L1 use in primary and secondary foreign language classrooms and its contribution to learning

Abstract

The bilingual nature of foreign language classrooms is often ignored in SLA research. However, L1 use in teacher-learner and peer interaction is a reality in these classrooms. Studies of teacher-learner and peer interaction have found varying levels of L1 use in different contexts. They have tended to highlight its limitations to learning but have also identified cognitive and social functions for L1 use that could contribute to learning. Research in both contexts draws attention to the lack of a principled basis for optimum L1 use for SLA. This chapter explores L1 use in 10 foreign language classes in Australian schools. The chapter is based on findings of a four month study in ten French and Italian classes and focuses on the context and purpose of L1 use in teacher-learner and peer interaction. L1 use by teachers and students varied across different activities and tasks. Teachers' L1 use tends to be associated with particular classroom contexts. Although it serves important social and regulatory functions, its consistent use, especially for dealing with communication difficulties, may limit opportunities for learning. In contrast, L1 use in peer interaction helps learners support and scaffold each other's L2 use and develop their understanding of L2 grammar.1 BackgroundResearch studies have demonstrated that interaction facilitates language learning in a number of ways (Mackey, 2007). At the same time there is growing evidence of the impact of context on the nature and purpose of interaction (Alcon, &. Garcia Mayo, 2009; Garcia Mayo & Alcon,, 2002; Mackey & Gass, 2006). A learning context that has received limited attention in interactionist research is that of the primary and secondary foreign language (FL) or, as they are called in Australia, Language Other than English (LOTE) classrooms, where both teacher-learner and peer interaction often includes use of LI as well of L2. This chapter draws on a study of the nature and purpose of interaction in primary and secondary LOTE classrooms in Australia (Tognini, 2008) to examine the use of LI in teacher-learner and peer interaction in this context and explore its contribution to learning.Interaction occurs when learners are under pressure to communicate (Gass, 2003). It provides them with opportunities to receive valuable input and to try out language that they are in the process of acquiring. As they push their output they can receive feedback about the effectiveness of their communicative efforts. In turn, the feedback learners give each other as part of the interaction stimulates them to notice difference between their interlanguage and the target language. For example, Swain (1995; 2005) demonstrated that this feedback pushed learners to make their output more precise, coherent and appropriate. This finding is particularly relevant to the current study.The contribution of output to second language learning has been established by a number of studies. As well as giving learners an opportunity to apply the insights they have gained about aspects of the target language from feedback, successful output helps them to consolidate prior knowledge and increase fluency through automatic retrieval of form (Nobuyoshi & Ellis, 1993; McDonough, 2005; Swain, 1995, 2005). Output thus provides evidence of what is occurring in terms of learner acquisition. It is also the way that teachers assess learners and judge their development. This dynamic process of learner output, as part of the interaction, and teacher assessment (and possible invention as a consequence) was the focus of analysis in the current FL/LOTE study. The nature of learner output in teacher-learner, and within peer interaction, is examined particularly with respect to LI and L2 production.2 Foreign language/LOTE classroom learningFor the majority of primary, secondary and tertiary students across the world, second language learning often occurs in FL/LOTE classes. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 41 citations exist upstream.