1. UNIT 5. AN ADDITIVE APPROACH TO PLANNING IN PLURILINGUAL CLASSROOMS.
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION RESEARCH.
JSP

2. AIMS OF THE SESSION Knowing several language acquisition theories:
The Common Underlying Proficiency Theory and the Iceberg Metaphor.
The Interlanguage.
Interactionism and the Scaffolding
Recognizing the factors that affect language acquisition.
JSP

3. INTRODUCTION
“LANGUAGES EMBODY THE INTELLECTUAL WEALTH OF THE PEOPLE THAT SPEAK THEM. LOSING ANY OF THEM IS LIKE DROPPING A BOMB ON THE LOVRE”
(Ken Hale, linguist)
JSP

4. SUPPORTING MOTHER TONGUE
Advantages of maintaing one’s mother language:
Personal identity
Cultural heritage
Intercultural understanding
Skills supporting cognitive development
Additive bilingualism vs. Substractive bilingualism
Many opportunities for schools and students
European Council ideas on intercultural awareness
Multilingualism
JSP

5. BILINGUALISM
Bilingual Kids from Parents.wmv
JSP

6. BILINGUALISM ADDITIVE BILINGUALISM SUBSTRACTIVE BILINGUALISM
“Social and emotional conditions for learning that value all languages and cultures and affirm the identity of each learner and promote self steem.”
Does not replace the mother tongue.
SUBSTRACTIVE BILINGUALISM
Does not affirm identity
Another language replaces the mother tongue
Colonial situations or political situations in which one language is over another language.
JSP

7. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
Jim Cummins (Canada, 1980)
“People who are learning a second language are not faced with a totally unmapped territory”
Common framework of language structures and functions = Common underlying proficiency (CUP)
JSP

8. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
JSP

9. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
CUP implies the interdependence hypothesis: the surface features of any two languages may be different (BICS), but the underlying cognitive proficiency skills are common across languages (CALP).
Linguistic exposure and experience in two languages can promote the cognitive academic skills underlying both languages.
JSP

10. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
JSP

11. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS): language needed to interact in social contexts, language used in everyday communication or informal settings.
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP): formal academic learning. Thinking skills: analysis, synthesis, evaluation related to CALP.
JSP

12. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
CUP linked to CALP
Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
Type of language that allows for the transfer of academic skills from one language to another.
The aim of high quality bilingual education
JSP

13. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
Bilingual or multilingual people with meaningful exposure and experience
develop CUP skills which enable the development of CALP skills in both languages.
ONE CENTRAL PROCESSING SYSTEM
JSP

14. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
In summary,
Child’s first language is not a hindrance
Cognitive and academic skills transfer to the new language
Such skills are interdependent across languages.
The knowledge of one language helps to learn the second (or third) language
JSP

15. THE COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY THEORY AND THE ICEBERG METAPHOR
LITERACY SKILLS THAT CAN BE TRANSFERRED:
Directionality
Sequencing
Ability to distinguish shapes and sounds
Kwoledge that written symbols correspond to sounds and can be decoded in order and direction
Semantic and sytantic knowledge
Text structure
Use of clues to predict meaning
Variety of purposes
Confidence in oneself
JSP

16. FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (I)
Case study: an oral production of a 5 year old bilingual boy.
At school:
“Pau m’ha pushat”
“I not can do this” / “I no can’t do this”
“I not want to go” / “I not want go”
“Lucia not goes” / “She not go”
“Want you this”
“Me no like this homework”
At home:
“M’he deixat el llibre on the table”
“Estic on the carpet”
“Dóna’m el apron, please”
JSP

17. FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (II)
Language transfer: appliance of native language knowledge to a second language.
Interference or negative transfer: errors originated in the application of L1 grammar rules to the construction of L2. The greater the differences between the languages, the more negative transfer will result (false friends).
Interlanguage: linguistic system developed by a learner of a L2 who has not become fully proficient yet but who is approximating to the target language. (Spanglish)
JSP

18. INTERACTIONISM (I)
Krashen and language acquisition.wmv
JSP

19. INTERACTIONISM (II)
Interaction between the learner and the language environment
Innate cognitive processes
Adults use modified input to address children
ESL learners need comprehensible input to make sense
Background knowledge
Language level of the lesson
Production of meaningful output and reception of feedback.
Differences between second language natural acquisition and second language formal acquisition.
JSP

20. INTERACTIONISM (III) KRASHEN’S 5 MAIN HYPOTHESIS
The natural approach: we learn in a predictable order. 5 stages:
Preproduction
Early production
Speech emergence
Intermediate fluency
Advanced level
The acquisition learning hypothesis: acquisition vs. learning
Monitor hypothesis
Input hypothesis
(Positive) affective filter
JSP

21. INTERACTIONISM (IV) KRASHEN’S THEORY APPLIED TO CLASSROOM:
Meaningful input
Real life communication
Foster positive situations
Limited use of grammar teaching
Correction of mistakes only during learning
Natural focus:
communicative skills,
comprehension before production,
speaking and writing skills when the pupil is prepared,
acquisition better than learning,
low affective filter
JSP

22. INTERACTIONISM (V) BRUNER VYGOTSKY Scaffolding
“Provision of appropriate assistance to students so that they may achieve what alone would have been too difficult for them.”
Comprehensive input
Teachers predict students’ difficulties
VYGOTSKY
Proximal development(ZDP)
Notional gap between
A) the learner’s current developmental level
B) the learner’s potential level
JSP

23. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION
SEE YOU NEXT WEEK
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION
JSP