Investigating English Language Teaching and Learning - Literature review Example

Table of Contents 1.0.Literature Review Summary 2 2.0.Details of the Interviewees 3 3.0.Introduction to the Interview 6 4.0.Results of the Case Study 7 5.0.Summary 13 6.0.References 14 1.0. Literature Review Summary Building from literatures reviewed, it remains that second language literacy remains to be contentious. In so speaking, literatures reviewed from different premises but with common stance show that effectiveness of using first language (Arabic in this study) in teaching second language (English in this case) remains debatable. Along these positions, this study summarises leading summaries from different scholars that will be used in the preceding section (data analyses). Beginning with contemporary scholars, it is important to consider the position held by Al-Hadhrami (2008) that learner’s first language in the English classroom is a contradictory and controversial pedagogical issue. The position Al-Hadhrami takes is that structure arrangement of the two languages are so different that the conformity becomes a challenge especially when dealing with Arabic learners who have not been exposed to the English before. This research has been considered as it will be tested in the interview question that will target the population on which Al-Hadhrami based his conclusion. On the same note, literature review considered researches such as that of Gillen (2014) where the conclusion made was that being an Arabic teacher who is able to speak English as a second language would be an added advantage to Arabic students or to schools in which the main clientele comprise native Arabic speakers who are learning English as a second language it should not be assumed that such advantage will be automatic transition to allow such teachers to speak in Arabic while teaching learners. In addition, literature review dwelt hugely on scholars aligned to linguistic imperialism. These scholars include Al-Buraiki (2008); Cook (2001) who have taken to explore the constituent fallacies that underlie the English learning profession, which has indeed contributed to the English linguistic hegemony. That is, these scholars believe that using L1 in teaching L2 is misunderstood by some linguistic fallacies to extend that theoretical and fundamental issues are ignored in such study. These scholars have been reviewed to help in designing interview question that attempts to assess whether teachers understand fallacies surrounding using L1 in teaching L2 within Arabic context. In such connectedness, there are some scholars such as Al- Karmani (2005); Gibbons (2008); Lange (2014) who are breaking away from linguistic imperialism tag by asserting that English as L2 in Saudi Arabia should be taught monolingually. It has to be noted that much still lack in terms of evidence to ascertain instances where L1 can successfully be taught monolingually. The push for further research is embedded on the fact that literatures on monolingual as reviewed fails to recognize that while L1 is indeed an essential pedagogical tool, it needs to be applied in a collaborative way such that it (L1) does not hinder L2 or vice versa. It is from this basis that semi-structured interview questions will be based to assess the claim. Seemingly, unless further research is conducted and well-structured questions are developed that attempt to answer the issues as raised, debate seems endless among scholars and such has been compounded by the fact that Arabic students have a complex culture and different sentence structures. 2.0. Details of the Interviewees The numbers of participants/interviewees were 4 teachers and 5 students from five different universities within Saudi Arabia. The four teachers comprised of two foreigners teaching English in these universities as second language but fluent in Arabic as their second language. On the other hand, the other two were Saudi Arabian by citizenship but were fluent in English as their second language. Contrariwise the 4 students were all from Saudi Arabia taking English lessons as second language. In that regard, it is important to note that the interviewee (4 teachers and 5 students) were between the ages of 21 years and 48. Based on the academic qualification of the five students, most of them (four) were pursuing bachelor degrees in different fields while the remaining was taking diploma course but all the five taking English as part-time or extra lesson in their respective universities. Still on students, the sample collected for study comprised each participating teacher’s first to fourth year class. The student sample was based on cross-sectional and changed year as they moved from one class to another. Due to such variations the sample ensured that the students represented background demographics within Saudi Arabia. Finally, the type of students that have been selected for study will be able to answer a number of questions and concerns as raised in the literature review. Additionally, they will be able to inform significant facets as well as perspectives concerning the use of first language in teaching second language in Saudi Arabia. To contextualize this statement critical issue such as monolingually will be addressed by students at a higher level of learning their role is another aspect that defines the characteristics of the participants or students chosen addressing the semi-structured questions. Concerning the four teachers, one was from United States of America and native speakers of English while the other two were from United Kingdom and native English speakers as well. This variation has been considered to ensure the study answer the structured questions effectively and such in turn inform fully all the essential elements of the phenomenon as they are arising in the literature review. The average range of experience in teaching English for the four teachers was 8 years with the two from United Kingdom leading with 12 and 14 years respectively. This aspect has been considered from the sample to ensure that there is the needed experience when the research will be requiring additional focus groups for additional information or in the instance that the focus group do not bring about new ideas (data saturation point). Still in teachers, both the two teachers from United Kingdom had all their teaching years at various universities in United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia while the ones from United States had taught at an international English school and another at the university. It is also essential to mention that all the four teachers had interacted with students at different levels with all of them having taught students at beginner, intermediate and advanced at different times of their careers. Thirdly, the sample population/participants were stratified by gender and education. 50% of the total participants were women beginning on the education stratification of the five students, 60% had completed the highest school track, and 30% had completed the medium school track and the rest completing the lowest track. This aspect has been considered to address issues in the literature review as scholars believing that using L1 in teaching L2 is misunderstood by some linguistic fallacies to an extent that such misunderstanding makes theoretical and fundamental issues being ignored in studies. In addition, about fourth of the students worked part-time where English was needed as a mode of communication especially for office related issues. To ensure consistency with research questions, participants were randomly put in equal experimental conditions but such ensuring that women and men with lower and higher education levels equally distributed across experimental conditions. That is in every experimental condition 4 men and 4 women were given equal experimental conditions. Finally, due to issues such cultural practices in Saudi Arabia that affects the use of first language in teaching second language, this study will use participants from diverse organisations and locations. Such diversities will also be considered in terms of beliefs and religion. Since participation will be confidential, there will be no determination whether entire group/participants selected for study participated. 3.0. Introduction to the Interview Based on the nature of participants the research has identified above, the structure of interview questions will be based on different levels of language proficiency and the institutional curriculum. To contextualize this statement, the questions are based on three premises; first, the impact students feel about using L1 in teaching using L2. The second premise is why teachers and students should use L1 or L2 anyway. The research questions that have been established are as follows; 1. What are the available reasons why English teachers and students taking English as L2 use (or do not use) L1? 2. How do the problems of monolinguals and cultural orientations impact the teaching-learning processes? 3. How much to students in English classroom use Arabic without the teacher promoting its use? 4. How do you feel when your teacher uses Arabic in the class? 5. Do you like it when your teacher uses Arabic? Why or why not? 6. If you use Spanish, when do you use it? Under what circumstances? Are there any particular activities or moments in which you consider the use of Spanish necessary? Question one has been drafted for interviewees to help in the exploration of reasons why teachers and students may or may not decide to use Arabic in teaching English in Saudi Arabia. That is, it will bring about the qualitative aspect of the research so that meanings and significance of the issue from the perspective or participants is analyzed in the next step. Additionally, question 2, 3, 4 and 6 as listed above will be able to inform significant facets as well as perspectives concerning the use of first language in teaching second language in Saudi Arabia. As already noted, question one attempts to assess the qualitative point of view. The point is that it attempts to study the subject matter in their natural settings (classroom) so as to make the interpretation in terms of the meaning of the matter. This is where the interview questions as set becomes effective as they relate directly to participants and can make meaning to the questions. 4.0. Results of the Case Study Discussion of results of the case study has been divided into two sections: the teachers’ points of view concerning the research questions as outlined and the students’ perspectives regarding teachers’ using of L1 in teaching L2 and their perspective concerning the research questions as set. The two perspectives have been drafted to provide an understanding (in-depth) of the analysis of the phenomenon of L1 use in the English classroom by the identified groups of participants. Beginning with teachers’ perspective of the subject matter and the research questions, it was apparent from 3 teachers interviewed that there are new themes emerging that argue against earlier researches that were established in the literature review. That is, the data collected from these three teachers suggested that all the three accept that they have used and even allowed the use of L1 in the English classroom to different degrees but such depended on different factors. In as much, the three teachers provided different reasons as to why they support the use of L1 in their classrooms. First, it was established that they all adopt L1 as it is considered as a pedagogical device for clarification. Just Lange (2014) found in the literature review, the three teachers affirmed that L1 is acting as any other teaching tool for explaining aspects with such as grammar. One of them asserted: “For me it’s much easier to return to Arabic. Students were asking me about the ‘s’ ending…and I explain it in Arabic because it would take me hours to explain it in English! (L1) [L1 is used for]…certain words or expressions in order to keep the moment going of an activity…it really depends on the circumstances of when I use it [L1].” On the other hand, the second respondent (teacher) argued that; “I think it is essential in some cases to explain some things in Arabic, because even if you give examples or do pantomime there are certain grammatical points that are very difficult for students to understand in spite of similarities between the languages.” Looking at these responses, there are three critical issues that can be concluded. First, the quotes shows how in primarily teacher-started exchanges the teachers in classroom have decided to use Arabic so as the learners to succinctly capture and understand aspects of a class and the language targeted. Secondly, the quotes as expressed by teachers indicate that teachers as source of information are becoming conscious when it comes to decision making. On the same breadth, the second quote in particular shows that some teachers can incorporate Arabic in their classes so as to provide a comparative analysis of the languages as it can be expressed through the following excerpt: “…comparisons between Arabic and English are quite close. I have them reflect, and if I use Arabic, I tell them to look at the phrase and think about how it would be said in English. And from there we proceed and they notice how to say it in English. What matters is that they perceive the similarities between the two languages.” Thirdly, the first and the second quotes as illustrated above dispute literature review summary as provided above. Looking at scholars such as Al-Buraiki (2008); Cook (2001), they have maintained that there is constituent fallacies that underlie the English learning profession and that it is not easy to integrate first language into the learning of English for successful acquisition of the latter. The third excerpt as illustrated above differs slightly with the first two and adds a different dimension of the thesis statement. It suggests that the teachers did not necessarily have to initiate communication with Arabic, but instead, elicits L1 from the students so as to use it as a means of comparing tenets of Arabic and English. In so doing, students will be able to apply their own experience as well cognitive skills that help then in acquisition of the target language (English). The relevance of this response to the thesis statement is that it rests in the fact that this particular integration of L1 can encourage the active participation of the learners, whereas the teachers take on the responsibility of the facilitator. Subsequently, it affirms that literatures on monolingual as reviewed fails to recognize that while L1 is indeed an essential pedagogical tool, it needs to be applied in a collaborative way such that it (L1) does not hinder L2 or vice versa. Finally, the quote as cited in the third excerpt in the view of experience gathered represents a case where there is use of contrastive analysis which is used as a noticing activity of notification. The other two teachers, in their response, contended that it was appropriate to use L1 in teaching L2 because such mechanism helps in the creation of rapport between teachers and learners. From the submission given through the questions set, it can be established that the two teachers showed that it was important to speak in Arabic while handling English classroom so as to establish a connection with learners at the outset. As Gillen (2014) notes in the literature summary above, rapport is part of connecting with learners as it is a means of establishing empathy with the learners, more so when some of the native speaker teacher who took part in this study mentioned having had the same situation when they were learning English. The following information exemplifies the claim above: “…kind of bond, make a connection with their students…just like chit chat with them…like about the weekend or something... I want to ask them about what they did on a holiday weekend and I know they can’t tell me in English, I’d ask and let them tell me in Arabic like before the class or something. There are times when I tell them jokes out of the blue or when class is over and I tell them “Class is over and I am going to tell a joke” and I switch to Arabic…there are silly jokes but most of them laugh and that is how I gain their trust.” Contrariwise, the perspectives of the five students have been presented depending on three basic premises which emerged from the data. The first premise that has been established from the data is that using Arabic in English classroom is like an aid that helps learners classify or explain instructions, vocabulary and instructions. This premise seems to coincide with premise held by the two teachers analysed above. Three out of the five students interviewed responded that using L1 (Arabic) is effective especially when the teacher is trying to teaching linguistic concepts that are complicated or cannot easily be related in their environment. From this premise, we can deduce that L1 as accepted by learners when they do not understand the structure in their class. In this example it can be seen that if the student does not have the needed or enough vocabulary, they automatically switch to Arabic. One of the respondents said: First student, “I recommend the teacher to use Arabic when I do not understand a phrase or structure to learn more. When I have enough vocabulary I do not recommend the teacher to speak Arabic. Again, we need it (L1) a lot, because there are phrases and sentences that we cannot easily understand.” Second student, “We need to speak a minimum of Arabic to advance in our target language. About me using it, I use it (L1) when I have a vocabulary doubt and it is necessary when the teacher is explaining grammar because it is easier to understand. Again, when I use it, it is because I cannot find the right word in the foreign language…that I get the impression I am wasting time.” What can be picked from these students is that they prefer to have their teachers (in some instances themselves) use Arabic when attempting to understand unfamiliar language, vocabulary and unfamiliar grammar. Again, looking at this responses vis-à-vis literature reviews above, it can be argued that the use of L1 occurs spontaneously during the acquisition of English or during class sessions. Unlike what Gillen (2014) postulates, there is no evidence, basing on the quotations from the first and second students that the practice of using L1 has been getting discouragement from teachers. The last quotation brings one critical discovery that has not been captured by researchers reviewed thus far. It is the fact that students opt to use L1 for grammar and vocabulary related functions but there is a need to stress that they are concerned about time wasting which makes this study realise that such has been a concern on behalf of learners for better pacing in the process. In such connectedness, it has been realized; from the first student that he chooses the teacher to use L1 as it is a mode of socialization. On the other hand, respondents from students showed negative aspects on using Arabic while teaching English class. Array of opinions included: Student 1: “I think it [use of L1] is illogical and clearly it is wrong because if we are in a foreign language class the last thing we want to do is speak our own language (Arabic). We need to learn the other language effectively.” Student 2: “When the teacher uses Arabic, well, I think that I do not learn much or that class was useless. Well, it bothers me because you are learning a language by practicing it and if you don’t practice, you won’t learn it. Additionally, I think that it is important to not use English in class, because it is a way to become familiar with the language - that way our ears can pick it up and our learning will be enhanced.” In the quotes above, students are making strong and negative judgment regarding the use of Arabic and phases such as ‘illogical’, ‘the last thing we want to is speak Arabic’ and ‘clearly it is wrong.’ From these phrases students have preference for their teacher who uses English throughout. Lastly, it has been revealed, basing on excerpt from student two that the adoption of L2 (English) should emphasized so as to optimize the learning process. Conclusively, when the study considers different positions held by students and such compared with opinions held by different scholars in the literature reviewed, there is different picture that emerges. Contrary to the teachers using L1 as a given learning device or an aid that bonds, students tend to differ from this opinion, something that negate researchers such as Gibbons (2008), Cook (2001). 5.0. Summary One critical summary that can be made is that reasons why Saudi Arabian English learning students can use Arabic in such classroom are similar to the reasons that earlier scholars such as Cook (2001) have attributed before. Having finished and assessed the semi-structured questions and the responses from both teachers and students this study agrees with scholars such as Karmani (2005) and Al-Buraiki (2008) who call for a more flexible and comprehensive view of the role of using L1. Also considered from the responses that have been given is the opinion from Cook (2001) who postulates that teachers and students should start viewing L1 positively. One critical finding that has been made from the responses is that not all students are happy when teachers use L1 in classroom (regardless of the reasons that have been established). Based on this premise, this study summarises that teachers should reevaluate their moral considerations and obligations to their learners as well as their objectives for English learning process. On the other hand, this study realizes, basing on the responses that there are myriad of reasons as to why students and teachers will opt to use Arabic or rather L1 in English learning class. This view contradicts researches such as Al-Hadhrami (2008) that looks at the issue from one perspective (such as the theory of monolingual or the linguistic imperialism). Regarding practices, teachers as viewed in this study had different decisions to either use or not use L1 and such decisions were embedded on different considerations and beliefs. It is from this perspective that this study agrees with Al-Buraiki (2008) that there is no one single reason why teachers may encourage or use Arabic in teaching English in Suadi Arabia. This finding is of significance for current and future learners and teachers of any target language because it brings it illustrates the decision-making process of learners and teachers and their functions. 6.0. References 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-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. Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 402–423. 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. 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) Read More