A BRIEF GUIDE TO RESEARCH ON IMMERSION PROGRAMS

0
0
1837 days ago, 706 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

A BRIEF GUIDE TO RESEARCH ON IMMERSION PROGRAMS Fred Genesee McGill University French Immersion in Manitoba Conference Winnipeg Feb. 6, 2009

Slide 2

PERILS OF BILINGUALISM

Slide 3

IS BILINGUAL ACQUISITION EXCEPTIONAL? Sections: Children with Autism Children with Down's Syndrome Children with William's Syndrome Hearing-Impaired Children with Visual Impairment Hearing offspring of hard of hearing guardians Bishop & Mogford 1989

Slide 4

THE GLOBAL VILLAGE

Slide 5

ENGLISH IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE (Niall Ferguson, Los Angeles Times)

Slide 6

COGNITIVE ADVANTAGES BIALYSTOK (2004/2007) specific consideration (official elements of the mind) concentrate on important assignment data, screen out unessential data an aftereffect of overseeing 2 dialects continues into adulthood

Slide 7

CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING

Slide 8

ROAD MAP brief audit of Canadian Immersion programs lessons from research: 1. estimation of substance based L2 direction 2. age 3. time 4. understudies with learning challenges + 5. concurrent bilingualism openings & challenges

Slide 9

PROGRAM MODELS: early aggregate drenching

Slide 10

PROGRAM MODELS: postponed inundation

Slide 11

PROGRAM MODELS: Two-Year Late Immersion

Slide 12

PROGRAM MODELS: Double Immersion

Slide 13

1. CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION IS EFFECTIVE significant substance & open utilization of dialect to advance L2/L3 securing: advances procurement of bona fide dialect capability educationally proficient – 2 at the cost of 1 exploits youngsters' common dialect learning capacities investigate confirm …

Slide 14

Research prove (Genesee, 2004) English dialect improvement scholarly accomplishment French capability

Slide 15

ENGLISH LANGUAGE OUTCOMES Speaking, Listening, Reading, Writing Immersion Students = Non-inundation understudies Students in improved drenching score superior to anything understudies altogether English projects on English dialect tests

Slide 16

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT arithmetic, science, other Immersion Students = Non-submersion understudies

Slide 17

FRENCH PROFICIENCY Comprehension Skills (Listening & Reading): Immersion = Native speakers > Non-inundation Production Skills (Speaking & Writing): Immersion < Native speakers > Non-drenching

Slide 18

BUT… content-based direction alone is not ideal Immersion understudies have noteworthy crevices in their syntactic and informative fitness dialect expressions guideline is imperative concentrate on-shape can upgrade French dialect ability (Lyster, 2007)

Slide 19

THE CHALLENGE… to create educational modules and educational methodologies that advance L2 learning – an educational programs that coordinates substance and dialect direction methodicallly and unequivocally (Cloud, Genesee, & Hamayan, 2000)

Slide 20

2. EARLY L2 INSTRUCTION IS GOOD early introduction exploits youthful understudies' regular dialect learning capacity early socio-social openness teaching method and learning styles are perfect in early evaluations: learner-focused & intelligent

Slide 21

BUT… ambitious start does not ensure more elevated amounts of accomplishment than deferred begin postponed L2 presentation can be similarly powerful here and there (Genesee, 2004):  late drenching = early inundation now and again more established understudies are quicker learners more seasoned learners have all around created L1 proficiency aptitudes that can exchange & encourage L2 education improvement

Slide 22

THE CHALLENGE to create sound grade-to-review educational modules that guarantees constant dialect advancement (Cloud, Genesee, & Hamayan, 2000; Met, 1998)

Slide 23

OPTIONS schools and guardians have options – early or postponed concentrated on L2 plausibility recently L3 guideline, even submersion ( Cenoz & Genesee, 1998)

Slide 24

3. TIME on TASK dialect securing is perplexing – stretched out introduction to L2 in submersion is great additional time in school makes additional time outside school for L2 learning: growing understudies' collections through valid dialect use in the group BUT : no straightforward relationship between time & learning in school… .

Slide 25

TIME & procurement of larger part dialect time does not make a difference such a great amount for English dialect securing early aggregate submersion = incomplete inundation early aggregate drenching = deferred submersion Immersion understudies = non-Immersion understudies How is this conceivable? Submersion in English outside school AND

Slide 26

COMMON UNDERLYING PROFICIENCY (from Cummins, 2000)

Slide 27

TIME & obtaining of minority dialects time matters additional time in French  more noteworthy capability in French, for the most part: aggregate drenching > incomplete inundation more support for L1 of minority dialect understudies  more noteworthy L1 and English dialect ability WHY? exchange of minority dialect proficiency aptitudes to English and French proficiency

Slide 28

BUT… time is not a psycholinguistic variable: two-year late submersion = early aggregate inundation infrequently just giving broadened drenching background is insufficient time must be converted into viable learning openings (Cloud, Genesee, & Hamayan, 2000) teachers must have a long haul *, reasonable arrangement for investing energy – how to connection dialect figuring out how to content after some time

Slide 29

4. Submersion FOR ALL? Investigate on larger part dialect understudies has demonstrated that it is successful and reasonable for understudies (Genesee, 2004): with scholarly difficulties with poor L1 abilities from distraught financial families adapting typologically diverse dialects (Hebrew, Japanese, Mohawk) Little research confirm on understudies with serious intellectual, perceptual and socio-enthusiastic difficulties

Slide 30

WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN WITH LANGUAGE or READING ACQUISITION DIFFICULTIES? SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST (APRIL 2002) … . I am an analyst working in English schools in an exceptionally French environment. We are here and there tested with youngsters who have been determined to have SLI and that originate from unilingual French homes. My insight into the tricky was persuading that including yet another dialect a youngster experiencing issues acing his first language could put a lot of weight and setting the tyke up for disappointment.

Slide 31

Immersion understudies with poor L1 abilities ☼ Bruck (1984) anglophone submersion understudies with L1 shortages = anglophone control understudies ☼ Erdos, Genesee & Savage (2008) in number connection amongst's L1 and L2 perusing aptitudes and antecedents of perusing

Slide 32

FRENCH-ENGLISH BILINGUALS with LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT Paradis, Crago, Genesee & Rice (2003) French-English bilinguals with LI * (8 years of age) Fr monos with L I Eng monos with L I * Not in bilingual projects

Slide 33

RESULTS bilingual kids with debilitation had same examples of disability as monolingual kids with weakness – in both English & French bilingual kids with hindrance had same seriousness of impedance as monolingual youngsters with disability – in both English & French kids with dialect weakness were bilingual

Slide 34

5. Synchronous BILINGUALISM myth of the monolingual mind

Slide 35

EVIDENCE: MONOLINGUAL MILESTONES word first vocabulary word language structure/division prattling words spurt brush. communicat'n (7 mths) (10-12 m) (12mths) (18mths) (24mths) (past) bilingual turning points are a similar bilingual breakthroughs are the same

Slide 36

Educational Implications 3 rd dialect kids and their folks ought not be debilitated from utilizing the legacy dialect at home regardless of the possibility that the tyke is associated with having a dialect learning disability they ought to be urged to utilize it in ways that strengthen proficiency aptitudes this gives an establishment to the obtaining of scholastic dialect and proficiency in English & French

Slide 37

LAST WORDS Immersion training is compelling it is appropriate for various learner bunches adequacy relies on upon numerous factors – " overlooked details are the main problem " examine discoveries can manage our endeavors in arranging successful submersion programs require more accentuation on expert improvement so direction keeps on developing with our developing comprehension of what makes inundation work

Slide 38

to take in more about bilingualism fred.genesee@mcgill.ca

Slide 39

Thank You

Slide 40

REFERENCES Cenoz, J., & Genesee, F., (1998). Past Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education . Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Christian, D., & Genesee, F. (2001). Bilingual instruction. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Inc. Cloud, N., Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E. (2000). ). Double Language Instruction: A Handbook for Enriched Education . Portsmouth, NH: Heinle & Heinle. Genesee, F. (2004). What do we think about bilingual training for dominant part dialect students. In T.K. Bhatia & W. Ritchie (Eds), Handbook of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism, pp. 547-576. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Genesee, F., & Nicoladis, E. (2006). Bilingual obtaining. In E. Hoff & M. Shatz (eds.), Handbook of Language Development , 324-342. Oxford, Eng.: Blackwell. Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2004). Double dialect advancement and disarranges . Boston: Brookes. Johnson, R.K., & Swain, M. (Eds., 1997), Immersion training: International perspectives . Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Lindholm-Leary, K., & Borsato, G. (2006). Scholastic accomplishment. In F. Genesee, K. Lindholm-Leary, W. Saunders, & D. Christian (Eds) Educating English dialect learners, pp. 176-222. NY: Cambridge University Press. Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and showing dialects through substance: An offset. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Met. M. (1998). Educational programs basic leadership in substance

SPONSORS