Second Language Literacy - Literature review Example

Second Language Literacy---Task one The accumulated wisdom of research on second language literacy, particularly in the field of bilingualism has indicated that while initial literacy learning in a second language has proved to be successful, it is often riskier than starting with the learner’s home language---more so for those learners affected by culture, poverty, lower level of parental education or poor schooling. It is from this perspective that the concept of second language literacy has been contentious that it needs academic competence it its research and analyses. One of the issues that have not been given much interest is the effectiveness of using English as second language in teaching English classroom in Saudi Arabia. Based on studies such as Afzal (2012), the position of first language in the acquisition of English among Saudi Arabian students has been the subject of controversy among scholars. That is, the central focus on the utilization of the first language in the English classroom among such learners have been pegged on the accompanying social, cultural and political contexts if not trends in the usage of mother tongue (Arabic language) in teaching English classroom. Conversely, Al-Hadhrami (2008) argues that the use of the learner’s first language in English classroom is contradicting and controversial pedagogical issue in a number of English First Language (EFL) programmes within Saudi Arabia. This study appreciates, basing on conclusions made from studies such as Gillen (2014) that being an Arabic teacher who is able to speak English as a second language would be an added advantage to Arabic students or schools where main clientele are native Arabic speakers learning English as second language. Despite these conclusions, this study is aware of the dynamics of English as first language and English as second language in English speaking countries. The point is, there are cases where ESL students are immersed in English outside the ESL classes. This brings another dimension of argument on whether what Gillen concludes on is worth considering owing to the fact that second language literacy is a diverse concept that does not conclude on the premise of such conclusions. Contrariwise, Arabic language that this study considers as first language (L1) is as a constructive pedagogical tool that can be used in English learning classes within Saudi Arabia. Based on this observation, it is worth contradicting positions held by scholars such as Nicholas and Starks (2014) so as to understand the wider view of effects of exploring pedagogical issues of using Arabic in English learning classroom within Saudi Arabia. This will also help to understand or learn English (in this case second language L2). Defending this position from the perspective of linguistic imperialism, researches have explored the constituent fallacies that have been underlying the English learning profession---something that has indeed contributed to the English linguistic hegemony (Cook, 2001; Al-Buraiki, 2008). As a matter of fact, Al-Buraiki defines the so called English linguistic hegemony as “the implicit and explicit beliefs, values, purposes and activities that can characterize the English learning profession and which has contributed significantly to the maintenance of English as a dominant language” (p.73). This definition help dispute the position held by scholars such as Cook that scholars should believe in ‘monolingual fallacy.’ Citing studies such as Al-Hazza and Lucking (2005), there is a belief that English should be taught monolingually (use English and English only while teaching English learning classroom). In this case, it is dangerous for this study to adopt this finding but look for other supportive arguments since its adoption in this review will certainly be a problem in L1 or hindrance in learning of English as L2 in Saudi Arabia. Additionally, the best way to understand the arguments surrounding the monolingual fallacy is to consider arguments posited by Gibbons (2008). Gibbons discusses the effects of using Arabic in English classroom. He actually adopts what he terms as Monitor Model where he emphasizes on a natural approach to the process of acquiring English as a second language among Arabic learners in English classroom. His conclusion is that English within Saudi Arabia can be acquired through the process of L1 (Arabic), and where immense exposure to the English as L2 is required but at the same time limiting the exposure of L1. But again this model misses some critical issues that scholars such as Lange (2014) have pointed with regard to second language literacy. That is, Gibbons fails to recognize that while L1 is indeed essential pedagogical tool, such needs to apply in a collaborative way such that L1 does not hinder L2 or the other way round. Myriad of studies have indicated problems and benefits associated with the use of Arabic as L2 in teaching English classroom within Saudi Arabia (Alshammari, 2011; Ahmad, 2011; Roberts and Street, 1997). One of such complications is that the approach of using Arabic in English classroom is neither pedagogical nor conclusive in the sense that Arabic students have complex culture compounded by different sentence structures. What Alshammari seems to be postulating is that using Arabic in English classroom must be done or taught through English and not by using L1. But Van Weijen et al., (2009); Ross, (2000) seemed to question Roberts and Street’s rejections of using L1 in teaching Arabic in English classrooms. Assessing Van Weijen et al. point of view, they question how learners can truly appreciate the tenets of the targeted language if they are not made to relate L1 in learning L2. Interestingly, this debate seems endless among scholars as Nicholas and Starks (2014) who takes different position regarding pedagogical and conclusiveness of using L1 in English classroom. As a matter of fact, their position contradicts Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz (two different teachers who took parallel studies in two different English learning institutions within Saudi Arabia) who critically assessed the amount of L1 use in English classes within Abu Dhabi. In doing this, Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz made comparisons in which the two teachers applied different teaching methods. Mahmoudi applied Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) and in so doing heavily depended on translation to the first language (Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz, 2013). Going by Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz, L1 has no any significant role to play when it comes to EFL and for that matter, too much use of Arabic in English classroom may deprive learners valuable input in the adoption of English language. On the other hand, Amirkhiz applied a unique method where he was explaining technical terms from English in Arabia and thereafter assessing the learnability of these terms. Amirkhiz concluded that the chances of these students understanding complex terms in English was high when he explained these terms in Arabic and relate them in English. Unfortunately, none of the scholars bring documented evidence either from teachers’ or students’ perspective regarding the claim as put. This research finds that there is paucity of information concerning L2 language acquisition and how effective L1 assists in the process. Researches that have attempted to find the relationship include that of Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz (2013) showing the importance of L1 in scaffolding Arabic learners as well as optimizing learner interest in cognitively demanding interactions or tasks. What Mahmoudi and Amirkhiz tried to investigate has also been reflected in Troudi (2007) research who by taking a case study on Arabian countries (including Saudi Arabia) found tasks that were likely to reduce, sustenance of collaborative interactions, cognitive overload as well as fostering the development of metalinguistic terminology. It can be argued that these are studies that have significantly supported the role of first language in teaching of English within Arabian countries. However, there is one interesting position that second language literacy posit and that is, L1 represents a powerful source that can be applied to enhance English teaching but such should be used in a principled way. The idea of whether or not L1 assist in optimizing learners’ interest in cognitively demanding interactions or tasks in L2 has been concluded by Aburumuh et al. (2009). Aburumuh et al. explored the students’ reactions when instructors use Arabic language when teaching English in the Department of English and Modern European languages at the University of Qatar. Discussing their data and findings, Aburumuh et al. affirm that of all native instructors (native English speakers) and 70% of non-native speakers of English agreed that it was profitable to use Arabic in English teaching Arabic classroom. The position help by these instructors is that use of Arabic at some point was important as it helped students relate some aspects from the perspective of L1 rather than doing the same from L2 perspective that they were not even familiar with. Despite this finding, a question that needs to be explored further include whether or not inclusion of L1 should dominate teaching process and if not, by how much. Additionally, it is almost certain thus far that studies have explored the attitudes of learners towards the use of Arabic in English classroom. Conversely, such information continue to remain dominance with existing findings include the questionnaire that was distributed by Auerbach during a conference and in the process, 86% of the students responded that they sometimes preferred the use of Arabic while in English classroom (Auerbach, 1993). Since the introduction of English in Saudi Arabia by 1925, the subject of whether or not English should be taught using Arabic has been subject of debate. Protagonists of the school of thought assert that latest trends in Saudi Arabia where native English speakers and Arabic English speakers use Arabic in teaching English is not only an improvement to learning but shifts to and from utilization of first language to bridge gaps learners encounter in the process of learning English (Aburumuh et al. 2009; Alshammari, 2011). Recent studies that have researched on risk factors learners in Saudi Arabia indicate that the use of Arabic language is viewed as a controversial pedagogy in English classrooms especially when educators are supposed to acknowledge cultural and linguistic diversities of students in such classes (Spalding et al., 2009; Yi, 2010). Therefore, it is important from this argument to look at this issue from theoretical underpinning such as that of socio-cultural by Vygotsky that makes it interesting in pursuit of underlying issues with regard to using Arabic in English classroom. In summary, socio-cultural background of Saudi Arabia leaves this study with one thought and that is when meanings are negotiated using first language L1, learners succinctly focus on the tenets of the targeted language (L2). Basically, these are the complexities that are continuously seen with regard to the topic. Study by Al-khresheh (2010) that summed up socio-cultural background of Saudi Arabia and the process of using Arabic in teaching English carried a research in Al Huda International School located in Riyadh. In her case study Al-khresheh used 20 Arabic students with an aim of finding the effect of using Arabic language in English classroom. The conclusion made was that L2 and L1 have two unique linguistic characteristics and systems. Therefore it will be not be prudent from her studies for students to use their L1 in order to fully capture English as L2. The main reason given in this study is that English and Arabic (L1 and L2 respectively) have different if not unique sentence structures that it cannot be assumed that one can integrate both languages effectively. This study failed to recognize one key aspect; when teachers use Arabic in English classroom, especially where there is cultural diversities language owners tend to lag behind in their pursuit of the targeted language. In addition, from the perspective of second language scholars such as Spalding et al. (2009) say it is only possible to assume that L1 can necessitate the acquisition of L2 if students are able to separate the two linguistic systems compared to when targeted language is used throughout. Conclusively, the question that the study group composed of students from different culture is not applicable because Naomi Chomsky argues in her theory that people tend to acquire languages in a similar pattern regardless of their culture. More studies oppose the findings by Al-khresheh (2010) and some relevant cases include Al-Hadhrami, (2008); Al-Buraiki (2008); Al-khresheh (2010). Of particular interest is Al-Hadhrami (2008) who argued that teachers should not use Arabic in English classroom because in doing so, learners tend to compare elements from Arabic language and use them directly in the newly acquired elements of English thus some meanings are lost in the process. This research also finds the statement by Al-Hadhrami to be more convincing in the sense that English classes need as much time and exposure as what learners had when acquiring their first language and in so doing, using Arabic in such classes deny students the needed exposure and time. Theorists supporting social interactions believe that input given to students is equivalent to output students give in the process of language teaching and acquisition (Atkinson, 1987). The point where there is rift is that in as much as this study finds social interaction theorists to be embedding their argument on ‘innatist’ notion of comprehensible input, the bottom line idea is that comprehensive input expressed through L1gives learners opportunities to experiment with the targeted language. Scholars such as Droop and Verhoeven (2003) have mentioned issues such as the learner being forced into a more syntactic processing mode to an extent that it occurs in comprehension. That is, comprehension output has the ability to play significant role in interaction. Bringing the aspect of comprehension in this argument, further researches are relevant so as to ascertain how effective using L1 in teaching L2 is. Another important research that can help this study find the right direction is that by Hartman (2003). Hartman did a study on six different ambassadors residing in Arabian countries including Saudi Arabia (the other five were Egypt, Algeria, Israel, Kuwait and Israel). The main object was to investigate the process and time these ambassadors took to learn English in these Arabian countries. The research concluded that the acquisition process was faster when these learners were occasionally exposed to Arabic language in the process. The suggestion that can be made from this study is that the adoption of L1 in teaching English makes learners acquire English close to a level in their first language. In as much, this study needs to reiterate that it is unrealistic to believe that using Arabic in English classroom is effective for teaching and learning. While this is something that Harman failed to capture in the research, the underlying issue is that it is prudent to use Arabic in English classroom when a teacher is checking and explaining the meaning, teaching and explaining grammar and explaining class tasks and activities. Contrariwise, this research finds Hartman’s assertion to be retrogressive when using Arabic in the same classroom and in so doing a teacher is communicating somewhat simple task such as maintaining contacts with the students or asking them to undertake learning related tasks. This is exactly what Storch and Wigglesworth (2005) support. In their study Storch and Wigglesworth investigated effectiveness of using Arabic in teaching English in middle level colleges. While the study supported what Hartman (2003) had initially suggested, there was new dimension to their results and findings. That is, teachers can only use L1 in teaching English classroom under the following scenarios; classroom management, explaining difficult and ambiguous concepts, building rapport between teachers and students. It therefore stands that the only possible reason that teachers should use L1 in English learning classroom is when they negotiate meanings that may be technical for these learners before they are fully acquainted with L2. Certainly, there is need for more research that will try to link these arguments with theories of language acquisition such as that of Skinner (behaviorist) positing that acquisition of L2 largely depends on environment where there are principles of association, conditioning reinforcement and imitations. This research believes that just like any other students, those Arabic in English learning classroom are able to associate sounds with actions, objects and events. It therefore remains that there are some findings reviewed thus far that are not supported by Skinner and his theory. Based on Skinner, this study found divergent views between using L1 in teaching L2 and abilities of learners to acquire syntax and words by imitating others (as argued by protagonists of the idea that teachers can succeed when integrating Arabic while teaching English in Saudi Arabia). When looking at deeper underpinnings of syntax in both languages (Arabic and English) as Skinner puts it, this study realizes that suggestions made by these protagonists do not give research based conclusions. That is, teachers can only enable learners to acquire L2 by reinforcing correct speech and once the two languages (in this case Arabic and English) have no similar syntax then integrating Arabic while teaching English classroom may not contribute as effective as researches posit. A good example of conclusion that can support this argument is that it is because of the same problem in syntax that some learners of English as their second language (ESL) may experience problems with reading and writing Arabic therefore using Arabic in such classes complicates the process of learning. Karmani (2005) carried out a detailed study of the effect of local language while teaching English classroom in India. The study adopted two distinct views of her topic: to either use English or avoid it. Starting with use it, she found that foreign students exposed to English throughout the program were unable to participate fully in English related programs with just 25% of the population showing proficiency. On the other hand, integrating local languages in India was found to be reducing barriers to English learning especially among the native speakers as they could easily build rapport between them and their teachers. The conclusion that was made was that though adoption of local language while teaching English could improve L2 acquisition, it is upon teachers to assess the learnability of the students and decide whether to use English throughout or introduce local languages in between teaching process. Important to mention from this particular study is that while it has considered use of Arabic in English classroom from teachers’ point of view, the worry is that little has been mentioned or students view has not been considered concerning the best approach while they are learning English. Mentioning of students considerations in such analyses, Ross (2000) considered it in her recent study. Her sample population comprised of 35 students learning English in Al Noor Indian Islamic School located in Abu Dhabi. From the sample population, about 80 percent (24 respondents) engaged in the research thought that Arabic should be integrated in the process of teaching them English. On the other hand 11 respondents (20 percent) felt that using English throughout the session will give them maximum exposure to the language. This research brings a different view since it shows existing difference between how teachers and students perceive the use of L1 in English classroom. Unlike opinions held by Karmani (2005) there exist differences between what teachers think and what students think regarding use of Arabic language in English classroom. Therefore, this research, unlike what has been presented before, help this study not only embed its thesis statement but bring relationship such thesis statement has with what was argued by Naomi Chomsky. What Ross finds with the 35 respondents conforms to the fact that there are language acquisition device that necessitate development of new languages and related skills provided such are exposed to learners. For as long as Chomsky found that children possess universal grammar accentuate the fact that over 80% of the students engaged in the research believed that Arabic should be integrated in the process of teaching English. It is not only Naomi Chomsky and Ross who should be cited for having used learners to judge the effects of using L1 acquisition of L2. Recently, Ahmad, J. (2011) sought students’ opinion on whether the use of Arabic in English classroom contributed towards learning English among Saudi Arabian students between ages of 15-25years. From the data the research collected 81% preferred if the teacher used Arabic language only when explaining difficult grammars but not every single word that the teacher finds necessary. Consequently, learners did not prefer the teacher giving instructions on how to carry their activities in Arabic language (L1). As this findings stand, there are some issues that problematize facts. For instance, during my tenure as English teacher in Arabic school, a number of issues were poignant. First, sometime English is better taught monolingually and Al-Hazza and Lucking (2005) prove this assertion. Secondly, as a teacher during the time, it was recognized that the earlier English is taught, the better the outcome of the teaching and finally if other languages are used, there is a level of standard of English that will be compromised. References Aburumuh, H. A., Smith, H. L., & Ratcliffe, L. G. (2009). Educators’ cultural awareness and perceptions of Arab-American students: Breaking the cycle of ignorance. The Journal of Multiculturalism in Education, 8. Afzal, S. (2012). Relationship between Providing Persian Equivalents of English Adjectives and Iranian EFL Learners' Active Vocabulary.International Journal of English Linguistics, 2 (1), 231-238. Ahmad, J. (2011). Pronunciation problems among Saudi learners: A case study at the preparatory year program, Najran University Saudi Arabia. Language in India 11(7), 22-36. Al-Buraiki, M. (2008).The L1 in Young Learner Classrooms: Teachers’ Views and Practices. Retrieved on April 17 from http://www.moe.gov.om/Portal/sitebuilder/sites/EPS/English/MOE/baproject/ version2/Ch2.pdf Al-Hazza, T. & Lucking, R. (2005).The minority of suspicion: Arab Americans. Multicultural Review, 14(3), 32-38. Al-Hadhrami, A. H. (2008). The role of the L1 in Grade 5 EFL classrooms. In S. Borg (Ed.). Investigating English language teaching and learning in Oman. Muscat: Ministry of Education, Oman. Al-khresheh, M. (2010). Interlingual interference in the English language word order structure of Jordanian EFL learners. European Journal of Social Sciences, 16(1), 106-113. Alshammari, M. M. (2011). The Use of the Mother Tongue in Saudi EFL Classrooms. Journal of International Education Research, 7 (4), 95-102. Atkinson, D. (1987). The Mother Tongue in the Classroom: a neglected resource? English Language Teaching Journal, 41, 4, 214-247. Auerbach, E. (1993). Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom.TESOL Quarterly, 27, 9–32. Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 402–423. Droop, M. & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 78-103. Gibbons, P. (2008). “It was taught good and I learned a lot”: Intellectual practices and ESL learners in the middle years. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 31(2), 155-173. Gillen J., (2014), ‘Linguistics is a discipline with its own history’: Language, linguistics and digital literacies (Ch. 2). In Digital Literacies, New York, Routledge. Hartman, A. (2003). Language as oppression: The English‐Only Movement in the United States. Socialism and Democracy, 17. Karmani, S. (2005). Petro- Linguistics: The Emerging Nexus Between Oil, English and Islam. In Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4(2), 87-102. Lange, P. (2014), Representational ideologies (Ch.6). In Kids on YouTube: Technical Identities and Digital Literacies. (eBook) Nicholas, H. and Starks, D., (2014). Additional language literacies (Ch. 6). In Language education and applied linguistics: Bridging the two fields, New York, Routledge. Mahmoudi, L., &Amirkhiz, S. (2013). The Use of Persian in the EFL Classroom–The Case of English Teaching and Learning at Pre-university Level in Iran. English Language Teaching, 4 (1), 135-140. Roberts, C. & Street, B. (1997). Spoken and written language. In F. Coulmas. (Ed.), Handbook of sociolinguistics: Writing systems (pp. 168-186). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Ross, S. (2000). Individual differences and learning outcomes in the Certificates in Spoken and Written English. In G. Brindley (Ed.), Studies in immigrant English language assessment, Vol. 1 (pp. 191-214). Sydney: NCELTR. Spalding, E., Wang, J., Lin, E., & Hu, G. (2009). Analyzing voice in the writing of Chinese teachers of English. Research in the Teaching of English, 44(1), 23-51. Storch, N. and Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Is there a role for the use of L1 in an L2 setting? TESOL Quarterly, 37, 4, 760-769. Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. California: Sage Publications. Troudi, S. (2007). The Effects of English as a Medium of Instruction. In Jendli, A., Troudi, S. & Coombe, C. (Eds.). The Power of Language: Perspectives from Arabia. Dubai: TESOL Arabia. Van Weijen, D., van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Sanders, T. (2009). L1 use during L2 writing: An empirical study of a complex phenomenon. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(4), 235-250. Yi, Y. (2010). Adolescent multilingual writers’ transitions across in- and out-of-school contexts. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(1), 17-32. Read More