Home Uncategorized theories of language learning

Uncategorized

theories of language learning

https://learn.teachingchannel.com/video/deeper-learning-for-ell-inps

For this week, in addition to the power point presentation, you will watch one video clip of a secondary classrooms for English learners. After reading Chapter Two in McKay and watching the video clip, write at least one paragraph on how the sociocultural and cognitive theories addressed in chapter two are reflected in the secondary classrooms highlighted in the video. Identify how students in the classrooms were able to use their home languages, and take risks in their new language, and what information the teacher needed to know to organize instruction so that would happen.

C H A P T E R T W O

Young learners and language
learning

Introduction

Assessing the language learning of young learners requires knowledge of
both the general characteristics of young learners, as were outlined in
Chapter 1, and tied to this, knowledge of the characteristics of their lan-
guage learning. Knowledge of children’s approach to, and needs in,
second language learning is critical for fair and valid language assess-
ment. Without an understanding of children’s language learning, teach-
ers and assessors might make choices about assessment that result in
some or all children being disadvantaged. This might happen in the
assessment process itself, or in the teaching that follows as a result of the
assessment.

This chapter first defines what is meant by language use ability and
makes a case for the assessment of language use. It provides a brief
overview of current thinking about the processes of foreign and second
language learning in young learners. There are both sociolinguistic
and cognitive perspectives on children’s foreign/second language learn-
ing that give insights into the complex nature of language learning.
Knowledge of these processes helps teachers and assessors to select
and sequence assessment tasks, and to formulate and apply assessment
criteria appropriately. The chapter then draws on a framework from the
general assessment field to provide an outline of the components of
language knowledge of young learners. These components make up a
theoretical framework of communicative language ability which provide
a basis for assessment of language use.

terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Wayne State Univ Libraries, on 15 Sep 2020 at 10:20:34, subject to the Cambridge Core

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

What is meant by language use ability?

The definition of language use ability that underpins the ideas in this
book can be summarized in the following way: the ability to use the
language for the purpose of achieving a particular goal or objective in
a particular situation (adapted from Bachman and Palmer 1996, p. 44).
Language use ability is also known as the ability to use language commu-
nicatively. The meanings that children exchange involve children cre-
atively using the language they have learned to fit the purpose of the
interaction (e.g., to answer questions about a task) and to suit the context
(e.g., when they are talking to the teacher at school). It is possible and
desirable that all young learners learn to use language, that is, to com-
municate in their target language in some way, depending on the needs
of their context and the requirements of the curriculum. Indeed young
learners’ close relationship with, and dependence on, the immediate
physical environment means that their language learning is, by its
very nature, closely integrated with real, meaningful communication
(Brumfit, Moon and Tongue, 1995).

We can see evidence of language use ability when children in the early
stages of language learning:

• understand new language uttered by the teacher, spoken by another
student or written in a story (using strategies to guess what is being said
from the context);

• respond appropriately to directives (perhaps with physical movement);

• create their own utterances, substituting their own word in a practised
sentence; or form their own sentence(s) based on vocabulary and
structures they have learned or heard;

• use language appropriately in non-rehearsed interactions, that is, in sit-
uations where they are not practising language in rote-learned routines.

We see children in more advanced foreign language classes and in second
language classrooms extending their language use ability into situations
where they can, for example,

• understand extended teacher input and interaction on classroom
content;

• interact with peers, teachers and others for both social and academic
purposes;

• read and write in the language on social and academic topics;

Young learners and language learning 27

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

• use the language appropriately, according to purpose and context, and
according to the expectations of their age level;

• employ language learning strategies that enable them to take respon-
sibility for their own language learning.

There are different ways of describing language use ability, depending
on the theoretical framework employed. A theoretical model of language
use ability, such as the one presented later in this chapter, gives teachers
and assessors a reference point to check that children are developing
knowledge and skills that will enable them to use language in a range of
situations, according to the curriculum and according to their needs. The
developing language abilities of foreign language and second language
learners, over time, have been described by educators in a number of
foreign and second language standards (McKay, Hudson and Sapuppo,
1994; The National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project,
1996). These language performance standards, examples of which are
given in Chapter 8, describe the development of language use ability;
they are usually based on teacher observations of growth rather than on
second language acquisition research, but it is possible to see that even
in the very early stages of language learning, despite having a limited lan-
guage ability, children are able to make an initial move towards language
use, both in the receptive and productive modes. Children are also able
to make rapid and sure advances in their ability to use language if they
have the right language environment in which to grow, as I will discuss
below.

There are different theoretical perspectives in the field of second lan-
guage acquisition (‘second language acquisition’ is the overall term for
the study of both foreign and second language acquisition, and from now
on will be referred to as SLA) on how children learn a foreign or a second
language. The two main perspectives come from a sociocultural perspec-
tive and from a cognitive perspective. Almost all theorists accept that
each perspective incorporates ideas from the other; that is, that children
successfully learn a foreign or second language when both sociocultural
and cognitive influences are activated and interact as they learn.

Sociocultural perspectives in language learning

When children are learning how to use a new language, they are devel-
oping a complex array of knowledge and skills. They are developing

28                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

much more than knowledge of the grammar and vocabulary of the new
language. Sociologically oriented modes of language and literacy learn-
ing stress the significance of the socialization process in the language
learning process. Language learning is seen as a primarily social process
rather than an individual process (Gee, 1996). Sociocultural perspec-
tives are widely discussed in the literature, and readers are encouraged
to read further in the area. The main ideas in sociocultural theory in
relation to school language learning are covered here under four main
headings:

‘Learning how to mean’

Developing new identities

Learning the discourses of the classroom

Learning the specific discourses of curriculum content areas

‘Learning how to mean’

‘Learning how to mean’ is a term coined by Halliday (1975), and used by
sociolinguists subsequently (Luke & Freebody, 1990; Gee, 1996; Carr,
2003) to emphasize the idea that when we learn to use language, we are
learning how to communicate meaningfully, and that meaning is tied
inextricably to our social and cultural context. The ideas behind the term
‘learning how to mean’ underpin what is meant when I talk about ‘learn-
ing how to use language’ in this book. Language use is engagement in dis-
courses into which members of a community are socialized. Children
need to learn the ‘social text’ (the way people are expected to interact) of
the language use situation when they are learning language. They have to
learn what is expected when they engage in language use – who can talk,
when, where, in what ways, with whom and for what purposes. It is not
possible to use a new language in culturally appropriate ways without
learning the cultural codes (the rules of interaction) of the language. It is
not easy to identify these cultural codes, even for the native speaker,
because they operate largely at the unconscious level. ‘When two people
use the same language to communicate but come from different ethnic
backgrounds, the cause of at least some of their misunderstandings is
likely to come from the different cultural codes they use in communica-
tion.’(Crozet, 2001, p. 3).

Language carries these and other cultural codes, and learning a lan-
guage involves learning these codes, gradually, and over time. Crozet

Young learners and language learning 29

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

(2001) suggests that the following four areas help to identify the cultural
codes in a language:

• The role of speaking and silence: e.g., the ways that silence in a con-
versation is accepted or filled; rules about who speaks when.

• Approaches to interpersonal relationships: e.g., differences in naming
systems; different ways that children, women and men are expected to
interact.

• Rules of politeness: the ways that eye contact is used; the ways to
respect elders; the way to ask for information (directly or indirectly).

• Non-verbal behaviour: the expected ways of using body language
(gesture, posture, stance, facial expression, etc.) and of using accent,
intonation and rhythm in speech; the ways that hand signs are used to
accompany speech.

As children go through the process of participating in social interaction
and becoming familiar with the cultural codes, they also acquire vocabu-
lary and structures that allow them to express more and more complex
meaning. In sociolinguistic terms the process of language learning is pri-
marily one of entering into a new discourse community or communities,
of a ‘struggle to participate’ (Pavlenko and Lantolf, 2000).

Developing new identities

As children learn a language, they are in the process of developing new
identities. They are venturing beyond their experiences in their first lan-
guage and culture, to a point where their identity and subjectivity are
being opened up to new possibilities (Carr, 2003). Language is ‘the most
salient way we have of establishing and advertising our social identities’
(Lippi-Green, 1997). Young language learners, particularly second lan-
guage learners, are developing new identities in the community and at
school. In formal learning settings, the nature of the classroom – the way
that teachers acknowledge and build on first language experiences,
knowledge and skills – determines how well children develop their new
identities in the second language. Is the second language a replacement
for the first language, or is it a new tool with which to communicate about
new things, to add to existing knowledge and identity? If it is a replace-
ment, the denial of children’s first language identities is likely to be detri-
mental to their learning of the second language and the development of

30                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

their new identities in this language. Looking at children’s progress in lan-
guage learning through the window of identity has provided powerful
messages that language learning is more than the development of lan-
guage knowledge (see, e.g., Toohey, 2000; Miller, 2003).

Learning the discourses of the classroom

All children entering a new school need to learn the discourses of the new
classroom and school; how people interact (teachers, students, principals,
parents) and how the language of school is used for different purposes and
in different contexts. The discourse of the classroom can be said to be
made up of the social interaction amongst participants (peers, teacher,
visitors), the everyday business or busy-ness of the classroom when teach-
ers manage learning, giving instructions and setting class tasks, and the
actual academic work of the classroom. Teachers and others construct
meaning in the classroom in ways that reflect the culture of that class-
room, the school system and the society beyond. For some children, it is
easier to learn the discourse of the classroom because it reflects the lan-
guage practices of their home. For others, there may be a wide gap
between the way language is used at home and at school. If children’s lin-
guistic and cultural experiences at home do not match the communica-
tive and cultural environment of the classroom and of school there can be
discordance, and this can result in learning difficulty. This discordance
may be experienced by native speakers of the language (Heath, 1983;
Wells, 1989) as well as by children learning a foreign or second language
who have come to school from a minority linguistic or cultural back-
ground. Children from a particular cultural group may, for example, tell
stories in different ways from the majority of the children in the class. They
are likely to find the new ways of telling stories strange; they need
acknowledgment of this, and help with understanding the new culture’s
narrative genre. They may understand instructions differently, perhaps
not being accustomed to the indirectness often used in middle-class com-
munications (‘Sam, it’s time for you to settle down!’). The extent to which
children are able to learn to use the target language successfully in the
classroom will depend to a large extent on the nature of that classroom
and, in particular, whether there are opportunities (clear explanations,
modelling, references to first language experiences, etc.) to help children
to enter into the discourse of that classroom. Evidence of discordance will
be seen in children’s performance in assessment tasks.

Young learners and language learning 31

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Language learners in school have to learn not only how to interact
socially in (and outside) the classroom, but also how to participate in the
discourse of academic study. Cummins (1980; 1983) has described social
language (Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills or BICS) and aca-
demic language (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency or CALP) as
different on two dimensions: the degree of active cognitive engagement
and the degree of contextual support that is available. He thus recognizes
the role of both cognition and context in language learning and language
use, that is, that children’s cognitive skills are engaged in, and also influ-
enced by, opportunities for language development in these two types of
language use. Cummins represented BICS and CALP through two con-
tinua as illustrated in Figure 2.1. The horizontal continuum refers to the
degree of contextual support that is available (intonation, gestures, pic-
tures, etc.). The vertical continuum refers to the degree of active cognitive
involvement in the task or activity ‘in other words, to the amount of infor-
mation that must be processed simultaneously or in close succession by
the individual in order to carry out the communicative activity’
(Cummins, 2001b). Thus tasks in quadrant A (e.g., a face-to-face group
discussion, playing with others in the playground) are more characteris-
tic of BICS, while tasks in quadrant D (e.g., writing a report, giving an oral
presentation on crocodiles) are more characteristic of academic tasks.

Research has shown that it takes considerably longer for second language
learners to develop the abilities they need for academic language use than
it does for them to be conversationally fluent (Cummins, 2000). When
young bilingual learners learn language in the classroom they need to learn
how to perform in the range of different discourses relevant to the school
context. Thus, what Cummins is saying is that if young children are not

32                             

A C

B D

Cognitively undemanding

Context reducedContext embedded

Cognitively demanding

Figure 2.1 Range of contextual support and degree of cognitive involvement in
communicative activities (Cummins, 2001b, p. 144)

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

given the instruction they need to become proficient in the kind of acad-
emic language they need in the classroom, then they are unlikely to succeed
at school. Our assessment procedures need to reflect this imperative; we
need to devise and include academic tasks that tap into and monitor chil-
dren’s ability for academic language use as well as for social language use.

Learning the specific discourses of curriculum content areas

Cummins talked generally about the type of language use ability that
children need to enter the discourse of the classroom. We can also look
more closely at children’s need to learn the specific discourses of subject
content areas such as science, social studies, physical education and
mathematics. Young learners are already engaging at an early age with
beginning versions of the discourse of specific curriculum content areas
(for example, ‘Pour the sand into the scales. Is it heavier or lighter than the
stone on the other side?’). As they progress through the elementary years,
the content areas become more specialized, and the language used to talk
about and learn the content becomes more linguistically complex and
academically demanding. In many ways, there are commonalities across
different content areas. Mohan (1986), for example, has devised a ‘know-
ledge framework’ that picks out the knowledge structures common to
activities across the curriculum. For action situations these are descrip-
tion, sequence and choice, and for organizing information these are clas-
sification, principles and evaluation. Mohan identifies the language of
the different knowledge structures, for example the language of classifi-
cation is set out in Table 2.1.

By following Mohan’s knowledge framework as a guide to understand-
ing the commonalities of knowledge structures and related language
across different curriculum content areas, teachers can help with the
transfer of thinking skills from one content area to another.

Different academic content areas also have, to some degree, their own
special way of constructing meaning, their own discourse. For example,
analysis of student talk in elementary school science lessons has revealed
that students mainly explain, describe and compare scientific concepts
(Bailey and Butler, 2003). Across content area, genres and functions differ
somewhat, but in general, vocabulary is more specific and specialized
than anything else. Children, particularly those who are learning through
a foreign or second language need to be taught explicitly and not ‘invis-
ibly’ (Fairclough, 1989) in a way that ensures that they learn both the new

Young learners and language learning 33

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

culturally based understandings in the curriculum area (for example, the
shared background knowledge, the expectations of teachers) and the lan-
guage (vocabulary, structures, genres) of the new discourse. Assessment
practices can help to make the language of content areas more visible to
children and also give teachers the chance to ensure progress in academic
language.

Young learners are therefore developing new identities, learning to
become members of a range of different discourse communities. And
they are learning to participate in the language of the classroom and of
content areas. For foreign language learners, opportunities to participate
in the discourse communities of the language they are learning may
come later rather than earlier, though opportunities to interact with pen
pals on the Internet or to read children’s literature from the target culture
bring them closer to the new discourse community. Young learners in
immersion and bilingual programmes meet these challenges earlier than
those in regular foreign language programmes, as they interact with
native speakers and study content areas through the language. Children’s
success in language learning is therefore not simply a matter of their
ability to study successfully or to have the right attitude; it is much more

34                             

Table 2.1 Classification: thinking processes and language (Mohan, 1986,
p. 79)

Thinking processes Related language

Observing/Measuring/ This is an apple. Mary has three slices of bread.
Describing POINTER WORDS: this/that

VERBS OF CLASS MEMBERSHIP: be
VERBS OF POSSESSION: have
POSSESSIVES: his
GENITIVES: Mary’s
REFERRING TO OBJECTS: Singular/plural, count/mass,
part/whole. Articles
AMOUNT OR QUANTITY: some/two/half
UNIT NOUNS: piece/lump
NOUNS OF MEASURE: a pound of / a pint of

Comparison Mary has more bread than Sarbjit.
COMPARISON: more than/taller

Classification Apples are a kind of fruit.
GENERIC FORMS: apples/music
SPECIAL NOUNS: kind/sort/species/class
CLASSIFICATION: be/include/place under

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

complicated than that: ‘what we perceive as language learning ability is
not a fixed characteristic of a person but rather a complex reflection of the
whole learning situation’(Bialystok, 2001, p. 89).

Cognitive processes in language learning

Most cognitive theorists acknowledge the importance of sociolinguistic
processes in language learning; however, they stress the importance of
cognitive processes in SLA. To understand and respond appropriately to
a child’s performance, it is important to understand the cognitive
processes of language learning. Why is a child using ‘me’ instead of ‘I’?
(me go too). How is it that a child might be able to produce seemingly
complex language early (e.g., I don’t want to), but appears not to be able
to do other seemingly simple things (for example, correctly using, for
third person singular, he goes). How is it that young foreign and second
language learners continue to make errors despite the fact that they are
able to communicate successfully with words, phrases and gestures?
Cognitive theorists believe that an understanding of cognitively based
language learning processes helps teachers and assessors to make judg-
ments about children’s performance and to act accordingly with ongoing
teaching and assessment strategies.

In order to illustrate some current thinking about cognitive process in
language learning, this section refers to the theories of three applied lin-
guists concerned with cognition, Schumann (1997), Skehan (1998) and
Cummins (Baker and Hornberger, 2001). Readers are encouraged to refer
to the original publications for a full understanding of these theories.
Skehan is concerned with explaining how second language acquisition
happens through the cognitive abilities of the learner, and how cognitive-
processing problems are overcome. Schumann believes that emotion
underlies most, if not all, cognition and attributes variation in success in
second language acquisition to the role of emotion. Cummins deals with
the influence of children’s first language on their second, and on their
opportunities to become a proficient bilingual at school.

A dual-mode system in language use and language learning

Skehan’s model is motivated by the fact that human memory is a limited
capacity processor, and that it would not be possible to use language

Young learners and language learning 35

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

fluently, if we were limited to the processing of rules alone. He hypoth-
esizes that all language users employ a dual-mode system to process and
use language. The two systems that contribute to the dual-mode system
are the formulaic system and the rule-based system.

New computer-driven research suggests that language use is based
much more on lexical elements or chunks than we have realized in
the past. When learners apply their formulaic system (Skehan also uses
the term ‘examplar-based system’) they are relying on the use of chunks
of language and idioms. Chunks might be words or groups of words
and in some cases formulaic units that may contain structure but are
unanalysed (the learner is not able to recognise its grammatical rules
or perhaps even its individual words). Thus ‘Open your books and turn to
page twenty-five’ may be an unanalysed chunk for beginning school
learners, who may follow the action response of others, understand
what the sentence means as a whole, without understanding its parts,
except for the page number at the end. The formulaic system has only a
limited potential for expressing new and precise meanings – language
users can only (in this system) use the formulaic expressions they have
learned, and in the context in which they are relevant. The value of the
system is that learners can draw on the resource of formulaic expres-
sions more quickly than their knowledge of grammatical structures,
and they will tend to do so in moments of communicative pressure
(p. 63). Learners can also use their formulaic system as a learning strat-
egy, to reach for something they don’t yet understand properly, and to
push themselves on towards increased proficiency. According to Skehan,
the formulaic system is likely to be ‘context-bound’, with language
learned well for a particular context, but not easily transferred to another
context (p. 89).

We know that when young learners are learning language, they rely
heavily on the formulaic system, accumulating chunks, or formulaic
items, and using these to understand and get their meaning across. This
is so in first and second language learning. A newly arrived learner in a
second language classroom learns many chunks of language very early,
especially receptively, but is not able to analyse its rules until later.
Cameron (2001, p. 50) describes how language learners also employ
‘slots’ (it’s . . . ) that can be filled by different nouns and adjectives. For all
learners, chunks continue to be learned throughout language learning,
for example in idioms and phrases (the big bad wolf; white as chalk). As
the next section shows, chunks play an essential role as building blocks
for further language learning for both young and some older learners

36                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

(depending on their learning style and exposure to the language), but
particularly for young learners.

According to Skehan, learners also use their rule-based system, when
they draw on underlying rules of the language to construct sentences and
discourse. Language learners develop their language by:

• accumulating memory-based chunks of language which they then
combine to build language.

• inducing underlying rules from the language they see and hear
(gaining implicit knowledge of the language rules), or become con-
sciously aware of rules by studying the language (gaining explicit
knowledge of the language rules).

In a well-developed system (e.g., in a first language speaker’s system) all
of this is done without conscious thought. The demands on the profi-
cient user’s memory storage are not great in a well-developed system,
since users can generate an infinite number of possible meanings from
a limited set of language rules by drawing on a large pool of memory-
based chunks of language. There is maximum creativity and flexibility
in what the learner is able to process or comprehend, and what he can
produce, and there is no constraint on the production of new combina-
tions of meanings (p. 30). However, in a system that is not well devel-
oped, reliance on the rule-based system during language use, which
can happen especially with learners (young and older) who are learning
by focusing on grammar and vocabulary only, creates a heavy process-
ing burden. Thus, foreign and second language learners who have
had little opportunity to draw on a formulaic system developed through
language use opportunities, quickly become tongue-tied and anxious
as they try to construct a sentence in their head based on the rules
they have learned. The processing constraints are very high. These
learners have more chance of success if they have a supportive envi-
ronment, for example a listener who is willing to wait, and who signals
encouragement, a speaker who is willing to repeat, or enough time to
write and revise without pressure. This kind of situation can be exacer-
bated for young learners who are limited to grammar study because
young learners’ rule-based system is limited by their still-developing
metalinguistic ability (their capacity to use knowledge about language).
Skehan suggests that neither system works entirely alone: ‘Clearly,
neither the rule-based nor the exemplar system is ideal separately’
(Skehan, 1998, p. 86)

Young learners and language learning 37

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Language learning takes place when learners engage in meaningful
communicative activities, that is, language use tasks, on the one hand
(activating the formulaic system), and through focus on form in the
context of language use within communicative tasks (activating the
rule-governed system) on the other. Through focus on form learners
are given an opportunity to ‘notice’ (Schmidt, 1990), that is, to be con-
sciously aware of the form of language (such as vocabulary and struc-
tures) so that this can assist knowledge to move from the short-term
memory to the long-term memory. Information that is not encoded
into long-term memory will be lost. Thus, a dual mode system is
involved in language learning. It is through communicating meaning
through language use that the two systems, the formulaic system and
the rule-governed system, are activated. Skehan suggests that adult
language learners’ attention needs to be channelled in a balanced way
towards both communication on the one hand, and form on the other
hand, so that neither dominates at the expense of the other (1998,
p. 126). Since children have less developed metalinguistic ability the
need to channel the bulk of children’s attention towards meaning com-
munication is vital if fluency is to be achieved.

Young learners tend to rely on the formulaic system as they hear and
see language in use; and through this they gain implicit knowledge of the
language rules, and thus they are able to create their own structures and
discourse. It is likely there will be some differences in learning style
amongst younger learners that may need to be accommodated by
teachers. Older learners in the later elementary school years develop
greater metalinguistic awareness and become more able to gain know-
ledge of language rules from explicit language study. However, depend-
ing on the learning context, older elementary age learners still tend to rely
strongly on a formulaic system.

Skehan’s theory helps to highlight the differences between adult
and child SLA, in particular children’s greater reliance on the formu-
laic system, and their subsequent need for a rich language use
environment.

Emotion and language learning

Schumann’s (1997) theories are concerned with the role of emotion or
affect in second language learning. As children experience the world they
develop appraisal systems. Appraisal systems are the value systems that

38                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

individuals develop and bring to their language learning. Gradually,
through interaction with their mother, and with their environment and
others, children develop a value system which is uniquely their own. The
inherited culture of the society is transmitted through these types of
interactions. Some learning, such as learning to walk and learning
one’s first language, is generated by innate mechanisms. This type of
learning is less influenced by a learner’s appraisal system. However,
foreign or second language learning is strongly influenced by a learner’s
appraisal system. Because people have different experiences, the way
they react emotionally (through their appraisal systems) are different,
this is why different learners achieve different results when they have
opportunities to learn a foreign or a second language. Each person
and child differs in their motivation, interest and attention in second
language learning. ‘These value mechanisms influence the cognition
(perception, attention, memory and action) that is devoted to learning’
(Schumann, 1997, p. 2).

In addition, Schumann suggests that foreign and second language
learning is a form of sustained deep learning. That is, it takes place over
an extended period of time (often several years), and when it is complete
(or, in the case of language learning, we would say, highly proficient) the
learner is seen as expert (p. 32). Sustained deep learning is never
inevitable and is highly dependent on cognitive factors, such as emotion,
attention and motivation. Some sustained deep learning occurs because
the learner is forced to acquire the material (as in some school learning)
and doesn’t resist. More often, deep learning happens because the
learner is attracted to the field and likes it (p. 35). This type of learning has
a strong emotional and motivational component (p. 35). Learners evalu-
ate their own performance and listen to and observe the evaluations of
their performance passed on to them by others. All these factors lead to
variable success in second language acquisition amongst learners.
Successful foreign and second language learning is therefore strongly
reliant on positive emotion and attitudes on the part of the learner, and
on positive feedback on the part of others and on self-evaluation. To
assume that exposure to language use and constant study of language
forms is sufficient for language learning is erroneous. Since it is not
inevitable that young learners will succeed in foreign or second language
learning (I include here the higher levels of learning required to succeed
in academic discourse), it is clear that young language learners at school
are influenced by these factors as much as older learners.

Young learners and language learning 39

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Linguistic interdependence

Cummins has been especially concerned with bilingualism and with the
influence of children’s first language on their second language learning and
cognitive development. A collection of Cummins’ work is now available
(Baker and Hornberger, 2001). Cummins’ influential theories have sug-
gested that successful SLA is dependent on a well-developed first language.
That is, that there is interdependence between the first language and the
second language. The cognitive skills tied up with children’s linguistics
skills can transfer from one language to the other, and when this happens
children have the best opportunities for success at school. For children to
achieve some success at school, they need to at least reach a lower thresh-
old level defined as the point where they achieve the language use ability
they need ‘to avoid cognitive deficits and to allow the potentially beneficial
aspects of becoming bilingual to influence their cognitive growth’
(Cummins, 1979, p. 229). This point will vary according to the children’s
stage of cognitive development and the academic demands at different
stages of schooling (Cummins, 1979, p. 229). Once they have reached this
lower threshold, then they are able to access, through language, the
abstract concepts they need to be successful in school. For the best oppor-
tunities for success, children need to achieve a higher threshold level,
when the first language is sufficiently developed to support academic pro-
ficiency in SLA. At this point they are adding another language to an
already well-developed first language, and positive cognitive effects result.
These are the children who gain the most positive cognitive effects from
their bilingualism, and who therefore have the best opportunity to be suc-
cessful at school. ‘It is clear that in minority language situations a pre-
requisite for attaining a higher threshold level of bilingual competence is
maintenance of L1 [first language] skills’ (Cummins, 1979, p. 232).

Cummins suggests that a range of factors influence the child’s oppor-
tunity to become a proficient bilingual, in particular first language main-
tenance, but also background variables (community and parental
attitudes towards participation in the second language culture and main-
tenance of the first language) and input and process variables (e.g., expo-
sure to the second language, teacher attitudes and expectations, and
motivational factors).

Cummins’ theories remind us that cognitive processes in language
learning do not happen in isolation but are tied to the child’s first lan-
guage abilities, and to the child’s cognitive abilities developed within the
first language. The foreign and second language learner is not a tabula

40                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

rasa, or a blank slate, but comes with linguistic and cognitive abilities that
have a strong influence on subsequent language learning and cognitive
development. Cummins’ later writing (e.g., 2000), addresses the socio-
political contexts in which bilingual children learn, and the effect of
power relationships in the society on the possible marginalization and
disempowerment of second language learners. His later theories turn our
attention back to the sociocultural contexts in which children learn and
remind us that both sociocultural and cognitive perspectives are insep-
arably relevant to SLA.

Optimal conditions for language learning

Optimal conditions for language learning are those which include, at
least, the following four features: a focus on meaning, interesting and
engaging input and interacting, selected opportunities to focus on form,
and a safe and supportive learning environment. The current consensus
in SLA, reflecting the theories outlined above, is that in foreign and
second language classrooms, children’s language learning flourishes
when there is a focus on meaning, and when their teachers and other vis-
itors give them opportunities to interact in ways that reflect the wider
discourse communities relevant to the language they are learning.
Children learn to use language because the interesting activities in
which they are engaged absolutely necessitate (from the child’s point of
view) cooperation and interaction. Teacher-talk around an irresistible
focus of interest in the classroom can encourage children to become
involved, provide meaningful input about something they can see in
front of them (enabling them to confirm their predictions about what the
teacher is saying) and encourage them to respond to questions, as in the
following example:

Now come and look at the rabbit in the cage. (Everyone comes to the cage and

looks in.) Can you see his long back legs? They’re very strong. That’s how he

can run fast and jump very high. Peter, point to the rabbit’s back legs. Can

everyone tell me how many back legs the rabbit has got? Everyone – jump

up high. The rabbit can do that too. Let’s look at some pictures of a rabbit

running and jumping.

Language-rich activities give children opportunities to listen and guess
from the context, to take risks to use the second language (which they

Young learners and language learning 41

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

are more likely to do if the environment is safe) and to engage in inter-
actions, when they are ready, with the teacher and each other. Children
are more likely to learn through language use activities that engage
them in doing, thinking and moving. Talk around physical activity,
pictures and objects, and problem-solving activities brings optimal
opportunities for language learning. Right from the beginning of
language learning, in both foreign and second language classrooms, the
use of literature can provide a strong basis for the promotion of language
learning through language use (Falvey and Kennedy, 1997). Reading and
writing skills grow as children use language in print; literature and
content-based activities (e.g., maths, science and social studies) play an
important role as input, and as the basis for problem-solving and stimu-
lating interaction (see Chapters 6 and 7). Through these experiences
children learn the social rules of interaction and belonging, that is, the
discourses with which they are engaging, and their language knowledge
(e.g., knowledge of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation) expands
and strengthens.

Young learners also benefit from opportunities to focus on form, that
is, to focus on the ‘stuff’ of language – the grammar, vocabulary, pronun-
ciation, stress and other features, within the context of tasks in which
they are engaged. Children do not need to be told explicitly about lan-
guage rules in order to learn how to use language, nor do they necessar-
ily gain any advantage from being told about language, since they may
not be cognitively ready for this kind of analysis. Their natural tendency
is to attend to meaning rather than form (Bialystok, 2001) and therefore
their attention will quickly swing back to meaning or away on to some-
thing else in the environment that is more interesting. Well-chosen litera-
ture can supply many opportunities for this type of incidental focus on
form. The following extract from The Very Hungry Caterpillar provides
valuable input for second language acquisition because it is supported by
colourful illustrations that allow children to predict the meaning, and it
repeats, through the days of the week, many of the same words and
phrases, giving children a chance to understand and internalize these
items of language.

On Monday, he ate through one apple. But he was still hungry. On
Tuesday he ate through two pears, but he was still hungry. On
Wednesday he ate through three plums, but he was still hungry.

The Very Hungry Caterpillar (Carle, 1974)

42                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Young learners benefit from this kind of focus on form in carefully
chosen tasks. Focus on form may involve, for example, labelling pictures
and diagrams, filling in gaps in sentences whose meaning is illustrated
through accompanying pictures, and playing games that involve some
kind of focus. As teachers draw children’s attention to certain aspects
of language in one-to-one and whole-class activities, they are also
involving children in focus on form. As children grow older, their ability
to think about language grows as part of their maturational develop-
ment until they are able to handle more explicit focus on form. Older
learners are likely to benefit from working together on focusing tasks,
when they have an opportunity to talk about and think through the lan-
guage together (Swain and Lapkin, 1998). It helps learners when focus-
ing tasks are contextualized, that is, when a connection is made
explicitly to purposeful language use in tasks. When a language work-
sheet is handed out, for example, it is helpful to tell children why they
are doing it:

We’re going to do this worksheet on science language to help you to write

about the science experiment we did together this morning.

Like first language learners, young foreign and second language
learners need a safe environment, where they can take their time before
they start to talk, but where they are encouraged to take risks. That safe
environment also gives them opportunities to learn the different dis-
courses of the classroom, to become full members of the classroom
community, and to develop, without fear, new identities within it. While
children are interacting, they benefit from positive experiences and
positive feedback. Children are encouraged to use language when their
teachers and others use facial expressions and tone of voice to enhance
meaning, when they display real pleasure when children attempt to
interact, and when they show real interest in what children have to say.
Classrooms that promote value and draw on children’s first language
help the language learning process. Teachers’ positive attitudes to chil-
dren’s first language, and the inclusion of children’s first language and
culture in tasks in the classroom are optimally important for language
learners. This applies to all minority language learners, whether they are
learning a foreign language (such as Hmong children in Vietnam learn-
ing English) or a second language (such as Sudanese children learning
Dutch in Holland).

Young learners and language learning 43

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Children need to work hard to learn a language

The implication of what is known about cognitive processes in language
learning is that language learners, including children, need to work hard
to learn a new language. Children do not simply absorb the language
around them. They need to engage with their language environment in
strategic ways in order to learn the language. Indeed, Bialystok (2001)
tells us that children, as much as adults, need to use ‘brute learning
strategies’ in order to learn a new language.

Pinter (1999) has observed children’s language learning strategies in a
foreign language situation, and has seen that children:

• ‘use L1’ in order to double-check words or expressions not avail-
able in L2, and to engage in task-related discourse to establish
common grounds about the task before carrying it out.

• ‘appeal for assistance’ from the adult.
• ‘build patterns’ whereby they repeat what they are comfortable

with over and over again. In this, they play safe and try to exploit a
given phrase as much as possible.

(adapted from Pinter, 1999, p. 16)

Children’s language learning strategies differ depending, for example, on
personality, or on the nature of their language environment. Some chil-
dren need to go through a ‘silent period’ when they watch and listen and
interact, but do not speak. Some children have a strong need for social
interaction and learn quickly because they want to engage with others.
Some children have been seen to pick up language by observing their
teachers and peers, with little direct interaction with them ( Wong
Fillmore, 1991), though this will occur only if there is access to the right
conditions for language learning.

As young learners progress in their language learning, they continue to
use language learning strategies. As they learn to write, for example, they
are learning how to process text, to plan, to organize and goal set, how to
engage their long-term and working memory effectively. They are learn-
ing how to revise their work, to edit for content and organization and to
take account of their audience ( Weigle, 2002). In reading they are learn-
ing to recognize the important information in text, to adjust their reading
rate, to skim, to preview, to use content to resolve a misunderstanding, to
formulate questions about information (Alderson, 2000).

The following list of descriptors from the TESOL Standards for
Grades 4–8 outlines the strategies children are expected to learn in

44                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

order to be able to begin to achieve academically in curriculum content
areas:

• following oral and written directions, implicit and explicit
• requesting and providing clarification
• participating in full-class, group, and pair discussions
• asking and answering questions
• requesting information and assistance
• negotiating and managing interaction to accomplish tasks
• explaining actions
• elaborating and extending other people’s ideas and words
• expressing likes, dislikes and needs ( TESOL, 1997, p. 83)

The recognition of the role of learning strategies is important, both in
teaching and learning, and in assessment. As a point of interest, children
who have learned a foreign or second language do have an advantage
over monolingual children in being able ‘to treat language as a formal
system and examine its properties’ because as they have learned their
language(s) they have had to focus on and become more aware of lan-
guage; for example, they have had to be aware of which of their two (or
more) languages is being spoken and in which language they should
respond (Bialystok, 2001).

There are many publications concerned exclusively with the teaching
of languages to young learners (see, e.g., Halliwell, 1992; Brumfit, Moon
and Tongue, 1995; Cameron, 2001). In this section I have summarized
some key points and will now turn to the implications for assessment of
what we know about optimal learning conditions for young learners.

Implications for assessment

What we know about language learning holds many implications for
foreign and second language assessment. Assessment of language learn-
ing by teachers and assessors requires knowledge of the social and
cognitive processes at play as children respond to the assessment
requirements placed before them. Effective language assessment builds
up children’s abilities to use language in the full meaning of the term;
assessment should both promote and monitor children’s ability to enter
into the new discourses relevant to the language they are studying,
whether they are predominantly the discourses of social communication
for present and future encounters with native speakers, and/or the dis-
courses of the classroom and of the content areas they are learning.

Young learners and language learning 45

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Effective assessment is done in a climate where the first language and the
first language identities that children bring to their learning are acknow-
ledged and built upon.

Children’s greater ability to understand and use formulae in the early
stages of learning requires selection of particular types of tasks in those
early stages, where children are able to draw on their known formulae and
vocabulary to participate. Such a task would be familiar, routine and prob-
ably contain a repetitive element. Early morning whole-class routines
when children check on the day, the date and the weather are one such
example. Simple games are another. More rule-based assessment tasks
should then be used when children are more advanced in the language
and mature enough to handle explicit language-focused assessment
work. As they progress, children can handle language use in which they
are asked to go beyond the predictable and the routine; they can be asked
to tell others what they did at the weekend, or describe a shared event, or
write a report about a chosen animal. As rules emerge, assessment needs
to be targeted to the range of language rules, vocabulary and meaning that
children can handle; however, there will still be a need for teachers and
assessors to monitor the continuing development of formulae, since these
continue to play an important role in successful language use.

Assessment and feedback need to evoke positive emotions in children
about language learning, about themselves and about others. Since chil-
dren bring different experiences and motivations to their learning, indi-
vidualized needs assessment and subsequent targeted feedback during
teaching helps to enhance success and therefore motivation. Teaching of
self-assessment strategies and promotion of self- and peer-assessment in
the classroom gives children a chance to become engaged in the sus-
tained deep learning that is required in successful foreign and second
language learning and to build up their language learning strategies.

Effective assessment requires an acknowledgment of the role that chil-
dren’s first language plays in their foreign and second language learning.
This is mostly done through the teacher’s and assessor’s acknowledgment
of the first language in the assessment process (e.g., their acceptance of
the use of the first language, in certain instances, to help children under-
stand what is expected in the assessment procedure), and of their accep-
tance of children’s use of the first language when their second language
‘falls down’. Such acknowledgments in classroom and external assess-
ments can be done, with planning, without loss of trustworthy assess-
ment data. In addition, decisions about children’s foreign or second
language learning with no regard for the nature of their progress in their

46                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

first language are likely to be ill-informed, and resulting actions, for
example about placement and intervention, may be inappropriate and
even harmful. Assessment tasks that are concerned with ascertaining
young learners’ ability to use the language need to reflect the language
use activities in which children engage within a successful language
learning environment. Since a large part of assessment in elementary
schools is carried out in the classroom and during the day-to-day busi-
ness of learning that makes up the curriculum, it follows that much of
assessment takes place through the kinds of tasks children are regularly
engaged in in the classroom. Children show their language ability
through the kinds of tasks with which they are familiar, and through tasks
that are most likely to promote their interest and motivation to use the
language. Even in more formal assessment tasks involving language use,
such as a one-to-one interview with the teacher, or a short picture
description, it makes sense to structure the assessment task in a way that
reflects the kinds of learning tasks that optimize their motivation and
interest in language use. The kinds of tasks that do this are those that
reflect the ways they learn language most effectively.

It is axiomatic that the way that children learn best be reflected in the
way that they are assessed, and the knowledge of how young learners
learn language is therefore fundamental for those involved in the lan-
guage assessment of young learners.

It is at all points of the assessment process, when teachers and asses-
sors select or construct assessment tasks, make decisions about the
nature of children’s performance, and give feedback and provide reports
about that performance, that they require knowledge of language learn-
ing. At any of these points there can be a positive or negative impact on
the children’s progress and long-term success.

The influence of the language curriculum and external tests
on language learning and assessment

Language learning in schools is generally embedded in a curriculum set
out by the state, the district, the school or the classroom teacher, and this
will have a major impact on the nature of language learning. The cur-
riculum may also be established through a set textbook. The way that a
curriculum or textbook is set out and sequenced reflects the understand-
ing of language learning held by the curriculum writer, teacher or
textbook developer. Assessment should reflect the goals and objectives of

Young learners and language learning 47

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

the curriculum, and will also be influenced by understandings of lan-
guage learning embedded in the curriculum. If the established curricu-
lum emphasizes the learning of grammar and vocabulary in isolation,
then it will be difficult if not impossible for teachers and assessors to
assess children’s language use ability. When, however, the curriculum is
designed to promote language use, children will have opportunities to
use language meaningfully, and hence assessing language ability through
language use tasks is the most appropriate and accepted way to assess
language learning.

In many curricula, knowledge and skills that are integral to language
learning are also explicitly stated as goals or outcomes. Table 2.2 shows
extracts from the Queensland Schools Curriculum Council (2000)
Guidelines, outlining curriculum goals for language learning. These goals
stretch beyond the immediate knowledge, understanding and skills of
language learning to include important, related areas such as the devel-
opment of understanding of the ways children approach life (intercul-
tural understanding), the development of language awareness and
learning-how-to-learn skills.

These goals establish what children need according to this curriculum,
in order to learn language and to learn beyond language successfully, and
they set the scope for assessment in the language learning programme.
Goals and learning outcomes are also established by education depart-
ments in standards documents. Some curricula for young learners
(although this is rare) may be narrower in their scope, defining mainly the
structures and vocabulary to be learned. Thus the curriculum within
which teachers and assessors work, and the textbooks that accompany
that curriculum, define the scope and nature of language learning, and
therefore have a key influence on what is learned and assessed.

External tests also have a strong influence on what and how children
learn, and on how teachers are inclined to teach and assess in the class-
room. If an external test assesses children’s language use, as defined in
the curriculum, then there is alignment, and “teaching to the test” may be
a productive part of the teaching. If, however, the external tests focus on
areas of language ability that are only part of the curriculum, then there
is a lack of alignment. For example, if the external test focuses on chil-
dren’s knowledge of vocabulary and grammar above all else, then the
external test has imposed this construct for learning and assessment
(even if a language use curriculum exists). If the curriculum and the
teacher’s learning activities do not focus on vocabulary and grammar,
then teachers are caught in a trap; they are required to teach with a focus

48                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Young learners and language learning 49

Table 2.2 Curriculum goals for language learning for years 1 to 3
(adapted from Queensland Schools Curriculum Council, 2000)

Intercultural communication

As children participate in tasks using another language, they become aware of cultural
practices and develop skills in communication in many contexts. . . Learning to com-
municate interculturally involves children in developing

• socioculturally appropriate ways of communicating in a particular language (inter-
cultural understandings);

• familiarity with the functions of language (language awareness);
• the skills and strategies used to internalize the new language together with self-

management of their learning (learning-how-to-learn skills);
• general knowledge according to their needs, interests and prior learning (topical

knowledge).

Intercultural

In learning another language, children develop an awareness and appreciation of the
culture of the people who use it. They can use this knowledge as a basis for comparing
their culture with others and take their first steps in negotiating another cultural
system. . . . Through an awareness of culture and how to communicate in appropriate
ways, young children tend to move towards a greater acceptance of their own personal
identity in a global society.

In the early childhood years sociocultural language learning promotes and fosters an
awareness of aspects of the target language community. These could include:

• how young children in the target language community live;
• contemporary society in the target language community;
• relationships to the children’s own communities;
• cultural practices – dress, festivals, songs, games and family life.

Language awareness

Children will begin to develop an awareness of the role of language as well as culture
within their world as they learn about language. An understanding of these roles
helps children to become more conscious of the diversity of the world that surrounds
them and to learn how to respond appropriately. Children will begin to develop an
awareness of

• the features of their own language and the language of others;
• the function of language in their everyday life;
• language as a system and how it works;
• appropriate language for varying contexts;
• how language is learnt;
• how diversity is enriched through cultural variation.

(Scarino, Vale, McKay and Clark, 1988).

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

on vocabulary and grammar to ensure that children pass the test. Thus
the nature of the curriculum and external tests are central influences on
the nature of language learning and assessment of young learners, even
when teachers and assessors have knowledge of current theories of child
language learning as they have been outlined in the previous section.
This is a reality which, it is hoped, would be changed by those in author-
ity, to a situation where curriculum and assessment are aligned with each
other, and with what we know about children’s SLA (that is, that children
need to and can learn to use language in communicative ways).

Describing the components of children’s language use ability

We now move on from examining language learning processes to exam-
ining the nature of language ability. How can we describe language ability
in order to ‘capture’ it in assessment? How can we examine a child’s lan-
guage use in an assessment task, and know whether it is appropriate to
the situation, whether it will achieve what it intends to achieve, and what
its strengths and weaknesses are? The framework in this section is
complex; but children’s language ability is no less complex than adults’
language ability, and I would argue that it is important that teachers
and assessors of young learners have a deep knowledge of the nature of
language ability. This section can be referred to at any time by readers.
It is not necessary to understand this section to access the remainder of
the book. Rather, this section is for those readers who are ready to make
sense of the complex nature of children’s language knowledge in assess-
ment tasks.

50                             

Table 2.2 (continued)

Learning-how-to-learn

. . . By participating in learning experiences in the target language, children begin to
develop an awareness of the skills and strategies required to take responsibility for their
own learning. These include:

• identifying and discussing a problem;
• taking initiative and being persistent in completing tasks;
• sharing with the teacher and other class members the ways in which they have

solved problems;
• exploring new ideas and applying prior learning;
• accessing and locating information.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

I have chosen to use Bachman and Palmer’s (1996) framework of
language ability to describe children’s language use ability. It provides a
comprehensive and well-respected tool with which to make sense of its
nature. Note that the components in a framework of language ability are
different from language learning systems such as Skehan’s formulaic and
rule-based system discussed earlier in this chapter. Skehan’s systems are
processes for learning. The following components describe the actual
knowledge and processes that learners need when they are using language.
In a language assessment task, according to Bachman and Palmer (1996),
a number of components of language ability interact to engage test takers
in language use. One of the components of language ability is language
knowledge. We will focus on the characteristics of language knowledge first
because they reflect and link the model to the sociolinguistic and cognitive
perspectives we have already described in language learning above.

Language knowledge

Language knowledge is made up of the elements listed in Table 2.3. It can
be thought of as ‘a domain of information in memory that is available for
use by the metacognitive strategies in creating and interpreting discourse
in language use. There are two broad categories of language knowledge:
organizational knowledge and pragmatic knowledge.

Language learners need organizational knowledge if they are to
organize and produce their own spoken and written texts, and to under-
stand the texts produced by others. They need grammatical knowledge
which, according to Bachman and Palmer (1996), involves knowledge of
vocabulary, syntax and phonology/graphology to organize individual
utterances or sentences. (See Purpura (2004) for more recent, additional
thoughts on the nature of grammatical knowledge and its relationship
with performance.) They need textual knowledge made up of knowledge
of cohesion, and knowledge of rhetorical or conversational organization,
to be able to form texts by combining utterances or sentences. Knowledge
of cohesion is involved in producing or comprehending the relationship
among sentences in written texts or among utterances in conversations.
For example, the pronoun ‘she’ provides a cohesive reference to ‘Jenny’ in
the following sentences:

A: Is Jenny coming to the party?

B: Yes she is.

Young learners and language learning 51

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Knowledge of rhetorical or conversational organization is involved
in producing or comprehending organizational development in written
texts or in conversation. For example, we know that English written nar-
ratives, in their ideal form, have a beginning, a climax and a resolution.

52                             

Table 2.3 Areas of language knowledge (Bachman and Palmer, 1996, p. 68)

Organizational knowledge
(how utterances or sentences and texts are organized)

Grammatical knowledge
(how individual utterances or sentences are organized)

Knowledge of vocabulary
Knowledge of syntax
Knowledge of phonology/graphology

Textual knowledge
(how utterances or sentences are organized to form texts)

Knowledge of cohesion
Knowledge of rhetorical or conversational organization

Pragmatic knowledge
(how utterances or sentences and texts are related to the communicative goals of the
language user and to the features of the language use setting)

Functional knowledge
(how utterances or sentences and texts are related to the communicative
goals of language users)

Knowledge of ideational functions (enabling learners to express or interpret
meaning in terms of our experience of the world)

Knowledge of manipulative functions (enabling learners to use language to
affect the world around us)

Knowledge of heuristic functions (enabling learners to use language to
extend their knowledge of the world around us)

Knowledge of imaginative functions (enabling learners to use language to
create an imaginary world, or extend the world around them for humorous
or aesthetic purposes. Examples include jokes and the use of figurative
language and poetry)

Sociolinguistic knowledge
(how utterances or sentences and texts are related to features of the
language use setting)

Knowledge of dialects/varieties
Knowledge of registers
Knowledge of natural or idiomatic expressions
Knowledge of cultural references and figures of speech

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

In language use situations, children also need pragmatic knowledge if
they are to achieve their communicative goals. They learn, for example,
that if they want to get someone else to do something, or tell them some-
thing, they have to ask them in polite and appropriate ways, using forms
of the language (structures, vocabulary) that are required to achieve the
goal. Pragmatic knowledge is what language users need in order to be
able to use the organizational knowledge that they have. Pragmatic
knowledge enables us to create or interpret discourse by relating utter-
ances or sentences and texts to their meaning, to the intentions of lan-
guage users, and to relevant characteristics of the language use setting.
That is, pragmatic knowledge is what activates the organizational knowl-
edge that a language user has.

There are two areas of pragmatic knowledge: functional knowledge
and sociolinguistic knowledge. Functional knowledge enables us to
interpret relationships between utterances or sentences and texts and
the intentions of language users. Bachman and Palmer (p. 69) give the
following example to explain this:

For example, the utterance ‘Could you tell me how to get to the post
office?’ most likely functions as a request for directions rather than as
a request for a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer. The most appropriate responses
are likely to be either a set of directions or, if the speaker does not
know how to get to the post office, a statement to this effect. A verbal
response such as ‘Yes, I could’, while accurate in terms of the literal
meaning of the question, is inappropriate, since it misinterprets the
function of the question as a request for information.

To answer appropriately, language users often need prior knowledge of
the language use setting, including the characteristics of the participants.

Sociolinguistic knowledge enables us to use language to create or inter-
pret language that is appropriate to a particular language setting. This
includes knowledge of the conventions that determine the appropriate use
of dialects or varieties, registers, natural or idiomatic expressions, cultural
references and figures of speech. Dialects or varieties are versions of a lan-
guage that are used in different regions or social classes, and to different
versions of a language used in different countries (for example, American
English; Indian English; Singaporean English). Registers are variations in
language used by people usually sharing the same occupation (e.g.,
doctors, lawyers) or the same interests (e.g., stamp collectors, baseball
fans) (Richards, Platt and Weber, 1985). Idiomatic expressions and figures
of speech are words or phrases that may not have their usual or literal

Young learners and language learning 53

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

meaning but have been passed down through the culture (‘Try and get your
head around this’; ‘Be as quite as a mouse’) and cultural references are ref-
erences to ideas or events or things that people in the culture know about
(the Taj Mahal; Christmas Day; ceremonies and literature and so on).

Language knowledge is central to language use; if learners do not have, or
are weak in certain components of language knowledge, then they will have
greater difficulty engaging in language use than others who are stronger.

In order to engage in language use, language knowledge is not enough.
Learners need to ‘activate’ their language knowledge in ways that are
appropriate to the language use context. As depicted in Figure 2.2, they
will activate their language knowledge according to their own individual
characteristics (e.g., their outgoingness, their background knowledge,
and their emotions on the day) and they will do this using their strategic
competence which helps them to weigh up the situation and make deci-
sions about their participation in the language use.

Language knowledge interacts with (1) individual
characteristics

When children use their language knowledge in language use tasks, they
also bring to the task a range of individual characteristics that inevitably
influence their performance on the task. The individual characteristics of
language learners can be described under four headings (Bachman and
Palmer, 1996):

54                             

Individual characteristics

Language knowledge

Personal characteristics

Topical (or background) knowledge

Affective schemata/emotional state

Strategic competence

Language use task context or situation

Figure 2.2 How components of language use work together in a language use
task (adapted from Bachman and Palmer, 1996, p. 63)

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

• language knowledge

• personal characteristics

• topical (or background) knowledge

• affective schemata or emotional state

The components of language knowledge have been described above. The
other three areas are described below.

Personal characteristics

For young learners, the most obvious personal characteristic (and there-
fore the most defining) is their age and developmental maturity. As dis-
cussed in Chapter 2, children’s language ability is characterized by the
fact that they are in the process of developing in their cognitive, social,
emotional, and physical maturity. Their approach to language assess-
ment tasks, and their ability to perform in tasks, is determined by their
maturity in the ways I described in Chapter 1. Maturational development
varies across different age groups and across individual children. Their
personalities may, for example, bring differences in tenacity and concen-
tration span.

In addition, each child is influenced strongly by their cultural back-
ground, first language, educational background, and type and amount
of preparation or prior experience. The nature of their bilingual and
home experiences will influence their performance. What is the nature
of their educational background? Has their education been disrupted
because of migration or refugee experiences? Does the home provide
opportunities to experience literacy? Children’s personal characteristics
will influence their ability to take part successfully in a task, and thus
will necessarily influence the nature of the tasks in which children are
asked to participate.

Topical (or background) knowledge

Young learners bring their topical or background knowledge to oral com-
munication, and to their reading and writing. When children use language
they communicate about something, and this ‘something’ will be related to
the world in which they live. All language users need topical knowledge in
order to be able to communicate at all. Topical knowledge usually contains

Young learners and language learning 55

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

cultural knowledge. Native speakers of a language may not be aware of the
load of cultural content in a task; most foreign and second language learn-
ers are dealing with degrees of new cultural knowledge in every task.

Young learners’ topical knowledge relies on their developing knowledge
of the world. The growth of learners’ topical knowledge can be seen as
four conceptual spheres.

Sphere 1: The first and innermost sphere represents what learners
can see, hear, and touch directly. In practice, this is the classroom
situation. Here, words are merely an accompaniment of action.

Sphere 2: The second sphere represents what the learners know from
their own experience, their daily life, what they have seen and heard
directly but cannot see or hear at the moment. This can be brought to
mind by the use of words together with the classroom situation.
Examples of themes and topics within this sphere include self, family
and friends, home, school, free time, holidays and pets.

Sphere 3: The third sphere represents what the learners have not expe-
rienced directly, but what they can call to mind with an effort of the
imagination, with the help of pictures, dramatization, charts, and
plans. Examples of themes and topics within this sphere include litera-
ture, events of general interest, and topics related to other subject areas.

Sphere 4: The fourth sphere represents what is brought into learners’
minds through the spoken, written, or printed word alone. Examples
of themes and topics within the sphere include social issues, envir-
onmental issues, jobs and careers, comparisons between their own
country and the target country, relationships with others, and current
events. (Billows 1961, cited in Scarino et al., 1988, Book 2, p. 8)

Thus, young learners’ topical knowledge grows as their experience of the
world grows and as they develop cognitive and social maturity. Children’s
language use will be influenced strongly by the topical knowledge they
bring to the task or language use situation. This includes the general aca-
demic knowledge and content area specific knowledge that children are
learning at school.

Affective schemata or emotional state

The characteristics of a task may evoke an emotional response from test
takers, based on their previous experiences, or also in the case of young
learners, on their emotional maturity. Emotional responses can either
help or hinder a test taker’s performance on a task. Bachman and Palmer

56                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

suggest that it is important to promote feelings of comfort or safety in test
takers, but at the same time we should balance the need for comfort for
the test taker and the performance to be measured (p. 66).

In Chapter 1, I outlined the social and emotional development of
young language learners, from 5 to 12 years of age. The growing confi-
dence and independence, and developing ability to cooperate and share
over the years means that the affective schemata of young learners
changes dramatically over the space of time from 5 to 12, and that teach-
ers and assessors need to design assessment tasks to cater for these
differences. Cultural differences in experience and attitude will also influ-
ence what a child brings to an assessment task. A young girl may find it
difficult to be interviewed by an adult male – perhaps the power relation-
ship (in the child’s eyes) is too great. The girl may believe that she should
stay quiet and respectful rather than speak to show what she knows.

Topics in assessment tasks may be emotionally charged for children.
This may be negative or positive. Talking about their weekend may bring
unhappy memories for children in dysfunctional families, whereas
remembering how they were able to touch and talk to a koala on a school
excursion would bring an enthusiastic response. Assessment materials
(colourful, shiny paper; music; friendly-looking puppets) can also influ-
ence emotional response in young learners. The stakes involved – what
happens if I fail – influence all test takers, including children. Many
aspects of the task need careful analysis by teachers and assessors who
know the children, or in the case of large-scale testing, by test developers
who know the age-group and the broad characteristics of the test takers.

Teachers and assessors who know children individually have the best
advantage in assessment. Young learners, especially those in the junior
elementary years, develop emotionally at different paces because of mat-
urational and experiential factors. This is an important reason why class-
room assessment undertaken by the child’s teacher is best for young
learners. Testers who prepare tests for young learners require special
skills to be able to cater for the affective needs of young learners in tests,
and to avoid inhibiting each child’s best efforts.

Language knowledge interacts with (2) the characteristics of
the language use setting

The characteristics of the language use setting interact with language
knowledge and influence the nature of the child’s language performance.

Young learners and language learning 57

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Children who have more advanced levels of language knowledge make
different choices when speaking to a teacher than to a friend. The teacher
uses language in one way when giving them classroom directives and in
another when telling them a funny story. The setting influences the per-
formance of children in an assessment task. A task to be performed in
front of the whole class will possibly negatively influence the perfor-
mance of a shy child. The use of colourful and interactive computer-
based material will probably stimulate interest and elicit a possibly
different performance from black and white pictures.

The importance of the language use setting is hard to overestimate. As
I will show in Chapter 4, the selection of a task is central to valid and reli-
able assessment.

All components work together through (3) strategic
competence

Strategic competence

The strategic competence component of language ability involves the
language user being engaged, bringing all the components together in
relation to the communicative purposes and the context. The result is
fluent, accurate language use appropriate to the task or the language use
context. Bachman and Palmer hypothesize that strategic competence is
required by all language learners as a ‘cognitive management function
in language use’ (1996). Strategic competence is a metacognitive func-
tion (a function concerned with learning strategies that involve planning
and directing learning at a general level) that integrates all the compo-
nents of language use, enabling language users to create and interpret
discourse.

Strategic competence is hypothesized to be made up of cognitive
strategies that involve goal setting (deciding what one is going to do),
assessment (taking stock of what is needed, what one has to work with,
and how well one has done) and planning (deciding how to use what one
has). When language learners are taking a test, for example, they would
first set their goal – identifying the test tasks, choosing a task, and decid-
ing whether to attempt the tasks selected; assess – determine the desir-
ability and feasibility of successfully completing it, assessing their
knowledge and relevance of their knowledge for the task, and assessing
the correctness of the response; and plan – select elements of their topical

58                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

and language knowledge to complete the task, formulate a plan to com-
plete the task, and select one plan for implementation as a response to
the test task. Language learners go through the same strategic processes
when they are involved in any language use, for example a conversation
or a writing task.

Young learners have a limited but growing ability to think about what
needs to be said in different situations to different people, and to plan
what they are going to write in ways that are appropriate to the purpose
and audience. They have been developing strategic competence in their
first language from birth (Halliday, 1975). They are still developing skills
to handle discourse in their first language for most of their elementary
years, and beyond. The development of their strategic competence in
their foreign or second language will depend on their experience with real
language use in communicative situations. The metacognitive skills
required in strategic competence are part of this development. The
metacognitive skills required in strategy use are reliant on a degree of
cognitive maturity. The cognitive maturity, metacognition and commu-
nication strategies of young learners cannot be assumed. Using their
strategic competence, children therefore bring their individual charac-
teristics to their language use, drawing on their topical knowledge and
their affective schemata.

For language teachers in Europe, the Common European Framework
of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001) is a framework
that also sets out components of language use ability. The European
framework serves the same purpose as the Bachman and Palmer frame-
work; it describes what is involved in language use. With knowledge of
what makes up language use, it is possible to monitor the develop-
ment of the components, and to decide what should be focused upon in
assessment.

Summary

Even from the beginning learners can use language in simple ways, for
example by using learned formulae and new vocabulary slotted into
learned sentences in spontaneous and flexible ways, and by using
gestures and facial expressions to supplement what they are saying. As
children become more proficient, they will become more able to use
language for social and academic purposes, in both spoken and written
form.

Young learners and language learning 59

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

There are both sociocultural and cognitive perspectives on language
learning, both of which complement each other (Bialystok, 2001). As
children learn to use language, they are ‘learning how to mean’, that is,
learning how to interact within new discourses. Language learners take
on new identities as they do so. Young learners, especially those in
second language and immersion programmes, are under pressure to
learn the new discourses of the classroom and of content areas learned
in the new language. Cognitive perspectives on language learning
include Skehan’s (1998) dual-mode system, in which both formulaic and
rule-governed systems work together (in children with more emphasis
on formulaic systems), Schumann’s theories concerned with emotion in
second language learning, and Cummins’ (1979) theory of linguistic
interdependence. Optimal conditions for language learning are those in
which favourable sociocultural conditions (opportunities to use lan-
guage, to engage with relevant discourses and to bring their language
and first language identity to their learning) are present, and cognitive
processes suitable for children’s age level (opportunities to activate the
dual-mode system; opportunities to have positive experiences with the
language and with each other) are activated. The implications for assess-
ment of these perspectives are that assessment procedures should
promote and monitor the development of relevant discourses and new
identities, engage and monitor cognitive processes, and include knowl-
edge of first language progress. These implications are relevant through
each step in the assessment process. Language curricula and external
tests are able to influence the conditions under which young learners
learn language; good curricula and tests reflect what is known about lan-
guage learning.

A theoretical framework of language ability (in this case Bachman and
Palmer (1996) is used) assists teachers and assessors to plan for language
assessment by laying out the components of language ability. Other
frameworks, such as the Common European Framework for Languages
might be used in the same way. Effective assessment of young learners
combines knowledge of children’s growth (their physical, cognitive, social
and personal growth), and their language learning processes with such a
framework to ensure best assessment practice. Curricula designed for
young learners do this to some degree. However, often curricula are not
detailed to the point of defining what they mean by language ability.

The next chapter looks at research into the assessment of young lan-
guage learners.

60                             

https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733093.003

https://www.cambridge.org/core

Module Three Part One and Two

Lavf58.29.100

Module Three Part One and Two

Lavf58.29.100

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ theories of language learning ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now