Teaching Heritage Language Learners: Research Data and Pedagogical Implications

Olga Kagan, Director, National Heritage Language Resource Center

A heritage language learner: a working definition



Broad definition : those who have been raised with a strong cultural connection to a particular language, usually through family interaction (Fishman 2001; Van Deusen-Scholl 2003). NO MEASURABLE PROFICIENCIES



Narrow definition: dominant. those who have been exposed to a particular language in childhood but did not learn it to full capacity because another language became MEASURABLE PROFICIENCIES Source: Polinsky and Kagan 2007

The purpose of this workshop

 Suggest research questions that may lead to improvements in  HL curriculum  HL materials

FOR HLLs of NARROW DEFINITION, i.e. those who (typically) can have oral and aural proficiencies

Curricular Components



Demographics/sociolinguistics



Community history history and community interests; students’ motivations



Linguistics



The baseline language of the community



HL learner characteristics across languages and by language



Psycholinguistics



The processes of language retrieval, maintenance, and acquisition; HL specific strategies

Why Demographics?

The American Community Survey 2005 2008:



20 % of the U.S. population speak a language other than English at home

A book on communities and language education (CUP in press)

Ed. Kim Potowski 

Histories of immigration



Language loss and maintenance



Community attitudes



Attempts to make predictions

Ten languages most frequently spoken at home, the 1990, 2000 Censuses and 2007 Community Estimate: A Comparison Language 1990 2000 2007 Spanish Chinese Tagalog French Vietnamese German Korean Russian Italian Polish 17,356,952 28,077,853 34,547,077 1,294,754 825,391 1,905,766 521,053 1,556,150 633,078 243,904 1,311,820 713,759 2,001,948 1,238,232 2,085,172 1,019,889 1,366,470 882,875 704,697 993,068 681,424 2,464,572 1,480,429 1,355,805 1,207,004 1,104,354 1,062,337 851,174 798,801 638,059 Total 26,362,627 39,051,628 45,509,612

A heritage language learner: a working definition rooted in community and family



Narrow definition: those who have been exposed to a particular language in childhood but did not learn it to full capacity because another language became dominant. MEASURABLE PROFICIENCIES

Four Waves of Russian Immigration to the US

 First wave: After the communist revolution of 1917 (to Europe>to US)  Second wave: After WWII  Third wave: Early 1970s-late 1980s  Forth wave: After the collapse of the S.U.

The recent wave of Russian immigration 1970s-present

 76% of Russian speakers are born abroad  42% arrived before 5  28% between 6-10

NHLRC Survey

Broad/narrow definitions (Russian) [Kagan & Dillon 2001; Kagan 2005] GROUP 1: completed/almost completed high school in the former SU GROUP 2: attended/completed junior high or equivalent GROUP 3: attended/completed elementary school GROUP 4: emigrated at a pre-school age born outside the former SU or

Kondo-Brown, 2005 (Japanese)

Role of a Japanese-speaking mother

Group 1 . No Japanese-speaking parent or grandparent. Grandparents born in the U.S.

Group 2.

No Japanese-speaking parent.

At least one grandparent born in Japan. Group 3.

At least one Japanese-speaking parent born in the United States or Japan.

A Japanese HL Class

(Carreira & Kagan in prep)

  Japanese 100 – 12 students 6 (US born): four or more years of a community school in the US.  1 (foreign-born): six to eight years of school in Japan.  1 (raised in a Japanese-speaking home in Korea): attended Japanese school for five years.   2 (US born): 1-2 years of schooling in Japan 2 (one US born; one foreign) – no formal schooling

Different levels of HL and classroom practices: UCLA Russian Program

    R 100 – Literacy in Russian (groups 3/4) R 102 – Flagship Advanced/Superior Russian R 107 – Russian for Social and Cultural Studies R 103 – Russian for native and near-native speakers R 108 – Business Russian

Discussion Question 1

 In your language, what groups of proficiency do you expect? What factors would they depend on?

 History of immigration?

 Language maintenance in the family?

 Attendance at community schools?

 Other?

NHLRC Survey of Heritage Language Learners

   

An on-line survey 1,700 responses 22 languages Survey Report http://www.nhlrc.ucla.edu

Heritage Language N Amharic Arabic Armenian Cantonese Gujarati 13 28 57 3.35 174 10.23 10 % 0.76 1.65 0.59 Hindi/Urdu Ilocano Japanese 24 9 19 1.41 0.53 1.12 Korean Mandarin Persian Russian Spanish Tagalog Thai Vietnamese Other 134 60 11 113 89 7.88 268 15.76 3.53 185 10.88 396 23.28 111 6.53 0.65 6.64 5.23

Language Percent n Arabic Armenian Cantonese Hindi/Urdu Japanese Korean Mandarin 1.6% 3.4% 10.2% 1.4% 1.1% 7.8% 15.7% 28 58 174 24 19 134 268 Persian Russian Spanish Tagalog 3.5% 12.7% 23.1% 6.5% 60 205 396 111 Thai 0.6% 11 Vietnamese 6.6% 113 Other (Indonesian, Ilokano, Polish, Portuguese, Amharic…)

Major

Biological Sciences Financial Studies Social Sciences Other Sciences Miscellaneous Languages and Linguistics Other Humanities International Studies Ethnic Studies Engineering Arts and Design Health Sciences (Except Biological) Criminal Studies/Justice Computer Sciences 50 46 40 25 12 327 276 268 155 140 103 101 90 65

HL Motivations: a bridge between community and classroom

400 300 200 100 0 1000 900 800 700 600 500

Why have you enrolled in HL courses

To learn about my cultural and linguistic roots.

To communicate better with family and friends in the U.S.

To fulfill a language requirement.

For a future career or job.

To communicate better with family and friends abroad.

To prepare for travel in my country of origin Because it is easy for me Other (please specify)

Motivations by Language

(NHLRC Survey, Carreira & Kagan in prep)

Top four priorities for their HL (1= first priority, 2= second priority, etc.)

For a career or job To connect with cultural and linguistic roots To communicate with family and friends in the US To fulfill a language requirement Spanish Mandarin, Cantonese 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 Russian Korean Tagalog Vietnamese Persian 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 4 1 1 1 4 3 4 4 4 3 To communicate with family and friends abroad

Discussion Question 2



What are the ways to incorporate motivations in a HL-specific curriculum and materials?

Learner Characteristics: Age of Arrival and HL proficiency

NHLRC Survey

Age of Arrival: 43% younger than 5

77%

U.S.-born

+

arrivals before age of 5

Age of Arrival and Speaking HL

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Us born

What language do you speak most of the time?

<2 2 - 5 yrs 6 -10 yrs

Age of arrival

11 - 13 yrs 14-18 yrs English HL A mix of the two

Age of Arrival and Reading time

Time spent reading in the HL

15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 US born <2 2-5 yrs 6-10 yrs 11-13 yrs

Nativity/age of arrival in the US

14-18 yrs No time <15 min.

15-30 mins.

~ 1 hr 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs.

Age of Arrival and Internet Use

Internet use in the HL

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Us born <2 2 - 5 yrs 6 -10 yrs

Nativity/age or arrival

11 - 13 yrs 14-18 yrs never rarely frequently

Age of Arrival and Self-rating

Rate your HL abilities

4.5

4 3.5

3 2.5

2 1.5

1 0.5

0 US born <2 2 yrs. - 5 6 yrs. 10 11 yrs. - 13

Nativity/age of arrival

14-18 listening reading speaking writing

Linguistic Biographies

 Supply valuable information  Self-assessment is of value  It can be used for placement 

Question: What is the shortest questionnaire that can yield results for placement?

To salvage heritage languages



… it is crucial to find ways to foster an environment that supports heritage-language speakers’ regular and active use of the language beyond the preschool years.

T. Au (2007)

1%

What language(s) do you speak with your friends?

1% 29% 69% English My HL language A combination of English and my HL Other

In the past six months, which of the following activities have you done in your HL OUTSIDE of class?

Spoken on the phone.

Listened to music.

Watched tv.

Watched a movie or dvd.

Listened to radio.

Visited a website.

Written an email or letter.

Attended a community or church event.

Read a newspaper.

Read a book or short story.

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

The least proficient HLL’s

   Access to language since age 0; Output interrupted at age 5; Continued exposure to the HL   at home through some HL media  In the community

* Compared to peers in the L1 country, not a full range of access ** Compared to L2 learners, the access is enormous

Discussion Questions 2-4



What does the combination of English and HL look like?



How can we connect HL activities outside of class with classroom practices?



What are the main differences in teaching L1s,L2s and HLLs?

Do HLLs see themselves as native speakers of their HL?

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

Please rate your English language abilities:

none Listening low intermediate Speaking advanced Reading native-like Writing

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

Please rate your heritage language abilities

None Listening Low Intermediate Speaking Advance Reading Native-like Writing

Carreira and Kagan (in preparation)

Aural proficiency (the average of listening and speaking scores)

Native-advanced Intermediate

Spanish Russian Persian Korean Vietnamese Mandarin and Cantonese Tagalog

Low

Carreira and Kagan (in preparation)

Literacy skills (the average of reading and writing scores)

Native-advanced

Spanish

Intermediate Low

Russian Korean Vietnamese Persian Tagalog Mandarin and Cantonese

Discussion Question 5



How do HLLs evaluate their own language competencies?

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being "not important" and 5 being "extremely important", how important is it for you to accomplish the following goals in your HL class?

Improve speaking Improve listening Improve reading Improve writing Improve grammatical accuracy Increase vocabulary Three Four Five 121 126 120 108 109 111 85 113 63 53 56 44 144 210 143 133 167 101 232 1030 292 868 283 1000 245 1070 287 990 240 1109

What is easy and hard for you to do in English? 1-5

Tell a joke Tell a fairy tale Tell a story Use polite language Be rude Talk about current events Debate an idea Give a formal presentation before an audience

One

1205 1221 1268 1321 1276 1212 1071 923

Two Three Four Five

195 187 167 119 113 192 280 328 98 96 83 72 94 104 142 206 46 36 24 25 45 33 45 71 69 71 71 72 87 72 71 78

What is easy and hard for you to do in HL? 1-5

One Two Three Four Five

Tell a joke Tell a fairy tale Tell a story Use polite language Be rude Talk about current events Debate an idea Give a formal presentation before an audience 380 311 392 592 635 280 217 145 359 321 412 460 343 353 248 198 391 403 419 344 334 455 393 372 284 336 244 142 183 319 427 412 204 247 144 78 119 209 330 486

Self-assessment of aural comprehension in HL. 1-5. Compare to L2?

One Two Three Four Five

Understand humor Understand a conversation if you eavesdrop Understand news reports Understand movies Understand TV shows Understand song lyrics Understand a formal talk 536 742 473 606 633 502 464 458 463 366 439 425 355 346 385 247 398 350 338 390 395 165 111 272 158 154 253 274 67 50 102 59 59 113 127

Research on Vocabulary

 Vocabulary is emerging as the best indicator of HLLs’ overall proficiency Polinsky (1995, 1997, 2000) - Russian Kanno et al.( 2008) - Japanese  Increasing vocabulary may emerge as the primary goal of HLL instruction

Lexical approach to L2 teaching

 Lexis, not grammar, is the basis of language.

 …“language consists of grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalized grammar.“  One of the central organizing principles of any meaning-centered syllabus should be lexis.

Lewis, M. (1993).

The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward.

Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.

Lewis’s Suggestions to Lexical Approach: HL specific and 21

st

century

      Intensive and extensive listening and reading Language comparisons and translation— chunk-for chunk, not word-for-word—aimed at raising language awareness.

Add dialects

Guessing the meaning of vocabulary from context.

Noticing language patterns and collocations.

Working with language corpora and

Internet sources

Using language for discovery and

research

Discussion Question 5



What HLL’s lexical deficiencies?



What are the most efficient ways to expand HLL’s vocabulary?

Research on Grammar



incomplete L1 acquisition in heritage speakers is …selective and localized.



some areas of grammatical knowledge appear to be more susceptible to incomplete development than others.

Montrul et al. (2008)

Indications of systematic differences Differential Object Marking in Spanish Montrul (2004,2008) Gender in Russian Polinsky (2008) Inflected infinitives in Brazilian Portuguese Rothman (2007) Cohesive devices in Russian Friedman and Kagan (2008) Polinsky: HL grammar

Discussion Question



In the language you teach/research, what are the MAIN grammar points that NEED to be taught to HLLs?

Discussion Question

 What kind of assessment is appropriate for HLLs:  Linguistic biographies  Oral interviews  Aural comprehension  Written testing  Portfolios  Other

The processes of language retrieval, maintenance, and acquisition HL specific strategies

Vygotsky’s ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) and HLL assessment and teaching 1) Tasks: a difference between what learners can do without help and where they need help (scaffolding) 2) Skill-oriented zones: young children learn their native language by being placed in a ZPD 3) It is impossible to understand a child's potential intellectual Development using a one-way assessment 4) Arguments against standardized testing as a means to gauge students‘ intelligence Wells, G. (1999) Dialogic inquiries in education: Towards a Sociocultural Practice And Theory of Education, CUP

Vygotsky’s ZPD: EXTENDING THE CONCEPT TO HLLs

1) 2) 3) We put students who learned HL in ZPD, into a constrained environment Retrieval may happen best when relearning by socializing FL-type testing may NOT assess well naturally acquired and partially attrited knowledge

Static Assessment (SA) VS Dynamic Assessment (DA)(Poehner 2008)

 SA: isolating abilities that are conceived as stable, discrete traits that can be sampled and measured  DA: helps improve functioning and entails understanding the process of development

HL Strategies

  Large chunk reading and listening Surfing the Internet   Participating in community events Speaking the HL with family    Noticing and asking questions Practicing ambiguities Playing language games  ???

A strategy HL may welcome…

What would you like to read in your HL classes?

Novels/Short Stories Magazine Stories Newspaper Stories Poetry Comic Books Non-Fiction Plays Web Pages Letters/email Newsletters Religious Literature 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Discussion Questions

 What are HL-focused classroom practices?

 What are HL strategies?

L2 VS HL Teaching: Videos



Korean, Sun-Hee Lee and Nayoung Kwon, Wellesley College



Tagalog, Nenita Domingo, UCLA



Russian, Larisa Karkafi, UCLA

Discussion Question



Tagalog and Russian: Do you see a difference between these classes and a typical L2 class?



Korean: Is the testing appropriate for HLLs? What’s being tested? How do the speakers’ speaking proficiencies differ?

In a nutshell

 

HL language groups, learner competencies, and classroom practices; Motivations and interests Baseline language of HLLs

  

Self-rating and language placement Vocabulary Grammar

 

Differences between L2 and HL teaching HL specific strategies

Questions

 QUESTION # 1: Community and Curriculum  1. In your language, what groups of proficiency do you expect? What factors would they depend on? History of immigration? Language maintenance in the family?

Attendance at community schools? Other?

   2. How to connect HL activities outside of class with classroom practices?

QUESTION # 2.

From either your experience or research, what does the combination of English and HL look like?

Questions (cont)

QUESTION # 3 How do HLLs evaluate their own language competencies? Could their self-rating be used for placement purposes?

Question # 4  In the language you teach, what are HLL’s lexical deficiencies?

 What would you propose as the most efficient ways to expand HLL’s vocabulary?

Questions (cont)

Question # 4  In the language you teach, what are HLL’s lexical deficiencies?

 What would you propose as the most efficient ways to expand HLL’s vocabulary?

Question # 5  In the language you teach/research, what are the MAIN grammar points that NEED to be taught to HLLs?

Questions (cont)

Question # 6  What are the main differences in teaching L2s and HLLs? Assessments, including linguistic questionnaires? What is the shortest optimal list of questions in a questionnaire?  HL specific strategies?

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT: The THREE FOCI

Focus on language



Massive vocabulary development



Certain grammatical points Focus on motivation and identity

 

Large chunk reading and aural input Interaction with the community Focus on pedagogy



macro approaches: content and culture based; task-based; project-based

References

         

Au, T. K-f Salvaging Heritage Languages in Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging, ed. Brinton, Kagan, Bauckus He A. W. (2006) Toward an Identity Theory of the Development of Chinese as a Heritage Language . Heritage Language Journal, Volume 4, Number 1 Kagan, O. & Dillon, K. (in press) Bridging Contexts, Making Connections: Selected Proceedings from the Fifth International Conference on Language Teacher Education. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.

Kagan, O. & Dillon, K. (2001) A New Perspective on Teaching Russian: Focus on the Heritage Learner . Slavic and East European Journal 45.3 (2001): 507-18. Reprinted in Heritage Language Journal Volume 1, Number 1, Spring 2003 Kagan, O. (2005) “In Support of a Proficiency-based Definition of Heritage Language Learners: The Case of Russian. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8, 213-221.

Kagan, O., & Friedman. D. (2004). Using the OPI to place heritage speakers of Russian. Foreign Language Annals 36(4), 536-545.

Kanno, K., Hasegawa,T., Ikeda,K.,Ito Y.and Long M. Prior Language-learning Experience and Variation in the Linguistic Profiles of Advanced English-speaking Learners of Japanese. In Brinton, D., Kagan, O., and Bauckus, S. ed. Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging. Pp. 165-180 Kondo-Brown, K. (2002) “Family and School Factors Influencing Academic Performance of Bilingual Shin Nisei Students in Hawaii.” Asian and Pacific Islander American Education: Social, Cultural, and Historical Contexts. Ed. Eileen Tamura, Virgie Chattergy, and Russell Endo. South EL Monte, CA: Pacific Asia Press, 2002. 149-74.

Kondo-Brown, K. (2005). Differences in language skills: Heritage language learner subgroups and foreign language learners. The Modern Language Journal, 89(iv), 563-581.

References

        

He A. W. (2006) Toward an Identity Theory of the Development of Chinese as a Heritage Language . Heritage Language Journal, Volume 4, Number 1 Kagan, O. & Dillon, K. (in press) Bridging Contexts, Making Connections: Selected Proceedings from the Fifth International Conference on Language Teacher Education. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.

Kagan, O. & Dillon, K. (2001) A New Perspective on Teaching Russian: Focus on the Heritage Learner . Slavic and East European Journal 45.3 (2001): 507-18. Reprinted in Heritage Language Journal Volume 1, Number 1, Spring 2003 Kagan, O. (2005) “In Support of a Proficiency-based Definition of Heritage Language Learners: The Case of Russian. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8, 213-221.

Kagan, O., & Friedman. D. (2004). Using the OPI to place heritage speakers of Russian. Foreign Language Annals 36(4), 536-545.

Kanno, K., Hasegawa,T., Ikeda,K.,Ito Y.and Long M. Prior Language-learning Experience and Variation in the Linguistic Profiles of Advanced English-speaking Learners of Japanese. In Brinton, D., Kagan, O., and Bauckus, S. ed. Heritage Language Education: A New Field Emerging. Pp. 165-180 Kondo-Brown, K. (2002) “Family and School Factors Influencing Academic Performance of Bilingual Shin Nisei Students in Hawaii.” Asian and Pacific Islander American Education: Social, Cultural, and Historical Contexts. Ed. Eileen Tamura, Virgie Chattergy, and Russell Endo. South EL Monte, CA: Pacific Asia Press, 2002. 149-74.

Kondo-Brown, K. (2005). Differences in language skills: Heritage language learner subgroups and foreign language learners. The Modern Language Journal, 89(iv), 563-581.

       

Montrul, S. (2004). Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition 7,125–142.

Montrul, S. (2008). Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Polinsky, Maria. 1995. Cross-linguistic parallels in language loss. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 14. 87-124.

Polinsky, Maria. 1997. American Russian: Language loss meets language acquisition. In Wayles Browne et al. (eds.). Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Cornell Meeting (1995), 370-406. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publishers. Polinsky, Maria. 2000. A composite linguistic profile of a speaker of Russian in the USA. In Olga Kagan and Benjamin Rifkin, eds. The learning and teaching of Slavic languages and cultures. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.

Polinsky, M. (2006). Incomplete acquisition: American Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 14, 191–262.

Polinsky, M. (2007). Russian gender under incomplete acquisition. The Heritage Language Journal 7

.

Polinsky, M. & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage Languages: in the “wild” and in the classroom. Compass of Language and Linguistics, ( http://www.blackwell compass.com/home_linco_compass )

References

   

Rothman, J. (2007) Heritage speaker competence differences, language change, and input type: Inflected infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese.

359 – 389 The International Journal of Bilingualism ‘International Journal of Bilingualism’ • Volume 11 • Number 4 • 2007,

Sohn, S-O., & Shin, S-K. (2007). True beginners, false beginners, and fake beginners: Placement strategies for Korean heritage learners. Foreign Language Annals, 40.3, 353-364. Schwartz, Ann M. 2001. Preparing teachers to work with heritage language learners. In J.K.Peyton, D.A. Ranard, S. McGinnis, eds. Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource, 229-252. McHenry, Il: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems Co.

Valdés, Guadelupe. 2000. The teaching of heritage languages: An introduction for Slavic-teaching professionals. In O. Kagan and B. Rifkin, eds. Teaching and Learning Slavic Languages and Cultures, 375-403. Bloomington, IN: Slavica.