eurosla presentation aix france

8/2/2019 EUROSLA Presentation Aix France

1/31

Early Language Learning in Europe

Interaction of contextual and

individual variables in instructed

early SLA

Jelena Mihaljevic DjigunovicUniversity of Zagreb, Croatia

Magdalena SzpotowiczUniversity of Warsaw, Poland


2/31


The present study: part of ELLiE*

multinational longitudinal project: Croatia, Italy, Netherlands,Poland, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom (N = 1,200)

aim: What can realistically be achieved in state schools whererelatively limited amounts of class time are available for FLlearning?

_________________________________________

*This research has been supported by a European Commission grant under the Lifelong LearningProgramme, Project n. 135632-LLP-2007-UK-KA1SCR. An additional British Council grant supportedthe Croatian team.


3/31


Country contexts: similarities

Croatia Slavonic L1

mostly monolingual

classes central curriculum

ca.80 % - English

two 45-min lessons perweek

Poland Slavonic L1

mostly monolingual classes

central curriculum ca. 80 % - English

two 45-min lessons perweek


4/31


Country contexts: differences

Croatia long tradition in FLL &

early start

compulsory from grade 1since 2003

grades from the start ofprimary school

massive out-of-school

exposure (media,tourism)

Poland short tradition in FLL &

early start

compulsory from grade 1since 2008

no grades in lower primary

not much exposure (dubbedTV)


5/31


Aims

the interplay of contextual variables andindividual learner differences

impact on L2 acquisition


6/31


Interplay of individual and contextual

variablesContextual

variables

Widersocial context

Language-learningmilieu

The immediatelanguage

learning environment

NationalFL education

policy

School settingSignificant

othersNature of instruction

Out-of-classexposure to English


7/31


Individual

variables

Ability Gender Attitudes &motivation

Linguisticself-confidence


8/31


Sample

N = 350 first graders

(age: 6/7 years)

(F 170; M 180)

7 schools in Croatia

7 schools in Poland

Croatia Poland

N=172 N=178

F 85

M 87

F 85

M 93


9/31


Methodology

mixed-method approach

instruments

administered to whole sample administered to six focal learners per group


10/31


Measures

school setting

instruction

out-of-class exposure

ability

attitudes & motivation

linguistic self-

confidence language achievement

observation

oral interviews

smiley questionnaires

standard questionnaires listening tasks

speaking tasks


11/31


Classroom instruction Example 1

(Use of L1 & L2)S: Teacher, ta trebamo nacrtati? [what should we draw?]T: Eeee sad gledam [now I look] carefully. Ovdje su [Here are] two

trees, na svakom [on each] tree trebate napraviti plodove [you needto make fruits]. Ovdje znai [So here] apples, ovdje [here] pears. Aiznad toga, lijepo ete ih obojiti [And above that you will colour them nicely],colour them and match them. Ovako. [Like this] ekaj, ekaj,ekaj. [Wait, wait, wait] Who is big? Tko je od njih [Who among them is]big?

SS: Ovaj tu. Ovaj tu. [This one. This one.] Father. Father.T: Ok, who is strong? To ete sami odluiti i spojiti. [You will decide for

yourselves and connect.] Vidite ko je [See how..it is] small, pa povuete

crte do njega[then you draw lines to it]T: Idont know.T: Jeste dovrili ovo? [Are you done with this?]


12/31


RESULTS


13/31


End-of-year language achievement:

listening task

Minimum

MaximumMean

SD

Median

Mode

0

1713.670

2.511

14

13


14/31


Vocabulary acquisition

(listening task)High recognition Poor recognition

nose

red, blue, green,yellow

milk, yoghurt,chocolate

mouth, legs

trousers

pencil, ruler,

blackboard

window, chair

doing, writing,

riding, eating

kitchen


15/31


End-of-year language achievement:

speaking task

Minimum

MaximumMean

SD

Median

Mode

1

4717.892

9.593

17

13


16/31


Vocabulary acquisition (speaking task)

High recall Low recall

colours (blue!)

animals (cat, dog)

toys (teddy bear,

doll)

fruit

animals (hamster,mouse, parrot)

toys (kite, train,

plane)

animals (snake,crocodile)


17/31


Interplay: type of settlement

Differences in motivation, linguistic self-confidence,ability and language achievement

ANOVA: linguistic self-confidence: ns ability: ns

motivation: city YLs < village & town YLs

listening scores: village & town YLs < city YLs

speaking scores: ns


18/31


Interplay: immediate teaching

environment (key)Village schools (43) (46)

(73) (74) (75)

Town schools (47)

(71) (72)

City schools (41) (42) (44) (45)(76) (77)


19/31


Interplay: immediate teaching

environment ANOVA:

linguistic self-confidence: ns Ability: ns Motivation:

(45)(city)< (76) (city), (75) (village), (72) (town), (74) (village),(71) (town), (73)(village)

Listening scores: (46) (village) < (77) (city)

Speaking scores: (46) (village) < (77) (city)


20/31


Group comparisons

Group (46) / lowestachievement

Group (77) / highestachievement

Unqualified T

Local children

No specialized classroom

Generalist/English T

Children from all over thecity

Specialized Englishclassroom


21/31


Group comparison

Group (46) / lowestachievement

Group (77) / highestachievement

Too much L1Whole-class

Too little feedback

Poor motivator

Average classroommanagement skills

Balance of L1 & L2In pairs & groups

Appropriate feedback

Very good motivator

Very good classroommanagement skills


22/31


Grp T perceptionofactivities Ls enjoy

most

Activities best liked

by Ls

(46) TPRgames, singing Singing, playing games,role-playing, counting

(77) Games, competitions,acting out, drawing, singing

Learning new words,learning, games


23/31


Grp Materials used Error correction

(46) TextbookFlashcards

CD

T ignores mistakes, eventhe obvious ones

(77) Textbook

FlashcardsCD

T prompts self-correction


24/31


Comparison of 3 high & 3 low achievers

See handout


25/31


Correlations between

ability, language achievement, linguistic self-confidence and

motivation (grade 1) (Croatia/Poland)

Ability Listening Speaking Motivation Linguistic

confidence

Ability 1.000 .182*

.737**

.350*

.684**

-.057

.353*

.035

1.000**

Listening 1.000 .416**

.799**

-.211**

.273**

-.254

.737**

Speaking 1.000 -.376*

.515**

.073

.684**

Motivation 1.000 -.109

.353*

Linguistic

confidence

1.000


26/31


Correlations

grade 2

Ability Listening Speaking Motivation Linguistic

confidence

Ability 1.000 .257** .051 -.079 .035

Listening 1.000 .111 -.144 -.034

Speaking 1.000 .072 -.015

Motivation 1.000

-.127

Linguisticconfidence 1.000


27/31


Grade 1 Grade 2

product

mot

compreh

Ling confd

ability

product

mot

compreh

Ling confid

ability


28/31


Conclusions

Instructed early SLA: teaching context and individual learner differences

seem to be relevant from the beginning of the

early start interplay between contextual factors and

individual learner differences is more revealingthan separate variables

interplay changes with length of learning


29/31


Implicatons

longitudinal approach key to understandingimpact of interplay on SLA

importance of triangulation

include larger samples


30/31


Thank you for your attention!


31/31


Jelena Mihaljevic Djigunovic

[email protected]

Magdalena Szpotowicz

[email protected]

eurosla presentation aix france

Documents