Learning Prnisses and Academic Achievement. Relevant Research In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 375 639 FL 022 477 AUTHOR Hawson, Anne TITLE A Neuroscientific Perspective on Second Language Learning and Academic Achievement. PUB DATE Apr 94 NOTE 29p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 4-8, 1994). PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Reports Evaluative /Feasibility (142) Speeches/Conference Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Achievement; *Artificial Intelligence; *Cognitive Psychology; Educational Strategies; Elementary Secondary Education; Immersion Programs; Instructional Effectiveness; Interdisciplinary Approach; *Language Processing; Language Proficiency; Language Research; Learning Processes; Linguistic Theory; Neurolinguistics; *Neurological Organization; Research Utilization; Second Language Learning; *Second Languages; Sociocultural Patterns; Threshold Level (Languages) ABSTRACT It is proposed that research on neurological organization, comnitive psychology, and artificial intelligence can contribute to understanding the relationship between second language learning prnIsses and academic achievement. Relevant research in these areas and in the field of neurolinguistics is reviewed, with several themes or topics highlighted: the threshold hypothesis of language proficiency; the search for alternatives to this theory; the "connectionist" approach to cognition; the link between learning and attention; the roles of information processing and the visual system in immersion second language learning; and interference effects of sociocultural factors. It is concluded that there are several advantages in trying to integrate emerging information from neure,scientific research, cognitive psychology, and artificial intelligence into educators' thinking about language learning problems: there is substantial research available; data are more precise than in most second language research; the perspective is physical, not behavioral, and information can be constructed from knowledge of the brain's inner workings; and artificially constructed ideas about learning processes can be de-constructed. Contains 55 references. (MSE) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** A NEUROSCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE ON SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Anne Hawson University of British Columbia Introduction In spite of several decades of intensive investigation of a putative relationship between second language learning and academic achievement, no clear picture affording an explanatory mechanism for such a relationship has emerged. The reasons for this are complex, born, it would seem, out of the complexity of the "relationship" itself. What has become clear during the debate is that second language learning can result in a multiplicity of academic achievement outcomes depending on the particular social, economic, or educational circumstances of the learner and, of course, on the learner's aptitude and motivation for learning languages, factors which should not be considered unrelated to those already listed. The combined efforts of researchers thus far have elucidated a dizzying merry-go-round of influences, spinning in close coordination with one another, but never truly interacting. Out of ideological bias perhaps, researchers have insisted on the primacy of one perspective or another, even while acknowledging that no one approach provides a complete explanation of the data. With so much information from so many sources now available on the topic, however,it seems unreasonable and even counterproductive not to make an effort at this point to weave the disparate ideological threads into a cloth which, though it may not be the sole and unique product of combining the strands, will,if care is taken to honour the natural relationships between the individual fibres, constitute a garment of substance and durability with which to clothe the bare "facts". The raison d'etre for this paper is to attempt to do just that, and, towards that end, it will be posited that it is through the lens of recent neuroscientific discovery on the mechanisms of brain functioning that a synthesis of the varying perspectives can best be accomplished. An overview of the issues In the first half of this century, most of the research relating second language learning and academic achievement was aimed atexplicatingthe negative outcomes experienced by educators and learners alike (see Cummins, 1984a, ch. 5 for a comprehensive review of the issues, and Reynolds, 1991, for a detailed list of past reviews). As Reynolds (1991) aptly puts it, "the basic plot lit le of those early studies" was that "bilinguals (especially bilingual children, the preferred subjects of research), had lower IQ scores than monolinguals, were socially maladjusted, and trailed monolinguals in academic performance" (p. 145). Though these studies have since been proven to be faulty methodologically on many grounds, the perception of the "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY 011A e of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RE SOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IF RIC) r\e__ This document nas been reproduced as received bornhe person or organization riginaling Minor changes ',aye been made to improve 2 eproduction Quality P0111501 view or opinions stated in this dOcu BEST COPY AVAILABLE TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES merit do not necessarily represent official INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." OERI position or policy 2 second language learner as being at a disadvantage educationally in comparison to monolinguals persists today, in spite of the plethora of studies which, following the lead of the pivotal work by Peal and Lambert(1962), have spoken for a positive influence of second language learning on academic outcomes (see Mac Nab, 1979; Cummins, 1984a, ch. 5; Reynolds, 1991). Part of the reason for the persistence of the negative perception may be that, as pointed out by Carey (1991a), in spite of the positive data, "the average person is all too familiar with the opposite results: namely, that the immigrant populations and other minority ethnic groups are usually academically disadvantaged while they are immersed in mastering their second language rather than advantaged from working in their non-dominant language, as the additive immersion model would propose " (pp. 340, 341). And, indeed, Lambert later acknowledged that there could be two separate linguistic outcomes experienced by second language learners in immersion situations: "additive" bilingualism, which refers to "the adding on of a second language to a well-developed first majority language", and "subtractive" bilingualism, which implies the "lower vocabulary and oral and written communication capacity in both languages" common to the minority group second language learner's experience (Carey, 1991a, p. 342). In this context, and throughout this paper, a majority language group refers to a group whose language enjoys a high status and often, but not always, a high prevalence within a society; a minority language group is one whose language has a low status and usually, but not always, a low prevalence within a society. Such apparently straightforward categorizations, however, draw a barrage of queries from critics of the approach of Lambert and others which seeks to centre the issues in the language arena': a) How are "bilingualism" and "monolingualism" being defined? Is it possible to eliminate all extraneous variables in "between group" designs comparing monolinguals and bilinguals, and if not, are the results of such comparisons reliable? Can studies of "balanced bilinguals" be meaningfully related to those whose categorization of bilingualism is much broader, or to those which studied children in situations in which the goal of the program was to make them capable of functioning in the second language with no regard as to how they fared in their first language? (MacNab, 1979; Carey, 1987, 1991b, 1993a; Reynolds, 1991) b) What does it mean to say that a student has "lower" competence in certain language tasks? Against which standards is their competence being measured? Can the circumstances of language use for these students be considered equivalent to those of the students whose performance set the standards? If not, should they be considered deficient in language ability when the language ability which they do develop may be quite adequate to their social needs? (Edeisky et al., 1983; Martin-Jones and Romaine, 1986; Commins and Miramomtes, 1989; Snow, 1992) c) To what extent does the social status of the first language interfere in the learning of both the first and second languages? What is the relationship between socioeconomic 3 3 status anu achievement on language tests? (Edelsky et al., 1983; Genesee, 1984; Martin- Jones and Romaine, 1986; Cummins, 1986; Lambert, 1990) d) Can the research results relating second language learning to academic achievement, whether positive or negative, be considered valid outside of the sociopolitical contexts prevalent during the studies, or do they reflect to some extent at least the image of "political correctness abroad at the time in the society in which they were carried out? (Carey, 1991a,b, 1993b; McGroarty, 1992) e) Can the educational treatments given to second language learners in minority and majority situations be