Cognitive Advantages of Second Language Immersion Education
January 28, 2014
The linguistic and educational success of second language immersion education is now well established (see here). What has been less clear until recently was whether children who attend immersion programs show the same kind of advantages in cognitive skills, such as metalinguistic awareness and executive control, as do children who are early bilinguals. Metalinguistic awareness is our explicit knowledge of different aspects of language (sounds, words, syntax, and so on) and, when needed, our capacity to talk about these properties. It is crucial in the development of literacy, for example. As for executive control (also known as executive function), it is a set of complex cognitive processes that include attention, inhibition, monitoring, selection, planning, and so on. Inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility are three core aspects of executive control.
In a recent study, York University professor Ellen Bialystok and her colleagues Kathleen F. Peets and Sylvain Moreno studied the development of metalinguistic awareness in children becoming bilingual in an immersion education program. They gave different tasks to second and fifth grade English-speaking children in a French immersion program and compared their results with those of children in a regular English program. The tasks involved morphological awareness (adding correct morphological forms to nonsense words), syntactic awareness (making grammaticality judgments), and verbal fluency (generating words that belong to a semantic category or that begin with an initial letter). These three tasks differed in their need for executive control, from the least in the first task to the most in the third task.
The researchers found that the metalinguistic advantages reported in studies of early bilinguals emerged gradually in these immersion children, with tasks requiring less executive control giving positive results sooner than tasks requiring more executive control. Thus all immersion children outperformed their monolingual counterparts in the morphological awareness tasks, even after two years of immersion, and fifth grade immersion program children were more accurate in the syntactic awareness tasks than their monolingual counterparts. The verbal fluency tasks began as a problem for the younger children in the immersion program (literacy instruction in English only starts in third grade) but the older children had regained the ground and performed equivalently to monolingual children. The authors concluded that the advantages previously reported for early bilingual children could already be detected in children learning another language in an immersion program.
What about the advantages in executive control as such that children brought up bilingually show systematically over their monolingual counterparts? Do immersion children also show these advantages? Belgian scientists Anne-Catherine Nicolay and Martine Poncelet examined this. They tested third grade French-speaking children in an English immersion program and compared them to a similar group following a monolingual curriculum. They assessed attentional and executive skills by means of six different tasks such as alerting, auditory selective attention, divided attention, mental flexibility, and so on.
The results they found showed that in four of the six tasks, the immersion children did better than their monolingual counterparts. This is quite remarkable as the children had only had three years of immersion education which involves less intensive exposure to a second language than in early bilingualism. And yet, the immersion experience had already produced some of the cognitive benefits associated with early bilingualism.
The one negative finding that surprised the researchers (i.e. no difference between the two groups) concerned interference inhibition. In the task they used, the flanker task, children were presented with a central arrow pointing to the left or to the right, and flanker arrows above or below pointing in the same direction or in the opposite direction (in this latter case, the flanker arrows create an interference that has to be inhibited in order to answer correctly). Children had to concentrate on the central arrow and press a left button when the central arrow pointed to the left and a right button for the arrow pointing to the right. The authors explained the lack of a difference between the two groups by the fact that young emerging bilinguals in immersion programs (third grade children here) have not yet had much practice at inhibiting interference since they devote less time to second language production in a classroom situation than in real life.
Do children who have had further experience of immersion education show better control of interference inhibition? The answer comes from a paper by Ellen Bialystok and Raluca Barac who also used a flanker task but this time in two different studies with immersion children. In the first, they tested second and third graders who attended school in Hebrew, and in the second, they tested second and fifth graders in a French immersion program. In both studies they found that executive control performance improved with increased experience in a bilingual education environment. Basically, the length of time spent in an immersion program—some of their children had had two more years of immersion than in the Belgian study—determines the extent to which executive control is affected.
So the news is excellent for all those who are putting time and energy in immersion education—teachers and staff, parents and, of course, children. As Ellen Bialystok, Kathleen F. Peets and Sylvain Moreno state so nicely: “The road to bilingualism is incremental, and so are the accrued advantages”.
François Grosjean, Ph.D., is Emeritus Professor of psycholinguistics at the University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland and the author of Bilingual: Life and Reality, among other books.
References
Ellen Bialystok & Raluca Barac (2012). Emerging bilingualism: Dissociating advantages for metalinguistic awareness and executive control. Cognition, 122, 67-73.
Ellen Bialystok, Kathleen F. Peets & Sylvian Moreno (2012). Producing bilinguals through immersion education: Development of metalinguistic awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, 2012, 1-15, doi:10.1017/S0142716412000288
Anne-Catherine Nicolay & Martine Poncelet (2013). Cognitive advantage in children enrolled in second-language immersion elementary school program for three years. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16 (3), 597-607, doi:10.1017/S1366728912000375
www.psychologytoday.com
How did we get the teaching of Irish so wrong?
January 28, 2014
Irish is our official first language.
We spend at least 13 years studying it and yet very few of us would claim to be able to speak it. What is the problem with Irish in our education system? In a chilly hall in Loreto Bray, Co Wicklow, a group of Transition Year students are arguing about whether learning Chinese would be a better option than learning Irish. It’s the usual debate about culture versus practicality. Impressively, at least one girl has experience of both: “I’m learning Chinese and trust me, Irish is way easier.” These girls are taking part in a student outreach roadshow that youth co-ordinator for Conradh na Gaeilge Aodhán Ó Dea has been presenting in various schools during the past three years. The idea is to get students thinking about their attitudes to Irish and to inspire them to use the language outside of school.
“A lot of the time I’d find that students like the idea of the language,” says Ó Dea. “They don’t want to lose it, but often they say they don’t enjoy learning it. In some of the wealthier schools, the level of Irish is good, but the attitude towards it is downright hostile, and on the other hand some schools where standards aren’t great, the students are really receptive and enthusiastic about its importance to our culture.” It’s a thorny subject. Why, with 13 or 14 years of instruction and learning in Irish, does research show standards continue to fall? A 2006 report by Dr John Harris from Trinity College found a sharp fall in the standard of Irish among sixth-class students between 1985 and 2002. It also found a quarter of Irish primary school teachers believed their own standard of Irish to be “weak”.
Last November, the chief inspector’s report said students’ learning was “less than satisfactory in almost a quarter of Irish lessons in primary schools and almost a third of Irish lessons in post-primary schools”. The report was also concerned about language competence of teachers in a “small but significant number of classrooms”. Irish can be successfully taught, the students in Loreto Bray, for example, have a really good level of Irish, but that success is less common than it should be. So how can we improve?
Plans at primary level
At primary level a new integrated language curriculum is due for junior classes this September. It’s not before time. The curriculum in place since 1999 intended to encourage a communicative, task-based approach, but while the document itself is wonderfully child-centred and idealistic, it seems to ignore the fact that for most children, and indeed, teachers, Irish is a second language and needs to be learned rather than absorbed. Another, very simple problem with the old curriculum is that it was only available in Irish. For a busy teacher, this is an added obstacle, even for those with a reasonable proficiency in the language.
“We need an integrated teaching programme of Irish for English-medium schools,” says Deirbhile Nic Craith, education officer with the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO). “Previously, we had the Buntús Cainte which had step-by-step lessons for teachers. In Irish-medium primary schools, they have the Séideán Sí which is excellent but we have nothing like that for English-medium schools. We need a programme that integrates the various curriculum strands so busy teachers aren’t entirely left up to their own devices to plan.” This is an important point. Teachers need the support of a formal structure, an ABC of what to teach, right from oral Irish lessons in infant classes. There needs to be a clear and steady progression through the course. At the moment, there is no structure for teachers to follow. A clear, step-by-step, framework of Irish lesson plans, similar to French or Spanish, would benefit children and teachers who are less confident in their own command of the language.
The new curriculum, which will be introduced to junior classes (up to second class) in September 2014, will give teachers far more support in terms of what to teach and how to teach it. It will include a step-by-step guide about how to achieve particular curricular objectives. The curriculum will be published online to enable teachers to click through to the material and supports. Making an English-language version of the document would certainly help teachers, but some people involved in teacher-training acknowledge that such a move would be met with hostility from Irish language groups.
Pádraig Ó Duibhir of St Patrick’s College Drumcondra, with his colleague Prof Jim Cummins of the University of Toronto, has conducted a review for the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) of strategies proven to work for language learning in the lead up to this upcoming curriculum review. “Part of the issue is the system of 30 or 40 minutes a day for Irish in primary school,” says Ó Duibhir. “That drip drip approach has not been successful for Welsh in Wales or French in Canada. Schools achieving good results here have children using Irish outside the Irish class. One school, for example has had great success with a Lá na Gaeilge where everyone makes an effort to speak Irish on one day each week. The children have a need to use it. In practising it, they experience success, which further motivates them.”
An approach to language learning that takes the language outside of the language class has been successful. In Cordoba in Spain teachers are encouraged to teach one subject apart from English, through English. “PE and art are easy ways into that sort of approach. Science could work too,” Ó Duibhir says. Such an approach assumes a good level of competence from teachers and, as seen in the Harris report, that assumption is not always accurate. “Take teacher-training for second level,” says Anna Ní Ghallachair, director of the Language Centre in NUI Maynooth. “Entrants need a BA or a Masters’ in Irish, but what exactly does that mean in terms of their competence in the language? For primary-school teaching, higher-level Irish is a pre-requisite for entry into college, but again, does that really tell us anything about their language competence?”
One suggestion is for teachers to achieve a minimum level of competency as laid out by the common European Framework of Reference for Languages. This is a guide to describe the achievements of language learners across Europe. It is standardised and allows teachers and students understand what level of skill they have attained. The European certificate of Irish, the Teastas Eorpach na Gaeilge (TEG), has been designed within this framework. People taking the TEG can sit a series of six exams that test for proficiency from absolute beginner right through to advanced.
Siuán Ní Mhaonaigh, the director of TEG, says “I firmly believe much of the tinkering being done to syllabi is unnecessary,” she says. “A practical and valid testing system would go a long way towards improving things for Irish. At the moment we are not asking the right questions in our exams.”
Lack of acceptable standards
Indeed, a lack of a recognised acceptable standard is a problem across the board. In first year of secondary school, a maths teacher can assume a certain level of numerical ability among students and can therefore build on that. An Irish teacher on the other hand could be faced with students who have excellent Irish alongside others who have barely a word. They aren’t so much building on a foundation as being forced to start from scratch.
“Standardised tests in Irish have been developed,” Nic Craith says. “If they were used it would give us some idea of what teachers could expect.” Nic Craith agrees that using the common European Framework of Reference for Languages could be a very useful tool, both within schools and in teacher-training. It would be an independent benchmark of a student or a teacher’s true ability and it would give students and teachers something to work towards. Proper assessment can be a motivator in and of itself.
However, by the time students reach second level, for many, a rot has already set in. Those who have a good level of Irish face boredom while the teacher tries to bring other students along, while students who have already experienced eight years of fruitless teaching and learning are more resistant and discouraged than ever. Students who are willing and happy to learn French and Spanish don’t see Irish in the same light. They have already learned it for eight years, they can’t speak it and therefore must be terrible at it.
The Leaving Cert’s two papers and the oral and aural exams can seem like too much work and many students opt for ordinary level as a strategy to allow them to focus on other subjects. The literature, it is argued, is off-putting and distracts from Irish as a language. Conradh na Gaeilge proposes that Irish at Leaving Cert should be subdivided into communicative Irish, which would be compulsory and which would take the oral language, written communication, comprehension and so-on, and an advanced option which would encompass poetry and literature. Others argue this would dumb down the subject with no evidence that the language would experience any boost as a result.
“We need to ask ourselves, are we teaching Irish for cultural reasons, or for it to be used?” says Dr Muiris Ó Laoire, a lecturer and researcher on multi-lingualism in IT Tralee. “If we want it to be used, we need to rethink what we’re doing. How are we going to provide meaningful opportunities for use? It can be done but it is a challenge.” “The teaching and learning of the language can, and does work,” says Ní Ghallachair. But for it to be more successful, we need to acknowledge the effort needed. We need to examine how teachers are trained to teach, how students are taught to learn and how all are motivated to use it. “Irish depends on the commitment of a school and teachers in a way other subjects don’t,” says Ó Duibhir. “But I think our expectations are unrealistic. That’s not to say the way things are is okay, but I do think that when it comes to Irish, perhaps we need to redefine what success is.”
www.irishtimes.com
Lá Mór na Gaeilge – February 15th 2014
January 28, 2014
Coláiste beo beathach
January 28, 2014
Junior Spider Internet Awards
January 27, 2014
Closing date for applications to internet awards for school students extended until 7 March 2014
The Eircom Junior Spiders will take place in the RDS in Dublin on 1 May 2014. The internet awards recognise the work of students and teachers in primary and secondary schools across the country.
Among this year’s categories, is a category for Irish language or bilingual websites, ‘Suíomh is Fearr’, sponsored by Foras na Gaeilge. Websites or blogs can be entered in this category and can be based on any content, but must use the Irish language in a creative and innovative way.
The awards are divided as follows: MEGA for primary schools; GIGA for years 1-3 of post-primary schools; and TERA for years 4-6 of post-primary school. Each classification is then subdivided into distinct categories based on content and type.
Last year’s Irish language winners were Coláiste Íosagáin, Dublin, in the TERA category for their site, ‘Níos Aclaí Anois’ and St. Colman’s College, Mayo in the GIGA category for their site, ‘Irish Exam Guide’
The competition will be open for applications from schools and students until 7 March 2014 and a shortlist will be announced on 28 March 2014. The award ceremony will take place on 1 May in Dublin’s RDS where each of the shortlisted candidates will have the opportunity to display their site.
Further information in relation to this competition is available at www.juniorspiders.ie and a poster which can be printed out and displayed in your school is available at the link below: School Poster
Foilsithe ar Gaelport.com
Stinging European criticism highlights need for Irish Language Act
January 27, 2014
IT’s now time to set a date for the introduction of an Irish Language Act, according to a local Irish language group.
The call comes in a week that the Stormont Executive came in for stinging criticism over how it promotes Irish here and in a week when some of the North’s leading Irish language groups lost key funding (see story above).
A report by the Council of Europe – a human rights organisation with 47 member states – said that more should be done to promote Irish, including in the courts, education, the media and in the Assembly. Every three years the Council uses information provided by various governments to compile a report on the state of minority languages. However, despite repeated requests, the Northern Ireland Executive has been unable to reach a consensus on its submission regarding Irish.
Reacting to the report, Janet Muller, CEO of Pobal, the umbrella organisation for the Irish language community in the north, said the report strongly urged that the Irish Language Act be introduced.
“It is in our opinion time to publish an agreed target date for its introduction and more forward” she added.
Agreement
Culture Minister Carál Ni Chuilín said she is committed to bringing forward legislation for an Irish Language Act.
“An Irish Language Act was agreed as part of the St Andrews Agreement, however this continues to be blocked by the unionists,” she said. “I am continuing to seek all party agreement around the Executive to bring forward the legislation as that is the only way it will be successful. The continuing growth of Irish medium education and the cross-community success of the Líofa initiative has shown that there is a demand for the rights of the Irish language speakers to be recognised and safeguarded in law. I will continue to work for an Acht na Gaeilge.”
West Belfast Sinn Féin MLA and the party’s spokesperson on the Irish language, Rosie McCorley, said the Council for Europe report highlights unionist “intransigence” when it comes to Irish.
“The Council for Europe report is saying what we already know. unionist politicians refuse to accept the rights and needs of the Irish language community,” she said.
Niall Comer, president of Comhaltas Uladh of Chonradh na Gaeilge, said he welcomed the support of the Council of Europe for the use of Irish in the courts and on bilingual street names in the north.
“The lack of political consensus on the Irish language and the persisting hostile climate in the Assembly, as noted in the report of the Council, has long hindered the development of a much-needed Irish Language Act to protect the rights of Irish speakers on this island,” he added.
Andersonstown News
Foilsithe ar Gaelport.com
‘Irish language policy risks being seen as a sham’
January 27, 2014
Only six of the 16 officers responsible for the use of Irish in Government departments can speak the language themselves, the outgoing Irish language commissioner has said.
Seán Ó Cuirreáin pointed the fact out to TDs and senators who he addressed about his decision last month to resign from the job in February. He said he is stepping aside two years ahead of schedule because he can do no more for the language rights of Irish speakers and Gaeltacht communities. After 10 years in the role, he said Government policy on Irish is in danger of being seen as a sham with inadequate access to public services and departments self-auditing compliance with legal requirements. The job was advertised publicly last week, but Mr Ó Cuirreáin told the Oireachtas sub-committee on the 20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language the same problems will exist for his successor.
He said the amalgamation of the work of his office later this year into the Ombudsman’s office was never discussed with him before being announced two years ago. Mr Ó Cuirreáin said there is no possibility of success for a new system to increase the number of civil servants fluent in Irish; and the system to develop language plans or language schemes in State bodies is in a sorry state because of ineffective implementation. He said it is more than two years since a review of the Official Languages Act began, but first steps to amend it have not yet been taken by publishing heads of a bill, now due before the summer.
“If the State can not provide assurances, when the legislation is being amended, that it will ensure that it can communicate in Irish with Gaeltacht communities without terms and conditions, and that it will have adequate staff in public administration with proficiency in Irish, then I believe that its policy will be viewed as a sham,” he said. He said the 16 officers nominated by Government departments to implement the act and liaise with his office were all very talented and diligently carry out their responsibilities. But only six out of the 16 officers in question have Irish themselves, he said. Sinn Féin senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh said this was scandalous when there are people in the public service with Irish who would be happy to use it in their day-to-day work but do not get the chance.
Mr Ó Cuirreáin said it was no good if a department returns a call with someone who can speak Irish but has no knowledge of the subject the caller wanted to discuss. Sub-committee vice- chair, Fianna Fáil’s senator Labhrás Ó Murchú, said minister of state Dinny McGinley will be given a chance to respond when he appears before it soon. Sinn Féin TD Peadar Tóibín said they should also bring in secretaries general of each department and Education Minister Ruairi Quinn. The commissioner said two cases investigated by his office caused concern about the Department of Education’s attitude. In one, the department had directed a Gaeltacht primary school to appoint a teacher from a panel of teachers up for redeployment who said they did not have enough Irish to teach there. In another case, he said the department refused to provide the option to study subjects through Irish up to Leaving Certificate at a school in the Donegal Gaeltacht. Mr Tóibín said it was disrespectful to the commissioner and to people in the Gaeltacht that there was no Government TD at the hearing. The absent coalition members were committee chair Michael McCarthy and Kevin Humphries (both Labour TDs), and Fine Gael senator Hildegarde Naughton.
www.irishexaminer.com
Aip dhátheangach d’Eamhain Mhacha
January 27, 2014
Oireachtas Sub-Committee deliberates Language Commissioner’s resignation
January 27, 2014
Seán Ó Cuirreáin tells some home truths
A meeting of the Oireachtas Sub-Committee on the 20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language welcomed An Coimisinéir Teanga, Seán Ó Cuirreáin, to discuss the commissioner’s resignation due to take place on 23 February 2014.
Seán Ó Cuirreáin announced his resignation to the Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions in December as a result of the Government’s failure to implement language legislation at the level of the State. The Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht announced this week that expressions of interest are now being accepted for the role of An Coimisinéir Teanga.
During today’s meeting, Seán Ó Cuirreáin detailed the marginalisation of the Irish language by state authorities. He said that while he believes there are those within the State sector who support the language, “there are stronger and more widespread forces in place who have little or no concern for the future of our national language”.
The absence of all Government representatives at today’s meeting was sharply criticised by TD’s and Senators in attendance.
Regarding the 20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language, the Commissioner stated that the Government’s attitude towards the Irish-speaking and Gaeltacht communities is “speak Irish among yourselves, but don’t speak it to us”.
The Strategy was published by the Government in 2010 with the aim of increasing the number of people who speak Irish outside of the education system from 83,000 to 250,000 and to increase the number of daily Irish speakers in the Gaeltacht by 25%. Nine distinct areas for proposed initiatives are set out in the Strategy.
The Sub-Committee which met for the third time today were informed by the Commissioner that there is no independent audit or review being conducted on the implementation of the Strategy, a process of “self-assessment” is how he described it.
Deception
Referring to a talk given by Seosamh Mac Donncha, NUI Galway, a t last year’s Tóstal na Gaeilge, the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht was described as a “sub-section located far from the centre of power”, and according to the Commissioner, a organisation which is “operating in those circumstances could not protect or preserve what is left of the Gaeltacht, and we are only fooling ourselves if we think it could”.
While discussing the language planning process, the Commissioner stated that the Gaeltacht Act “placed liability for language planning on Gaeltacht communities who never sought that responsibility. Economic planning would not be left to such local communities nor would they be given responsibility to decide locally on matters concern housing, roads or the environment. But when it comes to the language, well, that’s another story”.
The Department of Education and Skills’ attitude towards the Irish language, and it’s official stance throughout two investigations undertaken by oifig an Choimisinéara Teanga, is clearly a matter of deep concern for the Commissioner, particularly due to the emphasis placed on the education system in the Strategy.
In one case, a Gaeltacht primary school had been directed by the Department to appoint a teacher from a panel of surplus teachers although neither the teachers themselves, nor the school authority in question, believed that any of the available teachers had sufficient Irish to teach in a Gaeltacht school.
In another case, the Department refused to provide the option of studying the subjects of the curriculum through Irish up to Leaving Certificate level to students in one of the strongest Gaeltacht regions remaining in Co. Donegal. The Department put forward legal and practical arguments in both cases. The Commissioner believes that “the root of our problem is that we have never made an adequate connection between the learning of Irish and its subsequent use”.
Parting words
If the Strategy is to succeed, the Commissioner believes that the starting point must always be based on reality, and the truth, rather than on a presumption based on unfounded hope. “Groupthink has no place in matters as important as the survival of a language”, he said.
With the end of Ó Cuirreáin’s reign in sight, the Government’s position on this issue remains more critical than ever.
“I would say to you with certainty here today in the Houses of the Oireachtas, that it is with heavy hearts that the people of the Gaeltacht and the Irish speaking community in general will approach the centenary of the 1916 Rising in two years’ time if our national language is to be merely a symbolic language, and rather than being an integral part of our culture and heritage, that it is pushed aside, marginalised and left in the in the halfpenny place in the life of this nation”.
Foilsithe ar Gaelport.com
Tráth na gCeist Bórd Feachtas i gColáiste na Coiribe, Gaillimh
January 24, 2014
