Chinese-English Biliteracy Acquisition - Coursework Example

Quantitative Research Critique Quantitative Research Critique Introduction Quantitative research is a systematic empirical study of a phenomenon using mathematical, statistical or computational techniques (Healey, 2011). Quantitative research seeks to investigate the relationship between a dependent variable and an independent variable or variables (Healey, 2011). This paper seeks to critique a quantitative study that employs an experimental approach. For this purpose, this paper chooses an article by Min Wang, Charles Perfetti and Ying Liu (2004) titled “Chinese-English Biliteracy Acquisition: Cross-Language and Writing System Transfer” Summary of the Study The study sought to investigate the relationship between cross-language and writing system in Biliteracy acquisition by students who were learning to read in two diverse writing systems- English and Chinese. To this end, a sample of 46 Mandarin-speaking students were selected and tested for both their first language and second language reading skills which was Chinese and English respectively. The researchers designed comparable experiments in both English and Chinese with a bias two reading processes; orthographic and phonological processing. The researchers then tested the word reading skills under both writing systems. The researchers found out that Chinese onset matching skills have a significant correlation with English onset matching skills and rime matching skills. The study revealed that Pinyin, a phonetic system that is often employed in teaching children how to read Chinese characters, had a high correlation with English pseudo word reading. In addition, tone processing skills in Chinese contributed significantly to the variation in English pseudoword reading even after considering the effect of English phonemic-level processing skill. On the other hand, orthographic processing skill under the two systems did not have any significant correlation. The researchers concluded that bilingual reading acquisition is influenced by orthographic skills and shared phonological processes. Reasons for Using a Quantitative Approach The researchers did not expressly indicate why they choose a quantitative approach to their study. However, the fact that they were interested in determining causal relationship is a pointer to why they opted for a quantitative approach. The researchers were interested in determining whether there is a relationship between bilingual reading acquisition (dependent variable) and orthographic skills and shared phonological processes (independent variables). Causal relationships can only be determined using a quantitative approach. In addition, quantitative approach reduces the researchers’ bias because the results are based on empirical observations and quantitative data limiting the avenues for researchers to include the subjective opinions. Therefore, a study that employs a quantitative approach is often considered objective thus concretizing the validity of the research findings (Calmorin, 2004). Critique of the Study In selecting their sample, the authors only selected Chinese subjects for the study. Since the study is about cross-language transfer, the use of non-Chinese English subject would have presented a better basis of developing and argument and reaching a justifiable conclusion. The study fails to highlight the phonological and orthographic processes that occur in learning Chinese by English speaking students and how this affects their final results. The study also jumps into their main discussion without introducing the readers on the background behind the study. The authors fail to present the role of phonological processes in learning to read English and Chinese. In general, the authors of this paper fail to define the terms used and how they relate to the study. The authors also fail to present information on the role of orthographic processing in learning to read English and Mandarin. By neglecting to do this, they fail to present a clear understanding on the difficulties of orthographic processing for a subject trying to learn to read a different language. From reading Dickinson et al. (2004) we learn that phonological awareness is a critical predictor of reading achievement. With this in mind, the subjects, who are all living in an English speaking country, have had access to English texts and conversations. The authors fail to look at how such associations may affect cross-language transfer and hence their study. Children cannot be expected to reflect on structures that are unfamiliar to them as dialect can influence linguistic awareness (Chaney, 1994). With these in mind, the study should have presented a means to identify structures that Mandarin speaking children have difficulty understanding in their quest to learn English and the same for English subjects trying to understand Mandarin. The lack of reviews on literature dealing with both phonological processes and Orthographic skills leads to questions on the depth of the study. Several studies have been carried out to understand bi-literacy acquisition with respect to both phonological and Orthographic Transfers such as the study on Korean-English transfer by Wang, Park and Lee (2004) or the study on the development of phonological and orthographic knowledge carried out by Stage and Wagner (1992). The study by Stage and Wagner (1992) would have provided the best basis on which to look at how these skills are developed and how they can be transferred. Literature Review The researchers discussed key information on the subject under consideration using appropriate and relevant literature. The researchers used literature by various authors to discuss cognitive consequences of learning to read under different writing systems including Chinese, English and Spanish. The researcher also used recent research findings to discuss cross-language transfers in bilingual acquisition in French-English and Spanish- English. Reviewing other studies done on the same topic was appropriate because it was important in refining the research methodology by building on the strengths on previous researches and learning from their mistakes to avoid the same pitfalls. Research Question The research question for the study was: Is bilingual reading acquisition a joint function of shared phonological skills and writing system specific skills? From the research question, the researchers developed the study hypothesis that bilingual reading acquisition is a joint function of shared phonological skills and writing system specific skills. The research question was appropriate. This is because it adequately covered the research topic that was of interest to researchers. However, the researchers should have been more specific to their topic. The researchers were only specifically interested in Chinese-English biliteracy acquisition which is not reflected in the research question. Experimental Design The researchers performed experiments using both English tasks and Chinese tasks with the intention of identifying a child’s manipulation and differentiation abilities between phonological units in both spoken Chinese and English. An experimental design was appropriate in determining the correlation between the key variables under investigation. In addition, an experimental design was appropriate because the researchers could manipulate the variables to determine their effect. The researchers did not clearly state whether they used a true experimental design or a quasi-experimental design. However, a true experimental design was not possible because random assignment of the study participants is difficult since the researchers were dealing with human beings (Healey, 2011). Therefore, the researchers must have used a quasi-experimental design. In addition to an experimental design, the researchers should have used a phenomenological research design which is an effective research tool in bringing to the fore the people’s perceptions and experiences (Sutton & David, 2010). It should be appreciated that since we are dealing with children, who are human beings, their perceptions and experiences are equally important in analysing the subject matter. Sample Size To constitute sample size from the population of interest, the researchers selected a sample of 46 Chinese immigrant students in Washington DC that comprised of 22 girls and 24 boys with a mean age of 8 years and 2 months. The researchers did not justify why they chose a sample of 46 participants. Since the researchers did not adequately describe the target population, it is not possible to ascertain whether the sample was large enough to ensure representative, reliable and valid data was collected. The sample of 46 participants was small enough to overcome constraints of time and financial resources that are often a major consideration in every study. Sampling Strategy The researchers selected a sample from the targeted population by deliberating selecting Chinese immigrant students in Washington DC to constitute the sample. The researchers used judgement sampling. This sampling techniques was appropriate since it ensured the number of male and female were almost equal; there were 24 boys and 22 girls. However, non-random sampling could have resulted in bias sampling of the respondents. The researchers should have used simple random sampling to eliminate the risk of biasness in the sample selected, increase independence of the study results, increase both internal and external validity of the parameters calculated during the study and accord the study a more scientific feature (Calmorin, 2004). The researchers selected the entire sample from Washington DC. This was prudent since Washington DC is a metropolitan city with immigrants from all over the world. Hence a sample obtained from Washington DC could be representative of the whole world. This is evident from the descriptive statistics of the sample: of the 46 participants, 27 were born in the U.S, 17 were born in mainland China and 2 were born in Europe. However, picking the entire sample from one area may have resulted in an unrepresentative sample. Although, Washington DC is a metropolitan city, the possibility that there are measurable and immeasurable environmental factors specific to Washington DC that may influence the results that cannot be ruled out. Data Collection Tools The study relied on primary data. Data was collected directly from the study participants and recorded by the researchers using computers. The researchers used closed ended questions. Closed ended questions made it simpler to code the responses thus facilitating statistical analysis (Peck & Devore, 2011). Data Gathered The data gathered was qualitative data which was coded. Coding the data ensured that the data was quantitative to facilitate statistical analysis. Data Analysis The researchers used bivariate Pearson correlation tests. These tests were appropriate because the researcher was interested in analysing causal relationship. In addition, the researchers used regression analysis in analysing the collected data. Regression analysis was equally important in determining the nature of the relationship after establishing that a relationship exists between the variables. Regression analysis was important in developing a model and in directly answering the study hypothesis. Weakness of a Quantitative Approach Quantitative approach to any study assumes that it is possible to manipulate the variables at various level and control or exclude other factors that are not of interest to the researchers. However, since we are dealing with human beings it is impossible to introduce lab-like conditions. In addition, it should be appreciated that since we are dealing with children, who are human beings, their perceptions and experiences are equally important in analysing the subject matter. Interpretation of the Results The researchers interpreted the obtained results correctly. All the relevant information regarding bivariate Pearson correlation was included. However, with regards to the regression analysis, the researchers only explained the explanatory power of the developed model but overlooked the coefficients of the independent variables and the signs of the coefficients and what they implied. Discussion The discussion adequately covered the key findings of the study. The only item that was left out is discussing the coefficients of the model that was developed and the nature of the relationship between the key variables under consideration. Conclusion The researchers concluded that bilingual reading acquisition is influenced by orthographic skills and shared phonological processes (Wang, Perfetti, & Liu, 2003, p. 83). The conclusion was based on the findings. The researchers did not attempt to introduce any new findings or concepts that cannot be deduced from the study. Similar Studies Most of the other studies on the subject of cross-language phonological and orthographic relationship have utilized quantitative methods. Quantitative analysis has been regarded as the earliest form of research method, where scientist embarked on studying the natural sciences by investigating things that could be observed and measured. Studies on cross-language learning involve the study on the ability of children to understand specific items concerning the languages under study. The items in these studies are quantifiable as they entail a specific input and are expected to produce an output, level of understanding, that can be quantifiable (how many vowels can the child identify, how many words can the child pronounce, etc.) Analysis of Comparable Studies There are several studies about the issue of cross-language learning. Most researchers agree that phonological process are more important in learning to read than orthographic skills and as such much of the literature that is available deals with cross-language learning and its relationship with phonographic processes. Durgunoglu et al. (1993) carried out a qualitative study on first grade Spanish speaking children who had been enrolled in a bilingual education program. The researchers investigated the impact of phonological awareness in the learning of an L2 language. They found out that children who performed well on Spanish Phonological awareness tasks had a larger likelihood of reading English words and pseudowords than those who performed poorly. Dickson et al. (2004) repeated this test several years later using 123 Spanish-English bilingual preschool children. The receptive vocabulary abilities of the subjects was tested using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. The researchers confirmed Durgunoglu’s result as they found out that phonological awareness spring levels in each language were strongly correlated to the phonological awareness in the other language. A more recent study that fully fits with the research under anysis was the study carried out by Wang, Park and Lee (2006). In this study Korean-English bi-literacy was analysed with a special emphasis on both the phonological and orthographic transfer. The study utilized 45 participants and utilized all the test that have been used in the current paper under analysis. They found out that cross language learning is a joint function of phonological processes and orthographic skills. This is consummate with previous studies on the subject as well as the result of the current paper under analysis. Through analysis on previous literature on bilingual and bi-literacy acquisition, we find that all the papers reach the same conclusion despite the language base used. Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative research In the study of bilingual and bi-literacy transfer, a quantitative approach brings about several advantages and disadvantages. In the paper being analysed the first main advantage of a quantitative approach is that it tests and validates already constructed theories on the issue of phonological and orthographic transfers. The use of quantitative approach also allows the researchers to test hypothesis that they had developed thus giving the reader a background on the subject, an understanding of what this background means to the issue at hand and proof of the relationship between the developed background ideologies and the situation at hand. Quantitative approach has also allowed the researchers to construct a situation that eliminates confounding influences on the variables that present a more valid causal relationship between the variables. The quantitative approach however presents two main challenges in this study. First, the categories utilized by the researchers may not reflect the understanding of the constituents. This means that this study utilized a given set of questions and tests on a given sample size however, the test utilized may not be fully understood by the population represented by the sample size. The second challenge is that the knowledge that has been retrieved from the study may be too abstract to be applied in specific situations and context. While we know that phonological processes and orthographic skills determine cross-language transfers, the researchers fail to clarify how we might use this knowledge to help children learn. Studies Utilizing Qualitative Approaches As stated above, the subject of cross-language transfers has received a lot of attention. Studies that have been carried out have mostly been quantitative in nature but some qualitative studies have also been carried out. Dufresne et al. (2006) carried out a qualitative study that sought to address the important variances between monolingualism and bilingualism. In this study, the researchers found out that children exposed to many languages have a better phonemic awareness than monolingual children. Another study was carried out by Hernandez, Bates and Avila (1994) an Spanish-English bilinguals and what it meant in sentence interpretation. The study found out that orthographic skills are very important in cross-language learning and that phonographic influences can be seen on bilinguals who are predominantly Spanish. The study found out that bilinguals utilize an amalgram (a combination of the strategies present in both languages) in selecting the presentation of sentences. As can be seen in both these examples, the qualitative studies conform to the result derived from quantitative studies and as such, it can be argued that the relationship between phonological and orthographic transfer is strong and justifiable. Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Approach The research on cross-language transfer studies many variables such as language transfer, L2 language acquisition, phonological awareness and orthographic skills. Qualitative studies such as case studies and ethnographic studies are poorly equipped to examine these dependent and independent variables. Qualitative studies cannot present a causal relationship between the variables and as such makes it very hard to prove the hypothesis of the study. Qualitative studies also utilize a lot of data to prove a particular relationship. The large amount of data may overwhelm the researchers leading them to concentrate on few manageable areas and as such prevent the presentation of a clear and valid analysis. Qualitative studies are also not as reliable as quantitative studies as they do not rely on hard numerical proof to base their results but rather on the insights and abilities of the observers. Details Not Accounted For One of the major issues that the studies failed to account for is those children who can speak fluently but have trouble reading. This includes children with dyslexia and other learning disorders and their inability to comprehend the written form. By looking at the behaviour of a given sample size without actually interacting directly with the subjects, these study fail to recognize that a child may have an issue that prevents them from reading and thus preventing cross-language transfers. These studies also fail to explain what happens when children who are fluent in languages based on the alphabet try to learn languages containing symbolic characters. In most of the studies, the researchers have utilized non-English speaking subjects as their sample. English is a fairly common language and thus most children have had access to it one time or another. Mandarin or Korean on the other hand is quite rare in the West and thus children have not been exposed to it. A good study should thus focus on English students trying to learn these languages and the difficulties that they encounter. Conclusion The paper under analysis looks at cross-language transfer between English and Mandarin and how it is affected by phonological processes and orthographic skills. The study found out that both these processes have an important impact on cross-language transfer and that orthographic skills are very important in this case as the two languages under study are very different. Quantitative research offer the only means with which to influence a particular variable and thus test cause and effect relationships. In the paper under analysis, the quantitative method allowed the researchers to influence the two variables in successful reading acquisition, phonogrphic awareness and orthographic skills. Basically, for this paper and for the subject mattr, the most appropriate research method was a quantitative method. The use of quantitative analysis was appropriate in the analysed paper as it allowed the researchers to develop a causal relationship between cross-language transfer and both phonological processes as well as orthographic skills. Apart from this, the researchers we able to obtain numerical data with which to test their hypothesis and through the use of statistical analysis, present a clear picture on the issue The results from the study may be used by teachers to help students learn and understand other languages. Teachers should ensure that children practice on phonological process and improve their orthographic skills in L1 (first language) References Calmorin, E. A. (2004). Research Methods and Thesis Writing 2007 Ed (Revised ed.). Cabu: Rex Bookstore, Inc. Chaney, C. 1994. Language development, metalinguistic awareness, and print awareness in 3 year old children in relation to social class. Applied Psycholinguistic, 15: 371-394 Dickinson, D., McCabe, A., Clark-Chiarelli, N., & Wolf, A. 2004. Cross-language transfer of phonological awareness in low-income Spanish and English bilingual preschool children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25: 323–347. Dufresne, T., & Masny, D. 2006. Multiple literacies: Linking the research on bilingualism and biliteracies to the practical. Paediatrics and Child Health, 11(9): 577-579 Durgunoglu, A. Y., Nagy, W. E., & Hancin-Bhatt, B. J. 1993. Cross-language transfer of phonological awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 453 – 465. Healey, J. F. (2011). Statistics: A Tool for Social Research (9 ed.). London: Cengage Learning. Hernandez, A., Bates, E. & Avila, L. 1994. On-line sentence interpretation in Spanish– English bilinguals: What does it mean to be “in between”? Applied Psycholinguistics, 15(4 ): 417-446 Peck, R., & Devore, J. L. (2011). Statistics: The Exploration and Analysis of Data (7 ed.). New York: Cengage Learning. Stage, S. A., & Wagner, R. K. 1992. Development of young children’s phonological and orthographic knowledge as revealed by their spellings. Developmental Psychology, 28(2): 287-296. Sutton, C. D., & David, M. (2010). Social Research: The Basics (revised ed.). New York: SAGE. Wang, M., Park, Y. J., & Lee, K. R. 2006. Korean-English biliteracy acquisition: Cross language and orthography transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1): 148- 158. Wang, M., Perfetti, C. A., & Liu, Y. (2003). Chinese-English Biliteracy Acquisition: Cross-Language and Writing System Transfer. ELSERVIER, 67-88. Read More