Teaching English language learners
It is important to note the practices for teaching a second language are largely the same as those used to teach a first language; however, there are a few differences that teachers need to consider. This chapter draws on examples of practical techniques from the various theories related to language development, as they all have some merit when teaching English to young children. The limitations and problems associated with these theories need to be acknowledged, although this is not the aim of this chapter. For more information on theory and the problems of these views, refer to the work of Jones, Diaz and Harvey (2002)—their work is a good example of a critical examination of these theories in relation to bilingualism.
Theories of language acquisition and development in young children There have been several theories relating to language development and acquisition, ranging from behaviourism and direct instruction to more child-centred constructivist approaches. It is important to note when examining theory related to literacy, or any other topic, that ‘… each view of literacy is embedded in the political, social and philosophical context of the time and has a profound influence on how children are taught literacy in the early years’ (Barratt-Pugh 2000, p. 1). A good example of this is the earlier belief that it was harmful for children to be exposed to more than one language too early in life and ‘… that there would be considerable confusion on the child’s part and that normal language development would be delayed’ (Hakuta 1986, p. 1). Today this idea seems implausible, given that more recent research has shown children flourish in bilingual and multilingual homes and schools with the proper support. Contrary to the findings of previous research, the bilingual children performed reliably better than the monolinguals on both the verbal and the nonverbal measures. The bilingual children’s superiority in nonverbal tests was more clearly evident in those subtests that required mental manipulation and reorganization of visual patterns, rather than simple perceptual abilities. A statistical analysis of the structure of the relationship between the different measures indicated that the bilinguals were superior to the monolinguals in concept formation and in tasks that required a certain mental or symbolic flexibility … bilinguals enjoy a certain advantage in ‘cognitive flexibility’ over their monolingual counterparts (Hakuta 1986, pp. 34–5).
The psycholinguistic theory of early childhood bilingualism emphasises the individual’s cognitive strategies and skills used when learning a new language and their interaction with the environment (Clancy & Finlay 2001). Psycholinguistic theory focuses on the idea that language is a system of rules, and humans are predisposed to understand these rules and generate language (Emmitt, Pollock & Komesaroff 2003). It argues
385