View Content #26548

By Julie Sykes, CASLS Director

While presenting ways to include pragmatic analysis and approaches to interculturality in the world language classroom, I am often asked what the role of a learner’s first language (L1) can, should, or should not be. Example questions include, “In light of the need to stay in the target language as much as possible, how do you do this kind of work before advanced levels of proficiency?”, “Is it okay to use the L1 for lower level learners?”, or, even, “Our learners do not have the language skills to do this, doesn’t this distract from what we are trying to teach?”.  In considering a variety of responses, I always come back to a desire to prioritize deep learning and reflection while building proficiency, regardless of the language used to facilitate that experience.

The L1 or a combination of the L1/target language can, and should, be used in instances where its use promotes a deep-level of analysis, reflection, and understanding of the language being learned, always in the service of continued proficiency gains. The L1 should not serve as a crutch to distract from meaningful engagement with target words or phrases to be learned or to replace meaningful input, but rather to enhance it.   

Supported both empirically and theoretically, the need to move towards this type of multilingual approach in world language classrooms is increasingly apparent, if not critical. On-the-ground efforts include various Seals of Biliteracy that support and enable recognition of many student language experiences, as well as an increasing number of immersion and heritage learner programs and support systems to encourage simultaneous development of first, second, and often third language skills. Despite these efforts, a “monolingual ideology” remains prevalent in world language classrooms, curricula, and assessments, especially outside of heritage contexts (Scott, 2010; Ortega, 2017, 2018).

Yet, small shifts in:

• classroom management (e.g., avoiding a marker of L1 versus L2 only use and including a language choice option; avoiding the tendency to pretend not to understand when a learner uses their L1),
• task design (e.g., utilizing language indicators to scaffold a task and add proficiency-level appropriate reflections), and
• assessment measures (e.g., offering spaces for deep learning expressed in the L1, L2, or combination of the two)

can support a more multilingual environment without sacrificing the critical time in the L2 needed for learning and proficiency development. In her groundbreaking text, Double Talk: Deconstructing Monolingualism in Classroom Second Language Learning (2010), Virginia Scott notes the critical importance of moving beyond the monolingual, native-speaker model as the idealized target and embracing the notion of developing proficient second language speakers. She offers numerous practical solutions and ideas for making this happen.  This month in InterCom, we will explore some of Scott’s suggestions while adding our own to provide a in-depth look at the ways in which learners’ unique language profiles, including their first language, can enhance and deepen learning in the world language classroom. This week’s Activity of the Week offers an example of a modified task design at a variety of proficiency levels to demonstrate ways a learner’s L1 can be utilized to enhance the overall learning experience and proficiency development.

References

Ortega, L. (2018). SLA in uncertain times: Disciplinary constraints, transdisciplinary hopes. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 32(1), 1-30.

Ortega, L. (2017). New CALL-SLA research interfaces for the 21st century: Towards equitable multilingualism. CALICO Journal, 34(3), 285–316.

Scott, V. (2010). Double Talk: Deconstructing Monolingualism in Classroom Second Language Learning. Series on Theory and Practice. In Second Language Classroom Instruction, J. Liskin-Gasparro & M. Lacorte, series (Eds.). New York: Pearson-Prentice Hall Publishing.