Perspectives Vs. Reality of Heritage Language Development Voices from Second-Generation Korean-American High School Students

Research

Perspectives vs. Reality of Heritage Language Development Voices from Second-Generation Korean-American High School Students

Grace Cho

Introduction students. A similar finding was seen in Ma- English (Peyton, Ranard, & McGinnis, tute-Bianchi’s (1986) ethnographic study of 2001), particularly in terms of national The United States is abundant in Mexican-American children, which reported security, diplomacy, and international com- human resources and educational oppor- that fully bilingual Mexican Americans merce (Kuenzi & Riddle, 2005) as well as tunities to produce many multicultural tended to perform better in school and had in the private business and service sectors and multilingual citizens. The number of a stronger Mexican identity when compared (Wright, 2003). individuals who speak a language other to those who had weak bilingual skills. than English at home continues to increase Having advanced bilingual skills also Decline in Heritage Language significantly. According to the 2010 U.S. was shown to be related to higher grades Census, the foreign-born population num- and standardized test scores (Bankston & Despite these benefits, research also bered 39.9 million (13% of the total popu- Zhou, 1995; Garcia, 1985; Lee, 2002), lower shows the difficulty of maintaining or de- lation), an increase of 28.2% from 2000. dropout rates (Rumberger & Larson, 1998), veloping one’s HL. Research documents a About 85% of the foreign-born population greater educational and occupational aspi- continuing pattern of decline in the use of spoke a language other than English at rations (Portes & Schauffler, 1995), and job- HL and in HL competence among language home and 15% spoke only English at home related advantages (Fradd & Boswell, 1999; minority groups, leading them to eventu- (U.S. Census, 2010). These astounding sta- Tienda & Neidert, 1984). Children who are ally lose their HL and become English tistics reveal great potential to maximize more motivated to develop their HL tend to monolinguals. the linguistic and cultural capabilities of have higher self-esteem (Phinney, Romero, The use of the HL begins to decline immigrant children. To that end the devel- Nave, & Huang, 2001), a stronger sense of as children of immigrants move through opment and maintenance of one’s heritage linguistic and cultural identity (Pigott & school. In this regard, Garcia and Diaz language (HL) is essential. Karoche, 2005), and positive attitudes to- (1992) conducted a survey research with There is ample evidence that being ward their own ethnic group (Tse, 2000). Spanish-speaking high school students in bilingual (i.e., maintaining one’s HL in ad- Knowing multiple languages broadens Miami, Florida. They found a decline in the dition to English) is beneficial and has no the number of people with whom one can percentage of students who reported using negative effects on an individual’s ability to communicate, grants access to supportive mostly or all Spanish. Among these stu- function in society (Krashen, 1998a). Peal networks in the community (Dornbusch dents, HL was used more with parents, less and Lambert (1962) were among the first & Stanton-Salazar, 1995; Matute-Bianchi, with siblings, and even less with peers. A researchers to find a positive relationship 1991; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001; Zhou & similar decline was found among Vietnam- between bilingualism and cognitive ability. Bankston, 1994), and facilitates effective ese-speaking children in elementary and Their study showed that bilingual children communication with parents, elders, and middle school (Nguyen, Shin, & Krashen, have greater cognitive flexibility than do the HL community (Cho, 2000, 2008; Fu- 2001) and across a number of language monolingual children and that bilingual- ligni, 1997). As Krashen (1998a) has noted, communities (Wong Fillmore, 1991). ism promotes academic achievement, HL development allows the HL learner HL competence is shown to decline which, in turn, fosters higher academic with age as well. Merino (1983) compared expectations. . . . to profit from their [parents, extended HL competence with English competence Analyzing national longitudinal data, family members, and HL community and found a decline in oral Spanish com- members] wisdom and knowledge, promote Fernandez and Nielsen (1986) found a petence between ages five and seven, a healthy sense of multiculturalism, an ac- positive correlation between academic ceptance not only of both the majority and measured at two points in time in a test of achievement and bilingualism among His- heritage culture, but a deeper understand- oral language production. Zhou (2001) con- panic- and European-American high school ing of the human condition. (p. 9) ducted a study comparing HL competence of 363 Vietnamese-background teenagers, Society also benefits from bilingual- Grace Cho is a professor and chair who were either born in the U.S. or arrived ism in terms of business, diplomacy, and of the Department of Secondary Education before age six. At a two-year follow-up, national security. The U.S. government in the College of Education 61% reported a decline in HL competence, recognizes the need for Americans who at California State University, Fullerton, which was accompanied by an increase in are proficient in languages other than Fullerton, California. English competence. Espiritu and Wolf’s

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 30 Research

(2001) study showed a similar pattern ment of their children’s HL and culture. second-generation Korean-American among Filipino-background students. Korean ethnic schools, ethnic associations, high school students residing in Southern The most commonly observed pattern newspapers, and professional organiza- California. The participants were recruited among the U.S. immigrant population is tions have been established to promote through Korean language classes, Korean the language shift phenomenon (Castillo, culture and language (Geer, 1981). Lee weekend schools, Korean churches, and 2004; Portes & Schauffler, 1995). A con- (2002) found that U.S.-born Korean Ameri- a university, as well as through personal sistent finding in the field of sociology of cans have a strong desire to keep their acquaintances. Pseudonyms are used to language is that HLs are lost by the third language and culture. Regardless of the protect participants’ privacy. The study generation of immigrants (Veltman, 1983). presence of factors associated with slow- utilized data collected through interviews Moreover, the language shift from the im- ing down the rate of shifting to English, and derived from a questionnaire. migrants’ HL to the dominant language of however, the pattern of an accelerated shift To obtain a broad perspective, seven the host society has accelerated over the to English has been documented in Korean Korean-American high school students years, showing a complete language shift immigrant families (Shin, 2005) and has were interviewed. All respondents were within two generations (Wiley, 2001). been shown to have negative consequences “second-generation” Korean Americans A large-scale study of over 5,000 sec- (Cho & Krashen, 1998). living in the U.S. However, they also had ond-generation adolescents in Florida and Little empirical research has exam- diverse backgrounds in terms of age, HL California showed that only 30% of these ined the cause of language shift or the proficiency, access to HL materials, living adolescents were fluent in their HL. The factors related to the HL development in an HL-speaking environment, and ex- majority (72%) reported that they were of language minority groups. This study periences learning the HL. The interview English dominant and preferred speaking investigates the factors that facilitate or data yielded rich first-hand, in-depth English (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). Lopez inhibit the HL development of second- perspectives of HL development, including (1996) found that English monolingualism generation Korean Americans, with a focus promoting and inhibiting factors for HL at home increased from one generation to on adolescent HL learners, who go through development. the next and that the shift was more rapid phases in the development of their identity, A second group of participants con- in the third generation than in the second ethnic identity, and their attitudes toward sisted of 260 second-generation Korean- generation. Such a shift was even more HL development and HL speakers, which American high school students. As seen rapid among Asian-Americans as compared are shaped during these phases (Erickson, in Table 1, the sample was balanced by to Latino-Americans across generations. 1968; Tse, 2000). student gender; 133 (51.2%) were female The shift to the dominant language was also and 127 (48.8%) were male. Age of the noted in research on Korean Americans. Method students ranged from 14 to 18 years old (M=15.9 years). The criterion of second Korean Language Gap Participants generation was broadened by including All participants in this study were Korean-American youths who came to Over one million Koreans live in the U.S., of whom 30% are U.S. born Table 1 second-generation Korean Americans. Questionnaire Participants’ Demographic Data (N = 260) Korean immigrants are geographically Variable n % more dispersed than are other recent Asian immigrants, but the majorities are Age (M=15.9, SD=1.35) concentrated in four large metropolitan Generation cities: Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, U.S.-born second generation 211 81.2 and Washington, D.C. (Terrazas & Batog, “Almost-second” generation, Age at arrival (M = 3.67, SD = 1.66) 49 18.8 2010). California has the largest number Gender of Korean immigrants of any state, and one Female 133 51.2 in five Korean immigrants resides in the Male 127 48.8 Los Angeles metropolitan area (Terrazas Self-identified Ethnicity & Batog, 2010). Korean 31 12.0 Research on language use patterns of American 11 4.2 Korean immigrants indicates a language Korean American 217 81.5 gap between parents and children. Stud- Other 6 2.3 ies show that first-generation Korean Dominant Language immigrants speak almost exclusively English 234 90.0 Korean at home and at work, while most Both Korean and English 24 9.2 second-generation Korean Americans Korean 2 0.8 communicate predominantly in English Studied or are Studying the Korean Language (Hurh & Kim, 1984; Min, 2000; Shin, Yes 180 69.2 2005). Min (2000) reported that 77% of No 79 30.4 second-generation Korean Americans Length of Time Studying HL (n=180) speak only or mostly English to their 0-1 year 72 39.1 parents after the age of five. 1-3 years 55 29.9 Korean immigrants have been actively 3-6 years 38 20.7 involved in the maintenance and develop- Note. Valid percentages are used.

WINTER 2015 31 Research the U.S. before school age in addition to open-ended comments from the question- These findings demonstrate a shift toward those who were born in the U.S. As such, naire are included. the society’s majority language. they all grew up and began their formal Regardless of whether one is dominant education in this country. Fifty (19%) were Participants’ Background in the majority language or prefers using “almost second-generation,” coming to the Becoming dominant in the major- English to Korean, most of the participants U.S. when they were young (M=3.67, age at ity language (i.e., English) seems to be a had positive attitudes toward maintaining arrival; SD=1.66) and having lived in the common phenomenon among second-gen- or developing their HL. As seen in Table 3, U.S. most of their lives (M=15.4 years of eration Korean-American youth. As shown a total of 187 (75.1%) of the participants residence; SD=1.92), and 210 (80.8%) were in Table 1, most participants reported reported that being able to speak, read, second-generation Korean Americans who English to be their dominant language and write in Korean is very important, were born in the U.S. Only participants or the language with which they feel the 38 (15.3%) of the participants indicated whose parents are Korean speakers were most comfortable. Specifically, 234 (90.0%) important, and only 24 (9.6%) responded included in the final analysis. of the 260 participants indicated English not important or don’t know. as their dominant language, 24 (9.2%) felt Participants also were asked to state Data Collection and Analysis equally comfortable in both Korean and their reasons for wanting to maintain Prior to the interview, each partici- English, and 2(<1%) felt more comfortable their HL. As also seen in Table 3, a large pant in the first group of seven subjects in Korean. Interestingly, the majority of majority (n=219, 84.2%) indicated a desire completed a comprehensive questionnaire the participants spoke Korean at home, to have a closer relationship with their to provide language proficiency data and and Korean was their dominant language family. This was followed by being able demographic information, which were later while growing up in the U.S. Specifically, to communicate with Korean speakers used to guide the participant’s interview. 164 (63.3%) of the respondents reported (n=218, 83.8%), to understand the culture All interviews were conducted in English, having spoken Korean always or often (n=162, 62.3%), and to enhance career op- audio-recorded, and transcribed. Each while growing up. portunities (n=156, 60.0%). interview lasted approximately 30 to 45 The findings appear to demonstrate minutes, and extensive notes were taken. a shift toward the society’s majority lan- Facilitating Factors for Developing As needed, follow-up questions were sent guage. Most participants indicated English One’s Heritage Language via email for clarification and elaboration as the language that they prefer to use in Participants had similar views in of certain responses. Salient quotations conversing with others. As seen in Table regard to how to improve their Korean were noted and are presented in the find- 2, 233 (90.0%) of the participants reported language skills. The factors that facilitate ings below . that they speak English all or mostly with HL development are presented in Table 4. Descriptive statistics were used to their siblings, 240 (93.0%) indicated using Being immersed in the Korean language analyze the questionnaire data. Qualita- English all or mostly with close friends, by visiting or living in Korea. The results tive analysis was used for the data from and 116 (44.7%) use English all or mostly. indicated that “being immersed” in a Ko- the interview and from the responses to Additionally, 65 (25.0%) use both lan- rean-speaking environment, specifically the open-ended questions on the question- guages when speaking with their parents. naire. The data were coded and analyzed for emergent themes according to steps Table 2 outlined by Strauss and Corbin (1990). Language Preference (N = 260) The interview data were used to develop items for the questionnaire, which Prefer to speak with Mostly or all in English Both languages (bilingual) Mostly or all in Korean n (%) n (%) n (%) was administered to the larger sample of 260 subjects. Questionnaire items included Parents/at home 116 (44.7%) 65 (25.0%) 79 (30.4%) demographic information, language profi- Siblings 233 (90.0%) 19 (7.3%) 7 (2.7%) ciency and use, Korean language learning Close friends 240 (93.0%) 14 (5.4%) 4 (1.6%) experience, attitudes toward the Korean Others 236 (90.7%) 20 (7.7%) 4 (1.6%) language, and possible facilitating and inhibiting factors in developing one’s HL. Table 3 Questionnaire Participants’ Perception Data (N = 260) Findings Variable n % The findings of the study include the participants’ language characteristics Importance of Developing Korean language Very important 187 75.1 (e.g., language dominance, preference, Important 38 15.3 use) and their perspectives on HL develop- Not important 22 8.8 ment, including their perceptions of what Don’t Know 2 0.8 promotes or inhibits development of their HL. In addition, mismatches between their Reasons for Developing one’s HL Closer relationship with family members 219 84.2 perspectives and the reality of how one Communicated with Korean natives 218 83.8 acquires an HL are presented. The results Understanding the culture 162 62.3 of the questionnaire are presented, and to Career purposes (i.e., enhance career opportunities) 156 60.0 give voice to the participants’ perspectives, Note. Valid percentages are used. salient quotes from the interviews and

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 32 Research visiting or living in Korea, was the most cated by 222 (85.4%) of the respondents. television, listening to Korean music, frequently reported factor (n=226, 86.9%). Sam, a fluent Korean American, stated and reading books written in Korean, According to the participants, being “im- that the best way to acquire Korean is was considered another facilitator by 122 mersed” in the target language provided “continuously using it with native Korean (46.9%) questionnaire completers. One of the best means to receive Korean language speakers on a daily basis.” He explained: the interviewees, Edward, believes that input as well as to learn or use the target being exposed to Korean entertainment on I have improved my Korean language language. Julie stated, skills by engaging in conversations with a daily basis will motivate learning one’s The best way [to learn and use Korean] natives of Korea. By making friends, it has HL. He stated: would be to live in Korea, for like a semes- forced me into situations where I have to Introduce [the Korean language] at an ter or two, where people would only talk to utilize the Korean language. In addition, early age, as well as Korean radio, music, you in Korean, so you’d be forced to learn I can pick up on different vocabulary used TV, or movies, to familiarize [a child] or use Korean. in conversational Korean. with the culture and the slang. Create an interesting culture to nurture the desire Janet concurred, stating: Considering that first-generation to learn the target language. Koreans are largely Korean-dominant The perfect way to do this would be to speakers (Kim, Lee, & Kim, 1981), speak- go and visit Korea. This would give you Sam mentioned a combination of the a chance to put your knowledge to the ing in Korean with one’s parents is the factors noted above as well as an additional test and push yourself beyond what you most easily available source of HL input activity (i.e., reading lighter material in thought you were capable . . . definitely hav- for second-generation Korean Americans. Korean): ing to constantly hear and see the language Kerry felt that early exposure to the HL I think conversing with native speakers, is a catalyst and that speeds the entire from parents is beneficial, stating, process up. I strongly recommend that visiting Korea, watching TV, and listening the person trying to improve their Korean Ultimately, the best way to learn Korean to Korean music are good ways of improv- speaking skills just keep on practicing and is from your parents. If your lifestyle is ing your Korean skills. But I also learned try and keep themselves as submerged in exposed to the Korean language, it will a lot by reading comic books. be of much benefit. the language and culture as they can. Kerry, a Korean proficient speaker, Similarly, Albert noted: Taking Korean language classes. As developed her Korean oral skills by speak- noted above, over half of the participants ing Korean at home and developed her The best way for anyone to learn any lan- (n=143, 55.0%), reported that taking a Korean literacy skills and understanding guage is to actually live in that country. “good” Korean language class or attending of the culture by reading Korean books. Since you are forced to learn the language, not by choice, but by necessity, you only Korean language school would facilitate Consequently, she scored high in the Ko- have one decision to make. You are left one’s HL development. Edward, an aver- rean SAT II exam and, as a result, was able with a very conscious decision. You need age Korean speaker, pointed out, “If living to waive her high school foreign language to give some effort to learn. in Korea isn’t an option, taking language requirement. classes and having language exchange Kerry, a proficient Korean speaker, I did well in Korean SAT II, so I didn’t partners are also beneficial.” He added: said that being immersed in the Korean have to take any foreign language class in language by visiting Korea and socializing Another good method of learning Korean school. My parents taught me the Korean alphabet and basic sounds. Being an only with Koreans makes achieve language is to attend Korean language schools. In child, I grew up only speaking Korean proficiency easier. addition, exposing yourself to the Korean community, in general, will provide you in the house. This helped to develop my The best way is to visit Korea, have friends with the opportunity to practice and learn speaking abilities tremendously. Since I that are Koreans, especially friends how the Korean language is spoken. was always interested in Korean culture straight from Korea, and involve yourself and language, I taught myself to read in Korean social activities. This will make He emphasized the need to take the “Ko- simple sentences in Korean and read it easier to learn the Korean language. rean class seriously and to try practicing Korean books. it more” as important steps to improving Engaging in conversation with Korean- one’s Korean language skills. Inhibiting Factors for Developing proficient speakers. The second most salient One’s Heritage Language factor that helps one develop a heritage Engaging in language-learning activities. The findings show some environmen language is to engage in conversation with Engaging in informal language-learn- - native language speakers, which was indi- ing activities, such as watching Korean tal or circumstantial factors that inhibit the HL development of Korean-American Table 4 high school students. From the interview Facilitating Factors of HL Development (N = 260) data, a list of obstacles or challenges to learning the Korean language was derived Factor n % and later used in developing the question- Visit or live in Korea 226 86.9 naire items. Use Korean 222 85.4 On the questionnaire, participants Speak Korean with parents 190 73.1 were instructed to choose only one response Take Korean language class 143 55.0 from a list of obstacles or challenges, which Watch Korean television 122 46.9 Recreational Korean reading 74 28.5 most likely led to fewer responses than Listen to Korean radio, music 39 15.0 would have been provided had they been given the option to choose more than one Note. Participants were allowed to choose more than one response. or “all” for the inhibiting factors.

WINTER 2015 33 Research

Participants also were directed to they are not supportive. For an example, not having an effective use for it. I reflect on their perspectives in the space when I visited Korea, if they knew that don’t need to learn Korean to be able provided. Only single-item responses were I was from the U.S. and speak English, to function in society. While knowing included in the final analysis. Because they would tell me to talk in English so Korean is an added value, it presents 63 responses had more than one answer, they could practice English instead, that is how it is these days. itself as . . . a burden to learn. only 194 questionnaires were used in the analysis (Table 5). Of the questionnaire respondents, 42 Janet, a low HL-proficient student, (21.6%) indicated a lack of access to the grew up speaking mostly in English at Time and access. Lack of time was Korean language as one of the obstacles home and did not see a reason to enhance identified by 58 (29.9%) of the respondents or challenges to learning the Korean her HL skills beyond the beginning level. as their number one inhibiting factor in language. Several questionnaire respon- It’s due to my ability to scrape by at the developing their HL. Their explanations dents provided explanations about their level at which I’m at. I was raised in a included: choices: mostly English-speaking household, so I have no time to attend a structured class there never was any significant motiva- It is difficult to have opportunities to to learn Korean language. tion to improve my Korean skills beyond speak in Korean with others. a ‘barely competent’ state. I have a busy schedule . . . If I had more Not having Korean-speaking people time, I would engage in conversation with Lack of motivation to learn one’s HL, around is an obstacle. natives more often and sit down and study based on one’s HL speaking ability, was independently. [An obstacle is] a lack of people to practice reflected in the following as well: Korean with in daily life. The second obstacle was lack of access I’m self-conscious around native to the Korean language at home and/or in Reading Korean would help, but it is hard speakers because I feel embar- the community. Over four-fifths of the par- to find the materials to read. rassed. ticipants reported that being surrounded Over the past several years, I find myself When I was a child, I was regularly by the Korean language, by visiting or reading less and less, disheartened by the taunted for having an ‘American’ ac- living in Korea or by having opportunities material available. to practice speaking Korean with more cent. That can really discourage one proficient Korean speakers would help Lack of motivation. Having no motiva- from practicing as much as possible. tion to learn the HL was the third obstacle them to acquire the Korean language more Fear of criticism. Another discourag- or challenge identified by second-generation quickly. However, as Kerry pointed out, ing factor was concern over criticism by Korean Americans. The results indicated regardless of its benefit, “accessing the proficient Korean speakers. “There is also that 32 (16.5%) of the respondents felt no Korean language in the U.S. is not an easy fear of being ridiculed if you say things motivation or desire to learn the Korean task.” She explained: incorrectly by Korean native speakers.” language. Some of the reasons were based When respondents were grouped by HL First, I think it’s very difficult to learn on the limited practicality of knowing one’s proficiency levels, the findings showed a language without some exposure at HL, being “self-conscious” about one’s HL an early age. Picking up the tone and that the weak HL speakers were affected skills, and being discouraged by the negative vocabulary is difficult without early more by native Koreans’ negative attitudes attitudes or comments of proficient Korean exposure. Living in America, the bulk of and/or critical comments than were fluent speakers. our conversations is in English, so it may or proficient Korean Americans. Some did not feel that it was necessary be hard to have conversational partners Specifically, 47% of the low HL-profi- in Korean. to know the Korean language when living cient learners and 18.9% of the fluent or outside of Korea. Albert stated, Albert presented a similar view, stating proficient Korean speakers were affected that being in a situation where one can prac- Nobody outside my family talks to me in by native Korean speakers’ attitudes. As tice or use Korean is important, but that the Korean. Even my family does not always such, these negative attitudes inhibited the opportunities to use Korean are very limited talk to me in Korean. So, I did not feel the HL development of weak HL speakers. in the U.S. as well as in Korea when he was need to learn Korean. visiting the country. He stated: Similarly, another interviewee saw the Mismatches Nobody outside my family talks to me in value of knowing more than one language This section presents three mismatch- Korean. Even my family does not always but did not see the value of using it beyond es between how the participants view and talk to me in Korean. So, I never needed to one’s home. how they execute or are able to execute use Korean. Also, when I talk in Korean, Not being exposed to it enough and their beliefs as related to developing and maintaining one’s HL. Table 5 Inhibiting Factors of HL Development (N = 194) Mismatch 1: Lack of HL access vs. not utilizing available HL resources. Factor n % As seen earlier, a majority of partici- Lack of time 58 29.9 pants felt that being exposed to the Korean Lack of access to Korean language 42 21.6 language on a daily basis, by speaking with Lack of motivation 32 16.5 native Korean speakers (n=222, 85.4%) or Lack of a good Korean language class 29 14.9 by speaking Korean with their parents Native Koreans’ negative attitudes 18 9.3 (n=190, 73.1%), is an effective way of Note. Participants were instructed to choose only one response. Only those who checked one response were included in the analysis. improving one’s HL skills in the U.S. The

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 34 Research findings, however, showed that the Korean and even lowered their self-esteem. Weak six years (Table 1). When asked, on the language is not widely used by parents in language learners, especially teenagers, questionnaire, to comment about their Korean immigrant families. For example, who are generally quite self-conscious, Korean language class experiences, they Janet’s parents did not want to speak in were affected by the way that native Ko- reported: Korean with her or with her siblings when rean speakers reacted to them. Lack of explanation in English. they were growing up because they felt The negative responses of native that speaking to their children in English Korean speakers were experienced as a Not enough time to learn and experience would help them to succeed academically. barrier to learning the Korean language. the culture and language. Similarly, Patrick’s parents spoke to For example, Julie stated that the best way Teacher’s lack of enthusiasm while teach- him in Korean before he entered school to learn Korean is to live in Korea, where ing. but his parents started using less HL at one would be forced to use the language. Too much emphasis on grammar. home once he started school. Patrick was In reality, however, that environment had proficient in Korean but was a limited a negative effect on the development of Not enough interaction to use or practice English-proficient student at the time that Julie’s Korean language skills. Julie shared with Native Korean speakers. he entered kindergarten. Due to his class- her frustration over her encounters with One questionnaire completer explained room behaviors (e.g., slow in recognizing native Koreans who “shut her down,” and in more detail: English words, heavy accent), his teacher as a result, she avoided opportunities to referred him to a speech pathologist. After socialize with Koreans, even in the U.S. There is generally too much emphasis on that incident, his parents started using She stated: written grammatical form rather than an English at home and, eventually, spoke oral/aural approach. For me, the problem For me, my biggest problem is the fact was that memorizing so much grammar more in English than in Korean at home. that I don’t want to associate with Korean Currently, Patrick is proficient in Eng- proved to be counter-productive and culture. I avoid Koreans as much as I can, inhibited my ability to speak freely for lish, excels academically, and is a prolific so I can never improve. Korean people, a long time. writer; however, in the process of learning even those who live in the U.S., are very English, he lost his Korean skills. Accord- cruel to me for not knowing Korean. I Some respondents blamed themselves ing to his self-report, he has low proficiency am nice to foreigners, but they [Korean for the ineffectiveness of Korean language in all areas of Korean language skills (i.e., native speakers] are mean to me. That’s classes, as seen in the following: speaking, listening, reading, and writing). the reason that I don’t want to associate with them. Many times, I pretend that I Not studying enough. There was additional evidence that am Chinese because people think I look No time to attend a structured class. indicated that Korean is used minimally Chinese, and I don’t want to bother to by second-generation Korean Americans at correct their perception. Not taking the Korean weekend school home. The results showed that only 30.4% of and class seriously. the participants spoke Korean most or all of She added that, based on her experi- the time with their parents, and only 9.9% ences, she would not visit nor live in Korea Others mentioned alternatives to a spoke Korean with their siblings at home. again. Janet stated that one of the biggest formal Korean language class: problems in learning Korean was the combi- Mismatch 2: Consequence of “being Ideally, if I had more time, I would engage nation of language and people [attitudes]: in conversation with natives more often forced to speak” vs. HL acquisition. and sit down and study independently. Participants indicated that “being The biggest obstacle is that Koreans don’t accept me, even in the U.S., for example, Kerry, who participated in a summer forced to speak” is beneficial to learn- at church and in high school. They would ing a new language. There were some accept me [however] if I spoke Korean or language-learning program, stated that mismatches, however, between how they if I knew the Korean culture. They [fluent the Korean language class was not effec- viewed the HL facilitating and/or inhibit- Korean speakers] are very disrespectful tive. She claimed that she learned about ing factors and how they learned the HL. and mean to me for not speaking Korean Korean culture but not the language. well. Clearly, “being forced to speak at an early It was a good opportunity to meet new age” was not helpful for teenagers who Mismatch 3: Attending HL class: Cata- people from all different areas of the U.S., were self-conscious about how they spoke lyst for or obstacle to HL development? to learn Korean culture, and to see many or who were less proficient as compared to Taking a Korean language class or at- famous Korean landmarks. fluent Korean speakers. tending Korean language school was consid- For some, who were average-to-pro- She did not learn the “language itself” ered to be a facilitator for HL development, because English was spoken by all her ficient Korean speakers, such stress-pro- but some Korean classes were considered voking situations may have given them friends, and she did not have enough in- to be obstacles. According to Edward, a teraction with native speakers. motivation to seek out opportunities to “good Korean language class” is one that engage in conversation and to improve is “relevant and meaningful.” Of the 260 Discussion their Korean skills. For instance, Edward, participants, 180 (69.2%) had studied or an average HL speaker, stated, “Visiting were studying the Korean language. Overall, the findings from the question- Korea made me want to improve my knowl- Of these participants, 72 (39.1%) had naire and the interviews complemented edge of Korean language and culture.” taken Korean classes for less than one each other. Most of the U.S.-born Korean- For non-fluent or weak Korean speak- year, 55 (29.9%) had studied the language American high school students who partici- ers, however, such a situation created a for 1 to 3 years, 38 (20.7%) had studied it pated in this study were English dominant “high anxiety” environment that inhibited for 3 to 6 years, and 19 (10.3 %) had taken and preferred to speak in English. The them from acquiring the Korean language Korean language classes for more than majority had positive attitudes toward

WINTER 2015 35 Research maintaining or developing their HL and morphemes required by young children factors found in this study, to capitalize wanted to develop their HL to have a closer to express Korean honorifics (politeness) on HL learners’ strengths, and to identify relationship with their family, to be able (Park, 2008). community resources and assets so that to communicate with Korean speakers, to To ensure that HL input is compre- they can be included in the development of understand Korean culture, and to expand hensible, parents need to tailor their HL an HL program. Such an HL program will their career opportunities. speech to their children, to be tolerant of motivate students to learn and to continue Factors identified by the participants the language developmental errors that developing their HL skills well enough to as facilitating HL development included are made by their children, and choose advance to higher levels. receiving HL input by visiting or living interesting, relevant, and meaningful in Korea, engaging in conversations with topics in which to engage their children in Provide a Variety of HL Reading Materials native HL speakers, enrolling in high- conversation. In addition, parents as well HL classes/schools should provide quality HL classes, and engaging in infor- as school personnel need to be informed quality reading materials (e.g., fun, in- mal language learning activities such as that maintaining and developing one’s teresting, at the right reading level) from watching Korean television, listening to HL is important and to dispel the myth or which students can choose as well as op- Korean music, and reading books written fear that maintaining one’s HL will have portunities for students to read for plea- in Korean. a negative effect on developing English sure (e.g., comic books, magazines). A large The findings also showed, however, proficiency. number of studies on literacy development that HL maintenance or development is have shown that extensive reading and, in a challenging task in the U.S. and that Minimize Anxiety particular, reading for pleasure improve language shift to the dominant language One of the common beliefs about HL vocabulary, grammatical accuracy, of the country was evident. Even those who second language learning is that “forcing reading comprehension, writing ability, live in an area with more available sources oneself to talk in the target language is spelling, and even aural comprehension of Korean input had difficulty maintain- the effective way” of acquiring the target and oral proficiency (Krashen, 1993). ing or developing their HL. Compared language. As seen in this study, however, Additionally, McQuillan (1996) to Korean-Americans residing outside of to foster language acquisition, foreign showed that pleasure reading was an Southern California, our participants had language anxiety (i.e., “fear of speaking” excellent way to develop HL vocabulary. more opportunities to encounter Korean and “fear of not understanding”) needs Therefore, helping HL learners to estab- native speakers. to be minimized. According to Krashen lish a reading habit is critical. Moreover, In view of this study’s findings, and (2008), “Forcing oneself to talk to people children who are taught to read and write with a focus on the modifiable inhibiting when we are not ready often results in in- in their HL and who have consistent op- factors, the following recommendations are comprehensible input,” which can lead to a portunities to read HL texts have been presented: frustration and discouragement, resulting shown to have more positive attitudes in less language acquisition (p. 19). toward and are less likely to lose the Maximize Comprehensible HL Input As seen in the findings, the high language (Fishman, 1991; Vasquez, Pease- Parents are perhaps the most signifi- expectations of native Korean speakers Alvarez, & Shannon, 1994). cant HL provider for immigrant children toward less-proficient HL speakers often and have the ability to compensate for inhibits these less-proficient speakers by Maximize Informal Language Learning the lack of access to the HL outside of making them anxious or discouraged and The participants in this study noted the the home. Research has shown that in- often turning them off from learning the benefits of informal learning activities such tergenerational transmission of an HL is HL. As such, error correction and criti- as watching Korean television, listening to one of the most effective ways to preserve cism can contribute to second-generation Korean music, using online HL resources, a language (Fishman, 2001; Park, 2008) Koreans feeling alienated from their own and engaging in light reading with comic and that parental use of the HL is criti- HL group, eventually making them reluc- books, magazines, and other materials in cal to children’s HL development (Bayley, tant to learn their HL, a type of “language which they were interested. Yi’s (2008) case Schechter, & Torres-Alaya, 1996; Kondo, shyness” (Krashen, 1998b). Therefore, it is study explored the effect on HL of the online 1998; Portes & Hao, 1998). important for proficient HL speakers not writing activities (e.g., instant messaging, According to Krashen (1985), to in- to ridicule but rather to tolerate weak HL online community posting, note exchanging, crease competence in a second language, speakers’ errors and to encourage further and diary-writing with peers) of biliterate one needs to receive comprehensible in- interaction in the HL. Korean teenagers. put (i.e., understanding of what is heard The study showed how an informal and read), in a low anxiety-provoking Develop Good HL Programs learning activity (i.e., online writing prac- environment, that contains elements that As Valdes (2001) has pointed out, for tice) was not just a valuable way of devel- have not yet been acquired. In addition, the most part, HL instruction has not been oping one’s language fluency and cultural Au (2008) noted that receiving abundant based on research because there is sparse knowledge or a means to socialize with comprehensible input and having regular research on this topic. Many of the avail- one’s own ethnic peer group; it also made and active interaction with HL speakers able studies concentrate on beginning-level the HL learning process enjoyable and beyond the preschool years are important HL students because few second-genera- purposeful for the HL learners, motivating for preserving one’s HL. Studies have tion immigrants achieve advanced levels them to voluntarily continue to engage in shown that childhood exposure to one’s of HL literacy (Kondo, 1998). In developing HL literacy practice. Although Yi’s findings HL helped adult learners to acquire higher an HL curriculum, teachers need to bear was based on just a few participants, the levels of native-like pronunciation (Au, in mind the inhibiting and facilitating findings have practical implications for 2008) as well as the linguistic terms and

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 36 Research meeting the needs of today’s “techno-savvy” Conclusion immigrants in San Diego. In R. Rumbaut & student population and for those HL learn- A. Portes (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children of im- ers with limited access to their HL or to a Understanding Korean-American migrants in America (pp. 157-189). Berkeley, HL peer group. perspectives on HL development, par- CA: University of California Press. Overall, maximizing informal learn- ticularly maximizing the facilitators and Faltis, C. J., & Wolfe, P. (1999). So much to ing opportunities will motivate students minimizing the inhibitors, should go a say: Adolescents, bilingualism, and ESL in secondary school. New York: Teachers Col- to learn their HL and even encourage HL long way toward fostering multicultural, multilingual citizens who are well versed lege Press. acquisition and development. HL teachers, Fernandez, R., & Nielsen, F. (1986). Bilingualism with cross-cultural knowledge and well students, and their families should take and Hispanic scholastic achievement: Some advantage of informal learning activities in equipped with language skills to meet baseline results. Social Science Research, the HL classroom and at home. They also the demanding challenges of diversified 15, 43-70. should use the HL in their conversations, today’s world. Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift: particularly with HL learners, as well as It is hoped that the results of this Theoretical and empirical foundations of as- draw upon Korean movies, music, drama, study will be used for planning educational sistance to threatened languages. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. novels, comics, video clips, games, and programs that take into account the needs and resources of immigrant families as Fishman, J. A. (Ed). (2001). Can threatened popular social networking sites as a way languages be saved? Reversing language well for informing the public, preservice to provide abundant comprehensible input shift revisited: A 21st century perspective. in a low anxiety-provoking environment. teachers, and educators about the value Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. of maintaining and developing one’s HL. Fradd, S. H., & Boswell, T. D. (1999). Income pat- Limitations and Suggestions terns of bilingual and English-only Hispanics References in selected metropolitan areas. In S. H. Fradd for Future Research (Ed.), Creating Florida’s multilingual global Au, T. K. (2008). Salvaging heritage languages. This study was conducted in a limited workforce; Educational policies and practices In D. Brinton, O. Kagan & S. Bauckus geographic area but one in which the for students learning new languages. Talla- (Eds.), Heritage language education: A new hassee, FL: Florida Department of Educa- participants had more exposure to their field emerging (pp. 337-351). New York: tion. Retrieved from http://www.ncela.gwu. HL than do other second-generation Ko- Routledge. edu/pubs/florida/workforce99/indexhtm rean immigrants living in other parts of Bankston, C., & Zhou, M. (1995). Effects of minor- Fuligni, A. (1997). The academic achievement the country. In addition, due to sampling ity-language literacy on the academic achieve- of adolescents from immigrant families: method, a large percentage of the par- ment of Vietnamese youths in New Orleans. The roles of family backgrounds, attitudes, ticipants were attending or have taken Sociology of Education, 68(1), 1-17. and behavior. Child Development, 68(2), Bayley, R., Schechter, S., & Torres-Alaya, B. HL classes; therefore, the results may 351-363. (1996). Strategies for bilingual mainte- reflect a more favorable attitude toward Garcia, H. (1985). Family and offspring language nance: Case studies of Mexican-origin maintenance and their effects of Chicano HL maintenance. Taken together, these families in Texas. Linguistics and Educa- college students’ confidence and grades. In considerations limit the generalizability tion, 8, 389-408. E. Garcia & R. Padilla (Eds.), Advances in of the findings. Castillo, J. (2004). Spanish in the United States: bilingual education research (pp. 226-243). For the purpose of the study, the age Demographic changes, language attitudes Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. group of the participants and parental and pedagogical implications. Geolinguistics Garcia, R., & Diaz, C. (1992). The status and ethnicity were controlled. According to 30, 71-83. use of Spanish and English among Hispanic Cho, G. (2000). The role of heritage language Zhou (1997), children of immigrants have youth in Dade County (Miami) Florida: A in social interactions and relationships: become the fastest growing and the most sociolinguistic study. Language and Educa- Reflections from a language minority group. tion, 6, 13-32. diverse (in terms of ethnicity, socioeconom- Bilingual Research Journal, 24(4). Retrieved Geer, C. H. S. (1981). Korean Americans and ic circumstances, and settlement patterns) from http://brj.asu.edu/archive.html ethnic language education: A case study in segment of the U.S. children’s population Cho, G. (2008). Bridging the cultural divide: Western New York (Doctoral dissertation, since the 1980s. Therefore, to make the Korean Americans visit their heritage State University of New York at Buffalo). study more representative of current homeland. International Journal of Foreign Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, societal dynamics, it would be valuable Language Teaching. Retrieved from http:// 3896. www.tprstories.com/ijflt/index-summer09. to conduct a similar study with Korean Hurh, W. M., & Kim, K. C. (1984). Korean im- htm#2008 Americans from more diverse backgrounds migrants in America: A structural analysis Cho, G., & Krashen, S. (1998). The negative of ethnic confinement and adhesive adapta- (e.g., interracial, intercultural immigrant consequences of heritage language loss and tion. Rutherford, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson parents, immigrant spouses of different why we should care. In S. Krashen, L. Tse University. socioeconomic statuses). & J. McQuillan (Eds.), Heritage language Kim, K., Lee, K., & Kim, T. (1981). Korean- We also did not evaluate parents’ development (pp. 31-40). Culver City, CA: Americans in Los Angeles: Their concerns language abilities, either in English or Language Education Associates. and language maintenance. Los Angeles, CA: in the HL, nor did we ask about parental Dornbusch, R. D., & Stanton-Salazar, S. M. National Center for Bilingual Research. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction educational background, either of which Kondo, K. (1998). Social-psychological factors of inequality: Information networks among could potentially affect Korean-American affecting language maintenance: Inter- Mexican-Origin high school students. Sociol- views with Shin Nisei university students adolescents’ attitudes toward HL develop- ogy of Education, 68(2), 116-135. in Hawaii. Linguistics and Education, 9, ment as well as their language use and Dugger, C. (1998, March 21). Study lauds immi- 369-408. HL acquisition. Thus, in future research, grants’ children. The Press Democrat, p. A8. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Is- it would be useful to include parents’ Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. sues and implications. Beverly Hills, CA: language abilities and educational back- New York: Norton. Laredo. grounds, as related to HL input. Espiritu, Y. L., & Wolf, D. L. (2001). The para- Krashen, S. (1993). The power of reading. Engle- dox of assimilation: Children of Filipino

WINTER 2015 37 Research

wood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Peal, E., & Lambert, W. E. (1962). The relation Valdes, G. (2001). Heritage language students: Krashen, S. (1998a). Heritage language devel- of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological Profiles and possibilities. In J. K. Peyton, opment: Some practical arguments. In S. Monographs, 76(27), 1-23. D. A. Ranard & S. McGinnis (Ed.), Heritage Krashen, L. Tse, & J. McQuillan (Eds.), Heri- Peyton, J. K., Ranard, D. A., & McGinnis, S. languages in America: Preserving a national tage language development (pp. 3-13). Culver (2001). Heritage languages in America: Pre- resource. McHenry: IL: Center for Applied City, CA: Language Education Associates. serving a national resource. Washington, DC: Linguistics. Krashen, S. (1998b). Language shyness and heri- Center for Applied Linguistics. Veltman, C. (1983). Language shift in the United tage language development. In S. Krashen, Phinney, J., Romero, I., Nava, M., & Huang, D. States. Berlin, Germany: Mouton. L. Tse, & J. McQuillan (Eds.), Heritage lan- (2001). The role of language, parents and Wiley, T. G. (2001). On defining heritage language development (pp. 40-49). Culver City, peers in ethnic identity among adolescents guages and their speakers. In J. K. Peyton, CA: Language Education Associates. in immigrant families. Journal of Youth and D. A. Ranard & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage Krashen, S. (2008). Anxiety is good for you. Adolescence, 30, 135-153. languages in America: Preserving a national International Journal of Foreign Language Pigott, B., & Kabach, M. (2005). Language ef- resource (pp. 29-36). McHenry: IL: Center for Teaching. Retrieved from http://www.tprsto- fects on ethnic identity in Canada. Canadian Applied Linguistics. ries.com/ijflt/index-summer09.htm#2008 Ethnic Studies 37(2), 3-18. Wong Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning a sec- Kuenzi, J., & Riddle, W. (2005). National secu- Portes, A., & Hao, L. (1998). E pluribus unum: ond language means losing the first. Early rity education program: Background and Bilingualism and loss of language in the Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346. issues. Washington, DC: Congressional second generation. Sociology of Education, Wright, W. E. (2003). Language policy issues in Research Service, The Library of Congress. 71, 269-294. the U.S Press. In J. Cohen, K. T. McCallister, Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/ Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (2001). Conclusion: K. Rolstad & J. MacSwan (Eds.), Proceedings misc/RL31643.pdf The forging of a new America: Lessons for of 44th International Symposium on Bilin- Lee, J. S. (2002). The Korean language in Ameri- theory and policy. In R. Rumbaut & A. Portes gualism. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. can: The role of cultural identity in heritage (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children of immigrants Yi, Y. J. (2008). Voluntary writing in the heri- language learning. Language, Culture and in America. Berkeley, CA: University of tage language: A study of biliterate Korean Curriculum, 15(2), 117-133. California Press. heritage adolescents in the U.S. Heritage Lopez, D. E. (1996). Language: Diversity and as- Portes, A., & Schauffler, R. (1995). Language Language Journal, 6(2). Retrieved from similation. In R. Waldinger & M. Bozorgmehr and the second generation: Bilingualism http://www.heritagelanguages.org/ (Eds.), Ethnic Los Angeles (pp. 139-163). New yesterday and today. International Migration Zhou, M. (1997). Social capital in Chinatown: York: Russell Sage Foundation. Review, 28(4), 640-661. The role of community-based organizations Matute-Bianchi, M. E. (1986). Ethnic identities Rumberger, R. G., & Larson, J. (1998). To- and families in the adaptation of the younger and pattern of school success and failure ward explaining differences in educational generation. In L. Weis & M. S. Seller (Eds.), among Mexican-descent and Japanese- achievement among Mexican American Beyond Black and White: New voices, new American students in a California high language minority students. Sociology of faces in the United States schools (pp. 181- school: An ethnographic analysis. American Education, 71(1), 68-92. 206). Albany, NY: State University of New Journal of Education, 95, 233-255. Shin, S. (2005). Developing in two languages: York Press McQuillan, J. (1996). How should heritage lan- Korean children in America. Clevedon, UK: Zhou, M. (2001). Straddling different worlds: guages be taught? The effects of a free vol- Multilingual Matters. The acculturation of Vietnamese refugee untary reading program. Foreign Language Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of quali- children. In R. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.), Annals, 29, 56-72. tative research: Grounded theory procedures Ethnicities: Children of immigrants in Amer- Merino, B. (1983). Language loss in bilingual and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ica (pp. 197-227). Berkeley, CA: University of Chicano children. Journal of Applied Devel- Terrazas, A., & Batog, C. (2010). Korean im- California Press. opmental Psychology 4, 277-294. migration in the U.S. Washington, DC: Zhou, M., & Bankston, C. L. (1994). Social capital Min, P. G. (2000). Korean Americans’ language Migration Policy Institute, 2010. Retrieved and the adaptation of the second generation: use. In L. M. Sandara, & S. C. Wong (Eds.), from http://www.migrationinformation.com/ The case of the Vietnamese youth in New New immigration in the United States (pp. USFocus/display.cfm?ID=793 Orleans. International Migration Review, 306-332). New York: Cambridge University Tienda, M., & Neidert, L. (1984). Language, 28(4), 821-845. Press. education, and the socioeconomic achieve- Nguyen, A., Shin, F., & Krashen, S. (2001). Devel- ment of Hispanic origin men. Social Science opment of the first language is not a barrier Quarterly, 65, 519-536. to second-language acquisition: Evidence Tse, L. (2000). The effects of ethnic identity from Vietnamese immigrants to the United formation on bilingual maintenance and States. International Journal of Bilingual development: An analysis of Asian Ameri- Education and Bilingualism, 3, 159-164. can narratives. International Journal of Park, E. (2008). Intergenerational transmis- Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 3, sion of cultural values in Korean American 185-200. families: An analysis of the verb suffix-ta. U.S. Census Bureau (2010). America’s families Heritage language Journal, 6(2). Retrieved and living arrangements: 2009. Washing- from http://www.international.ucla.edu/ ton, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and languages/heritagelanguages/journal/volu- Household Economic Statistics Division, met-2.asp Fertitity and Family Statistics Branch. Ac- cessed March 2011.

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 38