid240785A2-1C45-11D9-BC3D-000A95DAC1D6@mac.com"
type="cite">Hi everyone again!
<br>
<br>
With the assumption that others besides Miriam and me are still
interested in the subject I will push forward in my ignorance about
dual-language programs.
<br>
<br>
My interest is not about code switching per se, but the quality of the
language that results from dual-language programs and the social
ramification that eventually result.
<br>
<br>
Miriam appears to think that peer discipline and role modeling
together are enough to ensure the integrity of each language. For the
moment, I remain skeptical. Certainly with properly selected teachers
and native-speaking parents the children would have no dearth of role
models for their own native tongue. In the classroom, however, they
would only have teachers as models for their non-native tongue.
Moreover, these latter would have to compete with the attention of
each student's peer group which would likely consist of monolingual
cores with some bilingual fluency and bilingual buffer groups with
good fluency in each language -- well, at least for their level of
educational development. Add to this the creativity of children and
what is likely to result, if not linguistic invention and all of the
problems associated with it as the child claims professional
competency in his non-native language, when he grows up.
<br>
<br>
Sincerely,
<br>
<br>
<!-- Helvetica -->R. A. Stegemann
<br>
EARTH's Manager and HKLNA-Project Director
<br>
EARTH - East Asian Research and Translation in Hong Kong
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/earth/hklna/">http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/earth/hklna/</a>
<br>
Tel/Fax: 852 2630 0349
<br>
<br>
By the way, my international nickname is Hamo, and you
are welcome to use it as my first name on this mailing list. See
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/hamo/nick1.html"><http://homepage.mac.com/moogoonghwa/hamo/nick1.html></a>
<br>
<br>
On 11 Oct 2004, at 21:24, Miriam E Ebsworth wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><br>
<br>
Dear RA,
<br>
<br>
I can appreciate your concerns. <br>
It's certainly true that contact between language communities often
results in code switching/mixing. And extensive contact can lead to
borrowing, as you have noted. But just as non-natives benefit from
speaking L2 to each other- usually without learning each others'
errors- non-natives will benefit from native input both from teachers
in the classroom and from native peers. In such situations, it's even
more unlikely that natives will learn non-native errors. And good
programs will provide lots of native models and input, in and out of
the classroom.
<br>
<br>
Most code switching is done by individuals who have a shared good
command of 2 languages, but know they are participating in a speech
event in which both languages are understood by fellow interlocutors.
<br>
Crutching- or using the alternate language due to lack of competence-
does happen, but is not the main reason for switching. Solidarity,
humor, capturing just the right nuance- are more frequent functions of
switches.
<br>
<br>
And allocating substantial dedicated time to each language is an
important part of any good bilingual program. <br>
Not every dual language program does this in the same way. Some start
off with the 2 language groups sharing only a small number of classes
while they acquire the building blocks of the alternate language.
Others have everybody together all the time from the start. And there
are intermediate positions.
<br>
<br>
You also touch on the issue of discourse domains. I can think of
Chinese English speakers who know the language of technology in
English a lot better than I do- in any language. So I would guess that
each program needs to ascertain what kinds of discourse and topics of
discourse will be needed by the learners in each language. And of
course, in any bilingual program issues of language supremacy come
into play. <br>
<br>
It's great to have this forum so that we can explore ideas, research
and terminology.
<br>
<br>
Best,
<br>
Miriam
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>