Using L1 in the TEFL classroom

First Language and Learning English as a Foreign Language

Language is the most dynamic form of symbolism that cultures possesses Language is the medium in which people interact and communicate for the exchange of ideas , knowledge and feelings . Language acquisition has been one of the most intriguing aspects of human nature and had been the focus of different disciplines . For the most part , language acquisition had been theorized and conceptualized in different ways all of which was to determine where language came from and how it developed . On the other hand , the

multicultural aspect and globalization of our society have made it almost a necessity to learn English as the most favored international language . Most educational curriculums in the world integrate the learning of English as a second language especially in areas where the first or native language is structurally different from English (Gitsaki , 1998 . According to Krashen 's (1981 ) model of second language acquisition acquired and learned languages are different Language acquisition is a subconscious process brought about by the meaningful interaction of the individual with the target language while learning a language is a conscious process which results in conscious knowledge about the language (Krashen , 1981 ,

.103

Learning a second language is a complex process that can be affected by different factors , one of the most leading issue is that of how first language affects the teaching of English as a foreign language in the classroom . Several researches have reported that first language proficiency strongly predicts English language learning (Clay , 1993 Snow , Burns Griffin , 1998 , moreover , a strong correlation between first language fluency and learning English was also reported (Hiebert Pearson , Taylor , Richardson , and Paris , 1998 . Children who have to learn a second language generally have to use first language in comprehension and analysis of the information exchanged in the second language . Therefore the impact of first language to learning a second language can be facilitative while it can also interfere with learning a second language such as English (Bialystok , 2002 . This literature review would present what has been known about the role of the first language in learning English as a second language in the context of classroom learning as well as how teachers can effectively use the first language to the teaching of English . This exercise would also discuss the theoretical framework , the research methods and the strengths and weaknesses of the presented literature

Appendix

Auerbach , E (1993 . Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom TESOL Quarterly , 27 (1

Bialystok , E (2002 . Cognitive processes of L2 users . In V . Cook (Ed Portrait of the L2

user (pp . 147-165 . New York : Multilingual Matters

Burden ,

(2000 . The use of the students mother tongue in monolingual English `conversation

classes at Japanese universities . TLT Online Editor . Retrieved May 12 2008 , from HYPERLINK "http /www .jalt-publications .org /tlt /articles /2000 /06 /burden " \t "blank " http /www .jalt-publications .org /tlt /articles /2000 /06 /burden

Clay , M (1993 . Reading Recovery in English and other Languages Keynote address presented

at the West Coast Literacy Conference , Palm Springs , CA

Cummins , J (2000 . Language , power and pedagogy : Bilingual children in the crossfire

Clevedon , England : Multilingual Matters

Cummins , J (2001 . Bilingual children 's mother tongue : Why is it important for education

Retrieved May 12 , 2008 , from HYPERLINK "http /www .oise .utoronto .ca /MLC /MotherTongueDK .pdf " \t "blank http /www .oise .utoronto .ca /MLC /MotherTongueDK .pdf

Garcna , G . E (2000 . Bilingual children 's reading . In M . Kamil ,

br Mosenthal , D . Pearson R

Barr (Eds , Handbook of reading research Volume III (pp .163-179 Hillsdale , NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Giacobbe , J (1992 . A cognitive view of the role of L1 in the L2 acquisition process

Second Language Research , 8 3 , 232-250

Gitsaki , C (1998 ) Second Language Acquisition Theories : Overview and Evaluation . Journal of

Communication and International Studies 4 2 :89-98

Hamers , J Blanc , M (2000 . Bilinguality and bilingualism 2nd ed Cambridge , England

Cambridge University Press

Hiebert , E .H , Pearson ,

.D , Taylor , B .M , Richardson , V Paris S .G (1998 . Every Child a

Reader . Ann Arbor , MI : Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA

Jia , G Aaronson , D (2003 . A longitudinal study of Chinese children and adolescents

learning English in the United States . Applied Psycholinguistics , 24 131-161

Kohnert , K (2008 . Second language acquisition : Success factors in sequential bilingualism . The

ASHA Leader , 13 2 , 10-13

Krashen , S (1981 . Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning . Oxford

Pergamon Press

Laufer , B (2000 . Avoidance of idioms in a second language : The effect of L1-L2 degree of

similarity . Studia Linguistica , 54 2 , 186-196

Montrul , S (2005 . Second language acquisition and first language loss in adult early bilinguals

Exploring some differences and similarities . Second Language Research 21 , 199-249

Schweers , C (1999 . Using L1 in the L2 classroom . Forum (37 )2 Retrieved May 12 , 2008 , from

HYPERLINK "http /exchanges .state .gov /forum /vols /vol37 /no2 /p6 .htm " \t "blank " http /exchanges .state .gov /forum /vols /vol37 /no2 /p6 .htm

Snow , C . E , M . S . Burns , and

. Griffin , eds (1998 . Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young

Children . Washington , DC : National Academy Press

Upton , T (1997 . First and second language use in reading comprehension strategies of Japanese

ESL students . TESL-EJ , 3 (1

Weschler , R (1997 . Uses of Japanese (L1 ) in the English classroom Introducing the functional-

translation method . The Internet TESL Journal (3 )11 . Retrieved May 12 2008 , from HYPERLINK "http /iteslj .org /Articles /Weschler-UsingL1 .html http /iteslj .org /Articles /Weschler-UsingL1 .html

Annotated Bibliography

Cook , V (2001 . Using the first language in the classroom . The Canadian Modern Language Review , 57 3 , 402-423

Vivian Cook in this article argues for the use of the first language in classroom teaching . He said that the age-old avoidance of the use of L1 in classroom teaching have been short of being dense since there is so much potential that the use of the L1 can bring into the learning of a second language . Cook said that the banishment of the L1 use in daily classroom experiences have been brought about by the unfounded belief that the L1 would hinder the learning of L2 . The issue of how the first language influences the learning of a second language has dominated the field of language acquisition . The long held belief that compartmentalization of two languages enables the learner to shift between the first and second language at ease was the desired outcome of language teaching . In the course of language research concrete evidence had been found to support the idea that L1 supports the learning of L2 The author substantiates his arguments by clearly identifying what instances involved the use of L1 and how it helped the learning of L2 According to Cook , L1 can be used to transmit meaning , teach grammar effective classroom management and for students to assist their learning of the L2 . Cook cited that the systematic use of L1 in the classroom have been documented and applied by the New Concurrent Method , Community Language Learning and Dodson 's Bilingual Method

This article gives the reader an excellent background on why L1 has been avoided by teachers and students in the classrooms for the longest time . Although there are common sense benefits for the use of L1 the points raised by the author are common place and have been the resounding theme of those who endorse bilingualism . In reality students and teachers actually use L1 in some degree especially if this is the dominant language , thus embracing the use of L1 as a classroom and teaching strategy is almost a given . Cook however was able to outline the different ways in which L1 could be integrated to the classrooms and this is probably the strongest point of the article

Turnbull , M (2001 . There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching , but .The Canadian Modern Language Review , 57 4 531-539

Miles Turnbull picked up the case made by Cook (2001 ) in saying that L1 can be used in second and foreign language teaching . In this article the author argued that L1 indeed is a resource that should be explored and applied by teachers and students in learning a second language but that this should be done strategically . This meant that L1 use should be systematic and in the right amount . Turnbull pointed out that maximizing L1 use in second language teaching is vague , teachers may interpret it differently and does maximize also extend to interactions beyond that of the classroom activities . Current education practices say that L1 should be avoided by teachers while making use of the target language as much as possible in to increase the experience of students to the target language . He pointed out that using L1 excessively may be counterproductive because it reinforces the dominant language if it is shared by all students . Another disadvantage is that it lessens the exposure of the students to the target language and hence diminishes the TL input which broadens the knowledge and mastery of the students . The author calls for more research on this study as well as better guidelines and educating teachers on how and when to use L1 an the TL

This article appears to be a critique of the claims made by Cook (2001 although the author said that he agreed with the points raised by Cook The arguments are simply a reiteration of Cook 's ideas and the empirical evidence presented are not that substantial . Moreover , the report is confusing because the title says the use of L1 in second language learning but all throughout the , there is very little reference to the L1 and the use of Target Language (TL ) was confusing because it meant some other language other than L1 but is it a second or foreign language added to the confusion . Also , the author made a criticism on the idea of maximize but the report have not actually been able to answer the how , why and when it should be maximized instead he pointed out that the education agencies are the ones to delineate its use

Chen , R Hird , B (2006 . Codeswitching in EFL group in China Language , Culture and Curriculum , 19 2 , 208-220

This research report presents the results of a study conducted to test the extent to which students used codeswitching during group work in a class of English as a foreign language in China . Group work had been an accepted method in teaching English language to students while there had been very little research to its effectiveness or what happened during group work . This study sought to answer the said questions by observing and interviewing Chinese students during their regular classes in English . The study found that Chinese students regularly use codeswitching during their interaction in small groups when the task is to discuss a certain question or . The researchers found that the students try to speak English during group discussions but often resorted to speaking in their language to clarify their previous statements , to ask for help , to translate their ideas from L1 to English among others . The study concluded that the presence of codeswitching in group work especially in English classes is counterproductive . Group work was supposed to support the learning of English through the input-interaction and through socialization , but in this case , it was evident that the supposed function of group work was done in the first language rather than in English

This research article brings to mind the numerous methods used in teaching English as a second and foreign language that was borrowed and adopted as is without considering how the cultural orientation of the students in a particular region would respond to it . Most English classes use group work to provide students with the opportunity to speak English but more often than not , students just comply with the required output but conduct the group discussion in their own language . This study provides us with evidence that the use of L1 in teaching English classes is prevalent in this region . However , the methods used to observe the students and how the interviews were conducted might have influenced the students to become more conscious of their English that they had to resort to codeswitching in to give the best output

Nation ,

(2003 . The role of the first language in foreign language learning . Asian EFL Journal , 5 2 , 1-7

This article examines the role of the first language in learning a foreign language by identifying how it affects the four strands of a second language learning course . The four strands are meaning focused input and output , language focused learning and fluency development . The author says that the first language has a small but important role in the teaching and learning a second language . This analyzed empirical studies on the use of the first language in learning a second language to arrive at a short-list of instances wherein the use of L1 would be beneficial . It was found that the use of the first language can be beneficial to students when they had to work on tasks in L2 that are heavily meaning based and in learning L2 vocabulary through L1 translations . The said methods would go a long way in building L2 fluency and is similar to how pictures and graphs aid the learning and understanding of L2 concepts . The author ends with suggestions on how to encourage L2 use in the classroom , this included integrating L2 in every teacher-student interaction as well as preparing lessons and activities that are within the skills and competency of the students in using L2 so as not to tempt them to use L1 and to encourage and reward the use of L2 and to not punish those who do not use it

The author argued that the role of the first language in the teaching of a second language is small but important . However , from the evidences he presented it would appear that the said role is far from being small He was able to substantiate his claims by providing empirical studies to support it and taken at face value there is more to the use of L1 it seems . Then , the author also emphasized that L1 should not be avoided but strategically used while L2 should be encouraged and used more frequently in to force students to use the L2 and hence build their fluency . The suggestions he made on how to increase L2 use was basically a reiteration of the idea that learning tasks should be geared to the skills and capabilities of the students

Extended Critical Article Review

Miles , R (2004 . Evaluating the Use of L1 in the English Language Classroom . School of Humanities . Centre for English Language Studies Department of English , University of Birmingham

This is a quantitative study that sought to test the assumption that the use of the first language facilitated learning of the second language in an English language classroom and that the use of the firs language did not hinder the learning of the second language . The was accomplished as an action research wherein the measures of the study and the variables tested were incorporated in the daily classroom lessons and activities . This study measured the influence that L1 had on the learning of L2 in terms of the scores that the students garnered from the pretest and posttest of the Key English Test used by the university . The variables measured in this test were the presence and use of L1 (Japanese ) in an English language class and test scores . The researcher conducted two experiments to test the hypothesis that the use of L1 did not hinder L2 learning and that it facilitated L2 learning instead . The results indicate that the class in which L1 was permitted improved their scores significantly than the other classes in which L1 was not permitted and where L1 was limited . The second experiment however did not statistically supported the assumption that L1 use facilitated learning of L2 due to inconclusive statistical values however it was still indicative that using L1 in the classroom was beneficial to the students . It was concluded that L1 use in the teaching of a second language should be permitted but at the same time be limited to support activities rather than relying on the L1 for teaching the L2

This research was inspired by the personal bias of the researcher being an English teacher for second language learners thus it was natural for the research to be designed to prove that L1 use is not a hindrance to L2 learning . The key concepts used in this study included L1 or the first language and L2 or the second /target language . The first language refers to the language that the individual first learns in to communicate with other people . At present , the multicultural society is faced with the reality that a first language may not necessarily be the true or native language of that culture . The second language however usually means the learning of the English language . The researcher pointed out that the concept of English as the superior language had been a social and political construct that the whole world have embraced especially in the idea of an English only classroom . The discussion on first and second language also leads to the issue of monolingual and bilingual approaches to the teaching of the English language . Those who advocate a monolingual approach says that learning a second language should mirror how the first language was learned , thus direct instruction and more exposure to the second language would make learning the L2 more efficiently . The monolingual approach had caused the English only policy in most schools and universities across countries especially when English language learning is compulsory . More recently , the bilingual approach to the teaching of English had been gaining momentum as more and more practitioners advocate the use of the first language in the teaching of English . The bilingual advocates argue that learning a language is not as simple as exposing the learner to the language constructing meaning and understanding the language involves the use of the first language and to ignore it would be a mistake

The researcher is obviously a supported of the bilingual approach hence the objectives of the study , however , the need for establishing concrete proof of the advantages of the approach justifies the purpose of the study . According to the researcher , the most damaging claims leveled against the bilingual approach is that the use of L1 hinders the learning of the L2 and that it only interferes with the learning experience of students . Since there are few researches on this issue the researcher deemed it necessary to conduct the said research in an attempt to validate his ideas and theories . The research was founded on the theory of Cook (2001 ) that the L1 is a useful resource that could help facilitate the learning of L2 through strategic use of the L1 in classroom activities

The author presents a solid argument for the objectives of the study as well as excellently laying the groundwork for the current research in terms of the theoretical and applied studies on the use and role of the L1 in the teaching of a second language . On the other hand , the research questions posed by the study are quite simplistic and do not actually further the theory of L1 use but only lends support to the theory that it is real and measurable . Of course researches are done to answer questions and probably the author is tormented with the said questions as he is presently teaching in an institution that adopted the English only policy . This would be a personal bias that may eventually seep into the way the results of the study are analyzed and evaluated which is one of the greatest threats to the validity of the claims and conclusions that this study would generate

The study used a quasi-experimental design in which 3 groups or classes that corresponded to the conditions that would make the comparison of the test scores of the participants possible was identified and used The 3 groups were a class in which L1 was permitted and where the teacher can speak the students L1 , the second group was where L1 was permitted but the teacher did not speak the student 's L1 , the last group was an English only class which meant that L1 use was The students in this study were all Japanese college freshmen who were in the country as part of their college education and were to study English subjects for a whole year after which will continue their education in Japan . This group therefore is ideal because they are homogenous , that is they share the same L1 , had the same rate of exposure to English prior to coming to the university , they also were also taking similar subjects , used the same textbooks and followed the same lessons . The first experiment involved using the pretest scores of the students in the Key English Test that the university used and after five months of classes , the students were retested to determine whether there were any improvements in the scores both in the written and oral exams . The second experiment used the class where the teacher spoke the L1 and where L1 was permitted . The experiment involved giving the students 2 difficult and 2 easy lessons that corresponded to days in which L1 was used and days in which L1 was banned in the classroom . Test results were again compared to indicate learning and the influence of L1 to the rate of L2 learning

The strength of this study was in its theoretical and conceptual arguments and assumptions however its primary weakness is in its methodology . As discussed , the study used an experimental approach in which 3 groups were compared , the independent variable was the use of L1 and the dependent variable was the post test scores as a measure of L2 learning . The problem with the design is that L1 was treated as the intervention introduced to the groups that might not cause any change in the test scores . We know that a treatment condition is needed for an experiment and the use of L1 did not satisfy the treatment condition as proposed by the researcher . This is because the students in all the groups shared the same L1 and since the researcher had no way of knowing or measuring to what rate L1 was used in the classroom , saying that it is the experimental condition is bogus . There may be instances when students used the L1 without the knowledge of the teachers and for five months the researcher actually had very little control over the said variable . Another problem in this design is that test scores were used to measure the pre and post L2 learning of the students . It is safe to assume that after five months of classes in English , the students would generally be able to learn something regardless of whether they used L1 in the class or not . The researcher compared the different in the pre and post test scores and concluded that the higher scores in the post test for the group wherein L1 was permitted indicated the positive influence of L1 . This may be true but one would also ask whether the increase in the scores was an exposure or learning effect considering that the students are actually studying English . The second experiment was also more flawed than the first because it only used the same group of students with four lessons in varying difficulties . There was no control group to compare it to and the lessons were designed to range in difficulty but with different content and . The issue here is that the lessons may not be on the same cognitive level such that conjunctions needed some form of analysis while superlatives only involved and sequencing . At the same time , the lessons were not pretested and validated before it was used in the actual study

Despite the loopholes in the study which the researcher admitted and acknowledged , the results indicate that to some extent the use of L1 did support and facilitate the learning of L2 and that it did not hinder the learning experience at all . Although , the latter is more of a speculation than an actual result since there was actually no way of measuring in what ways it hindered L2 learning . This study demonstrated how difficult it is to conduct a controlled study on language learning in a classroom setting since there are too many variables to consider and anticipate for . Also , it calls to question what really the appropriate measures of L2 learning are and how can this be observed and measured in the classroom when we know that learning does not occur in a vacuum and that language learning is the most enigmatic of all ...