Language of Instruction in a Multi-Cultural Setting / La Langue D'Instruction Dans un Contexte Pluriculturel / Unterrichtssprache Beim Zusammentreffen Verschiedener Kulturen || Strategies

Strategies of Bilingual TeachingAuthor(s): John DowningSource: International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift fürErziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, Vol. 24, No. 3, Language ofInstruction in a Multi-Cultural Setting / La Langue D'Instruction Dans un ContextePluriculturel / Unterrichtssprache Beim Zusammentreffen Verschiedener Kulturen (1978), pp.329-346Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3443829 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 08:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Review ofEducation / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.127.95 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:35:37 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3443829?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


STRATEGIES OF BILINGUAL TEACHING

JOHN DOWNING

In many countries the question is posed ? should school instruction be delivered in the pupils mother tongue (Ll) or in another language (L2)? Cognitive problems may be aggravated or ameliorated by emotional or motivational tones.

A frequently used strategy has been to impose the majority L2 on minority Ll

speakers, sometimes with mass failure results. Even if Ll is acceptable, serious retar? dation in the development of literacy occurs when the initial instruction is delivered in L2. Even with strong positive motivation towards learning L2, literacy instruc? tion in L2 still causes cognitive confusion.

Less commonly initial literacy instruction is delivered in the pupils Ll even though the goal is literacy in L2. This avoids cognitive confusion, but if the Ll speakers have adopted negative attitudes to their own language the strategy does not survive. Rarer still is the strategy to deliver instruction part of the day in Ll and part in L2; little research evidence is available on this approach but indications are favorable.

L'instruction scolaire devrait-elle etre dispensee dans la langue maternelle des eleves ou dans une autre langue? Telle est la question que l'on se pose dans de nombreux

pays. Les problemes de la cognition sont susceptibles d'etre influences (aggraves ou

ameliores) par des pulsions emotionnelles ou motivatrices. Le plus souvent on a im?

pose L2 majoritaire a une minorite Ll; le resultat se soldant parfois par un echec

massif Meme lorsque Ll est acceptable on note un serieux retard dans l'alphabetisation

lorsque l'instruction initiale est donnee en L2. Meme avec une for te motivation posi? tive a l'egard de L2 l'alphabetisation en L2 entraine neanmoins une confusion de la

cognition. De facon moins courante on procede a Valphabetisation initiale en Ll des eleves, bien que V objectif soit l'alphabetisation en L2. Ce procede evite une con?

fusion cognitive. Toutefois si les usagers de Ll ont adopte une attitude negative a

l'egard de leur propre langue, cette politique echoue. Plus rare encore la decision

d'enseigner pendant une partie de lajournee en Ll et pendant une autre partie en L2.

Les resultats des recherches entreprises sur ce dernier systeme sont encore trop limites pour permettre une conclusion, neanmoins les premiers indices semblent favorables.

In vielen Landern fragt man sich - sollte der Schulunterricht in der Muttersprache der Schuler (Ll) oder in einer anderen Sprache (L2) erteilt werden? Laute, die das Gefuhl beruhren oder Motivation auslbsen, konnen Lernprobleme erschweren oder erleichtern.



330 JOHN DOWNING

Oft wurde die Methode angewandt, einer LI sprechenden Minderheit die L2 der Mehrheit aufzuzwingen, manchmal mit dem Ergebnis zahlreichen Versagens. Selbst wenn die Erstsprache annehmbar ist, entsteht in der Entwicklung des Lesen- und Schreiben-Lernens eine wesentliche Verzogerung, wenn der Anfangsunterricht in einer Zweitsprache erteilt wird. Auch bei starker Motivation, die Zweitsprache zu

erlernen, verursacht der Lese- und Schreib-Unterricht in ihr kognitive Verwirrung. Weniger iiblich ist es, den Anfangsunterricht im Lesen und Schreiben auch dann

in der Muttersprache der Schuler zu erteilen, wenn das Ziel das Erlernen der Zweit?

sprache ist. Zwar wird dabei eine kognitive Verwirrung vermieden, aber wenn die-

jenigen, die LI sprechen, ihrer eigenen Sprache gegeniiber eine negative Einstellung bekommen haben, bewahrt sich diese Methode nicht. Noch seltener ist die Taktik, den Unterricht wahrend der Halfte der Zeit in LI und wahrend der anderen Halfte der Zeit in L2 zu erteilen; fiir diesen Ansatz stehen nur wenige Forschungsergebnisse zur Verfiigung, aber sie scheinen giinstig zu sein.

The chief difficulty in evaluating alternative strategies for coping with

bilingual situations in a multi-cultural setting is the great diversity of

such settings. Also the cognitive variables, which are the main concern

of educators interested in this problem, are so intertwined with motiva-

tional variables, such as cultural and political sentiments, that it is very difficult to reach definite conclusions for educational policies.

Because the field of bilingual education is so wide, no attempt can be

made to review all of the varieties of strategies that have been attempted.

Only the main types will be described here. Also, generally just one typ? ical example will be presented and discussed. A further limitation that

will be imposed here is that only the early years of primary schooling will be considered. Two important recent studies indicate that L2 (sec? ond language) teaching is more effective for older pupils when L2 learn?

ing is the objective. Carroll's (1975) IEA research on teaching French as

a foreign language in eight different countries concluded that the age for

beginning learning this L2 was of little importance. The only factor

found to be of major significance in Carroll's study was the sheer amount

of time spent in learning French. Also McLaughlin (1977) recently re?

viewed a wide range of publications on L2 learning. He found that, "Con?

trolled studies comparing younger children with older children generally indicate that the older children perform better. The results of experiment? al research comparing young children with adults learning L2 invariably show that the older groups do better." He adds: "Related to the miscon-

ception that younger children learn a language more effectively than do

older children and adults is the belief that the earlier a child begins to



STRATEGIES OF BILINGUAL TEACHING 331

learn an L2, the better" (e.g. Andersson, 1969). What evidence there is

on this topic points to the opposite conclusion: Older children do better

on almost all aspects of language acquisition than do younger children

in comparable circumstances. The acquisition of phonological features

is a possible exception to the rule." Therefore, McLaughlin's review

need not be repeated here. His studies have shown rather clearly that, if

achievements in an L2 are the goal, then the most effective strategies will include postponing the introduction of L2 to a later stage of school?

ing than the primary years. Hence, this article will limit itself to those

bilingual settings where cultural circumstances require educational poli?

cy makers to consider the alternatives of delivering instruction to prim?

ary classes either in the mother tongue or in a second language.

Cognitive Problems

Under unilingual conditions the child uses his cognitive processes to

make sense of the language of instruction on the basis of his or her past

experience of speech. Other factors may complicate the situation. These

may be facilitating or interfering depending on characteristics of the in?

dividual child and his environment. In this article the situation of inter?

est is where the child's past experience of speech differs from the lan?

guage of instruction in school. Most educators would expect on common

sense grounds that it is harder to comprehend instruction delivered in a

second language (L2) that one does not know at all or does not know

well than instruction received in the mother tongue. It might also be

envisaged that some subjects of the curriculum are likely to be more af-

fected than others by such a mismatch between the pupil's mother

tongue (Ll) and the language of instruction (L2). For example, in learn?

ing mathematics the concepts are more likely to be the same in both

languages: once the child has overcome his initial confusion and devel?

oped the appropriate concepts, they are readily transferable from one

language to the other. But in the study of language itself there is an ad?

ditional problem. The metalinguistic description of language used by the teacher may employ linguistic concepts related to L2 that may be

meaningless in the child's own experience with his Ll. In reading in?

struction, for instance, the teacher may refer to L2 phonemes that do

not exist in the child's Ll. Thus it is in the area of the development of

language skills that the greatest difficulty might be anticipated in bilin?

gual settings of this type. Therefore, this article will concentrate mainly on alternative strategies for instruction in reading and related skills under

such conditions.



332 JOHNDOWNING

Affective Problems

Before commencing this review of alternative strategies for education in

bilingual situations, another important type of variable should be noted.

In addition to the cognitive difficulty of comprehending instruction

given in L2 described in the previous section, there is an affective vari?

able that must be taken into account in considering the suitability of

an educational strategy for a particular bilingual situation. Sometimes

this affective variable overwhelms the cognitive factor. For example, if

instruction delivered in L2 is perceived as a denigration of the mother

tongue, negative emotions may be aroused toward the teacher and the

school and the cognitive difficulties may be aggravated. On the other

hand, if pupils perceive their own LI as being unworthy as a medium

for education, the possible cognitive facilitation of having instruction

delivered in LI may be diminished or negated by the pupils' negative value judgment of LI in this role.

The strategies to be considered fail into two main categories: firstly,

bilingual situations where instruction is delivered in L2; and secondly,

bilingual situations where instruction is delivered in the LI of the child.

In addition there are strategies in which delivery is in both LI and L2.

Delivery in a Second Language

This class of strategies is the classic treatment meted out by a socially

superior group to its inferiors. But it has been used also under quite dif?

ferent circumstances. The affective variable is likely to be strongly relat?

ed to these differing social contexts. Examples will be given of the ef?

fects of this type of strategy in such different social circumstances.

The classical imposition of an L2 as a medium of instruction on a

minority subculture is well described by Garcia de Lorenzo (1975). The

minority group she studied live in Northern Uruguay on the border with

Brazil, a border disputed by the Spanish and Portuguese for about three

centuries. These Uruguayans' LI is dialect of Fronterizo which has a

Spanish phonological system, but the language is strongly influenced by

Portuguese. Thus for children in this area Fronterizo is LI and Spanish, the official language of school instruction, is L2. Garcia de Lorenzo be?

came interested in this group because she was a member of the National

Board of Education of Uruguay and the children in this area "were re-

peating grades more frequently than in other parts of the country be?

cause of reading problems." The affective variable is clearly present in




this example. Garcia de Lorenzo reports that Fronterizo "is discouraged because of its social derogatory connotations." She cites Hensey (1972) whose survey of teachers in this area of Uruguay found that 82 percent of teachers associated "language problems" with "lower class" social

status. The low self-esteem of Fronterizo monolinguals is indicated by the report that they "feel ill-at-ease" in talking with speakers of stand?

ard Spanish. Garcia de Lorenzo concludes that the essential learning

problem is cognitive: the child "has no bridge [from Ll] to the symbols [of L2] introduced to him", but she recognizes that this difficulty is

exacerbated-by the "guilty" feelings of the children regarding their own

Ll. She also notes how "nationalism, based on fear, and strong emotion?

al attitudes" has prevented implementation of a bilingual education pro?

gramme. Her conclusion is: "Until such time as it is feasible to introduce

bilingual education to the children of the frontier, I see little hope of

remedying the problem. Children will be locked into a system which

continues to perpetuate the learning problems they face."

This Uruguayan case is representative of the extreme difficulty that

arises when a mismatch between the Ll of the child and the L2 in his

instruction causes cognitive confusion that is compounded by negative affect from the perceived social unworthiness of his own Ll. This situ?

ation is analogous to a caste system defined by language. This type of

strategy for a bilingual setting is clearly ineffectual.

Sometimes the L1/L2 mismatch is consciously chosen as a strategy for education. The affective variable has sometimes proved positive but

not always so. It depends on the degree of choice. Two cases bring out

the importance of freedom of choice in bilingual settings. When Ireland separated from Britain, the new Irish Republican gov?

ernment made strong efforts to revive the Irish language.1 Laws were

passed that gave preference to people who were literate in Irish. The

schools were required to give priority to instruction in Irish and educa? tors were to work toward the goal of giving all instruction in Irish. For

a small minority of Irish children this brought about a match between

Ll at home and Ll in school, but for the great majority this strategy meant that Ll was English while the language of instruction was an L2 ? Irish. The strategy was imperfectly implemented because of the

shortage of good Irish-speaking teachers, but it improved over the years while this goal was still officially required. It is important to note the

indirectness of the choice of a self-imposed L1/L2 mismatch in the case

of Ireland. The government was democratically elected and it deter?

mined this strategy. But parents had no choice other than at the elections.



334 JOHN DOWNING

There was only one neighborhood school for their children and every- one had to cope with the L1/L2 mismatch. (Exceptions were made for

some handicapped children such as the mentally retarded). The results of this type of strategy have been well documented by

Macnamara (1966). In a study of fifth grade pupils in Ireland and Britain

he compared the English literacy attainments of English speakers (LI) in Ireland whose instruction was delivered in Irish (L2) with the English

literacy attainments of English speakers (LI) in Britain whose instruc?

tion was delivered in English (LI). He also compared the Irish literacy attainments of two groups in Ireland: children whose LI was Irish and

children whose LI was English. Macnamara's data showed that, "Native

speakers of English in Ireland who have spent 42 percent of their school

time learning Irish do not achieve the same standard in written English as British children who have not learned a second language (estimated difference in standard, 17 months of English age). Neither do they achieve the same standard in written Irish as native speakers of Irish

(estimated difference, 16 months of Irish age)." This massive retardation

in the development of literacy skills indicates the ineffectiveness of this

type of bilingual strategy. For the majority of children and parents in

Ireland the teaching of literacy in an L2 was not their positive choice.

It was decreed from a remote government that was in other respects pre- ferable to an alternative one. Most parents probably accepted the bilin?

gual education requirement as unavoidable or with indifference. Most

children hardly ever met a native speaker of Irish. Their instruction must

have seemed to them to have been a mysterious ritual. The cognitive confusion caused by the mismatch between the children's LI and the L2 of instruction was profound. The patriotic ideal of reviving the na?

tional language was too remote from reality to provide any positive motivation to overcome the difficulties of learning literacy only in an

L2. Thus the affective variable was at best neutral.

A third type of strategy, however, does seem to produce effective

motivation to overcome the cognitive difficulties created by receiving

literacy instruction in an L2. Several experiments of this type have been

conducted in Canada. These are the "French immersion" programmes for English-speaking Canadian children. They usually receive all their

instruction, including reading, in L2 (French). What makes this strategy different from the first two types described earlier in this article is that

the French immersion programme is for children whose parents volun-

teer them for it. Indeed, these parents are usually eager to enrol their

children in these classes and enthusiastically support them for various




reasons. Thus, the affective variable should be highly positive in this bi?

lingual setting, and may increase motivation sufficiently to overcome the

cognitive confusion produced by the mismatch between the Ll of past

experience and the L2 of instruction.

Although there have been several more recent researches, their find?

ings are not very different from those of the first major experiment re?

ported by Lambert and Tucker (1972), which will be reviewed here as

an example of this strategy. The English-speaking children in their study received all of their instruction in French from the time they began school. The achievements of these children in the two experimental classes were compared with control classes of (1) French-speaking child?

ren who received all their instruction in French, and (2) English-speak?

ing children who received all their instruction in English. The tests of reading in English adminstered at the end of Grade I

showed that the bilingual class had significantly lower scores than the

English instruction control classes. The retardation of the bilingual group continued into Grade II in one of the experimental classes, but in the

other the degree of retardation did not reach statistical significance. These results do seem to indicate that the mismatch between the English

language at home and the French language at school caused retardation

in the development of cognitive clarity regarding the reading task. But

tests of reading in French showed no significant differences between the

English-speaking experimental group and their French-speaking controls in Grades I and II. In Grade III, one of the experimental classes had sig?

nificantly lower French reading scores than the native French control

group, but the research method of comparison was different in the other

class and it is difficult to treat the results in the same way. This lack of

a significant difference between the experimental bilingual and French-

speaking control classes in Grades I and II may have been due to the

insensitivity of the criterion tests. The teaching methods and the child?

ren's behaviour in the classrooms seem to have been rather rigid and re-

strictive in all cases with little opportunity for explorative behaviour.

The French reading tests were rather mechanical and required stereo-

typed rather than thoughtful reading responses. Possibly the differences

were small because neither the experimental nor the control classes

were much extended either in their reading instruction or reading tests.

A more recent experiment by Barik and Swain (1976) found that Eng?

lish-speaking Canadian children in their French immersion programme at the end of Grade I were "not on a par with their French-speaking

counterparts in French achievement". Here the difference was significant.



336 JOHN DOWNING

Barik and Swain also confirmed that English-speaking children in the

French immersion programme were at the end of Grade I "behind their

English-speaking peers attending the regular English program in English

language skills which involve reading (word knowledge, word discrimina?

tion, and sentence or paragraph reading)." From these two Canadian studies it is clear that the cognitive variable

is still of powerful importance even when the affective variable is strong?

ly positive. When young children receive their instruction about reading a written language that is an L2 they find it difficult to relate it to their

past experience of LI, and cognitive confusion increases about the fea?

tures of speech and writing. This still occurs despite positive affect to?

ward the task of learning in L2.

However, the longer term effect seems more favourable for the French

immersion programme. In the experiment reported by Barik and Swain, formal instruction in reading and related skills in English was introduced

for 25 minutes per day, beginning half way through the second year.

By the end of the year their English reading achievements seemed to have

caught up with those of English-speaking children taught entirely in LI.

But the English spelling attainments of the French immersion pupils still showed a "substantial lag." Their French achievement still was "not

at par with their native French-speaking peers in French achievement."

The very strong positive affect in these French immersion programmes must not be underestimated or overlooked. Even the researchers appear to be somewhat influenced in their reporting style by the enthusiasm

of the immersion movement in Canada. For example, Barik and Swain

conclude: "The overall impression which emerges from the findings of

the French immersion program at Allenby Public School in Toronto is

one of optimism concerning its viability and the attainment by the stud?

ents of the academic and linguistic skills for which it was designed."

Similarly, Lambert (1972) claims that the immersion pupils "are doing

just as well as the Controls, showing no symptoms of retardation or nega? tive transfer".

One important difficulty must be noted in evaluating these French

immersion experiments in Canada. It is that the children taking part have not been representative of the population. They have been mostly well above average in socioeconomic class and in intelligence.

Delivery in the Mother Tongue

In a bilingual setting there may be some children whose LI is also the



SRATEGIES OF BILINGUAL TEACHING 337

language of instruction, while for other children in the same school this

same language of instruction is an L2. This is a common occurrence in

countries such as Australia and Canada where there is a continuous in-

flux of new immigrants from other parts of the world. In such condi?

tions the education authorities are often concerned about the difficulties

of the children for whom the language of instruction is an L2. In South

Australia, for example, a frequently discussed problem is that of teach?

ing reading in English (L2) to children who know only Greek or Italian

as their Ll.

One country in which this problem was recognized at an early date

is Mexico. Here the problem of concern is that in many areas children

come to school with an Ll Indian language whereas the national lan?

guage is Spanish. Two main strategies have been developed to cope with

this bilingual situation. One group of schools teaches reading only in

L2?Spanish, their rationale being that it is better not to waste time on

teaching literacy in the vernacular but instead to get straight into Span? ish which is the essential language for success in education. The second

group of schools begins literacy instruction in Ll?the local Indian lan?

guage?during the first year, and Spanish reading takes over in the sec?

ond year. A very carefully designed research study has been made of the

effects of these alternative strategies by Modiano (1973).2 She compared thirteen schools of each type. The criterion was the pupil's achievements

in reading comprehension in Spanish (L2). She used two independent measures and found that "both measures showed the bilingual approach to be significantly more effective in teaching reading comprehension in

Spanish." Delivery of initial reading instruction in Ll (Tzeltal or Tzotzil)

produced superior reading comprehension in L2 (Spanish) at later stages than did delivery of reading instruction in L2 for the whole period of

schooling. The affective variable in this Mexican bilingual setting is complex.

Certainly, however, the attitudes toward Tzeltal and Tzotzil would be

positive in both parents and children. On the other hand, many parents are supportive of the view that the school should get on with the teach?

ing of Spanish?the language associated with material success in Mexico.

Probably both strategies receive affective support. Modiano's study, therefore, supplies a rather clear example of the cognitive benefits of

matching the language of instruction with the child's past experience of

speech in his own Ll.

The significance of the affective variable is discussed more fully in

another study which had a rather similar bilingual strategy to the Mex-



338 JOHN DOWNING

ican one described above. It is reviewed here also because it takes us in?

to the important area of dialect problems. Its author, Osterberg (1961), explains why bidialectism should be

considered as bilingualism:

The study of Scandinavian language conditions, for example, illustrates the rela? tive character of all attempts to draw dividing lines between different languages... Hence it follows from a linguistic point of view that it is the magnitude of the differences between the language variants which is decisive in the question of whether bilingualism obtains or not... and it is of secondary importance whether, and in what manner the combination embraces dialect and language.3

Osterberg devised a very important experiment on this problem of dia?

lect. It was conducted in the PiteS district of Sweden, which has a "dis-

tinctive, archaic and still vital" dialect spoken by some 30,000 people. There is no literature in it, and teachers' attitudes and Swedish public

opinion generally toward this PiteS dialect are negative. Observations

confirmed that PiteS school children and adults suffer from language difficulties. Osterberg's hypothesis was that these difficulties "are dialect

conditioned and that they spring from the individual's encounter with

the standard language" that "begins systematically with school attend?

ance."

To test this hypothesis, Osterberg compared an experimental group that was ihstructed in dialect (DI) with a control group that was taught as usual in the standard language (D2). About 350 pupils were allocated

randomly to the two groups, and so also were their teachers. Subsequent

testing demonstrated that the children in groups DI and D2 were equi? valent in school readiness and intelligence, and in other variables also.

Training of the teachers and standardization of their methods were equat ed, too.

Group DI began with a ten weeks' period of reading instruction in the

PiteS dialect, while group D2 received parallel instruction except that it was in standard Swedish. A basal reading series was used that was new

to all the teachers in both groups. The content was identical in the DI

and D2 readers, except that the text was translated into the PiteS dialect in the former. After ten weeks several tests were administered and a fur?

ther instructional period of twenty-five weeks began in which both

groups were instructed in D2, except that group DI was given a gradual transition from DI to D2 in the first four weeks of this second period.

The tests at the end of the initial ten weeks of instruction found the DI group to be significantly superior in oral reading, reading rate, and

comprehension. The differences were large and Osterberg comments:




What first and foremost characterizes DI pupils* lead is the mastery of difficult

aptitudes in reading technique which we called articulation and the ability to combine and read off both words and word-groups. Thanks to the sureness many of them had already gained in articulation, for instance, they have also to some extent begun to read ftuently.

These tests were, of course, administered in DI to the DI group and in

D2 to the D2 group. At the end of the second experimental period all

tests were given in D2 to both the DI and D2 groups. Therefore, at this

point the D2 group was being tested in the language in which it had re-

ceived instruction for thirty-five weeks, whereas the DI group had been

exposed to D2 materials for only twenty-five weeks, or some what less

if one takes into account the four-week transitional period. Yet in read?

ing D2 material, the DI group surpassed the D2 group.

Osterberg's results provide strong evidence that mismatch between

DI and D2 is an important handicap in acquiring literacy. Furthermore, his finding that initial DI instruction is superior in transfer to D2 read?

ing firmly fixes the temporal locus of the trouble. Mismatch has its ill

effects in the first initiation phase of learning literacy.

Osterberg reports a number of observations made of the children's

behaviour in the experimental and control groups and relates one com-

paratively notable feature of the latter. The D2 pupils become "general?

ly unsure and their uncertainty affects their performance in lettering, articulation and reading tempo." This indicates the manner in which

this mismatch produces its harmful results in poorer reading and writing attainments. Osterberg's words are reminiscent of Vernon's descriptions of "cognitive confusion" which she regards as the most common psycho?

logical feature of reading disability. In her more recent survey of research

on reading disability, Vernon (1971) concludes:

It would seem that in learning to read it is essential for the child to realize and understand the fundamental generalization that in alphabetic writing all words are represented by combinations of a limited number of visual symbols. Thus it is possible to present a very large vocabulary of spoken words in an economical manner which requires the memorizing of a comparatively small number of

printed symbols and their associated sounds. But a thorough grasp of this prin- ciple necessitates a fairly advanced stage of conceptual reasoning, since this type of organization differs fundamentally from any previously encountered by child? ren in their normal environment.

Earlier, Vernon's (1957) review of research on the causes of reading dis?

ability led to her conclusion that "the fundamental and basic character? istic of reading disability appears to be cognitive confusion and lack of



34 0 JOHN DOWNING

system... It must be attributed to a failure in analyzing, abstraction and

generalization, but one which, typically, is confined to linguistics". Vernon said that "the fundamental trouble appears to be a failure in

development of this reasoning process". She described the cognitively confused child as being "hopelessly uncertain and confused as to why certain successions of printed letters should correspond to certain phon- etic sounds in words".

Several investigations have shown that an important difference be?

tween normal readers and disabled readers lies in the inferior conceptual and integrative abilities of the latter (Klapper, 1968; Robinson, 1953; Serafica and Sigel, 1970). Vernon (1971) believes that reasoning and

understanding are characteristic of the normal development of reading skill. She states: "The employment of reasoning is almost certainly in?

volved in understanding the variable associations between printed and

sounded letters. It might appear that certain writers suppose that these

associations may be acquired through rote learning. But even if this is

possible with very simple letter-phoneme associations, the more complex associations and the correct application of the rules of spelling necessi-

tate intelligent comprehension." Vernon (1957) indicates that "cogni? tive confusion" is the normal state of the young beginner. Therefore, it

would seem that an important part of learning to read consists in reason?

ing about the reading task in an effort to achieve cognitive clarity. The

question addressed in this present article is ? how is this striving for cog? nitive clarity influenced by receiving instruction in an L2?

The way in which the affective variable exacerbates this cognitive confusion is indicated by Osterberg's description of the PiteS children

in the control group situation where their reading instruction was de-

livered in D2.

Pupils have difficulty in grasping the links between extramural life and intra- mural work. Experiences derived in the previous environment are consciously or unconsciously pushed into the background as unfavoured phenomena. What is learned at school obtains no natural anchorage in the children's experiences and spontaneous observations. The school's study content then becomes a sep? arate phenomenon. Progress does not proceed from the concrete, the already known. The matter assimilated becomes associated with theoretical constructions and psychic contents, which in structure and function have no roots in practical life outside the school. What is assimilated becomes the 'barely learnt,' and as a result processes of forgetting set in more readily. In the same way subjective tiredness, for instance, acquires fairly wide scope and the results of schoolwork suffer generally. The school is constructing a system of study and contributing to a basis of personality development which lacks two fundamental qualities

?

continuity and personal integration.




Osterberg's experiment constitutes a strategy for bidialectal settings such

as that found in this Swedish community. It was clearly a very successful

strategy from the point of view of the PiteS children in the experimental DI classes and their parents. The author of this article visited PiteS a few

years ago to find out how the experiment was followed up. When asked

what happened after the experiment, Osterberg's laconic reply was, "No?

thing ?

nothing at all." The strategy did not suit the administrators in

Stockholm.

Some educators who are familiar with Osterberg's classic experiment have proposed that its strategy for coping with bidialectism could be ap?

plied in other bidialectal settings. Stewart (1969) cites Osterberg's work

in support of a proposal to apply this strategy in teaching reading to

speakers of the Black American dialect of English. He argued that "begin?

ning reading materials should indeed be adopted to the patterns of non-

standard Negro dialect?and to those of any other nonstandard dialect

which school children in a particular area may speak, for that matter".

He asserted that "Instead of being ignored or made the target of an era-

dication program, Negro dialect should actually be used as a basis for

teaching oral and written standard English". Stewart showed how Black

American dialect materials could be developed for this strategy of de-

livering reading instruction in this DI. He developed parallel reading text?

books in DI (Black dialect) and D2 (standard English) for use in experi? mental and control classes. The dialect was based on common language

patterns of Black children in Washington, D.C. where it was decided to

implement the experimental strategy.

Unfortunately, Stewart's plan was not prepared for the extremely

strong negative emotions that interfered with his strategy. Even before

the experiment began, Stewart was attacked for introducing "a bad lan?

guage that shouldn't appear in schools". The experiment itself was

wrecked by this self-hate of these people's own dialect. Unlike the proud

speakers of PiteS dialect in Sweden, these Black American community leaders despised their own mother tongue and were, according to Stewart

(1975), "ready to condemn this child to more generations of school fail?

ure because of their resistance to the incorporation of the recognition of black culture into the curriculum of the schools". Wolfram and Fasold

(1969) in the same volume that contained Stewart's earlier article warned that "Sociolinguistic research has shown that speakers who use socially stigmatized speech forms sometimes have the same low opinion of such

forms as do speakers who do not use them. As a result, even though the Black English materials might be clearer and more natural to some, they



342 JOHN DOWNING

may not be acceptable because of the presence of these stigmatized forms."

Thus in the case of Black English, its association with generations of

degradation may prevent its speakers from trying the solution of giving it the dignity of a printed form. The Black English dialects which these

people developed still seem to be tainted by their origins in slavery. Searle (1972) brings out this similar problem in Tobago: "But as these

new, separate nations find their independent political identities, their

people still speak in a language that takes them back to the past and

their subjection and exploitation through centuries of slavery and colo-

nialism". Searle's experience as a white teacher in black Tobago is a real?

ization of two linguistic ambivalences in these people. The more obvious

and immediate problem is their ambivalence toward their own dialect.

In their homes and on the street it is spontaneously and positively ac?

cepted, but most of the same people reject their homely language for

written prose or poetry. Standard English only deserves such dignity. Thus, education becomes "a process of self-betrayal and alienation, in

which the child assumes that the word that gave her life and sensation

is beneath poetical expression, and so she must turn to another which

is not hers". But Searle's book indicates that a new ambivalence toward

Standard English is becoming increasingly conscious. The realization

seems to be growing that this "proper" language is the invisible chain

which still fetters the black Tobagan to England. Thus Searle sees "Tri-

nidad and Tobago, with a black prime minister and a predominantly black government, but the real governor of the culture?the language?is still in control. The black man still speaks out his experience in words

and symbols belonging to the white man."

The contrasting emotional attitudes in the Osterberg and Stewart bi-

dialectal experiments demonstrate the great importance of the affective

variable in the outcome of this strategy of delivering reading instruction

in the LI of the child as a preparation for learning to read in a standard

or national language that will be his L2.

Mixed Delivery

Obviously it is not impossible to provide instruction partly in the med?

ium of LI and partly in L2. For example, in the description of one of

the French immersion programmes earlier in this article it was pointed out that language arts instruction was delivered in LI (English) for 25

minutes per day beginning in the middle of the second grade. Many other




strategies of this mixed type have been used. For example, in Australia,

Canada and England there are special classes for immigrants where child?

ren arriving with little or no English are assisted in learning English as

an L2 by teachers who use the child's own LI to help bridge the gap. One bilingual project of this mixed type is the Dade County, Florida

bilingual programme in the United States. In 1961 it began as a transi-

tional method, paralleling instruction delivered in Spanish (LI) with

teaching English as L2. The pupils were from refugee families from Cuba.

Since 1963, however, a different strategy has been used in some of the

schools. For one half of the school day all instruction is delivered in LI

(Spanish) and for the other half all instruction is delivered in L2 (Eng?

lish). Evaluation of this programme at the first school to implement it

shows that these Cuban children are equally proficient in reading in

both LI and L2 by the sixth grade. However, the generalizability of this

finding remains in question because of the limitation of the small middle-

class sample, as Spolsky (1972) has pointed out.

Conclusions

Firstly it is perfectly clear that the mismatch between the LI of the pupil and the L2 of school instruction causes serious confusion in the pu-

pil's comprehension of the teacher's instruction. As Spolsky (1972b) re?

marks, "Learning in school depends on interaction ? interaction of the

pupil with his teachers, with his books, with his peers ? and all these in-

teractions are mediated by language. School is not just a place that

teaches language; most of its teaching takes place through language, and

most of its learning depends on a pupil's ability to understand what his

teacher says and what is in his books. Without communication between

teachers and pupils, there is little chance of effective education." This

seems obvious, but, actually, the deprivation is even more serious than

this for the child when instruction is delivered in an L2. John and

Horner (1971) reach the crux of the problem psychologically. They state: "Children between the ages of five and seven use language at an

accelerating rate for purposes of problem-solving. When ideas are being formed in one language it is difficult to state them in another, and the

child's unsuccessful attempts at translation may lead to great frustration

and loss of interest in expressing ideas." Therefore, "When the school

attempts to teach a second language before the child has developed ade?

quate cognitive skills in his native language, the child may become a 'non-

lingual', whose functioning in both his native and second languages de-



344 JOHN DOWNING

velops in only limited ways. Such children may become literally 'children

without a language'. A Navajo educator has observed that: "Children

who have forgotten their language, really have no language. They are

five, six, seven years old and they are just not quick enough in a language which is not their own." The result is the 'cognitive confusion' described

by Vernon and documented clearly in the bilingual researches reviewed

in this article.

This first conclusion indicates that young school beginners make bet?

ter progress if their instruction is delivered in their own mother tongue. However, there may be a variety of reasons why instruction should never-

theless be in the medium of an L2. These reasons have to be weighed

against the superior effectiveness of delivery in Ll. In making such judg- ments it is important to take into account the second generalization that can be made from this review. That is, that the outcome may be in-

fluenced to a very important degree by the affective variable. As in the

Black English experiment, the effectiveness of Ll delivery may be wiped out by negative emotions, or, as in the case of the French immersion

programmes, the positive motivation of parents and children may go

quite a long way to overcoming the cognitive deficits of delivery of in?

struction in an L2.

NOTES

1. Cf. Immersion Programmes: "The Irish Experience" by Dr. J. Cummins in this issue.

2. Cf. Dr. Modiano's communication "Research in bilingual education in Mexico" in this issue.

3. Cf. A Pask's review of U. Ammon's work on the effect of bidialectalism in this issue.

REFERENCES

Andersson, T. Foreign Languages in the Elementary School. Austin, (Texas): Uni?

versity of Texas Press, 1969.

Barik, H., and Swain M. "Primary-grade French immersion in a unilingual English- Canadian setting: The Toronto study through grade 2." Canadian Journal of Educa? tion 1 (1976), pp. 39-58.



STRATEGIES OF BILINGUAL TEACHING 34 5

Carroll, J.B. The Teaching of French as a Foreign Language in Eight Countries. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, and New York: John Wiley, 1975.

Garcia de Lorenzo, M.E. "Frontier dialect: A challenge to education." Reading Teacher 28 (1975), pp. 563-658.

Hensey, F. The Sociolinguistics of the Brazilian-Uruguayan Border. Paris: Mouton, 1972.

John, V.P., and Horner, V.M. Early Childhood Bilingual Education. New York: Mod? ern Language Association of America, 1971.

Klapper, Z.S. "Psychoeducational aspects of reading disabilities." In Natchez, G.

(ed). Children With Reading Problems. New York: Basic Books, 1968.

Lambert, W.E. Language, Psychology, and Culture. Stanford, (Calif.): Stanford

University Press, 1972.

Lambert, W.E., and Tucker, G.R. Bilingual Education of Children. Rowley (Mass.): Newbury House, 1972.

Macnamara, J. Bilingualism and Primary Education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univer?

sity Press, 1966.

McLaughlin, B. "Second language learning in children." Psychological Bulletin 84

(1977), pp. 438-459.

Modiano, N. Indian Education in the Chiapas Highlands. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973.

Osterberg, T. Bilingualism and the First School Language, Umea, Sweden: Vaster- bottens Trycheri, 1961.

Robinson, H.M. "Diagnosis and treatment of poor readers with vision problems. Clinical studies in reading, II." Supplementary Educational Monographs No. 77.

Chicago, (III): University of Chicago Press, 1953.

Searle, C. The Forsaken Lover. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972.

Serafica, F.C., and Sigel, I. E. "Styles of categorization and reading disability." Journal of Reading Behavior 2 (1970), pp. 105-115.

Spolsky, B. "The limits of language education." In The Language Education of Min?

ority Children. Rowley (Mass.): Newbury House, 1972a.

Spolsky, B. "Introduction". In The Language Education of Minority Children, 1972b.

Stewart, W.A. "On the use of negro dialect in the teaching of reading." In Teaching Black Children to Read. Baratz, J.C. and Shuy, R.W. (eds.).Washington, (D.C): Center for Applied Linguistics, 1969.

Stewart, W.A. "Teaching blacks to read against their will". In Luelsdorff, P.A. (ed.). Linguistic Perspectives on Black English. Regensburg (Germany): Hans Carl, 1975.

Vernon, M.D. Backwardness in Reading. London: Carnbridge University Press, 1957.

Vernon, M.D. Reading and its Difficulties. London: Carnbridge University Press, 1971.



346 JOHN DOWNING

Wolfram, W., and Fasold, R.W. "Toward reading materials for speakers of Black

English: Three linguistically appropriate passages." In Baratz, J.C. and Shuy, R.W.

(eds.). Teaching Black Children to Read, 1969.

UNION MONDIALE POUR LA SAUVEGARDE DE L'ENFANCE ET DE L'ADOLESCENCE

UMOSEA WORLD UNION FOR THE SAFEGUARD OF YOUTH

International Congress

"URBAN LIFE AND THE CHILD"

Montreal, October 31 - November 4, 1979

The World Union for the Safeguard of Youth (UMOSEA) is

organizing, in co-operation with the "Conseil du Quebec de

l'Enfance Exceptionnelle (CQEE)", an International Congress in Montreal (Canada), October 31 - November 4, 1979, on

the general theme "URBAN LIFE AND THE CHILD".

The programme is available from the Organizing Committee:

CQEE, 2765, chemin de la Cote Sainte-Catherine, Montreal,

P.Q., H3T 1B5, Canada, Tel. (514) 342.05.96, and the UMOSEA Secretariat: 28, place Saint-Georges, F-75442 Paris Cedex 09, France, Tel. (1) 526.04.45.



Documents

Language of Instruction in a Multi-Cultural Setting / La Langue D'Instruction Dans un Contexte Pluriculturel / Unterrichtssprache Beim Zusammentreffen Verschiedener Kulturen || Strategies